Breeding for standards, work, temperament, health or all.

Personally, I think Marlowe is just the most handsome black & tan that ya ever did see, and he's from UKC working lines (don't ask me how I know where he comes from because that information is on a need-to-know basis only!), though as far as I can tell black & tans haven't really been split too much as a breed into show and working (yet).
 
I hear you about the need for a stable temperment in a working dog. Marlowe is utterly unflappable and quite a serious little boy and as long as he gets what he needs from me, he is a really great family pet. I can take him pretty much anywhere, though he does get bored easily and doesn't enjoy going places where he just has to sit around and do nothing for long periods of time.

ORIGINAL: labcrab

 What's the answer? Support the split in certain breeds, not support it in others? And if the split becomes so wide that you essentially have created 2 different breeds, is that acceptable?

 
I t has been done, but that doesnt make it right.  North Americans have ruined the Akita to the point that the rest of the world had to creat a new breed because they are so different from the original standard. 

I have to throw a wrench into things and talk about those other breeds, you know the "non-sporting" breeds, because this is what I know.  Some breeds original functions have be totally decimated, no one is gonna send a group of Shibas out in the bush to kill game, not if they are smart anyhow.  And who drives a coach with an unleashed Dalmatian to protect the horses?  But that does not mean that these breeds should jsut be bred for looks alone.  I know my male Shiba, and several others that would do well in lure corseing, and my bitch is and excelent tracker, they do well at the unstructured stuff where they get to follow their sences, not our comands, but a Shiba that does obediance is a rare find, at least a HIT Shiba is.  But there has to be jobs that they can perform, at home and in the ring.  IMO a well balanced healthy dog is a working dog. 
 
 
I have to agree with everyone else, if you dont want a Lab that acts like a Lab why get a Lab, or a BC, or anyother breed?  I just makes no sence to me, that is why I am only buying my next dog from a breeder that does both.
 
 
I do have to add that if the Lab breed was more cohesive, in that the show dogs could still function in the field, then maybe they would be a more balanced breed, not the 2 extreems we are seeing now.  The show bred couch potatoe and the basket case field bred, and balanced dog more like what brookcove is discribing with them being able to turn it off after they have done their work for the day.

ORIGINAL: mudpuppy

Should dogs be bred based on their ability to perform their original purpose, OR for their temperament, OR for their physical similarity to the breed standard, OR for health, OR all of the above OR for some other reason that I didn't mention?

 
agree 100% 

it's not like there is some kind of shortage of dogs. Why shouldn't we demand that our breeding stock be the supreme best of the best? 

the reality is that people who hunt will want to go to a breeder who breeds primarily for hunting skill, and people who look for beauty will go to a breeder who breeds primarily for that....what is wrong with that, assuming everyone cares about health?...why is everyone so worked up?
 
and if neither of those two breeder groups puts enough emphasis on temperament for those of us who just want a great house dog, someone will take up that niche...so, the different dogs of the same breed will not be of the same standard...what is the issue?

Faramir is right.  If you are a "conformation" person, go to a breeder that specializes in "conformation" dogs.  If you want a working dog, look for that emphasis.  If you are lucky enough to fall for al breed that can do everything, go for it.  As long as the dog is structurally sound and healthy and you commit to its care, that's the important thing, isn't it. 
 
In my humble opinion, if everyone would be more careful about choosing a dog and follow through with the care of the dog, we would have fewer shelter dogs to place. 
 
 

True dat, Faramir.
 
The truth is often simple and perhaps that it why people prefer to make it complicated lol.

ORIGINAL: faramir

the reality is that people who hunt will want to go to a breeder who breeds primarily for hunting skill, and people who look for beauty will go to a breeder who breeds primarily for that....what is wrong with that, assuming everyone cares about health?...why is everyone so worked up?

and if neither of those two breeder groups puts enough emphasis on temperament for those of us who just want a great house dog, someone will take up that niche...so, the different dogs of the same breed will not be of the same standard...what is the issue?

 
haha!  That's exactly what I've been *trying* to say!!  I just...  couldn't....  get....   it...... out......!  Thanks for putting so simply and succinctly. 

This particular subject is precisely the reason that it took me many years to have my first Saluki. The breeders are very protective of their breed, mainly because the breed has, for the most part, maintained it's original form and function. I had Irish Setters for many years, as both hunting companions and show dogs. I bred my own, combining good field and show lines, into dual purpose dogs. I had a Field Champion, a "dual" (my beloved Sparkles) and many hunting and obedience titled show dogs. The Saluki breeders knew that it would be a culture shock to go from Irish to Saluki and were rightfully concerned that I would become disillusioned with the breed, as the two are extremely diametrically opposed. What they did not understand is that I was disillusioned with the Irish Setter, as the gene pool that I tapped for what I wanted was limited, and I would eventually breed myself into a corner. The genetic health problems in the breed eventually became so widespread that I could no longer justify breeding out into new lines as I had no desire to introduce those problems. My Irish typically lived healthy and happy to 14 years and beyond. Sparkles died 3 days shy of her 15th birthday, having been out chasing squirrels just prior to the embolism that took her down. I myself am an avid hunter and the breed just suited me. I still love them so and have had them bring tears to my eyes at the shows, but I am just not the type of person that will have JUST a show dog. They are much more than that to me. My Salukis fit me. They are calm and docile (well, Amber is a beast so there's always an exception [sm=happy.gif]), graceful and beautiful to look at yet extremely hardy and powerful, and swift, efficient hunters. You would be hard pressed to find one that doesn't in many ways conform to its original form and function. There is one big winning show Saluki right now that has hurt the breed - absolutely no muscle tone, has probably never been on dirt other than to relieve itself, and way too extreme and overdone. Shame on the judges for promoting that!
 
Just recently, a woman at work asked me what I thought of the BiTzu. I said "What the hell is that?" A Bichon/Shih Tzu mix. She looked at me like I was retarded. I told her that the only thing I knew about it was that there were probably 10 at the pound listed as a mutt that would probably be euthanized. I told her it wasn't a "breed" and she told me that yes it was, and that she paid $1,200 for it! I told her that my Champion Saluki didn't even cost that, and she'd never be able to show her mixed breed in anything. *sigh* People just don't get it.

If it's ok for people to just breed for conformation and "pretty" why get so ruffled over doodle breeders?

ORIGINAL: tashakota

If it's ok for people to just breed for conformation and "pretty" why get so ruffled over doodle breeders?

What a can of worms! []

The problem I have with "doodle" breeders is that there is no standard for mixes. Doodles can have long gangly legs, shorter stumpy legs, long shaggy coat, short coat, petit bone structures or be giants. All of these could be considered perfectly accpetable doodles. Also, since they're bred only as pet quality dogs, their temperaments and level of trainability can be all over the map.

People who breed purebreds for conformation have a standard and a well defined goal they are trying to achieve.

Diane:   Faramir is right
RWbeagles:  True dat, Faramir. 
Labcrab:  haha!  That's exactly what I've been *trying* to say!! 
----------------------------------------------
 
i'm not used to people agreeing with me...i think i'm going to cry....

I know. []  So if a Goldendoodle, Labradoodle and Schnoodle standard were written up, it would be ok?

FWIW - a mutt's a mutt IMHO, but just to play devil's advocate.  You've taken a breed, removed one major aspect of it's existence and that's ok, because they're breeding for a "new" standard that doesn't include the working part.  And people are ok with this?  I mean, all they're doing is producing pet quality dogs.  And by pet quality, I'm defining that as a breed with little to no working ability/drive/etc but looks similar* to the working type.

It's been said that doodle breeders shouldn't breed dogs because there are plenty of dogs in the shelters without homes.  That it's not necessary because of all the unwanted dogs in the world to produce only "pet quality" dogs.  Yet based on what people have said in this thread, they are ok with certain breeders producing a "better pet" if the dog looks like a purebred but does not have the same characteristics of the foundation breed.  And all that because it's recognized and can earn titles.



*I use the word similar because show quality Aussies are bigger and fluffier than the field Aussies.  Ditto for BC's.  Show GSD's have more angulation to their rears than field, etc.

I know. So if a Goldendoodle, Labradoodle and Schnoodle standard were written up, it would be ok?

 
LOL. I should have mentioned that the lack of breeding standard issue is just one of the many reasons I don't agree with purposefully breeding mixes. The working part of the equation is a whole other issue. IMO if someone is breeding only pet quality dogs then they're going to end up with a lot of substandard puppies (which isn't a problem for doodles because there is no standard [:'(] . I feel that dogs should never be bred unless there is a clear purpose in mind. For me, this should not include breeding a dog whose purpose is to sit in someone's backyard.

Let me be the devil's advocate here.  Don't flame me, I'm just giving y'all another perspective.  []

I think that it just doesn't sit right to most dog people that mixes are being bred and sold for big bucks when there are similar dogs in shelters.  But, think about it, people buy expensive purebred dogs for pets and spend the money so that they can raise it from puppyhood and will have a decent idea of what the dog will turn out to be.  The problem people have adopting shelter and rescue dogs is that they usually are not puppies and they have an unknown breed mix.  For most of us who look at dogs as individuals, that isn't a problems but for many, it is. 

If a doodle breeder can turn out a pretty consistant product (yes, it is a product) that is healthy and sound and has the characteristics from both breeds that people want, how is it different from the lab breeder who puts out nice pet quality puppies and sell them for what the market will bear?  Why don't more people go to the rescues and adopt Lab-ish dogs that are, maybe, more sound than the pure bred cousin?

I think that what is more "immoral, is the impulse buyer, who will buy or adopt a dog and then tire of it in a year or so when it has chewed a couple of shoes and pooped one too many times in the house".  Then you have this, perhaps, doodle dog that was purchased for big bucks or pure bred lab that was bought from the neighbor down the street or Heinz 57 picked up as a stray looking for a new home.  []

I think the only bone I have to pick with the Doodle dog people is that they tell people that these dogs are "registered" and then when people try to register them with doodles papers with the AKC or UKC, they have the same options as any other mutt. [:@] I would venture to say that most people don't try to register them because they are just pets.