Breed Standards and distortion

Every time there's a dog show, I feel sorry for some of the dogs who have been distorted by breed standards so much that they have changed from the good, sturdy stable dogs they used to be.

Take English Bulldogs, for example. If you look at one from 100 years ago, it looks far different than the ones we have today. Now the heads are so large and the hips so small that they are all born by Cesarean section. Yes they are great dogs, sweet, cute, and beloved. But how does this look "improve" the breed? What bothers me more are the German Shepherds who have the lower sloping back hips and now seem less sturdy, more prone to hip trouble, and weaker in general.

And I do so wish they would change breed standards to eliminate - or at least allow - ears and tails not to be docked. Yes, this served a specific purpose back in the day, but these dogs, like the Staffordshire, are no longer used for fighting so why chop their ears to bits? I have met many a gorgeous Great Dane with undocked ears - why cut them? Why chop off tails on pups that are never gonna be used for field work?

I know this may be controversial to some people, so please keep the discussion civil!

I agree with what you said about the breed standard, but not with the docking. Both of my springers have docked tails and I prefer them that way. I know a lot of Boxers that I think would look awful with long tails. Just my opinion...

I agree with the docking of the ears. I love floppy ears. Now the tails..............as stated above, some dogs would just look funny with a tail. But I'd probably love it just the same. :) I can't imagine my Zoee with a tail, yet Taggart does have a tail.

I also agree about the GSD. The way they stand/walk/run with their rear end so low.......I don't like the looks of it. My sister has had several GSDs over the years and they are already prone to hip problems. I'm sure this doesn't help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taz_Zoee

I agree with the docking of the ears. I love floppy ears. Now the tails..............as stated above, some dogs would just look funny with a tail. But I'd probably love it just the same. :) I can't imagine my Zoee with a tail, yet Taggart does have a tail.

---

I don't mind the lack of tail in breeds born that way, like Zoee, or Pembroke Corgis, etc. But I once met an Airdale whose tail, though docked, was not done correctly, and he was full grown and the bone was sticking out of the end of his tail so it had to be bandaged again, poor thing! He was a few inches taller than Standard at the shoulders, and yes, that tail could have been lethal, but so was Gracie the Great Dane's tail, we just kept breakables off low surfaces!

I agree with you Karen, 100%.

But trying to get the AKC Clubs to change their standard is a HUGE task.

I agree. I've been researching a bit about the AKC and CKC and what I am finding is really disturbing. They are waaay to lenient with the breeders, or at least that is what it seems like to me. Not to mention they don't seem to really be for the benefit of the dog, which is just sad.
FCI is not perfect either and they are most certainly just as guilty when it comes to cruel breed standards but my issues with them weren't as big (I used to be a member and worked for them as a trainer back in Europe) since it seems they are at least trying to move in the direction that benefits the dogs and not the people. For example with ear cropping and tail docking which is illegal in most member countries and there is definitely a strong push to make it illegal in any member country.

I also read that the collie who won best in breed was sired by a dog who was deaf and blind because of hereditary issues and that is is apparently just perfectly ok with the AKC! This sire was apparently never even shown, so I do not understand how he would even be allowed to breed within the club? :confused: What is the point of a club if it doesn't regulate the breeders more?
From what I know of the FCI is that a dog needs a minimum of two second best in breed in order to get a breeding certificate. Now, I am not saying that this can't also be misused and I don't personally think that showing always is the best way to see if a dog is a good candidate for breeding... but at least by requiring a minimum of winning (or second place, as it is ;)) in the show ring, you eliminate dogs with obvious defects and hopefully also some with more subtle lack of standard.

I dunno. I don't want to come across like I am bashing the AKC/CKC and praising the FCI but like I mentioned before, I just happened to have been researching a bit about the AKC in particular and am very surprised with the differences.

Oh and also one thing which really saddens me, is how some people who are into the show world just seem to be completely blind to the faults. I had this one friend who was also a trainer, great lady and all and she knew a lot about dogs. But she was also into showing and bought a Italian Greyhound specifically for that. Her first IG jumped of a table and broke it's leg so badly it had to be amputated. Her second IG also broke a leg but this time it was so bad the dog had to be put down :(
But despite this, when talking to her, she seemed to totally resist to even consider that maybe, just maybe, it should be possible to change a breed standard so you encourage sturdier dogs. Doing that is apparently impossible because "then it wouldn't be an Italian Greyhound"....

Docking of ears and tails in dogs is the same- to me- as declawing a cat. Inhumane. When we know better, we do better. :(

Tail docking does not bother me, but it is illegal here. I think cropped ears look pretty bad, but again illegal here. I also think the showlines should be capable of working a full day and have some instinct (and be tested for it) before they can become show champions (I know a bit hard for the breeds bred for fighting). In saying that though i much prefer the showline JRTs over the working and american Jacks.

I, too, think the time has passed for docking. It's a painful disfigurement for no reason at all.

GSD's - why DO they encourage that sloped shape? It most certainly has contributed to the hip problems with the breed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pinot's Mom

I, too, think the time has passed for docking. It's a painful disfigurement for no reason at all.

GSD's - why DO they encourage that sloped shape? It most certainly has contributed to the hip problems with the breed.

---

I do not know. I asked, and was told their show "stack" - how they pose the dog, is meant to show the proper right angle the back leg makes in that position, but I didn't get any indication of why they'd want a lower back end when the dog is standing normally ...

Have you never seen the documentary on the royal kennel club? They breed cavaliers to have such small heads that the skulls are to small for their brains, causing the skull to push on the brain and the dogs have all sorts of issues including muscle spasms, seizures, etc. Owners often go for the surgery that removes the part of their skull pushing on the brain but it is very risky. Another example is the Rhodesian ridgebacks, they must have a ridge to compete in shows and meet the breed standard. The ridge is considered a health issue, I forgot exactly what it was. But anyway, breeders started taking these perfectly good pups to be put down and they were actually the most healthy out of the litter. The German shepherds that show in England have a terrible gait because of the sloped back.

It really is disgusting how they say they're bettering the breed when in reality they seem to be worsening it. It's disgusting to me how you can sell a pup you know is going to become a beloved member of the family and they have thes issues and die at a young age. They know of it because it has happened before yet they don't do anything but keep breeding more and more of the unhealthy pups.

It really is quite... unsettling... to see where dog breeding is heading. Especially today with modern science. Already with sperm banks there is line breeding going on which would never had been possible in the past. At least before, when a popular sire was gone, he stopped producing more pups. Now it's becoming common practice to breed a bitch to her great-great-great grandfather.

Now just imagine when cloning becomes more reliable and affordable. With the current way kennel clubs are operating, it's basically just going to be a race to start cloning champions. If they don't really care about genetic diversity in the breeds now, why would they care in the future.

...

I did see that documentary about the royal kennel club, yeah. Seems they are even worse off than AKC and FCI. The rules of import are so strict that hardly any new bloodlines are being introduced and it's having obvious effects on several breeds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Karen

Every time there's a dog show, I feel sorry for some of the dogs who have been distorted by breed standards so much that they have changed from the good, sturdy stable dogs they used to be.

Take English Bulldogs, for example. If you look at one from 100 years ago, it looks far different than the ones we have today. Now the heads are so large and the hips so small that they are all born by Cesarean section. Yes they are great dogs, sweet, cute, and beloved. But how does this look "improve" the breed? What bothers me more are the German Shepherds who have the lower sloping back hips and now seem less sturdy, more prone to hip trouble, and weaker in general.

And I do so wish they would change breed standards to eliminate - or at least allow - ears and tails not to be docked. Yes, this served a specific purpose back in the day, but these dogs, like the Staffordshire, are no longer used for fighting so why chop their ears to bits? I have met many a gorgeous Great Dane with undocked ears - why cut them? Why chop off tails on pups that are never gonna be used for field work?

I know this may be controversial to some people, so please keep the discussion civil!

---

They've also ruined temperaments in the show world.

I don't think they're bettering the breeds at all, all of it is honestly just really sad.

I'm not a fan of ear cropping. I hate when Pit Bulls have cropped ears. It just looks ridiculous to me, so I am very glad Brennan's are natural.

I don't understand how the tail being physically cut off makes any difference. Its not a genetic trait in most breeds. So a quality cocker spaniel with a tail could produce show quality puppies just the same as a docked dog could and you could dock the puppies if you wanted and the fact that the parents had their tails intact wouldn't effect their traits at all. After finally owning a dog with a tail, I never want to have a docked dog again.

My boxer is 100% natural- her ears were never cropped and her tail was never docked and for that I am very thankful! For the longest time I loved the nubby tail on boxers but now that I own one with a long tail I wish they all had them. There is so much personality that shows through her long tail that would go unseen if it were little and nubby. I especially loves when she holds it up high in the air straight as a stick and spins it in a perfect circle, it reminds me of a helicopter blade and it cracks me up! I am surprised her butt doesn't start to lift off the ground. :D

Attachment 52751

Hehe, in that picture it almost does look like her helicopter tail is lifting her butt off the ground! :D

I totally don't see a point in docking/cropping either. I would like to get a Jack Russell again sometime and I would definitely prefer if her tail was intact, just like Tiki's always was.
Same with Rottweiler. I just do not see the aesthetics of a Rottie with no tail...