Theoretical Discussion: Standards

[TrishB]

Originally Posted by moondog

Hmmm...so which breed should we outcross with a Rottweiler?

For the record - I don't believe that another breed should be outcrossed with the Rottweiler. I was simply offering it as another example of how other groups deal with breed managment. Spidey offered what the Border Collie people do. I simply offered what the Quarter Horse people do.

[German Vanegas]

Originally Posted by spidey

I can certainly see both sides of this issue, though - I can see the value in maintaining breeds as they were originally intended, but I can also see that there really is no need to have, say, Pit Bulls who can fight another dog to the death these days. It's one thing to have normal variations of temperament and appearance within a breed, it's another to have entirely separate breeds within a breed, one for work, and one for show, the former is fine, the latter is almost always highly detrimental. It's a hard question, but I do think that breed clubs need to be VERY careful about considering any change to their standard, to ensure that it really is in the best interests of the breed.

Good example. Bear in mind the fact that most modern Pitbull terrier lines have bred out inter-dog aggression, however, pitbulls have standards too, albeit breeders, in their own selfish ego and "playing God," have altered some dogs making into huge out of standards pitbulls, for a personal satisfying ego trip. Therefore, a violation of the desired standards is exactly that: a transgression

[German Vanegas]

Originally Posted by damp

If I understand the meaning of the word evolution right… it’s positive and prolonged. Earlier Mother Nature took care of evolution (and surviving.) To day the humans do.

The “evolution” or destruction is mostly ruled/controlled of ignorance, politicians, lobbyists, BYB’s and money!

Evolution is good and meaningful, when/if (since the humans took over that responsibility) we have a JOINT DEFINED goal for the evolution/betterment. The defined goal is the standard.

If someone can’t handle and raise such a dog, there are hundreds of other breeds available suiting their needs (and the color of their couch!)

And I wouldn't add anything else; the above says it all clearly and factually

[German Vanegas]

Originally Posted by moondog

Hmmm...so which breed should we outcross with a Rottweiler?

Oh boy! You cracked me up! That's a good one! It's like comparing "apples with watermellons"

Originally Posted by moondog

... Are you suggesting that temperament/workability and good conformation as resources are nowhere to be found in the breed? If anything should change, it should be for breeders to actively recognize the standard; expand their minds and their goals to conform to it; test their dogs more comprehensively to ensure compliance; and strive to produce ALL the qualities of the breed as stipulated in the standard. Without losing sight of it.

If the standard is comprehensive, as it is for the Rottweiler, then all we have to do is live up to it. The division of breed characteristics into "conformation" or "temperament/workability" has nothing to do with the standard being deficient, and everything to do with the breeding being deficient. It's called tunnel vision.

I agree. You still can find ethical breeders producing the TOTAL rottweiler, THAT is a fact Jack!

[German Vanegas]

Originally Posted by TrishB

For the record - I don't believe that another breed should be outcrossed with the Rottweiler. I was simply offering it as another example of how other groups deal with breed managment. Spidey offered what the Border Collie people do. I simply offered what the Quarter Horse people do.

I see. OK, let us turn it around then. Please, you tell us: what should be done for the betterment of the Rottweiler, in disregard of the current desired standards of the breed?... Any suggestions?

[TrishB]

Originally Posted by German Vanegas

I see. OK, let us turn it around then. Please, you tell us: what should be done for the betterment of the Rottweiler, in disregard of the current desired standards of the breed?... Any suggestions?

You're missing the point of the thread German. Please read the original post again.

This is an open discussion about standards and how they impact breeds, for better or for worse.

You post an interesting question though - maybe it should be a new thread.

[Lorrie]

Originally Posted by TrishB

Although this is in horses, it applies to the discussion. In the American Quarter Horse, you can still breed an American Quarter Horse to a Thoroughbred and register it as an American Quarter Horse. Yes, it's an Appendix (1/2 and 1/2). But if you breed that horse to a Quarter Horse, it's an American Quarter Horse. Breed that horse back to a Thoroughbred and it's an American Quarter Horse (when in reality, it's 3/4 Thoroughbred).

The reason for this is that the breed is still evolving - speed is sometimes brought back into lines by breeding out to a TB. Arabians do the same thing when they outcross to Thoroughbreds as well. In essence, acknowleding and allowing these other lines to be integrated into their own for some greater purpose (i.e. speed / stamina / size in this particular case).

And it is because of this the American Quarter Horse is NOT a quarter horse anymore .. or a least you have to travel far and wide to find one that IS a quarter horse .. and has the qualities that MADE QH's what they are/were and that is not a bay Thoroughbred with AQHA papers.

I have had Quarter Horses since I was 7 years old ... HATE what they are doing to the breed .. it's a bastardization .. not a "bettering" of the breed .. in my opinion.

[LikeToRun]

Originally Posted by TrishB

This is an open discussion about standards and how they impact breeds, for better or for worse.

All right Trish, I'll bite. I believe the answer to this, as in many things, is personal responsibility.

That means that a standard, like a law, regulation, or guideline, can be an effective TOOL to provide a basis for breeding programs for Rottweilers (and other dogs, of course). But, like any tool, it is really the responsibility of the people who can, to use it.

Take the example of speed limits, almost nobody believes that the speed limit of a road is a firm "standard," more of a guideline for safety which personal responsibility can be exercised to judge which side to be on depending on the weather, traffic, etc...Since it's basically unenforcable (really, as if one radar trap really changes anything!), it's a lot like the situation Trish brings up.

Almost anybody CAN breed a dog, in fact, left to their own devices, dogs will usually breed themselves. This means that there is a lot of breeding that goes on that is not subject to show conformation proof, working title proof, or even the benefit of somebody saying "hmmm, Brutus and Xena are both nice wigglers, maybe they'd make nice puppies."

So, essentially these days, a breeding standard is almost a fiction. I realize that the best dogs are those that are purpose bred with care and research and planning, but *most* dogs don't come into the world this way.

And the folks who end up with pregnant bitches may see the standard as a speed limit that they really don't care about. The weather is fine, there's not too much traffic, go ahead, gun the engine.

What good does this do to the breed itself? None. A progressively smaller gene-pool of dogs that are generally inaccessable to the greater public adheres to standard, but the efforts taken to stay within standard (ie below the speed limit) mean that the greater dog population leaves the "standard" rotties behind. The people who would honour and respect standard dogs become fewer and fewer, as these dogs get more and more expensive, and even more and more prone to genetic issues due to the small size of their gene-pool. At the same time, puppy mills, back-yard, and accidental breeders produce dogs that are unpredictable in nature, size, and qualities, which become the true breeding stock. Most of the people who buy a rottie from a newspaper ad have no idea what the standards really are (witness, "my rottie is six months old and 150lbs!"). Nor do they really care, they got what they wanted, and they didn't have to cough up $1500 to get it.

The question becomes, do ethical breeders become the stoic guardians of a fiction? Are they to be the little old grannies who drive 40kph regardless of the weather or traffic while traffic whizzes by at 150?

Obviously, we'd all like for folks to drive at around the speed limit, give or take a bit, and for them to do that, they have to buy the guideline. It has to be real to them.

That's where personal responsibility comes in. And there's precious little of that in the world these days, if you've ever driven the 401, you know what I mean!

Is all lost? No. Breed clubs and competitive events are wonderful ways of getting people to realize what a rottie is and what they think it should be. I think Flyballmom and Spoteet are examples of amazing ambassadors for the breed in that respect, their tv exposure is priceless in fixing the image in people's minds in case they have that moment of opportunity to exercise a bit of personal responsibility with their rotts.

I'm almost done (and this is almost a digression, sorry Trish): There will always be people who want giant rotties, huge-headed rotties, bulldog-shouldered rotties, and all the other extremes, it's human nature. Personally, I like the ones on the small side of standard, they seem to have better *endurance*, which, if I had the power to change anything, is where I would encourage breeders to focus their efforts; I like to drive about 10k over the limit, weather permitting.

My five cents!

Cheers,

Trevor

[German Vanegas]

Originally Posted by TrishB

You're missing the point of the thread German. Please read the original post again.

This is an open discussion about standards and how they impact breeds, for better or for worse.

You post an interesting question though - maybe it should be a new thread.

I know how to read TrishB, well, sort of Nevertheless, the most attention-grabbing point you make in your personal quest is you saying, and I quote you literally:

TrishB stated: "There’s no right or wrong answer here – just a theoretical discussion of opinions!"

Umh! That opens the door to all kinds of absurd and illogical speculations which serve basically no good purpose, because, as you may have seen already, most people prefer to respect and adhere to the standards of the breed, clearly understanding the rationale of it and the valid principles intended by the true experts of the Rottweiler

Anyway, you didn't answer my question...

[Judi W]

This business of "adding something back in" has been done. Several years ago AKC granted special permission to the Dalmation club to attempt to correct a uric stone problem with their breed by going back to the Pointer ancestors (Pointers do not have the problem) and still register the offspring. This was a well-defined and scientifically evidence available goal. It was not successful in correcting the problem at all and merely accomplished polution of the purebred status. The solution lies conscientious selection of breeding partners and breeding stock, not in mongrelization. It takes many many generations to reestablish predictability and severe culling of the resultant offspring. It takes much less time to remove from the breeding pool of a breed that which is not desired within the breed.

[German Vanegas]

Originally Posted by LikeToRun

...What good does this do to the breed itself? None. A progressively smaller gene-pool of dogs that are generally inaccessable to the greater public adheres to standard, but the efforts taken to stay within standard (ie below the speed limit) mean that the greater dog population leaves the "standard" rotties behind. The people who would honour and respect standard dogs become fewer and fewer, as these dogs get more and more expensive, and even more and more prone to genetic issues due to the small size of their gene-pool. At the same time, puppy mills, back-yard, and accidental breeders produce dogs that are unpredictable in nature, size, and qualities, which become the true breeding stock. Most of the people who buy a rottie from a newspaper ad have no idea what the standards really are (witness, "my rottie is six months old and 150lbs!"). Nor do they really care, they got what they wanted, and they didn't have to cough up $1500 to get it...


...I'm almost done (and this is almost a digression, sorry Trish): There will always be people who want giant rotties, huge-headed rotties, bulldog-shouldered rotties, and all the other extremes, it's human nature...

This is "how to go down the sewer" with a conjectural question such as: "The real question is, are we doing those same breeds a disservice by not allowing them to ‘grow with the times’? There’s no right or wrong answer here – just a theoretical discussion of opinions!"

[German Vanegas]

Originally Posted by Judi W

The solution lies conscientious selection of breeding partners and breeding stock, not in mongrelization. It takes many many generations to reestablish predictability and severe culling of the resultant offspring. It takes much less time to remove from the breeding pool of a breed that which is not desired within the breed.

Clap! Clap! Clap! (applause with a standing ovation) Bravo! Bravo! Bravo!

[TrishB]

Originally Posted by LikeToRun

Is all lost? No. Breed clubs and competitive events are wonderful ways of getting people to realize what a rottie is and what they think it should be.

Thank you for your response Trevor!

I think you hit the nail on the head with this paragraph. The standard alone cannot (IMHO) ensure the future / adherence to it. Conformation shows, obedience trials, herding trials, schutzhund trials, etc. are what will enforce the intended vision for any breed (or their applicable sports).

A dog that simply meets the written standard hardly represents 'the breed'. I know of many that could fit within the standard that should never be considered as breeding prospects. Just as a dog that excells in only one sport doesn't mean that it is breeding prospect either.

Sadly, I think that too many people rely on only one aspect rather than all of the sport available that would PROVE the application of that standard. In a breed such as ours, we often say that there should be titles at both ends of the dogs name. The standard is only the guide, the titles from various sports to prove the all-around dog are the proof of that standard in action.

[TrishB]

Originally Posted by Lorrie

And it is because of this the American Quarter Horse is NOT a quarter horse anymore ..

I agree - watching an English class in Quarter Horses is very disappointing to me as well. These 'specialized' horses that are essentially Thoroughbreds are no more Quarter Horses than my domestic cats are. Quarter Horses are supposed to be the worlds most versitile breed! Put one of these spindly legged 17hh horses in a pen to cut cattle and they'll either climb into the rafters or break down due to lack of muscle, cow sense, strength and / or ability. The standard in the Quarter Horse now is laughable.

I don't approve of they way they've managed the breed - but it was an option that they put into place.

What other approaches have you heard of for 'breed management'?

[German Vanegas]

Originally Posted by TrishB

Sadly, I think that too many people rely on only one aspect rather than all of the sport available that would PROVE the application of that standard. In a breed such as ours, we often say that there should be titles at both ends of the dogs name. The standard is only the guide, the titles are the proof of that standard in action.

Well actually the Rottweiler breed belongs to the working group, therefore, proof of the standard in action is WORK ABILITY (which can be titled too) and not just competing in game events; also, it is quite wrong to consider a temperament assessment, such as CGC or a TT, as a working title or working capable