Obedience vs. Rally
- Thread starter Taqroy
- Start date
I see nothing backwards about encouraging people to adopt mixes and spay and neuter them and then further their relationship with them by competing in dog sports.
We'll likely have to agree to disagree though because although I am comfortable and understanding of keeping ones dog intact for ethical breeding purposes, past maturity, I don't believe the majority of the pet population is near responsible enough to maintain strict standards and not "oops". I am all for encouraging the average pet owner to spay and neuter their pet.
We'll likely have to agree to disagree though because although I am comfortable and understanding of keeping ones dog intact for ethical breeding purposes, past maturity, I don't believe the majority of the pet population is near responsible enough to maintain strict standards and not "oops". I am all for encouraging the average pet owner to spay and neuter their pet.
Have you guys seen the new AKC rally regulations that were put up a couple days ago? They have a bunch of new signs (lots borrowed from APDT) and look to be putting new emphasis on teamwork, briskness, etc in the ring.
It makes me laugh and laugh that "pleading" is to be penalized as a major deduction
It makes me laugh and laugh that "pleading" is to be penalized as a major deduction
I don't find altering backwards, I find requiring it to compete in a sport to be backwards. But like I said, I honestly didn't expect anything else from them. It's PC to push for altering.
And what I'm all for is encouraging people to weigh the pros and cons and make an educated decision that works best for them and their dog.
And yeah, I am whiny about not being able to compete in AKC at all because ASCA trials are harder to find around here. I'm hoping when I get to TX things will be a lot easier.
ETA: But like you said, something we more than likely won't agree on an a perfect example of why it would be hard for the AKC to do without explosion.
And what I'm all for is encouraging people to weigh the pros and cons and make an educated decision that works best for them and their dog.
And yeah, I am whiny about not being able to compete in AKC at all because ASCA trials are harder to find around here. I'm hoping when I get to TX things will be a lot easier.
ETA: But like you said, something we more than likely won't agree on an a perfect example of why it would be hard for the AKC to do without explosion.
Have you tried UKC? I'm not sure what their policy is either though.
AKC is a registry with titles created to test breed-ability. I believe it is a rational concern that someone with an intact dog achieving a "breed worthiness title" may believe their dog then worthy of breeding and AKC could be in turn blamed for encouraging the breeding of non-purebred dogs. Ya know?
I support the choice, but I do understand it would be a bummer having a non-registered (in this country) breed and wanting to compete and still maintain breeding rights. A loophole for these breeds would be a great idea, however, it would get ugly deciding which are the dutch shepherds and koolies of the world and which are the renascence bulldogs and canis panthers of the world.
AKC is a registry with titles created to test breed-ability. I believe it is a rational concern that someone with an intact dog achieving a "breed worthiness title" may believe their dog then worthy of breeding and AKC could be in turn blamed for encouraging the breeding of non-purebred dogs. Ya know?
I support the choice, but I do understand it would be a bummer having a non-registered (in this country) breed and wanting to compete and still maintain breeding rights. A loophole for these breeds would be a great idea, however, it would get ugly deciding which are the dutch shepherds and koolies of the world and which are the renascence bulldogs and canis panthers of the world.
I think that's exactly it. I don't buy even for a minute that the AKC is doing it for "ethical reasons." :rofl1:
And as far as them "encouraging" spay/neuter, they're not. They're just saying if you want to compete under us, your dog better be sterilized unless it has a pedigree. The "average pet owner" doesn't compete in AKC sports. Also, um... under this system, the average pet owner could still have plenty of "oopsies" between purebreds? Let's be honest, this does nothing to prevent unwanted litters. Nothing. I'm trying to think of the ignorant person who stood up and said, "Well... I want to do AKC sports, but my dog's not spayed! Once I drop this latest oops litter off at AC, I'll get that done so I can jump in the Rally ring! Oh, maybe I should get her some basic care while I'm at it..." I'm sure these are the people that are just itching to do dog sports, LOL. Not to mention, they don't ask for ANY proof of sterilization when you register the dog. It's total lip service, allowing them to remain PC and pacify the conformation crowd.
And I occasionally hear that there should be an option for rare breeds that are "purebred" but not recognized or on FSS, so they can remain intact. I cry bullshit, and honestly it really bothers me when people start arguing that. You're still supporting the abstract idea that a dog needs to be "purebred" (which when you come down to it, is difficult to define) to keep its gonads. A Koolie is no more or less valid than a street mutt I find, if both excel at the sport. Arguing otherwise just puts you right inline with the AKC's thinking - you just happen to have a breed the AKC doesn't recognize. It's still the idea that validity of a dog is based on pedigree, and that no matter what the quality of dog, if it's mixed, it must be culled. I don't support randomly breeding mutts when you don't know what's behind them, don't get me wrong. I thoroughly appreciate the predictability of a good purebred and have no plans for more mutts in my future. But I still think it's wrong to predetermine that a dog is a cull because it's a mix, sorry. I sat at one dog show near the base of some steep metal stairs that the dogs had to go up and down to get from grooming to the breed ring. Watching the "well-bred" dogs skitz out over some slightly weird stairs, seeing soooo many with such shitty environmental nerves, and watching a good portion come up the leash at their handlers when the handlers insisted they take the stairs... Yeah. Not too impressed by what's allowed to breed, when my mix with good structure, good drive, excellent nerves, and a great temperament must be sterile, sorry.
The reality is that IF AKC sports were about promoting the dogs that are best at those sports (no caveats), than none of that should matter. At all.
But that's not what AKC sports are about. They're about providing a venue for a certain few to play in. Not about the best dogs, point blank, but the dogs that the AKC will permit to participate. And you know what? That's fine. They're a kennel club. That's what a kennel club is - a club for certain people.
The AKC promotes the idea that the performance ring is for culls anyway. Oh, limited reg? Well you can't do confo because that's for good dogs, but you can take your mismarked little dog and do agility, or one of those silly things! They do not support the idea that breed worthiness can be proven outside of the confo ring. (And that why, while the AKC is "just a registry", it does, inherently, promote breeding for appearance.)
(And by the way, if you've never registered a dog through Canine Partners, you've never had the delight of seeing how patronizing the "paperwork" is. It has a cartoon dog with its tongue sticking out, and looks like it's designed for a 5 year old. It could not more clearly say, "Don't take this too seriously! It's not real registration and don't you dare mistake it for that!")
And as far as them "encouraging" spay/neuter, they're not. They're just saying if you want to compete under us, your dog better be sterilized unless it has a pedigree. The "average pet owner" doesn't compete in AKC sports. Also, um... under this system, the average pet owner could still have plenty of "oopsies" between purebreds? Let's be honest, this does nothing to prevent unwanted litters. Nothing. I'm trying to think of the ignorant person who stood up and said, "Well... I want to do AKC sports, but my dog's not spayed! Once I drop this latest oops litter off at AC, I'll get that done so I can jump in the Rally ring! Oh, maybe I should get her some basic care while I'm at it..." I'm sure these are the people that are just itching to do dog sports, LOL. Not to mention, they don't ask for ANY proof of sterilization when you register the dog. It's total lip service, allowing them to remain PC and pacify the conformation crowd.
And I occasionally hear that there should be an option for rare breeds that are "purebred" but not recognized or on FSS, so they can remain intact. I cry bullshit, and honestly it really bothers me when people start arguing that. You're still supporting the abstract idea that a dog needs to be "purebred" (which when you come down to it, is difficult to define) to keep its gonads. A Koolie is no more or less valid than a street mutt I find, if both excel at the sport. Arguing otherwise just puts you right inline with the AKC's thinking - you just happen to have a breed the AKC doesn't recognize. It's still the idea that validity of a dog is based on pedigree, and that no matter what the quality of dog, if it's mixed, it must be culled. I don't support randomly breeding mutts when you don't know what's behind them, don't get me wrong. I thoroughly appreciate the predictability of a good purebred and have no plans for more mutts in my future. But I still think it's wrong to predetermine that a dog is a cull because it's a mix, sorry. I sat at one dog show near the base of some steep metal stairs that the dogs had to go up and down to get from grooming to the breed ring. Watching the "well-bred" dogs skitz out over some slightly weird stairs, seeing soooo many with such shitty environmental nerves, and watching a good portion come up the leash at their handlers when the handlers insisted they take the stairs... Yeah. Not too impressed by what's allowed to breed, when my mix with good structure, good drive, excellent nerves, and a great temperament must be sterile, sorry.
The reality is that IF AKC sports were about promoting the dogs that are best at those sports (no caveats), than none of that should matter. At all.
But that's not what AKC sports are about. They're about providing a venue for a certain few to play in. Not about the best dogs, point blank, but the dogs that the AKC will permit to participate. And you know what? That's fine. They're a kennel club. That's what a kennel club is - a club for certain people.
The AKC promotes the idea that the performance ring is for culls anyway.
Oh, limited reg? Well you can't do confo because that's for good dogs, but you can take your mismarked little dog and do agility, or one of those silly things! They do not support the idea that breed worthiness can be proven outside of the confo ring. (And that why, while the AKC is "just a registry", it does, inherently, promote breeding for appearance.)(And by the way, if you've never registered a dog through Canine Partners, you've never had the delight of seeing how patronizing the "paperwork" is. It has a cartoon dog with its tongue sticking out, and looks like it's designed for a 5 year old. It could not more clearly say, "Don't take this too seriously! It's not real registration and don't you dare mistake it for that!")
Well considering I could compete with my AKC poodle fully intact yet be opening churning out doodle-this or doodle-that in my spare time, I guess I don't see the point besides appeasing and PC...which is not reason at all IMO. If people want to breed a dog (any breed(s)), not being able to compete in AKC isn't going to stop them. I'm all for encouraging education and s/n (with actual facts and research), but mandating it...
And I know the comment wasn't meant this way, but that those of us with mix breeds should feel lucky to compete at all is a rather lame sentiment. Like saying that since women in other parts of the world can't vote, we should feel lucky we can. No, we should feel enraged that others can't. (I'm bad at metaphors but you get my point I hope...)
P.S. Linds: NO MOVING to Texas before I get to meet you and Trav, understand???
And I know the comment wasn't meant this way, but that those of us with mix breeds should feel lucky to compete at all is a rather lame sentiment. Like saying that since women in other parts of the world can't vote, we should feel lucky we can. No, we should feel enraged that others can't. (I'm bad at metaphors but you get my point I hope...)
P.S. Linds: NO MOVING to Texas before I get to meet you and Trav, understand???
To keep the right to be bred I believe a dog should be purebred. The purpose bred working or sport mix falls in a gray area for me. This a fair and rightful opinion and I am not sure how it is anymore bullshit than that of the masses breeding mixes because they wanted to experience the miracle or life or didn't realize brothers and sisters in the dog world still like to bang.
We'll have to agree to disagree, to which I have been perfectly ready and comfortable with since this topic was even breeched.
AKC is a registry and it is a choice to contribute. This doesn't by any means equate to "shut up or change it" but it is a reminder that these complaints may be best worded in a letter and a petition. Things can change and have very obviously done so in the minimal years I have been involved in dog sports, these changes came because someone directed their frustration.
From their website:
AKC Mission Statement
The American Kennel Club is dedicated to upholding the integrity of its Registry, promoting the sport of purebred dogs and breeding for type and function. Founded in 1884, the AKC® and its affiliated organizations advocate for the purebred dog as a family companion, advance canine health and well-being, work to protect the rights of all dog owners and promote responsible dog ownership.
AKC 's Objective:
• Advance the study, breeding, exhibiting, running and maintenance of purebred dogs.
AKC's Core Values:
* We love purebred dogs
* We are committed to advancing the sport of the purebred dog
* We are dedicated to maintaining the integrity of our Registry
* We protect the health and well-being of all dogs
* We cherish dogs as companions
* We are committed to the interests of dog owners
* We uphold high standards for the administration and operation of the AKC
* We recognize the critical importance of our clubs and volunteers
Keynotes, they're all about breeding and providing a measuring stick for breed worthiness of the purebred dog.
With the acceptance of non-purebred breeding dogs they would have to change their entire mission statement. AKC was not created to please everyone, but in this day and age disappointing anyone is hazardous.
We'll have to agree to disagree, to which I have been perfectly ready and comfortable with since this topic was even breeched.
AKC is a registry and it is a choice to contribute. This doesn't by any means equate to "shut up or change it" but it is a reminder that these complaints may be best worded in a letter and a petition. Things can change and have very obviously done so in the minimal years I have been involved in dog sports, these changes came because someone directed their frustration.
From their website:
AKC Mission Statement
The American Kennel Club is dedicated to upholding the integrity of its Registry, promoting the sport of purebred dogs and breeding for type and function. Founded in 1884, the AKC® and its affiliated organizations advocate for the purebred dog as a family companion, advance canine health and well-being, work to protect the rights of all dog owners and promote responsible dog ownership.
AKC 's Objective:
• Advance the study, breeding, exhibiting, running and maintenance of purebred dogs.
AKC's Core Values:
* We love purebred dogs
* We are committed to advancing the sport of the purebred dog
* We are dedicated to maintaining the integrity of our Registry
* We protect the health and well-being of all dogs
* We cherish dogs as companions
* We are committed to the interests of dog owners
* We uphold high standards for the administration and operation of the AKC
* We recognize the critical importance of our clubs and volunteers
Keynotes, they're all about breeding and providing a measuring stick for breed worthiness of the purebred dog.
With the acceptance of non-purebred breeding dogs they would have to change their entire mission statement. AKC was not created to please everyone, but in this day and age disappointing anyone is hazardous.
I stated as much in my post, quite clearly. In fact, I have directed my frustration quite constructively, thank you. Back when mixes were supposed to compete on "separate but equal" status, I wrote to the AKC and expressed disappointment, and explained to them that my dog would not be registered unless this changed.
And it did.
I've read the mission statement. But they're not offering pedigrees and genealogy services to mutts. Just performance titles. There's no way to trace a mutts progeny through Canine Partners, lol, intact or not. Their offspring would still be registered as dogs of unknown origin and only be able to participate in "companion events". And as I said, the AKC pretty firmly indicates through its own registration system that conformation titles are what prove breeding worthiness, not companion events (hence the name).
But, as I also clearly said, they're a club and they can do what they want, and we chose whether or not we want to play by their rules.
Anyway, how do you define purebred? Koolies with no papers - purebred? Rustic, regional "types" that breed true - purebred? What about the FCI conformation/temperament inspectons you can get for a dog of no known background - if I got Macky inspected down in Puerto Rico and they passed her as a field-line Cocker, then can I breed her, because the FCI says ok? Technically, any breed can get into the ABCA registry through the ROM program. If I ROM my mixed sheepdog as a BC, then I can breed it? There are working farm Cardigans in Wales still, with peds that go back for generations but no KC registration. Yes? No? Maybe? What about KNPV line Dutchies? They're full of god knows what, they call them Dutchies if they're brindle and Mals if they're fawn, they keep peds but are notorious for hung papers. Are they in, or not?
Dogs with known backgrounds and no papers, dogs with unknown backgrounds and registration (happens, like I said, the FCI will inspect dogs and allow them to gain FCI reg (with breeding rights) if they pass). Purebred? Kosher to breed?
Sorry, but I personally have a lot of trouble basing breed worthiness on something as abstract as the concept of being "purebred". I believe dogs should be purpose bred - most will conveniently end up being what most people consider "purebred" as a result of this, but not all, and I'm more than fine with that. Forms follows function, and the like.
And it did.
I've read the mission statement. But they're not offering pedigrees and genealogy services to mutts. Just performance titles. There's no way to trace a mutts progeny through Canine Partners, lol, intact or not. Their offspring would still be registered as dogs of unknown origin and only be able to participate in "companion events". And as I said, the AKC pretty firmly indicates through its own registration system that conformation titles are what prove breeding worthiness, not companion events (hence the name).
But, as I also clearly said, they're a club and they can do what they want, and we chose whether or not we want to play by their rules.
Anyway, how do you define purebred? Koolies with no papers - purebred? Rustic, regional "types" that breed true - purebred? What about the FCI conformation/temperament inspectons you can get for a dog of no known background - if I got Macky inspected down in Puerto Rico and they passed her as a field-line Cocker, then can I breed her, because the FCI says ok? Technically, any breed can get into the ABCA registry through the ROM program. If I ROM my mixed sheepdog as a BC, then I can breed it? There are working farm Cardigans in Wales still, with peds that go back for generations but no KC registration. Yes? No? Maybe? What about KNPV line Dutchies? They're full of god knows what, they call them Dutchies if they're brindle and Mals if they're fawn, they keep peds but are notorious for hung papers. Are they in, or not?
Dogs with known backgrounds and no papers, dogs with unknown backgrounds and registration (happens, like I said, the FCI will inspect dogs and allow them to gain FCI reg (with breeding rights) if they pass). Purebred? Kosher to breed?
Sorry, but I personally have a lot of trouble basing breed worthiness on something as abstract as the concept of being "purebred". I believe dogs should be purpose bred - most will conveniently end up being what most people consider "purebred" as a result of this, but not all, and I'm more than fine with that. Forms follows function, and the like.
Well said, Emily.
No one's saying there isn't value in breeding true to type, preserving working ability, etc.
I would even go so far as to say I have no issue with health-tested, purpose-bred mix breeds by responsible breeders (support for lifetime of pupppy, etc.). It's not a grey area to me.
It's the "purebred" superiority that is so ridiculous.
No one's saying there isn't value in breeding true to type, preserving working ability, etc.
I would even go so far as to say I have no issue with health-tested, purpose-bred mix breeds by responsible breeders (support for lifetime of pupppy, etc.). It's not a grey area to me.
It's the "purebred" superiority that is so ridiculous.
I don't believe in breeding without purpose but I also desire knowledge and research of the past. Function and form are important to me.
I don't believe it is a purebred superiority as much as owners of non-purebred dogs are trying to change a purebred dog registry, maybe there should be more registries designed for the non-purebred or "does not matter" dog.
I don't believe it is a purebred superiority as much as owners of non-purebred dogs are trying to change a purebred dog registry, maybe there should be more registries designed for the non-purebred or "does not matter" dog.
This is exactly it, Shai! I am an enthusiast of dogs that are carefully and predictably bred. Mackenzy is AWESOME but I know I probably won't get so lucky with another dog of random origin, so I've pursued purpose-bred animals. Keeva conveniently comes with AKC reg, so the issue is null and void - but that's not why I got her, and if I ever breed any dog, the last thing on my mind will be their paper trail, lol.
I have a canine partners registered mutt. He's a foundling. I have no clue what's behind him, don't care how wonderful a dog he is, he should never be bred. He came to us neutered, but even had he not, I would have had him neutered. No reason for foundlings, rescues, mixed breeds with no purpose to be left intact. I'm perfectly capable of making sure he's not bred, but you never know - something may happen to me, and he might get out, might whatever. The risks of irresponsibly adding to the pet overpopulation problem far outweigh the health risks IMO. Not to mention it was my intact dog who died of osteosarcoma, and my intact dog who got prostate cancer.
I don't care what the AKC's reasoning is for requiring that the dog be altered, from where I'm standing where shelter crowding is so bad that dogs are euthanized within 24 hours of surrender, or simply dumped on the side of the road to become road kill or a coyote snack, its a good thing.
ILP does require a veterinarian statement with proof of spay or neuter.
I don't care what the AKC's reasoning is for requiring that the dog be altered, from where I'm standing where shelter crowding is so bad that dogs are euthanized within 24 hours of surrender, or simply dumped on the side of the road to become road kill or a coyote snack, its a good thing.
ILP does require a veterinarian statement with proof of spay or neuter.
Personally I think breeds, and dogs, would be better off if each breed looked after its own registry.
Pure breeds as we know them now are such a new invention, and I can't see this 'experiment' being sustainable as it is. I think there should be more places for the ethical breeding of other breeds into breeds, as well as purpose bred mixes.
Pure breeds as we know them now are such a new invention, and I can't see this 'experiment' being sustainable as it is. I think there should be more places for the ethical breeding of other breeds into breeds, as well as purpose bred mixes.
Then explain why not one single reputable breed rescue will adopt out an intact dog? Why not one single pound or humane society will adopt out an intact dog?
Come spend a week here in the deep south dealing with the "leave 'em intact" mentality and I'll show you many, many, MANY reasons for NOT leaving them intact. Would you like pictures?
Can you guarantee that your dog will NEVER get loose? Your house will never be broken in to, you won't have a car accident with your dog in the car and he gets loose? That he won't be stolen?
Can you guarantee that YOU will always be your dog's caretaker? That you won't be sick one day and need someone else to take care of him?
Come spend a week here in the deep south dealing with the "leave 'em intact" mentality and I'll show you many, many, MANY reasons for NOT leaving them intact. Would you like pictures?
Can you guarantee that your dog will NEVER get loose? Your house will never be broken in to, you won't have a car accident with your dog in the car and he gets loose? That he won't be stolen?
Can you guarantee that YOU will always be your dog's caretaker? That you won't be sick one day and need someone else to take care of him?
I don't base my medical or moral decisions on what a rescue with an agenda does. But you sure can.
And while you're at it send me pictures of orphans dying in Africa because it'll effect whether or not I have children about as much as pictures of dogs in shelters will effect whether I make the educated decision to not lop off my dogs sex organs.
No I can't. Don't feel the need to either.
And while you're at it send me pictures of orphans dying in Africa because it'll effect whether or not I have children about as much as pictures of dogs in shelters will effect whether I make the educated decision to not lop off my dogs sex organs.
No I can't. Don't feel the need to either.
I think that is where the personal exp comes from. Shelters and rescues often play to the lowest common denominator. Though speaking from experience a reputable rescue WILL adopt out an intact dog to very specific people.
That doesnt' mean I am against s/n. I am against it as a forced process on all people. Dash will never be bred, he has his parts. Kaiden is 8 years old and hasn't been bred since he was 2, he has his parts. For me lopping off or removing bits that aren't offending anyone doesn't make sense. Now if they do start offending others then they go.
That doesnt' mean I am against s/n. I am against it as a forced process on all people. Dash will never be bred, he has his parts. Kaiden is 8 years old and hasn't been bred since he was 2, he has his parts. For me lopping off or removing bits that aren't offending anyone doesn't make sense. Now if they do start offending others then they go.
1.) Ignorance? Differing view points? Explain to me why rescues adopt out dogs that are fear-biting train wrecks all the time, and I'll start caring about their procedures. I don't agree with half the stuff most rescues do, so why would this be any different? I don't really count them as an authority.
2.) Every picture you give will just be a picture on why people need to be responsible with their pets. For SOME PEOPLE that may mean altering, given their particular situation. FOR ME, there is no significant reason to alter my dogs. YOU may have lots of loose, intact dogs around. I do not. It is my choice, not yours and not the AKC's either, LOL.
3.) Nope, and I can't guarantee she won't eat somebody's kid. Doesn't mean I'm gonna have her teeth pulled, or have her wear a muzzle. I also can't guarantee my dog won't bolt to the road and get smashed by a truck. I'm still not going to deny her off leash time. I minimize the risks and the benefits outweigh them.
Sorry, but you know what's far more risky to the public than an intact dog, in all the scenarios you've given? One with a shoddy temperament. So now I declare that nobody with a dog with a less than bomb-proof temperament should keep their dog alive, lest they have an accident and strangers have to handle the dog in an extreme situation. Also, no one can own dogs that the general public might not enjoy (like high drive dogs, certain breeds, etc) in case somebody else has to care for the dog, and can't handle it. I declare it to be so.
2.) Every picture you give will just be a picture on why people need to be responsible with their pets. For SOME PEOPLE that may mean altering, given their particular situation. FOR ME, there is no significant reason to alter my dogs. YOU may have lots of loose, intact dogs around. I do not. It is my choice, not yours and not the AKC's either, LOL.
3.) Nope, and I can't guarantee she won't eat somebody's kid. Doesn't mean I'm gonna have her teeth pulled, or have her wear a muzzle. I also can't guarantee my dog won't bolt to the road and get smashed by a truck. I'm still not going to deny her off leash time. I minimize the risks and the benefits outweigh them.
Sorry, but you know what's far more risky to the public than an intact dog, in all the scenarios you've given? One with a shoddy temperament. So now I declare that nobody with a dog with a less than bomb-proof temperament should keep their dog alive, lest they have an accident and strangers have to handle the dog in an extreme situation. Also, no one can own dogs that the general public might not enjoy (like high drive dogs, certain breeds, etc) in case somebody else has to care for the dog, and can't handle it. I declare it to be so.