I think sometimes people take sport and working lines too far in the opposite direction.
When I think of a traditional working farm/herding dog, I think of something relatively unchanged through the years like English shepherds. They're able to do a full day's work day after day for years, but when it's time to settle down and chill, they don't pace around the room panting heavily and whining because they can't think of anything else to do.
The working dogs of yesteryear were bred to do their jobs. As long as they met the parameters set by their work and didn't break down too young, thumbs up. They weren't brought together by the hundreds or even thousands to compete against each other to see who does the job better, faster, harder, etc.
That is absolutely true in some breeds. The modern working Mals have been bred excel in bitesports that came about long after the breed originated as a protective herding dog. Most Mal people don't seem to know or care anything about their dog's herding instinct, some even seem to look down on Mals who herd as "not real work" or brag about how poorly their dogs did at herding. Sure they can still do protection work but that was just one aspect of the breed's original purpose which included herding, carting and whatever else their poor owners could train one dog to do so they didn't have to pay to keep different dogs for different jobs. Breeding for extreme traits that look really cool in competition has changed the breed. I think it's pretty safe to say that the Belgian farmers of a hundred years ago would not have tolerated a farm dog who redirected on them, was bad with their children or who easily got so aroused they couldn't think. To some (but not all), those are all acceptable traits in the breed in modern times. But it seems acceptable to many that the job for Mals has shifted and changed with time, interests and needs.
Brittanys are another good example of how breeding for working competitions has changed a breed. In field trials, "running big" is highly desirable. This means that your dog goes way, way far away from you to find birds. The dogs are allowed to wear GPS collars because they quickly and easily get so far away from you risk not being able to find them. They are followed on horseback because you would never see them on foot. I some how doubt that the original people using the breed for hunting were tracking them on GPS units
Some lines of Brittanys are bred for "foot hunters" (and I think the French Brittanys also hunt closer) but those dogs don't do well in the field trials. So yes, it's really cool that ability has been preserved in that breed because having a DC is so desirable, which they have more than any other breed. But breeding for what wins in field competitions certainly has changed the type of dogs they are.
GSDs are different in a way but not in a way. The breed founder created Schutzhund to test their worthiness as breeding dogs, knowing that not all breeding dogs could be active working dogs. However, SchH and the dogs have surely changed over the past 100 years or so. I still think breeders that are following the SV standard and using SchH not as a sport but a way to test their dogs temperament are producing the dogs with the best working character. But there's all sorts of dogs being bred to the SV standard who's breeders aren't looking at SchH as a test of their dog's abilities and as either - just a title to get out of the way or as a test of breeding great competition dogs. Both of those approaches are counter to what the breed founder intended though as is all of the changes that have been made to turn SchH into more of a sport. But time changes, interests change and needs change.
A friend of mine is hoping to get a GSD puppy that is being bred for agility. You can say up and down how they should be getting this or that but they want an agility dog above all else. And they want a GSD and there happens to be someone who is breeding GSDs for that purpose from dogs proven for that purpose.
I guess my question is....why is it ok to change SchH to be more sport-like then breed dogs to excel in that sport, to develop working Mals around protection sports, to breed Brittanys to be flashy field trial dogs but it's not ok, in our modern world to breed dogs who are good pets for pet owners? Don't kid yourself, none of these examples are remaining true to the breed's "original purpose" or breeding them "like they did in the old days". It's impossible to do so, even with people who mean well and care about preserving working traits because...time changes, interests change and needs change.
It's all legitimately very confusing to me. I honestly don't understand a lot of these arguments that pop up around what seems to be a core issue of "I like the breed(s) I like the way I like it/them and think no one should mess with them." Which honestly I think is perfectly acceptable even if I don't truly understand it, but then just say so.
ITA! Honestly, I think it comes down to "I don't like this so there
must be something legitimately wrong with it".
Also I'm not suggesting people looking for pet GSDs just go to the local grocery store and call someone who put a flyer up for $300 puppies. Those puppies may or may not be good pets. I'm simply suggesting going to a knowledgeable show breeder who is breeding for a more easy pet type dog and buying a pet quality puppy from them. Two very, very different things.
Oh that's easy people on the internet will tell them what they want.
:rofl1:
