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

Dogs are worthless to any activity without a solid temperment.   You can't train them, you can't trust them wholly, and you can't fully develop potential without trust.  For example, you could never teach tracking to a dog who can never be off a four foot leash because of aggression or the tendency to be distracted and just run off.....And I don't imagine anyone wants to share their time and home with an animal that is to all intents and purposes, wild and unpredictable.   So temperment should be a primary concern regardless of breed-all domestic dogs are meant to be companions and workers along with people, so they need to get along.
 
Second, I would love to see a return to focussing on the working attributes of each breed, because diversity comes from diversity of purpose.  I have seen beautiful dogs posing in a ring who could never hope to do the jobs they were originally developed for-in fact, I wonder if some of them are capable of walking into that ring on their own.  There is a huge difference between appearance and substance, and good judges are looking for both with their hands as well as their eyes...
 
And I would love to see a move away from exaggerating certain unique breed characteristics all out of proportion to the animal itself....Example, English Bulldogs being bred so much for the large heads that it is almost impossible for a bitch to deliver a litter of pups without a c-section and great risk to her life and that of the pups...
 
Finally, I would like to see a movement away from cropping and docking with the exception of dogs who are actually working in the field and therefore the cropping and docking is a safety, injury and health issue.  Otherwise, can we please leave them with the equipment that God gave them in the first place-and if you don't like ears and tails....well get breeding and breed true, and get accepted as a breed who is born without these attributes in the first place

I don't understand why people think they don't want "drivey" working dogs.

I do.  People like you and I, mudpuppy, aren't "normal" as described by social society.  We are "dog nuts".  We understand how to harness those drives and use them to our advantage.
 
I can pratically guarantee you that if somebody else had ended up with Strauss, he would have ended up in the shelter.  He has had all kinds of issues that had to do with his drives and me not using them correctly and to my advantage.  Now, compared to the working lines, he'd be considered "medium" drive.  To the American line owners, Strauss is very "High drive" and to the average Joe pet owner, my dog is "insane".
 
He barks while he runs agility, he barks and growls during rally, he's incredibly talky and noisy.  He would bite if I didn't give commands fast enough, he "yells" at me when I ask him to do a moving down (though he always complies).  He goes insane for tuggy, he is a tracking fiend, he is go go go.  But he is also highly stimulated, mentally and physically.
 
The reason this dog is not in the pound is because I have him, and because I have had the tenacity to continue working with him, through frustration, anger, and yes, tears.  This dog is not in the pound because I SWORE to myself I would not be like my mother and just give up a dog every time there was an issue (it has happened 9-10 times in my lifetime with dogs I've owned).  This dog is with me because I told myself I wanted a working dog.  Well damn it, I got a working dog, and while I don't regret it, sometimes I wonder "WTF did I get myself into!?"
 

It's so easy to train and exercise a dog with drive.  Throw the frisbee

It's easy to train and exercise a dog with drive if you know what you're doing or have guidanceb!  Throw the frisbee sounds reasonable to you, but for most people, what they end up thinking is "Why isn't she tired yet!?" 
 
I know a Corgi that will play Chuckie until he drops.  He's obsessed with the toy.  His owner once put chuckie in the wash because he was dirty (horridly), and that Corgi sat there the entire cycle, jumping at the washing machine, barking at it, trying to get IN it to get his Chuckie out!  "All done Chuckie!" and he went to his crate.  Very toy driven, and very motivated to work.
 

People love labs and goldens because they are full of drives-- eager to please, avid fetching dogs, chow hounds

People love Labs and Goldens because they rarely think for themselves.  This isn't so with the herding and working breeds.  Yes, some are more biddable than others, and many of them are extremely people oriented, but they also have an independent streak and they decide "Ok, I'm gonna do it for ME now, screw you, see you later."  Goldens and Labs "I love you, I'll do anything you ask, just throw a ball or give me a cookie.  I'll never leave your side."  "Normal" people don't know how to deal with a dog that thinks for itself a lot/on occassion, and then they think they've got a bad dog.

Have you ever tried to train a dog that appeared to have NO drives?

Yes.  His name is Ranger.  His motivator for work was agility obstacles.  Especially contacts.  He worked because he was expected to work and liked to work.  He'd eat a cookie and play tug, but he wasn't exceptionally driven by these things.

Hmmm - interesting think about cropping and docking for some sporting dogs.  Why is it that they feel the need to dock spaniels' tails and not setters'?  Setters have pretty profuse hair on their rather long tails and are known to swing them while working in the field.  Most serious hunters with Llewelins will trim down the feathers on tails, breeches and legs to prevent snagging in the field, but the tail is never docked. 

Same thing with pointers.  Why are GSP tails docked and English Pointers left natural.  Who makes these rules?  Is this done to satisfy some standard set years and years ago?  Labs and Golden work in this same environment and they leave their takes natural, too. 

Same with dew claws.  It is now thought that in some sports, dew claws can increase agility, and agility dogs with out them suffer more carpal arthritis.  There are some dogs whos standard demands dew claws.  Both my girls have front dew claws.  They are attached and functioning.  They use them like thumbs. You only have to see them holding a bone to know that they enjoy having them. I keep their nails short to prevent hooking them.  Go figure. 

From what I can surmise, Spaniels do not work as far from the hunter as setters do (I'm not a sporting person, please correct me if I'm wrong).  When a Spaniel flushes, they tend to do it within a reasonable proximity of the hunter.
 
Setters are sent farther away to flush, and the tail is useful as a "flag"
 
Pointers are stationary when they point, so there is no need to dock.  The Tail also helps continue the line of the dog to the quarry.  The brush as I understand it from my english friends, is thick, but not as thick as it is in Germany, and the tail of the Pointer is not as thick as that of a GSP with an intact tail

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?

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? 

Bravo!

ORIGINAL: JRTmom

Corvus, since shelters and rescues are full of mixes who would fit nicely into your description of a "pet quality" BC, I don't see why anyone who wants a watered down version of the breed should go to a breeder. My family adopted a young BC mix from the SPCA who was intelligent, easy to train, had BC coloring and coat texture, and excelled at agility. She also fit in well with my family's busy schedule, and since she was mixed with something more laid back, she didn't have the extremely high energy needs of a purebred.

Mixes like this that make excellent family pets are a being euthanized everyday due to lack of homes. Meanwhile there are breeders who cater to the pet market by suppressing the original qualities of the breed (or creating designer breeds) to achieve the same temperament as a mix that could be found in a shelter. To me, that isn't ethical.

The way I see it, the problem with relying on mixed breeds is that they aren't reliable. I don't mean to offend people with mixed breeds because I've met plenty of mixed breeds that have been just the most perfect mix of the breed traits from both parents. However, I have also met mixed breeds that are all the bad things about the breed traits from both their parents. How could I be certain if I got a BC cross puppy that it would need less exercise than a purebred BC? I can't be certain, because mixed breeds don't breed true. It's just a little bit of pot luck.

Shelters are indeed great for mixed breeds. They're also great for any dog that's suddenly grown into something unmanageable for the average family. I don't think shelters provide the answer to conundrums like this. I'm sorry there are potentially great family pets being put down every day, but I don't think people should be expected to simply rescue a young dog that potentially needs a lot of work when they may want a puppy to start from scratch with. Shelter dogs are not for everyone, and, as I pointed out, mixed breeds are often a case of luck.

I can totally understand why working BC breeders don't like what's happening to their breed. But what I don't understand is what is so wrong with forming pet strains and working strains. To me, such strains are the perfect solution to the problem. You don't have to have a pet strain BC if you want a working strain BC. A so-called 'watered down' version of a breed is not necessarily something to be sneered at. Not when it's filling a purpose and providing people with just the kind of dog they want.

Incidentally, I've seen plenty of working BCs over here. Kelpies are generally the Australian sheep farmer's herder of choice, but I've seen working BCs at sheepdog trials holding their own. There's a working strain and a pet strain of kelpie, too. Because a working kelpie that doesn't get to work sheep for 10 hours a day is an absolute nightmare. I wouldn't have a pet strain kelpie either, but at least they can function in a suburban setting. I'm frankly relieved that this trend emerged, because people who love kelpies but don't have a farm were ending up with neurotic backyard dogs. I'd far rather see pet strains that are better suited to life as a pet. If that means we split the breed into two strains and adjust the breed standard to make that possible, then so be it. Better than miserable working dogs with nothing to do. I don't think people should be told they don't want a particular breed just because they love 90% of the things about it and not 100%. If we don't cater for the huge number of people that want that last 10% modified to better suit their lifestyle, then we're doing the breed a disservice by limiting them only to working purposes when they could make fantastic pets.

Just to make it clear, I DON'T want a working dog with a lot of energy because I hate to see dogs not getting enough exercise. But I know people with pet strain BCs that adore their dogs and provide them with everything they need. If the dogs were working strain, then those people and those dogs wouldn't have the supremely happy relationships they have. Who am I to say that's wrong?

However, I have also met mixed breeds that are all the bad things about the breed traits from both their parents. How could I be certain if I got a BC cross puppy that it would need less exercise than a purebred BC? I can't be certain, because mixed breeds don't breed true. It's just a little bit of pot luck.

 
I love my mixed breed dog dearly but as much money and time I put into dealing with her health problems and top quality training I could have easily bought more than one pure breed, heath guaranteed pup that if for some reason doesn't meet the agreement I signed could be exchanged for one that does.  It really is a gamble when you adopt a mixed breed dog. I don't mind owning a mixed breed but there is no reason to breed such a dog to only create more problems
 
After everything I've been through with my own dog I want my next one to meet the highest standard for it's breed.  I don't even want to have the thought of what if this or that.  I want to know that what I'm getting is pure.  I want to know that the breeder also meets my expectations.  I don't want some BYB dog that may or may not have health issues, I want the best, and I want it all.
 
That is my view on breeding to reach the standars, if not breeding for that then it's almost no differnt then breeding a mixed.  If I'm going to own a pure breed dog it better be the best.
 

But what I don't understand is what is so wrong with forming pet strains and working strains. To me, such strains are the perfect solution to the problem. You don't have to have a pet strain BC if you want a working strain BC. A so-called 'watered down' version of a breed is not necessarily something to be sneered at. Not when it's filling a purpose and providing people with just the kind of dog they want.

 
Corvus, i agree with you.
border collies are so smart...so if someone figured how to breed them into a great family dog for the average joe...or cross breed them to a good match...hey, that's what dog breeding has been about for so many centuries...FULFILLING A HUMAN NEED.
 
there would still be breeders for people who need the border collies to work, or for those people who just like the border collies just the way they are now.

Faramir, what makesBorder collies so smart is breeding for work.  Stop doing that and the brains break down just as fast as the other traits.  "Smart" isn't a single trait that you can recognize as present and available to be passed on to the next generation, in an untrained dog.  What makes up "smart" are things like:  Quick reflexes with good impluse control, sensitivity without shyness, intelligence that is subject to a want to please, work ethic without stubbornness.  There are many other aspects of this desireable characteristic - the thing most people notice about BCs.  But notice how all these things are balanced - if you don't check the balance each generation with training and work, that is what you will lose.  And the dogs suffer.

So you'll have not-so-smart Border collies, that might have the obsessiveness and reactivity of their ancestors, or the energy level might crop up, or other traits that make these dogs unsuitable to be pets.  Pet bred dogs are the most screwed up BCs I know.  Shyness, snappishness, fear aggression - all of these are severe problems if you don't put EACH generation of this breed under the stress of training.  I know a really popular breeder who deliberately breeds pets and sells them all over the country - does all health testing available, is what you'd call responsible in every way - they even do a little competition with a few of their dogs (but they have dozens, that are all bred as much as possible).  I've never heard of a dog from their program that didn't have some temperamental issue.  the problem is transitioning from HIGH performance to NO performance.  You can't do it without producing some wacked out dogs.  It's like putting one of Michael Jordan's kids in the basement first thing in the morning and saying, "We'll be back in about ten hours - now don't do anything, Mikey darling."

Health starts breaking down, too.  There are problems that come up when you expose these dogs to a great deal of stress - epilepsy, spine problems, connective tissue weakness, something called exercise intolerance - all these are easily identified when training for work and culled.  Pet bred dogs just don't get exposed to these stresses on a regular basis. 

You can't switch from a working standard of health and high performance, to NO performance, within a few generations or even a dozen or so, without working out quite a few kinks.  Who gets those dogs?  And for what purpose is their suffering?  Because someone wants a BC that looks like a BC but doesn't act like a BC?  Pooey.  I've put down three of those "mistakes" - cradled their poor frightened heads until they relaxed and felt peace for the first time in their lives.  That's what I see everytime someone proposes we make more of these pet BCs.

Faramir, what makesBorder collies so smart is breeding for work. Stop doing that and the brains break down just as fast as the other traits. "Smart" isn't a single trait that you can recognize as present and available to be passed on to the next generation, in an untrained dog. What makes up "smart" are things like: Quick reflexes with good impluse control, sensitivity without shyness, intelligence that is subject to a want to please, work ethic without stubbornness. There are many other aspects of this desireable characteristic - the thing most people notice about BCs. But notice how all these things are balanced - if you don't check the balance each generation with training and work, that is what you will lose. And the dogs suffer.

 
Well said brookcove! I completely agree that  trying to remove a particular trait (especially one that makes the breed a successful working dog) is like playing Russian Roulette. I would be just as leery of someone buying a purebred "pet quality" BC as I would if they adopted a BC mix. Even the best breeders don't have entire litters with the exact qualities they were hoping for, so a pet quality puppy could have the same requirements of purebred PLUS a lot of unexpected negatives.
 

I don't think people should be told they don't want a particular breed just because they love 90% of the things about it and not 100%.

 
IMO if you can't deal with 100% of the breed's traits, then you should be looking for another breed (or adopt a mix with the qualities you want). My entire daily schedule is based around my JRT's need for exercise and mental stimulation. This may not always create an "ideal" situation, but I wouldn't have it any other way. I love the breed for ALL of it's qualities, even the ones that aren't so convenient.
 
If someone bred BCs who didn't require as much physical exercise, they would still need lots of mental exercise to stay sane (and to keep a dog mentally busy is often more challenging than physical needs). If they also wanted to avoid that , they would undoubtedly have to lower their intelligence and desire to please. As brookcove pointed out, this would leave you with dogs who were stubborn, slow to learn and shy which is far from an ideal pet.
 
One of my major pet peeves is with people choose a breed and then try to modify their needs to fit their busy (or lazy) schedule. If a dog's body is designed to be very active, even if they are "pet quality" and not overly energetic, they still require plenty of exercise to maintain a healthy weight. I hate seeing JRTs at the dog park who look like over stuffed sausages and hearing their owners brag about how their dogs are so lazy they hardly need to walk them. My dog would be lazy too if he was morbidly obese.
 

Another option for someone who doesn't want the complete BC heavy exercise, very high drive package would be to adopt a senior BC. At this particular stage in my life, I'd enjoy a 10 year old BC far more than a puppy or teen-age dog.

[align=left]I agree with several of the last seveal posts about the BC.  I'm not sure if it's even possible to post a point that can conclude a decision in either direction, but here's my point.  I posted a reply a couple pages ago that explained why I chose my BC, above others that I looked at.  I think that over-all most of the posters can agree on one thing and that is that the BC's have a fullfilling life regardless of what environment they are in.  But I do have to go back to my original reason for getting the breed.  I don't have a surplus of herdable stock, but I do have horses and wanted a BC that was athletic, intelligent, able to enjoy my parents farm, and who was first and fore-most healthy. On a shallower note and less importantly, I also wanted to be able to dress her up in cute clothes, go to the mall and get her pictures taken, and do a lot of other pseudo-suburban activities OFF OF THE FARM!  I did lots and lots of research about BC's and looked at several litters of puppies before finding what I was looking for.  Between Rescues and Breeders, my options were as follows:[align=left] [align=left]Shelter/resuces: [align=left]Great place to get a dog if you are looking for a rescue and you want to do your part to help save the dogs that end up there.  Maybe even a great way to get a watered down version (as someone put it) of the breed.  But also a great way to get a BC from a serious and intense working background who ended up there, or for a dog that ended up there for reasons that could stem from health, behavior, or breeding problems, or a great way to get a dog with no drive.  You just never know.  Great dogs can and do come from shelters, but it's not a reliable shopping method if you have a goal in mind.  I totally condone rescuing dogs, but since I knew what I was looking for the shelter was not a reliable option. My mother fell in love with my dog and wanted something similar.  Being an advocate of not buying from breeders, she chose to go thru a BC rescue.  What did she get...a crazy black and white puppy that grew up to be mostly springer spaniel!  She loves the heck out of this dog, regardless, and wouldn't do anything differently.  But I can't explain the amount of drama that she's had to go thru to get where she is.  Apparently this ?BC? was a product of a meth lab rescue and let's just say that it's taken more than a 12-step program to get him to a tolerable state.  IMO, anything less than my mothers patience, time, intelligence, compassion and financial abilities to work with this dog would have landed him at another rescue or at the pound.  He is a very lucky dog...[align=left] [align=left]BREEDERS: [align=left]Intense working stock:  I looked at these litters and found the parents to be amazing working dogs, but a little too intense for me.  Their role at the farms was not that of a working dog who's secret life involved sleeping in bed with thier owners.  It was clear why they were there, and it wasn't to go to the park and hang out everyday, some minor agility, the occasional frisbee contest, or to follow behind on an occasional horseback ride, which is what my lifestyle involves.  It was to work from dawn to dusk, then sleep, and do it all over again. Breeding for these traits is a wonderful way to preserve the original purpose of the breed.  And as long as farmers will continue to need working dogs, then I'm not sure that a dog without a work ethic will ever be unavailable to them. Not for me...[align=left]Bench breeders: The dogs that I looked at from these breeders were impeccably well-cared for in a foo-foo kind of way, and beautiful.  But they seemed to be missing something such as the BC eagerness, and appeared better suited for a living room than a farm.  I mean no offense to people who breed for bench standards as I'm sure that there are many who have the best of both worlds. Those people weren't offering puppies in my area at that time.  If my dog and I were going to compete in anything, it would be something like frisbee or agility.  I needed something more true to the original breed.[align=left]BYB'ers: I'm just not in to the idea of someone supporting their lifestyle by breeding their dog.  I'm defining this as people who's interest is financial or simply a lack of population control and they take very few extra steps to assure a quality dog.  I will not support this industry...[align=left]Pet Quality: I believe that there is a difference between pet quality and Back-yard-breeding.  Pet quality is exactly what it states...the dog is bred for health, temperament, drive, and appearance, but the parents aren't chosen based on championship bloodlines or titles.  This is where I found my dog.  She was from a farm, both parents worked the stock a few hours a day.  At night, they slept in the house.  When they weren't working, they followed the owners around overseeing things.  Both parents were healthy for their years, freindly, smart, nice-looking, and had the coat length and size that was desirable to me.  SOLD!  I paid a reasonable amount of money to cover shots, etc and today I have an exceptional dog who excels at just about every dog/owner activity that we do, including laying around the apartment watching movies.  [align=left] [align=left]In summary, my opinion is similar to the purchase of cars or to anything for that matter.  No matter how many sporty, small, fuel-economic cars are made in the future, there will always be trucks available for those who need them.  As a consumer, if you are looking for something specific, you should be offered that variety in order to make a choice best suited for your lifestyle, assuming that no harm is done by your choice.  With this point, I am assuming that both styes of vehicles are made for a PURPOSE, and not just made because they are a collection of left-over, un-safe, parts. Neither variety of products are better worse than the other, they are just more suited for different people.  [align=left] [align=left]The blame for bad breeding or a deterioration of a breed should be placed with those who breed for NO standards.[align=left] [align=left]So, I still stand at being "pro-choice," when it comes to being able to choose the details of your dog.  I think that many people are assuming that all pet quality breeders are beneath any standards, and that's not the case. Their standards are just different. There are crappy breeders of all sorts regardless of what standards they are breeding for.  In my opinion, the breeder that is most right is the one that lands an all around great dog who best fits the needs and lifestyle of the perspective owner...and that great fit is both true to the breed AND to the dog.[align=left] [align=left]

when i get some time, i'm going to have to start a thread which gives a quick history of modern dog breeds...it is the history of breeders cross-breeding, or refining a particular breed, to add or weed out traits that might have been good for previous uses, but not for the current need.
 
for example, retreivers used to be used primarily for retreiving nets for fishermen...when guns got more accurate in the 1800's, and accurate bird shooting was now possible, they switched them to be bird hunters...they bred for gentle mouths...mixed them with pointers and setters to give them more of a bird instinct, etc etc.
 
the breeders weren't saying we are playing with fire by playing around with their traits...they experimented, and came up with some great new breeds, or improved old breeds...all the possible gloom and doom predictions as to what would happen to the "watered down" border collies might happen...and they might not....it is possible a new great dog will be created.

the breeders weren't saying we are playing with fire by playing around with their traits...they experimented, and came up with some great new breeds, or improved old breeds...all the possible gloom and doom predictions as to what would happen to the "watered down" border collies might happen...and they might not....it is possible a new great dog will be created.

 
That's great in theory, but in North America there are already thousands of perfectly good dogs being euthanized everyday. What do you think happened to all the "experiments" that didn't turn out well?

That's great in theory, but in North America there are already thousands of perfectly good dogs being euthanized everyday. What do you think happened to all the "experiments" that didn't turn out well?

 
JRTmom, i just don't know what the statistics are of what sort of dogs are in the shelters...and i'm not sure anyone does...i never heard before that a large percentage were dogs of this category...i think a large percentage of dogs in the shelters are due to not being a good match with the owner...i am all for coming up with new breeds or variations of a breed, IF the result will be dogs that fit better into people's lifestyles...