This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Gustav on 17 January 2010 - 21:01
So are we saying the "current" showlines have "hybrid vigor"??? I think I know a little about breeding and I'm somewhat confused!! ....And if we examine the average showline and the average workingline would they have about the same "lack of hybrid vigor"(After all this is not opinion but something that can be quantifiable especially if you have Winsix(sp) pedigree program...which I have!). And lastly, IF one of these lines Happens to have substantially less hybrid vigor than others, is it not a fact that, mental/physical impairments are associated with the decrease of the HV. Just trying to understand things logically without the emotions or opinions.
by BabyEagle4U on 17 January 2010 - 21:01
I bought my Cattle dog off the bed of a truck at an auction. There was two litters (13) puppies to choose from. No papers. Just a truck load of 6 and 8 week old Cattle Dogs. My son crawled in the bed of the truck with all these puppies and a puppy chose him. It was the smallest female there. She literally took control of the situation in no time by being jealous. She did it with seriousness too. Every other puppy listened. There was Christopher siting in the center ring of cattle dog puppies with now Sara. LOL
We think she's awesome and love her.
We think she's awesome and love her.
by nonacona60 on 17 January 2010 - 22:01
Babyeagle4u,
I LOVE CATTLE DOGS!!!!! She is gorgeous. What a site that must have been........ the bed of a truck full of ACD puppies. In certain ways, they are very much like GSDs, wouldn't you agree?
I LOVE CATTLE DOGS!!!!! She is gorgeous. What a site that must have been........ the bed of a truck full of ACD puppies. In certain ways, they are very much like GSDs, wouldn't you agree?
by crhuerta on 17 January 2010 - 22:01
What a great breed!... and....what a nice looking dog you have there!
by BabyEagle4U on 17 January 2010 - 22:01
Hummm, Cattle Dogs are big on eye contact. They must have eye contact on everything with eyes around them. And they are very repetitive with keeping tabs on every set of eyes. I think that's the Dingo in them, she needs to know eye counts. Which is an awesome help livestock wise.. especially at night.
GSD I don't see like that. GSD works with what they have infront of them, a Cattle Dog knows when something is missing and needs to search for it. Edit: Or when another set of eyes show up.
I dunno really, she's not pedigreed.
GSD I don't see like that. GSD works with what they have infront of them, a Cattle Dog knows when something is missing and needs to search for it. Edit: Or when another set of eyes show up.
I dunno really, she's not pedigreed.
by Keith Grossman on 18 January 2010 - 00:01
"LOL, Keith. You'd think I said you have a small penis or something."
Your basis in knowledge about that subject would be the same as your basis in knowledge for your claim that VA dogs are the worst of the worst genetically...none. :P
"Let me explain something quickly- I was being sarcastic when I said I can't tell them apart. It was an offhand, rather humorous (in my eyes anyway), comment referring to the fact that these dogs are judged on CONFORMATION. Yes. CONFORMATION. What is conformation? How well something CONFORMS>>>supposedly to the standard, but lately it seems to be more to each other and whatever trend is "in" right now. Why else would people be literally painting their dogs if VA shows are not just a beauty contest?"
Because people have a tendency to overlook the flaws in their own dogs, the point of showing and breed surveying them should be to obtain an impartial assessment from someone knowledgable in the breed. Having the same dog seen by more judges, all of whom come to more or less the same conclusion, lessens the possibility than an individual judge's preferences taint the overall impression of that dog.
Do some get carried away with the competition, their egos or the money and cheat? Of course they do but there have been some recent rule changes to prevent this and they are being enforced. Is it a perfect system? No, but would you advocate simply not ever having any judge assess the dogs against his interpretation of the standard?
"When you breed for one particular trait over and over, you are exacerbating other traits that may (or may not) go hand in hand with the desired trait. Then, you repeat this a zillion times, and now you've narrowed your gene pool to a point where statistically, the probability of what used to be a rare recessive flaw increases and is now occuring more frequently. And so on and so forth. I really don't see why I need to own a VA dog to have this most basic view/understanding of genetics. Please enlighten me. Actually, don't. I'm kind of bored with this."
Your argument is fundamentally flawed for a couple of reasons. First, you make it sound like there are only a few hundred dogs in the gene pool rather than tens of thousands. It also rests on the assumption that the only trait sought after by show line breeders is looks and that working ability isn't important. I would submit that that is incorrect and that the focus is on dogs who are both structurally correct and work. As an example, the dog who sired the only litter I've ever bred placed V35 at the BSZS in 2001. That same dog also placed 2nd amongst 10 dogs in Country Side Kennels protection Tournament with Gary Hanrahan judging and was the only show line dog entered. So not only is he structurally correct and beautiful but on that day, at least, his protection work was better than 8 out of 9 of the working dogs in attendance...the total dog.
Your basis in knowledge about that subject would be the same as your basis in knowledge for your claim that VA dogs are the worst of the worst genetically...none. :P
"Let me explain something quickly- I was being sarcastic when I said I can't tell them apart. It was an offhand, rather humorous (in my eyes anyway), comment referring to the fact that these dogs are judged on CONFORMATION. Yes. CONFORMATION. What is conformation? How well something CONFORMS>>>supposedly to the standard, but lately it seems to be more to each other and whatever trend is "in" right now. Why else would people be literally painting their dogs if VA shows are not just a beauty contest?"
Because people have a tendency to overlook the flaws in their own dogs, the point of showing and breed surveying them should be to obtain an impartial assessment from someone knowledgable in the breed. Having the same dog seen by more judges, all of whom come to more or less the same conclusion, lessens the possibility than an individual judge's preferences taint the overall impression of that dog.
Do some get carried away with the competition, their egos or the money and cheat? Of course they do but there have been some recent rule changes to prevent this and they are being enforced. Is it a perfect system? No, but would you advocate simply not ever having any judge assess the dogs against his interpretation of the standard?
"When you breed for one particular trait over and over, you are exacerbating other traits that may (or may not) go hand in hand with the desired trait. Then, you repeat this a zillion times, and now you've narrowed your gene pool to a point where statistically, the probability of what used to be a rare recessive flaw increases and is now occuring more frequently. And so on and so forth. I really don't see why I need to own a VA dog to have this most basic view/understanding of genetics. Please enlighten me. Actually, don't. I'm kind of bored with this."
Your argument is fundamentally flawed for a couple of reasons. First, you make it sound like there are only a few hundred dogs in the gene pool rather than tens of thousands. It also rests on the assumption that the only trait sought after by show line breeders is looks and that working ability isn't important. I would submit that that is incorrect and that the focus is on dogs who are both structurally correct and work. As an example, the dog who sired the only litter I've ever bred placed V35 at the BSZS in 2001. That same dog also placed 2nd amongst 10 dogs in Country Side Kennels protection Tournament with Gary Hanrahan judging and was the only show line dog entered. So not only is he structurally correct and beautiful but on that day, at least, his protection work was better than 8 out of 9 of the working dogs in attendance...the total dog.
by Keith Grossman on 18 January 2010 - 00:01
"man i like a lot of your posts and they are generally very intelligent and to the point. however i dont know how someone can say others have no understanding of genetics when some obviously put a lot of work into there breedings, understand the history of this breed, and study genetics for the betterment of there own breedings. "
I think that far too few people put that much thought or work into their breedings. I think that on that point we'll simply have to agree to disagree and move on.
"Anyone with any experience/ research with genetics and breeding knows when you close off a portion of a genes you end up with faults as well as strengths. if you circle off another group within the original portion you inherit that many more issues by not having the diversification needed. Also, I think we all know the faults that follow breeding for a specific strength with disregard to all others.As this happens quite often. Statistically speaking through percentages designer dogs in all species have far more issues do to closed gene pools and poor breeding. Its a simple fact that people that follow that trend should recognize and own."
All of this is, of course, true but as I pointed out to Jen, it isn't like the gene pool we're discussing is limited to a few hundred dogs. There is plenty of diversity in the breed and it is entirely possible and not very difficult to breed a total outcross. Applying what you've pointed out above to the dogs originating in many of the eastern bloc countries, it would be counter-intuitive to suggest that there is greater diversity in the lines from countries in which the people had limited freedom to move about as they wished and virtually no access to new bloodlines for 45 years than there is in bloodlines that had no such restrictions. All of this, of course, if we can even trust the information on the pedigrees from some of those countries to be accurate which in some cases we clearly can not.
People are making the assumption in this discussion that I don't like working line dogs which couldn't be further from the truth. I like both which is why you will never see me bashing or making unfair and inaccurate characterizations of either.
I think that far too few people put that much thought or work into their breedings. I think that on that point we'll simply have to agree to disagree and move on.
"Anyone with any experience/ research with genetics and breeding knows when you close off a portion of a genes you end up with faults as well as strengths. if you circle off another group within the original portion you inherit that many more issues by not having the diversification needed. Also, I think we all know the faults that follow breeding for a specific strength with disregard to all others.As this happens quite often. Statistically speaking through percentages designer dogs in all species have far more issues do to closed gene pools and poor breeding. Its a simple fact that people that follow that trend should recognize and own."
All of this is, of course, true but as I pointed out to Jen, it isn't like the gene pool we're discussing is limited to a few hundred dogs. There is plenty of diversity in the breed and it is entirely possible and not very difficult to breed a total outcross. Applying what you've pointed out above to the dogs originating in many of the eastern bloc countries, it would be counter-intuitive to suggest that there is greater diversity in the lines from countries in which the people had limited freedom to move about as they wished and virtually no access to new bloodlines for 45 years than there is in bloodlines that had no such restrictions. All of this, of course, if we can even trust the information on the pedigrees from some of those countries to be accurate which in some cases we clearly can not.
People are making the assumption in this discussion that I don't like working line dogs which couldn't be further from the truth. I like both which is why you will never see me bashing or making unfair and inaccurate characterizations of either.
by yoshy on 18 January 2010 - 00:01
i would disagrre with your last statement keith for several reasons.
Gene pools start somewhere before you get 10,000 dogs off of those lines.You start with a small group.
Schh isnt an acurate assesment of a dogs ability to work in the field. As well why do you not see these working show dogs in the field (police/military) if they are in any way equal to or superior in performance and durability?
im not knocking your dog/dogs. My dogs do what i need. as do yours. both equally special to us. but i have yet to see showline dogs keep up in working enviroments that truly tests a dog. I also have yet to one with my own eyes who could provide the years of service, the durability/ athleticism, and true willing/mental state for the work. Im not saying there arent a few diamonds in the ruff. I just have yet to see them. I also see many more showline gsd's with mental, and physical issues than working line. based on client stats. So the percentages provide the back bone of my arguement.
edit this was to your response to jenni. didnt see your post as i was writing this one.
edit2: im not beating up on you or jumping to conclusions by any means. To each is own. Im just not a fan of many showline dogs if any. maybe one day that will change. they serve the purpose in which you/they want them for. I just dislike anything that diminishes the capability of shepherds. that means many working breeders/breedings as well. but thats neither hear nor there and there are many problems on both sides of that fence. so neither are perfect.
Gene pools start somewhere before you get 10,000 dogs off of those lines.You start with a small group.
Schh isnt an acurate assesment of a dogs ability to work in the field. As well why do you not see these working show dogs in the field (police/military) if they are in any way equal to or superior in performance and durability?
im not knocking your dog/dogs. My dogs do what i need. as do yours. both equally special to us. but i have yet to see showline dogs keep up in working enviroments that truly tests a dog. I also have yet to one with my own eyes who could provide the years of service, the durability/ athleticism, and true willing/mental state for the work. Im not saying there arent a few diamonds in the ruff. I just have yet to see them. I also see many more showline gsd's with mental, and physical issues than working line. based on client stats. So the percentages provide the back bone of my arguement.
edit this was to your response to jenni. didnt see your post as i was writing this one.
edit2: im not beating up on you or jumping to conclusions by any means. To each is own. Im just not a fan of many showline dogs if any. maybe one day that will change. they serve the purpose in which you/they want them for. I just dislike anything that diminishes the capability of shepherds. that means many working breeders/breedings as well. but thats neither hear nor there and there are many problems on both sides of that fence. so neither are perfect.
by Keith Grossman on 18 January 2010 - 00:01
"So are we saying the "current" showlines have "hybrid vigor"??? I think I know a little about breeding and I'm somewhat confused!! ....And if we examine the average showline and the average workingline would they have about the same "lack of hybrid vigor"(After all this is not opinion but something that can be quantifiable especially if you have Winsix(sp) pedigree program...which I have!). And lastly, IF one of these lines Happens to have substantially less hybrid vigor than others, is it not a fact that, mental/physical impairments are associated with the decrease of the HV. Just trying to understand things logically without the emotions or opinions."
That isn't what I was trying to imply at all, Gustav, but my post got cut off before my point was made. I think that some of what the OP is seeing might be the result of hybrid vigor since there are so many people here who believe that if they have two registered $200.00 GSD's they should have puppies and its entirely possible that their two dogs have virtually no common ancestory.
That isn't what I was trying to imply at all, Gustav, but my post got cut off before my point was made. I think that some of what the OP is seeing might be the result of hybrid vigor since there are so many people here who believe that if they have two registered $200.00 GSD's they should have puppies and its entirely possible that their two dogs have virtually no common ancestory.
by Gustav on 18 January 2010 - 02:01
Keith wrote
" It also rests on the assumption that the only trait sought after by show line breeders is looks and that working ability isn't important. I would submit that that is incorrect and that the focus is on dogs who are both structurally correct and work. "
Keith, Are you talking about 1970 or 2010. That statement is ludicrous, and the example you gave is an exception to the rule and very rare these days. With the division in the breed today, and the weakness of the showlines in work in both performance and participation , how can a breeder be breeding for work and NOT use any workinglines in their breeding programs???? Makes no logical sense !! And results in work/sport world don't support this either(except for exceptions), so I think that assumption has a lot of validity to it.
" It also rests on the assumption that the only trait sought after by show line breeders is looks and that working ability isn't important. I would submit that that is incorrect and that the focus is on dogs who are both structurally correct and work. "
Keith, Are you talking about 1970 or 2010. That statement is ludicrous, and the example you gave is an exception to the rule and very rare these days. With the division in the breed today, and the weakness of the showlines in work in both performance and participation , how can a breeder be breeding for work and NOT use any workinglines in their breeding programs???? Makes no logical sense !! And results in work/sport world don't support this either(except for exceptions), so I think that assumption has a lot of validity to it.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top
