Breed Standards

[Rooroo]

Just wondering what the general consensus is on breed standards,

personally though I think the majority of the standards are for the good of the breed. (as a biased owner of a blue Wiem) I feel some are Silly and out dated.

We have yellow, black, and chocolate labs.

Why not Blue Wiems?

anyone else think some of the breed standards are a little "old"?

[GoldenRetrLuver]

I think being "old" is good in a way. It helps preserve the breed for what it was meant to be. Like personality, colors, structure, weight, height, etc....

[binka_nugget]

I guess there's some good to it. For example, the sheltie's standard. If they were to change the height standard, some people wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a collie and a sheltie. But some, I'm not a fan of. For example, the border collie's standard. I'm not sure if they updated it or not but for a while, some of the "best" border collies only looked good and wouldn't be able to herd at all.

[cali]

I agree with binka on the border collie standerd, as it was made by AKC, not the parent club. the parent club did not exist untill a year AFTER the standerd was written by people whos ONLY conection with border collies were giving them ILP #s :eek: I dont agree with most standerd though, because its not for the good of the breed, its for the looks of the breed and only the looks. these things are not for the betterment of the breed, since when was breeding dogs that cant walk(german sheperd) cant see(adding about 10 inches to coat lengths) and giving them a TONE of genetic problems, and dogs that cant work if there life depended on bettering the breed?:confused:

[cali]

oh ya and binka they DID change the height standerd. several times. its rar that you see a breed that fits the standerd that looks ANYTHING like they did orginally. sheltues used to be little dogs, they did not have a humugous full coat, and well basicly they never looked like they did until collie was added to the breed, hence why they look like mini collies, they are not but, many many years ago some collie was added to the breed. also the breed standerd for a sheltie used to be tiny like full grown could fit in a dolls bed tiny:eek:

[binka_nugget]

Originally posted by cali
oh ya and binka they DID change the height standerd. several times. its rar that you see a breed that fits the standerd that looks ANYTHING like they did orginally. sheltues used to be little dogs, they did not have a humugous full coat, and well basicly they never looked like they did until collie was added to the breed, hence why they look like mini collies, they are not but, many many years ago some collie was added to the breed. also the breed standerd for a sheltie used to be tiny like full grown could fit in a dolls bed tiny:eek:
Wow! really? I've read that a reason for some bigger shelties is because of a collie that was thrown in not too long ago.

[Moose]

I'd have to agree with both Jules and binka_nugget on this one. A breed should keep in its "original." When people/breeders start straying from the original standards of a breed, something just doesn't sit right with me there. I can't really think of the words I want to use now, but I just don't like it. It almost takes away from the "older" breed....

[Twisterdog]

I think being "old" is good in a way. It helps preserve the breed for what it was meant to be. Like personality, colors, structure, weight, height, etc....

I agree.

[cali]

but that is not what the standerd does, dogs that fite these standerds are absolutly NOTHING like the original breed, thats the problem, they revise the standerd as much as they want for the sole purpose of looks.

[Twisterdog]

but that is not what the standerd does, dogs that fite these standerds are absolutly NOTHING like the original breed, thats the problem, they revise the standerd as much as they want for the sole purpose of looks.

You are speaking of your experience with border collies. Not every breed is like that.

The smooth fox terrier breed standard, for example, is almost exactly like the original breed. And the standard is not at all for the sole purpose of looks. Not at all. In the breed standard of almost every terrier, it states the attitude and temperment of the dog must be fiesty, strong-willed, brave, etc. Terriers are not disqualified or docked points for actually starting fights with other dogs in the ring. Points are not necesarily taken off a terrier's score in the confirmation ring due to scars and scratches, either. They are first and foremost working dogs, even in the confirmation ring.

If the border collie conformation standard is not what you think it should be, that is not the fault of the AKC or any other registry organization. It is the fault of the border collie breed club. They are the ones that set the standard. The breed club with the most members, political pull and winning dogs ends up being the official parent club. Lots of people complain, after the fact, about "barbie" collies and Parson Russell terriers, etc. But the fact of the matter is ... if they didn't like the direction their breed was headed, they should have organized themselves before registry recognition, and done something about it then.

[Rooroo]

Ok, well here's what my issue with the standard is,

Weimaraners are by breed standard a light gray, however the "BLUE" coat is genetically dominant to the gray coat. The big problem I have is not that it is a recognized fault, but that ppl discourage the breeding of the Blue dogs because they are not perfect, I think this is silly because a Blue dog who has otherwise perfect characteristics can have perfect little gray puppies. So why not broaden the gene pool a little more and breed Blue dogs that have good hips, teeth and coats?

I had my Blu fixed, but just the same if I could have I feel I should have bred her she's otherwise a Beautiful specemin, and I don't just say that because I'm her mommy she gets comments from everyone, even at the Vets office EVERYONE has to stick their head in and see my Baby Blu.

(and personally I'm finding I think that the Blue Coat is much more striking)

[GoldenRetrLuver]

Originally posted by Rooroo
So why not broaden the gene pool a little more and breed Blue dogs that have good hips, teeth and coats?


Because, like I said, responsible breeders are trying to keep the breed as it was when it was first created, which is a mouse gray-silver gray coloring. I agree with you, the Blue Weims are gorgeous, just some breeders have their preference as to which colors they like. IMHO.

[Twisterdog]

Originally posted by Rooroo
Ok, well here's what my issue with the standard is,

Weimaraners are by breed standard a light gray, however the "BLUE" coat is genetically dominant to the gray coat. The big problem I have is not that it is a recognized fault, but that ppl discourage the breeding of the Blue dogs because they are not perfect, I think this is silly because a Blue dog who has otherwise perfect characteristics can have perfect little gray puppies. So why not broaden the gene pool a little more and breed Blue dogs that have good hips, teeth and coats?

I had my Blu fixed, but just the same if I could have I feel I should have bred her she's otherwise a Beautiful specemin, and I don't just say that because I'm her mommy she gets comments from everyone, even at the Vets office EVERYONE has to stick their head in and see my Baby Blu.

(and personally I'm finding I think that the Blue Coat is much more striking)

Then the answer to this, and any other issue dog owners and breeders have with a standard .... change the standard. Yes, you can. There is no mysterious Higher Power of Conformation that sets the standards. We set the standards - the owners, breeders and fanciers of a breed. There is no they setting the standards - there is just a well-organized and outspoken group of us. If you think blue weimaranars should be recognised, start a group that will make it happen. Or, join one that already exists. Majority rules. If 75% of Weimaranar breed club members want blue weimaranars recognised, they will vote the change in, and petition the AKC for the change. Happens all the time.

[cali]

the border collie standerd IS AKCs fault, the border collie parent club did not exist until a year AFTER the border collie standerd was written, by AKC people who knew nothing about the breed, they wrote the standerd for what people who have had no dealings with the breed think they should look like. :( and many many breeds the bosten terrier for example before AKC got a hold of then they did NOT look like they ran into a wall. :eek:

[Twisterdog]

the border collie standerd IS AKCs fault, the border collie parent club did not exist until a year AFTER the border collie standerd was written, by AKC people who knew nothing about the breed, they wrote the standerd for what people who have had no dealings with the breed think they should look like. and many many breeds the bosten terrier for example before AKC got a hold of then they did NOT look like they ran into a wall.

Can you post documentation of this? I've personally never heard of the AKC writing a breed standard on it's own without consulting a breed club. According the AKC, they "will accept dogs registered with the American Border Collie Association (ABC), the American International Border Collie (AIBC), and the North American Sheepdog Society (NASD)." So, could you please enlighten me?

Also, what exactly about the AKC breed standard concerning border collies don't you like? No where in the breed standard does it say, "This dog is no longer allowed to herd sheep." Many, many conformation champions also have herding titles. I've heard a lot of BC people complain about the show dogs having "all that hair"; however, the breed standard allows for shorter coats as well as the long, rough coat.

Boston terriers were recognised by the AKC in 1893, 110 years ago. They are a native American breed, created in Boston, Massachusettes. The predesesors to the AKC recognised Boston's were still in the "development" stage, and did not necesarily breed true. By the time the breed was recognised, shortened faces were the breed standard ... for the last 110 years.

From the AKC breed standard for Boston terriers, "The muzzle is short, square, wide and deep and in proportion to the skull. It is free from wrinkles, shorter in length than in width or depth; not exceeding in length approximately one-third of the length of the skull. The muzzle from stop to end of the nose is parallel to the top of the skull."

[KYS]

I agree Twister.
IMHO: I also do not think you can blame AKC.
Their is a written standard to follow, and some breeders
interpet the standard to suit what they like.
And some judges put up a dog that maybe
they should not have. The breed standard
needs to be written in such a way, where
their can not be any questions on how the standard is interpeted.
It needs to be cut and dry. The official breed clubs have
a lot to do with by-laws etc and changes in the standard.

Not to get off subject, I will say, that I am not a big fan of AKC.
Only because I think they need to be more than just
a registrating body, and be more of a policing.
IMHO, they need to have stricter rules on what dogs
can be registered and breed etc. So maybe
we can have some healthier dogs out their,
and those AKC papers might mean something.
JMHO

[cali]

ok first the border collie was recignized in 1995

here is a quote

AKC, which of course had no previous familiarity with Border Collies except for issuing them ILP numbers, itself adopted a breed standard that defines what a Border Collie should be and how it should look. AKC did not designate a parent club for the Border Collie until August 1996

taken from:http://bordercollie.org/akc.html

[Twisterdog]

Thank you for that information, cali. I was unaware of much of that. I'll read it in more depth later. Interesting, to say the least.

However, I'm still curious about my original question:


Also, what exactly about the AKC breed standard concerning border collies don't you like? No where in the breed standard does it say, "This dog is no longer allowed to herd sheep." Many, many conformation champions also have herding titles. I've heard a lot of BC people complain about the show dogs having "all that hair"; however, the breed standard allows for shorter coats as well as the long, rough coat.

[cali]

because
A-it allows only prick and tipped ears the best herding BCs have rose ears not tipped.
B-there body is supposed to be quite bulky, and "muscular" now they are muscular but th eonly BCs winning in teh showring are total bulk.
C-medium to long hair, they are only supposed to have short to medium. the long har was added cuz well they do that to nearly every breed.
D-muzzle the muzzles are getting shorter and shorter, they never had short muzzles, they have medium lengh muzzles, with plenty of room because they need to breath very well.
E-another thing with the coat, from what I have read border collies "need" a bath at least every 2 weeks, and have hard to manage hair, something I have noticed with show BCs and what people who breed these dogs have said. a true border collie coat is again short to medium length and should almost never need groomed. dirt just falls off, and the coat does not tangle. Remember they are working dogs and never came in the house or anything of the sort they stayed tied up or in a pen when not working. they were not bathed or brushed regularly.

also when bred to a standerd they are bred for looks, these people may very well work there dogs but they are still bred for looks, something that should never happen with the breed, on a board I visit we are all against akc recignition, now the diverse nature of the true working border collie is very noticable, basicly if it has instinct, a good coat for weather purposes, a good eye,can work and are healthy its a border collie. you get good working dogs from breeding to dogs that are healthy and are outstanding herders, with NO basis on looks whatsoever. if it can work and work well, its a good dog. looks should have no factor in the breed at all, and AKC is getting people to breed the BC for looks.

[Twisterdog]

Well, that will indeed be a sad thing for the breed if the conformation champions are bred only for appearance, with no regard to original purpose and skills.

Perhaps that will happen to the border collie, and if it does, it will be a sad case of mismanagement by all parties involved. However, I really haven't seen that happening to too many breeds. It is the exception, not the rule. Almost all of the winning conformation dogs at Westminster, for example, also have titles in herding, field trials, earth dog, etc. They have certainly NOT lost their skill at their original function.

The AKC is not perfect, and I agree with KYS - it would be nice if they could do more to police and research the dogs submitted for registration. However, think about what an impossibly daunting task it would be. How could they ever verify every litter of puppies? Not possible.

If people simply want an excellent working dog, with no regard to looks or breed - fine. Get one. No one is forcing someone who wants a good herding dog to get a purebred border collie from show lines. Get the dog that works for your purposes, and give it good home. For some people, though, a confirmation champion suits their purposes. Good for them. Just because a dog is an excellent example of its breed standard, does not make it helpless or stupid. That's like saying all beautiful women are airheads. Not true.

[KYS]

posted by Twisterdog: However, think about what an impossibly daunting task it would be. How could they ever verify every litter of puppies? Not possible.>>>
Just because a dog is an excellent example of its breed standard, does not make it helpless or stupid. That's like saying all beautiful women are airheads. >>>



I know, I have heard that before. :(
I still think that proof of OFA, CERFS or what
every test should be required for a specific breed,
should be sent into AKC on both breeding stock
in order for their litter to be registered.
(Just a start)
Hopefully, as DNA gets more widley used in the future,
AKC can also take advantage. Just think of the possiblities for a better future for all breeds.

Talk about beautiful air heads, I just watched Legally blond two.
Talk about a corney movie. lol
Now back to serious.
I love when I see champions with working titles
next to their reg. names. It's nice when Titles and conformation go hand in hand and the owner takes that
extra step/time to take that beautiful dog and work it like it was breed to.

.

[Twisterdog]

Originally posted by KYS
I still think that proof of OFA, CERFS or what
every test should be required for a specific breed,
should be sent into AKC on both breeding stock
in order for their litter to be registered.
(Just a start)
Hopefully, as DNA gets more widley used in the future,

Good point. I agree.

[Shelteez2]

Originally posted by KYS

I love when I see champions with working titles
next to their reg. names. It's nice when Titles and conformation go hand in hand and the owner takes that
extra step/time to take that beautiful dog and work it like it was breed to.

.

I so agree. It is my dream to one day have a dog with titles on both ends. Hopefully I can start with my future whippet!

[Rooroo]

Twister dog, good to know I'll have to look into what to do about that,

my Blu is akc registered it's just that she can't be shown for confirmation. She can compete in anything else, and I may someday do agility with her, because she loves to work, and I think it would help my cause to get some good looking, hard working Blue dogs out there;)