A dog & canine forum. DogBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » DogBanter forum » Dog forums » Dog behavior
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

I Got Bitten Today



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 4th 03, 06:42 PM
Debbie S
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default I Got Bitten Today


From:

But that's the whole point. How can you then expect something that is
bred for something different to be the same thing?

I was refering to not seeing the 'magic' I still think the magic
appears to us based on what our _own passions are. Since of I know GSDs
that are being used for herding, and some of them come from 'Schutzhund'
lines, not being bred for herding for many, many generations, I"m not
convinced you _always lose the instinct. If that were the case, there
should be almost _no GSDs capable of working stock, at least in this
country. shrug

I'm not a 'breed' person. I"m a 'dog' person. Individual dogs. The
working line GSD is probably the breed most suitable for me, but I've
found my passion in a sport that is harder for a large dog with
substantial bone. GSDs were bred as multi-purpose dogs. Some of the
qualities that I admire in a GSD are it's drive, nerve, work ethic,
resilience, intelligence. Kira has all of those qualities, and her
lines could be described as all Schutzhund sport dogs. The BC has
drive, athleticism, intelligence, and work ethic, and I fail to see how
it's inextricably tied to herding instinct. There's just far too many
of the sport dogs to show it's not. Can those dogs herd? Apparently
many of them can. Are they sport herding caliber? Probably not. But
many of them are still working their home farms and ranches.

There's alot of talk amongst GSD folk that the sport of Schutzhund has
changed into a stylized test, no longer testing the true nature of the
dog. If sport _herding is so much more difficult than _real herding,
how is that not changing the selection criteria for breeding stock? And
will that be a good thing in the case of the border collie? Only time
will tell.

I have a really hard time believing that you are so obtuse as to not
realize how offensive that statement is.

Oh, fercryingoutloud, Melanie! If it makes you feel better to call me
jaded, go for it. I probably am. shrug You're reading more into my
words than are actually there. You're going to be a little more
wide-eyed around dog sports than I am. That's just reality, unless you
don't care. You care. It's important to you. You're going to see lots
of things that amaze you with dogs, at least some of which someone with
more age and experience would have already seen. That's just the way it
is.

It's incredibly arrogant, however, to summarily dismiss the passions
and concerns of the community that has fostered and developed this breed
for way longer than you've been interested in it.

I want one dog. One. I don't care if it herds. If I cared about
everything everyone in the world thought I should, my brain would
explode. So would yours. We all have our priorities, concerns, and
passions. Mine is dogs. _Individual dogs, not so much breeds as a
whole. I"m not a breed person, never really have been. The closest
I"ve come is with GSDs, as they're my favorite.

I know people who have been in Border Collies their entire lives, and
you know what -- it's still magic.

Because of what _they're bringing to the table. Love of a breed,
interest in herding, etc.

from another poster:
"There's that click that happens when the dog is on stock and learns
how to read, anticipate and move them and I think it changes the dog at
a core level. Magical."

You can change the wording a little, and make that statement regarding a
fast, driven dog aceing a tough ExB course in perfect sync with it's
handler. Again, I maintain that the magic is found as much with the
observer as it is in the dog.

But it doesn't mean it isn't something special and worth preserving.

All breeds are 'special' and have things worth preserving, especially
amongst their fanciers. I just don't think the sport collie, as you
call them, is going to be the death of border collies. The American
Show Shepherd hasn't hurt the working line dogs, least not as far as I
can see. I got a _great dog, even having been out of the GSD loop for
many, many years. And it wasn't terribly difficult.

Debbie

  #2  
Old September 5th 03, 03:47 AM
Robin Nuttall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Melanie L Chang" wrote in message
...
Debbie S ) wrote:



You may not lose all of it -- but you lose enough of it to change it into
something else. There is a vast difference between a dog who has all the
puzzle pieces necessary to do the job, and one who does not. There's a
vast difference between a dog who has enough drive to work all day, and
one who likes to chase sheep around the pen a little bit, but gets tired
and decides it's more fun to eat sheep poop after a while.


I honestly don't think you can state this categorically. While it's
generally true that dogs not bred for a certain task MAY lose the ability to
do that task, and dogs bred FOR that task tend to retain ability better,
there are dogs from pure show backgrounds who can work, and dogs from pure
working backgrounds who can't.

When you've been in a breed as long as some of us have, you start to see
things that make beliefs like yours untrue. For instance, I know of a
Schutzhund 3 dog, fully titled by age 3, who is from pure American show
lines, with nary a German dog or even an American-bred working dog within
his pedigree *anywhere* unless you want go to back 60-70 years. A few CDs
here and there, and that's it. I know several schH 1 and 2 dogs from
non-working backgrounds. Are they common? No. But you can't say that dogs
not bred to work will instantly lose all ability to do so. It simply isn't
true.

I know several dogs from strong working backgrounds who aren't worth diddly
in the protection arena. Likewise, I know of a BC from some top working
dogs, who belongs to a local who owns sheep and trains and trials. He told
me flat out that she didn't have ANY sheep sense or instinct whatsoever.
None.

It's just not as black and white as you're trying to make it Melanie. Not
selecting for herding ability isn't a good thing, but not selecting for it
doesn't mean it disappears, pouf, within an instant. Or a generation, or as
can be seen by my friend's SchH 3 dog Jack, even in 60 years. You ARE
looking at probabilities though. If I was looking to buy a schutzhund dog,
would I go with all American bloodlines? Nope. I'd go with a mix of American
and European. Likewise, if I was going for a conformation dog, I probably
wouldn't go all-German--though it's been done, and with spectacular
results.



  #3  
Old September 5th 03, 03:47 AM
Robin Nuttall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Melanie L Chang" wrote in message
...
Debbie S ) wrote:



You may not lose all of it -- but you lose enough of it to change it into
something else. There is a vast difference between a dog who has all the
puzzle pieces necessary to do the job, and one who does not. There's a
vast difference between a dog who has enough drive to work all day, and
one who likes to chase sheep around the pen a little bit, but gets tired
and decides it's more fun to eat sheep poop after a while.


I honestly don't think you can state this categorically. While it's
generally true that dogs not bred for a certain task MAY lose the ability to
do that task, and dogs bred FOR that task tend to retain ability better,
there are dogs from pure show backgrounds who can work, and dogs from pure
working backgrounds who can't.

When you've been in a breed as long as some of us have, you start to see
things that make beliefs like yours untrue. For instance, I know of a
Schutzhund 3 dog, fully titled by age 3, who is from pure American show
lines, with nary a German dog or even an American-bred working dog within
his pedigree *anywhere* unless you want go to back 60-70 years. A few CDs
here and there, and that's it. I know several schH 1 and 2 dogs from
non-working backgrounds. Are they common? No. But you can't say that dogs
not bred to work will instantly lose all ability to do so. It simply isn't
true.

I know several dogs from strong working backgrounds who aren't worth diddly
in the protection arena. Likewise, I know of a BC from some top working
dogs, who belongs to a local who owns sheep and trains and trials. He told
me flat out that she didn't have ANY sheep sense or instinct whatsoever.
None.

It's just not as black and white as you're trying to make it Melanie. Not
selecting for herding ability isn't a good thing, but not selecting for it
doesn't mean it disappears, pouf, within an instant. Or a generation, or as
can be seen by my friend's SchH 3 dog Jack, even in 60 years. You ARE
looking at probabilities though. If I was looking to buy a schutzhund dog,
would I go with all American bloodlines? Nope. I'd go with a mix of American
and European. Likewise, if I was going for a conformation dog, I probably
wouldn't go all-German--though it's been done, and with spectacular
results.



  #4  
Old September 5th 03, 03:18 PM
Mary Healey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Robin Nuttall wrote:
To me,it's just as offensive to breed for *only* working ability as it would be to
breed for *only* drive or *only* a perfect head. Even breeding only for
genetic health is bad, beause it ignores working ability and structure.


I'd argue that it's more offensive to breed for *only* working ability.
A sound, healthy dog without a drive in its character is useless and
possibly inconvenient, but the dog doesn't care. A dog with a lot of
working desire, whose instincts write checks its body can't cash, is
misery on 4 legs and painful to watch.

Yes, working ability is important, but only to the extent that the dog's
structure and genetic health allow it to be expressed.
--
Mary H. and the Ames National Zoo: Regis, Sam-I-Am, Noah (1992-2001),
Ranger, Duke,
felines, and finches

  #5  
Old September 5th 03, 03:18 PM
Mary Healey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Robin Nuttall wrote:
To me,it's just as offensive to breed for *only* working ability as it would be to
breed for *only* drive or *only* a perfect head. Even breeding only for
genetic health is bad, beause it ignores working ability and structure.


I'd argue that it's more offensive to breed for *only* working ability.
A sound, healthy dog without a drive in its character is useless and
possibly inconvenient, but the dog doesn't care. A dog with a lot of
working desire, whose instincts write checks its body can't cash, is
misery on 4 legs and painful to watch.

Yes, working ability is important, but only to the extent that the dog's
structure and genetic health allow it to be expressed.
--
Mary H. and the Ames National Zoo: Regis, Sam-I-Am, Noah (1992-2001),
Ranger, Duke,
felines, and finches

  #6  
Old September 5th 03, 03:39 PM
Gwen Watson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Robin Nuttall wrote:

"Mary Healey" wrote in message
...
Robin Nuttall wrote:
To me,it's just as offensive to breed for *only* working ability as it

would be to
breed for *only* drive or *only* a perfect head. Even breeding only for
genetic health is bad, beause it ignores working ability and structure.


I'd argue that it's more offensive to breed for *only* working ability.
A sound, healthy dog without a drive in its character is useless and
possibly inconvenient, but the dog doesn't care. A dog with a lot of
working desire, whose instincts write checks its body can't cash, is
misery on 4 legs and painful to watch.

Yes, working ability is important, but only to the extent that the dog's
structure and genetic health allow it to be expressed.
--


Excellent point, and let me add to it. Dogs bred for working ability and
drive *only* are often bred by people who really don't have a deep
understanding of what good drive is. Many breeders mistake hyperactivity for
drive. So they simply breed "high as a kite" to "high as a kite" and totally
disregard that tiny little thing called livability. A dog without drive may
not be much of a working dog, and certainly shouldn't be bred, but he's also
going to make a nice quiet pet for somebody. Dogs bred for drive without
consideration of livability are likely to be dead on a table right quick.
Not only are they a misery to live with but they can also be dangerous in
the wrong hands.


I 110% agree with this POV as well. Totally! I have sen it first hand.

Gwen

  #7  
Old September 5th 03, 03:39 PM
Gwen Watson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Robin Nuttall wrote:

"Mary Healey" wrote in message
...
Robin Nuttall wrote:
To me,it's just as offensive to breed for *only* working ability as it

would be to
breed for *only* drive or *only* a perfect head. Even breeding only for
genetic health is bad, beause it ignores working ability and structure.


I'd argue that it's more offensive to breed for *only* working ability.
A sound, healthy dog without a drive in its character is useless and
possibly inconvenient, but the dog doesn't care. A dog with a lot of
working desire, whose instincts write checks its body can't cash, is
misery on 4 legs and painful to watch.

Yes, working ability is important, but only to the extent that the dog's
structure and genetic health allow it to be expressed.
--


Excellent point, and let me add to it. Dogs bred for working ability and
drive *only* are often bred by people who really don't have a deep
understanding of what good drive is. Many breeders mistake hyperactivity for
drive. So they simply breed "high as a kite" to "high as a kite" and totally
disregard that tiny little thing called livability. A dog without drive may
not be much of a working dog, and certainly shouldn't be bred, but he's also
going to make a nice quiet pet for somebody. Dogs bred for drive without
consideration of livability are likely to be dead on a table right quick.
Not only are they a misery to live with but they can also be dangerous in
the wrong hands.


I 110% agree with this POV as well. Totally! I have sen it first hand.

Gwen

  #8  
Old September 8th 03, 08:25 PM
dianne marie schoenberg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Mary Healey wrote:
A sound, healthy dog without a drive in its character is useless and
possibly inconvenient, but the dog doesn't care. A dog with a lot of
working desire, whose instincts write checks its body can't cash, is
misery on 4 legs and painful to watch.


Damnit, Mary, you just made me cry.

Until you have lived through that with a dog you love, who
lives to work and keeps trying to do so through terrible pain
even as his legs collapse beneath him--you cannot possibly
imagine how horrible it is.

Dianne
(in memory of K.C., 12/23/1989 - 4/24/2002)
  #9  
Old September 8th 03, 08:25 PM
dianne marie schoenberg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Mary Healey wrote:
A sound, healthy dog without a drive in its character is useless and
possibly inconvenient, but the dog doesn't care. A dog with a lot of
working desire, whose instincts write checks its body can't cash, is
misery on 4 legs and painful to watch.


Damnit, Mary, you just made me cry.

Until you have lived through that with a dog you love, who
lives to work and keeps trying to do so through terrible pain
even as his legs collapse beneath him--you cannot possibly
imagine how horrible it is.

Dianne
(in memory of K.C., 12/23/1989 - 4/24/2002)
  #10  
Old September 8th 03, 08:51 PM
Gwen Watson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



dianne marie schoenberg wrote:

Mary Healey wrote:
A sound, healthy dog without a drive in its character is useless and
possibly inconvenient, but the dog doesn't care. A dog with a lot of
working desire, whose instincts write checks its body can't cash, is
misery on 4 legs and painful to watch.


Damnit, Mary, you just made me cry.

Until you have lived through that with a dog you love, who
lives to work and keeps trying to do so through terrible pain
even as his legs collapse beneath him--you cannot possibly
imagine how horrible it is.

Dianne
(in memory of K.C., 12/23/1989 - 4/24/2002)


Indeed. I am seeing this with Blade. Though he is in no pain.
And what he has is not known whether it is inherited or not.
But it is similar in some ways to MS. So more than likely he
will progress. So while there isn't much pain involved there
will be in high possibility of inability to walk.

Gwen


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I Got Bitten Today Deb Dog behavior 6 September 5th 03 12:33 AM
I Got Bitten Today Sionnach Dog behavior 4 August 25th 03 02:52 PM
I Got Bitten Today Leah Dog behavior 6 August 25th 03 06:27 AM
I Got Bitten Today Sionnach Dog behavior 0 August 24th 03 08:50 PM
I Got Bitten Today Leah Dog behavior 0 August 23rd 03 01:59 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0 (Unauthorized Upgrade)
Copyright ©2004-2024 DogBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.