Discussion in 'Dogs - General Dog Chat' started by avaloncoolies, Jan 4, 2013.
No! I've seen pictures of Finn, but I've only ever my Ryder.
was this a tangled themed litter? lol
Poor Hudson gets BC all the time. Poor kid, he has an identity problem.
I don't watch movies...
Ryder is Finn's dad and Taigh's grandpa. (They're all Diamond Aire dogs, like the dogs in the photo posted.)
Oh lol Flynn rider is the guy from Tangled :rofl1: prince charming kinda dude
So, is producing a great inconsistent variety in a litter and a line a good thing or a bad thing?
Avalon has made the case it is not desirable and her coolies have a consistent type that possibly our eyes are not educated to see at this point but many other posters are saying their own breeders lack consistencies in litters in an effort to rationalize the differences they may see within the coolie breed as "no more drastic than this litter".
Would you prefect to have an expectant type from your breed/breeder or do you enjoy the variety gamble?
Shamoo gets Boston, Arnold gets ridgeback, Sloan gets coyote, and Backup gets GSD. I think of this as uneducated onlookers with a less common breed (or so common but so misunderstood) than an issue of inconsistency amongst a breed.
I prefer to know the type being produced or close to it. I do not like to see much variety in my breed and chosen lines.
I think variety comes with dogs where working is the desirable trait, then looks. Look at any working dog breed.... It's only when conformation becomes the desired trait that its becomes uniform for a few people.
Personally..... I think it's a bit of a moot point. There's ALWAYS going to be variations, and it's individual interpretation of one standard, never mind individual uses and wants in those dogs. That is good or bad or both, it's not going to change.
I think coolies are no exception to that, and seeing as they haven't had the sport or confo input yet, they're just more varied than others who have had that treatment. Not a bad thing... Or good.
Are Australian C/Koolie and German Coolies interbred? Here you have made a distinct claim that your dogs are German coolies, how does one signify that if they still interbreed? What says they are German coolies and not Aus C/Koolies?
This is something the American pit bull terrier and American Stafforshire Terrier (and American Bully) have run into and it is, to this day, a constant argument. These questions I pose are not new, they come from years of being in the pit bull type world where definitions of why a dog is what changes from breeder to breeder.
I can look at many working breeds and find relative consistency in the breed, further in the line, and predictability in a breeding.
Backup hasn't a lick of show lines in his blood and yet his sister and he could be switched and you'd have to look twice.
I don't think I buy that only when show dogs come into play do we get consistency of dogs. Furthermore it's not just cookie cutters I am referring to, many traits are essential to workability and some are unique to certain breeds, or in less common place their breeders.
I may have strayed from my initial question of consistency of breed, I accept that my eye is not well enough trained on this breed yet (but I would still love someone to list the similarities so I can better educate myself).
I am now curious though more with the representation of variety within a litter, is that a good thing or a bad thing?
In the past it has been to my understanding that an inconsistency in a breeding is not ideal (recently it was commented in the American cocker thread that a good breeder would have more consistency in their litter than needing to place all of their winning hopes on one pup).
The aussies are from a very well known (and well spoken of from the aussie people I know) hall of fame kennel that does breed for conformation (ASCA) as well as working trials. They look different from the AKC style show aussies.
Personally, I think breeding for extremely narrow type is actually detrimental to breeds as a whole. Breeding for a looser standard is (imo) healthier. For me, breeding for dogs that look consistently of the same type is not a priority in the least. I'm looking at structure and health and working temperament.
Even so, with just my minimal research and knowledge of the breed I am starting to be able to pick out which dogs come from which type of breeder (straight working, ASCA 'all arounder' style, or AKC show style).
Within papillons, and purely show bred ones at that.... these two are sisters:
coat by Summer_Papillon, on Flickr
DSC_0422 by Summer_Papillon, on Flickr
ETA; When they were young
I prefer having a good idea what I'm getting, personality and structure-wise at least. It's nice knowing that of the two Mira-sisters I know, I could gave taken either of them home as pups and been very happy too. Three peas in a pod, though they do vary somewhat in looks (for someone used to FCRs anyway, I know FCRs tend to all look the same to many ).
But with genetic diversity comes variety. I think it's a matter of finding that sweet spot between knowing exactly what you're going to produce and intelligently outcrossing for the health of your dogs.
This is a general statement by the way, not specifically regarding K/Coolies. I don't know enough about how established they are as a type. Seems like lines are tight but the breed itself is quite broad? But that's based on just the two "lines" seen on this forum so...grain of salt and all that.
Yorkies are so ridiculously bred these days, that I've never seen two yorkies who look exactly alike.
I mean, how many yorkies do you meet that actually look like this?:
I agree and this is my opinion in my pointed question. I'm open to other opinions but I find the seeking out a pure bred but wanting a gamble in a litter to be... Unique?
Lauren, no one asked for cookie cutters, the question is, would you prefer your breeder produce a relatively consistent look and temperament and thus hedge your bets or do you prefer the genetic diversity in a litter of pups that may allow for your ideal or not?
I would prefer a consistent look and temperament. Personally. I want to meet dogs produced from that breeder (and although they would be different colors and personalities of course) find a lot of the same type I like and a stable, even temperament I look for. Of course there will be differences in colors, drives, personalities.. but I mean honest to goodness temperament (ease of adjusting to new environments, off switches, aloofness with strangers, confidence , handler oriented for example) I would hope to see much of the same.
I just want to know what I can expect when a litter is bred and the kind of dog my puppy will grow up to be
Journey and Merlin for example are as different as different can be when it comes to their PERSONALITIES and colors. But at their core they have similar structure and temperaments I think..(handler oriented, brave in new environments etc..)
It's still a moot point. The standard varies because different people see it differently. Fashions come and go. You can't say one standard, because there really isn't one in any breed. There are interpretations of standard.
So to say, do you want consistency is really saying, do you want all dogs to look like YOUR ideal... It'll never happen.
And it depends now strict you mean on consistency.... Do you mean all have the exact same mould? Because there's consistency in working and show bred gsps if that's the case, but there are definite differences too. Depends whose asking. I see similarities. Fred's breeder who shows thinks they look worlds apart.
Generally show bred dogs are bred to look like A or B, so once that hits then I do believe you'll see more "type". Otherwise you wouldn't distinguish between work and show lines. There's not many breeds that maintain dual roles.. Again, to me it's neither good nor bad, I like both routes!
Honestly, consistency looks wise is not a concern for me much.
I prefer a breeder that is breeding for structure and yes, some breed type. But as far as the extreme consistency in type you see in a lot of show type lines, then no. It's not a concern to me. I believe you can breed for good structure without getting hung up on what I view as minor issues.
Consistent temperament is more of a concern to me. But I don't think that consistency in temperament is necessarily reflected in the looks of a group of dogs.
I honestly think with the aussies, a lot is that people are so used to the show type and the full drop ears just because that is what is most common.
Dizzy, I'm not sure you understand what others have taken from my questions. Should I try and represent them again?
I have repeatedly said its not about looks purely but looks do hold importance with the purebred dog. They signify important traits. I am referring however to a predictable size, joint structure, feet, and personality such as DA, instinct, drive, off switch, handler focus, etc.
Variance will always happen but you sought out a GSP from your breeder because you expected a certain dog, you have said in another thread you chose this dog as to not be overwhelmed by a strictly hunting line dog. That is predictability and confidence in a breeder who can produce what they have sought out to create.