The Elitist Attitude.

I am kind of done here because I can see in that other thread the responses are more kinder, more creditable, and respectful of the OP's inquiries.

Moderator speaking...

Always important to remember when threads like this come up...not to allow any one poster to make an otherwise important and interesting topic...all about them.

Better by far, to focus on the actual topic...and let any parties insisting on personal attention, stand out as such all on their own. Not saying such is happening here, but let's always be aware that it can occur.

Another Mod has already suggested this thread return to topics and issues rather than people...and I think that an excellent suggestion. Let's do just that. Thanks all!

FourIsCompany

Chuffy

I also think that every breeder should be involved in rescue. 

 

Now that I understand what DumDog was meaning by this, I would like to respond.

I disagree.   While being involved in rescue is certainly commendable and I would respect and admire a "good" breeder who chose to be involved in rescue, I don't think the fact that they are a breeder obligates them in any way to be involved in rescue. As long as they are reputable, breed for health, conformation and temperament and betterment of the breed, etc., I don't think they should feel bound to be involved in rescue. They are doing their part for the breed. Many times, they are doing MORE than their part.

OTOH, I think breeders who are breeding their family pets, ignoring health tests, BYB, and so on ARE obligated to do something right for their breed to make up for how badly they're screwing it up. So, being involved in rescue would be a good thing for them to do. Better yet, they should stop breeding and stick to rescue.

I said in my earlier post (I think, maybe I am going mad) that I do agree taht the breeder shoud take back any pup they have bred for any reason.  This might mean they are "involved in rescue" at some point, they might be "rescuing" one of their own pups!  And what if there is a problem with one breeding and, as Dumdog says, several pups all have the same problem, what then?  The breeder is likely going to need help.  That's just one reason why I think "being involved in rescue" is a good idea.  Scratch their back; one day you may need them to scratch yours.  When I said "I think they should help a few rejects"  I didn't mean EVERY breeder has to otherwise they are terrible!  I meant that it would be a bally good idea, for the reasons I stated.  If I had to choose from two breeders and one rescued and the otehr didn't, I'd go for the one who rescued, all other things being equal.  Aside from anything else, a breeder should be a dog lover and should be aware of the repurcussions from irresponsible breeding, I'd be hard pressed to believe someone who was involved in rescue wasn't failed on eitehr of those counts.

DPU

Shouldn't they be focusing on the hip issue of GSD rather than the coat.  Afterall you can easily cut the coat to the bigwigs standards.  How ridiculous are these bigwigs standards.....totally irrelevant to the family pet.  No wonder the bigwigs remain anonymous. 

 Umm the SV IS focusing on the hip issue with their new hip rating system. But they still want GSDs to look and act like GSDs before being breed too. Structure is also important to pet owners, even if they don't know it as a dog with poor structure doesn't "hold up" as well in old age and may be more prone to injuries. You seem to think that because a standard says a certain color or coat is unacceptable, that is all breeders of that breed think about. I understand you don't know much about the breeding world, genetics or the such but perhaps if you are going to start arguements against show or working breeders and make statements like the above, you should do some research first.

whtsthfrequency

DPU: " I am not convinced that such things as conformation, genetic testing, or having the right stud as defined by a few is really for the betterment of the dog.  The betterment of the Great Dane would be a stronger heart but the focus is on color, size, .....thats the reality"

 So do you feel HD is not a problem with GDs? Eyes aren't a problem? The only real issue is cardio? I would love to hear how you feel breeders can select for a "stronger heart". That is a totally honest question - if you were breeding how would you go about creating GDs with "stronger hearts"?

Liesje

Chelsea, a long coat is a fault or a disqualification, but not any dog is perfect.  You can show coated dogs in UKC, coated dogs are AKC registered, they can compete in AKC events and Schutzhund (German Shepherd sport).  It's only a problem in the AKC show ring.  The AKC show ring is not the end-all or be-all of German Shepherd dogs, hardly!!  

 It is actually a problem when showing under SV/USA rules too.

So do you feel HD is not a problem with GDs? Eyes aren't a problem? The only real issue is cardio? I would love to hear how you feel breeders can select for a "stronger heart". That is a totally honest question - if you were breeding how would you go about creating GDs with "stronger hearts"?

Are you asking me or DPU? Because the quote was one of his. I merely highlighted certain points because I was asking his opinion on the need for genetic testing and health discrimination.  I am sure he knows more about all the various particulars of GDs than I. My specialty is cows and sheep ;)

AgileGSD

Liesje

Chelsea, a long coat is a fault or a disqualification, but not any dog is perfect.  You can show coated dogs in UKC, coated dogs are AKC registered, they can compete in AKC events and Schutzhund (German Shepherd sport).  It's only a problem in the AKC show ring.  The AKC show ring is not the end-all or be-all of German Shepherd dogs, hardly!!  

 It is actually a problem when showing under SV/USA rules too.

True, forgot about that.  But they can show UKC, can compete AKC, SchH, AHBA etc....  They can get all the titles another GSD would except for an AKC CH or an SV rating.  I'm not defending coats b/c I understand the purpose of an undercoat on a GSD, but the comparison of coats vs. hip dysplasia was not a good one.

Chuffy

I said in my earlier post (I think, maybe I am going mad) that I do agree taht the breeder shoud take back any pup they have bred for any reason.  This might mean they are "involved in rescue" at some point, they might be "rescuing" one of their own pups!

Yes, you did. And you're not going mad. Well, at least this isn't an indication of such.   I should have quoted DumDog and answered her post. I was just being lazy and quoted you. Sorry. 

Liesje

I'm not defending coats b/c I understand the purpose of an undercoat on a GSD

Many have undercoats. Mine do. Just FYI. GSD Coats

The Long Stock Coat is a long coat that has an undercoat.  This is not a desired coat length despite the dog still having an undercoat.  Stock Coats shed just as much as their short or plush coated counterparts ;)  The Long Stock Coat, like the normal Long Coat, can be distinguished by long tufts, or 'feathering', of hair on the ears and the backs of the legs and tail.

 

The Standard Long Coat is a long soft outer coat with no undercoat, and is a fault as far as the standard is concerned.  It has long hair or feathering on the ears, legs, and tail.

Liesje

but the comparison of coats vs. hip dysplasia was not a good one.

I must've missed something, because I sure didn't do that, and I hope you don't think I did.

Thanks for all the answers about coated GSDs. I thought that long coats were specifically bred for, so thanks for clearing that up. Actually I'm really glad to hear it, because I think those dogs are gorgeous and was sad to think they only came about through questionable breeding practices.

chelsea_b

Liesje

but the comparison of coats vs. hip dysplasia was not a good one.

I must've missed something, because I sure didn't do that, and I hope you don't think I did.

Thanks for all the answers about coated GSDs. I thought that long coats were specifically bred for, so thanks for clearing that up. Actually I'm really glad to hear it, because I think those dogs are gorgeous and was sad to think they only came about through questionable breeding practices.

Chelsea, you did not make the comparison, someone else did.

Liesje

True, forgot about that.  But they can show UKC, can compete AKC, SchH, AHBA etc....  They can get all the titles another GSD would except for an AKC CH or an SV rating.  I'm not defending coats b/c I understand the purpose of an undercoat on a GSD, but the comparison of coats vs. hip dysplasia was not a good one.

 Well the SV thing is pretty important for anyone breeding to the traditional GSD standard. I like coats too and to me it wouldn't necessarily mean the dog shouldn't be bred if it is an otherwise good GSD. I don't so much care for the breeders who breed only for coats though - breeding only coats to coats to produce more coats. Belgians have some really wacky coat/color issues involving AKC registration, so my view of such things could be a bit skewed at this point ;)

FourIsCompany

I disagree.   While being involved in rescue is certainly commendable and I would respect and admire a "good" breeder who chose to be involved in rescue, I don't think the fact that they are a breeder obligates them in any way to be involved in rescue. As long as they are reputable, breed for health, conformation and temperament and betterment of the breed, etc., I don't think they should feel bound to be involved in rescue. They are doing their part for the breed. Many times, they are doing MORE than their part.

 I agree except for one point. IMO any breeder should be willing and able to take back their own dogs for re-homing. If I ever breed that would be one of my own requirements. It has also been something that I look for when buying a dog, not because I ever intend to use it, but because to me that shows the highest responsibility from the breeder.

 Of all the good breeders I know all of them insist on taking their own dogs back in the event of problems, and only some of them are involved in breed rescue.

dgriego

 I agree except for one point. IMO any breeder should be willing and able to take back their own dogs for re-homing. If I ever breed that would be one of my own requirements. It has also been something that I look for when buying a dog, not because I ever intend to use it, but because to me that shows the highest responsibility from the breeder.

 Of all the good breeders I know all of them insist on taking their own dogs back in the event of problems, and only some of them are involved in breed rescue.

 See, I wouldn't consider that rescue, though. That's just being responsible- especially since it's generally (with everything else done right) happening too often.
 

Truley

chelsea_b

Liesje

but the comparison of coats vs. hip dysplasia was not a good one.

I must've missed something, because I sure didn't do that, and I hope you don't think I did.

Thanks for all the answers about coated GSDs. I thought that long coats were specifically bred for, so thanks for clearing that up. Actually I'm really glad to hear it, because I think those dogs are gorgeous and was sad to think they only came about through questionable breeding practices.

Chelsea, you did not make the comparison, someone else did.

Correct.  Don't worry, Chelsea, you asked a legit question.  Someone else brought up hip dysplasia.