# April 16th 2006 - Lineage or Individual Temprement?



## admin (Mar 27, 2006)

If you HAD to buy a puppy right now, hypothetically speaking, which method of choosing the dog would you be more comfortable with?

1. Relying 100% on choosing the individual (lineage-unknown, parents unseen) dog yourself thru selection testing and personally watching the puppies grow up to 12 weeks old.

2. Rely 100% on their Pedigree, no breeder feedback, pups sight unseen.


----------



## Jerry Lyda (Apr 4, 2006)

I wouldn't use 100% of either. I would have to do all of that plus. Even with pups in the same litter some will be better than others. Picking the best one is tough. They will change so much from week to week. It's a crap shoot.


----------



## Mike Russell (Apr 9, 2006)

I would use a combo of both, if buying for myself for my reasons. However, it's also dependent on the use of the dog. If the dog is just going to be used for work and not breeding, then you could just rely on individual testing because pedigree doesn't really matter, only the individual does.


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

OK lemme try and get this point accross....

this is hypothetical... its logical to take both into consideration, but that's not the question -- if you HAD NO OTHER CHOICE... which option would you choose? Nobody's gonna make you do it, it's a hypothetical question. Nobody's gonna take this as advice and go do it, myself and a few other folks are just curious what the results would be on a poll to see what people would put more faith in, in a situation where they would have no other choice.

Don't take it too seriously, puppies are a gamble... but which gamble are you more willing to take? Option 1 or Option 2?


----------



## Greg Long (Mar 27, 2006)

I would look at the individual.Not the ped.

Greg


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen (Mar 29, 2006)

brrrrrrrr you have akward questions Mike... I would look at the ped, so I can make a good assumption what the character will be.. BUT in real life I won´t pick a puppy on this conditions :evil:


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

haha, it's a difficult question I know, I haven't quite reached a conclusion as to what MY answer would be... you can blame Connie Sutherland for this 

A pedigree will indicate what the character may be like.... but if you are good at testing puppies then there is a chance that if u look at 20 litters that maybe you can pick out a nice pup and not know anything about the parents.

So, I guess my answer would be that I'd look at the pedigree -- because I dont have enough experience picking puppies to be able to make any reasonable assumption that I could pick a good puppy. A pedigree showing very nice parents gives ME personally better odds of a pup being suitable because at least I know *something* that way.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Mike Schoonbrood said:


> haha, it's a difficult question I know, I haven't quite reached a conclusion as to what MY answer would be... you can blame Connie Sutherland for this .......


My idea was to question which people thought was more important, and a way to pick the most important might be to decide which you would choose for info if you could only have one: the pup itself to look at and test, OR the pedigree.

Naturally, this is hypothetical.

I don't know my answer yet, either.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Mike Schoonbrood said:


> haha, it's a difficult question I know, I haven't quite reached a conclusion as to what MY answer would be... you can blame Connie Sutherland for this ......


Hey, *you* guys think up poll questions for Mike!!! :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Jerry Lyda (Apr 4, 2006)

I would have to go with #1- The pup and not the pedigree.

Bastin is a super dog with a nice ped. but I don't think he produces well. May be some out there but I haven't yet heard of it. With the right bitch I think will make a difference.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Jerry Lyda said:


> I would have to go with #1- The pup and not the pedigree.....


Yeah, me too. I would want help in assessing the pup (either way, actually), but it would be the pup and not the pedigree if I had to choose one or the other.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Connie Sutherland said:


> Jerry Lyda said:
> 
> 
> > I would have to go with #1- The pup and not the pedigree.....
> ...


But wait.....Mike S. makes a good point about how good (not) I would be at assessing the pup......... whereas the pedigree would tell me SOMEthing.

Maybe if I knew a lot about puppies' temperament, and had loads of experience......then I could trust myself more than the pedigree.


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen (Mar 29, 2006)

If you can see the puppies several times in several situations it tells a lot, but just see them 1 time you could make more of the ped :wink:


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Selena van Leeuwen said:


> If you can see the puppies several times in several situations it tells a lot, but just see them 1 time you could make more of the ped :wink:


That sounds like a good answer!


----------



## jay lyda (Apr 10, 2006)

Hey, can I buy one of each!!!


----------



## Mike Russell (Apr 9, 2006)

Here's the problem...

I won't even go look at pups unless I like the pedigree! If the pedigree pleases me, then I'd go and look at the pups and do testing to see if there is something in the litter I like. There is no guarantee that I will find something that I like, even if the pedigree pleases me. If the pedigree displeases me, then what's the use in even looking at the pups?

Now, if I was just searching for dogs that I would put into service and there were no aspirations of ever breeding them, then I'd just look at the individual dogs...however, how would I really know how to find the right kind of dogs that might do the work without looking at the peds? I would end up wasting a lot of time if I just went around looking at all the litters for GSDs that I could find!


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

Perhaps I should rephrase the question.... because I understand that both elements are required for picking a pup, but my question is more relating to what you value more as a tell for what a worthwhile dog is -- the dogs behavior regardless of its lines or the lines and hope you get a good dog.

So, in hopes that some of you who are insisting on being difficult...

Lets say you HAVE 2 dogs, one was picked purely based on its pedigree, the other one was purely picked on going to see a bunch of GSD litters and picking a pup that exhibits the qualities you like to see in a pup between 0 and 12 weeks of age. *Which pup do you feel is more likely to be better than the other pup?*.

I know it's a difficult question, and I know that neither single option is a realistic way to pick a pup, but this is *hypothetical*. Do you value a pups behavior more than a pedigree or trust a pedigree to dictate a pups behavior???


----------



## Jerry Lyda (Apr 4, 2006)

Mike this is a hypothetical question only. There is a lot of what IFS. If a bull frog had wings he wouldn't bump his butt when he jumped. =D> We all had said we would like to have more info when picking a pup.
If you had a have a pup for what ever reason and you would be getting it for free and along with the pup you would get a free ten year supply of food, of your choice, and 50% off on all vet bills which of the two options would you choose?  
This is just a game. :wink:


----------



## Tim Martens (Mar 27, 2006)

with a 12 week old puppy, i'd have to go with pedigree. it's darn near impossible to tell what a dog's temperament will be based on what they are like at 12 weeks old. now if it was a one year old puppy, i'd go with option A, but at 12 weeks, i go with option B (pedigree only)....


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Tim Martens said:


> with a 12 week old puppy, i'd have to go with pedigree. it's darn near impossible to tell what a dog's temperament will be based on what they are like at 12 weeks old. now if it was a one year old puppy, i'd go with option A, but at 12 weeks, i go with option B (pedigree only)....


Now I am learning here. About what age can you actually start to judge the puppy's temperament and drives, etc.? You mentioned age one. Would you say that's about the age when you know what the dog will be able to do?


----------



## Mike Russell (Apr 9, 2006)

Mike Schoonbrood said:


> So, in hopes that some of you who are insisting on being difficult...


Not insisting on being difficult, just that the question doesn't really work in the real world. It could be answered if you gave more info, such as:

"The pup is to be an end user type dog" (meaning it will be used for sport, work, pet, etc ONLY)

"The pup is for potential breeding purposes"

If it's an end user, then you look at the dog only, because the rest doesn't mean anything if you're not going to ever breed the dog. If it's a potential breeding animal, then "Pup A" of unknown origin is worthless because you do not know the genetics behind the dog and "trash pedigreed" dogs have been know to throw flukes that actually can be useful.

In Jerry's example (free this and that), I'll take the pup with the pedigree that pleases me and if he proves worthless, then I can always sell him as a pet. Less risk with more to gain.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Mike Russell said:


> Mike Schoonbrood said:
> 
> 
> > So, in hopes that some of you who are insisting on being difficult...
> ...


Yeah, it's not a real-world question. It was my question, and I didn't know how else to say "Which means more to you? Pedigree or the individual dog? Does the lineage outweigh individual differences more often than vice versa?"

And I see what you mean about the end use, too. Makes a difference!


----------



## Mike Russell (Apr 9, 2006)

Connie Sutherland said:


> And I see what you mean about the end use, too. Makes a difference!


Yeah, I usually have to ask for clarification first, because the way I look at things is usually for breeding purposes and mostly for the production of strong females...because females are what create a good breeding program!


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I have to agree with Mike R on this. The choice is TOTALLY determined by the dogs end use. Worker/sport only or breeder. 
I've had this very same discussion with working terrier people and the answer is the same. If you want a breeder, you go with the pedigree. If you want just a worker, you go with the individual dog. My own JRT is a fantastic hunter but I wouldn't breed that tempermental little ba$+^rd for love or money. I knew that when I got him for hunting.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

With only those two original options, I would most def go with pedigree, as I would have a better clue of what working ability was bred into the dog and of course, genetic health issues are of too big a concern to go with the unknown.


----------



## Lynn Cheffins (Jul 11, 2006)

I would have to go with pedigree - just seeing the pup at 12 weeks you can't tell all that much about how they are going to be. If you are familiar with the pedigree and the dogs in it, it can be a better indicator as to health and development. I did just this recently - bought a pup sight unseen on pedigree alone. BUT - I was very familiar with the pedigree and all the dogs behind it, so was very comfortalbe with the idea. I am very happy so far with the pup.


----------



## Andres Martin (May 19, 2006)

Mike...do you mean a puppy ALL BY HIMSELF? All SAD that he's away from his litter mates? In a strange place? Being evaluated by a stranger?

The individual...not the pedigree. The answer is obvious, huh? Would you arrange a marriage between your son (I don't know if you have one, but let's say you do) and a daughter of Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, at six years old...or would you prefer to evaluate the particular specimen...not knowing wherefrom she cometh?


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Andres Martin said:


> Mike...do you mean a puppy ALL BY HIMSELF? All SAD that he's away from his litter mates? In a strange place? Being evaluated by a stranger?
> 
> The individual...not the pedigree. The answer is obvious, huh? Would you arrange a marriage between your son (I don't know if you have one, but let's say you do) and a daughter of Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, at six years old...or would you prefer to evaluate the particular specimen...not knowing wherefrom she cometh?


Yeah -- hypothetical and oversimplified questions are kinda dumb. I can say that because I was the one who supplied the dumb question.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Well, I'd have to go with pedigree. At least by checking into the dogs behind your pup you can get a good idea of what they have been bred for, plus it is not such a crap shoot with regards to inheritable problems like hips, elbows, eyes, etc..


----------



## Jose Alberto Reanto (Apr 6, 2006)

In my opinion, work is still the best indicator and the best xray. So pedigreed or not, it doesn't matter. I work the dog from pup and if structure and genetics are superb, I may breed it. Again, the pups are evaluated.

Just my opinion..


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Yes, working ability is the best indicator, but we are talking about 12 week old pups! The unfortunate part about not looking into the genetics is you can end up with a dog that can't even walk without pain, to say nothing of not being able to work, & must be put down before 2! This is a big problem here in the states anyway.

I think this whole question points out how important it is to look at all aspects of the dog, including the pup itself.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Jose Alberto Reanto said:


> In my opinion, work is still the best indicator and the best xray. So pedigreed or not, it doesn't matter. I work the dog from pup and if structure and genetics are superb, I may breed it. Again, the pups are evaluated.
> 
> Just my opinion..


Hey, Al! There you are!  You've been missed!


----------



## Jose Alberto Reanto (Apr 6, 2006)

susan tuck said:


> Yes, working ability is the best indicator, but we are talking about 12 week old pups! The unfortunate part about not looking into the genetics is you can end up with a dog that can't even walk without pain, to say nothing of not being able to work, & must be put down before 2! This is a big problem here in the states anyway.
> 
> I think this whole question points out how important it is to look at all aspects of the dog, including the pup itself.



Hi Susan:

Pups, unlike humans are not useless even at birth. You see them targetting for their dam's milk at day one. When you start working pups starting 6 weeks of age, you see much of their behaviours that they will carry on till they're adult. It's quite consistent. The way I work adult dogs is mostly the same way as I would with pups, only lesser in terms of intensity. In fact, both young and adults work together during trainings as the young learn from the adults.

Structure is best checked during the work as work is still the world's best xray. In some cases I experienced, not working pups at an early age were mostly borne out of not knowing how to work them at that age. The sad part is, it's likewise used as a lame excuse to hide weaknesses in breeding. 

Just my opinion...




Connie Sutherland said:


> Hey, Al! There you are! You've been missed!


Hello Connie,

I miss the forum too. Been travelling in and out, working dogs...

Best regards...


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Well, as the old saying goes, there are as many good methods as there are good trainers. Personally, I don't work puppys other than tracking, & a little motivational ob. I let them be crazed little monsters till they are around 10 months.

I would also want to know my pup had working dogs bred behind him. Unfortunately here in the states, there are many more american show line dogs that have had the work bred right out of them - ON PURPOSE, then there are working line dogs being bred. 

While it is true you can palpate hips in a young dog, it still is too inacurate & is no guarantee of whether or not the dog will end up crippled, to say nothing of heart murmers or elbows!


----------

