The Elitist Attitude.

 *dies laughing* OMG! I am soo saving those!!

Pwca

I made a little quick one on an earlier page... feel free to steal it. :P

Really?? I must have missed it.. *goes back and hunts* 

Edit: Found it! Consider it Yoinked! Lol 

I'll remove it if anyone complains but until then! *proudly dances around a new sig* 

Marklf

My last GSD was from what many posting here would call a BYB yet he was a beautiful example of his breed and many GSD owners and breeders that saw him commented on how fine an example he was, so your anecdote means little.

Just wanted to say that my GSD has gotten a lot of compliments from both owners and breeders as well. He has a very nice head, and a great gait. But that doesn't mean he's breeding quality. " A fine example" does not exclude a dog from being ridden with genetic problems, or having a nasty temperament, as a lot of GSDs do. 

I still haven't seen Truley proven to be wrong. I haven't seen an example of the mythical family that breeds a family pet and cares for the litter and takes back if necessary, and does the necessary testing.

And I still think that if you can't breed properly (imo, function over form with health testing) you shouldn't get to breed at all. OTOH, my favorite breed, Sibes, were not specifically bred as pets, so to speak. Though they were bred for friendly temperment around humans. But they were also bred for intelligence and endurance or workability. An authentic Sibe would be a difficult housepet.

So, I keep hearing about pet quality, which is essentially a dog that is not of show quality, though it doesn't speak to temperment or trainability. My grandparents had a champion Apricot Poodle who was to large to show. But he sired winning pups. So, since he couldn't show from being to large by an inch and a pound or so, he was deemed pet quality. I think we need more in pets than just the right dimensions. But I also agree that breed clubs will also keep an eye toward that. I can't count the number of times I have read that in the Am Staff clubs, no aggressive dog is allowed to breed as the aggressiveness should not be part of the breed standard. As opposed to others who might breed purely for the proper jaw structure, musculature, etc.

I also agree that the GSD with the sloped rear end is a disservice to the breed. Then, look at Pugs, with such a short airway that they are prone to asthma-like symptoms.

But up in the north, people breed alaskan huskies. That is not an actual breed but a type of dog, with purposeful outbreeding and breed mixing for the reason of creating the strongest, fastest sled dog over. One of the early lines was a mix of wolf, Irish Wolfhound, Siberian Husky, and German Pointer. But I'm not familiar with how they deal with genetic defects, which can happen more often since you don't know what you are crossing. What defines pet quality in an alaskan husky? Not running fast enough to make the team. Not temperment or ease of training or calm disposition. He/she didn't run fast enough.

So, how are we going to define pet quality if we want to allow people to breed simply for pet quality? And can we trust the electrician down the street to know his genetics well enough to breed dogs that are sweet and easy to train? And will we then be elitist for expecting that?

Ron, the lucky electrician with a Siberian Husky/Lab.

Marklf

Well I hope that no one minds a "newbies" opinion being posted here.

 Not at all! Welcome!

Marklf

Those that believe that only those dogs that are "proven" in the ring should be bred are IMHO dead wrong. 

as a possible elitist I would like to clarify what I mean when I use the word "proven". It has nothing to do with the show ring. I have a Vizsla and a Dogo, both are hunting breeds. To me a "proven" dog has what it takes to hunt. I could care less if he or his parents have ever been in a show ring. I do think that the standard for any breed is important. If your breed is not suppose to have a white spash on his chest then you should not breed one with a white spash on his chest regardless if he can hunt, if your dog has one testicle then you should not breed him regardless if he can hunt or not.

Marklf

If a person is more concerned with the breed "standard"

 Th standard is highly important! Even in a pet. If you love GSD's then there must be something about them that you love. Their looks, their personality, their size, all of which come from following the set standard for that breed. Staying true to the standard as much as possible is what keep a breed a breed. Deviation from the standard changes the breed. Vizsla's are all the wonderful copper color, because the standard calls for that color, it does not allow for white Vizsla's or grey ones or black ones.

 If you have a pet that is true to the standard (let's take my Gunnar the Vizsla as an example) with no faults, good hips, no health issues, two testicles and who has proven himseld to be a hunting machine and you want to breed, then by all means do so. But do your research, get help from those who have already learned about the pros and cons and breed to another "proven" dog.

 Now if you have a dog like my Hektor who is true to the standard in some ways (size, head, bite, temprament) but has only one testicle, and a pink nose and pink eyes and a couple of spots, but he has great hunting ability and comes from a long line of "proven" hunters, then you should NOT breed him. Hektor is a great dog, I love him a lot but he should never be bred because he is not up to the standard!  Having only one testicle is heridetary and he could pass that on, having a pink nose is a liability in the field hunting due to sunburns and he could pass that on, the Dogo is know as a solid white dog, having spots could be passed on so Hektor although a great pet and most likely a great hunter should never father pups.

 As for normal people not wanting show dogs, well even if you do your research and you put a "proven" dog to a "proven" dog and have eight pups, not all eight are going to be stellar in most cases. So you will always have pet quality dogs without compromising on health or on the ability of the breed to do what is was bred to do.

 I love Vizsla's because they are Vizsla's and I love Dogo's because they are Dogo's and if people breed with no regard to the standard then soon they will not be what I know as a Vizsla or a Dogo anymore.

ron2

I still haven't seen Truley proven to be wrong. I haven't seen an example of the mythical family that breeds a family pet and cares for the litter and takes back if necessary, and does the necessary testing.

 I got my Gunnar from one of these mythical families. The lady who bred him loves Vizsla's. She does not show or hunt although she used to years ago. She owns (last time I was there) 5 Vizsla's. Most were imported from Hungary. Anything she breeds has its health certified and hips are guaranteed. Because she takes such pains to breed a Vizsla true to the standard many of her pups have done well in the show ring and the field. She takes her dogs back if something goes wrong and fosters them until they can be re-homed She requires a no breeding contract from everyone who purchases from her and she tends to have only 1 litter every 1-2 years.  She asks a lot of questions if you go to her for a puppy and by the time the pups are on the ground all of them are taken already.

 I know she does not make a profit at it. It is something that she does because she loved the breed and she loves the puppies.

 She has her small kennel in her backyard; her pups are born in the laundry room and reside in the home with the family and all the dogs. Some at first glance would consider her a BYB and they would be wrong.

Marklf

If a person is more concerned with the breed "standard" then producing good quality PETS then they will end up producing dogs that are less likely to fit in with families and will be more likely to end up in the pound.

This statement is really not making sense, I'd love further explanation.

 Your comments about good temperament...are so subjective...everyone here likely has a different idea of what a 'good temperament' is, about what "fitting into a family" is...that is why some of us have GSD's and others have Beagles...some have Terriers...and others have Sighthounds.

There is no "perfect family dog" temperament...that to me...is a myth and totally dependent on the needs of each, particular family. Breeding for the family thus...is impossible. Ditto intelligent, that's subjective too....and do you think everyone wants a "friendly" dog, or a smart dog?....LOL.

Gosh as a breeder I am used to being told my show dogs are useless in the field...but never have I been told that due to their being bred to a standard, that they aren't good pets, either...*ouchie*

My hounds bred for the ring are no tougher a fit into families...than their hunting or BYB counterpart would be...and again, if you aren't a hound family...then you aren't and regardless of where you get your hound...you won't be a good fit.

Mark

 
There are absolutely LOADS of dogs besides pittie and lab mixes in rescues and shelters...check petfinder.... purebreds galore.

Of course, if people don't want to rescue or adopt but still want a particular breed, they should go to a concientious breeder - there is nothing wrong with that! You are totally right on that account. My parents have an ABC purebred border collie, I have a Mountain Cur rescue - no dog is "better" than the other and I am certainly no "better" than my parents for adopting versus buying.

And the vast majority of dogs bred by concientious breeders, even if they are of a top working/agility/show line, will be sold as pets. The ones that are kept at the very few that the particular breeder feels will properly continue their line.

I do agree a lot with you that there is an over-emphasis on form these days. Yes, form is important, or else a GSD would not be a GSD. But there are so many other things to take into consideration. Can the breed do what it was bred to do? It annoys the spit out of me seeing all the border collies who wouldn't know what to do with a sheep if it stepped on them in the AKC show ring. I hope to God the AKC never gets a hold of the Appalachian breeds...they already have their claws on the Plott, and I see no mention of hunting/trailing ability in the "breed standard" Example " Disqualification: Length of ear extending beyond the tip of the nose or hanging bloodhound-like, in long, pendulous fashion" Holy Moses, if the ears extend beyonf the tip if the nose but it's the best bear and coondog around, are you telling me it isn't a top Plott? Bleh.

Ummmm, guys?  I don't have my DOGS in my siggy because I don't know how to do that.  You've gotta quit coming up with such hard stuff.....

Send the pictures to me Glenda I can post them for ya!

Here is my boy, and for the record, his breeder still have his parents, 2 siblings from a previous litter(full to my dog) and several half siblings. He breeds with the knowledge that he is not expecting a prospect out of a litter, if he gets one, great, but he does not bank on getting that "one". He got lucky, he got 2 out the litter, none out of Kord's that I know of. And both of Kord's parents are certified to breed.

And by proved, I too am not talking about the show ring, proved for my breed is shutzhund or herding, show ring last for me.

The boy, his ears are to big, I had no plans to breed and accepted him on limited registration. He was neutered almost a year ago.

and could someone send me the link for the Elitist dog owner banner?

I LOVE it.

I copied it and put loaded it into my photobucket account. 

Marklf

Well I hope that no one minds a "newbies" opinion being posted here.  I have been lurking on this site for quite a while but this thread finally convinced me to sign up and post.  Although I understand the views of many of you "elitist" that post here I think that you are harming your own cause.   Most people that own and care for dogs do not need nor desire "show quality" dogs!  We want PETS!!!  Those that believe that only those dogs that are "proven" in the ring should be bred are IMHO dead wrong.  I have owned "well bred" dogs and some not so "well bred dogs" but what mattered was not how well they would have done in a ring but rather how well they would do in my family.  If a person is breeding healthy, good tempered, intelligent, and friendly dogs with the goal of producing healthy, good tempered, intelligent, friendly PETS then I do not have any problem with that.  If a person is more concerned with the breed "standard" then producing good quality PETS then they will end up producing dogs that are less likely to fit in with families and will be more likely to end up in the pound.  Sure those dogs may end up winning lots of shows but that does not in any way mean that they will be a good family pet.  Insisting that only dogs that can "improve" the breed seems to indicate that one thinks that the breed needs improving.  Most "pet" owners choose a breed, not because they think that breed needs improving, but because they like that particular breed the way it is.  Too often the desire to breed to the strict confirmation standards produces more health and temperament problems then it corrects!  Look what is happening to the GSD!  It appears that those that desire a "working" GSD breed to one standard while those desiring a  "confirmation" GSD breed to another.  If that is OK then what is wrong with those desiring a "pet" GSD breeding for that purpose?  The vast majority of GSD owners will never enter their dog in any competion and their dogs will not be a "working" dog either so the traits that they want in their pets may not be the same as those that are being bred for by the "show" breeders or the "working dog" breeders. 

 

Mark

Here is the problem--most people breeding only "pets" are not overly concerned with things like health and temperament.  That is why many people dislike it when breeds get popular--the more people that are out there breeding, the more likely you are to have someone who is going to screw something up.

I wanted a "pet" lab.  I could have had my pick of "pet" lab breeders, but I decided on someone who showed his dogs.  Why?  Stable temperament and non-spasticness were *extremely* important to me.  And, that's what I got.  I could not ask for a better temperament from a dog.  If I had gone to one of those "pet" breeders, I likely would have also ended up with a nice lab.  However, in this area, there are many labs with poor temperaments (a friend of mine that worked at a pet supplies store was attacked twice by a lab and a lab mix), and in some areas labs are the #1 biters.  A woman I know in lab rescue has said that about 10% of the dogs that come into rescue are dog aggressive.  these dogs are coming from somewhere, and I can tell you for a fact that we do not have *that* many show breeders in the area, so that does not leave many alternatives.

Regarding the statement that breeding to the standard is causing more dogs to end up in the pound, this is the lab Standard for Temperament: The ideal disposition is one of a kindly, outgoing, tractable nature; eager to please and non-aggressive towards man or animal. The Labrador has much that appeals to people; his gentle ways, intelligence and adaptability make him an ideal dog. Aggressiveness towards humans or other animals, or any evidence of shyness in an adult should be severely penalized.

Exactly which part of that standard would cause a dog to end up in a shelter? 

driego,

"Not at all! Welcome!"

Thank you!

"as a possible elitist I would like to clarify what I mean when I use the word "proven". It has nothing to do with the show ring. I have a Vizsla and a Dogo, both are hunting breeds. To me a "proven" dog has what it takes to hunt. "

 That is fine but you seem to contradict yourself when you then say "If your breed is not suppose to have a white splash on his chest then you should not breed one with a white splash on his chest regardless if he can hunt..."!  If I want a dog for its ability to hunt why on earth would I care if it has a "white splash" on its chest????  I can understand if the deviation from the standard could cause medical issues such as lack of a testicle or even your example of of the pink nose being burned but a "white splash" on the chest does not effect the hunting ability of the dog and that is what you claimed was important!

  "As for normal people not wanting show dogs, well even if you do your research and you put a "proven" dog to a "proven" dog and have eight pups, not all eight are going to be stellar in most cases. So you will always have pet quality dogs without compromising on health or on the ability of the breed to do what is was bred to do."

That is not necessarily true!   Those dogs that are not "stellar" enough for the ring may not be suitable for pets either!  In fact I have experienced dogs that were extremely "well bred" for show purposes but made lousy pets!  Many years ago my parents had a highly pedigreed carefully bred cocker spaniel which with the right handler probably would have done very well in the ring but it was not "pet quality" at all!  It had a temperament that was not good near children or other dogs.  Although it had the ability to appear cheerful, sweet and sensitive some of the time it also had the ability to be snappish, nervous and untrustworthy other times! 

Mark