yeah Nashems, I agree. I knew you just wanted to do it for fun lol
yeah Nashems, I agree. I knew you just wanted to do it for fun lol
But I just think that this is the sort of argument where there is mostly two sides......Funnily enough i have said before i know of a group who are breeding Golden Retrievers cross BC's for the purpose of Search and Rescue and that i agree with this, but even this early the dogs seem to turn out very similar. But no-one is breeding the puppies...they are not creating a new breed. They are crossing two breeds every time to get the cross. So that is not creating a new breed...it is different again.....just putting the cat amongst the pigeons again LOL
Pets are forever
There are still plenty of places for both sporting and working dogs.
I think there was just a bit of fun proposed in this thread to think up combos of dogs.
In reality creating a new breed takes time, skill, money and lots of culling and a very clear objective. Not sure why one would bother when there are so many dogs already on offer that are more than suitable for a range of different pursuits from companion to sporting to working. If people dont want a purebred there are always going to be thousands of crossbreds available and of course rescues are bristling with dogs. Why not just concentrate on doing a really good job with what we already have. If people would only reduce their need to breed their dogs it would also be helpful.
The people who breed dobermans to be doormats are effectively creating a new breed. It might look the same, but there's more than looks that make a dog a particular breed. Dobermann didn't care what his dog looked like, he wanted it to have a short coat and an athletic figure, but the rest was incidental. He just cut bits off to make the dog's looks meet the needs derived through the purpose (ie not having a tail or ears for people to grab onto). He wanted a dog that would be a man stopper, that could protect him whilst he collected tax. I'd argue that the desire for particular temperaments led to the development of most breeds, and yet today, the focus is almost exclusively on breeding for confirmation in regards to the appearance of the dog.
People say that they want to protect all of the different breeds, stop them from being diluted and avoid a world with just being dogs rather than breeds. I would argue it is already happening. I would argue that today, people may breed for different looks, but most aim for the same temperaments. Kelpies with lower work drive, dobermans that are less aloof and more friendly towards strangers etc - is this not dilution? If a kelpie doesn't herd or want to work on a farm and a doberman doesn't want to guard and doesn't even bark when strangers show up at the house - are they not all just being bred towards a common type?
This may be in response to changing times and dogs needing to serve new purposes to maintain their position as man's best friend - I am not trying to say that I disagree with people who breed dobermans to be, as one breeder proudly described their dogs, "labradors in doberman clothing". But I do think it should be acknowledged, the future of breeds discussed and planned. And for me personally, I don't really see this process as any different to someone setting out to create a dog like a doberman, but with some differences. No, I think it's already been done many times over.
And quickly, 20 years? It is certainly possible to create an entirely new breed in much less time than that. I would assume that today we could also take certain short-cuts and rely less on 'trial and error' since we now have a much greater understanding of genetics and how they interact.
However the showbred BC has been around for many years and people argue they are not a Border collie in the true sense of the word and although they are usually worthless as true working dogs, they still maintain athletism, biddability and intelligence and they often make good dogs for active city folk who like to go running with their dog. The sport bred ones for agility usually have plenty of drive and they often make good dogs for city folk who want to dog sports. The BC showbreeders breed for conformation it is true but the better ones I know also try and keep the biddability and intelligence and some drive in their dogs. I personally get my BCs from a working breeder as I have a farm.
They still remain very different from a dog like perhaps a pug. I dont think that it is a case of working towards one type of dog as there are many different types of people. I dont think there is a need to create a new breed so to speak as there are plenty of breeds that already exist that can be tweaked to fit a new need. As you said it is already happening.
We may know more about genetics but there are no shortcuts I know of currently to say breed a guaranteed top working dog. The skill is in that of the breeder knowledge and the testing of each dog to see what you have. We do have a lot better understanding but I dont think it is that simple yet to be able to dial up the dog you want. It is still going to be time consuming and expensive to for anyone who wants to create a new breed.
Go for it if you must but really there are so many dogs out there of different shapes, sizes, coat type, and personality, I cant really see the point.
Last edited by Kalacreek; 02-18-2012 at 12:53 AM.
Ok, I want to have my dog but with a different look. Her personality is pretty perfect (intelligent, affectionate, trainable, playful, has an off button), but I want a more slender dog, with better proportions. I don't mind keeping her Tassie tiger stripes. Or turn them into proper tiger stripes, I like that idea! The bushy tail that curls up when she is alert is a good feature too. Much more practical than my old sighthound x's whip tail, though I miss that sound of the tail hitting the couch. I could add less shedding, but I believe that would affect the insulation properties of her coat, so that would be a bad trade-off, I reckon.
However, both dogs were bred for and purchased for.... Work. Both can be tough as nails. Both can and will fulfill their original function and I train exactly for that. However, I confine this to sports, as I am very aware of thenew needs placed upon dogs in society to be able to be affable, social and good members of our community.
Given your expressed attitudes, 99bottles, I doubt your presence would be welcomed in the top working kennels.
Also, I am not saying that it's a bad thing that dobermans today are not as hard as the dobermans 30-40 years ago. The point I was making is that people are already creating new versions of dobermans in response to the new needs placed upon dogs in society (as quoted by you), and so I don't feel that I what I want to do is all that different.
Perhaps, as Lala would say, I could call the waaaahmbulance?
As for the remainder of your argument. I think we will have to agree to disagree. I believe what you are suggesting is a travesty. That is simply my opinion and no amount of arguing will change it.
If I am ever in a position to assist with the creation of a new breed, it certainly won't be something I just rush into. I took 3 years just to buy a dog... I'm a picky and pedantic person, a perfectionist. We would have a set of reasonable goals, we would health test, we would temperament test and we would not cull any puppies. If we can't achieve that, then we won't do it. It's as simple as that.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)