I don't think the OP cares about pet animals, because as he says, for breeding purposes they might as well not exist.
What he's (she?) is saying is that breeding dogs should be kept only by working people. I completely agree. And preferably, from my point of view anyways, I would rather have people that need the dog for something first, and then care about the breed, then someone who cares about the breed first and then works them so they can say they do. For instance, a person who owned a cattle ranch that needed protecting from people and animals, needed rogue cattle caught, might have presa canarios. And to me, that is the sort of place that should be breeding them. Not someone who keeps them as housepets and gets them to chase after a man in a suit with some sort of baton. Or, another way of putting it is, I wouldn't buy a livestock guardian dog from someone who had them in their house and said "yes, but, they like the outdoors and will sleep out there" and "yes, when they're around sheep they're very gentle with them" and "yes, he's really aggressive towards new dogs on the property." The components might be there but that still doesn't mean it will protect sheep. To me that just doesn't cut it. Or a sighthound for hunting from a breeder that lure courses 3 times a week. I would much rather have a German Shepherd from police K9 lines than purely Schutzhund lines.
Reflecting on that, I guess what lots of my problem is that sport doesn't test gritiness, which is integral to many working breeds. Speculative statements like "of course this dog will protect me, he'd die for me!!!" kinda bother me. I don't think most dogs would die for their owners, if they could help it- there's only one breed that has been bred to stay in a fight despite being exhausted, losing and getting the chance to quit, and it isn't typically used in protection. When someone "knows" that their dog will do something beyond what they've seen with their own eyes, and they use that as justification for breeding, the whole thing goes downhill, quickly.
Now, not all dogs are working dogs so of course it doesn't apply to all. And I'm not saying anything about the practicallity of having all breeders really work their dogs, but that would be ideal IMO.
What he's (she?) is saying is that breeding dogs should be kept only by working people. I completely agree. And preferably, from my point of view anyways, I would rather have people that need the dog for something first, and then care about the breed, then someone who cares about the breed first and then works them so they can say they do. For instance, a person who owned a cattle ranch that needed protecting from people and animals, needed rogue cattle caught, might have presa canarios. And to me, that is the sort of place that should be breeding them. Not someone who keeps them as housepets and gets them to chase after a man in a suit with some sort of baton. Or, another way of putting it is, I wouldn't buy a livestock guardian dog from someone who had them in their house and said "yes, but, they like the outdoors and will sleep out there" and "yes, when they're around sheep they're very gentle with them" and "yes, he's really aggressive towards new dogs on the property." The components might be there but that still doesn't mean it will protect sheep. To me that just doesn't cut it. Or a sighthound for hunting from a breeder that lure courses 3 times a week. I would much rather have a German Shepherd from police K9 lines than purely Schutzhund lines.
Reflecting on that, I guess what lots of my problem is that sport doesn't test gritiness, which is integral to many working breeds. Speculative statements like "of course this dog will protect me, he'd die for me!!!" kinda bother me. I don't think most dogs would die for their owners, if they could help it- there's only one breed that has been bred to stay in a fight despite being exhausted, losing and getting the chance to quit, and it isn't typically used in protection. When someone "knows" that their dog will do something beyond what they've seen with their own eyes, and they use that as justification for breeding, the whole thing goes downhill, quickly.
Now, not all dogs are working dogs so of course it doesn't apply to all. And I'm not saying anything about the practicallity of having all breeders really work their dogs, but that would be ideal IMO.
Last edited: