Breed Standards and distortion

[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!

[lolli94]

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...

[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 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.

[Karen]

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!

[Freedom]

I agree with you Karen, 100%.

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

[Varga]

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? 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.

[Desert Arabian]

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.

[Varga]

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

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...

[GiantSchnauzer]

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.

[Roxyluvsme13]

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.

[IRescue452]

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.