courtnek Posted June 3, 2004 Share Posted June 3, 2004 thank you Loki, and I LOVE the sig with the "Zen" dogs.... this is my point: [quote]We [the AKC] have gotten away from what dogs were originally bred for. In some cases we have paid so much attention to form that we have lost the use of the dog.[quote] I agree with Prim that a normal housedog for most people is best. They arent going to hunt it, they arent going to field trial it...but I honestly believe that the show ring has done them damage in the genetics department. Shepherds now have sagging hips, dysplacia is common. I am not saying that the average dog owner should have a field dog (I have one, A field trialed foxhound, and it has taken a lot of work to make her "house happy") and I agree that people want "pretty" dogs, but whne you breed too closely in the gene pool, and too far away from their roots, you end up with unexpected problems. My post was meant to say that even show dogs should show some field capabilities. I think if the breeders were made to breed the dog to its original purpose, and make it as pretty as it can for show, that the dogs would be more stable. I am 47 years old. I have watched the dogs get "prettier", and the temperaments get worse. and also the extra health issues.... My first dog was a golden, bred on a farm that sold them to the Seeing Eye. and people wanting pets, of course. The breeder made sure that every dog had the capability of doing what they were originally bred for, by doing retriever tests and scenting and sight tests. It was a good mix, my Golden never gave me an ounce of trouble, except for wandering off now and then when he managed to get out. He always came back. It's a given with a scent/sight dog. They will escape and check out the great outdoors if given the chance. He was never aggressive, loved everybody, but could swim like a fish and retrieve anything. I think you can blend the two "opposites" and come up with a healthier, more stable dog. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lokipups Posted June 3, 2004 Share Posted June 3, 2004 [quote]and I LOVE the sig with the "Zen" dogs....[/quote] Thanks, and the pooches say thanks too :D . (middle pup was a foster, the two big chooches are mine :lol: ) You and I are about the same age, so I know where you're coming from with the temperment issues. And I agree that everyone wants a "normal" house dog, but what constitutes normal? I think the definition of "normal" for a dog has come to mean "complacently bland" :o , meaning breeding out every personality and working trait out of any given breed and having generations of "Stepford Dogs". Yeah, great, you've got a nice furry sofa slug that's pretty to look at, but physically falls apart way before it's really old, with a lousy temperament to boot. I'm nauseated at the American show line GSD, most of them have dyplasia before they hit 5, and for what :( . [quote]I am not saying that the average dog owner should have a field dog (I have one, A field trialed foxhound, and it has taken a lot of work to make her "house happy") [/quote] Ah, but the key word in that sentence is "work" :) , something most average pet owners neglect to do, even the most miniscule amount. We have generations of people who get a dog expecting it to be already housebroken, well mannered, and self grooming :roll: . I just finished working with a Lab, who although was bought in a petstore ( :evil: , they didn't know any better), actually came from field lines. They called me for help thinking that their dog was a headcase, but in reality he was a working bred Lab that just needed some structure and a little bit of obed. work to get him in line. He's now a happy, well adjusted pup with 30 minutes of retrieving and 15 minutes of obed. training a day. As I told them, "That wasn't so hard now, was it?". If this dog had ended up somewhere else, I would bet dollars to doughnuts that he would've ended up in a shelter, for being "out of control". You want a JRT because there's one on TV that's cute? Then be prepared to be exhausted throwing a ball to tire the prey drive in the little bugger out every day. You want a Siberian puppy, cute, fluffball of lovin'? Then be prepared to make your yard as impenetrable as Fort Knox and kiss your lawn goodbye. I guess my point is, blame the ignorance of people, not the breeds and their specific traits., and the AKC and their ilk for perpetrating the myths of breeds through showing. Ok, I'll get off my rant now :grins: :motz: , lol. Laura Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Bitch Posted June 3, 2004 Share Posted June 3, 2004 Hey Primmy, it's already been said, but if you are going to bother to post so much, why don't you join? :roll: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odnarb Posted June 3, 2004 Share Posted June 3, 2004 [quote name='Kiwi'] There is a good reason why the "downface" of today's bull terrier was created, no it wasn't for cosmetic purposes as this article suggests[/quote] That's a new one! In all honestly, that sounds like one of those really silly arguements for breeding for nonfunctional traits. Sort of like how English Bulldogs have short snouts so that they can breathe while gripping a bull, and the facial wrinkles were to drain blood away. In reality, the Bulldog of bullbaiting days had much more muzzle without the wrinkles. But, show breeders have to justify the trendy appearance. Bull Terriers haven't been used extensively for dog fighting for a long, long time. And when there were, they didn't have the extreme heads that you see today. If that were true, the roman nose would have developed on the APBT by now. But, the fighting lines of today look the same as they did over a century ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaquelineC Posted June 3, 2004 Share Posted June 3, 2004 [quote name='odnarb'][quote name='Kiwi'] There is a good reason why the "downface" of today's bull terrier was created, no it wasn't for cosmetic purposes as this article suggests[/quote] That's a new one! In all honestly, that sounds like one of those really silly arguements for breeding for nonfunctional traits. Sort of like how English Bulldogs have short snouts so that they can breathe while gripping a bull, and the facial wrinkles were to drain blood away. In reality, the Bulldog of bullbaiting days had much more muzzle without the wrinkles. But, show breeders have to justify the trendy appearance. Bull Terriers haven't been used extensively for dog fighting for a long, long time. And when there were, they didn't have the extreme heads that you see today. If that were true, the roman nose would have developed on the APBT by now. But, the fighting lines of today look the same as they did over a century ago.[/quote] Darn good post, Odnarb! All of the pics I've seen of 'old time' Bull Terriers showed a face that looked MUCH more like a cross between a BULL and a TERRIER - Not the severe downface that they have now. I still think they're cute/cool though... I think English Bulldogs can be cool too - But it's kinda sad watching them try to breath and move around. Kiwi - I think your dogs are just adorable... That puppy pic is one of the cutest I've seen! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaquelineC Posted June 3, 2004 Share Posted June 3, 2004 [quote name='K'][quote]I think English Bulldogs can be cute too - But it's kinda sad watching them try to breath and move around. [/quote] Please dont be sad...you can watch my two and be happy...they can run and jump and walk for miles....really...we do a 7km walk every day...my youngest Cymmie can keep up with my Staffs nearly all the way...she can run really fast ..she is not aerodynamic in any way but boy is she determined!..and my old guy Snoop runs with the young 'uns at the start and trots by me the rest of the way back...and they dont wheeze or snort for breath...they do snore...but so does my Saint...Dont think that all Bulldogs are badly bred overweighted breezeblocks...some of us owners actually keep them fit,active,lean,muscular and healthy...the way they were meant to be...[/quote] You're right - I should have said 'It's kinda sad watching SOME of them try to breath and move around'. I haven't seen enough of them in person to make a sweeping statement like that. Glad to hear your guys are active and happy! :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted June 3, 2004 Share Posted June 3, 2004 [quote name='odnarb'][quote name='Kiwi'] There is a good reason why the "downface" of today's bull terrier was created, no it wasn't for cosmetic purposes as this article suggests[/quote] That's a new one! [color=blue]Um no actually it's not, the book I pulled that from was written over 40 years ago. Not to nit pick or anything... Unfortunately there isn't much accurate information about the Bull Terrier's history online[/color] In all honestly, that sounds like one of those really silly arguements for breeding for nonfunctional traits. Sort of like how English Bulldogs have short snouts so that they can breathe while gripping a bull, and the facial wrinkles were to drain blood away. In reality, the Bulldog of bullbaiting days had much more muzzle without the wrinkles. But, show breeders have to justify the trendy appearance. [color=blue]I don't think it's silly at all, I can see the reasoning behind developing the downface, for a quick example look at lions and tigers. I have some neat diagrams at home stating why they believed in this - which I'll endeavour to scan in and post.[/color] Bull Terriers haven't been used extensively for dog fighting for a long, long time. [color=blue]Thank God[/color] And when there were, they didn't have the extreme heads that you see today [color=blue]No you're quite right there :wink: [/color] If that were true, the roman nose would have developed on the APBT by now. But, the fighting lines of today look the same as they did over a century ago. [color=blue]I have not seen any proof stating downface is better than a definite stop [b]or[/b] vice versa for that matter, so cannot comment on that. [/color] [/quote] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Anonymous Posted June 3, 2004 Share Posted June 3, 2004 [quote]Darn good post, Odnarb! All of the pics I've seen of 'old time' Bull Terriers showed a face that looked MUCH more like a cross between a BULL and a TERRIER - Not the severe downface that they have now. [/quote] Yep the older ones probably were bull and terriers, before the dalmatian, borzoi (probably the culprit behind the downface) and pointer and god knows what else were added :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarahstaff Posted June 4, 2004 Share Posted June 4, 2004 What I mostly have noticed about the BT skull photos in that article is that there is very little difference between the 2nd & 3rd skull. There is the underbite in the 3rd skull, and the skull is set at a different angle, but otherwise, they are the same. Seems kind of deceptive, that he attempted to make the change look more dramatic by changing the angle of the skull. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.