Well, I'll stick my neck out here because I don't really know if it can happen.
So Joy you're saying that, say a Mal litter has a long hair in it (may be considered a Terv), that dog will probably have a lower prey drive then the others?

John Buddy's answer regarding coats:

but two smooths could throw a rough. Can you tell me if this person is correct?


Yes...she is correct. Two (rough factored) smooths could throw a rough. It generally happens when the sire and dam have one parents that was a rough and one that was a smooth.


Hope this helps!

John

And joy,
As much as you like semantics I feel it behooves me to point out that 'mellower' does not translate to prey or any other drive, period.
It connotes the over all bearing of the dog.
However if you want to limit it to prey that's fine by me.

And on the bye, when did you stop being a breeder?

I have zero intellectual or studied basis for this, but since Randy mentioned it, I will throw this in the mix about Mal/Terv litters. I knew of a litter of papered (and well-bred) Mals w/a coated pup or two. This combo had been done many times, and there were always a coat or two in there. I personally have only met pups from ONE litter, just to be clear. BUT- supposedly, the coats are always like this from this pair, and in fact the breeder prefers the coated pups from this breeding due to their intensity in bitework and lack of hectic, over the top play/prey.

The coated ones were mellower as far as what I'll call their temperament ( I disagree w/saying it's not a difference in temperament, it's a difference in drives), but they were more "serious" for lack of a better word(and I like to use that word to make Steve smile), in their aggression. I didn't see as much play/prey w/the coats as I did their typical Mali littermates. If I had to define the differences in a sentence, I'd say the coats leaned more toward fight and defense and the stock coats leaned way more on the prey/play (typical Mal) side. Kind of like comparing a W. Ger dog to a DDR dog, if we're just going by stereotypes.

Just thought I'd throw that in...not trying to start a "is it a Mal or a Terv?" debate, either.

" I'd say the coats leaned more toward fight and defense and the stock coats leaned way more on the prey/play (typical Mal) side. "


So mellower wouldn't be the word you'd use, then.

I like this thread.

wow, are you really friends??

Absolutely!

 Quote: connie sutherland

" I'd say the coats leaned more toward fight and defense and the stock coats leaned way more on the prey/play (typical Mal) side. "


So mellower wouldn't be the word you'd use, then.

I like this thread.

I'm getting confused,now, LOL. I would say that if you had both long and short hairs in the house, the long hair would SEEM mellower, however, when pushed, they are NOT mellower in terms of aggression. On the contrary, actually. However, if you never put them under that kind of pressure, it's possible that you could go on believing they ARE truly mellower.

I guess I would say that they have a TENDENCY to SEEM more "laid-back," while the stock coat ("normal" Mal) is typically bouncing off the walls.

Or, Connie, did I misunderstand what you were asking? Did you mean that in reference to Joy's assertion that they are mellower or did you mean that in reference to my post? I like this thread but it's making my head hurt.

Steve, your stalking skills are quite impressive

Jenni, I think I understand what you're saying! And I think this:

"I would say that if you had both long and short hairs in the house, the long hair would SEEM mellower, however, when pushed, they are NOT mellower in terms of aggression. On the contrary, actually. However, if you never put them under that kind of pressure, it's possible that you could go on believing they ARE truly mellower."

is what Connie was looking for.

So, what I'm getting from all of this is that coated dogs are generally calmer when not working than their shorter coated relations. Is that right? Cause I'm pretty confused now too