Jed

http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/2883/23/5/3

Because it's rigged, baby. It's not about breeding better dogs, they don't gove a rats about breeding better dogs. They have the results of studies, anecdotal evidence etc, which they are ignoring. They want NO dogs. And they are going to achieve it. I said that doco was the springboard for tiny steps along the road to no dogs. Why would there be a government enquiry because of some skewed doco, unless there was a lot going on behind the scenes? Even the maker admitted it was skewed and it got a bagging by OFA Did they have an enquiry into the RSPCA after the ABC doco on the RSPCA? Nuh. They came for the pitbulls They came for the tails Now they're coming for the breeders

Closer to home, I wonder if they intend testing the cocker pups which the BLIND bitch from the puppy farm whelped whilst in the RSPCA's care. Very likely to be PRA, and if the bitch is affected, and from a puppy farm, chances of affected pups are good. So if they are not tested, the public couldl be buying dogs which will go blind. And, of course, it was the breeders who paid for the gene to be identified, so cockers could be tested.

http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/4750/r...d-has-woken-up/ K9 Magazine Interesting to see that the RSPCA is prepared to oversee dog breeding. Where is the offer to match breeder donations to develop health tests? They want healthier dogs, are prepared to criticise the breeders, who are reponsible for 100% of the tests available, yet wont throw any money in.

Lots of people do go to vet school simply because they have the marks. Some have little experience with animals, but learn as they go along, others simply pass the course, and see it as a job. Really good vets have a passion for it. During vet school, students are expected to do practical work during the holidays. This is to increase their experience. Dairy farms, piggeries, horse studs, vet practices, specialist vet practices. The keen students pick the best teaching practice to do prac work at, and whilst they are there, they usually shine, so they are allowed to do procedures, and brought into important operations, consults etc. The not so keen vet students simply plod along. Of an intake of about 80 some years ago, only about 20 had experience with several animals. 10 or so had no animal experience at all. Part of the course involves animal handling, but I think anyone with no animal experience has to be behind the 8 ball at the start. It is well known (by practising vets) that when students graduate, they don't know much. The keener ones get into whatever practice they can, some are lucky enough to get into good practices, which teach them as they go, and the keener ones will change jobs to acquire experience and knowledge from really good vets. They will also work in practices which allow them to learn, and do increasingly difficult procedures, plus the good vets in those practices will continue to train them. Meanwhile, the not so keen are recognized by employers, and they don't get jobs in practices which will teach them, they tend to in places where their knowledge and expertise doesn't increase. So, vets divide into 2 streams after graduation - the good and keen ones go into a stream where their experience and knowledge grows, and the dull or uninterested ones go into a stream which is stagnant. And of course, the graduates who think they know everything never learn any more, and after 20 years in practice, they are still killing cats during speys, or giving dogs too much anaesthetic, taking 2 hours to do the job, and telling the owner that there was a problem with the dog when the problem was the slack assed vet. There are no PM's on dead pets! It's a very demanding job, emotionally and physically. Vets are up in the middle of the night to sick animals, need a hell of a lot of knowledge - more than a doctor - and distraught owners are emotionally draining for most vets, as are animals which despite every bit of knowledge and energy the vet has, still die. The attrition rate is high - many leave and go to other jobs, DPI, AQIS, pet food companies etc because of the huge demands. The suicide rate of vets is much higher than the population average. A good vet is a wonderous being. Treasure him. And some people go to vet school for all the wrong reasons. My nephew, dux of the school, thought vet sounded intresting, graduated BVSc (hons), got a job, the week after he graduated, as an ambo. Prolly not cut out to be a vet, eh?

Here's something on the Scandanavian wolves. There are so many conflicting studies, I prefer to go with the evidence of my own eyes, which at least I know I can trust.

The long answer is book length Powerlegs, but the short answer is that if you inbreed for generations, you produce whatevers which have fewer offspring, and perhaps a less active immune system. It also means that deletorious genes are more likely to occur Studies were done on a group of wolves on Lake Michigan, and also on things like fruit flys. There's a fair bit of research out there, but there is also a lot of supposition with no studies to back it up. There is also outbreeding depression, which is self explanatory - the same results as above, from x generations of outcrossing. Dr Helen King experimentally bred rats, brother to sister for over 100 generations. The end products were finer and larger than the original pair. Dr Whitney developed guppies by breeding brother to sister for 10 generations, each generation was a little smaller and less vigourous than the preceeding one, but at the 5th generation, there was a sudden improvement, and each generation afterwards improved in colour and vigour. Additionally, when 2 inbred lines, consecutive brother x sister matings are crossed with each other the progeny are always larger than the original stock, and possess increased vigour. Just giving you both sides!! Sandgrubber There is, depending on which author and which study you read. See above re Lake Michigan wolves. However, there are other studies which disagree. There are studies out there which prove or disprove everything, just about. I tend to go with my own experience, or the experience of others more experienced, who I trust. I personally disagree about "inbreeding" (linebreeding) being a problem in dogs, which should be stopped. This is because over a long time, I've seen a lot of dogs produced by outcrossing, and line breeding, and been able to see 4 or 5 generations as time passes, and reflect on the results. I do a little line breeding. I think my best bitch is the result of fairly tight linebreeding. My dog is the result of a half brother half sister mating, he is 7 no problems, good stud dog. I didn't breed him, but I was keen to own him. His dual grandfather is a multi country grand champion, very sound, who had no hereditary issues at 11. I can see no reason why he would not be used in a line breeding program, and I particularly bought the dog because I wanted to introduce strong healthy lines, to continue the healthy lines I already had. Additionally, my stud dog shares a grandfather on the bottom of the pedigree with my older stud dog. Again, a well credentialled dog, hale and hearty at 14, HIS father was hale and hearty at 16. Neither of my stud dogs has ever produced any of the health problems in the breed. My third dog, untested as yet, is from a totally different line, also very healthy. (I'm sorry I said that, they'll all test positive for all sorts of things now!! Never tempt fate) A lot of lines in various animals were brought forward quite a lot by ONE inbred example. The pedigree studies have proved that very few breeders do line breed. The ones I know who do it, do it with superior stock to produce superior results. However, I think it will be banned. And probably be introduced to Qld first, as DogsQld has shown they simply rull over when faced with any legislatitive process. BSL and docking legislation was introduced to Qld first, as the CCCQ was seen as an "easy" target, not having elected representatives, and having shown they were happy to lie down and roll over in the pastl. They have already advised members that they intend banning close (brother x sister, mother x son etc) matings, despite the fact that hardly any members do it, and members are against them banning it. I suppose, after that, matings of other relations will be banned as well. It will certainly close a door. And it will disseminate, rather than concentrate the blood lines of outstanding, healthy dogs, which seems to me to be a pity, as history shows us that this is the way forward. I would like to see proper scientific studies of dogs with problems specifically caused by line breeding. Not stuff someone thought, or results of mating fruit flies for 6 generations. Or studies of wolves. How healthy and sound were t he fruit flies, and how healthy and sound were the wolves? No one seems to have taken that into account, but I can find 5 or 10, or 20 dogs from long ago who were line, or inbred, who did great service to their breed. The dogs today which go back to them don't seem to be afflicted with anything, although they have come down to use by diverse lines. I also think that we need to factor diet into any health studies, as it is becoming increasingly apparent that diet has an enormous effect on health. Not that it matters much, between whatever "animal welfare" wants to legislate for, and the actions of the RSPCA, so many breeders will walk away there wont be much gene pool remaining. Maybe we should have taken Don Burke up on his offer, and started up in opposition to the ANKC!!

What we are all going to be soon to avoid draconian laws and dire consequences You can only breed "recklessly" if you know about it. some vets are good, some are bad. I spend a fair bit of my time stopping my owners having needless patella operations on perfectly health dogs done by vets who obviously are looking to make up the monthly payment on the Hummer. I like vets, but some are a disgrace. And they wont be educated, because they know it all already. They knew it all when they graduated, and haven't learned a thing since.

No, dobbem in to VicDogs. They might be interested

and 3. A non-statutory Independent Advisory Council on Dog Breeding should be established

West Australian Canine Association has a website, they are probably listed on there. Not sure of the link, but if you google Australian National Kennel Council, that will come up, click on the state on the home page. Otherwise, say where and when you want to go on here, and exhibitors will tell you what's on.

Lilli, I'm feeling argumentative tonight!! Unfortunately, 4 - 5 + breeds usually signals a pf, or a volume exporter. I don't think people who keep 2 bitches and breed a litter every 10 years are better, they've often worse because they have insufficient experience. 40 years = 8 litters. However, we do need some easy method for the novice to distinguish good from not so good. Most GOOD breeders, like you, have a max of 3 or 4 breeds, and sometimes they are similar breeds. I have 3, and I wouldn't mind trying a couple more either. Novice puppy buyers have no way of judging, so we need to give them a bit of a hand. If a simple rule of thumb such as "not keeping too many breeds", helps them, that's what we need. The number of buyers who think they have done their research and are armed with the right questions are legend. I can spot 'en a mile off!! If interested in Cavs, they ask has the puppy's heart been tested. If I was Shonkypaws,, I woulf say, "yep the vet tested his heart last week, it was fantastic", and that is exactly what the wrong breeder would say, and the buyer would buy the pup, and be happy about how knowledgable he appeared to the breeder, and how he was too switched on to be shonked. I tell the buyers that it is the hearts of the parents which need to be tested, and I explain why. I also tell them that the pup will have had his heart checked, as CM is not detected in 8 week old pups. Id they don't buy from me, at least they go away a bit sharper than they came Knowing of a couple of dol members who have been ripped off by winning kennels (that I would have thought were ok), I know how difficult it is to direct people to the right place without making defamatory statements, so I think every little thing helps If they want one of your breeds, we can say "oh, Lilli's got 50 breeds, but she's ok". :D I know a kennel with about 200 (?) dogs, 2 breeds, and I send people there in a heartbeat. They faint when they see how many dogs they are, but they are always happy with their pup, and if they know enough, they see the dogs are in prime conditon, physically, mentally and psychologically. We need as many pointers for newbies as we can get. Gotta go, the stud muffin has decided the dining room is now the toilet. I said he was healthy, not smart!! He'll be sorry

If I were Huski, I'd put Daisy into a sit - and put myself between her and the woman, and keep turning to face her so I was between her and the dog as she passed. I would frown and shake my head if she waved her stick. I think Molasseslass' suggestion about giving her a notice is a good one too, and I would add "the dog will not hurt you". If she is genuinely terrified, if the dog is still, she may be less frightened. If she is a straight nutter, it wont matter. It is very difficult to people who are terrified of dogs, I do feel for them. I just had a terrible vision of me walking my boxer loony - very well behaved, but I think if someone waved a big stick at her, she would see it as a new game, jump up and grab it and she can jump higher than my head from a standstill. Oh, the vision - how horrible. Be pleased you don't have a boxer, Huski

I know, Mita. SM is not a breed specific problem - although the incidence appears to be higher in CKCS. But, perhaps that is because the breeders have poured a lot of money into research, and the clubs have encouraged their members (ie, Cavalier owners and breeders) to have scans done. Whether the results are higher for CKCS, because of this, or because they do have more SM, I don't know. I'd have to say "maybe" because the research has been concentrated on Cavs. Claire Rusbridge's site features Cavs,because the Cav club has been supporting her research, but other sites in other countries seem to have a broader span of breeds I suspect a lot of dogs are pts without a diagnosis being made. Most vets have never seen SM, and wouldn't recognize it. The only way to diagnose is via MRI, which is expensive. That documentary was absolute (excuse me) crap. Unfortunately, people ("the public") believed it. They seem to be more inclined to believe the doco than breeders. That's a huge worry in itself. I shouted myself hoarse here, but no one believed. But for people like you who are prepared to do the reseach, the truth is revealed. I've said this before, but I'll say it again. After the documentary, several cav pups were put down for scratching and whining. The vets diagnosed SM at 3 and 4 months. Because they had seen the doco, and decided thes symptoms fitted. As you know, no symptoms appear until later. The breeders who bred the pups are choking! And I am sure there would be more pups which the same thing has happened to. Unfortunately, dog owners who wouldn't know SM if it bit them are now diagnosing it in every cavalier with a back problem, or which scratches. And a few of our most reputable cav breeders have been put off by comments from the public engendered by the doco, and wont breed any more cavs. So much damage, everywhere, and such significant damage. Just another step on the road to the end. *sigh* Doco did so much damage.

Chances are ok that the pups will be fine. And because it is free (a boxer will cost $1000+) there's a bit of money if something goes wrong. IMHO, x bred dogs like this have more chance of being healthy and growing up well than crossbreds from puppy farms with really big price tags. If the parents are ok, chances are good that the pups will be too. If you like them, and you want one, take it. And there wont be any breeder support, but it's free, and you wouldn't expect breeder support. You could pay a lot more than $0 and got no breeder support either. Yeah, sure, HD might be a problem, but you could buy a purebred which could jump the fence and be run over. Life's a gamble. Just don't take it if you feel sorry for it!! Take it coz you want it. there are some very nice accidental crossbreds out there. If you want a pup, you want that sort, and the pup is handy, why not? My daughter wanted a pup, we didn't have any, I saw a notice for Springer x Border Collies at the supermarket. She's a nice dog, good looking, healthy, no probs, she's about 10 now.

Those pups sound ok to me. Parents are sort of similar types. If the pup is going to be coated, it should have some coat now. ED, HD etc is a bit of a lucky dip, but if the parents are +2 and getting around ok, you'll just have to take your chances. Good idea about the puppy test, worth doing. As long as the whole neighbourhood hasn't been in patting the pups, they probably wont have picked up any puppy diseases. Vaccinate after you take it. Get it vet checked for problems, heart, teeth etc as soon as you get it. Pup will probably grow into a big boisterous dog, be prepared for that, do training, and all the right things. Sounds like they might be nice dogs. I'd do it

mlc Some of the presenters are known, by their own writings and speech over a decade, to be anti purebred dogs. Whether the rest are is unknown to us. And as there is to be a presentation by an oodledoodle breeder who has used the technique of criticising purebred dogs to boost her own oodledoodles, you can hardly claim "it's not an anti pure bred day" and be believed. The facts are plain, there is no point in denying them. If you want to support people who don't support purebred dogs, that's ok, but you can hardly expect to come to a purebred dog forum and receive universal accolades and sunshine. Nothing personal, sometimes it necessary to shoot the messenger.

KismetKat Not the seminar, the people and the ideology behind it. And not just temperament, everything. It's about genetics and training etc. You do a better job as a trainer with better tools. Remember though, "somewhat DA" might train up well, and be a good pet, but should not be used for stud --- so the breeder is doing the right thing by ditching the dog. The nature vs nurture discussion will be going on for centuries. As a breeder, I want to breed pups with the correct temperament, but it's then up to the owner to make or break them. Apropos of nothing, I believe that the RSPCA is a sponsor of this seminar.

Oops, SPRUNG!! PF, how very dare you!! Gee Erny, I don't think that BIG budgie can be MINE!! Well, maybe. Hi ahmadi, you're right!!

Good for you Jac, nothing like a free advertisement Woofnhoof What colours would they be exactly?

I surmised this thead was posted as revenge for this forum not instantly complying with the request in an earlier thread for subject matter to aid in the PhD study conducted by mlc's friend, which I thought rather immature. However, I may be ascribing motives which are non existent. Other motives I have considered are probably not suitable for this forum, so I shall keep them to myself. The seminar appears to be highly weighted towards crossbred dogs, "hybrid vigour" and discussions on financial independence made on the backs of dogs. I do hope that one of the attendees will ask Dr McGreevy whether the keeping of 200, 300, 500 dogs in agricultural premises with minimal socialisation, and more importantly, no socialisation of pups to produce these crossbreds equates with best practice for the welfare of dogs, particularly given the recent BBC documentary on the domestication of dogs via proven scientific studies. Which concur with other properly conducted studies proving the same thing. Perhaps the same enquiry could be made of the vet who is producing the Cavbeastuffups? It would also be interesting to learn what, if any, health tests are done on puppy farm breeding stock. I understand the producer of the poodle x labradors does indeed do testing. I am sure those enquiries will be made. The purpose of the seminar is to disseminate information, inform the public, and allow for fair study, I believe. The results of the study on inbreeding of purebred dogs has long been finalised, yet no results are available. I am aware that any "inbreeding" of purebred dogs is well within scientifically established parameters. The gene pools of some breeds, although not large, are diverse enough for continued production of healthy dogs. And as has been done in the past, new blood will be introduced via imported dogs or semen, when the need arises. It is rather unfortunate that a pet owner, and non ANCK member chose to make suggestions about what the ANKC should be doing, with no knowledge of the workings of the ANKC. But, it's a public forum. All should be free to speak, but some of those comments may have given an incorrect impression of the ANKC. mlc No, it's reasonable that people who own and breed purebred dogs would be more than concerned that a seminar would be conducted by people who are demonstrably anti purebred dogs, and who have in the past, used any and all tools, includiing - um - sketchy - research, to discredit them, and further, to dissmeninate incorrect informaton to the public to further a particular agenda. Counsel is supplying an opinon to registered breeders. The CCs exist for the keeping of registers of purebred dogs, and for the conduct of competitions for purebred dogs and for the continuation of the hobby. The CCs are supported solely by members, and their charter is to work at all times in the best interests of those members and purebred dogs.

Hi Petbehaviourist, I believe that dogs have wonderful abilities. Unfortunately, we humans don't have the skills or the tools to discover and qualify those abilities. The talents of Endal were amazing. Dogs detecting cancer, dogs detecting low blood sugar, seizures, termites, assistance dogs, guide dogs - they are capable of so much, all of it for the benefit of man. And the more we know, the more we will discover. They deserve better than we often give them.

Try it with your own dogs, Erny. I did - she came into the room, looked at me, left side first. She has big eyes and a lot of expression, so it was easy to spot. I was interested in them looking at the picture cards - I think that comes later. Some of mine show great interest in some things on TV. Forgotten what now, but I've often wondered what they take in. corrie, those foxes were pretty darned good. I could have a couple of them, specially the cuddly ones. Fascinating about the colours changing, although that was posted and discussed here some time ago. Just amazing. And soooo cute!! Really fascinating to know how man selected wolves and bred them, and they changed. I suppose the tamer wolves hung around, and so it went from there.

Welcome to the forum, PetBehaviourist, "Heated discussion"? Naw. Just members voicing their disapproval of a purebred dog forum being used to promote a seminar with key speakers whose voiced aims are to turn purebreds into crossbreds, and someone who is breeding poodle x labradors crossbreds, and CavBeastuffeds. There is bound to be dissention when the tenets of others are diametrically opposed to your own, and whose tenets, in your opinion, are not doing the best for "man's best friend" But there you go, everyone has a different opinion. I hope you enjoy the seminar. Jacquilee Mmm, me too, and considering you have to promise your youngest child, gouge out your eyes with a rusty teaspoon, show 10 pieces of photo ID, your mortgage, bank loan details, and sign 200 forms in triplicate to buy a halfway decent dog from any registered Cavalier breeder, I have to wonder where the breeding stock came from? *shudder*. I think registered Beagle breeders are marginally easier, but I still have to wonder, Oh, I suppose there is always good old Pets Purgatory, the mother lode for puppy farmers. Would you like a single heart murmur with that, or a double? How about a bit of SM on the side? Mita Breeders have conferences all the time - on the phone, at shows, at lunch. Breeders phone other breeders for advice on pedigrees and matings, on rearing pups, on coats, eating, just about anything you could think of. Breeders physically help each other quite a lot too. Plus, anyone who wants one has a mentor. Being particularly stupid and inept, I have a few, which is wonderful. Additionally, the ccs do run seminars/conferences from time to time. This forum is an encyclopaedia of knowledge too. Lots of things happen for cc members - if they want it to. Mita, please do go and look at the youtube links I posted in the general forum. You'll really enjoy them. I was fascinated. But the white silver fox is mine, OK?

Is this seminar about reasoned debate, or is it a step on the road to wiping out purebreds. In my paranoia I believe the latter. But Elenbah said it better except there will come a point where they will walk away, so they wont have anyone to control, and there wont be any ccs - Husky, I cannot imagine a more unsuitable cross than Cavalier + Beagle in terms of drive, temperament personality - to reduce the sense of smell by crossing two totally dissimilar breeds is incredible. Imagine breeding a pup with the conformation of a cavalier, and the drive of a beagle? Not to mention skull shape, dentition, and coat type. How long would it stay sound for? LP, MVD and SM could still occur in the pup. What a bastard - in the true sense of the word. And Huski, she can do it because she has no deep knowledge of dogs, or the breed, and no intrinsic knowledge or care for dogs of any particular breed, specially these two. People who support her are exactly the same by extension. And that's another thing which worries me about these people. Lots of book learning, lots of theory, but absolutely no common sense, or dog knowledge, or sense of dogs as sentient beings. Oh, I can imagine a more unsuitable x - stafffy x pug!! Sandgrubber - Drag the mouse, highlight, copy what you want - paste it where you want. Highlight the text, and click on the "quote" icon. That will wrap the quotes around it. Sounds like the breed standard runs contrary to what you want. IMHO, you need to breed as close to the standard as you can - in the standard, there is a wide range. I don't know that the duplex coat would be a problem in WA. If I had a breed which was seriously affected by the heat or cold, and to make it suitable, I would have to breed away from the standard, I would cease breeding that breed. However, it seems to me that a lot of labs are ok in WA, so I would give my buyers instructions about the keeping of the dog in the heat. I would think the duplex coat would insulate the coat a little. Friends had a lab in WQ (hot as WA) and he was fine. He had a duplex coat. Not all dogs within the line are going to match the standard 100%. One of my cockers is a true water spaniel, digs in the water dish, swims at every opportunity, would love to work. The other couldn't give a toss about water, couldn't give a rats about retrieving game. I don't think she would cut it as a working dog. However, she is mellow, and easy in all ways. She's the one for the family with little kids. Both are close to their standard, except for work and the second dog. I will breed her, and accept that she has a breed fault, but her pups will probably make better pets - when I breed her, I will chose a dog who throws drive. All dogs have faults - you accept them, and you try to breed away from them. I sold someone a cocker pup recently, they were disappointed their previous cockers wouldn't swim and didn't like water. the one they bought was out of the first bitch I mentioned, and I am sure that pup is this minute, digging in the water dish and tracking mud through the house. People who want suburban pets still want the attributes of the breed. Not everyone wants "insert batteries here" dogs. The people above want a dog who fits into the breed standard, who will be a cocker, not just in name. That is their right, imho. They will laugh about him digging in the water dish, because they will enjoy him fetching from water, and swimming. Buyers accept that the dog does (a) or (b) because he is a particular breed. Buyers wouldn't buy if the dogs were different. Some buyers prefer crosses, some like pure. I don't think any of our standards are contrary to "pets" - some dogs are not suitable for some homes. Accept that there is a breed for anything. If breed A is not suitable, it is not due to an unsuitable standard, it is due to the fact that another breed would suit more. I don't think we need to change the standards. We need to accept that not everyone wants the same dog, but we need to breed dogs to the standard for the people who want them. We may need to breed some things to one end of the standard or other. IMHO, after a lot of years of breeding, buyers do want the particular breed, they do want it to behave like the breed. There's always room for qualified debate, what I don't have time for is unqualified people who want to take over, or end our hobby. Dog breeds have adapted to fit the current world. And not simply by changing conformation features. Someone earlier in this thread spoke of the lowered drives in GSD and dobes. I don't breed those breeds, but I know the drive in boxers is lower than it was 40 years ago. The dogs of 40 years ago would often have a little slice of you if you were on their territory, the boys loved a bit of a dust up, blood was fine too, and whilst a boxer wouldn't begin a fight, he sure could finish one!! But they were still 100% trustworthy with their families, good with other pets, kind and nice. It became apparent that they would need to mellow a bit for the changing world. Not sure what others did, but I bred more mellow dogs - the drives were reduced, but I still needed to breed brave and bold dogs who could step up to the plate, who would be brave enough to do their job if injured, who still had the judgement to pick a bad guy and take action, without losing the trustworthiness. It took a bit, but I now have dogs who will still bite if the need is there, who wont back off, but wont bite as quickly and who need more reason. They are still within the standard for temperament, but they are not at the hard edge of the standard any more. If I had to breed them off the standard so they could cope in the modern world without having a DD tag I would have stopped breeding. And most of the people who buy them today couldn't cope with the majority of dogs of 40 years ago - AND the dogs are still within the standard. I don't think anyone has any right to change any breed. If you like a breed,but you don't want to breed it to the standard, leave it alone. One of the main reasons some lines in some breeds are trucked is because someone came along, liked the breed, but thought they would be better with this, or without that, which was off the standard, because that is what THEY like. And it's led to stuffed dogs and huge problems every single time. Lack of respect for the integrity of a breed always leads to grief. I love my boxers, just as they are. I have no desire to change anything. I have a picture in my mind of the ideal boxer, and that is what I have always tried to do. If I thought the perfect specimen was not perfect, I wouldn't have been interested in breeding the breed, if I had, I would have stuffed it. Breeds go downhill because people want to change the standard, because it either isn't the breed for them, they think they know better, or they don't understand the standard. And plenty don't. No. The temperament of many breeds has evolved, as I mentioned earlier with boxers, but any change must not go outside the standard.No breed is simply a working attribute, or a coat and once you change something well away from the standard, you change the line, and the breed becomes different. We are the guardians of the breeds I don't give a rats ass what they do - as long as the dogs aren't suffering, though they mostly seem to be, and as long as they don't want to stuff up my breed. I don't want them trying to change my breed either. If you want to create another breed, there is nothing stopping you doing that. If you want to breed labs which are more heat tolerant, and less food obsessed, you have the right to do that. Really, it's up to each of us, as breeders, what we do, and what we see as right. We are the ones who hold the reins, we need to be aware of that, and careful. Please don't think I am having a go at you, I'm not, but I think you would really benefit from having a proper mentor who you could talk these things through with. I know a few breeders I can chew things over with, and whether they agree or disagree, or call me an idiot, at the end of it, I have clarified the issue for myself. Over a long time breeding, I have cemented my opinion, because I have watched things happen, things change,breeders come and go, fashions come and go ---- and I have seen the results of it all. I've seen breeds totally stuffed by people who thought they were God, and I've seen them come good again over time. I think the extra time in the breed gives you another outlook. I notice breeders my age + have different opinions to those younger, and they are mostly due to experience. You also know what you can and should change, and what you shouldn't.