# The Decline of Breeds



## Alex Corral

After reading tons and tons of articles & threads from various working dog forums, I'm curious as to why people think all breeds of dogs have declined? Or, do you think breeds in fact HAVE declined. It's been pretty apparent on how difficult it is now to find a good working dog, with high drives and solid nerves (some breeds more than others). Were these dogs abundantly available 100 yrs ago? 50? 30 yrs ago? I know over-breeding has a lot to do with it, but what else happened?


----------



## Bob Scott

Dog shows became popular in the last part of the 1800s. From there, fad breeds started showing up because Presidents owned them/movie stars owned them/dogs became movie stars/everyone wanted one of "those" for a pet. 
Before all of this, dogs were basically working farm animals. The demise of working farms and/or introduction of modern equiptment made the use of dogs less attractive. 
Tons of reasons but basicaly dogs started becomming pets instead of working animals.
I've seen Rin-Tin-Tin (TV) Lassie (TV) Big Red (movie) and reciently 101 Dalmations (movie) Eddie (TV JRT) and others increas the demand for "one of those dogs". Back yard breeders and puppy mills jumped at the money making opportunities and down went the working dog in general. 
I doubt I even scratched the surface for the demise of working dogs. 
Even pet breeds fall to popularity of the masses.


----------



## David Frost

My data is anecdotal only but it's over a very long period (well in human life anyway.) 40 years ago, you would never have convinced me I could test 50 Labs and only find 5 that would retrieve. I've seen so many GSD nerve bags over the past 10 years it has convinced me that poor Max von is rolling in his grave. Anecdotal no doubt, but geez louise.

DFrost


----------



## Pauline Michels

PR also has a lot to do with it. When working breed magazines don't want protection photos, a breed club sends a written reprimand to a member whose dog appeared "aggressive" on a TV soap opera and irresponsible ownership results in BSL we hardly stand a chance of finding strong dogs.

Also high drive dogs require a lot of time and effort. I think there are breeders who will purposely breed "quieter" dogs so they can sell puppies to people who can "live" with them....if you consider sitting around "life".


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Pauline Michels said:


> Also high drive dogs require a lot of time and effort. I think there are breeders who will purposely breed "quieter" dogs so they can sell puppies to people who can "live" with them....if you consider sitting around "life".


And you know what's REALLY infuriating? There are plenty of breeds that are naturally low-energy, velcro-type companion animals. More than plenty! So why water down a perfectly good working-type breed?


----------



## jay lyda

Every one of you are EXACTLY right. =D>


----------



## symeon kazanas

Because people, especially us Americans want the look of a GSD and bragging rights to owning Rin Tin Tin, but don't want the true character of one. Perfect example is the AKC American Shepherd. Talk about complete destruction of the breed , Yuck squared!!!


----------



## Bob Scott

I might add that many folks think todays super high drive dog is becomming a strictly sport dog. As a kid in the 50s, I remember GSDs, Dobes as being less prey and lots more serious then the "average" sport dog today.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

QUOTE: Also high drive dogs require a lot of time and effort. I think there are breeders who will purposely breed "quieter" dogs so they can sell puppies to people who can "live" with them....if you consider sitting around "life".

This started happening with the Mals 10 years ago. I know a lot of people that have put down or nuetered dogs that I could NOT get them to sell to me, that were pretty much what I was looking for in a stud. They said they were doing it "for the breed".

This is why I so rabidly hate show people that I accidently meet them, and want to throw them to the ground and stomp them. Since I cannot, I chase them around and tell them how stupid they are. Sad thing is, they are usually quite ignorant of the fact that they are contributing to a major **** up, but I just am unable not to shit all over them.


----------



## Stephanie Vanderhaegen

There are some of us too that worry here for the working dogs. 
More and more dogbites are happening over here and if you hear the story your heart just aches cus its ignorant dogowners with their pets...

- Grandparents leave infant alone in house with two strange dogs of their friends that they were dogsitting.
- parents leave their three year old alone with a male Rot that they just picked up from the pound. ect

things like that that make me squirm and just ruin our working breeds in the hands of ignorance 

Some breeds like the rot and the pit are banned in some parts of Belgium. (Anderlect,ect)

Things like this decease the breed... 

The goverment wants to pass a law that all dogs have to take a social test, i.e like what they would do with a babydoll...

I just think people should have licences to own dogs like you do a car...
but that is dreaming...


----------



## Andy Andrews

In my mind, people have simply lost touch with the knowledge/skill that's required to produce quality. And not to sound like a dick, but in many areas of this community, I see that sport has overshadowed vocation, and that people seem to think that what looks/acts most impressively, is also the sign of working ability. 

I see the same thing happening with my beloved bulldogs. It seems as though the lunatics have taken over the asylum. Wheras people once knew what the traits of a working dog were, nowadays it would seem that lay people are in charge, because they desire these squatty/low slung bandogs with weird temperaments and giant heads, that can't breathe or move, and quit before they've even started. Their reasoning? To them, this looks tougher than this.


My $.02



Andy.


----------



## Alex Corral

Wow, thanks for everyone's comments. I understand a lot more and it's really sad. Really REALLY SAD. So in a nutshell, lack of education (which is ALWAYS a problem), neutering the assholes, breeding the weenies & beauty pagents are the cause of what we have today. I don't have much experience with working dogs *yet*, but I remember about 22-25 yrs ago, my dad bought 2 GSD pups for my grandfather in Mexico. Those dogs worked the cattle & guarded the house. They took their job seriously & did a great job. They lived to be about 12 yrs old & were safe for us to be around. My dad had absolutely NO CLUE how to pick the right pups. I guess he just got lucky. :-k


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

There has been a decline in the breeds, but the biggest problem we have is the decline in the common sense of man. Everyone got too soft. Honestly that is scarier than the loss of the breeds.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

I'm on the fence about this one. 

Is there really a decline in the number of quality dogs, or a HUGE increase in the number of dogs overall, making it harder to find those good ones? IE if you are looking for a good dog of breed X, 15-20 years ago you may have had to sort through 5 dogs to find 1 you wanted. But 5 were also all the dogs you had available to you to look through. Now you have to look through 25 of that breed, because they are on every street corner and in every house. But you can still find that good dog. I think this is true regardless of the type of work you are looking to do, be it PP, herding, SAR, detection, whatever.

Also, how many peoples standards have changed over the years? I look back at dogs I had 15-20 years ago, dogs that at the time I was thrilled with. They did the work I asked of them, and I have great memories of those dogs. I thought they were "all that". But when I pull out video of those dogs, I realize today I wouldn't keep them. Or if I did, they would just be kept as a pet.

I can agree that if you are looking at percentages only, ie the percentage of a certain breed that is capable of doing the work it was intended for, then yes the breeds are on a decline. But if you look at the numbers, ie how many individuals can you find in that breed who are capable of working, I'm not so sure there is a decline.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Quote: But if you look at the numbers, ie how many individuals can you find in that breed who are capable of working, I'm not so sure there is a decline.


There was a time that I remember, like Dave that finding a lab that didn't retrieve would have had you standing there open mouthed. I still remember that it was a friday, in may of 88 that I saw my first lab that wouldn't retrieve.:-k I stood there for a long time. 

I remember a time if a dog decided to shit and piss and tear up the house more than once or twice, he/she was taken out and shot, not spent thousands of dollars upon, with training and treat balls and other deliriously stupid crap. If enough people have a dog like that, and spend the money........then it is closer to the "norm" and thus acceptable. I have even seen competitiveness amongst women as to how much they have spent on these flaming pieces of shit.

I remember when people took personal responsibility for dogs like this and didn't pawn them off on the suckers we call "rescue" orginizations. Remember when "rescue" meant someone was saved??? For me it is a way of pawning off the crap dog you couldn't bear to waste 5 minutes a day with, and didn't have the balls to put it down. they know it was a junker.

I remember dogs that had character.

I also remember that the dogs "I" had in the past were better than the ones that I see now. How many Mal breeders have more dogs in flyball than they do in FR MR????

As far the GSD goes, it is much easier to raise show dogs. More money, less time. Or the breeders that cross the working and showlines and get ****-all, after they have been told that they will get **** all??? GOod thing they know better.

The poor Rott and Dobe, these dogs should be banished from the show ring, it is their best chance.

Or the people that have decided that there should be a "starter" dog, as it is this persons first dog. Way to keep lowering the bar. Who really benefits here??? Breeders. The dog gets to live, sure, but not necessarily a good thing. Plus, a lot of breeders and trainers have made the strong dog out to be a nightmare, and this is not always true.

Or my absolute all time favorite, clients that tell you flat out they know nothing about dogs, then want to argue with you as to their training. Usually it is because you are increasing the time they have to spend with the dogs, as in 5 min down stay, not 2 min. They wouldn't argue if you told them to kick the dog in the head, just if they have to actually spend time. Then they want to argue with you over nonsense, and try and get you to understand that none of this is their fault, as if anyone cared.


----------



## Bob Scott

Example: Last yrs SV show at Purina Farms brought in something like 30,000 dollars. How much did the USA or the WDA or the AWDF Schutzhund Nats bring in? 
"Show me the money"! Unfortunately sums it all up.


----------



## Alex Corral

*Re: The Decline of Breeds *New Question**

Ok, so what happened to the crap dogs back then? If they were nervy, fear biters, were they put down? I'm sure out of a litter of 10 pups there had to be SOME weak dogs. What happened to those dogs?


----------



## David Frost

*Re: The Decline of Breeds *New Question**



Alex Corral said:


> Ok, so what happened to the crap dogs back then? If they were nervy, fear biters, were they put down? I'm sure out of a litter of 10 pups there had to be SOME weak dogs. What happened to those dogs?



Can you say; "culled".

DFrost


----------



## Amber Scott Dyer

two things:

bad AR 

bad PR


----------



## Lindsay Janes

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> QUOTE: but I just am unable not to shit all over them.


 If you were able to shit all over them, don't forget to bring your toliet paper.


----------



## Alex Corral

*Re: The Decline of Breeds *New Question**



David Frost said:


> Can you say; "culled".
> 
> DFrost


Sooooo...does that mean only the "good one's" were selected for breeding and the others were just pets? Or does it mean the bad one's were euthanized?


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Culling is picking the good from the bad. THe bad are stuck in buckets of water, or their necks are snapped.

PC versions include spay or neuter. However they still charge for these pups.


----------



## Amanda Layne

How can you REALLY tell a "good one" at 6 or 8 weeks? I understand that they are showing "personality" at this age....but some of the shitters as puppies turn out to be awesome dogs......and some of the awesome puppies turn out to be shitters???


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

I don't think you can, unless the dog is extreme. IE has a completely sketchy temperament, runs and hides from it's own breeder, etc. Or has a structural issue that is really obvious, that would preclude it from being a good working dog. Otherwise they call pups a crap shoot for a reason, and that pup who looks awesome at 8 weeks may mature to be average, and that pup who looks good but isn't blowing you away at 8 weeks may end up being the superstar of the bunch. I've seen it happen to many times to be comfortable making permanent (ie spay/neuter or kill) decisions on a pup at 8 weeks.


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood

Sometimes its the handler more than the dog.


----------



## Alex Corral

Amanda Layne said:


> How can you REALLY tell a "good one" at 6 or 8 weeks? I understand that they are showing "personality" at this age....but some of the shitters as puppies turn out to be awesome dogs......and some of the awesome puppies turn out to be shitters???





Kadi Thingvall said:


> Otherwise they call pups a crap shoot for a reason, and that pup who looks awesome at 8 weeks may mature to be average, and that pup who looks good but isn't blowing you away at 8 weeks may end up being the superstar of the bunch. I've seen it happen to many times to be comfortable making permanent (ie spay/neuter or kill) decisions on a pup at 8 weeks.


I agree! This exact same thing happened to someone on the club. He was sold a "pet quality" Mal & he could not control the dog. Finally he gave him up to a person in our club with WAY more experience. This is a badass dog. I don't know how the breeder could've seen him as pet quality. Maybe he did a 180? 

Anyways, it's interesting to learn how breeds are what they are now. If man just didn't breed the crappy ones, once they knew they were crappy ones!


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

The percentage of pups that look like crap and turn out to be decent in the end is really small. Most that I know that cull, cull for obvious defects in physical traits not for temperament.

"pet quality" is refering to what the dog looks like. Just the fact that some asshole is breeding for conformation to even say that a dog is pet quality is inappropriate.


----------



## Lyn Chen

Shouldn't the rest of the litter be taken into consideration in that case? For example, in seven puppies, maybe one or two don't look as good as the others...it'd be worth keeping them and seeing if they catch up eventually.


----------



## Bob Scott

Interesting program on National Geo channel tonight. 
They more or less talked about what a short time it took for us to EF up honest dogs in the desire for breed types. 
Lots more then just that but if fit right in with this post.


----------



## Alex Corral

I know Bob. I read your other post as well. Damn I wish I had the NG channel! Maybe I can find it on youtube in a few weeks?


----------



## Tim Martens

Mike Schoonbrood said:


> Sometimes its the handler more than the dog.


i agree. i'm all for culling handlers...


----------



## Daryl Ehret

Worked for the Spartans...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mB_UrjFC02Q

I've seen a good share of pups turn out alot nicer than you could guess in the 12-16 week range. Seen some nice ones go the other way as well.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

People have changed and everything else has changed with them. Peope still want the best but will work with, and invest time in a dog that isn't worth it.....just because they "looove him now". The vast majority of people producing dogs are doing just that...producing dogs...hoping for that one out of ten show winner, field trial winner, sport dog. The don't breed for consistency any more, they breed for the one that will put them on the map. Meanwhile, they are producing 9 out of 10 culls while looking for it. Don't say they are not culls. If you are a pet breeder and breeding for good pet stock, it would be considered a successfull breeding. If you pawn yourself off as a breeder of working dogs , a show breeder, a field trial dog breeder and produce a majority of pet quality dogs you are a bad breeder, or, a pet dog breeder. It is really that simple.


----------



## ann schnerre

don--good to see ya back, i always look forward to your perspective. come back more often!!


----------



## Anne Vaini

I was talking with my dad and discovered some very interesting things.

Cows were selectively breed for milk production. There was TONS of inbreeding. Then an organization came along promoting the pedigreed conformation cow. They had miniature figurines of the "ideal" cow for farmer's to strive for. This nearly ruined breeds of cows. It greatly lowered milk production. It caused severe health problems, most notably being hoof problems.

Then another organization came along rating the daughters of bulls along a set of guidelines for health and production. They opened registries to allow more diversity. This organization's work dramatically increased the milk production of cows and produced healthier animals.

There is no animal which benefits from selective breeding for appearance. It should not be a foreign idea that temperament and purpose are affected by appearance. It is well proven that physical charateristics of dogs (a curled tail, for example) are a product of selectively breeding for human-sociable animals. It is theorized and not as well supported that behavior traits are related to coat color (in dogs and in other animals).

I am in no way supporting puppy millers or fads, but I am leaning away from the current notion of the "purebred" dog.


----------



## Bob Scott

Anne Vaini said:


> I was talking with my dad and discovered some very interesting things.
> 
> Cows were selectively breed for milk production. There was TONS of inbreeding. Then an organization came along promoting the pedigreed conformation cow. They had miniature figurines of the "ideal" cow for farmer's to strive for. This nearly ruined breeds of cows. It greatly lowered milk production. It caused severe health problems, most notably being hoof problems.
> 
> Then another organization came along rating the daughters of bulls along a set of guidelines for health and production. They opened registries to allow more diversity. This organization's work dramatically increased the milk production of cows and produced healthier animals.
> 
> There is no animal which benefits from selective breeding for appearance. It should not be a foreign idea that temperament and purpose are affected by appearance. It is well proven that physical charateristics of dogs (a curled tail, for example) are a product of selectively breeding for human-sociable animals. It is theorized and not as well supported that behavior traits are related to coat color (in dogs and in other animals).
> 
> I am in no way supporting puppy millers or fads, but I am leaning away from the current notion of the "purebred" dog.


There was a time that suggesting a person go to a dog show an talk with breeders to find a good pup was the norm. These WERE considered to be the good breeders by most folks. 
Times, they have changed! :roll:


----------



## Daryl Ehret

> "pet quality" is refering to what the dog looks like. Just the fact that some asshole is breeding for conformation to even say that a dog is pet quality is inappropriate.



I've never even before imagined that "pet quality" referred to undesireable conformation. To me, it's always meant "doubtful, or less than exemplary working potential". It just seems a nicer way to say; undesireable for breeding, ONLY suitable as a devoted companion. My preference is that a working dog must ALSO be a devoted companion, adaptable to all phases of the owner's unique lifestyle. That's primarily why I prefer the GSD to other breeds, although other breeds are certainly very outstanding in the work.

Overselection for ANY trait, can have detrimental consequences to either physical or temperamental characteristics. Selection for physical characteristics can affect other traits that are genetically linked to temperament, and the reverse holds true. There are some common trends that perhaps hold true across varied species, such as "nervousness" being more commonly present in fine boned animals versus more calm and confident heavy boned animals, or supposed nervousness found in animals with large areas of depigmented hair and skin.

Genetic traits are linked in very complex ways; physical ones affecting temperament, temperamental traits affecting physical ones, and environmental conditions affecting both. A single gene can determine many traits, or a single trait can result from the interaction of many genes, but supposedly about 95 percent of genes are "regulatory genes" that do not code for phenotypic traits at all, but instead regulate the action of other genes in response to environmental triggers.

Combining two differing characteristics of the parents can result in the progeny exhibiting the trait of one parent or the other, or the mid-average of the two. Add to that even, the complex idea that genetic information can be passed recessively, and not expressed over many generations only to suddenly spontaneously appear, and you soon realize that breeding is no simple matter at all. 

It's then vital to the breeder's success to put all the best resources available and his entire scope of knowledge into his planning efforts, while still trying to avoid the wealth of hype or misinformation so easily found at our disposal. Then he has to have a plan to put these pups into the appropriate hands of competent trainers, and careful not to place the ones in pet homes with owners that don't have the capability or knowledge of handling them.

Case in point: I will never forget the retired D.V.M. whose specialty was "animal behavior" who insisted being prepared for the active requirements of a workingline dog. After crateing in excess of 8-10hrs a day, the doctor felt it was necessary to put the young dog on meds to mellow it out from its overactive behavior. THEN complained that the dog was not eating sufficiently and gaining weight, was too bland and did not wish to participate with its' owner! At such a young age, forgiveness should be allowed for this type of excitement, in fact be channeled and used to imprint for working behaviors. A dog of this nature is not beyond eventually learning the appropriate contexts for such behaviors and become a perfect compliment to the owner's lifestyle, reacting when the time and place is right for being aggressively motivated, or "winding down".

It must be remembered that, while genes are predeterminants in which ALL behavior manifests itself in it's environment, they are NOT behaviors in themselves. Without an environment to interact and stage the performance, genes have no idea "how to behave".

In some cases the method of measuring or testing for "breedworthiness" has faults of its' own. Ever see a dog so confident that it was difficult to train the bark into the "bark and hold"? Environment and training can affect the perceived breeding value of a dog negatively, for example poor training concealing the dog's potential, or skilled training deceptively giving the appearance of better quality than deserved. So then, a breeder selecting for working ability can do alot better by knowing the inherant flaws of a given "breedworthiness" test, and not make a decision necessarily based on the test's scores. That, in my opinion, is the true value of understanding a particular sporting venue. It's seen not in the title itself, but in the process of attaining it.

I think that a breeder shouldn't be condemned for not knowing as much as another breeder who produces a grade better. The depth of knowledge that can be applied toward breeding spreads in many directions, can be applied in many ways. Breeding is a learning process that will grow and improve with experience. Everybody has to start somewhere. If any should be condemned, it's the breeder that doesn't apply himself, a breeder that doesn't strive to produce better than his past experience has allowed. A breeder must have ambition and goals to meet on the way, a clear and unwavering vision of what exactly is to be achieved.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

I have seen as many poor dogs bred because of the "form follows function" rule as for any other reason. Many breeders seem to think that is the breeders motto. Conformation breeders breed based on appearance, hunters breed solely for hunt....and it goes on pretty much the same from breeder to breeder. Just depends on what their special interest is. You have to breed for the whole package and you have to judge what you produce as a whole package. I have seen dogs produced that had unbelievable drive, hunt nose. Phenomenal dogs from most hunters standpoint. The mere fact they were not fast enough to put any pressure on any game much less catch it, spoke volumes of what the breeding was based on.
Today, the popular way to breed is to breed to the dog of the day....the one that just got the title. I have to ask....why? It may improve the looks of the paper, but, it rarely improves the dog. It also improves the saleability of the offspring. Since there is "inheritance", my guess is we are back looking for that lucky "one" in a litter. Masses of pups are being produced looking for that one special one. That is sound breeding?
Daryl, while it is great to have some understanding of the complexities of the genetics, how much of it is useful to the breeder? Most of what I see as the downfall is a lack of the basics....and, as you mentioned....all the misinformation that is now readily available at the touch of a button.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen

Don, we GOT to get you breeding Mals. Enough of this terrier affliction.


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood

I talked to a GSD breeder here in Belgium, I asked him which club he trained at so I could come visit and watch the dogs. He told me pretty much that his club is just weekend hobby sport type stuff, and that if I want to see the big boys I need to go to Antwerpen and watch the champions train.

To me, if you are a breeder and talk like that about your club then it makes me question how good the dogs are that are coming out of the breedings.

I am almost getting tired of hearing the kennel name "von der mohnwiese". I don't think I've worked any dogs out of those lines, but 9 out of 10 GSD breeders I have talked to in Belgium and Holland are breeding on those lines because whatshisface was a recent champion. I am sure that there's nothing wrong with breeding on those lines, I don't know the dogs so couldn't tell you my opinion, but I had never heard of the kennel name up until 6 months ago and now everytime I ask a breeder what lines they breed on they tell me the same damn thing.

I think what's wrong with the sport dog world is just as Don said, and this proves it pretty nicely, breeding on a fad. Too many people do it.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> "pet quality" is refering to what the dog looks like. Just the fact that some asshole is breeding for conformation to even say that a dog is pet quality is inappropriate.


Not neccessarily. To a conformation breeder pet quality may mean "looks" but if I say a pup is "pet quality" then it means I don't think it's got what it takes to be a working dog. Generally it means it's got a nice stable temperament, but is lacking in the drive department. Sometimes it also means structure. Which I guess you could put under "looks" but generally I think things like coat color, markings, ear set, etc when I say "looks" I've had pups over the years who had the drive and temperament as pups to be working dogs, but not the body. I just didn't think they would hold up over time with the consistent training, impacts, jumping, etc. So they were put in pet/protection homes, where they would get an outlet/use for the drive, but not be asked to perform like a working dog. To me that's the definition of "pet quality"


----------



## Daryl Ehret

> Daryl, while it is great to have some understanding of the complexities of the genetics, how much of it is useful to the breeder?


I think that an understanding of genetics is only a component of good breeding. Equally important components would be; a healthy diet, stimulus rich environment, method of evaluation, a good placement plan, and continued communication with the puppy buyer. If minimal consideration is given in the selection phase of the breeding, you can probably bet these other components are lacking much attention.

Having a basic understanding of hereditary patterns and an eye for trends of prepotency and is "generally" what we're talking about when we mention genetics. You don't need to know specifically what happens on the biomolecular level to make use of that type of information.

Personally, I think too much emphasis is placed in the belief of genetics being responsible for the whole dog, and not enough on the gene-environment interaction that takes place. To say that these breeds are a shadow of their former selves, and that selection is only what's responsible, is an oversight I believe. We raise them differently, feed them differently, train them differently, evaluate and test them differently... and so on.


----------



## Amanda Layne

Daryl Ehret said:


> I think that an understanding of genetics is only a component of good breeding. Equally important components would be; a healthy diet, stimulus rich environment, method of evaluation, a good placement plan, and continued communication with the puppy buyer. If minimal consideration is given in the selection phase of the breeding, you can probably bet these other components are lacking much attention.
> 
> Having a basic understanding of hereditary patterns and an eye for trends of prepotency and is "generally" what we're talking about when we mention genetics. You don't need to know specifically what happens on the biomolecular level to make use of that type of information.
> 
> Personally, I think too much emphasis is placed in the belief of genetics being responsible for the whole dog, and not enough on the gene-environment interaction that takes place. To say that these breeds are a shadow of their former selves, and that selection is only what's responsible, is an oversight I believe. We raise them differently, feed them differently, train them differently, evaluate and test them differently... and so on.


I totally agree.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

"Having a basic understanding of hereditary patterns and an eye for trends of prepotency and is "generally" what we're talking about when we mention genetics. You don't need to know specifically what happens on the biomolecular level to make use of that type of information."

I have to agree here. Having some basic knowledge of how dominates and recessives work is a must. What I have never agreed with reallynis the really technical aspect because without a genetics lab at ones disposal, it is usless info for the most part. Good to know but has no useful purpose without having a lab. Unfortunately, that leaves breeding in the realm of being less scientific than most would like to believe it really is. One does not know, for sure, what a breeding is going to produce until they do it. Where the rubber meets the road, it is the basics that produce the dogs. By basics, I mean a simple, well defined, standard of what a breeder wants to produce and a flexible plan to produce that dog. A basic understanding of the things that were mentioned above, an immense amount of intuition, and the ability to be totally objective about one's goals......to the point of appearing heartless to many. The lack of objectivity is one of the biggest problems in todays breeding. I think when one looks at a litter of pups and can rationalize that every pup in front of them will make some one happy, they need to change their standard to one that befits the poroducer of pet quality dogs.

"To say that these breeds are a shadow of their former selves, and that selection is only what's responsible, is an oversight I believe. We raise them differently, feed them differently, train them differently, evaluate and test them differently... and so on."

I am going to touch on this just as an example of breeding because it is one of the most obvious I can readily think of. It has to do with GSD's. I may be wrong on this point but, for years the low slung back end has been (put there for looks supposedly) touted as the ruination of the breed. Are the working GSD's built the same way? I have heard it said they have a limited working life because of this same structural defect. This leads me to believe it is not uncommon in working lines. If this info is somewhat correct, I have to ask, why haven't the working breeders bred it out of the working lines? If they didn't always have that rakish look, the genetics are still there. Is it considered the standard? Or has there been some improvement as of late?


----------



## Bob Scott

Don, I think SOME of the rakish look seen in some working dog pictures is more a fad of how the dog is stacked, or posed for a pic. Look at pics of GSD before the 60s and you wont see it at all. There was little difference between the show and working lines before that.
The Czech dogs have become (over)popular because they were the last to have little or no difference between working and show.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

I take it that all I have heard about the hindquarters on the GSD is untrue Bob? I read somewhere where one trainer won't work males at all and no females over a certains weight because, after training, the useful working span is only five years...maybe. There is a point to this, but, it is irrelevant if the GSD is conformationally up to par.


----------



## Daryl Ehret

You're not talking about my kind of shepherd, so I'll stay out of this one.

Genetic testing can be done in useful ways for the breeder. For example, I wish to avoid having the long-coat gene in my program, so after identifying a prospect that I was interested in, but also suspected *might* have it recessively, I was able to save alot of time and expense by having it tested as a pup, rather than finding out after training, feeding, titleing, and THEN breeding to know for sure two years from now, and then having to start over. The time is certainly harder to recoup than the money, but I wouldn't intend to lose alot of either. You can test for other things maybe less useful, such as for presence of the recessive black gene. Research in genetics will certainly get more useful in time, but until it is, I'm all for being practical.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Daryl, I am not referring to any particular type of Shepard and was just repeating what I have heard for years. So, since it is obviously not true let's forget the Shepard's and I will just bring up some of my experiences to illustrate this. 

I started breed a few years back, and, like everyone most likely is, I was something of an idealist. I was going to breed the best working Airedales and was going to do it by the book. Who better to set one straight but the Nat'l breed club, the ATCA. I was assured after all the years they had been around, the standard was the perfect working standard.....there was no better. Well, I started my breeding hobby and had two 50lb show bred dogs that had pedigrees to kill for. I knew the bitch was a hunting fool and that is what peaked my interest in the first place....I was going to do my part to save the working ability of the airedale. The first dilemma was picking the right offspring to breed to. I roaded them for miles in front of the truck to pick the very best and easiest movers. I kept this up for a couple of generations and one day it dawned on me that the original dogs were in the way, they couldn't keep up with the offspring. I had noticed before this that each generation was leggier, longer in the back etc, etc. To make a long story short, the standard was far from perfect unless your goal was to show dogs. It is all a sham. Over the years, I have learned a thing or two and one is a good running dog generally looks like crap standing still. They are a sight to behold when going wide open. They have rolling toplines, but never flat short backs. I could go on and on but I am sure you all get the picture. Dog breeds are man made and someone decides what is the ideal. That doesn't make it so.
If no one believes me, get five dogs together and do what I did, they will all end up with similar builds, non of which you will find in the show ring unless you are looking at the long dogs such as greyhounds. There are breeds that this probably would be a real stretch for such as the bull breeds. Anyway, things just started glaring at me such as the "for the good of the breed" that is so popular with conformation people. How can that be! They can't name one breed that has benefited under their tutelage. Yes, they helped bring many working breeds down to what they are, so did the hunters that bred solely for prey drive, so did the working breeders let it happen and dumbed down the way they breed. You said it Daryl. People raise their pups different, they feed them differently etc, etc. You left out the part where they breed differently. They breed for paper, they breed for one outstanding dog , even the working people breed with the same purpose as show breeders. Paper and the one top dog. Breeding is not about producing consistently good dogs any more. Raising pups differently, you bet, save them all, raise them in the house and save the weak ones that mother nature would have taken. That is today's idea of doing good by our dogs. Save the sick and the weak because someone can afford to take care of them....someone else. Canines have large litters because even in the wild they are inbred, eaten by other animals, the weak die. A few out of the litter survive. Tough to let mother nature take her course when the little darlings are sitting next to your easy chair looking at you while they starve because they can't compete. Even tougher since they don't know they are really dogs since they have been cuddled and played with, bottle fed, put on heating pads and everything else since birth...before they are sold to someone else. Does this sound cold and unfeeling? It is why I don't have pups in the house. Someone has to face reality along the line. Maybe it is just my reality. Whatever it is, it is for the good of the breed. I think the biggest downfall of breeders is the ability to rationalize. This is just my viewpoint and, I am pretty sure it is going to be wrong. LOL


----------



## Anne Vaini

> They can't name one breed that has benefited under their tutelage.





> Save the sick and the weak because someone can afford to take care of them....someone else.





> Even tougher since they don't know they are really dogs since they have been cuddled and played with, bottle fed, put on heating pads and everything else since birth...before they are sold to someone else


Yup yup yup. 
\\/

I gotta do the dancing dude because the clappin one doesn't work for me. IOW - Jeff is not alone :grin:


----------



## Tim Martens

Don Turnipseed said:


> Daryl, I am not referring to any particular type of Shepard and was just repeating what I have heard for years. So, since it is obviously not true let's forget the Shepard's and I will just bring up some of my experiences to illustrate this.
> 
> I started breed a few years back, and, like everyone most likely is, I was something of an idealist. I was going to breed the best working Airedales and was going to do it by the book. Who better to set one straight but the Nat'l breed club, the ATCA. I was assured after all the years they had been around, the standard was the perfect working standard.....there was no better. Well, I started my breeding hobby and had two 50lb show bred dogs that had pedigrees to kill for. I knew the bitch was a hunting fool and that is what peaked my interest in the first place....I was going to do my part to save the working ability of the airedale. The first dilemma was picking the right offspring to breed to. I roaded them for miles in front of the truck to pick the very best and easiest movers. I kept this up for a couple of generations and one day it dawned on me that the original dogs were in the way, they couldn't keep up with the offspring. I had noticed before this that each generation was leggier, longer in the back etc, etc. To make a long story short, the standard was far from perfect unless your goal was to show dogs. It is all a sham. Over the years, I have learned a thing or two and one is a good running dog generally looks like crap standing still. They are a sight to behold when going wide open. They have rolling toplines, but never flat short backs. I could go on and on but I am sure you all get the picture. Dog breeds are man made and someone decides what is the ideal. That doesn't make it so.
> If no one believes me, get five dogs together and do what I did, they will all end up with similar builds, non of which you will find in the show ring unless you are looking at the long dogs such as greyhounds. There are breeds that this probably would be a real stretch for such as the bull breeds. Anyway, things just started glaring at me such as the "for the good of the breed" that is so popular with conformation people. How can that be! They can't name one breed that has benefited under their tutelage. Yes, they helped bring many working breeds down to what they are, so did the hunters that bred solely for prey drive, so did the working breeders let it happen and dumbed down the way they breed. You said it Daryl. People raise their pups different, they feed them differently etc, etc. You left out the part where they breed differently. They breed for paper, they breed for one outstanding dog , even the working people breed with the same purpose as show breeders. Paper and the one top dog. Breeding is not about producing consistently good dogs any more. Raising pups differently, you bet, save them all, raise them in the house and save the weak ones that mother nature would have taken. That is today's idea of doing good by our dogs. Save the sick and the weak because someone can afford to take care of them....someone else. Canines have large litters because even in the wild they are inbred, eaten by other animals, the weak die. A few out of the litter survive. Tough to let mother nature take her course when the little darlings are sitting next to your easy chair looking at you while they starve because they can't compete. Even tougher since they don't know they are really dogs since they have been cuddled and played with, bottle fed, put on heating pads and everything else since birth...before they are sold to someone else. Does this sound cold and unfeeling? It is why I don't have pups in the house. Someone has to face reality along the line. Maybe it is just my reality. Whatever it is, it is for the good of the breed. I think the biggest downfall of breeders is the ability to rationalize. This is just my viewpoint and, I am pretty sure it is going to be wrong. LOL


=D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D> =D>

goddamn ****ing bullshit clapping hands...


----------



## Tim Martens

Mike Schoonbrood said:


> I talked to a GSD breeder here in Belgium, I asked him which club he trained at so I could come visit and watch the dogs. He told me pretty much that his club is just weekend hobby sport type stuff, and that if I want to see the big boys I need to go to Antwerpen and watch the champions train.
> 
> To me, if you are a breeder and talk like that about your club then it makes me question how good the dogs are that are coming out of the breedings.
> 
> I am almost getting tired of hearing the kennel name "von der mohnwiese". I don't think I've worked any dogs out of those lines, but 9 out of 10 GSD breeders I have talked to in Belgium and Holland are breeding on those lines because whatshisface was a recent champion. I am sure that there's nothing wrong with breeding on those lines, I don't know the dogs so couldn't tell you my opinion, but I had never heard of the kennel name up until 6 months ago and now everytime I ask a breeder what lines they breed on they tell me the same damn thing.
> 
> I think what's wrong with the sport dog world is just as Don said, and this proves it pretty nicely, breeding on a fad. Too many people do it.


mike, have you been the the groot wezendland kennel? my last dog was from there...


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

Don Turnipseed said:


> If no one believes me, get five dogs together and do what I did, they will all end up with similar builds, non of which you will find in the show ring unless you are looking at the long dogs such as greyhounds.


IMO this is obvious when looking at jumping ability also. In the Malinois, the best jumpers I see tend to not fit the "ideal" structure that the text books put forth. Or the show ring. They are a little long vs perfectly square. Aren't cow hocked, but aren't perfectly straight /\ in the rear either, just a slight bit of "hockiness". Croups are just a little more angled than the "text book perfect", etc. None of these are extreme, they are all just a little "off" of what the conformation ring and text books would tell us is perfect.


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood

Tim Martens said:


> mike, have you been the the groot wezendland kennel? my last dog was from there...


No not yet, but they are on my list


----------



## Andy Andrews

Don Turnipseed said:


> *If no one believes me, get five dogs together and do what I did, they will all end up with similar builds, non of which you will find in the show ring unless you are looking at the long dogs such as greyhounds. There are breeds that this probably would be a real stretch for such as the bull breeds.*


Don, in my world, legginess IS ideal. A longer, leggier dog is far more agile than a short, squatty bulldog.




Andy.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Andy, I stayed away from the bull breeds simply because I don't know enough about their structure. Given enough time, I would guess even they would be built similar to any dog that is bred for a specific function such as running ability. They would have to. Basically, what I am saying withing bounds, all working dogs should be able to run easily and move well. If conformation means anything then, the basic running gear an all of them should be about the same. They are not. Flat backs, long back, sloping backs, short backs and on and on. Conformation is based on their appearance while standing and trotting a round the ring.

In regards to the decline of the breeds, I put a pedigree up in the hunting section. Mike is the only person that has ever looked at one of these pedigrees and understood what it was other than it was tight. At least he is the only one that acknowledge the fact that it was a "line". They are recognizable as High Country dogs. They are bred in such a way that even in different litters with different parents, they look so much alike it is unnerving. It has been implied that maybe a lack of understanding of genetics is partly at fault for the decline of the breeds. It has nothing to do with genetics for the most part. The decline is because breeders won't breed dogs. It makes no difference how much they know about it, they rationalize that they are helping the breeds by saving the weak and the squirrely. Has nothing to do with genetics, or dogs...it has to do with people, nothing else. You could breed serious dogs all day long but the people can't do it. There is an old saying about breeders having to be callous to breed and do it right. Yes, it is an "old" saying that used to fit breeders. It is only used today because it makes everyone feel like a breeder. Good dogs can be produced breeding to paper, no doubt about it....once in a while. How many have dogs that came from champion lines that just don't have it. Don't be too quick to think it may be your training because darn few champions produce champions.....


----------



## Andy Andrews

Don Turnipseed said:


> *Andy, I stayed away from the bull breeds simply because I don't know enough about their structure. Given enough time, I would guess even they would be built similar to any dog that is bred for a specific function such as running ability. They would have to. Basically, what I am saying withing bounds, all working dogs should be able to run easily and move well. If conformation means anything then, the basic running gear an all of them should be about the same. They are not. Flat backs, long back, sloping backs, short backs and on and on. Conformation is based on their appearance while standing and trotting a round the ring.*


Don,

I cannot speak for others or their breeds, but where bulldogs are concerned, conformation is dictated by vocation. These dogs are rough-n-tumble workers, not dainty little decorations to be paraded around a ring, and the manner in which this breed has been tested and refined throughout its history suggests that everything about their structure revolves around the performance of a given task; be it hunting, herding, protection, or the activtiy we dare not speak of!  :-$

Having said that, again, the ideal bulldog is a physical specimen, no doubt, but they are generally ALOT leggier than what people commonly visualize when they think of 'pitbulls'. They are superior athletes, and as such, running is naturally something they do well! ;-) 

Here's a video I've shared before, but it's good enough to watch again. lol Notice how effortlessly the dog moves? This dog runs a 3:40 mile...3.13 seconds faster than the man who holds the world record! lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXkxcJG_Kig

It's also not uncomon to hear these dogs described as blockheaded greyhounds. I know my last bitch had been mistaken for a whippet on more than one occasion, but alas, most people just couldn't figure out why her head was so damn BIG!! I used to just tell them she was a cull I'd saved from a dirt nap.:lol: 



Don Turnipseed said:


> *In regards to the decline of the breeds, I put a pedigree up in the hunting section. Mike is the only person that has ever looked at one of these pedigrees and understood what it was other than it was tight. At least he is the only one that acknowledge the fact that it was a "line". They are recognizable as High Country dogs. They are bred in such a way that even in different litters with different parents, they look so much alike it is unnerving.*


I dunno, maybe I just assume everyone knows how to read a pedigree properly, and can spot a 'line' versus scatter-breeding. However, I agree, a quality line will show consistancy in both temperament, conformation, and working ability. That's a *good* thing, imo. 



Don Turnipseed said:


> *Good dogs can be produced breeding to paper, no doubt about it....once in a while. How many have dogs that came from champion lines that just don't have it.*


Paper doesn't make the dog, of course. And in my world, at least, it's more important to look at a dog's individual traits and how they compliment your existing stock, and enhance your overall 'vision', rather than simply breeding based on bloodline or accomplishments.



Don Turnipseed said:


> *because darn few champions produce champions.....*


I respectfully disagree. :mrgreen:





Andy.


----------



## Daryl Ehret

> because darn few champions produce champions.....


I couldn't suppress a chuckle while watching Nat'l Geo's "Science of Dogs" special... Where the two retriever dock-diving champs bred and produced pups with seemingly no aptitude for the sport.

Even clones, it seems, have no more in common with each other than maternal twins. Here's a pic of five clones of a famous accomplished working horse. Each looked very differently, and had very different sets of behaviors, imprinted by their maternal carriers.










Some of the mares...


----------



## Don Turnipseed

"I respectfully disagree."

In reference to champions produced through scatterbreeding Andy. A properly bred champion does have the capability to produce more champions because number 1, being properly bred it should produce consistency. Correct me if I am wrong but, you find some of the best, more recent, examples of tight breeding in bulldogs and ,as such, should be some of the most consistent producers when compared to other breeds.


----------



## Andy Andrews

Don Turnipseed said:


> *In reference to champions produced through scatterbreeding Andy.*


Gotcha!



Don Turnipseed said:


> *A properly bred champion does have the capability to produce more champions because number 1, being properly bred it should produce consistency. Correct me if I am wrong but, you find some of the best, more recent, examples of tight breeding in bulldogs and ,as such, should be some of the most consistent producers when compared to other breeds.*


Absolutely. And there are even people with exceedingly greater knowledge/experience than myself who can spot a line by simply looking at a dog's conformation. It's humbling. 





Andy.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

After thinking about it for a moment Andy, since you "respectfully disagree", I have to ask, are you saying breeding ch to ch on paper consistently produces champions? If so, that may be the way to go. I just figured, since that is the way most breeding is done, we should be overrun with champions and everyone would have one.


----------



## Bob Scott

In show breeding, CH to CH means breed my sweet little CH bitch to this years Westminister winner, regardless of lineage.


----------



## Andy Andrews

Don Turnipseed said:


> *After thinking about it for a moment Andy, since you "respectfully disagree", I have to ask, are you saying breeding ch to ch on paper consistently produces champions? If so, that may be the way to go. I just figured, since that is the way most breeding is done, we should be overrun with champions and everyone would have one.*


Don,

Paper and title are nice, but I think things work a little differently with bulldogs than with other breeds. ;-) 

Again, it's got more to do with knowing how particular traits will mix with what you've already got. That in and of itself requires a great deal of experience, because it's more than just knowing names on a pedigree; you must know the dogs and why/how they earned their title/reputation. In my opinion, not many people who breed have been in it long enough to know that kind of stuff...they just take the cookie-cutter approach.

And as far as how consistancy is achieved, the end goal is the same regardless, but how one arrives at the destination remains an intensely personal, and guarded forumla. 



Andy.


----------



## Daryl Ehret

> The combination of some strains seem to consistently produce outstanding offspring. In horses, when two individuals or two well-known and distinguishable bloodlines merge well to produce strong performing individuals, they are said to “NICK”. This means that the genetic patterns of each parent merge positively to produce above average offspring. You should be vigilant to observe nicks in your own animals or bloodlines. Sometimes the most appropriate match for your bitch might be an AFC of a proven nick rather than the trendy well advertised dog or the latest National Champion.
> http://www.spanielsinthefield.com/pdf/breedinggooddogs.pdf


Some distinguishable bloodlines are also very bad to mix in horses.


----------



## Daryl Ehret

Guess you could call 'em "Nixie's" (as in; undeliverable - return to sender)


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Daryl, when it is right it is right and after doing it long enough you know it at a glance. You know what I am talking about. You have been working toward thism particular cross for several years, lineing everything up and the resulting pups are disappointing. Some of then best crosses in my mind were miserable failures to me but they were nice pups. Then one time I had and accidental breeding years ago. I was totally digusted until I saw the pups file out of the whelping box. This is pretty much what I saw. Uniformity..I was delighted


----------



## Don Turnipseed

"And as far as how consistancy is achieved, the end goal is the same regardless, but how one arrives at the destination remains an intensely personal, and guarded forumla. "

Guarded Formula??? As in some luck, some intuition. LOL Just out of curiosity Andy, how long have you been breeding BD.

I have always told people you need to have an intimate knowledge of the dogs being bred. I do, they are all mine.


----------



## Andy Andrews

Don Turnipseed said:


> *Guarded Formula??? As in some luck, some intuition. LOL*


Don, 

I'm not talking about stealing a page out of Stephen Hawking's forumla on blackholes or anything, just that breeder opinions vary as to which traits produce quality stock. Some favor natural wind over bone, yet others prefer intelligence as opposed to speed or hard mouth, still there are also some that look explicitly for the intangibles. However, regardless of their breeding quirks, at the end of the day ALL breeders of bulldogs are looking to produce dogs that simply won't quit, ever. 

So, essentially, it boils down to experience and intuition, combined with a little bit of luck thrown in for good measure. ;-) 



Don Turnipseed said:


> *Just out of curiosity Andy, how long have you been breeding BD.*


I don't breed; I'm just stating an opinion based on my experience with these dogs and people who own them. No more, no less.



Don Turnipseed said:


> *I have always told people you need to have an intimate knowledge of the dogs being bred. I do, they are all mine.*


I don't doubt that at all, Don. Your dogs prove it.





Andy.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

"Don, 

I'm not talking about stealing a page out of Stephen Hawking's forumla on blackholes or anything, just that breeder opinions vary as to which traits produce quality stock. Some favor natural wind over bone, yet others prefer intelligence as opposed to speed or hard mouth, still there are also some that look explicitly for the intangibles. However, regardless of their breeding quirks, at the end of the day ALL breeders of bulldogs are looking to produce dogs that simply won't quit, ever. 

So, essentially, it boils down to experience and intuition, combined with a little bit of luck thrown in for good measure."

For not breeding Andy, you have the basics in perspective. I will tell you one of my secrets, beliefs, rules, or what ever one might call them. The cardinal rule is don't get focused on one aspect....ever. I like a driven dog but, it takes more than that to make an ideal dog. I have kept pups to breed in for no other reason but they were extremely smart. I have a 4 mo old right now that is here because she is probably the most agile pups I have seen and wired, but, when I pick her up, she just completely mellows. It is kind of like spicing up a meal. The meal may be good and solid to start with but, a few spices make it a great meal. I think this is why the dogs are treeing lions at 7 1/2 mo in Idaho, the brothers and sisters may be Calif State Certified Therapy dogs, or they may be obedience titles, or maybe they are doing water retrieving When there is two much narrow focus, you get a dog that has narrower abilities. IMHO. There is a picture of an 8 1/2 mo old going after the sleeve, His name is Curtis and looked pretty good. He is now a total service dog for a blind person. I think getting to focused will ruin the dog.


----------



## Andy Andrews

Don Turnipseed said:


> *For not breeding Andy, you have the basics in perspective.*


Thanks for the kind words, Don. That means alot coming from you.



Don Turnipseed said:


> *I will tell you one of my secrets, beliefs, rules, or what ever one might call them. The cardinal rule is don't get focused on one aspect....ever. I like a driven dog but, it takes more than that to make an ideal dog. I have kept pups to breed in for no other reason but they were extremely smart. I have a 4 mo old right now that is here because she is probably the most agile pups I have seen and wired, but, when I pick her up, she just completely mellows. It is kind of like spicing up a meal. The meal may be good and solid to start with but, a few spices make it a great meal. I think this is why the dogs are treeing lions at 7 1/2 mo in Idaho, the brothers and sisters may be Calif State Certified Therapy dogs, or they may be obedience titles, or maybe they are doing water retrieving When there is two much narrow focus, you get a dog that has narrower abilities. IMHO. There is a picture of an 8 1/2 mo old going after the sleeve, His name is Curtis and looked pretty good. He is now a total service dog for a blind person. I think getting to focused will ruin the dog.*


There is really not much about this statement that I cannot agree with; the only noticeable divergence I see lay within the delicate balance of combining intelligence and physical prowess with gameness in bulldogs. People who truly understand these dogs appreciate the fact that they're a jack-of-all-trades breed which excel at virtually anything set before them. And, having/finding/creating a line with desirable traits in abundance is certainly welcome, and goes along way in forging the overall package, the real truth is, however, that not all traits are respected equally in the bulldog community. 

I mean to say, you can be blessed with having a dog that comes equipped with every physical/mental advantage, or you can get stuck with a dog that is mediocre at best, and they are both only as good as they heart that propels them forward. Without gameness, the dog with advantages is no better than the mediocre dog, because it will eventually quit when the going gets rough. But, if the mediocre dog has heart, it will make the most of what it has, and will be there at the end of the day. And that has every application to the various types of work we discuss every day on this board, because it allows a dog to overcome physical and mental stress, such as fatigue/dehydration, frustration, pain, rough terrain, climate(hot/cold), or even the stress of having to engage it's 'best friend'...man! So, while tweaking a line by adding in genetic material that improves the overall caliber of a dog is wise, and helps preserve the 'do anything' nature of these dogs, having the assurance that a dog will be there when you need most is invaluable. And as such, it will remain the focus, and high 'ideal', of quality bulldog breeding programs.





Andy.


----------



## Christine Merck

Alex Corral said:


> After reading tons and tons of articles & threads from various working dog forums, I'm curious as to why people think all breeds of dogs have declined? Or, do you think breeds in fact HAVE declined. It's been pretty apparent on how difficult it is now to find a good working dog, with high drives and solid nerves (some breeds more than others). Were these dogs abundantly available 100 yrs ago? 50? 30 yrs ago? I know over-breeding has a lot to do with it, but what else happened?


I assume, in some places the environment for natural behaviour of dog is not given. Also, many people seem to think that dog is like sheep and hence treat dogs like sheep. I assume, people underestimate this tendency of belittlement. Also 18 years ago, I was wondering why people were not able to react adequately to dogs. 
By the way, we (friend of mine and me) were threatened by two guys by knife aged 10 and we had to give them money. Then we started to work with dogs (several dogs, crossbreed mainly). I recall that early training methods ( ca. > 20 years ago) of dogs were suitable for slowing down overall metabolism of dog. Therefore, we had conflict with dog trainer at Boxer Club Munich.

Also, this Pavlov experiment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Pavlov I cannot fully accept. From what I know, scientists developed antidepressiva on basis of theory of Pavlov by testing behaviour of mice or rats. Later on, it turned out that neurogenesis of the hippocampus is responsible for mood improvement.
But here the question is, what about mirror neuron system and imitation learning during increased hippocampal neurogenesis in humans. As mice probably do not have mirror neuron system.
In general, scientists tend to forget consolidation and reconsolidation (i.e. Rimonabant)


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Well, I'm lost! What did you just say Christine? Whatever it was is over my head....way over.LOL


----------



## susan tuck

Christine Merck said:


> I assume, in some places the environment for natural behaviour of dog is not given. Also, many people seem to think that dog is like sheep and hence treat dogs like sheep. I assume, people underestimate this tendency of belittlement. Also 18 years ago, I was wondering why people were not able to react adequately to dogs.
> By the way, we (friend of mine and me) were threatened by two guys by knife aged 10 and we had to give them money. Then we started to work with dogs (several dogs, crossbreed mainly). I recall that early training methods ( ca. > 20 years ago) of dogs were suitable for slowing down overall metabolism of dog. Therefore, we had conflict with dog trainer at Boxer Club Munich.
> 
> Also, this Pavlov experiment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Pavlov I cannot fully accept. From what I know, scientists developed antidepressiva on basis of theory of Pavlov by testing behaviour of mice or rats. Later on, it turned out that neurogenesis of the hippocampus is responsible for mood improvement.
> But here the question is, what about mirror neuron system and imitation learning during increased hippocampal neurogenesis in humans. As mice probably do not have mirror neuron system.
> In general, scientists tend to forget consolidation and reconsolidation (i.e. Rimonabant)


I'm sorry, I don't get it. This relates to dog breeding how?


----------



## Christine Merck

susan tuck said:


> I'm sorry, I don't get it. This relates to dog breeding how?


Example: Cassy ad multos annos http://www.malinois-vom-schnellen-fuchs.de/Bilder/Cassy/Cassy01.jpg is extreme bitch, so that Mario Neumann told me, he will not continue to use her for breeding as puppies are too dangerous. Maybe people prefer sheeps today. And some forgot the Cave Canem.
Whereas I was very impressed by character and behaviour of Cassy ad multos annos.


----------



## Bob Scott

Christine Merck said:


> I assume, in some places the environment for natural behaviour of dog is not given. Also, many people seem to think that dog is like sheep and hence treat dogs like sheep. I assume, people underestimate this tendency of belittlement. Also 18 years ago, I was wondering why people were not able to react adequately to dogs.
> By the way, we (friend of mine and me) were threatened by two guys by knife aged 10 and we had to give them money. Then we started to work with dogs (several dogs, crossbreed mainly). I recall that early training methods ( ca. > 20 years ago) of dogs were suitable for slowing down overall metabolism of dog. Therefore, we had conflict with dog trainer at Boxer Club Munich.
> 
> Also, this Pavlov experiment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Pavlov I cannot fully accept. From what I know, scientists developed antidepressiva on basis of theory of Pavlov by testing behaviour of mice or rats. Later on, it turned out that neurogenesis of the hippocampus is responsible for mood improvement.
> But here the question is, what about mirror neuron system and imitation learning during increased hippocampal neurogenesis in humans. As mice probably do not have mirror neuron system.
> In general, scientists tend to forget consolidation and reconsolidation (i.e. Rimonabant)


When you say breeding the mice and rats to the Hippopotamus is responsible for mood improvement, does this improve the mice and rat's moods or the hippo's?


----------



## Christine Merck

Bob Scott said:


> When you say breeding the mice and rats to the Hippopotamus is responsible for mood improvement, does this improve the mice and rat's moods or the hippo's?


Hippocampus is part of brain (limbic system).
When given (certain) antidepressant, researchers assume that newborn neurons in hippocampus lead to "improved mood" of mouse http://mentalhealth.about.com/cs/psychopharmacology/a/neurogenesis.htm
From what I know this effect of neurogenesis is similar for mice and humans (neglecting rate of metabolism). But, hippocampus has to do with "memory storage", so I doubt seomhow that mice and humans can be generally compared http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocampus with respect to learning and imitation.
Maybe this is another reason why FDA rejected Rimonabant http://www.rttnews.com/sp/todaystop.asp?date=06/13/2007&item=17&vid=0



> But FDA reviewers said data showed rimonabant patients were twice as likely to have suicidal thoughts or mental problems such as depression and anxiety. Twenty-six percent of patients reported a psychiatric symptom, compared with fourteen percent of placebo patients.


----------



## Christine Merck

Don Turnipseed said:


> Well, I'm lost! What did you just say Christine? Whatever it was is over my head....way over.LOL


I have to admit, Dr. Torsten Fliessbach, my former professor on theoretical physics, author http://www2.uni-siegen.de/~flieba/lehrbuch.htm is the only who can estimate on my ability. It took me two weeks to explain him another solution possibility in theoretical physics. But most other Germans prefer to believe that woman who cannot calculate.


----------



## Jessica Fry

Ok, I'm gonna have a go at this...



Christine Merck said:


> Also, this Pavlov experiment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Pavlov I cannot fully accept. From what I know, scientists developed antidepressiva on basis of theory of Pavlov by testing behaviour of mice or rats. Later on, it turned out that neurogenesis of the hippocampus is responsible for mood improvement.
> But here the question is, what about mirror neuron system and imitation learning during increased hippocampal neurogenesis in humans. As mice probably do not have mirror neuron system.
> In general, scientists tend to forget consolidation and reconsolidation (i.e. Rimonabant)


I guess you're referring to the theory of transmarginal inhibition in animals applied to research aimed at treating psychological disorders in humans. Empirical research as a theoretical basis for human medicine research.

Later, studies pointed to neurogenesis of the hippocampus as a determining factor for the function of antidepressants. Physiological research that might not be as appliccable to humans as proposed because mice and humans have distinct neurological differences?

I get it. But how does this apply to dog breeding?

The only thing I can think of is that temprament in dogs is the result of several neurological factors (based in the genetics of the dog probably) and that those neurological factors encompass complex pathways, that (1) we have no conclusive data on as far as function goes and (2) are prone to influence by the environment (trainer/handler).

Aka: nature vs nurture.

How am I doing so far? 

Edited for spelling...


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Come on now Jessica. Christine put that up on the 12th Today is the 16th. You've had 4 days to bone up and come up with that answer. Y'all are makin it look like I was the only one that didn't have a clue what Christine said. Now you have gone and compounded it because I can't agree or diagree with a thing either of you said....simply because I don't kinow what you said or how it possibly has to do with the decline of the breeds. I like the simple stuff like....the decline is due to loose breeding so no one knows what bad stuff is being passed on. It is due to attitudes that people are benefitting the breed by saving the weak. It is because people think if they know the big words they can breed better dogs. It is because people breed to titles and not the dog. It is because people breed to put those titles on their pedigrees because they sell pups. The dogs are not the problem. It is the people breeding them. Now that is simple enough to understand. Breeding good dogs is not that difficult nor does it take a PHD in genetics. You get the hardest dogs in the field and breed them, you breed the best offspring from two pairs and breed them. Then Grandpups back to the grandparents , 1/2 brothers to half sisters and even though this is somewhat simplified, you will know if there are recessives that can't be over come. If there are none, tighten them up some more. Don't save any weak. Keep only the ones that are crawling and crying when they hit the ground. You will have the best dogs around in short order. It isn't rocket science....people just make it sound that way. It is a simple matter of focusing what you want to see in the dog and keeping them strong and healthy at the same time.


----------



## Hil Harrison

Don Turnipseed said:


> Y'all are makin it look like I was the only one that didn't have a clue what Christine said. .


:lol: :lol: :lol: Well Im in there with ya too Don ;-) ........I didnt have a clue what Christine said either.........Im just a plain English gal :lol:


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Thanks for that Hil. I just knew I wasn't the only one....just the only one dumb enough to say,"HUH!" LOL "

"Im just a plain English gal"

There are times I wonder why we are talking dogs. Somebody slap me quick. LOL


----------



## Jessica Fry

Whoa you guys! My post was just an experiment in brain exercise... (ouch, btw) It's Sunday, I'm sitting here in East Lansing Michigan (of all places), my dogs and horses are at home, and I'm BORED ok? 

... and I still (like you) have no idea what all of it has to do with breeding dogs! Like I said, all I can come up with is that it's a very elaborate attempt at saying that a dog's rearing environment and the handler's view of the dog has a big impact on how the dog is going to perform later on in life. And I could be totally off, who knows?

Next time I'm bored I'll just go vacuum the house again or something...LOL


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Forget the vacumning.

"Whoa you guys! My post was just an experiment in brain exercise... (ouch, btw) It's Sunday, I'm sitting here in East Lansing Michigan (of all places), my dogs and horses are at home, and I'm BORED ok?"
Jessica, I had just got in from down the mountain. I cut, loaded and unloaded 1/2 a cord of oak and I was a little dry as was my humor. Now that I have been home for a while, I am no near as dry as I was earlier. If you are bored, this is the place to get unbored. When I get bored, it is either to the net or to the dog yards. I am headed out that way now to take care of the kids. Got an expectant mother to get set up.


----------



## Daryl Ehret

> Y'all are makin it look like I was the only one that didn't have a clue what Christine said


....uh, I'm headin' to the dog yards...


----------



## Bob Scott

I still think it all boils down to breeding mice and rats with hippos.
I base that on a biology class I had in my 6th yr of highschool!


----------



## ann schnerre

personally, for me, it's the same old "nature vs. nurture" argument. both play a part in ultimate developement of the organism. "how much" is the great debate. with my dogs--i use the "nature" to determine the "nurture". make sense?

quantum physics never comes into it!  (gotta go take ibuprofen, it's getting too heady around here)


----------



## susan tuck

WHAT???? Puppies are falling down the black hole? Oh gawd help'em.


----------



## Bob Scott

Of course quantum physics comes into it. If your gonna breed rats and hippos, the rat is gonna have to take a quantum leap to get the job done.
  Ok, I'll keep quiet!


----------



## Don Turnipseed

" Ok, I'll keep quiet! 

Thank you Bob..LOL

Ann, without the nature, nurture is pointless.


----------



## susan tuck

Bob, are you saying the hippo/rat mixes took a quantum leap down the black hole after the puppies?


----------



## Bob Scott

OH MAN! I could go on for days on this one but I promised :^o  to keep quiet.......before Don smacks me in the back of the head!  ;-) 
Fact of the matter is, the rat genes said to go down the hole but the hippo genes got it's big self stuck in the hole. SSSSSSSSHHHHHHHH! Susan, quit baiting me! :lol:


----------



## susan tuck

:lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Hil Harrison

Bob Scott said:


> Of course quantum physics comes into it. If your gonna breed rats and hippos, the rat is gonna have to take a quantum leap to get the job done.
> Ok, I'll keep quiet!


:lol: :lol: :lol: geez Id sure love to see a rat or mice jump a hippo:lol: Does that mean you'd get mice to be great underwater swimmers? Seeing that the rats can swim already I bet this could be one huge:lol: breakthrough.
Bob, if your gonna go do this amazing breeding programme Id sure love to see some pics:lol: ;-)


----------



## Bob Scott

Hil Harrison said:


> :lol: :lol: :lol: geez Id sure love to see a rat or mice jump a hippo:lol: Does that mean you'd get mice to be great underwater swimmers? Seeing that the rats can swim already I bet this could be one huge:lol: breakthrough.
> Bob, if your gonna go do this amazing breeding programme Id sure love to see some pics:lol: ;-)


I'm having problems with this program. The only willing stud I've found is a hippo. The female rat is hiding under the couch and seems to be under a bit of stress for some reason. 
I may have to rethink my aproach but the video cam is ready when they are. =P~ \\/


----------



## Hil Harrison

Bob Scott said:


> The female rat is hiding under the couch and seems to be under a bit of stress for some reason.


Darn Bob your using the wrong cheese  The size of the hippo is probably intimidating her....put her at ease we know you can do it:lol: Dont forget to place the vid cam through all this........this is headline stuff:lol: 

Sorry gone a bit offtopic here :lol:


----------



## Bob Scott

Tried numerous types of cheese. No luck!
One new discovery though. I never knew a rat could hold up the middle finger of it's tiny little paw. I think she was telling me I've got a #1 rating.


----------



## Debbie High

Bob, =; I know, I know.....It isn't working because you forgot about the "consolidation" and "reconsolidation" of the rat and the hippo! And I'm sorry but I just don't understand about the black hole thing......guess I'm just a dumb country girl!

I must be very easily entertained.....this has been the best laugh I've had in awhile!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## ann schnerre

this is the stuff of a "Nature" special!!! 

Bob, here's what i suggest: get a FEMALE hippo and a MALE vermin (well, most are, aren't they...)--should work like a charm. NOTHING will stop the male (and a female hippo can't hide under the couch---usually), and "wa-la"--the cross you've been looking for!

but DO film it! PLEASE!!!!


----------



## Bob Scott

Debbie! There ya go usin them big words (consolidation and reconsolidation). That's how this whole dern mess started ain't it? :lol: 
If those words mean I have to "console" this lady rat myself...well...the experiment ain't gonna make it! :-& 
Ann! GEEEZE! It should have been soooo obvious to me. I hear about male vermin all the time around here.


----------



## susan tuck

"I never knew a rat could hold up the middle finger of it's tiny little paw."
(Bob)
Oh my god, I'm laughing so hard my stomach hurts! This is the best thread ever, and I'm learning so much from it.


----------



## Bob Scott

And I'm embarrassed to say I'm a mod and supposed to head off this kinda "stuff" :^o   :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Hil Harrison

Bob Scott said:


> And I'm embarrassed to say I'm a mod and supposed to head off this kinda "stuff" :^o   :lol: :lol: :lol:


True Bob but this is a good thread to get your experiment up and running.:lol: Look at the useless I mean usefull :lol:tips that are coming in on a daily basis. Ann's tip of using the FEMALE hippo is just darn ingenious. Maybe the hippo is just feeling a bit out of her depth so to squeak.:lol: Maybe the self interaction with the test specimens will give all concerned some peace of mind and ease. Take note of the SIGN the rat gave you.....I think its trying to get some point across.

One thing you seem to have missed Bob, which could be crucial is:
At the moment the hippo is hidding with her head under the couch she would be in a great mating position for the rat. Bob Bob Bob, I think you missed that chance there, so the tip from this end is WAIT till she hides, get the cam rolling and dont forget our names on the titles at the end of the movie:lol:. To be continued........


----------



## Lynn Cheffins

It's all a waste of time if you are going to use show hippos for breeding stock, everyone know they are just bred for looks and tend to be nervy.


----------



## Bob Scott

Hill, I just don't know if I'm cut out for this scientific stuff.
Interaction with the test specimens sounds a bit unscientific to me. Scientists should remain unattached, so to speak, with their subjects. waiting for the hippo to put her head under the couch is.....well.....it's cold hearted. No emotion is just wrong in these delecate times. Can you see my conflict?
Lyn, this brings up yet another delema. Yes, show hippos are just pretty faces but the working line ones are just plain mean. That's a know fact! ;-)


----------



## Hil Harrison

Bob Scott said:


> Hill, I just don't know if I'm cut out for this scientific stuff.
> Interaction with the test specimens sounds a bit unscientific to me. Scientists should remain unattached, so to speak, with their subjects. waiting for the hippo to put her head under the couch is.....well.....it's cold hearted. No emotion is just wrong in these delecate times. Can you see my conflict?
> Lyn, this brings up yet another delema. Yes, show hippos are just pretty faces but the working line ones are just plain mean. That's a know fact! ;-)


 
Oh no Bob, this sounds as though you are losing some confidence here. Of course you are cut out for the job! I think interaction would be a good thing. 

See an important point maybe being missed here is:
Most scientistst DONT interact with the specimens and thats what they are used to. By interacting you are showing them something that is new to them and they might be so taken back that you will have them eating out of your pocket ( literally:lol: ) in no time.

The hippo hiding under the couch therory is not in MHO cold hearted. Just think of it as a really nice surprise for her. Im sure the rat will tell you the same and thats maybe why he started "signing" you. The rat of course sticking his middle finger up is (of course as explained by some Russian chess player)......a protest sign that all is not wel in camp Bob.

Lynn has however brought up a very good point here. Are you going for the showline or working hippo line? Problem is if you use the workingline you might end up with a high preydrive hippo and thats gonna pee the rat off bad cos they have one hell of a bite. I think I'd just go for the showline hippo seeing according again to that chessplayer that they are of lighter temperament which is gonna make Mr Rat a lot more comfotable in this whole situation.

Its gonna be a hard choice to make but we are all backing you on this Bob. By the way we are all waiting for a pic of you in that white lab coat. Bet it looks great


----------



## Bob Scott

Such decisions! 
What would/did Jane Goodall do in a similar situation? Are there chimps out there with long narrow faces? Is this the reasons primates have become proficient in tool use?
One thing I can say for sure. The hippo is definately more attractive then my (alleged  , thanks Hill  ) lab assistant! :lol: :lol:


----------



## Hil Harrison

Bob Scott said:


> Such decisions!
> What would/did Jane Goodall do in a similar situation? Are there chimps out there with long narrow faces? Is this the reasons primates have become proficient in tool use?
> One thing I can say for sure. The hippo is definately more attractive then my (alleged  , thanks Hill  ) lab assistant! :lol: :lol:


Im not sure quite what Jane would do Bob but I know someone who would know ;-) :lol: There are certainly chimps out there with the narrow faces, I have known a few who have taken off to be quite brainy and mastered in a number of things. Im not sure if chess playing Bob goes under tool use? What tool did you have in mind?

Oh Bob and concerning your last comment in that quote.....you are more than welcome:lol: ;-)

oh p.s you seem to be avoiding the comment of the labcoat pic?


----------



## susan tuck

Mike, I've seen some really nice dogs from Mohnweise. The belgian boys know what they are doing, the reputation is earned.


----------



## Daryl Ehret

Bob Scott said:


> Of course quantum physics comes into it. If your gonna breed rats and hippos, the rat is gonna have to take a quantum leap to get the job done.
> Ok, I'll keep quiet!












Wow, this thread has picked up some momentum!


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Daryl Ehret said:


> Wow, this thread has picked up some momentum!


Now, this is funny. I don't care who you are, this is funny and this rat might get the job done!


----------



## Daryl Ehret

Bob Scott said:


> One thing I can say for sure. The hippo is definately more attractive then my (alleged  , thanks Hill  ) lab assistant! :lol: :lol:


...Bob's new assistant...


----------



## Bob Scott

Hil, the only lab coat I would be wearing in those circumstances would have very long sleeves that wrapped around and buckled in the back.
Daryl, all I see is a red x. I'm betting that's a good thing! :lol:


----------



## Hil Harrison

Bob Scott said:


> Hil, the only lab coat I would be wearing in those circumstances would have very long sleeves that wrapped around and buckled in the back.
> Daryl, all I see is a red x. I'm betting that's a good thing! :lol:


:lol: :lol: :lol: I see you fired the last assisitant already Bob and have re-instated a new one..........Daryl! Are you so hard to work with or did the other assistant make you cut off your hair, seeing you can work better with short hair?
Do you see the link now from Daryl?

http://www.zbrushcentral.com/zbc/attachment.php?attachmentid=21479 omg wat a great pic!!!!!!!!!!!! lmao here

Is the hippo sleeping well at night? That might be the cause of some aggitation there. ;-)


----------



## Debbie High

Bob, Don't forget you could always do an AI! That should be more than a little interesting.:lol:


----------



## Daryl Ehret

here's the second pic, "Bob's assistant"











The assistant's un-matched matchmaking skills track "21 dimensions of compatability"


----------



## Daryl Ehret

OOPS!!


----------



## Hil Harrison

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: 
OMG Daryl im LMAO here.......you nut!!!!:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## susan tuck

AHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!!!:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Very funny, Daryl, but it also makes me want to :-& :-& :-& :-&


----------



## Bob Scott

Debbie High said:


> Bob, Don't forget you could always do an AI! That should be more than a little interesting.:lol:


I could just take the whole rat and..............errrr...........nevermind! :lol:


----------



## Bob Scott

Good lord, I think he's done it!
IT'S ALIIIIIIIIIIIIIVE! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Hil Harrison

Bob Scott said:


> Good lord, I think he's done it!
> IT'S ALIIIIIIIIIIIIIVE! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


omg Bob Daryl HAS KNICKED YOUR EXPERIMENT!!!!!!!!:lol: :lol: :lol: 

Ok Daryl...turning to you ( see Bob Im a traitor lol) will you think about putting ALL our names ( see how friendly I am:lol: )on the end titles to your thesis or movie. Please dont forget Bob:lol:


----------



## ann schnerre

personally, if we're gonna go AI rat to hippo, i want to see film of the whole process from bob collecting the rat, to AI'ing the hippo w/her head under the couch! 

something to consider: if she has her head under the couch, she'll never even see the male vermin approach, much less feel any more than a tickly, fly-feeling at the north end. this is where you want to wrap and control her tail bob. good luck with that  

daryl might be on to something, but i still want video from bob (and his assistant).


----------



## Hil Harrison

ann freier said:


> personally, if we're gonna go AI rat to hippo, i want to see film of the whole process from bob collecting the rat, to AI'ing the hippo w/her head under the couch!
> 
> something to consider: if she has her head under the couch, she'll never even see the male vermin approach, much less feel any more than a tickly, fly-feeling at the north end. this is where you want to wrap and control her tail bob. good luck with that
> 
> daryl might be on to something, but i still want video from bob (and his assistant).


especially want to see the assistant:lol: ;-)


----------



## Ren Sauder

Alex Corral said:


> After reading tons and tons of articles & threads from various working dog forums, I'm curious as to why people think all breeds of dogs have declined? Or, do you think breeds in fact HAVE declined. It's been pretty apparent on how difficult it is now to find a good working dog, with high drives and solid nerves (some breeds more than others). Were these dogs abundantly available 100 yrs ago? 50? 30 yrs ago? I know over-breeding has a lot to do with it, but what else happened?


I have not had the time to read the entire post though do plan to as I find all threads on this forum to have heaps of valuable knowledge within them. None the less I wish to give my two cents for whatever it is worth as a "kid" still a bit green to the worlking dog world.

As some of you know, most of my experience is within the dogsledding world, however I am also currently researching heavily into the livestock guarding dog world as well as valueing and reading any other bits of information I can get my hands on that have to do with working dogs in general including protection dogs and sporting dog. 

With Siberian Huskies, there is a very big split between the Siberian bred and raised for pulling a sled and the Siberian bred and raised to look pretty in a show ring. Their bone structure, movement and even their temperments differ. I've actually theorized that Alaskan Malamute has been influenced into the Siberian show dog lines to give more bone and a softer more "puppy" expression that some how wins the judges heart, regardless of the fact that this lessens their ability to do their job properly (pull light loads over vast distances at a moderate-fast speed whereas Malamutes are bred to pull heavy loads over shorter distances at a slower speed).

I look at breeders here in the US of bothe the Caucasian and Central Asina Ovcharka and I find myself sickened more often than impressed. There are breeders intentionaly breeding down thier temperments in order to gain a bigger market while playing off the "cool rare breed" factor to sell their puppies. How can a dog with a golden retriever temperment succesfully guard sheep from fierce predators? Others simply imported whatever they could get their hands on and regardless of what the dog turned out to be they bred him/her anyways simply because imprting cost so much they dont want to do it again. I know of one breeder who her prize male stud has hocks so screwed up, he cant do any of his paces properly and it has basically garunteed HD for him. This lady regardless keeps pumping out puppies usin him as her stud. I have seen one of his pups at 1 year old and her hocks are just as bad as his. Its so bad that if I were the owner and saw that in the pup I would probably cull it as no one deserves to have to deal with that kind of problem, going through surgeries throughout its life that wont even garuntee to fix the problem....Just one huge vet bill of a puppy. Not to mention the dog could never be worked.

There is another issue. Government. For some reason today's government has got it in their heads that they can control everything we have including our dogs. They are controling what breeds we can have and what theri temperments are like. If you have a hard-nosed dog you either have to keep it locked up tight so no one can ever access it, or move to the middle of nowhere because if that dog so much as breaks the skin on the wrong person, its as good as dead. Back in the old day, if someone gets bit by a dog they learn that maybe not all dogs are friendly and maybe they shouldnt have trespassed and thats the end of that. No lawsuits, no animal cops, no nothing. Just a life lesson and the dog keeps doing what he's doing.

About 99% of the North American population cant handle a hard-nosed working dog BUT they might like what they look like. So now they want a dog who looks like a Doberman but acts like a Lab. Sadly breeders (especially show breeders) buy into that and breed the soft dogs to fill the demand. It also doesnt help that a lot of kennels penalize a dog who acts agressively in the ring. How is one supposed to own a true guarding dog when they get penalized in the ring because the dog grolwed at the judge when he approached from behind and placed his hands on the dog's hips???

Also, when you focus all your energy and attention to winning pretty conformation titles you tend to forget other stuff. Oh sure, they claim to be mindful of temperment but I find all that that means is that their dogs wont bite the judge as opposed to the dogs will guard the property at night, or the dog will react to a threat and go in for a solid bite. A dog that reacts agressively to another dog who might have stared him in the eyes a little too long oddly enough gets dismissed from the ring...Hmmm

I'll end my rant there...I could go on all day, but what would it achieve???


----------



## Bob Scott

Ren, a good read is "DOGS" by Ray and Lorna Copinger (sp) 
It covers a lot of thoughts on sled dogs, herd guarding dogs, etc.

As for the rest of you, I'm thoroughly depressed now that Daryl has discovered the secrets I so desperately searched for.   
HOPEFULLY we can get back on track with "normal" (what does that mean) discussions on the forum. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:  ;-)
At least for a while!


----------



## Hil Harrison

Bob Scott said:


> As for the rest of you, I'm thoroughly depressed now that Daryl has discovered the secrets I so desperately searched for.
> HOPEFULLY we can get back on track with "normal" (what does that mean) discussions on the forum. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:  ;-)
> At least for a while!


Maybe for a while yes.;-) ...........maybe we can ask the admin to open a "Nonsence for all" forum:lol:


----------



## Bob Scott

Hil Harrison said:


> Maybe for a while yes.;-) ...........maybe we can ask the admin to open a "Nonsence for all" forum:lol:


 Good lord! I'd never get to sleep at night! :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Hil Harrison

Bob Scott said:


> Good lord! I'd never get to sleep at night! :lol: :lol: :lol:


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Daryl Ehret

I suppose you can't just use any mouse. You'll have to start with one who has "A" stamp on both hips.


----------



## Bob Scott

DANG, that's a good one! No wonder you beat me out on the race for a super breed. 
Now ya gott roll that hippo on her back on the xray table.:lol: ;-)


----------



## Daryl Ehret

With a hippo, you never know what'll come out...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yx9XpU_HOMc

The mouse still has alot going for it, though...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yzv0JdLk_1E


----------



## Daryl Ehret

Hippo and dog might have something going on, though...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJwgP44Ap9E


----------

