# Info about Dog Shows



## emily445455 (Apr 8, 2008)

To me, dog shows seem to be beauty pagents for dogs instead of humans. Ugly people can't be in beauty pagents, and ugly dogs (mutts, different colored dogs, whatever) can't be in dog shows. 

Are dog shows more than just a beauty pagent? If so, how?

Thanks


----------



## Shalva (Mar 23, 2007)

emily445455 said:


> To me, dog shows seem to be beauty pagents for dogs instead of humans. Ugly people can't be in beauty pagents, and ugly dogs (mutts, different colored dogs, whatever) can't be in dog shows.
> 
> Are dog shows more than just a beauty pagent? If so, how?
> 
> Thanks


maybe someone else has time to go into this, but I do think that there are lots of threads that discuss this very issue if you did a search..... I might have time later to discuss the intricacies of dog shows.... but suffice it to say that it is not simply a beauty contest..... 

however, doing a search on this might bring you some threads that can answer this for you. 
s


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

The idea behind showing is this:

Each breed was bred for a reason. This reason could be hunting, herding, or even companionship. 

Form follows function as many people point out, so for each job there would be an ideal build that would be most suitable for the job or the breed founders. This is what is called the breed standard which describes how the ideal of each breed should look. 

Take two breeds that perform basically the same task- a papillon and a cavalier king charles spaniel. Both bred for companionship, both toy spaniels, yet two distinct breeds. Each one has a standard that the ideal specimen would conform to (hence the name conformation). 

In a conformation show, each dog is supposed to be judged against the standard. It is a way for breeders to assess the physical look, build, and type of their bloodlines and thus can be a tool for a breeder to evaluate breeding stock. It is important to remember it is only ONE tool.

A dog is not judged against other dogs, but against the standard. It is entirely possible and correct for a less flashy, less 'pretty' dog to place over flashy incorrect dogs.

Also, remember those dog shows you see on TV are the biggest ones. They are not the best representation of your average show breeder.

Conformation ONLY addresses the physical aspect of a dog, not its ability or health so it is vital a breeder not only breed for conformation but keep the total animal in mind. When people breed solely for a ribbon, that's when big problems arise. Some fads in the ring are detrimental to the breed. 

Breed splits happen often in breeds where breeders take a breed in several different directions. In split breeds conformation lines can look totally different than working lines or sporting lines. Take labs... bench labs look a lot different than a hunting bred dog or trial bred dog. Or border collies as well. Bench border collies are bred primarily for looks whereas working ones are bred for solely herding and looks don't matter. To complicate things more most breeds don't have simple working/showing splits but rather lots of different splits within each group. Or you get group three like with border collies who focus on dog sports like agility or flyball. those dogs will be totally different than the bench or the herding dogs. 

Splits occur in many breeds, but it is important to remember not all. Some breeds are companion breeds and thus don't have a working type. Some breeds' original jobs are extinct and are no longer needed for those jobs. In some other breeds still it is not uncommon to find breeders that both show and work their dogs. Each breed would be a very different scenario.

Showing itself can vary depending on the club. American Pit Bull Terriers are shown both UKC and ADBA, for example. (More complicated still you could add that the Am Staff is UKC and AKC) AKC is the 'main' organization in the US, but not the only one. UKC is another showing venue that is a little more laid back. Again depends on the breed for what type of showing is appropriate.

That's all I got for now, maybe someone else can add on?


----------



## emily445455 (Apr 8, 2008)

So dog shows are about how the dog looks and how healthy it is within it's breed? Still sounds like a beauty pagent to me


----------



## Sharon R. (Jul 7, 2007)

Go to a show sometime and talk to some of the exhibitors. These are people who truly love and care about their dogs. Most (I will not say all) are extremely responsible dog owners, and in many cases, breeders. These are NOT the people who will indiscrimantly let their dogs breed to any other dog that happens along. These are NOT the people who dump their dogs at the shelter because they can't be bothered with training them. These are NOT the people who are responsible for the homeless dog population in this country.

My dog is beautiful, has the championship to prove it, but he also has brains and the ability to perform the task that he was originally bred to do -- and yes, he is doing that task!!


----------



## emily445455 (Apr 8, 2008)

Sharon R. said:


> Go to a show sometime and talk to some of the exhibitors. These are people who truly love and care about their dogs. Most (I will not say all) are extremely responsible dog owners, and in many cases, breeders. These are NOT the people who will indiscrimantly let their dogs breed to any other dog that happens along. These are NOT the people who dump their dogs at the shelter because they can't be bothered with training them. These are NOT the people who are responsible for the homeless dog population in this country.
> 
> My dog is beautiful, has the championship to prove it, but he also has brains and the ability to perform the task that he was originally bred to do -- and yes, he is doing that task!!


I don't doubt the people who show their dogs love their dogs very much. The trainer we go to shows her lab, she loves him very much.


----------



## kelliope (Apr 4, 2008)

Dog shows are more than beauty pagents. 

They show the health, temperment, conformation of a dog. Also, you will not see plastic surgery and implants in dog show dogs!


----------



## emily445455 (Apr 8, 2008)

kelliope said:


> Also, you will not see plastic surgery and implants in dog show dogs!


LOL that's true!!


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

Emily,

you could be my best friend.

btw, i would think that the higher a dog goes in the competition, the more "abuse" the dog is subject to.

oinest was sent to me as a pup on a plane...i would not want to put him through that again, if i could help it.

many of these dogs need to travel round-trip at least once a year.

and i wonder how much time they need to spend in crates.

and don't get me started on the dogs with the fancy long haircuts.

i'm sure there are some dogs that like the attention of a grooming...
but the long, extensive procedures that the the top dogs must go through...no normal dog would like that.

and is it possible that these long-haired beauties at the top of the competition are really allowed to get down and dirty, like a healthy dog would be allowed?
it would take a very special owner to be sensitive to that.

personally, i think the whole thing is for the owners...their own prestige and enjoyment.

i can see it being fun on a local level, for dog and owner...after that, the corruption and bribing of judges must be rampant.

and the way the people in the audience look, in their tuxedos and gowns for a DOG show...it borders on the absurd.

that spoof movie...Best in Show...i would bet it is not too far from the truth.
------------------

oh yeah, and in my opinion, a major cause of people getting dogs from pet stores (ie. puppy mill dogs), and not a shelter, is because the dog show gives people a focus on the cuteness of a breed look.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

emily445455 said:


> So dog shows are about how the dog looks and how healthy it is within it's breed? Still sounds like a beauty pagent to me


No, it's about how physically correct the dog is. You don't want to produce unsound dogs. These specifications have reasons for being in place. 

Things that are specified are things like gait. How does a dog cover its ground? What kind of movement is correct? Papillons are to be efficient movers, high stepping is a fault you often see. It'll specify proportions and angulation which once again has to do with function. Even some things in some breeds like markings can have reasoning. Like Dalmatians... blue eyes are allowed in AKC but not preferred. That is because blue eyes are often linked to both eye problems and deafness.

A beautiful dog could be totally wrong for its breed. Breeders are trying to maintain what they feel is correct for their breed whatever venue they breed for.

If you want a purebred, you want a dog that looks and acts a certain way It makes them different from a mutt, they have predictable features. If you breed a purebred with these not in mind, you quickly move away from this almost to the point where that purebred doesn't even look like the breed it is supposed to be. Then what is the point of a purebred dog if it does not look or act a certain way or if it is not able to perform a certain function? 

Now, I am not saying that all ring fads are about soundness and function and sometimes they get ridiculous. This is all theory and ideals.

A goal of a breeder is to breed an ideal- the best dog. A dog that is sound, healthy, with the appropriate temperament, can do its original job, and is conformationally correct. Once again, conformation is a small part, not all. 

You absolutely HAVE to have some sort of restrictions on a breeding program. There are way too many dogs produced these days.

Here is an example of why phyiscal guidelines are important:










Same breed, similar age, both males... one is pet bred, and the other a show dog. When you have no reasoning behind a breeding, dogs quickly move away from what the breed is supposed to be both in type and in temperament. I this case, the pet bred dog is twice the size that is correct.



dog-man said:


> Emily,
> 
> you could be my best friend.
> 
> btw, i would think that the higher a dog goes in the competition, the more "abuse" the dog is subject to.


'I would like to think' is not a good indication of actual knowledge on the subject.



> and i wonder how much time they need to spend in crates.


Yes, they spend time in crates. Go to any dog event and dogs will be crated, tied, chained, whatever to keep them confined. You will see this at herding dog trials, hunting trials, sledding, racing, showing, agility, obedience, whatever. It happens. The show dogs do not live in the crates, but they are kept crated at times. 



> and don't get me started on the dogs with the fancy long haircuts.
> 
> i'm sure there are some dogs that like the attention of a grooming...
> but the long, extensive procedures that the the top dogs must go through...no normal dog would like that.


Hey, my dogs don't need clipping. I'm sure no normal dog would like to be taken to the groomer's and clipped like beloved Oinest.



> and is it possible that these long-haired beauties at the top of the competition are really allowed to get down and dirty, like a healthy dog would be allowed?
> it would take a very special owner to be sensitive to that.


Hmm....










Yep, he still runs around and rolls in the mud like other dogs. He also poops, plays, etc you name it like any other dog.










Ain't it amazing what a bath can do?



> personally, i think the whole thing is for the owners...their own prestige and enjoyment.


Most things are for our enjoyment. Everything is selfish, then. We domesticated dogs for ourselves to make life easier for us. 

Besides that my dog absolutely LOVED showing. He was a ham in the ring. Every show, he'd have a blast. He always assumed all the people came to see him. He thought it was a job and a game and he enjoyed it.



> i can see it being fun on a local level, for dog and owner...after that, the corruption and bribing of judges must be rampant.


It is fun, though not as fun as agility or other sports imo.

Judges are trained to judge each breed. National breed clubs host seminars on this.



> and the way the people in the audience look, in their tuxedos and gowns for a DOG show...it borders on the absurd.


You've never been to an actual dog show, have you? the one's on tv are NOT how they usually run. Many of ours are outside or in arenas or hotels. I tend to wear jeans and a t-shirt to them.



> that spoof movie...Best in Show...i would bet it is not too far from the truth.
> ------------------


Most dog show people find that movie hilarious.



> oh yeah, and in my opinion, a major cause of people getting dogs from pet stores (ie. puppy mill dogs), and not a shelter, is because the dog show gives people a focus on the cuteness of a breed look.


LOL, that makes no sense. People get dogs from pet stores because it's easy and they want to.

The truth of the matter if as simply put is this, yes there are bad people in every sport who abuse dogs. No, most show dogs are NOT mistreated in any way shape or form even if the way they're kept is not the way you'd keep your dog. In the simplest form, an unhappy dog does not show well. An unhappy dog does not win. These dogs are fed and fed well, they are cleaner than most people come show time. they are exercised and kept in good condition and yes, they are happy. If they were not, they wouldn't run around a ring smiling. You can't force a dog to do that.

My show dog is a family member first and foremost.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> My show dog is a family member first and foremost.


well, your dogs don't need the ridiculous long haircuts of some breeds...and i would doubt that you are at the very top of the competition.

i do believe the more local the competition is, the more down to earth fun it can be to all.

Laurelin, i'm curious why did you not comment on the bribery issue?

and i have had the suffering issue of the flying and crating confirmed to me by someone in the know....and it just makes plain sense anyway...how could it be avoided.

anyway, don't take it personally...i think you're on of the normal and thoughtful showdog advocates.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

dog-man said:


> well, your dogs don't need the ridiculous long haircuts of some breeds...and i would doubt that you are at the very top of the competition.


Not the very top, but I have used a well renowned handler before. My dog wasn't top 10 or anything, but he did VERY well and beat out a lot of the top kennels at a specialty. (proud mama syndrome here)



> Laurelin, i'm curious why did you not comment on the bribery issue?


I didn't see it? 

Corruption happens but if caught will be punished. Corruption is in any sport and conformation is no exception. Any dog sport you participate in will have its politics.



> and i have had the suffering issue of the flying and crating confirmed to me by someone in the know....and it just makes plain sense anyway...how could it be avoided.


Our dogs never flew, they rode in a car. Yes, they were crated.

I'll say again, though that an unhappy dog doesn't preform well in anything. People always go on about how dogs in certain sports are not kept the way that they'd see fit. Because someone does something with their dog that you do not, or because someone confines their dogs differently than you, opts to have or not have different surgeries performed on their animals, does not feed the same as you, etc and I could go on, does not mean the dog is abused or suffering. Your ideal is not going to be right for every dog and owner out there. 

Abuse happens in dog shows, it is far far far from the norm.


----------



## Pai (Apr 23, 2008)

emily445455 said:


> So dog shows are about how the dog looks and how healthy it is within it's breed? Still sounds like a beauty pagent to me


There are also Agility Competitions, Canine Good Citizen tests, Shutzhund Trials (police dog-style training courses), Obedience Trials, Earthdog Trials (underground tunnel exercises for terriers) and Field Trials (like herding) that dogs can participate in. Many of these give 'titles' and ribbons just like Conformation Shows do. There are many different ways you can compete with your dog besides Conformation ('beauty pageant') shows.

There are bad/selfish people in EVERY hobby. Dog shows are no different. But you can't be negative about ALL people and all dog shows.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Here's some of just a little of what goes on at a dog show. If you have never been, I'd invite you to try to go so you can see for yourself what goes on.










I'm guessing they're miserably crated? I dunno, the zoi looks pretty comfy to me. Anyways, two dogs between showing.



















Lots of hugs.









Some goofing off as well


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

I guess no one has been to a dog show for mutts? They do exist ya know. Or have seen the ugly dog contest on Animal Planet? Well, here's your punishment!









People who don't understand the purpose of dog shows will not likely understand it any more than I'll understand ugly dog contests.


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

emily445455 said:


> To me, dog shows seem to be beauty pagents for dogs instead of humans. Ugly people can't be in beauty pagents, and ugly dogs (mutts, different colored dogs, whatever) can't be in dog shows.
> 
> Are dog shows more than just a beauty pagent? If so, how?
> 
> Thanks


 Excuse me???? A dog show is based on the dog against the standard of the breed. How it looks, how it moves, how it is built, how the temperment is, - Obviously you do not understand dog shows at all but opportunity is there for you to learn by going to shows. People that under rate dog shows are usually uninformed about the breeds etc.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Dog-man asked about keeping the really coated breeds hair nice looking. Here's how:









Snoods for afghans.









Wrapping the poodle's ears









And him just because he has a lot of hair


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

emily445455 said:


> I don't doubt the people who show their dogs love their dogs very much. ...


 Good God almighty- you have GOT TO BE kidding!


----------



## Shalva (Mar 23, 2007)

borzoimom said:


> Good God almighty- you have GOT TO BE kidding!


just take a deep breath and move on...... just move on and don't think about it


----------



## kelliope (Apr 4, 2008)

Umm...she was saying that she DOESN'T doubt that people who show their dogs love them very much. Not that people who show their dogs don't love them.

I don't disagree with dog-man and others that sometimes when animals get to the higher showing levels, sometimes the animal is second to winning. Not true of everyone of course, but I've seen it. It's true of equestrian sports too. Horses not allowed to be horses - that kind of thing.

It's not an unreasonable point of view.

That said, there's many a backyard dog or horse that would love to have the care and attention provided many of the show dogs and horses. It can be far worse on the other end, imo.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

kelliope said:


> Umm...she was saying that she DOESN'T doubt that people who show their dogs love them very much. Not that people who show their dogs don't love them.
> 
> I don't disagree with dog-man and others that sometimes when animals get to the higher showing levels, sometimes the animal is second to winning. Not true of everyone of course, but I've seen it. It's true of equestrian sports too. Horses not allowed to be horses - that kind of thing.
> 
> It's not an unreasonable point of view.


It happens, but it happens in any animal sport you'll find. There are bad apples in anything.



kelliope said:


> That said, there's many a backyard dog or horse that would love to have the care and attention provided many of the show dogs and horses. It can be far worse on the other end, imo.


I saw you added this, and I agree. Most show dogs are treated very well. How many pet dogs just sit around all day in a crate or empty yard and do nothing and their owners really don't do much with them?


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

kelliope said:


> Umm...she was saying that she DOESN'T doubt that people who show their dogs love them very much. Not that people who show their dogs don't love them.
> 
> I don't disagree with dog-man and others that sometimes when animals get to the higher showing levels, sometimes the animal is second to winning. Not true of everyone of course, but I've seen it. It's true of equestrian sports too. Horses not allowed to be horses - that kind of thing.
> 
> ...


 Well obviously you or dogman have not met real dog show people. The devotion to their breed, the time and effort, training etc it takes to make a champion. After all - a dog with HD etc can not move right so make sure your breeding lines are clear of it.. Cant have a thyroid problem or you get a dry coat so make sure clear of that.. Quite frankly your opinion seems to be based on lack of experience in showing. AND for your information, if anything a show dog is sooooooo well socialized and pampered with the best of care to show in the ring as represented.. And yes you are right- may all the dogs in the world be treated as a show dog- well fit physically, well cared for in diet and coat, well socialized to accept all situations, well trained to perform well..


----------



## wabanafcr (Jun 28, 2007)

Let's see here, here are some of my poor abused show dogs:

Champion Bibby, who is a group-placing, National Specialty Award of Merit-winning, sired by a Best In Show/Multiple Best in Specialty Show dog. Poor thing is obviously treated like a hothouse flower:









Cakey, who will enter the show ring this year. I've spent years working to get her coat to look "just so."









And poor Champion Viggo, who never ever gets to have any fun:









Just a few of my abused show dogs. And I know Shalva's live just as rough a life--including her top-winning girl, Meghan.

Are there show people that abuse their dogs? Absolutely. Do some dogs have to go through a lot to be shown? Yep. But a dog in pain or an abused dog will never show well. The dogs that are the top-winners love what they are doing. Bibby thinks the show ring is a tremendous place to be--food, admiration, petting, applause--what more is there?? She loves the whole game.

Dog show does not automatically equal "oh, the poor thing, what a terrible life." The vast majority of dog show folks that I know would put their dogs' welfare above any ribbon or trophy or award. I know hundreds of dog show people on two continents and can count the number that would risk their dog's health and happiness for a win on one hand, with some fingers left over.


----------



## Shalva (Mar 23, 2007)

dog-man said:


> well, your dogs don't need the ridiculous long haircuts of some breeds...and i would doubt that you are at the very top of the competition.


ok lets talk about showdogs.... and how laurelin can't possibly be at the top of competition because her dogs are pets and are allowed to get dirty.... 

let me introduce my meghan 
a bitch with over 80 breed wins, including supported entries. 

here is Meghan at Westminster in 2004, and she was at the top of her breed









licking people as they walked by..... 









One of her multiple group wins









and here she is at home.....


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

ROFLMBO! YOU tell 'em.. lol..


----------



## Shalva (Mar 23, 2007)

so here is a dog AT THE TOP of her game...... who is still a pet and still a top winning dog who still plays in the fields and chases ducks.... and gets covered in burdocks....... and is probably better cared for and loved than most


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

( calls the humane society.. roflmbo..)


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

This is the face of the abused show dog:










I mean, he doesn't look happy at all, rofl.


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

and Zubin- soooooooooooo stressed out..


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

Strauss and Ranger feel the same way after a show!









From working dog









To happy family pet









Show dog









To down time

Tell me that my dogs are abused show dogs  They're happy to disagree with you ^_^


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

This is only half of the equation. An important half, but not THE most important half.

It's the stuff that happens at home that matters the most to us. What happens in the ring is just a bonus


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

Did this just turn into a picture thread?

Here is my current show dog and show dog in training relaxing after a hard day of fetch. Have to work those muscles. Last thing we want is a fat show do.


----------



## animalcraker (Nov 9, 2006)

dog-man said:


> oinest was sent to me as a pup on a plane...i would not want to put him through that again, if i could help it.
> 
> many of these dogs need to travel round-trip at least once a year.


Oinest did not do well on the plane because he was a young puppy, probly between 8-12 weeks old, much too young for plane travel IMO. He had just been plucked away from everything that he knew to be shoved onto a scary plane for who knows how long only to be greeted by people he didn't know and go toa home he wasn't familiar with. 

The show dogs that do fly are accompanied by handlers that they know, or are picked up by peole they know. Heck a few even have their own personal planes to fly on whenever and wherever needed. That being said most show dogs do not need to fly. My calendar is full of back to back dog shows for 5 months straight that are within less than an hour to my home, most are within a few minutes. Those dogs that travel futher distances usually ride in motor homes that cost more than the average house, just go to a dog show, you'll see motor homes with more pop outs than a swiss army knife.



dog-man said:


> i can see it being fun on a local level, for dog and owner...after that, the corruption and bribing of judges must be rampant.


Anyone caught attempting to buy off judges or judges accpeting bribes get kicked out of AKC for life, and I'm sure it's a similar punishment for the other clubs as well. Judges that don't judge fairly don't last very long in the show world. Judges that are deemed as less than decent are imedietly put on owners personal "do not show" lists. If people don't enter under certain judges, then those judges won't be invited back to judge. the Clubs hosting the shows make thier money off of entry fees, if no one enters they don't make money. It's not profitable for them to hire a judge that no one will show under. 



dog-man said:


> and the way the people in the audience look, in their tuxedos and gowns for a DOG show...it borders on the absurd.


You clearly have never been to a dog show. Before you start subjecting us to your uneducated opinions it might be best gain some first hand knowledge on the subject. I've been to the national a couple times and have yet to see anyone in the audience whereing a tux or gown, what sort of shows have you been to?


----------



## Shalva (Mar 23, 2007)

oh Gee 
Yeah I wear gowns all the time..... to bathe my dogs and lets see what else do I do in my evening gown...... 
lolol 
shoot one of the reasons I became a professor was so I never had to dress up again..... are you kidding...... once again like animalcracker says you clearly have only ever seen a big show on television..... why not go to a real one and really learn what is going on before you spout off.... 

Flying: 
I don't generally fly and as such my dogs don't fly..... we also generally don't send them away with a handler..... Kaelyn went with a well trusted handler once because I was headed to Thunder Bay the handler was on the way.... and we wanted to get her finished so we dropped her off and picked her up on the way back..... she lived in his house for the week.... 

My dogs don't fly.....my husband and I cart them around and they stay in the hotel room with us..... they are very well travelled and very well behaved in the room..... but they are used to being in hotel rooms 


what other myths to you have about dog showing that I can burst.... because it seems you have bought right into them.... 

oh and one more thing..... I NEVER EVER EVER ship a puppy..... this past summer when I had my litters I had two pups going to minnesota from NH and the owners drove to my house picked them up and drove home..... I never ship a puppy. 
s


----------



## emily445455 (Apr 8, 2008)

Ok question...Looking at the pictures of the Dobermans... Why do certain breeds have to have things cropped to be in shows? I mean, it can't feel good, and if people love their animals why do they let them be hurt like this? (no offense, but IMO it's useless pain)

If I get a doberman I will make sure he/she is not cropped. I saw a pic of one who had big floppy ears and a long tail, she was so cute, lol


----------



## Shalva (Mar 23, 2007)

emily445455 said:


> Ok question...Looking at the pictures of the Dobermans... Why do certain breeds have to have things cropped to be in shows? I mean, it can't feel good, and if people love their animals why do they let them be hurt like this? (no offense, but IMO it's useless pain)
> 
> If I get a doberman I will make sure he/she is not cropped. I saw a pic of one who had big floppy ears and a long tail, she was so cute, lol



Boy Emily you have lots of opinions on things you clearly know little about ..... and once again, I am not sure why you are deliberately posting things that you know will upset many people especially when the issue of cropping and docking has been discussed to death..... to be honest these two posts seem quite incendiary..... and for no other purpose.... 

I would suggest you do a search on cropping and docking.... there are many different opinions about the issue 

and of course if you ever got a doberman it would be your perogative to not crop or dock...... 

To imply that people who do crop and dock do not love their dogs..... well that is just foolish and somewhat immature.... while I personally would not do it I would not mistake others who do continue the practice for not loving their dogs.... 

to be honest I think you are just trying to dig up old dirt.
s


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

The original reason for ear cropping and tail docking was to by tax reason identify the dog as a working dog- ie farm help etc. In other words- this would insure the dog was not " taxed" like a luxury item so to speak. 
ONe of the top dobes in the country does not have cropped ears. ( sorry- I forgot his name) but he was featured recently in the breed show about the doberman. Both ear sets are accepted by the AKC. In Europe they do not crop the ears. ( this also includes danes, bouvier, all the schnauzers, boxers etc)

Another reason for maintaining the tradtion of cropped ears is to crop the ear so that it can not torn in the line of work the dog was doing at the time. ( fighting boar etc.)



Shalva said:


> Boy Emily you have lots of opinions on things you clearly know little about ..... and once again, I am not sure why you are deliberately posting things that you know will upset many people especially when the issue of cropping and docking has been discussed to death..... to be honest these two posts seem quite incendiary..... and for no other purpose....
> 
> I would suggest you do a search on cropping and docking.... there are many different opinions about the issue
> 
> ...


 Yea I am beginning to wonder myself. At first I was trying to give benefit of the doubt that the OP clearly did not know a thing about showing. ( ie lets try to educate" ) but clearly its moving the other direction.. 
BTW- who ever mentioned about long gowns really has not even seen the biggest dog show in the world- " Crufts".. Not only are they are not wearing gowns and tux;s, most of them look like they came right off the fields.. lol. Westminster- the largest US show is dressed up, but even then- its such an honor to be invited as they only take the top 25 dogs of each breed. Its purely an invitational based on the top winning champions in each breed. How can you show a dog if you can not move the dog at the speed to show movement? ROFLMBO- can you just see this?? " pardon me judge but I cant run in my long gown- can you run the dog for me???? ( dying of laughter..)


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

Thanks Shalva and Borzoimom for the help with the cropping and docking issue. Whether you are against or not I could care less, but no one can tell me I don't love or care about my dogs. They get the best life I can offer, and part of that life includes showing. Ollie started going to shows when she was only 3 ½ months old. She’s never been in the ring, but she is still a little show dog if nothing else. She prances in just waiting to be let loss on a judge.

Emily here is a link to a cropping and docking thread I started awhile back. While to really make an opinion you need to do your own research, this will at least get you started on realizing there are multiple sides to every issue. 

http://www.dogforums.com/2-general-dog-forum/15265-cropping-docking.html

And here is a link to the AKC event search. Search for a show in your area and make note of with superintendent is hosting the show. If you go to that superintendent’s website, you can get a judging program that will give you the times for each breed. 

http://www.akc.org/events/search/

Dog-man I suggest you try the site as well. It's kinda funny when you realize how many shows were happening right under your nose. And you living in NY, I bet that’s the case. If anything going to a show could prove all of your points, and then you will have more kindling for the fire.


----------



## emily445455 (Apr 8, 2008)

I figured it was something done in the past for good reasons...but I just don't get it. Thanks for the thread Dob. So if both ear types are acceptable by the AKC, why do people still do it? Seems like it would hurt....a lot.


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

Emily one thing that might be interesting to note is that Dobermans that are NOT cropped are harder to place through rescue then individuals that are. People that want that breed of dog want the dog to look the standard. In the US the majority of them are still docked and cropped. All but one of the dogs that I have had have been dockedbut have natural ears (as the standard calls for in Rotties) I have to say. I for one really appreciate the docked tail. I have also witnessed the procedure many times and I can say... Sure doesn't appear painful. No screaming and bleeding all over like some folks would like to believe. It is done by 3-4 days of age and their nerve endings are undeveloped. Not much reaction at all in the cases I have seen anyway. I have not owned a dog with cropped ears yet as my Doberman had natural ears as well. If I were to adopt another one, I would like the cropped ears, though I probably would not do it if they were not done.

Oh, I just wanted to add. Don't you think that there are much bigger issues to worry about in the dog world? I mean if a person crops their dogs ears and then proceeds to give the dog 12-15 years of excellent care and love How is that a bad thing? There are abuses of all kind happening every day in the pet world. Lack of exercise and mental stimulation. At least dogs that are going to shows are getting that. They are also in most cases getting the best possible diets, grooming, attention. These are all things that so many "pets" do not get enough of. There are some really nasty show people but I think the majority of them are people who love their dogs, their breeds and enjoy spending time with their dogs training, grooming, exercising and then yes, showing them off to the world. Think about how many "pets" do not even get the basics. How many dogs are not fed regularly or exercised beyond letting them out to potty. No mental stimulation at all. I believe there is good and bad in every sport/activity out there.


----------



## emily445455 (Apr 8, 2008)

Inga said:


> Emily one thing that might be interesting to note is that Dobermans that are NOT cropped are harder to place through rescue then individuals that are. People that want that breed of dog want the dog to look the standard. In the US the majority of them are still docked and cropped. All but one of the dogs that I have had have been docked natural ears (as the standard calls for in Rotties) I have to say. I for one really appreciate the docked tail. I have also witnessed the procedure many times and I can say... Sure doesn't appear painful. No screaming and bleeding all over like some folks would like to believe. It is done by 3-4 days of age and their nerve endings are undeveloped. Not much reaction at all in the cases I have seen anyway. I have not owned a dog with cropped ears yet as my Doberman had natural ears as well. If I were to adopt another one, I would like the cropped ears, though I probably would not do it if they were not done.



I see what you're saying.  Maybe people should just be less picky?


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

While we are talking about cropping, my pet peeve is the dew claws. When removed at 3 days old prior to the pain sensor in a puppy, its easy. I have had a few ( usually rescues) that still have their dew claws, and honestly- and some time or another it gets torn. Causing not only pain, but enough blood to coat a floor.. 
and your answer to cropping- the part of the ear that is cropped is the lowest in " pain sensors" of any part of the ear. Its done outside the pain sensor ( forgot the name of the nerve). Done properly by a vet that knows what the heck they are doing, the ears heal quickly. I know you do not understand the process OP, but if you are really interested- ask your vet.. ( if your vet knows what they are doing....) 
( looking for my picture of my two dogs - now rainbow bridge- Dixie and Shane.. brb.. )



emily445455 said:


> I see what you're saying.  Maybe people should just be less picky?


 Okay- what are you trying to do here???? Exactly what is your purpose here??


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

Yes, maybe, or maybe people that like natural ears and tails should get breeds that have those features as the standard. I think we should praise the heck out of people who spend quality time with their breeds of choice regardless of the weather we personally like features of those breeds. There are so many people out there that provide mediocre care at best of their dogs and more that don't even meet the basic needs. I guess for me, ears and tails that are professionally and humanely docked/cropped ranks really low on my list of concerns. I guess that is from all my years of being out in the field working in a rescue setting. Seeing such horrific abuses on animals tends to shift ones perspectives on important things to concern myself with.


----------



## emily445455 (Apr 8, 2008)

borzoimom said:


> Okay- what are you trying to do here???? Exactly what is your purpose here??


I just meant when adopting animals from a shelter. A perfect doberman shouldn't be rejected just because it "doesn't look right" or whatever. 

After reading on the side Dob gave me, I'm thinking I don't like it normally...but if it will be working it should be done. I'd rather it be cut off than snagged off by a brach or another animal. But cosmetically, I don't see the point. 

I really wasn't trying to start anything, sorry if it came off that way


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

OP- docking is usually done at 3 days ie prior to the pain sensors in a pup. However- there is also a condition called " happy tail". this is when the dog is always hitting things with their tail, making it raw ( like goldens or labs etc). Even though the tail looks raw, the dog is not in pain with the tail- whyyyyyyy you say- because the pain sensors in the tail after the 3rd disc starts to shorten. While dogs have their tails docked as puppies before the pain sensor kicks in, it is possible to dock a dogs tail for medical reasons later in life.. 
Now- let me see if your you saying what you are saying- you hate mutts, but bash pure breds- sooooooooooo I guess you are a cat person..


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

emily445455 said:


> I figured it was something done in the past for good reasons...but I just don't get it. Thanks for the thread Dob. So if both ear types are acceptable by the AKC, why do people still do it? Seems like it would hurt....a lot.


From a conformation standpoint, Dobermans are a profile breed. They are judged by their lines and angles. When I dog has natural ears, it shortens the look of the neck. This ruins the profile, makes the dog look like they are out of standard. 

For me, a cropped dog is just how I view dobermans. The cropped look upholds what the breed is supposed to be, a true working dog. 

And the pain is really not as bad as everyone seems to think. They are still the same puppies as they were before the surgery. They will cry out though if they hit the ears on something. But I've never seen a puppy that looked to be in overall discomfort. They are still running around, playing, and rough housing. And the ears are healed enough for stiches to come out in less than a week. Within two weeks, you would never know the ears had surgery.

I also have to add. I am a little confused how a thread about dog shows turned into one about croppind and docking.


----------



## emily445455 (Apr 8, 2008)

borzoimom said:


> OP- docking is usually done at 3 days ie prior to the pain sensors in a pup. However- there is also a condition called " happy tail". this is when the dog is always hitting things with their tail, making it raw ( like goldens or labs etc). Even though the tail looks raw, the dog is not in pain with the tail- whyyyyyyy you say- because the pain sensors in the tail after the 3rd disc starts to shorten. While dogs have their tails docked as puppies before the pain sensor kicks in, it is possible to dock a dogs tail for medical reasons later in life..
> Now- let me see if your you saying what you are saying- you hate mutts, but bash pure breds- sooooooooooo I guess you are a cat person..


Was this for me? I don't know what OP means.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

borzoimom said:


> Now- let me see if your you saying what you are saying- you hate mutts, but bash pure breds- sooooooooooo I guess you are a cat person..


That would be hard since most cats are mutts. Is it still a mutt if it's not a dog? Or just mixed?


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

DobManiac said:


> I also have to add. I am a little confused how a thread about dog shows turned into one about croppind and docking.


I'm confused, too! 

ETA: Think of showing and cropping like this.... People crop these dogs all the time whether they show or not. The dobes and other cropped breeds at the petstore are all cropped, as are many pets, and with pit bulls we see very poorly done home crops. At the least, the show people are getting good doctors to crop ears and are maintaining them so much better than the guy wanting a 'scary' looking dog. How many pets do you see with pockets in their ears, scabby ears, infections, etc? How many show dogs do you see with those things?


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

emily445455 said:


> Was this for me? I don't know what OP means.


 Yes I mean you- OP means - original poster... You bash mutts then bash pure breds..

Its alright laurelin- the OP doesnt know what she is talking about either.. Or what she wants to talk about for that matter.. and all us show people are just running around in our long gowns bribing judges.. ROFLMBO


----------



## loratliff (Feb 7, 2008)

Geez, the people bashing dog shows have obviously never been to a horse show. I've shown Hunter/Jumper show horses on a national level for 15 years now... you want to talk about politics, bribery and abuse, go learn about the horse show world.

The bottom line is that it happens in EVERY sport - football, basketball, dog shows, horse shows, tennis, baseball, etc. Anything involving competition, really.

Sounds like you all also need to go to a "real" dog show, not the ones you see on TV. Think of Westminster as the Oscars of the dog show world and then it makes a lot more sense why people are wearing gowns and tuxedos.


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

Been in " real dog shows" since I was 8 years old- that is a little over 40 years..


----------



## applesmom (Jun 9, 2007)

Attention all show dog owners! Don't miss this great opportunity.

If any of you would be interested in purchasing a huge secret list of bribable judges which also includes their individual fee schedules for the regular classes, BOB, group and BIS bribes, feel free to send me a pm.

Of course by offering a judge a bribe your AKC privileges may be suspended for life. But what the heck, you'd still have dozens of other pet registries to fall back on so all your years of hard work and sacrifice wouldn't be totally wasted. 

In addition, my complete dog show wardrobe of evening gowns is also available at a nominal cost! You'll have to supply your own dogs though!


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

Roflmbo Applesmom ! Lollllllll


----------



## loratliff (Feb 7, 2008)

borzoimom said:


> Been in " real dog shows" since I was 8 years old- that is a little over 40 years..


Borzoimom, my post was not directed toward you. It was directed toward the people who believe that all dog shows are beauty pageants with people wandering around in tuxedos and gowns.


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

loratliff said:


> Borzoimom, my post was not directed toward you. It was directed toward the people who believe that all dog shows are beauty pageants with people wandering around in tuxedos and gowns.


 Uh why dont I have a long gown except for my wedding dress.. Jeez- I would love it.. Why are all my jackets have plastic for treats- why are all my " outfits" polyester so dog hair doesnt stick to it.. and why are my shoes flat .. ( uhhhhhhh duh so I can run on uneven ground in horse fields with gopher holes..)..


----------



## Pai (Apr 23, 2008)

People pierce their baby's ears, which hurts too. Are they bad parents?

Sure, crop/docking is largely cosmetic nowadays. But it's not too terribly different than all the kind of painful things we do for 'beauty' ourselves, really.


----------



## emily445455 (Apr 8, 2008)

borzoimom said:


> Yes I mean you- OP means - original poster... You bash mutts then bash pure breds..


When did I bash either of them? All I said was I don't approve of croping and docking for purely cosmetic reasons. I almost adopted a mutt, and bought a purebred...I'm not bashing either of them...


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

we are done with this- do your research- go to dog shows- then we will talk..


----------



## emily445455 (Apr 8, 2008)

I read most of the posts on the thread Dob gave me on croping and docking, and I posted my opinion above...that I don't care for it for cosmetic reasons, but for medical/safety reasons it's fine. I don't think I could ever go to a dog show...aren't they expensive? I'm not as against those now. 

I still don't understand where I bashed dogs.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

emily445455 said:


> I read most of the posts on the thread Dob gave me on croping and docking, and I posted my opinion above...that I don't care for it for cosmetic reasons, but for medical/safety reasons it's fine. I don't think I could ever go to a dog show...aren't they expensive? I'm not as against those now.
> 
> I still don't understand where I bashed dogs.


Some dog shows are absolutely free to get in. Others may cost a bit... $20 or so. Well, the large tv ones would be more. 

If you go to one make sure you go to one with more than one event.


----------



## emily445455 (Apr 8, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> Some dog shows are absolutely free to get in. Others may cost a bit... $20 or so. Well, the large tv ones would be more.
> 
> If you go to one make sure you go to one with more than one event.


I may go to one sometime...it's not very high on my list of things to do right now.  Maybe after I graduate.


----------



## Shalva (Mar 23, 2007)

emily445455 said:


> I read most of the posts on the thread Dob gave me on croping and docking, and I posted my opinion above...that I don't care for it for cosmetic reasons, but for medical/safety reasons it's fine. I don't think I could ever go to a dog show...aren't they expensive? I'm not as against those now.
> 
> I still don't understand where I bashed dogs.


Emily some of us have seen you on other forums and know your modus operandi and the asking questions and making statements about things you don't know anything about just to start debates and arguments..... 

you subtley bashed people throughout this thread and made implications about how people cared for or loved their dogs........ 

and in the first one when people responded to your comments about show dogs...yet you clearly say that they arent high on your list of things to do but you have all kinds of opinions... and you didn't get the reaction you wanted you started another incendiary comment in the same thread..... 

like I said it seems like you don't want to learn ...... just start a debate and get people riled up..... and some of us have seen you do exactly the same thing at other forums...... 

so mind us if we dont play your game...... 

s


----------



## emily445455 (Apr 8, 2008)

I said above that I don't really mind shows much now that I've read things on this thread, now that I know the dogs are well taken care of and not property that is abused. I've also said that after reading the posts on the thread Dob gave me I understand cropping and docking better now, and although I am not thrilled about it, I can understand how it could be very useful if they are working. *After going back and reading it, my first post on cropping and docking was out of line, and I apologize for typeing it, I wasn't thinking. * *I realize there are some who don't love their dogs, but no one here I am sure. It was rude and inaccurate for me to say and I am apologizing.* You can rube it in if you'd like, lol.

What other forums are we on together?  I'm on quite a few...sometimes I can't keep them straight, lol.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

Laurelin said:


> Some dog shows are absolutely free to get in. Others may cost a bit... $20 or so. Well, the large tv ones would be more.
> 
> If you go to one make sure you go to one with more than one event.


Do dog shows really charge? I've only been to about 15, so it's very possible I just missed it. I can understand the tv shows costing a fee, but not the normal ones. I figured they got all of their money off of entry fees.


----------



## FriendsOfZoe (Aug 7, 2007)

DobManiac said:


> Do dog shows really charge? I've only been to about 15, so it's very possible I just missed it. I can understand the tv shows costing a fee, but not the normal ones. I figured they got all of their money off of entry fees.


The Bay Colony Dog show in Boston charged 20 to get in...there was a discount for going multiple days too. But that is somewhat of an extreme, as renting a space that big actually in the city of Boston that will permit that many dogs in one place has got to be phenomenally expensive.

I found it very informative, and I only went for a few hours one day and didn't really talk to many breeders or anything...just to see actual breed rings being judged and not just seeing westminster or crufts on tv really helped me to learn a lot about shows. And I got to meet and see some truly special, gorgeous dogs.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

FriendsOfZoe said:


> The Bay Colony Dog show in Boston charged 20 to get in...there was a discount for going multiple days too. But that is somewhat of an extreme, as renting a space that big actually in the city of Boston that will permit that many dogs in one place has got to be phenomenally expensive.
> 
> I found it very informative, and I only went for a few hours one day and didn't really talk to many breeders or anything...just to see actual breed rings being judged and not just seeing westminster or crufts on tv really helped me to learn a lot about shows. And I got to meet and see some truly special, gorgeous dogs.


Thanks, I think I probably haven't noticed since I'm always on owner at the show, never a visitor. I really had no idea they charged. I also wonder if that is a northern thing. Stuff is always cheaper in Texas. LOL


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

DobManiac said:


> Do dog shows really charge? I've only been to about 15, so it's very possible I just missed it. I can understand the tv shows costing a fee, but not the normal ones. I figured they got all of their money off of entry fees.


They do. Most I go to as a spectator charge $10-20. Those are larger shows. OKC charges 20 I think...

Some are free and those are usually the outdoor ones or smaller ones. Midwest city was the most lax. It was free and we even smuggled a puppy Beau in (okay, not a good plan but the breeder wanted to get some evaluations on him from handlers and breed people)


----------



## applesmom (Jun 9, 2007)

The only fees I've run into so far are parking fees and those fees were collected by the property owners--not the show giving club. 

When I was secretary of the local GSP club we didn't put on specialty shows with intentions of making a huge profit. Many times we were lucky to break even and a few times we cleared a couple hundred dollars after expenses. The profit we did make was on the sale of catalogs and that was only because we printed our own. One of our board members owned a print shop and only charged for the supplies he used.

The only ones that really make a profit on dog shows put on by small local clubs are the superintendents or show secretaries and the vendors. The vendors are the true winners financially.

The club usually pays for the show site, ribbons and Judges expenses and most of the trophies are donated by club members or supporters. Most of the help at dog shows such as the ring stewards and pooper scoopers are volunteers.

I'd imagine that at shows such as Westminster it's a completely different story.

ETA there is an all breed cluster here that's held at the civic center downtown. The last I heard they did charge a $7.00 spectator fee and parking was another expense since the only available parking was in parking garages.


----------



## Shalva (Mar 23, 2007)

Most shows that I have been to are free to exhibitors but some have a fee to park..... the inside shows are hteo nes that most often charge some of the outside shows are free or a minimal charge..... $5 or $8 
I have never seen a show except for the big televised show charge much more than that. 
s


----------



## sillylilykitty (Mar 11, 2007)

I have been to dog shows in Hawaii and here in Colorado and I have never had to pay to get in. I went to a specialty show for Shar Pei's in Washington and we didnt have to pay to get into that either.

I love dog shows, but they love intact dogs too much and dont like neutered dogs enough. I personally have a problem with them not having a class for spayed and neutered dogs. I know there are people who disagree with me (which I will never understand exactly why) here.


----------



## applesmom (Jun 9, 2007)

sillylilykitty said:


> I have been to dog shows in Hawaii and here in Colorado and I have never had to pay to get in. I went to a specialty show for Shar Pei's in Washington and we didnt have to pay to get into that either.
> 
> I love dog shows, but they love intact dogs too much and dont like neutered dogs enough. I personally have a problem with them not having a class for spayed and neutered dogs. I know there are people who disagree with me (which I will never understand exactly why) here.


The Veterans classes do allow spayed or neutered dogs to enter.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

Laurelin said:


> They do. Most I go to as a spectator charge $10-20. Those are larger shows. OKC charges 20 I think...
> 
> Some are free and those are usually the outdoor ones or smaller ones. Midwest city was the most lax. It was free and we even smuggled a puppy Beau in (okay, not a good plan but the breeder wanted to get some evaluations on him from handlers and breed people)


I'll just have to start paying more attention. I'm going to a couple of large shows in July; I plan on checking this out. Does the Fort Worth show charge? They were really watching the door, and I noticed they tend to have a lot more rules than the average show.

Oh, I snuck Ollie into 4 or 5 shows. She never went ring side; I would put her in a crate at my breeders set up. We would walk in quickly and leave quickly. But my breeder wanted to see how she was maturing, and she would generally work Ollie a little bit. She also reposts Ollie's ears every time I go to a show. She is an ear posting guru.


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

PKC show was $5.00 to get in and $2.00 to park. Not bad at all.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

DobManiac said:


> I'll just have to start paying more attention. I'm going to a couple of large shows in July; I plan on checking this out. Does the Fort Worth show charge? They were really watching the door, and I noticed they tend to have a lot more rules than the average show.
> 
> Oh, I snuck Ollie into 4 or 5 shows. She never went ring side; I would put her in a crate at my breeders set up. We would walk in quickly and leave quickly. But my breeder wanted to see how she was maturing, and she would generally work Ollie a little bit. She also reposts Ollie's ears every time I go to a show. She is an ear posting guru.


Lol, when we decided to try Beau with a handler, we began meeting them and watching them show. So we brought him in the Dallas show through a guarded back entrance. We were waiting to be stopped so we could explain and tell them who we were meeting but since we were carrying a dog on a show lead, a kennel and a bunch of dog stuff they didn't even stop us! 

Then I was waiting, leaning against the wall with Beau on the ground and this judge came over and started talking to me about how nice my dog was! I was totally not much into showing back then so I just smiled and nodded.

I've never been to the Ft Worth show actually.  We always end up at something else on the same day.


----------



## sillylilykitty (Mar 11, 2007)

applesmom said:


> The Veterans classes do allow spayed or neutered dogs to enter.


YAY! Thats good news. I heard people can show a rescued dog, is this possible if the dog did not have AKC papers?


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

Laurelin said:


> Lol, when we decided to try Beau with a handler, we began meeting them and watching them show. So we brought him in the Dallas show through a guarded back entrance. We were waiting to be stopped so we could explain and tell them who we were meeting but since we were carrying a dog on a show lead, a kennel and a bunch of dog stuff they didn't even stop us!
> 
> Then I was waiting, leaning against the wall with Beau on the ground and this judge came over and started talking to me about how nice my dog was! I was totally not much into showing back then so I just smiled and nodded.
> 
> I've never been to the Ft Worth show actually.  We always end up at something else on the same day.


That happen to me with Ollie once. I let her sit ringside with me and watch best in show while we waited for the puppy match to start. Once they finished the judge came out and said what a nice looking puppy she was. But half the time a wonder if they say that just because she's little.LOL She was only 4 months at the time. I'll believe it a lot more once she isn't so puppish.


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

sillylilykitty said:


> YAY! Thats good news. I heard people can show a rescued dog, is this possible if the dog did not have AKC papers?



SLK Purebred dogs without papers can apply for an ILP and they can show in obedience, rally, agility etc.... NOT conformation.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

i find it curious that people respond to my posts by making believe i said something else.

does anyone think that when i made fun of the grooming needs of "long-haired" dogs that i meant golden retrievers, german shepherds or even paillons?

i was referring to the breeds that have the hair down to the floor, or or who have elaborate grooming needs, such as poodles.
i would be surprised if those dogs were allowed to get dirty on a regular basis.

as well, the few national dog shows i peek at for a for minutes, before i start to puke, do have lots of pretension guys in the audience in tuxedos.

and yes, if your dog travels more than once a year across the country by plane, i think it to be abuse.

i also said i can see the fun for owner and dog on a relatively local level...it is probably somewhat casual;
so why do people show me the local shows.

maybe there was one national picture....and a golden, who doesn't need the extensive grooming i complain about.


----------



## Darkmoon (Mar 12, 2007)

My goodness Dog_man, do you do anything besides complain?

I can't wait for the UKC shows just outside of town. I never knew about them until last year. $5 to park and thats it. I LOVED it. I would love to get into showing in the future when I have the finances to do so and maybe breed even


----------



## applesmom (Jun 9, 2007)

I'd love to hear the rationale on why you consider it dog abuse for a dog to travel a few hours in an airplane, sleep contendedly in it's crate during the trip and be greeted by loving arms when it arrives at it's destination.


----------



## Dakota Spirit (Jul 31, 2007)

dog-man said:


> i find it curious that people respond to my posts by making believe i said something else.


Don't know where you're pulling this from...but there is absolutely no need for anyone to 'make believe' your words. You do a fine job posting arguable comments are your own.



> does anyone think that when i made fun of the grooming needs of "long-haired" dogs that i meant golden retrievers, german shepherds or even paillons?


Well, considering those are all long-haired breeds, what do you expect people to think? Or are the exempt because they happen to be a Golden or GSD?



> i was referring to the breeds that have the hair down to the floor, or or who have elaborate grooming needs, such as poodles.
> i would be surprised if those dogs were allowed to get dirty on a regular basis.


Oh, you mean the Poodle coat originally developed to aid the dog's in their original purpose? That coat? Or were you speaking of Flat Coats, Irish Setters, Gordan Setters, or any of the other numerous long coated hunting breeds? Hell, even some of the herding breeds have extravagant coats - but the bottom line is they were all parts of the dog's original purpose. Those are the coats they are BORN with, not something that is dolled up purely for the idea of having a 'pretty dog'.

Did you look at Shalva's pictures? These people don't keep their dogs in glass boxes. They act and live like normal animals (Yes, just as your Oinest) minus the fact that they spend a bit of time in the ring now and again. How about you stop making assumptions or guesses and actually do a bit of research before posting?



> as well, the few national dog shows i peek at for a for minutes, before i start to puke, do have lots of pretension guys in the audience in tuxedos.


Again, as mentioned - those are the NATIONALS. It's like going to the Emmy's or the Oscars. Big big shows. They are rare and the only occasions in which the spectators dress formally.



> and yes, if your dog travels more than once a year across the country by plane, i think it to be abuse.


This doesn't really merit comment, but for the sake of everyone...do just a _bit_ of research. Comments such as this only make one look ignorant 



> maybe there was one national picture....and a golden, who doesn't need the extensive grooming i complain about.


What does this sentence even mean?


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

dog-man said:


> i find it curious that people respond to my posts by making believe i said something else.
> 
> does anyone think that when i made fun of the grooming needs of "long-haired" dogs that i meant golden retrievers, german shepherds or even paillons?


I was unaware that I had a shorthaired dog. Maybe if you mean one thing, you should say one thing instead of saying another.



> i was referring to the breeds that have the hair down to the floor, or or who have elaborate grooming needs, such as poodles.
> i would be surprised if those dogs were allowed to get dirty on a regular basis.


Someone I know that shows Bedlies (yeah you know who, Xeph) said it took her two hours to groom a dog on show day. I know she does more with her dogs than that. Maybe I should pester her for some everyday dog pictures...

I suppose it'd be better if these breeds weren't groomed so 'elaborately' and allowed to mat like many pet dogs are? These dogs are really groomed up for shows and yes, special precaution is taken to ensure their coat is as good as possible.

For example, Beau is a sable papillon. Sables have drier hair than other paps so you have to really work to grow ear fringe. You cannot touch it and it must be cleaned for the show ring. Oils will cause it to break. You also have to watch to make sure other dogs don't rip it out while playing. (Papillons go for the ears) 

Showing:










Immediately post showing:










Normally:










His poor ears *sigh*

Our handler showed a lhasa and yes, it's a lot of grooming and the dog is kept absolutely clean at the show. 



> as well, the few national dog shows i peek at for a for minutes, before i start to puke, do have lots of pretension guys in the audience in tuxedos.


Those are televised dog shows. There are hundreds of other non-televised shows out there. So... one for every few hundred is indicative now?



> and yes, if your dog travels more than once a year across the country by plane, i think it to be abuse.


Arbitrary numbers are always good. 



> i also said i can see the fun for owner and dog on a relatively local level...it is probably somewhat casual;
> so why do people show me the local shows.


Some of those aren't small local shows, they're big shows. the one I posted was several thousand entries. It's one of the biggest shows in the area. 

Believe it or not, the 'big shows' are not very many and most people who show don't go to them.

There are not 'levels' in dog shows really. Size will be different, and some shows like eukanuba require invites, but once again... those are not the norm.

I personally love how you ignore the norm to make your point.

maybe there was one national picture....and a golden, who doesn't need the extensive grooming i complain about.[/QUOTE]


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

dog-man said:


> i find it curious that people respond to my posts by making believe i said something else.
> 
> does anyone think that when i made fun of the grooming needs of "long-haired" dogs that i meant golden retrievers, german shepherds or even paillons?
> 
> ...


Dog-man, once again I am going to suggest for you to attend a dog show.

But don't forget to rent a tux first. I would hate for you to stand out like a sore thumb.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

DobManiac said:


> Dog-man, once again I am going to suggest for you to attend a dog show.
> 
> But don't forget to rent a tux first. I would hate for you to stand out like a sore thumb.


ROFL!!!!!!


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

DobManiac said:


> But don't forget to rent a tux first. I would hate for you to stand out like a sore thumb.


And your bubble.


----------



## kelliope (Apr 4, 2008)

borzoimom said:


> Well obviously you or dogman have not met real dog show people. The devotion to their breed, the time and effort, training etc it takes to make a champion. After all - a dog with HD etc can not move right so make sure your breeding lines are clear of it.. Cant have a thyroid problem or you get a dry coat so make sure clear of that.. Quite frankly your opinion seems to be based on lack of experience in showing. AND for your information, if anything a show dog is sooooooo well socialized and pampered with the best of care to show in the ring as represented.. And yes you are right- may all the dogs in the world be treated as a show dog- well fit physically, well cared for in diet and coat, well socialized to accept all situations, well trained to perform well..


You know you don't need to be rude. I actually was raised showing dogs. St. Bernards. And I have been to many dog shows. One of my favorites (though not always a favorite of the dog owners) was the benched show at the Cow Palace in San Francisco. 

In addition I have a very good friend who shows and raises corgis. She actually travels quite a bit showing her dogs.

So please don't assume I don't know what I'm talking about. And please read my post carefully. I stated that I have seen some instances where the dog's best interest was placed second, imo, to winning. I also said this isn't true of everyone and that many a backyard dog would love to have the care and attention most show dogs have.

Some of the attacks and sarcastic "oh here's a photo of my poor abused show dog" posts are a bit over the top.

Edited to add: As a matter of fact, I am still very interested in dog showing. I show my horses also. And when someone asks why we do the things we do or if showing is cruel to the horses, I take the time to explain and educate (as Laurelin did in some of her posts).


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

DobManiac said:


> Dog-man, once again I am going to suggest for you to attend a dog show.
> 
> But don't forget to rent a tux first. I would hate for you to stand out like a sore thumb.


 ( almost spits out morning coffee on the computer screen..) lol can you just see that??? lol 
As far as travel- well I hope you were not planning on taking your dog on trips with you on vacation, or going camping, or what the heck- do not even put the dog in the car at all like to go to the vets.. ( or the park..). And while we are at it- throw the crates out you have in your home.. After all being crated was stated as abuse.. Don't brush your dog and keep the coat clean. Oh to heck with it- do not even look for breeders with dogs free of genetic defects like HD etc- after all- if it doesnt have to move in a ring in front of a judge- who cares the dog the lame or moves like a duck or hops like a rabbit... And besides- with a unsocialized dog that never goes anyway, matted up coat thats dirty, has no clue what a crate is or other dogs are like, never attended any training classes etc, and hops like a rabbit because of HD- why would you want to take a dog like that anyway. ( probably bite someone anyway from fear aggression... ) Oh yea- you convinced me- it would be alot to just leaves my dogs at home in that type of condition, then spend so much time ( and lets not forget money for expenses to travel)- oh yea- .. ( gives up trying to show...)


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

I haven't attended a dog show, so I won't make assumptions based on a movie parody ("Best in Show.")

I imagine there are instances of winning placed above the best interest of the dog. It would be naive to assume that this never happens, considering the number of parents who place winning in sports above the best interests of their own children.

But based on what I have observed, because I've known a few top show dogs and their owners, I would rather be a show dog than the typical family pet. I like to travel, stay in the best hotels, get lots of attention and the best possible nutrition and medical care. I'd like somebody maintaining my ideal weight for me.

And, most of all, I'd like to remain intact (if you don't mind.)


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

applesmom said:


> I'd love to hear the rationale on why you consider it dog abuse for a dog to travel a few hours in an airplane, sleep contendedly in it's crate during the trip and be greeted by loving arms when it arrives at it's destination.


if a dog travels from California to NY or vice versa, or something similar, don't tell me it is only a few hours and sleeping contentedly in it's crate.

the dog has to be place in the animal cargo before the flight, and it all adds up to a significant amount of time, and not a relaxed atmosphere.

i'm sorry that this quote wasn't clear enough of what sort of dogs i was referring to; note the words FANCY, EXTENSIVE PROCEDURES:

_and don't get me started on the dogs with the fancy long haircuts.

i'm sure there are some dogs that like the attention of a grooming...
but the long, extensive procedures that the the top dogs must go through...no normal dog would like that._
------------------

but let's see if some of you can ADDRESS the issue, instead of picking on words.

the little dogs who have hair practically (or actually) dragging on the floor, and the dogs like poodles that have the elaborate haircuts.

if these dogs are at the top of the nationals, do you think they are given the proper doggie opportunity to play normal and get dirty?
i consider it abuse if the owners do prevent them from this normal behavior.

and don't tell me that their pampering is way better off than an abused dog...that is so irrelevant.

oh, and cut the BS about this being the the poodle's original "working" haircut...it is such an exaggerated form of the original cut, that the point is ridiculous.

if you could ask any of these top dogs: would you rather be under the dryer, or chasing squirrels in the woods, i think i know the answer.


----------



## Shalva (Mar 23, 2007)

dog-man said:


> if you could ask any of these top dogs: would you rather be under the dryer, or chasing squirrels in the woods, i think i know the answer.



Coming from a guy whose dog lives in a house, in a crate/on leash in the suburbs..... 

s


----------



## Rowdy (Sep 2, 2007)

dog-man said:


> if you could ask any of these top dogs: would you rather be under the dryer, or chasing squirrels in the woods, i think i know the answer.


I think that part of your mistake here is that you're assuming it's an either/or proposition, that the primped up show dogs never get to run and play. That's where you're wrong. They're still dogs. They still get to run and play. Playing and showing are not mutally exclusive.

You really need to go to a show and see the dogs and talk to the breeders and handlers. Then you'll have a better idea of what it's really like.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

This is what I honestly cannot understand....

Why in the world someone would focus on this 'abuse' when you could go to a shelter and see dogs that are starved and ACTUALLY abused. 

I never understand why most pet people who buy these dogs with floor long coats insist on clipping them short. It's different choices about grooming... neither dog is abused. Either way these are breeds that are going to see the groomer's more often than others.

These dogs are cared for and WELL cared for beyond your typical dog. They are well fed, well conditioned, well socialized, and for the most part _happy_ animals. Yet because you don't like the competition they are in you'd rather rail against their owners than dogs that actually need intervention?

Any sport as RonE has mentioned will have people put winning above the competitors. 



> And, most of all, I'd like to remain intact (if you don't mind.)


rofl!


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

All of you are forgetting that dog-man has allergies, so he can't go to a dog show. 

He had the same problem on a soft-ball forum. He made claims like, all softball players do is drink beer and act hostile. Here's what happened when he tried to make amends... 





Now, do you really want him to attend a dog show?


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

dog-man said:


> if you could ask any of these top dogs: would you rather be under the dryer, or chasing squirrels in the woods, i think i know the answer.


Since its practical that all dogs live freely in meadows full of flowers and rainbows where they can romp and play all day long with no cares in the world....

are you serious?

NO ONE here can give their dog the absolute ideal lifestyle. No one spends 24/7 letting their dog play offleash. The hard fact is that dogs that have to adjust (which is every dog) to certain lifestyles can be very happy. There are dogs living in apartments who are happy. Dogs who are *gasp* chained part of the time who are happy... Just because a dog's lifestyle does not fit _your_ ideal does not mean it is an unhappy dog that is not allowed to be a dog.

Honestly, what you can do is take a look at a dog. Does is have food, water, socialization, medical attention, grooming, etc? If its needs are met well then who can call one lifestyle abuse and the other not?


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

Curbside Prophet said:


> All of you are forgetting that dog-man has allergies, so he can't go to a dog show.
> 
> He had the same problem on a soft-ball forum. He made claims like, all softball players do is drink beer and act hostile. Here's what happened when he tried to make amends...
> 
> Now, do you really want him to attend a dog show?


CP, I think I love you.

Oh, wait. That’s Dog-mans quote for anyone in a blue moon that agrees with him.

Dog-man I really don't know how we are supposed to take you seriously when all of your points are assumptions about what you think might be occurring at dog shows. Nothing you have said is based on facts or even experience. You just saw a dog show on TV and decided to add that your hit list of things to protests. 

And I still don’t get how someone who would ship a 2 month old puppy on a plane for 3 hours, has a problem with mature dogs that are used to stressful environments riding in a plane. It just doesn't make sense.

As for as the long hair issue, most of the dogs with hair trailing on the ground are toy breeds. Most people with toy breeds don't even let those dogs outside let alone teach them how to behave. So sorry to say, would take a Yorkshire Terrier who is well behaved and loved, over one that is treated like a cat any day of the week.


----------



## Dakota Spirit (Jul 31, 2007)

What's ridicules really, is that your entire post is full of things you would 'consider' abuse. Things you've never seen or have experience in being as you've only ever watched National shows on TV. Basically, once again you are making completely baseless statements.

...and I get the whole "I've got allergies" issue, but I find it somewhat interesting that you can never go out in the wide world and actually experience these things you seem to have such opinions on, for one reason or another - be it allergies, lack of time, etc. -shrugs-


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

Well I would like to know with all these ' allergies how he is able to properly exercise his dog.. And if the allergies are only " to dogs" and not other things like pollens etc ( and never heard of only one allergen either..) as dogs age their dander changes as well. So- if only allergic to dogs and that is why he cant go to a show- or allergies so pollens etc- how does he take out his own dog that might get these " allergens" in the coat.


----------



## kelliope (Apr 4, 2008)

RonE said:


> I haven't attended a dog show, so I won't make assumptions based on a movie parody ("Best in Show.")
> 
> I imagine there are instances of winning placed above the best interest of the dog. It would be naive to assume that this never happens, considering the number of parents who place winning in sports above the best interests of their own children.
> 
> ...




Now that is a post I can agree with!


----------



## petstar (Dec 7, 2007)

I don't even see the point in arguing with DogMan on issues like this...He's never been to a show, has only seen "minutes" of the televised nationals, has limited "dog" experience, seems a little out of touch with reality and can't base any of his arguments around real facts...only assumptions and other people's opinions (from internet articles that he's read). 

It's the equivalent of me trying to argue with a rocket scientist...I know NOTHING about it. I could read some articles...but I've never been in a lab, never seen an experiment and although I might visit some forums...I'll never acquire the experience and knowledge of the professionals from basing ignorant opinions on assumptions and ignorance.

and I'm LOL at the hypocrisy...(It's not alright for adult show dogs to travel by air when they are experienced and used to the situation) but it is ok to subject a young, frightened puppy because Dog man wanted a "sweet" little pup (that he'd never met)...Better yet...I can't count the number of times that Dog man has claimed his dog came from a "reputable" breeder but no reputable breeder would ship their puppy to someone with little to no dog experience having not ever met them.


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

petstar said:


> I don't even see the point in arguing with DogMan on issues like this......Better yet...I can't count the number of times that Dog man has claimed his dog came from a "reputable" breeder but no reputable breeder would ship their puppy to someone with little to no dog experience having not ever met them.


 Yup! Totally!


----------



## Pai (Apr 23, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> I never understand why most pet people who buy these dogs with floor long coats insist on clipping them short. It's different choices about grooming... neither dog is abused. Either way these are breeds that are going to see the groomer's more often than others.


I never got that either... if you're going to buy a Maltese or Shi Tzu, why cut it so it doesn't even _look _like one anymore? So strange... if you have having to groom a dog, then don't get one that requires a lot of grooming to look nice! =P


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

Shalva said:


> Coming from a guy whose dog lives in a house, in a crate/on leash in the suburbs.....
> 
> s


what are you talking about? Ernie has not been in a crate since he was a small pup.
and i have no idea what you are implying about a leash or suburbs.



Rowdy said:


> I think that part of your mistake here is that you're assuming it's an either/or proposition, that the primped up show dogs never get to run and play. That's where you're wrong. They're still dogs. They still get to run and play. Playing and showing are not mutally exclusive.
> 
> .


i have no problem with a dog having a secondary interest, such as English literature or participating in dog shows, as long as his owner make his doggy fun primary.

i find it difficult to believe that the toy breeds and Poodles with elaborate or ridiculously long haircuts (at the top of the game) get the dirty playing every dog has a right to.



Laurelin said:


> This is what I honestly cannot understand....
> 
> Why in the world someone would focus on this 'abuse' when you could go to a shelter and see dogs that are starved and ACTUALLY abused.


excuse me, but my main focus IS the dogs who suffer and die in shelters every day.

that doesn't mean lesser forms of abuse are fine.

and as i mentioned earlier, i believe the reason the daddy who buys his little girl a purebred from the petstore, rather than rescue a dog from the shelter, is because dog shows glorify the beauty and cute look of dogs.
i see dog shows as a large part of the overall problem.



DobManiac said:


> As for as the long hair issue, most of the dogs with hair trailing on the ground are toy breeds. Most people with toy breeds don't even let those dogs outside let alone teach them how to behave. So sorry to say, would take a Yorkshire Terrier who is well behaved and loved, over one that is treated like a cat any day of the week.


i have no idea what point you are trying to make.

if someone loves their dog, they would not give them a hairstyle that impedes the owner from letting them play like a dog.

what does it matter what even stupider people do?



petstar said:


> and I'm LOL at the hypocrisy...(It's not alright for adult show dogs to travel by air when they are experienced and used to the situation) but it is ok to subject a young, frightened puppy because Dog man wanted a "sweet" little pup (that he'd never met)...Better yet...I can't count the number of times that Dog man has claimed his dog came from a "reputable" breeder but no reputable breeder would ship their puppy to someone with little to no dog experience having not ever met them.


your manner of taking things out of context and twisting words is quite interesting.

find me one quote that i said Oinest came from what YOU would call a reputable breeder.
i said i thought she was a good and caring breeder, and still think so.
However, she does sell dogs for a living, and does ship them.

she used Alaska Airlines, that specializes in handling dogs, and in my case, shipped her dog to a family that has given her pup a wonderful life.


actually, Oinest did very well on the flight, despite that he was put on the plane at 6 am and was not released to me until 6pm.

i first fell for the little guy, the way he came out of the crate, the tail wagging and ready to play.

nevertheless, i would not want to put him through that again unnecessarily.

i probably would not do that again with a next puppy...i don't see how it can be hypocrisy, based on what i did at a time of inexperience....sheesh.

--------
so far, i haven't seen any good responses about the stupidity of dogs with their hair dragging on the floor.
anything for the dog show, i suppose.

that's also why it's ok that bulldogs can't breathe and the majority of them have hip displaysia...anything to maintain their "cute" look for the show...no true concern for the health of the animal.



Curbside Prophet said:


> All of you are forgetting that dog-man has allergies, so he can't go to a dog show.


the main reason i wouldn't go to a dog show is that Oinest would probably not be allowed to meet and greet.

why would i abandon him for a day?

btw, i had a woman customer whose cat won a major national cat show.
she made the characters on BEST IN SHOW seem like well-adjusted folks.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

dog-man said:


> and as i mentioned earlier, i believe the reason the daddy who buys his little girl a purebred from the petstore, rather than rescue a dog from the shelter, is because dog shows glorify the beauty and cute look of dogs.
> i see dog shows as a large part of the overall problem.


And the daddy who buys a designer dog from the petstore?

Both those people are falling for trends and dog shows really have little to do with it. I won't lie and say it doesn't make a difference- since Kirby won BIS at Westminster, papillons have more than doubled in popularity, but there are a lot of factors to this. 

About hair cuts...

And about the hair thing, I belong to a small dog forum where a bunch of people show yorkies, and they do things like.... *gasp* agility. I can't post pictures here because they're not mine.

I know a bedlington terrier person that does all sorts of things with her dogs and a bearded collie owner who does a lot as well.

All those dog breeds have extensive grooming for show requirements. 

But whatever, you can keep railing against things you have no knowledge about.


----------



## 4dogs3cats (Dec 21, 2007)

RonE said:


> I haven't attended a dog show, so I won't make assumptions based on a movie parody ("Best in Show.")
> 
> I imagine there are instances of winning placed above the best interest of the dog. It would be naive to assume that this never happens, considering the number of parents who place winning in sports above the best interests of their own children.
> 
> ...


haha


http://images.google.com/imgres?img...+dog+playing&start=20&ndsp=20&um=1&hl=en&sa=N

dogman scroll down about half way and read the part that says:


> Just cause a dog is a show dog doesn't mean it can't be a dog!


Oh and


> Pantone Poodles is our home, not a kennel. Poodles are part of the family, live in the house and are spoilt pets first and foremost.
> 
> We live in the Central Highlands of Tasmania in the country surrounded by cow pastures and bush where wallabies, kookaburras, cockatoos and other native animals roam. It's an ideal place to raise happy poodles.


I dont know- they seem miserable to me...


----------



## kelliope (Apr 4, 2008)

Well, dog-man, I agree with you about some things pertaining to showing. Mainly that I don't agree with some of the "improving the breed" fads that are actually causing the breed some health problems. 

Also, I assume you are referring to Yorkies and Maltese? For the people who say why get the breed and then not keep it's hair the way it was intended - that is odd. Most people don't get a breed because of hair. They get a breed (or should anyway) because of temperment, exercise requirements, lifestyle. There is nothing wrong with an adult Maltese with a puppy cut. In fact, if the dog weren't showing, I would think it preferable.

Dog-man, I do know many a dog show person who really loves their dogs and take excellent care of them. Including letting them play and be dogs. They aren't all treated as hothouse flowers. 

I just wish some of the extreme trends in certain breeds would disappear.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

dog-man said:


> what are you talking about? Ernie has not been in a crate since he was a small pup.
> and i have no idea what you are implying about a leash or suburbs.


Ummm, who is Ernie?


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

DobManiac said:


> Ummm, who is Ernie?


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Omg, Summer did NOT like that video!


----------



## 4dogs3cats (Dec 21, 2007)

I cant see it cuz Im at work and youtube is blocked here, but I bet its funnyyyyy


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

Laurelin said:


> Omg, Summer did NOT like that video!


It woke Dusk up from his slumber. At first he just groaned really loud, but after the 5th beep he'd had enough. Walked out of the room with an attitude. I better go apologize know. Last thing I need is a pissed of doberman in my house.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

DobManiac said:


> Ummm, who is Ernie?


Ernie is his official name, and is still often called that by the family...he is also known as Ernie to the outside world.

however, within the family, Ernie became Ernest, and then Oinest.
that is what we primarily call him.



kelliope said:


> Well, dog-man, I agree with you about some things pertaining to showing. Mainly that I don't agree with some of the "improving the breed" fads that are actually causing the breed some health problems.
> 
> Also, I assume you are referring to Yorkies and Maltese? For the people who say why get the breed and then not keep it's hair the way it was intended - that is odd. Most people don't get a breed because of hair. They get a breed (or should anyway) because of temperment, exercise requirements, lifestyle. There is nothing wrong with an adult Maltese with a puppy cut. In fact, if the dog weren't showing, I would think it preferable.
> 
> ...


well said, i am always happy to see another person who sees the truth of the emporer's new clothes.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

DobManiac said:


> It woke Dusk up from his slumber. At first he just groaned really loud, but after the 5th beep he'd had enough. Walked out of the room with an attitude. I better go apologize know. Last thing I need is a pissed of doberman in my house.


Summer was on my bed and sat up right away, growling at my computer.


----------



## 4dogs3cats (Dec 21, 2007)

dog-man said:


> Ernie is his official name, and is still often called that by the family...he is also known as Ernie to the outside world.
> 
> however, within the family, Ernie became Ernest, and then Oinest.
> that is what we primarily call him.
> ...


When everyone said sesame street, I was like.. theres no Oinest on sesame street... I was confused. I thought Ernest- Ernie... But do you pronounce Oinest like "OY-Nest"?

Although I do find it odd that you did not comment on the post I made with the EXACT request you were looking for.... Poodle and everything.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> About hair cuts...
> 
> And about the hair thing, I belong to a small dog forum where a bunch of people show yorkies, and they do things like.... *gasp* agility. I can't post pictures here because they're not mine.
> 
> ...


DOES A BEDLINGTON TERRIER HAVE THE KIND OF HAIRCUT I HAVE BEEN REFERRING TO?

and if these owners are good owners who let their doggies get dirty, great.

do you deny that some of these top dogs with the ridiculously long and elaborate hairstyles very well might not?

a poodle with a somewhat normal haircut can have a lot of fun...i don't believe that most of the top show poodles are having their proper doggie fun.

so why do i get stories about poodles with a decent doggie hairstyle?
what is the relevance to what i said?



4dogs3cats said:


> But do you pronounce Oinest like "OY-Nest"?
> 
> Although I do find it odd that you did not comment on the post I made with the EXACT request you were looking for.... Poodle and everything.


yes, OY-NEST

do your dogs have the same hairstyles as the poodles that win the shows?


----------



## 4dogs3cats (Dec 21, 2007)

dog-man said:


> i have no problem with a dog having a secondary interest, such as English literature or participating in dog shows, as long as his owner make his doggy fun primary.
> 
> i find it difficult to believe that the toy breeds and _Poodles with elaborate _or ridiculously long haircuts (at the top of the game) get the dirty playing every dog has a right to.











HOW MUCH MORE CLEAR CAN I BE? I responded DIRECTLY to what you asked.



dog-man said:


> what does it matter what even stupider people do?


Stupider is not a word, BTW



dog-man said:


> do your dogs have the same hairstyles as the poodles that win the shows?


No MINE don't, but this website that shows the show dogs, with the elaborate poodle hairstyle is exactly what you asked for, no?


----------



## loratliff (Feb 7, 2008)

Dog-man, why is it just long haircuts that you're targeting? There are a lot of other time-consuming grooming practices that take up equally long amounts of "doggy" time. Just because someone has a Weimaraner doesn't mean that the dog never sits under hairdryers.

My Griff doesn't show, but he still gets hand-stripped because I like the look and feel of him like that. I'm obviously a horrible dog owner because the three hours of hand-stripping I put him through every three or four months keeps him from rolling in the mud and romping through meadows after squirrels.

You're delusional, fella...


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

( question- why are we continuing to talk to this person that doesnt want to learn anything and just comes here to argue????)


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

dog-man said:


> DOES A BEDLINGTON TERRIER HAVE THE KIND OF HAIRCUT I HAVE BEEN REFERRING TO?


You've obviously never talked to a Bedlington terrier person before. 

Bedlington terriers have some of the MOST grooming time of any breeds. It rivals poodle grooming. 

Talk to either breed's people and they'll tell you they have the hardest clipping jobs.

My friend spends 2+ hours PER DOG grooming before a show. (and this is after they've been bathed)

So stop yelling. And stop talking about things you don't know about.


----------



## 4dogs3cats (Dec 21, 2007)

Laurelin said:


> You've obviously never talked to a Bedlington terrier person before.
> 
> Bedlington terriers have some of the MOST grooming time of any breeds. It rivals poodle grooming.
> 
> ...


Amen. I'm just shocked he wasnt happy when I showed him a show poodle with a poodle cut playing in mud... sigh... pick your battles I guess


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

4dogs3cats said:


> HOW MUCH MORE CLEAR CAN I BE? I responded DIRECTLY to what you asked.
> 
> No MINE don't, but this website that shows the show dogs, with the elaborate poodle hairstyle is exactly what you asked for, no?


btw, i still have not been able to find your original response.

i'm not sure what you are saying.
i am happy to see a dirty poodle with a stupid haircut...it is encouraging.

but i still doubt it is common among the top poodles.
it would take too much work to undo the damage.

and "stupider" is a word:
Boys go to college to get more knowledge...girls go to Jupiter to get more stupider.
see....


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

4dogs3cats said:


> Amen. I'm just shocked he wasnt happy when I showed him a show poodle with a poodle cut playing in mud... sigh... pick your battles I guess


I guess. And this bedli was the top bedlington for several years, a eukanuba (and maybe westminster?) breed winner, and also has earthdog titles...

If that's not getting 'down and dirty' AND being at 'the national level' then I don't know what is.

We'll never win because he won't look at facts he is being presented with but instead will rely on the few minutes of televised dog show he's seen. It shows just what happens in the ring- none of what goes on behind the scenes.



dog-man said:


> but i still doubt it is common among the top poodles.
> it would take too much work to undo the damage.
> .


It is called a BATH and shampoo.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

loratliff said:


> My Griff doesn't show, but he still gets hand-stripped because I like the look and feel of him like that. I'm obviously a horrible dog owner because the three hours of hand-stripping I put him through every three or four months keeps him from rolling in the mud and romping through meadows after squirrels.


if your weimeraner doesn't roll in mud or romp in the meadows, because YOU like the look and feel of hadstripping (whatever that is)...then yes, i think you have your priorities all screwed up.


----------



## Spicy1_VV (Jun 1, 2007)

This has been a very interesting breed. Some people just love causing debates a little too much, but its interesting. 

Here are some of my abused show dogs.

These are all pics from the show, as you can see he was kept locked in his crate for horribly long hours.









They hate it so much that they wag their tails in detest. 

















Here is the lovely Bedlington Terrier, he's lives nothing short of living a "real dog life" when not at a show. 

Here are some of the others being abused at the show


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

dog-man said:


> if your weimeraner doesn't roll in mud or romp in the meadows, because YOU like the look and feel of hadstripping (whatever that is)...then yes, i think you have your priorities all screwed up.


Okay well you just proved you don't read at all.

she has a Brussels, not a weim. She handstrips and yes, while she is hand stripping the dog, it is not going to be playing in the field.


----------



## 4dogs3cats (Dec 21, 2007)

4dogs3cats said:


> haha
> 
> 
> http://images.google.com/imgres?img...+dog+playing&start=20&ndsp=20&um=1&hl=en&sa=N
> ...


THIS was my original post. A page ago. Notice what I had quoted

Ok well it doesnt show it now, but go back a page and youll see


----------



## Spicy1_VV (Jun 1, 2007)

Not at the show. We don't care about them unless they are showing, otherwise we leave them locked in a closet with the rest of our junk.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> You've obviously never talked to a Bedlington terrier person before.
> 
> Bedlington terriers have some of the MOST grooming time of any breeds. It rivals poodle grooming.
> 
> ...


 a bedi does not have long hair like the poodle.
if a bedi owner keeps the dog from playing dirty, then she is an idiot too.

ANSWER THE QUESTION:
DO YOU THINK THERE ARE MANY TOP POODLES WHO DO NOT GET TO PLAY DIRTY?
AND OF SO, IS THAT OK?

unbelievable how you skirt the issues.


----------



## 4dogs3cats (Dec 21, 2007)

OT- but Spicey- your dogs are gorgeous. Why dont you post pictures more often????


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

4d3c I think he will need a few hundred pictures and one of them will need to be wearing a rosette from a show covered in mud. lol


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

dog-man said:


> i take it back...i don't thinK you are intelligent and thoughtful.
> 
> don't you get it?
> I AM NOT REFERRING TO A DOG LIKE A BEDI, WHO DOESN'T HAVE A HAIRCUT WHICH IS EXTREME.
> ...


Stop yelling, you just look like an idiot when you do. 

I am unaware of what a Bedi is.

I am saying you know nothing about dog grooming if you think Bedlis are not one of the hardest to groom dog breeds. *They rival poodles in show grooming requirements.*

Apparently you weren't talking about longhaired dogs, which you contradict in your first post. Apparently time spent grooming was not what you meant, though you said so after we showed you pictures of long haired dogs in the mud.

Apparently even a poodle, which is the most extreme, is not good enough for you.

Every breed I talk about you dismiss. Every example we give you, you dismiss. Why is that? It's because your argument is faulty. You don't know what you're talking about, so how could it possibly be that things aren't how you've made them up to be?

HOW CAN I MAKE IT PENETRATE YOUR MIND!?

Okay, I couldn't resist. Sorry guys.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> she has a Brussels, not a weim. She handstrips and yes, while she is hand stripping the dog, it is not going to be playing in the field.


i don't recall her saying it is only when she does the procedure...if that is the case, then i think she is fine.
------------

when i was kid, my sister and i used to enjoy watching the beauty pageants.

when i first heard from women's libbers that it is degrading to women, i thought they were a bunch of extremists.

now i can't imagine anyone thinking otherwise.

should i go to Atlantic City, and meet the contestants?
pet them, get to know their boyfriends?

i find the physical STANDARDS that they are striving to meet to be pretty stupid, just by remembering what i saw on TV 40 years ago:
the right size and shape breast...the right proportion of waist to hip.

but wait, don't i know that this is crucial for their "function"?

a nice size breast shows the woman would be a good breastfeeder...the wide hips shows she is fertile and can hold many babies.

maybe i'll also conclude that these are the only woman who should procreate.

the temperament, health and intelligence of women who don't meet the "breed" standard is not as important.

and why do i ignore their talents?


----------



## Shaina (Oct 28, 2007)

dog-man said:


> and "stupider" is a word:
> Boys go to college to get more knowledge...girls go to Jupiter to get more stupider.
> see....


Brilliant. If you haven't before, you just moved yourself from "annoying" to "idiot". If anyone needed proof you just like to get people upset and have no interest in actually contributing anything useful, I think that should do it.



dog-man said:


> if your weimeraner doesn't roll in mud or romp in the meadows, because YOU like the look and feel of hadstripping (whatever that is)...then yes, i think you have your priorities all screwed up.


Read. Nothing in this post makes any sort of sense if you paid attention.



dog-man said:


> i take it back...i don't thinK you are intelligent and thoughtful.
> 
> don't you get it?
> I AM NOT REFERRING TO A DOG LIKE A BEDI, WHO DOESN'T HAVE A HAIRCUT WHICH IS EXTREME.
> WHAT DO I HAVE TO SAY TO MAKE IT PENETRATE YOUR MIND?


Okay, if a Bedi's coat is not extreme, what is? I assumed your problem with a coat was that the trailing hair on long-coated breed impeded their movement so they can't have fun, but that was refuted. Poodle cuts, while weird-looking, do not in themselves impede the dog in any way. So I assume your problem there was that due to the work involved you think they aren't allowed to play in mud ever, but it was just stated that Bedi's coats require just as much work and maintenance as a poodle's. So...how does the poodle deserve your ire and not the Bedi?

And I'm sure Laurelin is devastated to have lost the favor of as bright, promising a mind as yours.



dog-man said:


> AND NO, I DON'T BELIEVE A BATH AND SHAMPOO WILL NOT UNDO THE DAMAGE OF A DIRTY ROMP FOR THE TOP POODLES.


Based on what? Anything? Or just another assumption?


----------



## 4dogs3cats (Dec 21, 2007)

dog-man said:


> a bedi does not have long hair like the poodle.
> if a bedi owner keeps the dog from playing dirty, then she is an idiot too.
> 
> ANSWER THE QUESTION:
> ...


I would imagine if these people love their animals enough to SPEND the hours grooming them in the first place, then they love them enough to let them play like dogs. You can have both ends of the spectrum. Just because they look amazing in the show doesn't mean they don't get down and dirty. It is my firm OPINION (no facts here I dont show,) That if you go through the time and the energy to show a dog, than you care about it, and if you care about, its probably getting all the exercise it needs. Personally speaking, if my dog was crated all the live long day and trsnaported on airplanes a lot, and dint get to PLAY- theres no way he would want to trot around a show ring obediently with me.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

dog-man said:


> a bedi does not have long hair like the poodle.
> if a bedi owner keeps the dog from playing dirty, then she is an idiot too.
> 
> ANSWER THE QUESTION:
> ...


Honestly, I'm not a poodle person and don't know anyone who shows poodles. I can't answer. 

I CAN however, answer for people who show many another longhaired/high grooming requirement breed.

Bedlington terrier- http://ashcrofterriers.com/images/cocoa litter 3/mimi.jpg

Yorkie- http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8f/Yorkshire_Terrier_WA_Mozart_Dolce_Sinfonia.jpg

Bearded Collie- http://stripduke.web-log.nl/photos/uncategorized/beardie.jpg

Lhasa Apso- http://www.el-minjas.com/BIS4_lhasaapso.jpg

Havanese - http://www.geocities.com/ashstone30/mia150dpi.jpg ( I love these guys)

I know people with these breeds, and YES they do allow their dogs to be dogs.

If these are not coated/high grooming requirement breeds, then I don't know what is.

But that's not good enough for you. You'd rather BS based on your non experience than look at other breeds with similar grooming requirements.


----------



## 4dogs3cats (Dec 21, 2007)

Inga said:


> 4d3c I think he will need a few hundred pictures and one of them will need to be wearing a rosette from a show covered in mud. lol


I guess so.. I can start googling- I got all day... Let me ask you this.

What breed would I need to show you romping in the mud for you to finally believe what we are saying. That show dog owners are NOt slave drivers and their dogs DO have fun?
a yorkie?


----------



## Max'sHuman (Oct 6, 2007)

Why has nobody mentioned that although the show cut for poodles is rather extreme now it started as a functional thing, with the balls of fur around the joints helping keep their joints warm when swimming (they were retriever/sporting dogs, yes?) and also, I think it was also related to streamlining them while swimming? I don't have the full history, but the cut started with a reason.

Second of all, why are you just targeting poodles? This whole argument doesn't make a whole lot of sense. You seem to be thinking dogs with long hair or fancy hair cuts don't get to have fun (but them you don't count Bedlingtons because it was only poodles?). How are those two things related at all? Sure, a few days before the show the dog might now be allowed to roll in the mud, but it would be allowed to play and would probably have to be bathed and blowdried before the show regardless. I am fairly certain blowdrying plays a big part in the coat poodle coat getting that fluffy look.

I sincerely doubt that anyone who loves dogs enough to devote their lives to them would "abuse" them. Sure they might have different ideas, but in their minds they are doing what is best for the dog. And often, it's a darn good job. 

Seems like some people are pulling stuff out of their a$$ just to be contrary...

ETA: I also don't see why spending a lot time grooming causes so much suffering. Maybe I'm weird, but I always think it feels really good when someone else is brushing my hair. And I lot of dogs probably LOVE the attention.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

Can someone close this thread, because this is getting ridiculous.

We are now talking in circles. Dog-man if you really want to continue this conversation at least come up with a new point


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> I know people with these breeds, and YES they do allow their dogs to be dogs.


you know people who have these breeds, or you know people with these breeds who are at the very top of the dog show world?
AAAAAARRRRGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

and yes, my original post about "long-haired" dogs was about extreme long hair...why that is so unbelievable is beyond me.

but yes, i am also against hours and hours of grooming for any other dog as well.

any half-wit would already "get it" that i am not referring specifically to your basic hobbyist show person, who likes doing this stuff on a casual and local level.
or even to a top person, who has their priorities straight.

ya know, i used to love to watch the summer Olympics.

i won't watch it anymore...not just because of past steroid abuses....but because it now takes abusive training to get to the top of each field.

likewise, if there are any abuses at the top of the dogshow world, i would like to see them weeded out.
whether it is as simple as extreme grooming practices, or more serious issues involving breeding for "cute" traits that may be unhealthy for the dogs.


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

dog-man said:


> i take it back...i don't thinK you are intelligent and thoughtful.....


 The problem with you dog man is you think no one has any intellegence. I am tired of you... You fail to even open your ears and your eyes to those that know more in area than you do.. And you type like a 6 year old!


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

Shaina said:


> I assumed your problem with a coat was that the trailing hair on long-coated breed impeded their movement so they can't have fun, but that was refuted.


where was that refuted? i missed that.

did someone mention that their cousin has a poodle, and it plays in the mud?


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

dog-man said:


> you know people who have these breeds, or you know people with these breeds who are at the very top of the dog show world?
> AAAAAARRRRGGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> any half-wit would already "get it" that i am not referring specifically to your basic hobbyist show person, who likes doing this stuff on a casual and local level.
> or even to a top person, who has their priorities straight.


Yes, some AS I HAVE MENTIONED BEFORE have dogs that are doing very well. One was even ranked #1 last year. (How much higher can you get?)

Ah, so you want to categorize the entire sport by a bad few? I guess you'll be protesting everything then.



Max'sHuman said:


> Why has nobody mentioned that although the show cut for poodles is rather extreme now it started as a functional thing, with the balls of fur around the joints helping keep their joints warm when swimming (they were retriever/sporting dogs, yes?) and also, I think it was also related to streamlining them while swimming? I don't have the full history, but the cut started with a reason.
> 
> Second of all, why are you just targeting poodles? This whole argument doesn't make a whole lot of sense. You seem to be thinking dogs with long hair or fancy hair cuts don't get to have fun (but them you don't count Bedlingtons because it was only poodles?). How are those two things related at all? Sure, a few days before the show the dog might now be allowed to roll in the mud, but it would be allowed to play and would probably have to be bathed and blowdried before the show regardless. I am fairly certain blowdrying plays a big part in the coat poodle coat getting that fluffy look.


In an attempt to keep the thread somewhat educational, yes, the continental poodle clip is a more exaggerated version of a functional clip.

Also, show grooming does rely a lot of blow drying, straightening, etc. Dog coats aren't naturally that straight or fluffy, they're fluffed up and blown out to look more impressive.


----------



## Mudra (Nov 1, 2007)

There is only one point I see here.... THAT DOG-MAN does not read posts... Ya own reading eye glasses dog-man? Or should I send one your way? =P


----------



## Darkmoon (Mar 12, 2007)

Mudra said:


> There is only one point I see here.... THAT DOG-MAN does not read posts... Ya own reading eye glasses dog-man? Or should I send one your way? =P


Why bother? He'll more then likely put them on backwards and then yell at everyone else in the world that they are wearing their glasses wrong....


----------



## terryjeanne (Jul 13, 2007)

I always look forward to the dog show May long weekend. Last year a cairn terrier breeder was there with 3 or four puppies. I didn't ask but assume they were there for exposure and socialization. He was selling one and two he was keeping for future showing prospects. They were about 3-4 mths and he was more than happy to talk about his dogs and what the difference was between his show puppies and "for sale as pets" puppies. His wife was there and explained what hand stripping was.
This was a man that obviously loved his dogs. He wasn't in any rush at all, so I guess he wasn't showing a dog anytime soon that day as he spent a good hour with me


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

http://www.bar-nonepoodles.com/html/index2.htm

OK, I did a little research.

This is one of the top standard poodle kennels in the country. They have two dogs that are currently in the top five. If you click on the fun link, you will see poodles actually having fun. 

Oh, the horror.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> Yes, some AS I HAVE MENTIONED BEFORE have dogs that are doing very well. One was even ranked #1 last year. (How much higher can you get?)


which breed?


----------



## Shalva (Mar 23, 2007)

here is what I dont understand, 

why you guys have these conversations with this person...... 

thats what I don't understand 

and I don't understand why he is allowed to hijack threads..... over and over and over...... 

so there ya have it..... 
what I dont understand


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

dog-man said:


> which breed?


Bedlington Terrier, which we all know you'll say doesn't matter though they have really high grooming requirements. 



Shalva said:


> here is what I dont understand,
> 
> why you guys have these conversations with this person......
> 
> thats what I don't understand


I'll admit it.

I just like making him look like a moron, and I find it funny when he thinks he has to yell. 

Plus I am avoiding studying...


----------



## FriendsOfZoe (Aug 7, 2007)

Just to add too...not that there is any point...but not all dogs enjoy rolling in mud and getting very dirty. Many people here have posted about their dogs who wouldn't dare let their paws touch wet grass, never mind mud!! Letting a dog be a dog is not the same thing for every dog. Running free and playing with other dogs is not always what every dog wants. Some want leash walks. Some want to swim. Some want to roll in mud. Some only want to retrieve a tennis ball 40 billion times in a row. Some even like to WORK. 

Those dogs with the very long hair, like maltese, etc.? They were bred to be LAP dogs. A lot of them maybe enjoy that the most, and wouldn't want to run in the mud if they chose to.

You can't equate all dogs idea of fun with what your dog thinks is fun.


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

Shalva said:


> here is what I dont understand,
> 
> why you guys have these conversations with this person......
> 
> ...


 aman- I have had enough with him as well.. Stop replying to this delussional person all.. 
Mods- please- do something with this person.. We are tired of this..


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

You know there's an ignore option, right? You can chose to add him (or anyone else for that matter) to your ignore list.

I'm sorry, I'm very guilty of enjoying feeding trolls. 

And also on the off-chance someone has no idea about dog shows and thinks we who show sit around abusing our dogs after reading ignorant peoples' posts, I hope someone would correct them.


----------



## 4dogs3cats (Dec 21, 2007)

FriendsOfZoe said:


> Just to add too...not that there is any point...but not all dogs enjoy rolling in mud and getting very dirty. Many people here have posted about their dogs who wouldn't dare let their paws touch wet grass, never mind mud!! Letting a dog be a dog is not the same thing for every dog. Running free and playing with other dogs is not always what every dog wants. Some want leash walks. Some want to swim. Some want to roll in mud. Some only want to retrieve a tennis ball 40 billion times in a row. Some even like to WORK.
> 
> Those dogs with the very long hair, like maltese, etc.? They were bred to be LAP dogs. A lot of them maybe enjoy that the most, and wouldn't want to run in the mud if they chose to.
> 
> You can't equate all dogs idea of fun with what your dog thinks is fun.


WONDERFUL post. I hadn't even thought of that. Bailey won't go outside if the grass has DEW on it lol


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> Bedlington Terrier, which we all know you'll say doesn't matter though they have really high grooming requirements.


yes, i did learn that Bedlington terrier owners maight be morons too...first if the grooming procedures are as extreme as you say...and second, if any use this as an excuse to not let them get dirty...it sounds like your friend is not guilty of the second.

and, no my problem is not just with a few bad owners.

i have a problem with bulldogs that can't breathe, can't walk, and can't have natural births.

i have a problem with dachsunds whose backs are too long, and have spinal trouble.

i have a problem with dogs with wrinkly skin that have skin problems.

i have a problem with dalmations whose deafness is related to the gene which makes their cute coat.

all these problems were produced and exaggerated by show dog breed groups.

i would not go to a dog show, where dogowners are striving to meet a standard...when it is the allegaince to the standard which does not allow for the influx of new genetic material in the breed.

i have a problem with the crating and the flying, the extensive grooming...and much more.


----------



## Pai (Apr 23, 2008)

Max'sHuman said:


> Second of all, why are you just targeting poodles?


He thinks they look stupid, and therefore, anyone who goes through the trouble to groom a dog in a way that he thinks is 'stupid' is somehow abusing them, I guess. Nevermind that everyone's idea of 'beauty' is different. 

Apparently, spending lots of time grooming a dog means you never let them have a full life, either. Nevermind that he's making a HUGE illogical assumption about everyone who owns a high-grooming requirement dog based on ZERO facts. 

He can't deal with people having a different opinions than him -- apparently, in his eyes, that just means that we're all bad, stupid people. Whatev. Waste of time to talk to someone like that.


----------



## 4dogs3cats (Dec 21, 2007)

dog-man said:


> yes, i did learn that Bedlington terrier owners maight be morons too...first if the grooming procedures are as extreme as you say...and second, if nay use this as an excuse to not let them get dirty...it sounds like your friend is not guilty of the second.
> 
> and, no my problem is not just with a few bad owners.
> 
> ...


http://www.goldendoodle-labradoodle.org/health-issues.html

don't start.

AND I QUOTE



> Marketing and salemanship tactics have led many an unsuspecting purchaser to believe that the Doodles are healthier then their purebred counterparts that helped to produce them, thus the term "Hybrid Vigour". THis can be a honest statement when used in the right context....but, the genes are the genes and since many of them are carried in both sets of parents, the hereditary incidence is still there and could cause your new family member to be crippled, blind or even cause early death. Please, take the time to discover what diseases could and do effect the pups that are born into the world of the Doods. You will be glad that you did. you will be a educated consumer...............who can then have the information to make an informed decision as to the importance of purchasing that New Family member from A Premium breeder .


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

What about pit bulls that are so fat they can hardly walk?

What about severe roaching in german shepherd's backs?

what about field trial labs that are good workers yet have structural problems and are run into the ground yet still bred regardless? 

What about toy breeds bred to sizes so small they're smaller than a coke can?

All of those are problems facing the dog world and they don't have to do with akc showing at all. Trends and emphasizing one aspect can end up in bad dogs and detrimental breeding practices no matter what you are breeding for. 

I think you'll find some of the most detrimental breeding in those that breed solely for the pet industry.

And it's dalmati*a*n- pet peeve of mine.

The dal problem really stems from 101 dalmatians and massive overbreeding. The healthiest dal lines you'll find will be those bred responsibly by show breeders.


----------



## Pai (Apr 23, 2008)

dog-man said:


> and, no my problem is not just with a few bad owners.
> 
> i have a problem with bulldogs that can't breathe, can't walk, and can't have natural births.
> 
> ...


Dude, okay. Now you're changing the subject. First you bash people who groom their dogs a lot, and now you're going on about the (legitimate) problems with closed-registry breeding programs. Make up your mind what your point is, instead of simply changing your argument whenever someone proves how wrong you are about the original thing you were complaining about.

If you want to go off on how bad closed-registries are, go make a separate thread about it, instead of ranting about it here.


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

borzoimom said:


> aman- I have had enough with him as well.. Stop replying to this delussional person all..
> Mods- please- do something with this person.. We are tired of this..


Right now, Borzoimom, I am more concerned about what to do about you.

You report every post you disagree with. You complain about dog-man, yet you continue to participate in every discussion with him. 

It's time to grow up. We are not baby-sitters or playground directors. The "dog-man problem" has a simple solution: stop responding. If you have to, utilize the ignore function. If you want to continue banging your head against the wall, at least stop whining about it.

The next time-out will probably be for a back-seat moderator,


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I didn't realize people were actually upset about what he wrote. I just kind of find him amusing and waaaaaay off his rocker.

I suggest the ignore button once again. Works wonders. I've had to use it before on another board with a troublesome poster.


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

RonE said:


> Right now, Borzoimom, I am more concerned about what to do about you.
> 
> You report every post you disagree with. You complain about dog-man, yet you continue to participate in every discussion with him.
> 
> ...


 Fine Ron- if you havent noticed its not just me- its many of us at our wits end on this.. Countless theads that make nothing but high blood pressure.. Its only that I care that its reported.. so fine- no more reports.. Obviously no one cares how many members this upsets.. We know what to do .. Thank you.. 
dogman- you are on your own. Others- okay? follow suit- after all- we have the word of the moderator how to handle this.. Its only going to be solved by us and our lack of any reply in anyway- shape or form.. - signing out of this thread.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

Laurelin said:


> I didn't realize people were actually upset about what he wrote. I just kind of find him amusing and waaaaaay off his rocker.
> 
> I suggest the ignore button once again. Works wonders. I've had to use it before on another board with a troublesome poster.


I'm not upset, I just find it repetitive. He keeps restating the same thing over and over. It wasn't productive. But now Dog-man has added a few extra complaints, so maybe the conversation will flow more.


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

Thank God, borzoimom. I think you finally get it, though you don't actually need a moderator's permission to ignore someone who upsets you. Many people learn that all on their own in the course of living.

BTW, you are the ONLY member who has ever reported a dog-man post.


----------



## 4dogs3cats (Dec 21, 2007)

I come here to debate. I enjoy his posts, I know I cant change his views and he cant change mine, but it is interetesing having these discussions, IMO


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

Laurelin said:


> What about pit bulls that are so fat they can hardly walk?
> 
> What about severe roaching in german shepherd's backs?
> 
> ...



What about Rottweilers that are just too cute for words? sorry couldn't help myself. carry on.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

Inga said:


> What about Rottweilers that are just too cute for words? sorry couldn't help myself. carry on.


But Inga that's the problem. We have to stop judging these dogs based on cuteness. Since we all know that the cuteness gene is located right next to the sweetness gene.

Which is basically what all breeding programs should be based on.


----------



## applesmom (Jun 9, 2007)

IMO topics with opposing opinions; no matter how we percieve those opinions are often entertaining and a welcome break from the routine day to day stuff!


----------



## kelliope (Apr 4, 2008)

FriendsOfZoe said:


> Just to add too...not that there is any point...but not all dogs enjoy rolling in mud and getting very dirty. Many people here have posted about their dogs who wouldn't dare let their paws touch wet grass, never mind mud!! Letting a dog be a dog is not the same thing for every dog. Running free and playing with other dogs is not always what every dog wants. Some want leash walks. Some want to swim. Some want to roll in mud. Some only want to retrieve a tennis ball 40 billion times in a row. Some even like to WORK.
> 
> Those dogs with the very long hair, like maltese, etc.? They were bred to be LAP dogs. A lot of them maybe enjoy that the most, and wouldn't want to run in the mud if they chose to.
> 
> You can't equate all dogs idea of fun with what your dog thinks is fun.


Now this is VERY true and bears repeating!


----------



## FriendsOfZoe (Aug 7, 2007)

Seriously, I want dog-man to respond to my point. Post #150. 

Like Jenn, and possibly Laurelin, I find dog-man an exceptional place to vamp up my skills...an argument that would satisfy every other human being on earth doesn't do anything to dog-man. So I have to come up with a better one. It's a mental challenge, really.

And if I get sick of talking to a wall, (well actually, a computer screen), I stay away from the thread. Simple as that.


----------



## Spicy1_VV (Jun 1, 2007)

Laurelin said:


> What about pit bulls that are so fat they can hardly walk?
> 
> What about severe roaching in german shepherd's backs?
> 
> ...


I just had to say amen! Obese dogs are a peeve of mine regardless of breeds, but with Pits I think they really look horrible. They are supposed to be a lean, muscular breed, to see one obese is disgusting. 

I agree with all the rest of your post too. Some of the least healthy dogs and those with temperament problems as well that I personal know are from bybs and also a nice number of oops litters too. 



4dogs3cats said:


> OT- but Spicey- your dogs are gorgeous. Why dont you post pictures more often????


Thanks. I thought I posted pics too often.  I don't want to be a gallery hog..lol Since I haven't posted pics in a few days I'll try to get some up tonight or tomorrow. I got some really nice ones today I think anyway.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I also like a good debate. Spices things up. I can't say I've ever disagreed _vehemenently_ with anything dog-man's said, so I don't find it necessary to get into his threads in most cases, but I can get into a very good de-clawing debate (and a few other subjects) when necessary. If someone doesn't like it, use the "ignore" function. Let the rest of us have our fun  .

I see no problem with dog showing, as long as the dogs are cared for properly. I've met more neglected pet dogs than show dogs (OK, I've never met a show dog in person). But I think the average pet dog is more likely to be abused/neglected than the average show dog. Pet dogs are more likely to be beaten, overcrated, underexercised, tied outside, ignored, medically neglected, etc. Show dogs cannot be beaten; they'll cower in front of the judges. They can't be overcrated/underexercised; they'll run wild in the ring. They can't be tied outside; they'll be stolen. Some large show kennels may keep their show dogs outside in heated/cooled/graveled kennels, but I guarantee that's better than most hunting dogs get. They can't be medically neglected, or their body structure and haircoat will be negatively affected.

I supppose you can say that the presence of major abuse and neglect in no way excuses minor abuses. But, if you get into that, isn't everything a form of abuse or neglect? I let my dogs run loose in the country today. They dug holes (and ate dirt), ran until they were too tired to go on, and drank puddle water. Perhaps this was neglectful---they could get sick from eating (possibly pesticide-laden) dirt. They could have been hit by a car speeding by (one car passed us the entire time---but he could have been a bad person who would hit the dogs on purpose). They could get Giardia from drinking puddle water. The dog who came with us never gets out of the house normally. And her owner smokes in the house, so her lungs are probably pure black by now. Poor thing smells like tobacco smoke, and her fur is brown from the nicotine. There are all sorts of minor abuses people visit upon their pets, if you get into it too much, you'd have to concede that nobody should have a pet, and you could join PETA  .


----------



## Spicy1_VV (Jun 1, 2007)

Willowy said:


> I see no problem with dog showing, as long as the dogs are cared for properly. I've met more neglected pet dogs than show dogs (OK, I've never met a show dog in person). But I think the average pet dog is more likely to be abused/neglected than the average show dog. Pet dogs are more likely to be beaten, overcrated, underexercised, tied outside, ignored, medically neglected, etc. Show dogs cannot be beaten; they'll cower in front of the judges. They can't be overcrated/underexercised; they'll run wild in the ring. They can't be tied outside; they'll be stolen. Some large show kennels may keep their show dogs outside in heated/cooled/graveled kennels, but I guarantee that's better than most hunting dogs get. They can't be medically neglected, or their body structure and haircoat will be negatively affected.


What do you consider overcrated?  Length of time? Ect.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Spicy1_VV said:


> What do you consider overcrated?  Length of time? Ect.


Um...no particular period of time, I don't think you can put a time limit on it. I suppose 4 hours of crating could be too long for an energetic Lab puppy, but 8 hours or possibly longer (with appropriate potty breaks) wouldn't bother a sedentary older dog, if it was given proper exercise and attention when the owner was home. It depends on circumstances. I've just seen too many situations where people put their dogs in the crate just so they won't have to deal with them---exercise them, train them, etc. I do think this is more likely in a home situation than in a show situation. But like I said, I don't know any show people or show dogs, I'm just speaking in broad generalities.


----------



## Dakota Spirit (Jul 31, 2007)

Wait...there's an ignore option? Omg, Laurelin - you are my hero for the night.


----------



## Spicy1_VV (Jun 1, 2007)

Willowy said:


> Um...no particular period of time, I don't think you can put a time limit on it. I suppose 4 hours of crating could be too long for an energetic Lab puppy, but 8 hours or possibly longer (with appropriate potty breaks) wouldn't bother a sedentary older dog, if it was given proper exercise and attention when the owner was home. It depends on circumstances. I've just seen too many situations where people put their dogs in the crate just so they won't have to deal with them---exercise them, train them, etc. I do think this is more likely in a home situation than in a show situation. But like I said, I don't know any show people or show dogs, I'm just speaking in broad generalities.


I understand about not having specific time limits, that makes sense. I was just wondering on the overcrating issue before I said anything since I know show dogs that are in crates almost 24/7 (of course they have potty breaks). 

People can't generalize or lump all of whatever group together. Some show dogs are mistreated, neglected or abused. Then even that depends on someones definition, somethings are black and white in most opinions, others are gray where someone might say thats neglect and another would say its not.

There are house pets that are crated for most the time too. While the person works, while the person sleeps, while they pick up their carry out for dinner, ect. So you can find this any type of owner because dog owners vary no matter if they are show or pet people.

Show dogs are kept in a varying degree of ways, some inside with romps in a backyard, some in nice kennel buildings, others in regular kennels or tie outs. Some are given great amounts of attention, lots of training time or working time and allowed to just play and be a dog. Some are not given so much mental stimulation and not allowed much play. Is this any different then pet owners? What pet owners do or don't do, how well they take care of their dog, how they contain their dogs it varies. All pet owners can't be accused of neglect just because one starves their dogs, just the same all show dog people shouldn't be accused of neglect just because one doesn't allow their dog play and excercise. 

Willowy this whole thing wasn't directed at you or anything just so you know. I don't like how some on here act like ALL show people are a certain way.

*4dogs3cats* I posted some pics.


----------



## animalcraker (Nov 9, 2006)

dog-man said:


> any half-wit would already "get it" that i am not referring specifically to your basic hobbyist show person, who likes doing this stuff on a casual and local level.
> or even to a top person, who has their priorities straight.


How about instead of us trying to prove you wrong, and apparently having no idea what you are trying to say in the first place, Why don't you try to prove yourself right? Show us all those negleted and abused dogs at the top of thier game. You probly can't because it doesn't happen like you say it does.



dog-man said:


> likewise, *if there are any abuses* at the top of the dogshow world, i would like to see them weeded out.
> whether it is as simple as extreme grooming practices, or more serious issues involving breeding for "cute" traits that may be unhealthy for the dogs.


Spoken as someone who truly has NO CLUE what they are talking about.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

FriendsOfZoe said:


> Just to add too...not that there is any point...but not all dogs enjoy rolling in mud and getting very dirty. Many people here have posted about their dogs who wouldn't dare let their paws touch wet grass, never mind mud!! Letting a dog be a dog is not the same thing for every dog. Running free and playing with other dogs is not always what every dog wants. Some want leash walks. Some want to swim. Some want to roll in mud. Some only want to retrieve a tennis ball 40 billion times in a row. Some even like to WORK.
> 
> Those dogs with the very long hair, like maltese, etc.? They were bred to be LAP dogs. A lot of them maybe enjoy that the most, and wouldn't want to run in the mud if they chose to.
> 
> You can't equate all dogs idea of fun with what your dog thinks is fun.


ok, you want me to answer this post.

i agree that there may be dogs that don't want to get dirty, and may have less need for exercise.
---------------------------

a good movie to see, related to this subject, is "Chariots of the Gods".

it's about some British runners preparing for the Olympics, about 90 years ago.

it was considered scandalous that some athletes were hiring professional trainers.

the Olympics was supposed to be for amateurs...there was a concern for all sorts of abuses that come along with professionalism.

their fears turned out to be true.
look at the steroid abuse in various track and field events.
look at the little girls doing gymnastics: abusive training, competing while injuried, delayance of puberty, serious financial costs to their families.

some of these problems have filtered down to high school sports as well.

there are many things in this world that are good and healthy when done on a casual, amateur basis.
but when the stakes get higher, abuses are inevitable.

dog shows are no exception.

---------------------

btw, a close look at the "professional" dog show world is important, IMHO.

there is an impression given that these people are among the most concerned for dog health and welfare...that these dogs are the top of the line in terms of health.

i am not the only one who considers this a myth...and the consequences may be dire for dogs.

again, here is a website discussing many problems with genetics in purebred dogs...caused by the show dog competition mentality.

http://canine-genetics.com/


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

dog-man said:


> btw, a close look at the "professional" dog show world is important, IMHO.
> 
> there is an impression given that these people are among the most concerned for dog health and welfare...that these dogs are the top of the line in terms of health.
> 
> ...


Yea know Dog-man, in some ways I agree with you. In certain breeds inbreeding is becoming a problem, but even more than that I think studs are often over used. Breeders tend to want to use the best studs available, which I understand. But once they find something works, we do it over and over and over again. 

And I know for a fact that there have been certain Doberman studs brought to question due to overuse and certain health issues showing up. But I do I think the answer to these problem is opening the stud books and ending purebred dogs as we know them? Absolutely not. 

We just need more open minded breeders. Breeders how are open to using the stud that might not be in the top five. Open to bringing in extra background to their pedigrees. But these is not as cute and dry an issue as you seem to think. 

Line breeding allows you to know what you have, the good and the bad. It doubles up on everything. But in many ways out breeding can be a crapshoot. You have no idea how those genes are going to match up before you do it. Some breeders don't want to take that chance. That don't want to loss what they have already worked so hard to achieve in their lines. 

I also think studs are used to young. We are breeding dogs that are only 3 or 4 years old, with no idea if that dog is going to die an inherent disease down the line. So excited about either the prestige or the money, I don't think it matters which. 

So basically I'm saying in a rather longwinded way, that I would not argue that breeding practices should change in certain breeds. But I still don't think opening the stud books is a practical way to go about that. This problem can be solved by doing many things that are not near as extreme. 

But I still say that no matter what the breeding practices are within a breed, 90% of the times, responsible breeders produce healthier dogs by far than BYB. But there's nothing wrong with doing better. And there are breeders out there that are actively trying too. 

This is just my opinion from things I've noticed. It will most likely be refuted in a couple of minutes by the professionals. LOL


----------



## FriendsOfZoe (Aug 7, 2007)

DobManiac said:


> Yea know Dog-man, in some ways I agree with you. In certain breeds inbreeding is becoming a problem, but even more than that I think studs are often over used. Breeders tend to want to use the best studs available, which I understand. But once they find something works, we do it over and over and over again.



I agree with you wholeheartedly. That's where it is up to the buyer to look for breeders who are taking chances. With goldens it is very difficult. I think that is part of the reason we are starting to see a lot more English-style goldens (like Shalva's) over here, because that is one way that breeders can stay away from having every dog line bred. I am hard-pressed to find a golden within a 5 hour drive from me who doesn't have heavy Nautilus lines. Nautilus has produced some great dogs, for sure, but since every golden around here "needs" Nautilus lines, they are all the same--mediocre, in my opinion, too big and hairy, with not too fabulous hips and very much perpetuating a breed split.

We are lucky with goldens, however, in that we do have a breed split (who wuddathunkit?) as some breeders are moving now toward crossing field and show lines in an attempt to make more moderate dogs that can be field titled and do their original purpose and still win in the ring--and still be American style goldens (which, for some, like myself, is important, as I fell in love with the American style golden and am not sure that I could see myself seeking out a British-standard golden). They are few and far between, but that is the kind of line opening I think we need to see.

The other dog I am interested in is the Nova Scotia Duck Tolling Retriever, which is a much rarer breed and has its own host of difficulties. There are not as many dogs, so it is harder to breed out of line because you really don't know what you're getting...Luckily tollers still have not exploded with popularity, so most of the breeders are still very good and working to try to keep the dog from having a split and trying to keep new genes in the pool, largely by importing lines from Europe, Australia, etc. The biggest problem I see for tollers in the future is that a lot of people still want Nova Scotia lines in their dogs--meaning a kennel from N.S. on the pedigree. My worries are in crossing back to the original lines too much, allowing for inbreeding, and in the fact that most breeders in N.S. now are not breeding dogs from "original" lines, but from the same mix of Canadian and American dogs that everyone else is--and they're not necessarily more fit for breeding than any other dog, but are considered better because they live in Nova Scotia. Pretty dumb, eh?

I would imagine dobes are a lot like goldens, as they are so popular. I agree with stud overuse too. I kind of feel like a bitch shouldn't have more than maybe 2 litters and a dog shouldn't stud more than maybe 4....those are just quick guesses though and if I was actually a breeder and more involved in the show community, I might think differently (this has only recently become an interest of mine that I am researching actively). But I'm also a crazy person who thinks that a dog should have titles on both ends to be bred (and the back end being more important--I would rather see a field titled working dog with health clearances bred than a champion with no performance titles or working experience).


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

FriendsOfZoe said:


> But I'm also a crazy person who thinks that a dog should have titles on both ends to be bred (and the back end being more important--I would rather see a field titled working dog with health clearances bred than a champion with no performance titles or working experience).


 
I like to see titles on both ends too. But in Dobermans this rule doesn't really apply. They don't have a job like hunting or herding. Working dogs will compete in Schutzhund, but those dogs generally have a lot more drive than the average owner wants. But maybe we should be putting that drive back in. Dusk is a very soft and sensitive dog. He is definitely on the easier side of the spectrum temperament wise. But Shutzhund requires a lot of a dog, I don’t know if I’d want a dog that hard. 

What I like to see in my breed are dogs that have passed the Working Aptitude Evaluation. It's a temperament test for working breeds. I also like agility titles, this shows that form really does follow function in that particular dog. Obedience titles are a plus but not a necessity. I have yet to meet a doberman that couldn't achieve that. Utility titles would be good, but most show people don't put that kind of time into training.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

DobManiac said:


> But I still say that no matter what the breeding practices are within a breed, 90% of the times, responsible breeders produce healthier dogs by far than BYB. But there's nothing wrong with doing better. And there are breeders out there that are actively trying too.


ok, i basically agree with that.
i do think it important that the issue not be swept under the rug.
i am not in a position to say exactly what the plan should be.

as long as the best health interests of dogs, both in the long and short term, are more important than possible narrowminded priorities of some breed groups.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

dog-man said:


> ok, i basically agree with that.
> i do think it important that the issue not be sweeped under the rug.
> i am not in a position to say exactly what the plan should be.
> 
> as long as the best health interests of dogs, both in the long and short term, are more important than possible narrowminded priorities of some breed groups.


I think you would be suprised with how many breeders consider health as a top priority. No one is going to buy your dogs if you are known to have inherent health issues in your lines.


----------



## Dogstar (May 11, 2007)

DobManiac said:


> I think you would be suprised with how many breeders consider health as a top priotirty. No one is going to but your dogs if you are known to have inherent health issues in your lines.


Exactly. 

No dog is perfect conformationally- all dogs have areas they could improve on. Breeders therefore DO breed faulty dogs in conformational areas. But I don't know ANYONE reputable that will breed a dog with a health problem* that could be passed along. Hip dysplasia? Out of the breeding program. Thyroid a bit iffy? Spayed, neutered, and chilling on the couch- and parents may be altered too. Epilepsy? Yikes, let's fix your siblings, too. Reputable breeders may do a lot of INCLUDING dogs in their breeding programs based on visual, apparently cosmetic qualities- but they exclude a HECK of a lot more based on health.


*CEA is an exception here- I know breeders I would consider reputable who will breed a carrier (or even affected) dog if they are otherwise exceptional. There are a lot of breeders who have made the choice to keep working with CEA carrier lines (which are the vast majority of the rough collie gene pool) in order to preserve other traits. The percentage is going down- people are choosing non-carriers over non-affecteds- but from a starting point of something like 90% of the breed as carriers or affecteds and other health problems that are more life threatening, it's going to take many, many generations to fully eliminate this problem.


----------



## ELmostl (Mar 16, 2008)

dog-man said:


> ok, you want me to answer this post.
> 
> i agree that there may be dogs that don't want to get dirty, and may have less need for exercise.
> ---------------------------
> ...


there is nothing wrong with competition , and doing the best you can to be the best. 

this will require sacrifice , hard working , pain. people do it all voluntarily so why are you trying to stop people from doing what they want because you are a ******. 

this goes for beauty pageants , summer olympics , baseball , basketball.

i bet your one of those people that want to get dodge ball banned in school because its too much competition.

AS FOR THE ORIGINAL QUESTION.

dog shows are not really beauty contests because even though the dog may be the most beautiful dog , if he is not to standard he loses..right?


----------



## jesirose (Mar 27, 2008)

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Who would say which dog is most beautiful? It's about which dog conforms to the standards, which may or may not be what most people think beautiful.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

ELmostl said:


> there is nothing wrong with competition , and doing the best you can to be the best.
> 
> this will require sacrifice , hard working , pain. people do it all voluntarily so why are you trying to stop people from doing what they want because you are a ******.
> 
> ...


Sweetheart, the concept of standard is given such exaggerated importance, it is beyond silly.

and yes, competition can be very harmful, when it is taken to an extreme.
are you completely unaware what is going on in the world of sports, both professional and amateur, with dangerous steroids?

are you not aware of the abusive training practices of YOUNG girls in gymnastics and skating?

and in our case, dogs don't make the decisions...if they did, then none of them would be put through hours of extensive grooming procedures, fly in cargo on airplanes, or spend much time in crates.
they would play.

sweety-pie, i was a very good athlete as a lad, and enjoyed competition.
but there is such a thing as parents and coaches taking it way too seriously.

same thing for dog owners.



DobManiac said:


> I think you would be suprised with how many breeders consider health as a top priority. No one is going to buy your dogs if you are known to have inherent health issues in your lines.


yes, health is a very high priority.

but breed standard is an even higher priority.

so when genetic scientists explain that it is crucial that the stud books be re-opened, to allow new genetic material, the answer is a resounding "no".

the ostrich head goes in the sand.


----------



## animalcraker (Nov 9, 2006)

animalcraker said:


> How about instead of us trying to prove you wrong, and apparently having no idea what you are trying to say in the first place, Why don't you try to prove yourself right? Show us all those negleted and abused dogs at the top of thier game. You probly can't because it doesn't happen like you say it does.


Dog-Man I find it funny that you have completely neglected to respond to my post. Hrm... maybe that's because your claims of "abuse" aren't based on any facts or eveidence


----------



## Katzyn (Mar 22, 2007)

dog-man said:


> Sweetheart, the concept of standard is given such exaggerated importance, it is beyond silly.
> 
> and yes, competition can be very harmful, when it is taken to an extreme.
> are you completely unaware what is going on in the world of sports, both professional and amateur, with dangerous steroids?
> ...


You know, most athletes don't do sports for any other reason, other than they love the sport, regardless of how dangerous it is. Dog shows themselves are rarely dangerous, and if the dog loves it, then what's the problem? People can't very easily show a dog that hates showing. I show cats, and it's very obvious that you can't show a cat that hates showing. Someone would get hurt. The cats love being pampered, groomed, or they wouldn't be there. My case in point: my kitten. I made sure he was well socialized, so I could show him. He does well with most people (lol, SLK), but at the show, he turned into a moster, hissing, spitting, growling, hackles up. He HATED the environment. You can't show an animal like that.

I can see why you wouldn't like dog shows, Dog-man; they -do- seem to support the breeding of breeds that can't even live on their own (such as bulldogs), and they do things like crop ears and dock tails for (mostly) no reason. I don't like it, but if the dogs love it, that's all that matters.

I think people in this thread need to open their minds to the other side of the argument. Too many people are too convinced that they are right, and everyone who doesn't agree is wrong and should be ridiculed.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

animalcraker said:


> Dog-Man I find it funny that you have completely neglected to respond to my post. Hrm... maybe that's because your claims of "abuse" aren't based on any facts or eveidence



ok, ok, i'll answer your post.
it's not easy to respond to every point that is made.

i am not referring to obscene abuse...but a more subtle form.

MY OPINION IS THAT these would constitute a level of "abuse":

1) hours and hours of intensive grooming procedures which SOME breeds seem to need (and no one is denying...on the contrary)...

2) IF any dogs are prevented from normal dirty play (and i think it likely this is the case with the dogs with extemely long or elaborate hair).

i have also heard about it anecdotally...but no, i have NO PROOF...do you think it doesn't occur often among THE TOP DOGS of these breeds?

3) frequent flying
i can't believe that flying cargo can be anything but stressful to many of these dogs. 

4) extensive crating...there were those in the know here that confirmed this as a problem with a substantial number of dogs...do you deny it as true?
it is inevitable...but no, i do not have proof...never claimed to.



Katzyn said:


> You know, most athletes don't do sports for any other reason, other than they love the sport, regardless of how dangerous it is. Dog shows themselves are rarely dangerous, and if the dog loves it, then what's the problem? People can't very easily show a dog that hates showing. I show cats, and it's very obvious that you can't show a cat that hates showing. Someone would get hurt. The cats love being pampered, groomed, or they wouldn't be there. My case in point: my kitten. I made sure he was well socialized, so I could show him. He does well with most people (lol, SLK), but at the show, he turned into a moster, hissing, spitting, growling, hackles up. He HATED the environment. You can't show an animal like that.
> .


dog show advocates like to say that these are the best of the best.

however, i think the PROFESSIONAL dog show environment to be unnatural to a dog.

so, the dogs that can handle it, i think would not necessarily be the best specimen of doggieness. 
they are the best at handling that particular absurd environment.

anyway, thank you for being open-minded, and letting me know of your degree of agreement.


----------



## Max'sHuman (Oct 6, 2007)

Here's another thought....what the heck does the Olympics have to do with dog shows. You may be able to draw comparisons, but it's like comparing apples and oranges....sure they are both fruit, but the taste, texture, color, etc. is different.

Second of all you are guessing what is happening, you don't know. That is what is so irritating. You ask for further research because you suspect certain things are happening. But the bottom line is YOU DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT. What the heck makes you think your opinion or conjectures are more valid than people who are actively involved in show dogs. And don't tell me it's because you are unbiased, because obviously you are not.


----------



## ELmostl (Mar 16, 2008)

anyways i guess my last post got deleted. ugh.

dog man dont call me sweetheart , because i am a man as well , and that makes me uncomfortable.

as for the negatives of competition , yes steroids are an issue but sports are trying to regulate them , and they are illegal , people who use steroids usually suck in the first place. and are usually 1 in a few thousand athletes.

but a lot of people thrive on competitions to better themselves

as for the young gymnasts , i do not know enough about this to comment on them so after doing some research i will offer my opinion.

as for the dogs , they do not have a choice , but if they did not like it they would not win competitions because noone would be able to handle them..ye. a

ok. sweetie.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

ELmostl said:


> ok. sweetie.


----------



## ELmostl (Mar 16, 2008)

really.......


----------



## animalcraker (Nov 9, 2006)

Max'sHuman said:


> Second of all you are guessing what is happening, you don't know. That is what is so irritating. You ask for further research because you suspect certain things are happening. But the bottom line is YOU DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT. What the heck makes you think your opinion or conjectures are more valid than people who are actively involved in show dogs. And don't tell me it's because you are unbiased, because obviously you are not.


Ahh.. My new hero


----------



## FriendsOfZoe (Aug 7, 2007)

Oh good heavens. If gymnastics is coming into the thread then I'm going to have to leave. 

I was formerly a nationally competitive rhythmic gymnast. Not a day goes by when I don't live with this memory, from the pain in my ankles and calves caused by severe chronic tendonitis in my achilles which has probably already progressed into mild arthritis (at the age of 22) and if not, certainly will eventually.

I was emotionally scarred from the coaching...the emphasis on what you need to do better rather than an emphasis on what you did right. I had some struggles with eating disorders after my career in the gym ended, probably in part because of the low sense of self-esteem I had from gymnastics.

And I don't regret what I did for a minute. I learned discipline and hard work there, not to mention time management, and I would not be where I am today without those years. I still think that gymnastics is the best sport in the world and if I had a daughter, I would not only put her in gymnastics, but if she proved to enjoy it and have a talent for it, I would encourage her to continue in the sport as far as she could. 

There are goods and bads to everything. I deal with the pain in my ankles. Getting out of adolescence helped with the emotional pain. And now, all I have are good results to show from my "abusive" gymnastics training. Please, please, PLEASE do not discuss something that you could not possibly understand. There is more than one side to every story.


----------



## animalcraker (Nov 9, 2006)

dog-man said:


> MY OPINION IS THAT... ...i have NO PROOF


This just about sums up all of your arguments. 

If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck then it's a duck. Aye, to you I say you are a duck.


----------



## Wimble Woof (Jan 16, 2007)




----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

animalcraker said:


> This just about sums up all of your arguments.
> 
> If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck then it's a duck. Aye, to you I say you are a duck.


that's why i didn't respond to your original post.
i didn't see much going on upstairs.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

dog-man said:


> ok, i basically agree with that.
> i do think it important that the issue not be swept under the rug.
> *i am not in a position to say exactly what the plan should be.*
> as long as the best health interests of dogs, both in the long and short term, are more important than possible narrowminded priorities of some breed groups.





dog-man said:


> yes, health is a very high priority.
> 
> but breed standard is an even higher priority.
> 
> ...



Ok, I'm confused.

I thought for a minute there that you were open to other options, but now your bringing up the stud books again.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

FriendsOfZoe said:


> I was formerly a nationally competitive rhythmic gymnast. Not a day goes by when I don't live with this memory, from the pain in my ankles and calves caused by severe chronic tendonitis in my achilles which has probably already progressed into mild arthritis (at the age of 22) and if not, certainly will eventually.
> 
> I was emotionally scarred from the coaching...the emphasis on what you need to do better rather than an emphasis on what you did right. I had some struggles with eating disorders after my career in the gym ended, probably in part because of the low sense of self-esteem I had from gymnastics.
> 
> ...


i found this to be a very interesting and odd post.

you talk about serious physical and emotional trauma.

i am glad that you personally try to see the positives...but that doesn't mean it is an overall positive experience, that doesn't need some serious thought and perhaps oversight.

it just shows what people will do to themselves, to reach the top...and so few actually make it.

we all have different priorities...yours are different than mine...i would never expose my daughters to that type of choice and encouragement.

doesn't mean one of us is all right or all wrong.

but i am certainly entitled to have a strong opinion.


----------



## Pai (Apr 23, 2008)

DobManiac said:


> Ok, I'm confused.
> 
> I thought for a minute there that you were open to other options, but now your bringing up the stud books again.


He keeps changing what he's talking about just to keep an argument going. It's really kind of pointless. It's clear he's basically just derailing the thread for his own purposes, and making it all about HIM and HIS opinions instead of what the thread was_ originally_ started about (which was the purpose of dog shows). Typical trolling behavior. He's gotten everyone in the thread focusing on HIM and talking about what HE wants to be talking about, which is the entire point of trolling.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

DobManiac said:


> Ok, I'm confused.
> 
> I thought for a minute there that you were open to other options, but now your bringing up the stud books again.


i don't think there is any question that the stud books need to be opened.

the issue is what degree should it be.

personally, i have no problem with significant change, and an expansive range, within breed standards.

however, if someone has a plan to accomplish what is needed, without changing the standards too much, i would not be against it.


----------



## Spicy1_VV (Jun 1, 2007)

dog-man said:


> i don't think there is any question that the stud books need to be opened.
> 
> the issue is what degree should it be.
> 
> ...


It is your opinion that stud books need to be opened. Some agree some don't. I know that there are sometimes opportunities when they have opened in the past. 

The thing I'd like to know though is what exactly is needed? I haven't follow the last 2-3 pages of this thread but I see it continues to evolve.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

dog-man said:


> that's why i didn't respond to your original post.
> i didn't see much going on upstairs.


I really wish someone would call him out on these needless jabs and the name calling, but that's just me. 

It says a lot about maturity, does it not?

Everyone else can sit here and try to discuss the actual matter without resorting to this yet when someone says something he can't counter he simply belittles them.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

Spicy1_VV said:


> It is your opinion that stud books need to be opened. Some agree some don't. I know that there are sometimes opportunities when they have opened in the past.
> 
> The thing I'd like to know though is what exactly is needed? I haven't follow the last 2-3 pages of this thread but I see it continues to evolve.


read some info from this website:

www.canine-genetics.com



Laurelin said:


> I really wish someone would call him out on these needless jabs and the name calling, but that's just me.
> 
> It says a lot about maturity, does it not?
> 
> Everyone else can sit here and try to discuss the actual matter without resorting to this yet when someone says something he can't counter he simply belittles them.


no, i am not mature.

however, the woman (?) first edits my words, and makes an immature little ditty to me...
here's the context, which YOU are aware of:
Quote:
Originally Posted by dog-man 

MY OPINION IS THAT... ...i have NO PROOF 

This just about sums up all of your arguments. 

If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck then it's a duck. Aye, to you I say you are a duck. 

THAT WAS A REAL INTELLIGENT ARGUMENT THAT I JUST COULD NOT COUNTER.
--------------

so, if someone wants to start up with me with immaturity, i can throw it back.

if you answer like an intelligent adult, i can respond in kind.


----------



## FriendsOfZoe (Aug 7, 2007)

You know, dog-man, a fundamental aspect of research is thoroughness. The only evidence I have ever seen you give is this site (canine genetics), which I have read. However, it is not appropriate to base one's judgments on one website. You should read more--look at other sites, particularly ones that do not end in ".com" (I prefer ".edu" sites) and read scientific, academic, and veterinary journals regarding canine genetics. Get the whole range of facts, opinions, and options before you subscribe wholeheartedly to one website's way of looking at things.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

FriendsOfZoe said:


> You know, dog-man, a fundamental aspect of research is thoroughness. The only evidence I have ever seen you give is this site (canine genetics), which I have read. However, it is not appropriate to base one's judgments on one website. You should read more--look at other sites, particularly ones that do not end in ".com" (I prefer ".edu" sites) and read scientific, academic, and veterinary journals regarding canine genetics. Get the whole range of facts, opinions, and options before you subscribe wholeheartedly to one website's way of looking at things.


ok, please provide me with a website that has another opinion.

however, i don't think the AKC or those hired by them would be objective enough for my taste.

i have searched diligently to find intelligent articles to the contrary of what i have read, but have been unsuccessful.

i would be grateful if you could point me in the right direction.

i am not being sarcastic.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

dog-man said:


> read some info from this website:
> 
> www.canine-genetics.com


simple outcrossing is not the answer! It's going to be way more complicated than that and will have to be carefully done. 

Not all breeds are going to need this to begin with- some have huge gene pools. Some issues could possibly be fixed by simply outcrossing to other countries and other lines, not other breeds. 

If it really needs to be done, it has been done in the past and I am sure it will be done again. 

Look up the African Basenji Project once again. 

Read a standard as well, there's tons of variation allowed in most. 

Outcrossing also does NOT always make everything go away. Outcrossing to another breed can be detrimental to the breed in question. Outrossing a healthy line with few/no genetic defects to an unknown, unrelated line could bring in more problems than it could solutions. 

You have the idea that genetics is so much more simple than it is. Trust me, I spent 3 years as a GENE major here and it does not work that way... Outcrossing is ONE way to POTENTIALLY solve a problem. It can also hurt the population as well.

I agree that there needs to be something done in many breeds but as I'm not involved with them, it is really not my say. All I can really focus on is the breed I show and it is actually very healthy!


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> simple outcrossing is not the answer! It's going to be way more complicated than that and will have to be carefully done.
> 
> Not all breeds are going to need this to begin with- some have huge gene pools. Some issues could possibly be fixed by simply outcrossing to other countries and other lines, not other breeds.
> 
> ...


you have some good points...that's because i agree.

however, i think you are understating the extent of the problem, and overstating the efforts put out so far to meet the challenges.

the real problem, is that breed club members have worked so hard for so long to get their dogs as close as possible to the standard...their dogs are now at the top of the breed.

so, now, even if it is clear that they need to bring in new blood, which might change the standard somewhat, they will continue to look for other solutions instead.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

dog-man said:


> you have some good points...that's because i agree.
> 
> however, i think you are understating the extent of the problem, and overstating the efforts put out so far to meet the challenges.
> 
> ...


How is the problem so cute and dry that you know that opening up the stud books is the answer?

Is it not possible that the problem should be approached several different directions? You seem to think that mixing breeds together will result in this all mighty healthy specimen. Every dog will have bad genes in them. So opening the stud books can change the breeds in so many different ways. And quite a few of those ways will be very detrimental to the dogs.

We could be adding heath problems that certain breeds never had or even doubling up on the problems that are already there. There is nothing factual to suggest that this plan is better than all the others. Why not just take the time to weed out the inherent diseases. This why you will have control over what is getting passed on.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

dog-man said:


> you have some good points...that's because i agree.


Whoot! I am now only right because you agree! 

Geee... thanks. 



> however, i think you are understating the extent of the problem, and overstating the efforts put out so far to meet the challenges.


I am very well versed in my own breed, I don't know specifics about the others, though well enough to say what's being done. 



> the real problem, is that breed club members have worked so hard for so long to get their dogs as close as possible to the standard...their dogs are now at the top of the breed.


No... the real problem is people breeding away from the standards and away from functionality. Read a standard, the exaggerations you see will not be there. Things will be worded rather vaguely. Most extreme exaggerations are ring trends. 



> so, now, even if it is clear that they need to bring in new blood, which might change the standard somewhat, they will continue to look for other solutions instead.


Have you ever talked to people involved in breed clubs? Have you ever looked at a standard? (ask this again)

Standards do change. Ours was last revised in 1975, I believe. 

Change the standard, change the breed. Breeders are working towards improving and maintaining the breed, not changing it. Yes, improvements can be made and should be made but this is a long standing argument...

How much change can you do to a breed before it becomes something else? 

Am Staff people and APBT people argue this all the time.... to keep DA in the lines or to breed it out? Is it right to change a breed if in doing so you are no longer breeding dogs that are characteristic of that breed?

Why not leave it to each breed cub to look at problems? Some breeds are so well kept there are literally few to none. Look at some of the sighthounds.... Once again look at basenjis and where help was needed and sought out. 

In my breed I know a ton of dogs... there are a few genetic issues here and there among the individuals I know. The majority of the big issues are the ones NOT bred to standard. Why? Because their breeders didn't care. They just wanted a good pet, right? What does it matter if a dog is exactly the right height? Well... let me tell you if you start breeding most breeds that way you end up in just a few generations with a dog that barely resembles the breed you started with. 

I want my breed to still be here and I want it to be healthy. There's a lot we have to work on- more health testing is a start. We have our own genetic work being done and yes, a long way to go. Right now there is absolutely no need to outcross and start mixing breeds. The most common genetic issue is patellar luxation and that happens in something like 3% of all puppies born regardless of parentage. 

Shelties were outcrossed relatively recently to collies and we are STILL dealing with unwanted side effects of those crosses... It is not magic and you will not be bringing in only the 'good' genes.

You prove over and over that you really don't know much about dog shows, dog breeding, or dog politics. These issues ARE addressed all the time by serious breeders and the answers will vary. There is no 'one size fits all' solution to these problems.


----------



## Max'sHuman (Oct 6, 2007)

Since analogies seem to be a popular theme on this thread, here's another one: Would you go into a college class about Shakespeare, having read one of his plays, and then argue with the professor about all the reasons he is wrong based on that one play? Especially if that the professor got his PhD and wrote his dissertation about Macbeth? No? I would hope not. Sometimes it seems that is kind of what some people do here. I think because this is an internet forum people disregard credentials and such. Just some food for thought...


----------



## FriendsOfZoe (Aug 7, 2007)

You asked for some other resources; here they are. I found all of these via google, without going on any academic databases or anything. These five articles should take you awhile, and you can continue your research from there. I have done brief summaries as well.

Now that I did your research for you, I am going to make dinner and spend time with my family and my purebred dog, lol.

http://www.spinone.com/AKC_CHF99/18BreedingBetter.htm
This author discusses breed surveys, health testing, and artificial insemination, but not doodles.

http://www.spinone.com/AKC_CHF99/23HealthyBreeding.htm
Another one with a nice breeding plan

http://cgap.ucdavis.edu/publications.htmArticles from the UC Davis Canine Genetic Analysis Project, basically showing how genetic testing (which is improving dramatically) can reduce the instance of genetic diseases without sacrificing the purebred standard

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=18091995
Here is an article from geneticists at the NIH, discussing diversity in breeds. For golden retrievers, for instance, they suggest sharing stock across locations, rather than adding poodle

http://www.dateline.ucdavis.edu/printable_dl_detail.lasso?id=7579&preview=no
This one talks about the need for opening stud books and increasing diversity, but while still continuing the pure bred dog. It also recognizes that only breeds without sufficient genetic diversity really need this…the rest just need to share gene pools. For instance, golden retrievers and poodles have large, diverse populations, and so need better breeding, not cross breeding.


----------



## Spicy1_VV (Jun 1, 2007)

Dogman I read that site before when you posted it. There are things on there that I can counter with my own knowledge and experience. Things written on that site make it seem like it is A or B all the time. 
Like for one instance..........
Inbreeding depression does exist and it is bad. But it is not seen in every breed, in certain breeds its not an issue. In others we can see problems coming from the inbred specimens. 



> Many breeders still cling to the idea that inbreeding is the only route to success, and that they can use it as a tool to identify and weed out genetic problems in their line. They will cite the success of certain breeders who inbred extensively, unaware (or conveniently ignoring) that the most successful litters from these kennels were often the least inbred. They also seem to be unaware that many studies on a wide variety of species have demonstrated that highly inbred individuals frequently live shorter lives and have fewer progeny.


What I am aware of is the kennels I know who inbreed and I use for a source are the litters that were inbred. There are plenty of loosely bred litters I know that produced the least successful - this was inconsistency in type (conformation), health problems which popped up, temperament differences and lack of drives. This means more culling, which while most the pups will get good pet homes it still means almost a waste of breeding, pregnancy and life to an extent. 

I am aware of some of the studies which seem to be pretty legit, on the other hand they are ignoring the good inbred individuals and the bad genetically diverse individuals. They are not taking into account % of good and bad in inbred vs loosely bred. They don't take into account in domesticated controlled breedings what types of breeders made each breeding and the poor choices some might have made (in either instance). They just collect data and info for their own biased side. I do think it does need to be address the huge negatives that can happen from inbreeding or over breeding certain individuals.

I think when you breed a dog too much and they have 700-1000+ offspring that is bad. Can people really be culling properly? Are they just trying to breed to the top dog or sell off pedigree? They are lessoning the diversity in the over all gene pool. Time also needs to be taken to see how pups mature as flaws might not show up until later from a stud. Once you've bred so many offspring off of them without ample time the damage would be hard to undo. 

Inbred dogs live shorter lives? Shorter lives as compared to what? I've known inbred dogs which lived 15 or 16yrs and I've known out crossed dogs which lived only 8-10yrs. (I've had my own experience with this, one I had died younger then that, had health problems her whole life as did her siblings)

Inbred dogs have less progeny? I guess that depends how many times they are bred. Or does this mean per litter? One stud was inbred and had about 1000 offspring. Thats way too many for my taste but he was still bred a lot and from the litters I know 7-10 pups per litter, I don't know of all the litters but ones I know were average sized. Several of the females were also inbred too and the litters were not smaller then normal when compared to any other litter including outcrossed or even scatterbred dogs. 

From the last 5 loose breedings I know of 3 only produced 4 pups (smaller then average), one produced 8, and another produced 6 somewhat below average I'd say. The last 4 out crossed litter I know of (from 2 inbred/linebred parents out crossed together) produced two litters of 10 and two litters of 8. Both the last 2 linebreedings I know of produced 7 and 8. The last 2 inbreeding produced 8 and 13. Things can really go either way depending on what breedings you know of and are using for examples.



dog-man said:


> yes, health is a very high priority.
> 
> but breed standard is an even higher priority.
> 
> ...


I'm sorry but how the hell can you claim to know what is priority for another person? You have know idea at all. Again I don't know why people are generalizing others. One AKC breeder who was a very good breeder IMO, had a female they put a CH on and some other titles (did obedience and agility), also temperament testing. The dog was not optimally healthy nor did she have the drives she should. Why did the breeder choose to cull this dog after such hard work, time and money put into her if they only cared about the standard, not health and not anything else why would they not breed this CH titled dog with other achievements? Can you please tell me why since you seem to know it all? I thought it was because the dog wasn't quality despite having a CH title and meeting the standard, must be another reason however. 

I hate to rain on your parade but opening stud books will do little to fix health problems for the most part. Unless you can explain how this would benefit? What is this new genetic material going to offer? You believe that is people open the stud books its going to benefit the health of a certain breed? The only way to increase health is to cull out problematic dogs. Lets say breeders opened up to using unregistered, unpedigreed dogs, is this some how going to raise the Cane Corso's hip scores? Do unregistered or unpedigreed dogs somehow have better health then the documented purebred kept to standard dogs? I highly doubt it.
When you take into the account the fact that some breeds have known health problems even though they are not inbred and coming from different stock, they haven't been forced to conform to a specific standard, the pedigrees show the breeds development and how they are not genetically "purebred" yet the health problems still exist. If thats not enough there are the breeds or types that are even earlier in development as they come directly from the cross breeding of different individuals trying to achieve a dog of a certain purpose, yet with these loosely bred dogs problems still exist.


----------



## animalcraker (Nov 9, 2006)

Laurelin said:


> I really wish someone would call him out on these needless jabs and the name calling, but that's just me.
> 
> It says a lot about maturity, does it not?
> 
> Everyone else can sit here and try to discuss the actual matter without resorting to this yet when someone says something he can't counter he simply belittles them.


Tis ok. I figured he would act that way once he had to admit that he has no proof to anything he says and that everything is just based on his own inexperienced opinion.


----------



## Spicy1_VV (Jun 1, 2007)

Laurelin said:


> simple outcrossing is not the answer! It's going to be way more complicated than that and will have to be carefully done.
> 
> Not all breeds are going to need this to begin with- some have huge gene pools. Some issues could possibly be fixed by simply outcrossing to other countries and other lines, not other breeds.
> 
> ...


Amen! I did not understand how simply bringing in unrelated dogs to the registry is just going to magically make things go away. I don't even understand the whole concept of crossbreeding since the offspring can still suffere genetic problems. It is way more complicated then breeding unrelated dog to unrelated dog or one breed to another breed.

It isn't inbreeding or pure breeding I should say that has caused such negative effects in itself, it is the breeders choice. Over use of a stud, culling dogs on appearance only (to an extent some mismarks or unpreffered types wouldn't be detrimental to the breed but its what those that write the standard want), inbreeding out of convienence, there are many reasons why there are negatives. One thing is hate is accepted health problems, it is just "normal" in the breed. They will keep breeding the defective dogs because thats just part of the breed now, it didn't have to be but they bred themselves in a hole. There are certain breeds I don't like because of the poor health and non function of that breed. I do think that the breeders shouldn't have bred the dogs that way but nothing I can do about it.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Spicy, EXCELLENT post from someone with actual experience.


----------



## Ella'sMom (Jul 23, 2007)

I am only on page one of this thread but I have to jump in and make a remark - I LOVE to watch dog shows and it's amazes me to no end how much pride these dogs seem to have in themselves and how HAPPY they seem! I am a person that can't watch horse racing or bullfighting (even though I have been told the animals are fine...I still have a hard time watching it for whatever stupid reason) but dog shows are wonderful! They are showing off the BREED...not how "pretty" the dogs are! Oh my god it's so NOT like a beauty pageant. I can't stand beauty pageants!! Ok....I have to go read the rest of this thread................



Shalva said:


> so here is a dog AT THE TOP of her game...... who is still a pet and still a top winning dog who still plays in the fields and chases ducks.... and gets covered in burdocks....... and is probably better cared for and loved than most


I love the snow picture. God love her she is a beauty of a dog.


----------



## borzoimom (May 21, 2007)

Hey all- these few have no intention on trying to learn anything about show.. BTW- I posted my " abused show dog" in pictures and in training.. 
There is no hope here.. No attempt on the other end to understand and only doing this to try to make people upset.. This has gone on for pages- and its obvious- no attempt to try to learn or explore anything... All they are trying to do is justify their mutts.. thats it.. The real joke here is that it takes two " pure breds" to make their mutts.. uhhhhhhhhhhhhh.... they have no intention on learning or trying to explore anything..


----------



## Katzyn (Mar 22, 2007)

Ella'sMom said:


> I am only on page one of this thread but I have to jump in and make a remark - I LOVE to watch dog shows and it's amazes me to no end how much pride these dogs seem to have in themselves and how HAPPY they seem! I am a person that can't watch horse racing or bullfighting (even though I have been told the animals are fine...I still have a hard time watching it for whatever stupid reason) but dog shows are wonderful! They are showing off the BREED...not how "pretty" the dogs are! Oh my god it's so NOT like a beauty pageant. I can't stand beauty pageants!! Ok....I have to go read the rest of this thread................
> 
> 
> 
> I love the snow picture. God love her she is a beauty of a dog.


Lol, bullfighting bulls are NEVER fine. What moron told you that? XD

But anyway, how -isn't- a beauty pageant? I mean, human contestants are all about the looking good (you never see "deformed" humans in those things!), preforming to impress judges...Isn't that what the dogs do? They prance around, showing off how nice their body is. Sure, human contestants don't have their mouth looked at (though a beautiful smile is surely necessary to win), but it's pretty much the same, as is a cat show. It's all about who looks better, according to the standard, interpreted by the judge.

I don't know. I never saw the "use" of a dog show, or a cat show, but I still love going to them, because it's obvious the animals and their humans love it. And, like I said, that's all that matters.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

It's not beauty, but it is about looks. It's really about proper structure. 

Personally my dog who is most 'beautiful' to me is nowhere near a show dog.

And I'm sure we could all argue which one of these two is prettier:



















But one's a lot more correct for the breed.


----------



## Katzyn (Mar 22, 2007)

NOT to argue, just to say:

A model with a crooked ankle or arm would not be a model for long, just as a siamese cat with a large kink in it's tail would not be a show cat, just as a dog of the wrong colour for it's breed would not be a show dog.

By the way, you guys have such pretty dogs!


----------



## Curbside Prophet (Apr 28, 2006)

dog-man said:


> i have searched diligently to find intelligent articles to the contrary of what i have read, but have been unsuccessful.
> 
> I would be grateful if you could point me in the right direction.


The direction we need to look in is towards genetic engineering. But I can't answer the ethical question involved with this, however.

The problem with your solution really is no different than the current status quo. Why? It's a fallacy to believe selective breeding is indistinguishable from natural pressures from the gene's eye view. Pressure is pressure and it always leads to a bottleneck. Selective breeding is just a fast-acting bottleneck. 

So it would be more prudent to mess around with the exact genes (genetic engineering) than saying what we (collective we) want is the problem. Because what we want are healthy animals.


----------



## Ella'sMom (Jul 23, 2007)

applesmom said:


> IMO topics with opposing opinions; no matter how we percieve those opinions are often entertaining and a welcome break from the routine day to day stuff!


I so agree! I don't agree with everything dog-man writes about but love reading a post he has contributed to only because I can read both sides and it becomes an interesting debate if you will. How boring would it be to come here and read "I love designer dogs - especially doodles!" "Oh yes me too!" "Well you know, one should not be breeding mutts". "Oh, forgive me. I will make note of that." 

Because we all disagree and "debate" - it makes for a much more interesting read. When we start to insult and attack is when I get turned off. Ok...still have more to read on this thread............



Katzyn said:


> Lol, bullfighting bulls are NEVER fine. What moron told you that? XD
> 
> But anyway, how -isn't- a beauty pageant? I mean, human contestants are all about the looking good (you never see "deformed" humans in those things!), preforming to impress judges...Isn't that what the dogs do? They prance around, showing off how nice their body is. Sure, human contestants don't have their mouth looked at (though a beautiful smile is surely necessary to win), but it's pretty much the same, as is a cat show. It's all about who looks better, according to the standard, interpreted by the judge.
> 
> I don't know. I never saw the "use" of a dog show, or a cat show, but I still love going to them, because it's obvious the animals and their humans love it. And, like I said, that's all that matters.



I have a close friend that loves bullfighting. We have gotten into this a LOT. He has tried like crazy to change my mind about it - to no avail. I did a lot of reading about how the bulls aren't abused etc. Whatever the case is...I agree with YOU......bullfighting still disgusts me.
As far as beauty pageants and dog shows go...I don't really think there is a similarity - unless I missed the swim suit competition in the last one I watched.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

FriendsOfZoe said:


> Here is an article from geneticists at the NIH, discussing diversity in breeds. For golden retrievers, for instance, they suggest sharing stock across locations, rather than adding poodle
> .


thank you for sending these...now let's take a slow look, one at a time, if you don't mind, and see what they say.

they start with an introduction that states well the problem that i have been speaking about:

Introduction:
Many breeds are characterized by reduced genetic diversity related to small numbers of founders, popular sires whose allelic pool is over represented in subsequent generations, and changes in breed popularity over time. In addition, no dog can become a registered member of a breed unless both its parents are registered members of the same breed. As a result, while phenotypic variation across breeds is large, within breed variation at the DNA level is considerably more limited than in humans.
-------------------------------

now, you said they recommend the following:
For golden retrievers, for instance, they suggest sharing stock across locations.

this is a solution i have read about on the canine-genetics.com website i have been referring to.

i can see that would be a good start...and maybe all that some breeds need.

however, i have read that there are many breeds where you cannot share stock from Europe to the U.S.

in fact, this is a quote from the article regarding golden retrievers:
"...mixing between US and European populations is rare."

so, ok, that would be a great start...open the stud books for the same breed from various locations.

actually, though, i didn't see that recommendation in the article.
please point it out to me.

this is what i did see:
"By comparison, the extent of LD for the GR between the two subpopulations is 1.4 Mb for the US subpopulation and 1.8 Mb for the European. But when GR subpopulations are combined, the extent of LD is reduced to 1.2 Mb. This 25% decrease in LD is comparable to that observed when combining two distinct breeds."

they are saying that mixing the US and European stock lowered it significantly...JUST AS MUCH AS IF THEY WOULD COMBINE TWO DISTINCT BREEDS.
i take it that it is widely accepted that combining distinct breeds has a positive effect on many genetic problems...the reasons being obvious to anyone with at least a high school education concerning recessive genes.

i admit, that doesn't mean crossing breeds is the only way one to go.
if mixing the stocks of US and Europe would do the trick, go for it.

but the AKC groups don't listen to this either, to any significant extent that i know of.

also, i haven't seen anyone say here that the mixing of breeds increases the chance of genetic problems...i got that a few times on this thread.
-------------------

i don't know if it is relevant, but this acknowledgement would make me a little wary of this study's conclusions:

Acknowledgements:
We thank the American Kennel Club Canine Health Foundation, the French Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) and the intramural program of the National Human Genome Research Institute of the National Institutes of Health for supporting this work.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Ella'sMom said:


> As far as beauty pageants and dog shows go...I don't really think there is a similarity - unless I missed the swim suit competition in the last one I watched.


Okay, now I just want to shove Beau into a bikini.


----------



## Ella'sMom (Jul 23, 2007)

Laurelin said:


> Okay, now I just want to shove Beau into a bikini.


Heehee...having a mental image. Mommy make it go away! Too funny....


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Okay so say you have a breed like a papillon with only a couple of genetic diseases. If you were to outcross that dog to another breed with different genetic defects, you could be adding more problems into the breed. 

Why do you think ALL breeds need outcrosses? 

We need to focus on specific problems, not make grand sweeping statements about crossbreeding to better breed health.

What is the problem, first of all? How much of the population is affected? How much of the well bred dog population is affected? What are the potential solutions? Would screening be possible and helpful in eliminating this problem? Is there another line of the same breed that is problem free? Is there a closely related breed that could potentially help out? What are the problems that will arise from these crosses? 

Basically what can we change without losing our breed?

You can have mixed dogs that have genetic problems- my Shack (GSD x Golden) was severely dysplastic.

Harry was an outcross Japanese x American lines and he died at eleven months. His american half was fairly heavily linebred, as are all my papillons. that half of the family has never produced a dog with a genetic health defect. Not only that, but ANOTHER similar outcross I know died at the same age from the same symptoms. 

There ARE problems... for example, Trey's sire sired hundreds of dogs and 80 some odd champions. He also died young of cancer. Now, Trey has already outlived him, but Trey has had three tumors removed, one was precancerous. What could this sire have potentially done to the breed's cancer rate as a whole? 

You can talk theory regarding everything all you want but unless you're really out doing anything, you won't have the real world experience that other have. Some things sound marvelous on paper but really do not work out all that well in real life.



Ella'sMom said:


> Heehee...having a mental image. Mommy make it go away! Too funny....


Is this close enough?



















Real show dog abuse lmao.


----------



## Katzyn (Mar 22, 2007)

Laurelin said:


> Is this close enough?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


*wolf whistles* Heyyy, baby~ Woooo, sexay~


----------



## Rowdy (Sep 2, 2007)

Ella'sMom said:


> As far as beauty pageants and dog shows go...I don't really think there is a similarity - unless I missed the swim suit competition in the last one I watched.


How's this one?


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Katzyn said:


> *wolf whistles* Heyyy, baby~ Woooo, sexay~


I know! It seriously looks like he's trying to do pinup. 

Silly boy.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> Okay so say you have a breed like a papillon with only a couple of genetic diseases. If you were to outcross that dog to another breed with different genetic defects, you could be adding more problems into the breed.
> 
> Why do you think ALL breeds need outcrosses?
> 
> We need to focus on specific problems, not make grand sweeping statements about crossbreeding to better breed health.


can you please show me where i made any grand sweeping statements about crossbreeding?
or how about any recommendation that the solution is crossbreeding?

i talk about opening up the stud books.
this includes mixing stock from differerent countries.

that is one of the main recommendations mentioned on the 
canine-genetics.com site.

please look at my very last post before you argue against me a position that is not my own.

it happens that i am open to some crossbreeding IF that is the solution which experts recommend.

however, i do not trust the wisdom of breed groups at all.


----------



## bluedawg (Apr 20, 2008)

Thanks for bringing the funnay.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

We already mix stock from other countries in all the time. 

And who should be in charge of 'fixing' problems within a breed, then? A group of people outside the breed with no knowledge of the breed?

No thank you.



bluedawg said:


> Thanks for bringing the funnay.


You're welcome, Blue.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> We already mix stock from other countries in all the time.
> 
> And who should be in charge of 'fixing' problems within a breed, then? A group of people outside the breed with no knowledge of the breed?
> 
> No thank you.


i do not know about papillons, but there is a significant controversial issue of the AKC and CKC not allowing stock from other countries, despite the fact that it is recommended by geneticists.

right now, there are laws being passed in Europe to force breeders to change their ways.
that doesn't mean that the lawmakers can do a good job of breeding.
what it does mean is that the problem is so obvious to the scientific community, that breeders have to be pushed to face reality.

the solution is not to have an outside source making decisions.

the solution is for the breed groups to take their heads out of the sand.

i won't hold my breath.

even mixing dogs from other countries will make enough changes in the standards, that the top breeders will refuse.

the only hope is with breeders who say good riddance to the show ring, and do what is best for dogs.


----------



## Ella'sMom (Jul 23, 2007)

Rowdy said:


> How's this one?


This has to be one of the funniest pictures I have ever seen.

My 10 year old son said you should put a shirt on him.


----------



## applesmom (Jun 9, 2007)

dog-man said:


> i do not know about papillons, but there is a significant controversial issue of the AKC and CKC not allowing stock from other countries, despite the fact that it is recommended by geneticists.
> 
> right now, there are laws being passed in Europe to force breeders to change their ways.
> that doesn't mean that the lawmakers can do a good job of breeding.
> ...


Since when doesn't AKC allow stock from other countries?




> *I. IMPORTED DOGS*
> *A. Eligibility*
> Dogs imported into the U.S. may be eligible for registration in the AKC Stud Book, provided:
> *1. *The imported dog is of a breed eligible for individual registration in the AKC Stud Book.
> ...


http://www.akc.org/rules/special_registry_services.cfm

We've already seen what leaving the breeding to those that don't show would happen. Shelters overflowing with abandoned dogs with poor temperaments and multitudes of health issues.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

EDIT: THANK YOU APPLESMOM

We import dogs ALL the time. Go to a show and about half the specials will be from another country. Look at a papillon pedigree- many will have 4+ countries in the pedigree. 

Our national specialty winner last year was an import from Japan...

I can think of a ton of individual dogs coming from either Asia or Europe. 

No one remember the toy poodle, Vicki? 

Ever watch Crufts and see how many dogs are showing at Crufts from other countries?

Yep, no imports....









This is Joonas, who is from Sweden. Top phalene ever.









Kidd from Japan. BISS winner in 2007









Tango who is half Japanese and half American. New champion and future specials.









Beau- entirely American and a champion...


----------



## pamperedpups (Dec 7, 2006)

Good grief, dog-man. You know, it's okay to not know everything.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

pamperedpups said:


> Good grief, dog-man. You know, it's okay to not know everything.


ya know, it is amazing...someone can list the rules, and people think: oh, what is he talking about?

do you think it is so simple?

here is the beginning of a story of one breed in Canada.
you can go to the site to get more info:
http://www.seppalasleddogs.com

NEW SIBERIAN IMPORT STOCK became available once more following the breakup of the USSR in 1989. That should have been an exciting watershed event for the Siberian Husky breed. CKC and AKC, however, refused to permit the use of these dogs in breeding, while the Siberian Husky Club of Canada stood aside and refused to get involved or to advocate for the new imports with CKC. (Seppalas at that time were still nominally part of the Siberian Husky breed, even though they had been bred as a closed strain since the 1930's, isolated from show bloodlines.) The all-breed national registries insisted on CLOSED STUD BOOKS , placing the racist notion of breed purity above genetic health. CKC and AKC rejected the concept of fresh genetic input into an existing breed, ignorant of the science of POPULATION GENETICS, which insists that small closed gene pools require periodic refreshing with new genetic material in order to maintain full species soundness and genetic health.


----------



## pamperedpups (Dec 7, 2006)

...ya, it is amazing. You can site one example supporting your views about 100s of purebred dog breed genetics based one incident in one breed almost 20 years ago and that's supposed to prove what?


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

And look! I can counter that!

http://www.basenji.org/african/project.htm

Besides, you just said you couldn't import dogs into the AKC, which you CAN. The statement you can't is ridiculous.

And how much do you really know about that incident? Probably not much... I sure don't. 

Oh and look, they have a standard as well. I guess they should stop breeding with that in mind?


----------



## fuzzie (Jul 6, 2007)

dog-man said:


> and in our case, dogs don't make the decisions...if they did, then none of them would be put through hours of extensive grooming procedures, fly in cargo on airplanes, or spend much time in crates.
> they would play.


If it were up to dogs, do you think Oinest would be neutered


----------



## jesirose (Mar 27, 2008)

Wow, I would love hours of extensive grooming - oh wait, we call that a SPA. It's fun. Not all dogs want to play dirty like you insist. You may enjoy running around for hours on end. I sure don't. I'd rather be groomed than exercise


----------



## Pai (Apr 23, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> Kidd from Japan. BISS winner in 2007


He's beautiful... I love the bits of brown inside the black ears. Papillions are so pretty. =)


----------



## Dogstar (May 11, 2007)

Heck, Lizzie's mother was imported (in utero- her grandmother was born in England, bred to a dog there, and then whelped her litter in the US) from England and her father is from an English-bred bitch and an Australian import! I'm importing a puppy from Australia later this year. 

German Spitz have quite a small gene pool and yet are one of the healthiest small breeds out there. It's certainly not ONLY about diversity.


----------



## Pai (Apr 23, 2008)

dog-man said:


> That should have been an exciting watershed event for the Siberian Husky breed. CKC and AKC, however, refused to permit the use of these dogs in breeding, while the Siberian Husky Club of Canada stood aside and refused to get involved or to advocate for the new imports with CKC.


You're aware, that it's the* individual breed clubs that decide* when/how to add new breeding stock, not the _registries_, right? If people have a problem with how a breed is being handled, they are free to make their own club for the breed, or they can push for reform within the existing club. It's not a _registry's_ job or responsibility to do any changing of a breed club's policies or standards.


----------



## Dogstar (May 11, 2007)

Not to mention that the Seppalas, as I understand it, were originally registered with the Continental Kennel Club? I mean, I'm sure they're mostly sibe, if not all, but that really doesn't look good.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Kid is gorgeous. I love watching him show every time. He is just a beautiful dog.


----------



## applesmom (Jun 9, 2007)

This thread has gone about as far as it can go. Most likely the next one will be about how performance or working dogs are mistreated.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

fuzzie said:


> If it were up to dogs, do you think Oinest would be neutered


i, personally, would not neuter a dog.

i got Oinest from a breeder who neutered Oinest even before i was aware of him.

one reason i might not get a puppy in the future, is that i even find this to be against my values: depending on someone else who neuters.

that is why i would probably go the shelter route, if i ever get another dog.



applesmom said:


> This thread has gone about as far as it can go. Most likely the next one will be about how performance or working dogs are mistreated.


the abuse of a very large number of shepherd dogs in Australia is a very serious problem.

there is also a major problem with injuries in agility dogs.
many dogs who participate are not really made to do alot of the difficult exercises.



Pai said:


> You're aware, that it's the* individual breed clubs that decide* when/how to add new breeding stock, not the _registries_, right? If people have a problem with how a breed is being handled, they are free to make their own club for the breed, or they can push for reform within the existing club. It's not a _registry's_ job or responsibility to do any changing of a breed club's policies or standards.


i believe it is a combination of the registry and the breed clubs.

the famous case of the dalmation/pointer cross (to fix a health problem in dalmations) involved the AKC on its own first accepting the dogs, and then the breed club protested.



Dogstar said:


> Heck, Lizzie's mother was imported (in utero- her grandmother was born in England, bred to a dog there, and then whelped her litter in the US) from England and her father is from an English-bred bitch and an Australian import! I'm importing a puppy from Australia later this year.
> 
> .


anyone can breed.

the question is: could these dogs participate in the conformation shows?

or, can they be registered with the AKC?

i do not know the answer myself, in your breed and breeding situation.
let me know.



Laurelin said:


> And look! I can counter that!
> 
> http://www.basenji.org/african/project.htm


there is extensive info about the basenji project on the website i have been continually referencing:
www.canine-genetics.com

the point is, is that this is one of the rare exceptions, and breakthrough projects, to open up the stud books.

it is not common.
experts wish that it would become common.
-------------------------

for those who are interested in reading opinions different than what they are used to, here is a very thought-provoking article:


http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2006/05/inbred-thinking.html

-----------------------------------------

OK, PEOPLE, LISTEN UP.
BELOW IS A LINK FOR AN ARTICLE FROM A WOMAN WHO IS A MEMBER OF A BREED CLUB, AND IS AGAINST AKC ACTIONS TO OPEN UP STUD BOOKS IN A PARTICULAR SITUATION.

http://www.geocities.com/letsdiscussjudging/ahier.html


HERE IS THE INITIAL SENTENCE:
When a new breed is recognized by the American Kennel Club AKC, the stud book is supposed to be permanently closed to dogs from other domestic registries.

everyone, take a deep breath.

we are at an interesting point in the discussion.

we have two choices:
1) use the opposing viewpoints to help us clarify the truth of this important issue.

or

2) only try to prove the other person wrong.

let's try for the first option, and see where it goes.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Well, apparently we should all do nothing with our dogs and let everyone breed together cause that'll solve all our problems. 

And then we should ignore facts and things suggesting otherwise because we've read 'articles' from people with a huge anti-show agenda. Of course this person does not like the AKC, as he's a member of JRTCA! It's called politics...


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> Well, apparently we should all do nothing with our dogs and let everyone breed together cause that'll solve all our problems.
> 
> And then we should ignore facts and things suggesting otherwise because we've read 'articles' from people with a huge anti-show agenda. Of course this person does not like the AKC, as he's a member of JRTCA! It's called politics...


you make no attempt to clarify the subject, or address valid points made.

first, i am told i have no sources, and i am wrong by mentioning that there is a problem with closed stud books, and using dogs from other registries.

i bring statements from the Seppola project and this woman's letter, and then i am told it is only two sources, or just politics.

no, they are not the last word on the subject, but i think it should give you an indication that the issue is different than you first might have thought.

so, let's try and clarify the issue by sharing the partial information we both possess.

and, do not put words in my mouth...i have not advocated haphazard breeding.
i also do not claim to have breeding knowledge of how to implement the opening up of the stud books.

i am merely trying to open up discussion on what i consider a serious issue...because i see experts concerned about it...and it makes sense.


----------



## petstar (Dec 7, 2007)

dog-man said:


> you make no attempt to clarify the subject, or address valid points made.
> 
> first, i am told i have no sources, and i am wrong by mentioning that there is a problem with closed stud books, and using dogs from other registries.
> 
> ...


I think it's abundantly clear that you condone haphazard breeding (unless you've reformed and you are now willing to admit that the act of breeding your dog was exactly that...(haphazard breeding).

I'm shocked as to why you can't wrap your brain around this. You are arguing with people who have experience...who aren't basing assumptions on articles or ignorance. Do you honestly believe that because you have read some internet articles and watched a few minutes of a national dog show that you are informed enough to argue with people who exist in the dog show world?


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

petstar said:


> I think it's abundantly clear that you condone haphazard breeding (unless you've reformed and you are now willing to admit that the act of breeding your dog was exactly that...(haphazard breeding).


how is it abundantly clear?

because i own a goldendoodle, and think it is a good idea to breed them?

that is different than looking for solutions to fix the genetic crisis in purebred dogs.

a doodle is not a breed...i don't want it to be a breed...i just happen to think they make great dogs.

however, if people want a fixed breed, then the solution is not through casual breeding techniques.



petstar said:


> You are arguing with people who have experience...who aren't basing assumptions on articles or ignorance. Do you honestly believe that because you have read some internet articles and watched a few minutes of a national dog show that you are informed enough to argue with people who exist in the dog show world?


some people here have broad experience in the dog show world.

THAT is their education and mindset.

i have not seen an abundance of knowledge on the issues that i have been referencing.

the websites and articles i have been referencing are strong enough to start a discussion.

unfortunately, not all people in this world are willing to debate in a friendly and open-minded manner, regarding an issue that is near and dear to them.

that is why debates on religion and politics are not welcome here.

however, this is a DOG forum.

these articles and opinions deserve to be discussed.

the issue is not whether i am an expert or not...i am not.

read the articles and debate them...or watch on the sidelines.

you do have the right to just complain, but it really does not add anything.


----------



## wabanafcr (Jun 28, 2007)

dog-man said:


> the question is: could these dogs participate in the conformation shows?
> 
> or, can they be registered with the AKC?
> 
> ...


Yes, imported dogs from a legitimate foreign Kennel Club can participate in conformation shows and can be registered with the AKC. I have three imports, two from Denmark and one from England. All three are registered with the AKC, one is also registered in Canada. All three can be bred from (well, the youngest just turned 2 so he doesn't have any clearances yet so he hasn't earned the right to be a part of the gene pool yet) and their progeny registered.

The oldest, my Danish male, has earned his AKC championship and is competing in agility and training for field work. Yes, imports can be registered, can compete and can be bred, as long as they are from a legitimate and recognized kennel club.


----------



## Motebi (Apr 8, 2008)

Since we are at it: When will AKC finally ban cropping and docking ?   Why do they still endorse the amputation of canine body parts ? It's about time judges, handlers, breeders and puppy buyers don't buy into this nonsense anymore !


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

wabanafcr said:


> Yes, imported dogs from a legitimate foreign Kennel Club can participate in conformation shows and can be registered with the AKC. I have three imports, two from Denmark and one from England. All three are registered with the AKC, one is also registered in Canada. All three can be bred from (well, the youngest just turned 2 so he doesn't have any clearances yet so he hasn't earned the right to be a part of the gene pool yet) and their progeny registered.
> 
> The oldest, my Danish male, has earned his AKC championship and is competing in agility and training for field work. Yes, imports can be registered, can compete and can be bred, as long as they are from a legitimate and recognized kennel club.


i was actually asking the woman in particular that posted, but i am interested to learn about any breed policy.

i do not think that this is so simple across the board for all breeds.

i will look up some more quotes and articles, but i think it would help if someone here with inside info would come forth with even-handed information.

there seems to be strong limitations on using dogs from other registries.

however, i would imagine that some breeds, which are closely associated in their origin to a European country, could have more open rules to that country.

------------------------
here is a quote:
If one stud book has a reciprocal agreement with another stud book, it will accept animals with one or more parents from the other stud book. This helps to prevent inbreeding, by encouraging matches from different regions. Once a stud book is closed, the animals registered in it are considered to be “foundation stock,” meaning that every registered animal from then on will be a descendant of the foundation stock.

my question to those in the know:
if another country's registry includes dogs that are not from the foundation stock of the AKC registry, can those dogs be used in the AKC registry?


----------



## Max'sHuman (Oct 6, 2007)

dog-man said:


> however, this is a DOG forum.
> 
> these articles and opinions deserve to be discussed.
> 
> ...


Excellent points....guess once again the problem is somehow your perceived "tone" raises everybody's hackles....still, I think above of all else, this point stands....these are debate-worthy issues and could create some very interesting discussion


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

HERE IS A VERY INTERESTING ARTICLE ON THE SUBJECT FROM THE SALUKI CLUB OF AMERICA:

http://www.salukiclub.org/SalukiHealth/salukhealth-akcgenepool.html


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

Motebi said:


> Since we are at it: When will AKC finally ban cropping and docking ?   Why do they still endorse the amputation of canine body parts ? It's about time judges, handlers, breeders and puppy buyers don't buy into this nonsense anymore !


Go back a few pages and you can read about cropping and docking.

I really can't understand why people on this forum believe that it only exist in the show ring. It was never invented as a breed trend. Cropping and docking has a much longer history than that, which is way you see it in the ring. They are trying to present the dogs as they were original intended to look.

And honestly we can argue about the pain in cropping, but there is no pain in docking a 3 day old puppy’s tail. Please go and see the procedure and you will realize this. But that is the last I am going to say on this issue. 

Just go back a few pages and read.



dog-man said:


> i, personally, would not neuter a dog.
> 
> i got Oinest from a breeder who neutered Oinest even before i was aware of him.
> 
> ...


Why would you not neuter a dog in the future? And does it apply to both males and females?


----------



## Motebi (Apr 8, 2008)

Oh goody - why not crop a dachshund ? 









I guess it would be considered "unattractive", right ?


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

DobManiac said:


> Why would you not neuter a dog in the future? And does it apply to both males and females?


and also if you get a shelter dog, fyi it will most likely come neutered.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

DobManiac said:


> Why would you not neuter a dog in the future? And does it apply to both males and females?


i just don't think it is my right to do that (male or female)...i have some strong feelings about animal RIGHTS.

however, i do understand why society has an urgent need to do it.

so, my personal solution would be to only get a dog from rescue, rather than support breeding of any kind.
again, that would be my own personal solution...not pushing it on others.



Laurelin said:


> and also if you get a shelter dog, fyi it will most likely come neutered.


exactly.

but if i support a breeder that neuters her dogs, then i feel indirectly responsible for her actions.

if i rescue a dog from death that is already neutered, i don't feel a sense of going against my values.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

dog-man said:


> i just don't think it is my right to do that (male or female)...i have some strong feelings about animal RIGHTS.
> 
> however, i do understand why society has an urgent need to do it.
> 
> ...


Having an intact dog is not really supporting breeding unless you were allowing the dog to breed. 

But I do find it intriguing that you bestow dogs with such a level of humanity. It's different to say the least.



dog-man said:


> i just don't think it is my right to do that (male or female)...i have some strong feelings about animal RIGHTS.
> 
> however, i do understand why society has an urgent need to do it.
> 
> ...


 I actually found it odd that the breeder neuters the puppy before you even got him. I don't know any breeders that would do that. But AKC allows breeders to register puppies under limited registration. So maybe she did it because it was a mixed dog. 

I guess. All I know is I would never neuter or spay before a year, two years preferable for males. It seems weird that she wouldn't at least let you know beforehand that the dog would be neutered. That’s a breach of contract in my way of thinking. That should have been agreed on by both parties.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Max'sHuman said:


> Excellent points....guess once again the problem is somehow your perceived "tone" raises everybody's hackles....still, I think above of all else, this point stands....these are debate-worthy issues and could create some very interesting discussion


I have debated them before.... with people actually involved in working bred dogs and things like that. Most of them are able to realize not all dog breeds are in the same situation. I know someone who is the biggest working border collie advocate who will acknowledge that showing is perfectly fine and even needed in other breeds in particular the companion breeds which have no true job other than being a companion.

Actually most will...

You must realize also that there is a huge history of conflict between the AKC breed clubs and clubs such as the JRTCA and ABCA. I'm NOT saying these clubs are not right, but each side of the fight can and does go for the throat of the other... You can find anything to support or refute either group if you know who to look to for the information.

There is also a host of problems as well... For example the ABCA will unregister a dog that is an AKC champion and take away working titles from said dog simply because the dog is a Ch and must therefore be inferior. To me, that's ridiculous. What's it really matter if a dog is 'pretty' enough to be in the ring and can work? It seems counterproductive.

Same token, different side... most real working borders stand no chance in the AKC ring and most AKC borders cannot herd. Well, I won't say cannot herd but cannot herd to the level needed on a real farm.

Talk to the AKC people and they'll tell you they're breeding for versatility. Talk to the ABCA and they'll tell you they're breeding solely for working ability.

Truthfully, I agree with one and disagree with another's breeding practices, but the breeders are just emphasizing different aspects of the same breed.

Things like these you cannot really grasp until you start talking to both groups. It's big problems, no easy fix in sight. 

Breeding is really complex especially in the highly polarized breeds he keeps bringing up. Remember again, these are the extremes- not all breeds are as divided or divided at all.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

DobManiac said:


> It seems weird that she wouldn't at least let you know beforehand that the dog would be neutered. .


i knew in advance that Oinest and her other pups were already neutered.

that was one reason i chose her over another breeder.


----------



## applesmom (Jun 9, 2007)

dog-man said:


> i knew in advance that Oinest and her other pups were already neutered.
> 
> that was one reason i chose her over another breeder.


Have you changed your position on neutering since then?


----------



## animalcraker (Nov 9, 2006)

dog-man said:


> the question is: could these dogs participate in the conformation shows?
> 
> or, can they be registered with the AKC?
> 
> ...





dog-man said:


> i do not think that this is so simple across the board for all breeds.


Yes dogs from numerous breeds are imported registered and shown to Ch's and othere titles all the time in AKC. It's not just a select few breeds, the number one Afghan in the nation last year was a direct import from Japan. Many other Afghans come from all over the world and from every continent. Importing may be more prevelant in some breeds than others, but it can be done for every breed. 

And from the saluki article dog-man posted


> Breeders opposed to AKC recognition may then look at the AKC population and accuse the AKC of ruining the breed, but in fact they themselves are partly to blame for promoting the splintering of the breed.


I find this very interesting and have argued this with "working" breeders myself. The quote is refering to the fact that BC breeders were so opposed to AKC that only a very small perecentage of BC's were registered with AKC. As a result the AKC BC's gene pool was limmited to a small percentage that breeders could choose from while still maintaining their AKC registration.


----------



## Pai (Apr 23, 2008)

dog-man said:


> i believe it is a combination of the registry and the breed clubs.
> 
> the famous case of the dalmation/pointer cross (to fix a health problem in dalmations) involved the AKC on its own first accepting the dogs, and then the breed club protested.


Yes, because a REGISTRY has no final authority or say -- the BREED CLUB does. Which is exactly what I _said._ Note that the people who outcrossed those Dals, are continuing their breeding program just fine on their own, regardless of what their parent club decided. Which is ALSO what I said that every breeder is free to do, if they choose.


----------



## fuzzie (Jul 6, 2007)

I actually agree with dog-man on the neutering thing, it seems weird and unnatural to give a dog a surgery that may or may not altar his personality. I think I would get my dog a vasectomy if possible, so he wouldn't sire unwanted puppies.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

applesmom said:


> Have you changed your position on neutering since then?



to clarify...i did not want to neuter a dog, even then.

therefore, i chose someone who had already neutered, before i met the dog.

now, i do not even want to do that.


----------



## fuzzie (Jul 6, 2007)

Motebi said:


> Oh goody - why not crop a dachshund ?
> 
> 
> 
> ...













You forgot something, he looks rather dashing now I think


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

dog-man said:


> to clarify...i did not want to neuter a dog, even then.
> 
> therefore, i chose someone who had already neutered, before i met the dog.
> 
> now, i do not even want to do that.


So you are ok with neutering as long as you don't have to get your hands dirty?

Seems a little hypocritical to me.


----------



## 4dogs3cats (Dec 21, 2007)

PERSONALLY- I am going to neuter my dogs until innocent dogs stop dying in shelters. I do not think doodles, pitbulls, etc are the main causes of shelter animals. I think a big contribution is oops litters. How else would there be puppies in shelters? I wouldn't think those are planned. I agree that a Vasectomy may be better, but....why? My dogs don't seem to care whats missing. In fact, they DO (strangely) make fake...ahem's that you can get implanted, as silly as that sounds. But my dogs have calmed down, and they dont mark, and I know they arent off fathering unwanted litters. I can see both sides of the spectrum, but if done young, what personality is it really changing?

Dog-man- Oinest may certainly have had a different personality left un-neutered, but don't you love the dog he is? Even if he IS neutered?


----------



## Dogstar (May 11, 2007)

4dogs - in some breeds, the bigger worry, at least for responsible owners, is bone cancer- dogs neutered young are at a significantly higher risk in many giant breeds- danes, BMDs, etc.


----------



## 4dogs3cats (Dec 21, 2007)

Dogstar said:


> 4dogs - in some breeds, the bigger worry, at least for responsible owners, is bone cancer- dogs neutered young are at a significantly higher risk in many giant breeds- danes, BMDs, etc.


I originally was not aware of that but after reading more about Danes I have come to learn that there are health risks being neutered early. That is because of their growth right? They take so long to fully grow that neutering them messes with it?

I guess speutering has become such a common practice (and it should be with all the shelters bursting at the seams,) that nobody is really seeing the downside of it.. If you have a large breed dog and a fenced in backyard, and are responsible, I see no reason why you should be forced to neuter your dog at a young age. (Or if you show, or breed-RESPONSIBLY) I think its necessary most of the time though. maybe when the shelters arent so full (I know wishful thinking,) than the decision can TRULY be up to the owner.

Sorry to go OT- but this whole thread kind of formed a life of its own anyway lol.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

DobManiac said:


> So you are ok with neutering as long as you don't have to get your hands dirty?
> 
> Seems a little hypocritical to me.


did you read what i wrote?

i don't believe this.

how is saving a shelter dog, which is already neutered, some sort of hypocrisy?
i stated very clearly that was my philosophy now.

do you think i should let a dog die, because someone once neutered him?

what do you not get?
what i am missing?



4dogs3cats said:


> Dog-man- Oinest may certainly have had a different personality left un-neutered, but don't you love the dog he is? Even if he IS neutered?


i think the neutering probably made him easier to deal with, and i would hate to lose him because he ran away when smelling a sexy fox.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

dog-man said:


> did you read what i wrote?
> 
> i don't believe this.
> 
> ...


I didn't think my post was so unclear. 

It just seems to me that if you have such strong feelings about neutering, that you would be agianst it in all circumstances. I don't really see why it should matter whether the dog comes from a breeder or a shelter if they are performing a surgery on the dog that you don't agree with. Both parties are doing the procedure for the same reason, to keep the do from breeding. 

But if you feel that neutering a dog is against animal rights as you say, I just don't see the difference. Not that going to a shelter is a bad thing. It’s perfectly responsible choice. I just find your logic confusing.


----------



## Dakota Spirit (Jul 31, 2007)

dog-man said:


> how is saving a shelter dog, which is already neutered, some sort of hypocrisy?
> i stated very clearly that was my philosophy now.
> 
> do you think i should let a dog die, because someone once neutered him?


You _are_ aware that most dogs are neutered IN the shelter, right? We rarely, RARELY ever get dogs in that have already been fixed. However, the shelter policy is that every animal that leaves our facility is fixed before exiting the doors - so the surgery is done by us.

That being said, similar policies are very common among shelters. So you aren't cutting support on neutering by going the shelter route. In essence, you are following the same approach you did with your breeder, except you are getting the animal from a shelter instead.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

here is a trick i learned early on, and taught to my kids.

when there is a difficult decision to make, take a pad of paper, make a line down the middle, so you could write the reasons for each side of a decision.

even if the info written down is all correct, two reasonable people can come to a different conclusion...because we all have different priorities.

it is difficult to find a decision where all the good reasons are on one side, and none on the other.

i would rescue a dog even though someone neutered it already.
i don't think that should prevent me from rescuing the dog.

SAVING A DOG IS MORE IMPORTANT TO ME THAN THE NEUTERING ISSUE.

if i saw an intact dog, i might choose another who was neutered already, because i would want to be a less direct cause of the neutering.
i might also decide that saving that particular dog is more important than a subtle principle.

the original route i took, of looking for a breeder who already neutered the dogs, i consider now to be somewhat hypocritical, and that is one reason i don't want to do that anymore.

however, i had other reasons on my list to go to a breeder...since i was an inexperienced dog person, and felt a breeder's puppy would be best for me.

i do not regret the basic decision of that time.

now that i am more experienced, and think i could find a good dog in the shelter, my reasons on both sides of the list would now look different.

is that clear? i am trying my best.


----------



## Dakota Spirit (Jul 31, 2007)

Yes dog-man, your methods are now a bit clearer to me. Regardless of my opinion on your morals, I better see the point you are trying to get across.

What was confusing before was it coming across to me that you were not pursuing a breeder again because you felt you didn't want to be the direct cause of a neuter. I thought you figured all dogs came into the shelter already fixed (or that they weren't fixed upon adoption) - and as such, I wanted to dispel any misunderstanding on that front.

Anyway, thank you for taking the time to calmly explain.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

Dakota Spirit said:


> Anyway, thank you for taking the time to calmly explain.


it's worth it if i make myself understood...thanks.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

dog-man said:


> it's worth it if i make myself understood...thanks.


Thanks from me too. 

I was just confused by your logic; since I really didn’t see the difference in the two sceneries. But I understand having multiple reasons for choosing to go to a shelter instead.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

dog-man said:


> here is a trick i learned early on, and taught to my kids.
> 
> when there is a difficult decision to make, take a pad of paper, make a line down the middle, so you could write the reasons for each side of a decision.
> 
> ...


You know, this kind of sums up the entire thread nicely, don't you think?

Well done, dog-man.


----------



## Spicy1_VV (Jun 1, 2007)

dog-man said:


> here is a quote:
> If one stud book has a reciprocal agreement with another stud book, it will accept animals with one or more parents from the other stud book. This helps to prevent inbreeding, by encouraging matches from different regions. Once a stud book is closed, the animals registered in it are considered to be “foundation stock,” meaning that every registered animal from then on will be a descendant of the foundation stock.
> 
> my question to those in the know:
> if another country's registry includes dogs that are not from the foundation stock of the AKC registry, can those dogs be used in the AKC registry?


Right it is true the AKC stud book is closed but not to dogs of legitimate foreign registry. You can't AKC register a dog that is from another registry here like UKC or NKC but you can register a dog with AKC from another country. So you could bring in new blood to the gene pool that way. 

So yes those dogs can be used and registered. I believe someone quoted the AKC policy for you (applesmom maybe?) which states what dogs are eligible for AKC registration.


----------



## dog-man (Mar 26, 2008)

Spicy1_VV said:


> So yes those dogs can be used and registered. I believe someone quoted the AKC policy for you (applesmom maybe?) which states what dogs are eligible for AKC registration.


yes, but like anything else, the devil is in the details.

if the details make it to cumbersome to do with certain breeds, then that is quite relevant.



Laurelin said:


> You know, this kind of sums up the entire thread nicely, don't you think?


yes, i do...thank you.


----------



## melgrj7 (Sep 21, 2007)

A real bull fight ends with either a dead bull or a dead person usually.



Ella'sMom said:


> I have a close friend that loves bullfighting. We have gotten into this a LOT. He has tried like crazy to change my mind about it - to no avail. I did a lot of reading about how the bulls aren't abused etc. Whatever the case is...I agree with YOU......bullfighting still disgusts me.


----------



## poodleholic (Mar 15, 2007)

> i was referring to the breeds that have the hair down to the floor, or or who have elaborate grooming needs, such as poodles.
> i would be surprised if those dogs were allowed to get dirty on a regular basis.


I have numerous friends who breed and show Standard Poodles, a few who are at the top. All of their Poodles are allowed to play, and yes, even get dirty. Ears, topknots, and necks are protected with wraps and bands. In some cases, the entire body can be protected with a suit designed for that purpose, or, with coat protector leggings. Getting burrs out of Poddle hair, even with a field clip, can be pure hell! My Poodles have played with many of them. I personally know one Champion who also is field titled, and the owner did go through hell trying to grow coat and protect. Despite not having the length of coat the competition had, she was stunning to look at, and met the breed standard, so she won. That bitch is an excellent retriever in the field, and revels in leaping into the water to get that duck! Get dirty? You bet your life she gets dirty! 

My Poodles come from show lines, but are not show dogs, and, they LOVE to be groomed. When Beau is up on the grooming table, Maddy will leap up and try to butt him off, so it's her turn, AGAIN! LOL When I was first learning to groom them myself, it took me hours just to do one dog! I felt bad, so decided to give "poor" Maddy a break. What did she do? Jumped right back up on the grooming table, ready, willing and able to keep on going!


----------



## Hound (May 20, 2009)

Not all dog owners may agree on the social and economic impact of dog shows. While dog shows may only seem to be egotistical displays of your pet’s abilities, these activities are also lucrative ventures for pet owners to promote different causes such as to raise funds for better equipped animal shelters, and animal care campaigns. These further promote a more dynamic relationship between owners and pets, as well as amongst pet owners themselves.


----------

