The Elitist Attitude.

Marklf

What I consider to be elitist is when someone (I am NOT saying you do this) expects all others to follow their standard for breeding practices! 

I don't see anyone here doing that...it's actually IMPOSSIBLE to expect ANYTHING from ANY large varied group of people. I think we all here, know that.

What I see is an offering of information about why a person might think bigger than themselves and what they want...when they do a breeding. That has been presented in a number of ways by a number of people. I doubt ANYONE here expects ANYTHING aside from the person reading their post...so not sure where this statement comes from?

Folks...do any of you here....asking that people think before they breed..."expect all others" to follow your personal standard? On this? On anything in life?

I think Mark...what you might mean is that we "wish" or "hope" or "dream" that people might consider what we've said and see some merit in it. But we don't stay up nights wringing our hands if they don't.

Mark, I never thought you ment me, sorry I did not make that known. What I was responding to was how this whole Elitist thing came about from my end.

rwbeagles

Folks...do any of you here....asking that people think before they breed..."expect all others" to follow your personal standard? On this? On anything in life?

I think Mark...what you might mean is that we "wish" or "hope" or "dream" that people might consider what we've said and see some merit in it. But we don't stay up nights wringing our hands if they don't.

I sure do wish and hope and pray that they'll adjust their standard closer to that of mine.  And I try mightily to convince them as to why that would be the right move.  But, I do often come off as pushy, opinionated and bossy so I'm happy these threads happened if for no other reason than to learn how to do that less confrontationally and more effectively.

And I do sometimes stay up nights wringing my hands knowing that there are people out there who will breed their dogs "just because", sometimes I even have to avoid places (like the dog park and the pet stores) because I become so upset about it, I'm unable to behave in socially accepted manners and I have to count to 10 and walk away before I start screaming and crying and demanding that these people spend a day at the shelter before they do it.  Of course, NO ONE who breeds believes that could EVER happen to one of THEIR dogs.  But it does people, it does.   

I always keep my expectations of people as a whole...low. That way I am pleasantly suprised LOL.

rwbeagles,

"I don't see anyone here doing that...it's actually IMPOSSIBLE to expect ANYTHING from ANY large varied group of people. I think we all here, know that"

If you look back over this thread you will see posts (I do not want to directly quote them because I do not want to appear as if I am making this personal) that states views along the lines off; If someone is not breeding dogs "right"(according to that particular posters views on what is is is not "right";) you are not allowed to breed.  Also you will see posts that claim that any breeder that is not doing what a particular poster thinks they should do then that breeder is not "rebutable" or "ethical".  Those are just some examples of what I meant when stated they were "expecting all others to follow their standards".

Mark

rwbeagles

I always keep my expectations of people as a whole...low. That way I am pleasantly suprised LOL.

LOL, Gina!   One of my mottos in life is, "The average person tends to be . . .average."  I don't burn brain cells wishing everyone thought like I did, or even thinking that they ought.  If I tell you what I think, it's in the hope that it will be helpful to you in some way.  I am very passionate about what I believe, generally.

For example, on the topic of the OP,  I believe very simply that everything we humans have the care of, should be reproduced with some purpose and to some external standard - not subjective standards.  I have an objective selection process for my sheep based on very measurable goals.  The one litter of livestock guardians I bred, was with two dogs who met the breed club standard as determined by the work they did, rough size and coat qualities, and purebred status.  The pup I kept, exceeded both parents in working ability, temperament, and physical characteristics.

Humans are capable of making reproductive choices for themselves, on the basis of more than sheer convenience and raw instinct.  Many animal species have some kind of ritualistic selection process, but they do not choose whether to mate, but rather with whom.

When we domesticate animals, we convert many adaptive characteristics to ones that suit our needs.  Sheep in the wild shed their coats, for instance, while domestic breeds have coats that grow out forever, like a poodle's - eventually blinding them and matting down into the skin, if we do not shear them.  Wild cattle only nurse their young for a few seconds at a time, so that they are not a mark for predators.  Domestic cows  nurse their young for five to ten minutes - or longer, for some dairy breeds.

Thus, it is our responsibility to give thought to the animals we breed, to ensure we are not harming them, or the people who will own them.  I think we are, today, sadly far from that standard of stewardship, but it's the reason I am against random and selfish breeding of pet animals. 

Marklf

If someone is not breeding dogs "right"(according to that particular posters views on what is is is not "right";) you are not allowed to breed.

Firstly, "right" it's not according to any one individual's opinion, it's according to the breed standard. That's something many knowledgeable people have been working on over the years for the betterment of the health, constitution, temperament and overall well-being of the breed.  

Secondly, NO ONE said that you are not allowed to breed. No one.

Marklf

Also you will see posts that claim that any breeder that is not doing what a particular poster thinks they should do then that breeder is not "rebutable" or "ethical". 

That is called an opinion. We all have them. Just as the opinion that buying from a breeder at all is unethical. Or that their neighbor breeding their pets IS ethical. Those are all opinions and we all have them. That does not mean that we EXPECT anyone to conform to our opinions. I don't, anyway. I don't expect they will. I wish they would. I think a lot fewer dogs would be killed if they did, but I don't expect them to any more than I expect people to wise up and change their minds about anything.

Marklf

rwbeagles,

"I don't see anyone here doing that...it's actually IMPOSSIBLE to expect ANYTHING from ANY large varied group of people. I think we all here, know that"

 

If you look back over this thread you will see posts (I do not want to directly quote them because I do not want to appear as if I am making this personal) that states views along the lines off; If someone is not breeding dogs "right"(according to that particular posters views on what is is is not "right";) you are not allowed to breed.  Also you will see posts that claim that any breeder that is not doing what a particular poster thinks they should do then that breeder is not "rebutable" or "ethical".  Those are just some examples of what I meant when stated they were "expecting all others to follow their standards".

 

Mark

 

Mark, I'm confused.  Earlier you were criticizing the AKC for not holding breeds accountable for their own standards, but now you are saying standards are purely subjective and we don't need to hold breeders accountable to them? 

I find it interesting when some people claim they don't care about breed standards, responsible breeding and the whole nine yards because all they want is a "pet" but yet choose a purebreed dog and are confused as to why their purebreed dog grows up and barely resembles the breed it's supposed to be, has behavioral issues, health problems and can't figure out for the life of them why the breeder refuses to take their phone calls.

FourIsCompany,

"Firstly, "right" it's not according to any one individual's opinion, it's according to the breed standard. "

 Actually the word "right" in this instance refered to the OP's motive for breeding and had nothing to do with the "breed standard".

"Secondly, NO ONE said that you are not allowed to breed. No one."

Actually what I posted was very close to a direct quote from a post in this thread!  So yes those words were used!

Mark

Liesje,

"Mark, I'm confused.  Earlier you were criticizing the AKC for not holding breeds accountable for their own standards, but now you are saying standards are purely subjective and we don't need to hold breeders accountable to them?"

Now its my turn to be confused????  When did I criticize the AKC for "not holding breeds accountable for their own standards"????  And when did I say "standards are purely subjective and we don't need to hold breeders accountable to them? "

 Mark

whtsthfrequency

I understand the necessity of keeping a Plott to look like a Plott - what I am worried about is that due to the inclusion in the AKC, which you must admit focuses a great deal on form over function, despite the standard being written by people who know their dogs - I can see the show world doing to them exactly what the it did to the border collie, ending up with the ABC and AKC at odds - attracting breeders who only care about coat color, length, etc, not working ability - creating the best LOOKING dog to win shows, while not focusing on the breeding dog's working ability, which is JUST as important as appearance in the defining of the breed. Right now, I agree, the people who shows Plotts are "showing their working dogs" - but how long do you think that is going to last?

I might be getting off topic here, but since it's Truly's thread and she is a GSD person, maybe she can weigh in.  With GSDs, we already have this split.  We've got the "AKC" dogs, the west German high lines, and the working lines (which are also split into several varieties, but often crossbred).  Honestly...I'm not sure I see anything so wrong with it.  The thing is, neither of these three types really look like the original GSDs, so no side can really claim *they* are preserving the GSD as Captain Max von Stephanitz created them.  Also, I'm not sure any type has significantly more or less health or temperament issues than the other.  I know which *I* think exemplifies the breed and why, but I'm sure fanciers of the other types have good reasons of their own.  I think as long as breeders and fanciers of ALL types adhere to the standards for their type and breed to improve the breed (whatever traits they are trying to bring out), I guess I'm "OK" with the split.  It's a win-win-win!  There are differences in structure, drives, agility...but in all three there are amazing examples of the breed's smarts, athleticism, biddability, and versatility.

Marklf

Liesje,

"Mark, I'm confused.  Earlier you were criticizing the AKC for not holding breeds accountable for their own standards, but now you are saying standards are purely subjective and we don't need to hold breeders accountable to them?"

Now its my turn to be confused????  When did I criticize the AKC for "not holding breeds accountable for their own standards"????  And when did I say "standards are purely subjective and we don't need to hold breeders accountable to them? "

 Mark

Marklf

If the AKC really wanted to eliminate hereditary problems in the breeds it could do so fairly quickly!  All it would need to do is require breed specific health screening for all dogs that it registers!  Any dog that fails its genetic screening would lose it "AKC registered" status!  [...] the AKC profits from this misconception so unfortunately I do not see them doing anything to change that anytime soon!

Marklf

All "show breeders" produce dogs that cannot compete in the ring so they sell them as "pets" but the criteria that they used for selecting which dogs to breed to produce that "show dog" may not be the best criteria to use for selecting which dogs to breed for a good "pet" dog.

1.  The AKC is a registry and does not oversee breeding and standards, so it's not their responsibility to be doing health checks and denying registry.  The parent club of the breed needs to be more involved with correct breeding standards and adjusting the standard for their breed, if need be.

2. Who decides what qualities are good for pets and why an unproven dog should be bred to produce pets?  To me that is way to subjective. 

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

Hi Mark, welcome to the forum.

If you (colloquial) don't care about a breed in particular, go to the shelter and get a mutt.  For example, a medium sized female shelter mutt is likely to make a great, intelligent family pet.  There are thousands of them already with no need to breed more.

If you DO care about a breed, then you wouldn't want to see that breed ruined by too much poor breeding going on either.  After all, there are already more than enough dogs.

Showing is just a way of determining which dogs are suitable for breeding.  That's why they started!

Trials serve the same purpose.  A breeding-quality dog is an excellent specimen of the breed, and an excellent specimen of the breed can and will do the job it was trained for, and should do it well.

There are more than enough dogs.  If more are planned, it should be for a bally good reason.  Just wanting nice intelligent friendly pets is NOT a reason.   Most dogs fit this category, admittedly some training is required but the same is true of a cute puppy bought from a breeder, regardless of whether he is show or pet quality.

On that note, in any one litter there will be some pups that will turn out to be show quality, some breeding quality and some pet quality.  There is no need to breed entire litters of pet quality dogs.  There are more than enough dogs already.

Did I mention there are more than enough dogs already? 

ETA - I think you have made a great point though.  People who just want a bog standard pet, fairly low maintenance, just a companion to love and maye take for a walk round the block of an evening... are going out and buying high drive, high energy working dogs with no idea of how to cope with those nergy or drives. 

However, the fault there is not that the breeders are breeding "the wrong kind of dogs".  Tehre are different breeds for a REASON, and how BORING would it be if every breed was just a Golden in a different colour coat?!!  The fault lies with the buyers who fail to do their research and therefore don't really know what they are buying, or how to cope with it.  In some cases they either don't know or don't care that a shelter dog would probably better suit their lifestyle and tick the oxes of what they actually want from a dog.  Many want a purebreed as a kind of status symbol and would turn their nose up at a "mongrel".  (snobs).  None of this is the fault of breeders who are breeding pups true to their origin!