Let's Be Controversial

lancerandrara

Sports Lunatic
Joined
Nov 10, 2014
Messages
675
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Los Angeles, CA
#41
Urr... I don't think showlines are "ruining a breed", and I don't think breeding for companion dogs are "ruining a breed"? They are a different line with different purpose. I don't think pet dogs are pointless/useless, because companions and pets are a use in itself.

Despite what elitist working/sporting dog people want dogs to be bred toward, the vast majority of dogs in the nation are simply companions and pets.

Closed stud books are a detriment to any breed in the long-term.

And...

I like doodles? And think they're fun and silly and learn quickly and make great family pets? LOL
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
912
Likes
8
Points
18
Location
Texas
#42
Tbh I don't even know where all the doodle hate came from. All the doodles here are nice and, as far as I know, not as stupid as people seem to advertise them being. It may be regional though?
 

BostonBanker

Active Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
8,854
Likes
1
Points
36
Location
Vermont
#43
Yup, most of the doodles here are pretty decent dogs as well. Our neighbors had one that was barky when it was young, but otherwise was a really lovely dog.
 

JacksonsMom

Active Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
8,694
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Maryland
#44
Oh boy, my favorite!

I do not think that prongs and e-collars are the devil.

I am all for people breeding mixes as long as they're breeding healthy, sound dogs and standing behind them. Same with out-of-standard colors.

Similarly, I do not think that Doodles are a scourge upon dog-kind.

I am 100% for outcrossing and think that the dog fancy's view on it is outdated and spitting in the face of the actual science behind breeding. In fact I think a good portion of the dog fancy has absolutely zero clue about science and instead goes by tradition which is incredibly messed up.

There are some dog breeds that it is impossible to breed ethically, like Bulldogs, unless you're breeding way out of standard.

Purina is not pelleted poison and too many people get caught up in feeding what's trendy instead of actually looking at what works for their individual dog.

I think that in some breeds, AKC conformation is a joke. You're not evaluating breeding stock with you've got a dog whose fur is carefully sculpted in unnatural ways filled with hair spray and chalk.

I absolutely do not think that we should save every dog and that filtering a ton of money into one special case, whether it's a very sick, very injured, or even aggressive dog, is a waste of resources when we should be helping as many needy dogs as possible, not spending thousands to tens of thousands on just one.
:hail::hail::hail::hail:

The only thing I'm somewhat iffy on is prongs and e-collars. I would have to say *I* don't believe in them and wouldn't use but I'm not going to judge those who do that actually know what they're doing. It's just that I think in the wrong hands (which is where they primarily end up) they're a bad thing.
 

JacksonsMom

Active Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
8,694
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Maryland
#45
I don't automatically find it bothersome if puppies go to their new homes before 8 weeks old.
.
Yorkie peeps are insane about the 12 week rule. While it may be beneficial for a small breed pup to stay with it's mom until 12 weeks -- I think too much is put into it. You can't even go on a forum introducing your 10 week old new puppy without a million "your dog should be with it's mom until 12 weeks" posts. I got Jackson at 9 weeks and was perfectly okay with it and had zero issues.
 
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
912
Likes
8
Points
18
Location
Texas
#46
People put too much emphasis on age, I feel... I think 6wks might be the very youngest I'd be ok with taking a pup away from the mom. I think there are benefits with leaving the puppy with its litter mates for longer (for example, Hero stayed with his litter until nearly 10 weeks old, and his bite inhibition was much better than I expected) but I wouldn't blink an eye at a 6-8wk old puppy. It is a bit iffy but it's not exactly a problem. once you get into the 5wk and earlier territory, though, I feel like that's asking for trouble.
 

Southpaw

orange iguanas.
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
7,788
Likes
1
Points
38
Age
31
Location
Minnesota
#47
Yeah I just feel like that 8-10 week age range can be a prime time for them to hit a fear period and that's not when I want to throw a puppy into a brand new home. I know some people prefer to wait until like 12 weeks but honestly I want to be in charge of my puppy's socialization so don't want them to be that old either. I felt bad getting Sawyer at 7 weeks (I could've waited but that was when I had time off work), but it worked out great so now I don't find it such a dirty thing to do if the puppy is ready to go.
 

JacksonsMom

Active Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
8,694
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Maryland
#48
Yeah I just feel like that 8-10 week age range can be a prime time for them to hit a fear period and that's not when I want to throw a puppy into a brand new home. I know some people prefer to wait until like 12 weeks but honestly I want to be in charge of my puppy's socialization so don't want them to be that old either. I felt bad getting Sawyer at 7 weeks (I could've waited but that was when I had time off work), but it worked out great so now I don't find it such a dirty thing to do if the puppy is ready to go.
That was my biggest feeling, honestly. I didn't get Jax from the greatest place anyway so honestly I feel like MORE harm would have been done if he had stayed there until 12 weeks. But I do understand breeders reasoning for 12 weeks and don't have anything against it; I just don't think people should be crucified - breeder or buyer - for getting a bit sooner. I think good breeders will know if a dog is ready or maybe should wait for a bit longer.
 
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
103
Likes
0
Points
16
#49
Oh boy, my favorite!

I do not think that prongs and e-collars are the devil.

I am all for people breeding mixes as long as they're breeding healthy, sound dogs and standing behind them. Same with out-of-standard colors.

Similarly, I do not think that Doodles are a scourge upon dog-kind.

I am 100% for outcrossing and think that the dog fancy's view on it is outdated and spitting in the face of the actual science behind breeding. In fact I think a good portion of the dog fancy has absolutely zero clue about science and instead goes by tradition which is incredibly messed up.

There are some dog breeds that it is impossible to breed ethically, like Bulldogs, unless you're breeding way out of standard.

Purina is not pelleted poison and too many people get caught up in feeding what's trendy instead of actually looking at what works for their individual dog.

I think that in some breeds, AKC conformation is a joke. You're not evaluating breeding stock with you've got a dog whose fur is carefully sculpted in unnatural ways filled with hair spray and chalk.

I absolutely do not think that we should save every dog and that filtering a ton of money into one special case, whether it's a very sick, very injured, or even aggressive dog, is a waste of resources when we should be helping as many needy dogs as possible, not spending thousands to tens of thousands on just one.
First post immediately makes me feel a lot less controversial because it hits a lot of my big points, of course. :lol-sign:

But also reminds me that "controversial" is relative to the community you're engaging with. I'm also part of a few wherein not using prongs or especially e-collars for training is itself controversial, and find myself getting side-eye because I emphasize using other methods first and using unpleasant ones only very judiciously. I have a plastic prong for long-line herding exercises because my dog will choke himself on a flat collar, and an e-collar as an emergency "stopper" for off-leash work at home (not as a replacement for PR-based recall training but as a failsafe in case he ever blows me off and heads toward the nearby highway - I have yet to have to use it that way and hope never to). I'm perpetually trapped between being too soft for balanced trainers and too cruel for R+ only trainers.

A few more I have gotten flack for, some possibly surprising:

Willingness to breed merle x merle is not central to breeding good working dogs. If your two best workers are merle 9/10 times you should still be able to get a solid dog out of one of them to breed to offspring of the other if you're utilizing good long-range thinking in your breeding program.

If your breeding program is regularly producing deformed dogs, culling them does not negate the fact that you are producing a high percentage of dogs that are unworkable.

Contrariwise, if you did do a merle x merle breeding and have DM dogs as a result, unilateral lethal culling of all EW pups is not the most responsible course of action. There is no point euthing pups if you have yet to determine the extent of their actual issues, and in a world where speutering and pet homes exist there is no reason why a dog with minor hearing issues, etc. would in any way impact the quality of the breed if desexed and sent to an active companion home. It's one thing if you can't find one that's suitable and quite another if you don't even look.

And following from that, I really don't give a crap if a person that has done a merle x merle breeding is selling a DM dog as long as they are being honest with potential buyers. If I have an issue it will be with the dog being bred at all, not simply with it leaving the premises.

But all of that said, I can conceive of merle x merle breedings being justifiable in an extreme minority of cases, and can see them having been justified historically when dogs were more relied upon, based on other qualities of the dogs that may not otherwise be preserved.

"Work testing" is not a wholesale replacement for health testing.

I don't have a problem with work-bred dogs going to appropriate pet homes - the most important thing is that the dogs' needs are met, if there is a surplus of dogs vs. working homes I don't much care how they get met.

If one dog can't handle the livestock you're putting it on by itself most of the time that means you need to put more/better training on the dog, not that you need to throw more dogs at the problem.

And one controversial amongst those that dislike the UKC classification of Catahoulas and the fact that it may exclude them from Cur and Feist program hunting activities (which if so - I'm not clear on the point - is a bad call on UKC's part regardless, because they are absolutely hunters):

Catahoulas and in the past all other curs were probably as much stock dogs as hunting dogs, if not moreso the former. The first registering body of the Catahoula put "cowdog" in their name, not "hog dog." And let's not forget what type of dog Bewick used the word "Cur" for in his history of British quadrupeds. ;)


"a trusty and useful servant to the farmer and grazier; and, although it is not taken notice of by naturalists as a distinct race, yet it is now so generally used, especially in the North of England, and such great attention is paid in breeding it, that we cannot help considering it as a permanent kind. They are chiefly employed in driving cattle; in which way they are extremely useful. They are larger, stronger, and fiercer than the Shepherd's Dog; and their hair is smoother and shorter. They are mostly black and white color. Their ears are half-pricked; and many of them are whelped with short tails, which seem as if they had been cut: These are called Self-tailed Dogs. They bite very keenly; and as they always make their attack at the heels, the cattle have no defense against them: In this way they are more than a match for a Bull, which they quickly compel to run. Their sagacity is uncommonly great. They know their master's fields, and are singularly attentive to the cattle that are in them: A good Dog watches, goes his rounds; and, if any strange cattle should happen to appear amongst the herd, although unbidden, he quickly flies at them, and with keen bites obliges them to depart."

IIRC there are several genes that can cause bobbed tails in dogs and the one present in Catahoulas is the same one consistently present in the British and European-descended stock dog breeds that have naturally bobbed tails. Coincidence? IDK, mate. A lot of the purported history of the breed is poorly documented and I suspect much of the popular story is rather off. But the idea of owning a descendant of red wolves and a conquistador's war dogs proves easy to romanticize I'm afraid. According to Wisdom Panel the modern Catahoula is most genetically similar to scenthounds overall, which also does not follow from the party-line history of the breed.

I also think it's fine to take a pup at 6-7 weeks in a minority of cases.

I also think Flexis have limited uses although I wouldn't use one myself with my dog right now.

And this is a weird one but I often think that "dog people" overstate the difficulty of BC ownership. I'm sure it varies by line but I've seen plenty of functionally inexperienced owners do fine with BCs as long as the dog fit their pre-existing lifestyle (they live rurally or are very active, etc.) and there are a lot of other breeds I'd be quicker to caution an appropriately-situated newb away from, myself.
 
Last edited:

Paviche

Duuuuude.
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
1,297
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Aurora, CO
#50
I 100% believe that the people who say that all the Doodles they've ever met are nuts, aggressive and/or fearful, etc, are either totally BSing or at least convincing themselves to see things that aren't there. I don't doubt that there are bad Doodles out there (like with literally every breed or mix) but I wholeheartedly believe that people judge Doodles waaaaay harsher than they would other dogs. If a Lab jumps and knocks people around, he's poorly trained, but if a Doodle does it, he's hyper and spastic. If a GSD gets nippy at the groomer, he's poorly socialized, but if a Doodle does it, he's a raging bag of aggression. If a Newfie shies away from touch, he's sensitive or soft, but if a Doodle does it, he's dangerously unstable (and did I mention how he probably peed himself while doing it?!)

It's ridiculous.
 

Snark

Mutts to you
Joined
Mar 27, 2006
Messages
4,023
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Midwest
#52
I have relatives who got doodles last year, both are very nice dogs and very cute. My only 'issue' (and it's just me personally) is the high price each paid for their puppy. They paid more for their puppies than I paid for my Morgan horse. :yikes: I just can't see myself paying that much for what is essentially a mix breed.
 

Dekka

Just try me..
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
19,779
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
47
Location
Ontario
#53
The issue I have with doodles isn't the dogs. Its the doodle breeders. There is a breeder in my areaish that just pumps out the doodles. Her dogs are nice enough, nothing super special but nothing wrong with them. But she gets super high prices with minimal health testing.

I do agree that most dogs are pets, but I don't think all breeds need to be dumbed down. Does everyone need to be able to fit a border collie into their lives? Or a JRT?

I agree Confo shows often are silly and that not every dog should be saved.

Most of my controversial thoughts won't be terribly controversial on here :D
 

Dogdragoness

Happy Halloween!!
Joined
May 31, 2012
Messages
4,169
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Gillett/Flower Mound TX
#54
I 100% believe that the people who say that all the Doodles they've ever met are nuts, aggressive and/or fearful, etc, are either totally BSing or at least convincing themselves to see things that aren't there. I don't doubt that there are bad Doodles out there (like with literally every breed or mix) but I wholeheartedly believe that people judge Doodles waaaaay harsher than they would other dogs. If a Lab jumps and knocks people around, he's poorly trained, but if a Doodle does it, he's hyper and spastic. If a GSD gets nippy at the groomer, he's poorly socialized, but if a Doodle does it, he's a raging bag of aggression. If a Newfie shies away from touch, he's sensitive or soft, but if a Doodle does it, he's dangerously unstable (and did I mention how he probably peed himself while doing it?!)

It's ridiculous.
On the flip side, why shouldn't doodles be held to the same "standards" that we judge other purebreds by? If ANY dog, doodle or whatever gets nippy at the groomer I'd call them poorly socialized, if a dog shies away from touch I'd call them shy and also in need of socialization, if a dog jumps and knocks people around I'd call them poorly trained ... it MAKES NO DIFFERENCE whether it is a doodle, or whatever "fad" mutt they are breeding and giving a cute name, or if it's a purebred dog.

I will say that in my area, many of those people who breed those "designer" mixes aren't ethical, that's for sure and I wouldn't touch them with a ten foot pole, no more than I would a purebred breeder with the same ethics.

Are doodles my kind of dog? No. But neither are nordic breeds like huskies, does that mean I think huskies shouldn't exist either? No! All I hope is that people buying these dogs research their breeder and make sure they at least health test.
 

Paviche

Duuuuude.
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
1,297
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Aurora, CO
#55
On the flip side, why shouldn't doodles be held to the same "standards" that we judge other purebreds by? If ANY dog, doodle or whatever gets nippy at the groomer I'd call them poorly socialized, if a dog shies away from touch I'd call them shy and also in need of socialization, if a dog jumps and knocks people around I'd call them poorly trained ... it MAKES NO DIFFERENCE whether it is a doodle, or whatever "fad" mutt they are breeding and giving a cute name, or if it's a purebred dog.

I will say that in my area, many of those people who breed those "designer" mixes aren't ethical, that's for sure and I wouldn't touch them with a ten foot pole, no more than I would a purebred breeder with the same ethics.

Are doodles my kind of dog? No. But neither are nordic breeds like huskies, does that mean I think huskies shouldn't exist either? No! All I hope is that people buying these dogs research their breeder and make sure they at least health test.
I've never said that they shouldn't be held to the same standards, nor have I seen anyone else say that. If anyone is cutting Doodles more slack than other breeds, then they're just as wrong, but I've never seen that happen, only people acting like Doodles are Literally The Devil.
 

Dogdragoness

Happy Halloween!!
Joined
May 31, 2012
Messages
4,169
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Gillett/Flower Mound TX
#56
The issue I have with doodles isn't the dogs. Its the doodle breeders. There is a breeder in my areaish that just pumps out the doodles. Her dogs are nice enough, nothing super special but nothing wrong with them. But she gets super high prices with minimal health testing.

I do agree that most dogs are pets, but I don't think all breeds need to be dumbed down. Does everyone need to be able to fit a border collie into their lives? Or a JRT?

I agree Confo shows often are silly and that not every dog should be saved.

Most of my controversial thoughts won't be terribly controversial on here :D
This, and I think that's what many folks (especially in the poodle circles) have issue with, too.

On another subject, I DO NOT believe that working/herding/sporting breeds should be "dumbed down" so the "average" person can own them, IMO a GSD that looks like a GSD but acts like, say, a golden is no longer a GSD. IMO that is wrong, because it means people are getting dogs based on their looks and not if they are the best fit for ther household.
 
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
912
Likes
8
Points
18
Location
Texas
#57
On another subject, I DO NOT believe that working/herding/sporting breeds should be "dumbed down" so the "average" person can own them, IMO a GSD that looks like a GSD but acts like, say, a golden is no longer a GSD. IMO that is wrong, because it means people are getting dogs based on their looks and not if they are the best fit for ther household.
honestly, I have no problem with people breeding "dumbed down" versions IF and only IF there is somehow a distinction. I have no idea how they would make a distinction, but it would be better for an inexperienced person to like the way a GSD looked and end up with an easy/mellow dog that they were prepared for rather than there be no options for them, so they end up getting a GSD they like the looks of and end up getting a high energy working dog.

I have nothing wrong with liking the way a dog looks, as long as you take other factors into consideration. If there was a sight hound breed that acted like a herding breed, I would get one in an instant. (Maybe there is one that I just don't know about lol)
 

Dogdragoness

Happy Halloween!!
Joined
May 31, 2012
Messages
4,169
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Gillett/Flower Mound TX
#58
honestly, I have no problem with people breeding "dumbed down" versions IF and only IF there is somehow a distinction. I have no idea how they would make a distinction, but it would be better for an inexperienced person to like the way a GSD looked and end up with an easy/mellow dog that they were prepared for rather than there be no options for them, so they end up getting a GSD they like the looks of and end up getting a high energy working dog.

I have nothing wrong with liking the way a dog looks, as long as you take other factors into consideration. If there was a sight hound breed that acted like a herding breed, I would get one in an instant. (Maybe there is one that I just don't know about lol)
I dont agree with that logic. I think a lot more should be taken into consideration when choosing a dog than just looks. Dont we often get after people on here for doing that and tell them to "do their research" and all that?
 

Dekka

Just try me..
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
19,779
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
47
Location
Ontario
#59
I think the issue with dumbing a breed down is the worry it will get popular. It will make the 'correct' version far more rare and those people who love the breed will have far less access to dogs. Also there is a risk that the people who love the 'GSD looking Golden' will become breeders, get on the breed club BOD etc. And over time the Golden temperament becomes the new normal.
 
Joined
Apr 10, 2008
Messages
4,381
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Midwest
#60
I think the issue with dumbing a breed down is the worry it will get popular. It will make the 'correct' version far more rare and those people who love the breed will have far less access to dogs. Also there is a risk that the people who love the 'GSD looking Golden' will become breeders, get on the breed club BOD etc. And over time the Golden temperament becomes the new normal.
one could make the argument that it's already happened. I really don't care what kind of dogs people like, just take care of them. I don't understand why someone wants a dog that doesn't act anything like the breed description that defines it as a separate and identifiable breed, but take care if it and i have no problems.

But there are GSD breeders everywhere and there isnt' a single one in the state i live in that I'd go and looking for an actual working prospect., maybe 1. I have to go MN or IL to find a GSD breeder I'd feel confident would have a dog capable of working from it's breeding program. those aren't good odds considering I can find GSD puppies for sale all over around here.
 

Members online

Top