IT WAS JUST THE SHORT VERSION, DAMN. . .


I'll write an -F-ing book next time. . .

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

VanCamp,

And just why did you think my posts tend to get so long?

 Quote:

Originally posted by Richard Cannon:
As much as I hear the German GSD extolled here I have a question, Why are German PD's now importing dogs from Holland and moving to Mal's for their PSDs?

Same reason as with ASDs. It's a four-letter word starting with 'S' (only it doesn't end with 'T' except in our minds <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> ). Look at what started taking control of the SV back in the 70s and what controls it now.

Any time you look at working for a purpose other than what the breed was intended for that there become problems in a breed.

I don't totally agree with that. I agree more with what VanCamp said earlier that "....they used the same drives to do one job or the other. The essence of what makes the dog a worker does not change." Why? Because IMO dogs have preferences just like we do -- look at Flinks' demonstration of asking the dog what toy it prefers -- there is your answer. How many actually "ask" or test the dog to see where its preference lies. For example, a dog may be a good working dog (gets a working title) but if it is made to do a job it doesn't have an interest in (preference for) it won't work like a good working dog. That doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the dog, it just means it isn't being used efficiently -- that's a human error.

Working tests (SchH, FH, HGH, etc.) IMO are a big part of the problem. Too often too much importance is given to titles and scores. This results in pieces of paper being bred instead of real flesh & blood. Titles show whether a dog can be trained but actual work is the only thing that proofs a working dog.

In addition, the bar has constantly been lowered in performance tests -- for sure it has in SV herding. Why has the bar been lowered? What has been the result? JMO <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Ummmmmmmmmm Uhhhhhhhh, What's "rank", never heard of it? Be kind, it's been a long and bad week.

Trooper,

Dominance is close enough. It's a desire to increase his status in the pack through aggression. This can sometimes be challenging if you happen to be the pack leader.

Ellen,

By using for another purpose than intended I mean like what has happened with the Dobe. It has gone from a working/guard dog to a companion dog.

As I have said before, the problem is not that 4 lettered word that starts with S, but the fact that it isn't combined with the 4 lettered word that begins with W.

Richard,

The only problem I have with S or W is probably similar you -- the tendency to go to extremes. That tendency has created the split between the two anyway IMO.

I blame breeding for & promoting extremes (whether in S or W) as a main cause of, and justification for, excessive inbreeding and close line breeding which in turn has resulted in so many serious health and temperament problems in the breed(s) today.

I may be shot for saying this, but I don't have a problem with a dog being working/guard and/or companion as long as it is healthy, has sound nerves and a solid temperament. I don't see working/guard and companion dog as having to be exclusionary -- unless, of course, in the extreme -- which is probably what you mean anyway. Don't many police k9s live with their handlers as a family dog when off duty?

Richard has brought me around somewhat here. I don't believe that the problems caused by working breeders are equal to the problems caused by show breeders but the potential is certainly there. If Richard says that he couldn't find working dogs with their feet pointing in the same direction then my stance must change.
I hearby blow the whistle on any breeder that lets "health and the ability to move freely" slip in his line.

However, I don't really feel I have any business telling folks that their unethical for prefering one "type" over another.

You can post all the "politically correct" ideas of what a perfect working dog should be, but it's BS.
How many of you have ever seen the perfect dog that VanCamp described? I don't believe that is exactly the kind of dog that he prefers either :rolleyes: (closer would be: "bring em hard 'n' sharp, overflowing with fight with a touch of prey and defense, and enough nerve to do the job I'm asking")

The differing ideas that breeders have of the "perfect dog" will be an asset to the comunity in my opinion. Lets not all jump on the "perfect dog" bandwagon or we run the risk of ending up with a "generic dog" indeed, and be left with nowhere to go to correct it.

 Quote:

Originally posted by jason:
However, I don't really feel I have any business telling folks that their unethical for prefering one "type" over another.

Jason,

I don't think it is an issue of preference or diversity in what one breeds for as much as it is about HOW one goes about getting there. One can achieve the same results by "outcross" breeding -- by selecting the same phenotypes from different lines -- one does not have to inbreed or line breed to hold or set preference types.

Ellen,

If those genotypes are not relatively "fixed" in the two lines that we are outcrossing, predictability in that cross does not prevail. Outcross after outcross is a great way to water down your line.

P.S. Maybe we should start a new thread and discuss that in more detail. Staying inside vs going out is some of the blood 'n' guts of breeding. I've read alot lately about breeding dogs and that highly controversial topic has not been sufficiently addressed IMO