Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Anthropology,medical,natural sciences,animal behaviour,

Extra Info

  • Location
  1. "Larger breeds that are undisciplined and fearful..." Many of the dogs presenting this way are also more likely to be out door dogs only, with little of the opportunity or expectation of being out in public, in crowds or tight spaces. People in general, including long time dog owners, have a lot less experience with dog behavior and 'reading' a dog even if they are well able to read their own. Bigger dogs are far less often allowed to be the companions they are capable of being. Which is a huge shame because traditionally, these dogs have been selected far more more rigorously than small dogs who can more easily get away with poor behavior. Poor vets, and poor big dogs
  2. I don't disagree with any of the points you have raised. All very valid. I think its more complex than that though, and essential that its not made any more difficult to breed your own dogs with out joining a registry or doing it commercially. For the basic reason that breeding for your own 'backyard' (subjectively) is the foundation of the breeds and domestic dogs in general. If that foundations lost, we will loose Domestic dogs for all but t he most wealthy. No ifs, buts or maybes. Its inevitable with out that foundation to stand on. The near universal breeding of dogs to suit our own needs and environments, purposes etc is the only reason we have Domestic dogs that suit and can adapt to so many varied Human environments. We will lose that ability in our dogs, bit by bit, till theres nothing left and the costs and drawbacks of keeping dogs is too much to be a worth while consideration. 'Back yard' breeding absolutely needs to be done much better though, with much more thought and consideration. Rather than trying to stop byb we would all be better served in promoting the expectation that is done with thought and consideration. The last thing we need is a black market in dogs, yet legislation so far is increasing that likelyhood. Partly though the rising costs of dogs associated with meeting legislative demands. Reducing those able to breed makes commercialization of breeding inevitable to meet demand. Inevitable that those undertaking breeding will be far less likely to have any knowledge or real life experience of how to do it or what it entails. If the idea is greater responsibility taken, its not going to be achieved by reducing our abilities to respond. That can only cause the opposite. Rather than making it harder, any legislation should be to make it easier to do do better, and promote the expectation that it will. The best start would be to reduce the cost of registering entire dogs, but demanding publicly available genetic testing for entires. That means any one with an entire by choice dog has the means to understand the most basic basic requirement of breeding- Some understanding of they have in front of them. Buyers also have that available. Both would quickly understand the importance of using that information. We would be promoting that expectation. It would be the 1st step to promote real responsibility. The only thing we are promoting so far is reduction. If that doesn't stop there is only one end. And a likely gain for Pure bred Pedigrees as well, with that understanding. Win win instead of loose loose. The increasing costs of buying a dog are only going to encourage breeding as a profit venture with less experience and understanding to do it well.. You only have to look at the huge demand of 'covid' dogs and the fall out happening now on Gumtree with supply now rapidly out stripping demand. Not the fault of Gumtree, but poor and unknowledgable choices made. Gumtree just provides a good window to see what IS going on.
  3. And is what began the foundation of the breeds we know today.
  4. A single species that shares a single environment- Breeders just don't get that responsibility is a biological imperative for success or at least its biological definition. Attacking that environment to remove its perceived failures is not responsibility. Teaching how to deliver better value is, and its demonstration is all that can bring acceptance, the only way to increase both the species and its available environment . Value is always subjective. ANKC was founded on Objective values. Application of the wrong value creates a double negative and corrupts the language to convey the opposite message of that intended. Destroying the foundations of Domestic Dogs, can only leave them with no support.
  5. It is a smaller sample than I think is ideal, but the wording suggests breed is an unreliable predictor rather than a useless one. Not hard to believe to me. In pedigree breeding adhering to the standard in looks takes precedence over behavioral traits, many of which can be masked in a show ring setting. Unless very visibly negative, behavioral traits are more often a secondary consideration after conformation standard so I believe it only natural there would be increasing unreliability for the behavioral side. That it would 'slip'. Some generalized predictors were recognized in the study, but stereotyping is not a reliable predictor. I really don't see that can be disputed while buyers are encouraged to research not only breed, but breeders and their priorities. In working dog circles, there is a common saying; If you want a good personal protection/security Doberman, get a Mal. GSDs are also known to have traits in direct conflict with their ability to perform traditional roles Even in working strains, prey drive often takes precedence over traditional traits for the snappy responses and trainability to show/ perform well in a ring setting, though that be ring sports. And its commonly recognized that dogs very successful in ring sports don't reliably perform in real life scenarios- they are not 'protecting', they are looking for reward from the sleeve. The performance tests and training methods are ritualized enough that breeding for the rituals and not the job is affecting breeding practices and the traits rewarded through selection. A more rounded approach is less likely to achieve recognition as its judged. As in the show ring.
  6. I hope it leads to better protection, enough to preserve their species diversity without hybridization.
  7. Sorry you haven't had any reply. I think most of us see board and train as missing the most important step, of training the owner.
  8. I think it can manifest that way as well, though I don't know much about it. I've never had or seen one, or known anyone who has. That doesn't give most people much reason to look it up or google the subject.
  9. Seems the gene in Dobes is little understood and tho' some have specialized in trying produce natural Bob tails, Unless there have been advances made, the gene has been some what lethal and has not been worth the heart ache for most. Often expressing as only a kinked tail, maybe a 3/4 or more, or minus an anus. A perfect bob tail being far from the only result.
  10. Projection, Much ? Why would you take Rebannes comment as a personal critique, instead of simply linking the relevant info? The nastiness is unwarranted.
  11. I hope so too. We really do need something to represent the ordinary, unaffiliated dog enthusiast.
  12. I would say its little known in Australia that Dobes can carry the bob tail gene, and to say its well known is obviously not correct.
  13. Only on face book? I don't do that, but I'd also like to look at this more....
  14. Hmm, I like Companions for Humanity as a name. Glad to see this started though.
  15. And a Cow. Put the interests of many, under control of a separate, independent agenda.
  • Create New...