Aussiedoodles (here is one for you, Jewlieee!)

AgileGSD

spiritdogs

If you aren't sure that Doodles are any more prone than their purebred counterparts, then why would you condone breeding two disease prone breeds with untested parents??? At least testing gives some indication as to a dog's propensity for genetic mishaps.  Not testing seems very irresponsible, despite its inadequacies to predict all problems.

 Where do I condone that?

spiritdogs

IMO, the show look of GSD's should disappear.  It simply isn't functional.  The European dogs are so much more sound, it's a wonder the slope has hope of remaining at all...I guess some people are just more interested in what the dogs can do for them, than the responsibility they have to try to insure the dogs' optimal health.   JMHO

 There are many other extremes with show bred dogs of different breeds. The excessive rear angulation is getting to be more and more common in many breeds. Show dogs are often bigger, smaller, hairier, shorter muzzles, longer muzzled depending on the breed. I think breeding for the show ring actually encourages selecting for such extremes, although I'm not against it (and actually show my dogs).

 As for Doodles as service dogs, CCI breeds Lab/Golden crosses for service dogs and has for years. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4176/is_/ai_n14588327

This site has info on Doodles being used as service dogs by many different organizations:

http://www.goldendoodles.com/workingdoods.htm 

 

 

Guess we're in different camps.  I like the idea of breeding for function as well as form, not form to the exclusion of function.  IMO, the Aussies that win in the breed ring now are way different than those that won years ago when they could all pretty much still do the job for which they were bred.  Now, it seems as though we have Golden Retrievers in merle suits posing as Aussies...  None of the working Border Collies I know look anything like the ones in the breed ring either.  So, no surprise that the GSD's are all trotting around as if they were built with a ramp up their butts.  I think that the Doodles you see as service dogs were bred specifically for temperament and soundness, or they could not do the job.  There is a difference between a breeding program that does that in good faith, and places the puppies that don't pass muster as service dogs with the public as pets, and one that is solely based on making a buck by fooling the public into thinking that these are "special" or always "hypoallergenic".

spiritdogs

Guess we're in different camps.  I like the idea of breeding for function as well as form, not form to the exclusion of function.  IMO, the Aussies that win in the breed ring now are way different than those that won years ago when they could all pretty much still do the job for which they were bred.  Now, it seems as though we have Golden Retrievers in merle suits posing as Aussies...  None of the working Border Collies I know look anything like the ones in the breed ring either.  So, no surprise that the GSD's are all trotting around as if they were built with a ramp up their butts.  I think that the Doodles you see as service dogs were bred specifically for temperament and soundness, or they could not do the job.  There is a difference between a breeding program that does that in good faith, and places the puppies that don't pass muster as service dogs with the public as pets, and one that is solely based on making a buck by fooling the public into thinking that these are "special" or always "hypoallergenic".

 I never said I think it is a good idea to breed just for show or that I don't personally have an issue with it. But I'm obviously not opposed to conformation showing. People breeding just for show in most cases do feel their dogs are correct. I'm not going to call them irresponsible on the whole just because they breed for show dogs. In some breeds there is no longer real "work" for them and/or there are no longer working lines within the breed. With others, their original temperament or job is no longer considered PC (or in some cases, is no longer legal). Some breeds have been bred only for show/companions for the past hundred years or their breed was defined by breeding for a certain "look".

  The service dog Doodles are usually donated by breeders - I haven't seen any org that has their own Doodle breeding program so far. Instead, they are donated by breeders (in general, it does seem the breeders they come from health test which is often required by orgs). Of course there are differences between breeders, I think that goes without saying.

 Though it slips my mind right now which one, I do think that early on there was an org that had its own breeding program.  At any rate, pretty sad if it was the orgs that had to specify testing.  If you are going to breed any animal, and there are commonly accepted genetic tests for diseases that can cause loss of function, life or value, then the tests should be routinely done.  That way, all breeders are on a level playing field and so are the buyers.  It's called ethics, somthing that has fallen out of favor in general, but should be welcomed back - and the way to do that is to reward the breeders who do test and make responsible decisions by buying their pups, and not someone else's.  I don't have a problem with breeding for appearance either, especially with dogs that no longer have a function (that does not include Aussies and Border Collies, because they do still work on farms and ranches every day in this country), but I do have a problem with breeding for an appearance that lends itself to causing health problems for the dogs.  No dog made by nature would have the slope that GSD people thought was so lovely, and in fact, many GSD's over the years have suffered from joint problems associated with the preference for slope, not to mention the overbreeding that led to losing the stable GSD temperament of old, to the extent that those people who really needed a dog to work went outside the country to get them.  As you know, your breed is one that does still work.

To be honest, it really ticks me off that Aussies are being bred with Poodles - some of those dogs are going to be energetic leapers that bite when the kids don't move quickly enough - and that may have more to do with the type of people who buy them than with other factors, but it still isn't a great idea IMO.  There are days I wish my breed was a bit less colorful... Catahouladoodles anyone? 

Fast forward to the twenty-first century. I would think it is a fair statement to say the vast majority of dogs are now bred as pets. Add to that the fact the majority of the population are now urban dwellers and it comes as no surprise that the breeding of dogs is changing to suit their 'new' role in our society. Although I agree there is something very beautiful and inspiring in seeing a dog that has been bred from working lines that have maintained the traditional structural form, temperament and instinct/drive, I am also aware that such attributes have limited value to their ever increasing role as pets or companion animals. Speed, strength, agility, stamina, energy, drive etc. once the hallmark of a breed, has given way to more desirable traits reflective of it's role as a companion (ie form and temperament). Working lines fill a small yet important niche these days, whether it be as a true working dog or more typically a pet that works/competes. Unfortunately (I guess?) as society changes, to continue to breed dogs exclusively true to their original purpose, IMO would eventually cause a dangerous decease and possible demise of many breeds, as what once was a desirable trait becomes a negative to the average dog owner. I can certainly understand the disappointment of certain breeds becoming mere shadows of themselves - Golden Retrievers posing as Aussies, but I will take that over a world with nothing but Goldens. JMHO

denise m

I can certainly understand the disappointment of certain breeds becoming mere shadows of themselves - Golden Retrievers posing as Aussies, but I will take that over a world with nothing but Goldens. JMHO

I think I would rather see a world of all Goldens, than my breed changed to the extent that it would be a great family dog in almost any home. Breeding for better companions to me suggests breeding for the market and for demand, rather than what is in the breed's best interest.

spiritdogs

 Though it slips my mind right now which one, I do think that early on there was an org that had its own breeding program.  At any rate, pretty sad if it was the orgs that had to specify testing.  If you are going to breed any animal, and there are commonly accepted genetic tests for diseases that can cause loss of function, life or value, then the tests should be routinely done.  

 Except that we all know, there are many breeders who don't test and many buyers who will buy from them. And of course, the tests are not fail proof. In most cases, they simply tell you what the dog is, not what the dog will produce.

 You are right about an org having a breeding program for Doodles - the first Doodles were actually bred in Australia by a service dog organization.

spiritdogs

  No dog made by nature would have the slope that GSD people thought was so lovely, and in fact, many GSD's over the years have suffered from joint problems associated with the preference for slope, not to mention the overbreeding that led to losing the stable GSD temperament of old, to the extent that those people who really needed a dog to work went outside the country to get them.  As you know, your breed is one that does still work.

  The American show GSDs have their "slope" due to excessive length of the rear leg bones and angulation. Many also have loose ligaments, even ones which are not as extreme looking. It is not at all what the standard describes (or the GSDCA illustrated standard shows) but is being bred for because it produces extreme side gait. It does impair the dog's athletic ability IME but to be fair, most GSD show breeders OFA their dogs and there are a lot of extreme dogs with OFA Good (or better) hips. If you look at other breeds, excessive rear angulation is becoming the "in thing" all over - it isn't just a GSD thing any more.

 There are many GSD breeders in the US who are breeding working line dogs to the SV standard and testing them in SchH. One doesn't have to go out of the country to find a nice working GSD, although many people still seem to think that imports are the best. Amline GSDs have not lost their working temperament due to "overbreeding" but due to working ability not being bred or selected for over multiple generations. That can happen even with breeds which are rare or uncommon, if there is a shift towards breeding for the show ring.

  Belgains should still be able to work, although they are not really a breed in demand by farmers the way Aussies or BCs are. Most fo the working Belgians are owned by people who like the breed and decided to get involved with herding. I worry that too many breeders now are not selecting for proper temperaments, instead just breeding show dogs. When I first became involved with Belgians, most breeders did "stuff" with their dogs other than conformation. It was actually very much looked down on to breed a dog that wasn't a CH/working or performance titled. IMO this kept the temperaments overall sounder, as people had higher expectations of the dogs. Now ten years later I see softer and softer temperaments in more and more dogs and worse, dogs which are skittish, sight and sound senstive being shown and used for breeding. That isn't to say the whole breed is like that, I just worry as more and more people getting involved are "show people" who don't do anything else with their dogs or who have only ever had dogs with unsound temperaments (which makes them seem "normal";).

 It is frustrating that people are willing to say a dog isn't breeding quality due to structure, type or health but are not willing to say a dog is not breeding quality because it has a poor temperament. In a nutshell, that is the bad side of show breeding.

It is frustrating that people are willing to say a dog isn't breeding quality due to structure, type or health but are not willing to say a dog is not breeding quality because it has a poor temperament. In a nutshell, that is the bad side of show breeding.

Well, I agree with you there.  But, as you pointed out, many of the dogs don't have any "work" any more.  Working dogs, depending on what the work is that they were bred for, often don't have a soft enough temperament to be good pets, so instead of shying away from breeding them for pets, the original temperament is lost when they get bred to be softer and softer.  We've all seen Shelties that just stand there in a ring full of sheep, not knowing what to do.  But, the same dog might be a wonderful pet, and great at agility, obedience, or in the show ring. So, the definition of "poor" is fluid to some extent.  If someone were buying that dog for a sheep farm, they'd be disappointed;-)

spiritdogs

Well, I agree with you there.  But, as you pointed out, many of the dogs don't have any "work" any more.  Working dogs, depending on what the work is that they were bred for, often don't have a soft enough temperament to be good pets, so instead of shying away from breeding them for pets, the original temperament is lost when they get bred to be softer and softer.  We've all seen Shelties that just stand there in a ring full of sheep, not knowing what to do.  But, the same dog might be a wonderful pet, and great at agility, obedience, or in the show ring. So, the definition of "poor" is fluid to some extent.  If someone were buying that dog for a sheep farm, they'd be disappointed;-)

But dumbing down breeds so that they are more suitable pets is really no different than breeding Labradoodles because there is a market of pet people who want them. A dog doesn't have to be soft to make a good pet. Some of the most reoccuring problems I saw in my group classes were pet homes with GSDs that had overly soft and/or weak nerved temperaments. The pet homes I saw, though few and far between comparatively with well-bred German line GSDs tended to have far fewer problems than homes which had show (pretty common as there are a lot of GSD show people in my area) or pet bred GSDs. A working bred dog with a proper temperament, at least with the herding breeds should be suitable for an active pet home. If the home isn't an active pet home, one could argue as to why excatly they want that breed to begin with. By "active pet home", I mean one which is willing to socialize, train, manage, exercise and interact with their dog, as opposed to a home which just wants a dog to "hang out around the house".

Add to that the fact the majority of the population are now urban dwellers and it comes as no surprise that the breeding of dogs is changing to suit their 'new' role in our society. Although I agree there is something very beautiful and inspiring in seeing a dog that has been bred from working lines that have maintained the traditional structural form, temperament and instinct/drive, I am also aware that such attributes have limited value to their ever increasing role as pets or companion animals.

I cannot disagree with you more on all of these points.  Many misapprehensions here as to what the public "needs" and what a working bred dog really is.

The majority of the population are now urban dwellers.

The majority of the population have been, for many generations, something other than farmers or hunters or whatever function is fulfilled by the breed in question.  This has never made a difference in whether functional dogs were needed or not or whether it was smart to breed them for work.  And through the ages, if someone wanted to raise a working type breed as a pet, they did so.  More on that later.

it comes as no surprise that the breeding of dogs is changing to suit their 'new' role in our society

I can't speak to many working breeds, but working personal protection dogs will be used for the forseeable future, as far as I can tell, unless the Millennium arrive and I didn't get the memo. 

The need for herding dogs is actually on the rise because there's a perceptible shift now to smaller, grass-based, livestock centered operations.  Eventually the feedlot system will collapse, and farmers will be looking desperately for functional herding dogs.  If they can't find them here, they'll likely import them from Down Under and the UK, where humane, sustainable livestock management has kept the herding breed of primary importance.

Terrier dogs are rising in popularity in various roles, from pest detection to drug patrol.

there is something very beautiful and inspiring in seeing a dog that has been bred from working lines that have maintained the traditional structural form, temperament and instinct/drive, I am also aware that such attributes have limited value to their ever increasing role as pets or companion animals

Dogs bred "from working lines" maintain those "traditional" characteristics because they follow the function to which the dogs are bred.  A BC isn't medium sized, practically double jointed, moderately coated, slightly cow hocked, athletic, and smart because someone said, "Let's breed a cow hocked, athletic, smart dog!  Oh, look, you know, I think this dog would make a good sheepdog!"  They selected the dogs for breeding that worked best for them, (the ultimate compliment for a sheepdog is that he's "useful";).  And today's BC is what they ended up with.

People have taken dogs bred to the highest working standards as pets for as long as the dogs have been working animals.  Working animals can be turned into companion dogs with very little fuss.  This is where people have a huge misunderstanding of what makes a good working dog.

The same things that make a dog a superior working partner, can also make that dog a wonderful companion.

First, it would be foolish for someone to expect that they can take a working animal into their home and not make some kind of concession to provide the exercise and attention the dog needs. 

I would venture to say that it's not the dogs that have changed, but that people have changed their expectations of what a pet is.  Once a pet was a companion - truly a dog with a purpose as much as the dog working sheep off the hills.

Now people want the dog to provide entertainment as a cute puppy, and then the dog becomes something of a lifestyle accessory.  There really aren't many breeds that I can recommend for such families, but unfortunately these are the ones you are thinking of when you want my BCs to be bred down to fit such a lifestyle.

For the person to whom a pet is really a companion and a partner in life, a working dog can fit in their life just fine.  Working dogs need patience and self control to balance instinct.  They need a sound temperament that tolerates change and the pressures of work.  They need intelligence and discernment to be able to tell when to "help".  They need the ability to adapt rapidly and learn and expand their understanding of the world around them.  They need courage and a steady character and attentiveness to their human partner's wishes.

On top of this package is overlaid the superficial characteristics that most people see and that a lot of non-working breed fanciers focus on - athleticism, quick reflexes, inexhaustible work ethic, and usually interesting physical characteristics like the merle coloring of Aussie and Catahoula, the eye of the BC, the perkiness of the terrier, the grace and dignity of the GSD and Belgians and similar breeds, the friendly and eager demeanor of the hunting breeds.

Most people don't understand that those superficial characteristics are secondary. 

A dog can work sheep without eye, without being a speed demon, even lame and with one eye (my Ted has an uncle that had three legs and one eye and worked and even won trials).  But such a dog cannot work without the whole package that I listed in the first paragraph above.  And such dogs make excellent companions as well as working partners.  It's all about partnership.

 

Now people want the dog to provide entertainment as a cute puppy, and then the dog becomes something of a lifestyle accessory.  There really aren't many breeds that I can recommend for such families, but unfortunately these are the ones you are thinking of when you want my AUSSIE's to be bred down to fit such a lifestyle.

***Sigh***

I vote no merle Poodles.

At the end of the day, as long as the parents have been health tested, have sound and proper temperaments, what people do is their business (even if I do think it's silly to pay *huge* amounts of money for a mutt).  I do wish people would just call them what they are.  They're aussie poodle mixes and that's OK--get over it!  If you want a poodle aussie mix badly enough to pay $1000, why be shy about it?

Actually, one of my biggest objections to doodles (puts flame suit on) is that they are so flippin' ugly.  I have never seen one that I've found even remotely attractive.     

sillysally

is that they are so flippin' ugly.  I have never seen one that I've found even remotely attractive.     

Kyda

sillysally

is that they are so flippin' ugly.  I have never seen one that I've found even remotely attractive.     

:( I think hairy mutts are cute.

I think some hairy mutts are cute, but I can't get past the wet beards.  Eeeeewww.

Kyda

sillysally

is that they are so flippin' ugly.  I have never seen one that I've found even remotely attractive.     

:( I think hairy mutts are cute.

That's fine.  I just don't.  At all......... 

spiritdogs

Kyda

sillysally

is that they are so flippin' ugly.  I have never seen one that I've found even remotely attractive.     

:( I think hairy mutts are cute.

 

I think some hairy mutts are cute, but I can't get past the wet beards.  Eeeeewww.