Real Working Dogs

[crazedACD]

In your opinion, does a breeder need to prove their dogs can perform their breeds' intended purpose? Should a dog that can't do their intended job be excluded from being bred? Would you purchase a puppy whose parents were strictly pet or show dogs?

For companion dogs/dogs without purpose, do they need to be shown or titled in obedience, CGC, agility etc?

Do you consider obedience, agility etc "real work" that should be bred for?

Does a breeder need to compete with and title their dogs in these sports/jobs (sheepdog trials, hunt tests, etc), or is it okay as long as the dog does it at home? Do they need to be exceptional at their job to bred, or is an average working dog okay?

 

[CrystalGSD]

I'm very lax about all of those questions. I think as long as a dog is health tested and has a good temperament then I'm fine with it being bred. Yes, I would buy a puppy from strictly pet or show dog breeders, if that is what I want at the time.

For companion dogs, I think a CGC title and maybe a basic obedience title would be beneficial to show the dog can handle itself in different situations. I'm fine with dogs being bred for agility, obedience, etc. If the dog is successful at their job at home, they shouldn't need to title the dog and that dog can be bred.

Yep, I'm pretty relaxed with my standards.

 

[PerformanceDog]

In your opinion, does a breeder need to prove their dogs can perform their breeds' intended purpose? Should a dog that can't do their intended job be excluded from being bred? Would you purchase a puppy whose parents were strictly pet or show dogs?

I think for this it depends on the reasons you are wanting a dog and the lifestyle you are planning on having with said dog. For me, I want to do performance type sports such as agility, disc, etc. so I want a dog that will be structurally sound, good health in the lines, sound temperament, etc. so titles and other ways of "proving" a dog is important to me. I don't care if the dog does the job they were originally bred to do, but rather have the drives and structure and agility to do things that should make it a successful sport dog.

I personally would not buy a puppy anymore that is strictly pet/show dogs... Unless those people were very out of the norm for what I normally see, and more along the lines of my viewpoints.

For companion dogs/dogs without purpose, do they need to be shown or titled in obedience, CGC, agility etc?

I think having titles in stuff is one way to show the ability/soundness in a dog. That hopefully it shows the temperament is sound, or structure, etc. however, I also know dogs that skimmed by. So it's not a guarantee by any means. And there are so many factors that contribute to what a puppy is going to turn out to be like..

Do you consider obedience, agility etc "real work" that should be bred for?

I think it is real work, it makes the dog think, they need drive just like any "real" job.

Does a breeder need to compete with and title their dogs in these sports/jobs (sheepdog trials, hunt tests, etc), or is it okay as long as the dog does it at home? Do they need to be exceptional at their job to bred, or is an average working dog okay?

I think it depends on the titles vs at home thing. It's always a plus to have the titles, but titles can be different than really going out and hunting for example. So it depends, but as long as you trust the dog was worked enough at home or there is some proof, I think things like hunt tests aren't necessary. I would still prefer to find a breeder with them though. But again there are so many things, I would be willing to budge on some things if I found a breeder that did most of the things I find ideal (health testing, 2+ year guaranteed health contract and if something was seriously wrong a replacement pup-without having to return existing pup, titles, I really get into people who do a ton with the puppies as they are growing up (new places, surfaces, water, toys, interactive things, starting training, people, kids, dogs, other animals, etc etc.) to get the puppy started on the right track). There are so many things and odds of finding a breeder that is going to be 100% perfect in every way is unlikely.

So I think you have to be realistic about why and what you want to do with a puppy and research to try and find a breeder that will probably create a puppy that will be closest to what you are looking for. And everyone is going to have different priorities of what is most important that the breeder does. So it all depends.

 

[Toller_08]

I think it's awesome when a dog can perform adequately or exceptionally at what it was bred to do, but as I am not an avid hunter nor do I plan on having a farm with livestock, I don't specifically need a dog of my chosen breeds that can perform its original purpose. I don't want to see instinct disappear either, and likely wouldn't buy a dog from a breeder whose dogs were known to have zero natural instinct, but its certainly not the highest priority for me. I used to feel it was very important, but now I feel that as long as there are breeders out there with some kind of goal producing dogs for some kind of purpose, then that's good. Working ability is something to be maintained and definitely not unimportant to me for a breed in its entirety, but as I am strictly an owner interested in sports and not breeding, I am not going to go buy an obedience or agility dog from a sheep ranch. I think it's a little unrealistic for performance breeders to also have exceptional working dogs. Usually it's one or the other or somewhere in the middle.

When I buy a dog, I do want to see preferably some degree of performance titles hopefully on their dogs or at least dogs produced by them. For me, it's a better guarantee that I'm going to end up with a talented dogs capable of whatever activity I am interested in trying. It isn't the be all end all anymore, as some sport venues don't necessarily hand out titles or maybe the dogs work at home, but I do want to see dogs that are excelling and capable of many activities titled or not. I would not buy from conformation only or pet breeders.

I don't consider sports to be work per se, but I feel that nowadays, a breeder breeding great performance dogs is just as important for many as a breeder breeding for the breed's original purpose. The world of dogs is changing. Being an active dog owner and somebody interested in sports for fun, having a dog with lineage known to enjoy and do well in performance venues is important to me. I don't want "just a pet" but as said above, I also don't require a dog to work for its original purpose.

When looking for a breeder, the things that are important to me are that the dogs have good all around temperaments and are mentally sound, that the dogs are talented in some way other than conformation and that the dogs are structurally sound in order to last a long time doing whatever it is I want to do. Be it Obedience, Agility, Flyball or going for a hike.

I like the type of breeder such as where Journey came from. Her dogs are aesthetically pleasing to me, sound in every way, are worked a little bit around her home and took herding lessons, are great all around family dogs, are moderate and not overdone in either direction (work or show), and many of her dogs or dogs produced by her or produced by the person her foundation came from are doing very well in many different sports. That's the type of breeder I will seek out in the future should I pursue other breeds also.

That kind of felt all over the place, but hopefully makes sense haha.

 

[sassafras]

I don't even know anymore. My feelings bounce all over the place. Generally I do not have very "strict" feelings about a breed's original purpose because a lot of their original purposes don't exist anymore (or won't soon). OTOH I would hate to see some of these breeds lose what makes them themselves.

About the most specific thing I can say is that I don't think I would ever get a dog from someone who ONLY did conformation with no other activities or sports. I just don't think that on its own it's good enough criteria for me.

 

[joce]

When I search for a lgd I almost guarantee it will be from an old farmer out here who does not health test but that's been doing it for years and knows what pups are pets are working quality. I keep seeing peopl get them other places and expect the dogs to magically know to like their chickens and goats when they have been raised in a house!

I don't mind someone doing just one thing as long as they keep other things in mind(like only do confo but dogs could go out and do agility, pups get cgc etc) because breeders have a lot to do and are not super people. I feel lucky some days to keep a full time job and my guys. Now add in show and train and promote dogs HA! Plus they have a family and have to be nice to people. Not a fun job

 

[Laurelin]

In your opinion, does a breeder need to prove their dogs can perform their breeds' intended purpose?

Do they NEED to? No. Do I like to see it? Yes.

Should a dog that can't do their intended job be excluded from being bred?

I don't think so especially if we are strictly speaking. Many breed purposes are extinct these days,

Would you purchase a puppy whose parents were strictly pet or show dogs?

I have purchased a dog from purely show breeding. I would not do so again. I will either purchase from a working or sport breeder or someone who breeds for versatility and participates in some sort of physical activity with their dogs. I would purchase from someone who shows AND does a sport. I just want to be more careful that they understand the need for health and structure. I find, at least in my breeds, that a lot of the purely show breeders have practices I do not like.

For companion dogs/dogs without purpose, do they need to be shown or titled in obedience, CGC, agility etc?

No but I do expect them to be good house dogs and bred for health. Mia has a CGC so I'm pretty sure any dog can get a CGC lol.

Do you consider obedience, agility etc "real work" that should be bred for?

It's not real work. It's a game. But should it be bred for? I don't have a problem with people breeding for sports AS LONG AS they are decent breeders otherwise. Some sport breeders are very sketchy to me and seem to be purely commercial gigs. I would not support anyone mass producing dogs and overbreeding bitches to be good at a game. Some of the sport breeders have practices that if you switched the breed from 'superfast border collie' to 'good companion labradoodle' they would be completely lambasted by the dog community. But since they breed superfast it is ok? To me breeding solely for superfast is not enough reason to breed let alone breed the way some do. Nor is superpretty show dog.

Does a breeder need to compete with and title their dogs in these sports/jobs (sheepdog trials, hunt tests, etc), or is it okay as long as the dog does it at home? Do they need to be exceptional at their job to bred, or is an average working dog okay?

Working in the real world to me says more than trialling but I am not picky really. I also think in both show and working dogs breeding good dogs is fine. When you simply breed exceptional dogs you risk some genetic bottlenecking over time.

 

[release the hounds]

when you've been around long enough, you find that there's absolute crap that come from all kinds of breeders and some good too. In general I think breeders mostly do a pretty bad job at breeding dogs.

I've met more dogs than I care to admit to that are "real working" dogs either by an owner statement or actually certified and working the streets, that have no business being referred to as that.

and just because a dog "looks" like it's supposed to, doesn't mean it matches the fairytale breed description from the AKC either. a good bunch of those dogs are so far and away different than the working type dogs I can't even believe they call them the same breed. The amount of this obviously varies among the breeds, but generally speaking it is there in almost all of them to a degree.

For me, it's simple. Find a dog you like and get it. Who cares what everyone else thinks. There are people that have 30 years in dogs that I don't find to know anything. There are people that have been involved 5 years and have amassed a lifetime of knowledge it seems. There are lots that get a dog and 6 months later think they know everything, just ask them. And all of these types of people are breeding dogs too.

I know lots of breeders of all types. There are a small handful I'd even consider going to see what they have if I was looking for another dog. I simply don't see enough people that are really into their dogs and know them well enough to make good breeding decisions. It usually shows in the fact they never produce any dogs I'd want. From the "working" breeders that think their working line dog is going to produce working dogs because it has a name or a pedigree, to the confo breeders where, in my breed at least, it seems to be more about creating perception and markets for vastly inflated prices in which to sell puppies based on kennel names and pedigrees. No thanks.

 

[Elrohwen]

I just prefer that breeders to do something with their dogs. If that's just conformation shows, ok, fine. Most people in my breed only do confo so I would cut out a lot of really nice dogs in a breed I love if I required lots of sport or working titles. It does mean I have to be more picky about the temperaments they are breeding and whether I think those will be good for sports. In a larger breed with more choice, I would be more picky about titles.

I really don't care if people don't work the dog in the area it was originally intended. I like breeds that were bred to hunt, but I don't personally hunt, so I can't fault other people who don't hunt their dogs. I want a dog who can be a pet and dabble in sports, so why would I put a lot of emphasis on breeders who hunt their dogs? I do think it's great when people hunt them, and I think it's important for the breed as a whole, but it's not really impotant when I'm looking for a puppy.

If I wanted a dog to hunt, or herd, or whatever, then sure, I would look for a breeder who did those things. And if I wanted to succeed in sports at high levels I would look for breeders doing those things with their dogs. But I don't think it's necessary for every breeder to do those things, or we would have very few breeding dogs left.

 

[*blackrose]

I....don't know anymore.

If I had a preference, I would still probably lean towards a breeder that produces dogs that can perform their intended task. Aka, if a Labrador breeder was breeding dogs that had NO desire to retrieve, something would be wrong. That being said, I certainly don't care if not every breeder is breeding for The Best Hunting Dog, because, well, I don't want a hunting dog.

If I did want a hunting dog, then yes, a breeder WOULD have to actively hunt with their dogs/have the majority of puppy owners who actively hunt with their dogs so I would know what kind of dog I was getting.

If I just wanted a pet/companion dog, I'm pretty sure I'd be satisfied with someone doing extensive health testing and breeding dogs with sound temperaments and conformation. And while I would always choose a breeder who actively does things with their dogs over someone who doesn't...I'm less concerned about it as I used to be.

I just prefer that breeders to do something with their dogs. If that's just conformation shows, ok, fine. Most people in my breed only do confo so I would cut out a lot of really nice dogs in a breed I love if I required lots of sport or working titles. It does mean I have to be more picky about the temperaments they are breeding and whether I think those will be good for sports. In a larger breed with more choice, I would be more picky about titles.

I really don't care if people don't work the dog in the area it was originally intended. I like breeds that were bred to hunt, but I don't personally hunt, so I can't fault other people who don't hunt their dogs. I want a dog who can be a pet and dabble in sports, so why would I put a lot of emphasis on breeders who hunt their dogs? I do think it's great when people hunt them, and I think it's important for the breed as a whole, but it's not really impotant when I'm looking for a puppy.

If I wanted a dog to hunt, or herd, or whatever, then sure, I would look for a breeder who did those things. And if I wanted to succeed in sports at high levels I would look for breeders doing those things with their dogs. But I don't think it's necessary for every breeder to do those things, or we would have very few breeding dogs left.

^ what she said. LOL

 

[Julee]

In your opinion, does a breeder need to prove their dogs can perform their breeds' intended purpose? Should a dog that can't do their intended job be excluded from being bred? Would you purchase a puppy whose parents were strictly pet or show dogs?

I feel a breeder needs to do at least the basics to show that the breed can do its intended purpose. Regarding breeding, I think it depends on the dog and the reasoning behind why the dog can't do the intended purpose. An accident as a young dog that prevents the ability to herd or retrieve? Okay, understandable. A herding breed that's scared of livestock? Not so much. I do not believe in breeding dogs that are strictly pet or conformation dogs, though as I mentioned, if something happened that forced an otherwise stellar dog to be pet-only... I'm okay with that.

For companion dogs/dogs without purpose, do they need to be shown or titled in obedience, CGC, agility etc?

I like to see some effort towards SOMETHING. Can be service or therapy work, obedience, agility, etc... there's no reason for a dog of those breeds to not be able to attain a CGC, so I like to see those as well.

Do you consider obedience, agility etc "real work" that should be bred for?

Yes and no. First and foremost I feel that structure, health, and temperament should be bred for, even before working ability. A dog with nice structure (note I'm saying structure, not conformation) and a temperament appropriate for the breed will frequently make a good sport dog. I don't see anything wrong with dogs like "sporter collies", but I'd like to see "real" working ability maintained alongside that if at all possible. Not everyone has access to stock, however.

Does a breeder need to compete with and title their dogs in these sports/jobs (sheepdog trials, hunt tests, etc), or is it okay as long as the dog does it at home? Do they need to be exceptional at their job to bred, or is an average working dog okay?

I don't see anything wrong with a hunting dog, who hunts regularly, not doing hunt tests. Same goes for herding breeds, or hounds.

I feel that if a dog has nice structure, an appropriate temperament, and cleared health tests, an average working dog that does their job well is fine.

 

[Oko]

In an ideal world, yes I'd like to see border collies bred for being stock dogs only (and all the structure and temperament and health considerations that go into it), and no I don't consider agility something you can breed for or should breed for. Doesn't need to do sheepdog trials but needs to actually have work at home that proves it, not just super easy chores on a hobby farm.

 

[Keechak]

I want to see that a breeder's dogs have been evaluated by other people that I consider good judges in the activities I am interested in getting the dog for.

In general, breeders are not critical enough of their own dogs to weed them out of the gene pool, or they are willing to dismiss certain bad characteristics out of a love for their dogs. Evaluations by unrelated parties with no bias gives me a better overall picture of the dog's true nature.

 

[DJEtzel]

As long as dogs are being bred and housed safely, there is a goal that is being worked toward, and there are homes for puppies, I don't largely care what most breeders are breeding.

For my own taste, I'm never going to buy a dog from someone that does nothing with their breeding stock performance wise. I'm not going to buy a confo dog, CGC dog, or couch potato. I'm going to buy a dog that I know is likely to have drive due to momma and daddy's drive. If their dogs can't/won't do what I want to do with the dog, I'm not buying from them, period. Just a matter of taste! I like dogs that have a lot of drive to excel in the sports I play, and I want to stack those odds in my favor.

 

[Annabell]

I feel like a breeder's dogs should be able to do what they were originally bred for, even if that is not the breeder's specific goal. For instance a BC breeder that mainly breeds for agility should be able to send puppies off into homes that want to participate in herding. I would never purchase a dog whose parents were specifically confo/pet dogs. Even if it is a companion dog, getting their dogs involved in some kind of competition or even therapy/service work really shows a breeder's dedication and that their dogs are more than a pretty face.

My ideal breeder would be able to title their dogs in the conformation, herding, and sporting rings because those are the three things I would most likely participate in.

 

[Elrohwen]

I feel like a breeder's dogs should be able to do what they were originally bred for, even if that is not the breeder's specific goal. For instance a BC breeder that mainly breeds for agility should be able to send puppies off into homes that want to participate in herding.

But if the breeder is breeding for agility dogs, and probably spending all their time training and showing in agility, how will they know for sure that the dogs will herd?

My dog is birdy and has a ton of hunt drive, but I would never say that he could work as a hunting dog because I just don't know that. If someone wanted a puppy from him to hunt with, I would have to be honest that I think he has the drive, but I can't promise his offspring would be good hunting dogs because he's never been tested or trained for that. Having a BC who can pass a hunting instinct test doesn't mean that dog will do well on a large farm, or in herding trials. If someone really wants a dog for herding, they'll go to a breeder who herds with their dogs, not one who only does agility.

 

[Dekka]

I think instinct and ability is important. What makes a JRT different from a Bichon, or a BC different from a Newf? I mean other than just the packaging. The breed instincts that come from being bred to do a certian type of job. If we forget and say well because I don't herd sheep or hunt why do I care if my BC or JRT come from lines that can do appropriate things? But then we loose the breed characteristics that draw people to them in the first place.

If some day I get a Mal (not likey but would love to) it will not be due to the packaging as I am not wowed by their appearance, its due to the breed behaviour characteristics.

Its like with JRTs I was never drawn to them due to their looks, they have grown on me that way lol, but I love them for their terrierness, intelligence and tenacity. I have met JRTs that have none of those things in rescue. They look mostly like JRTs but they hold zero appeal to me as they could be a bichon in terrier clothes.

All that said Schen comes from a confo breeder. She shows A LOT but its just in confo. A few of her dogs have gone off to do things. However she has been around for ages and I have heard good things about her dogs so as a companion dog that is fine for me. Health testing and a good reputation (and a loooong line of champions. Schen's Dad was a ch in japan as well as the US lol)

 

[Annabell]

But if the breeder is breeding for agility dogs, and probably spending all their time training and showing in agility, how will they know for sure that the dogs will herd?

My dog is birdy and has a ton of hunt drive, but I would never say that he could work as a hunting dog because I just don't know that. If someone wanted a puppy from him to hunt with, I would have to be honest that I think he has the drive, but I can't promise his offspring would be good hunting dogs because he's never been tested or trained for that. Having a BC who can pass a hunting instinct test doesn't mean that dog will do well on a large farm, or in herding trials. If someone really wants a dog for herding, they'll go to a breeder who herds with their dogs, not one who only does agility.

If someone wants a dog for serious herding, then of course they wouldn't go to a sport breeder. What I mean is that the original instincts should still be there. If the instinct is there, then it would still be possible to train a dog to do what it was originally bred for.

 

[Elrohwen]

If someone wants a dog for serious herding, then of course they wouldn't go to a sport breeder. What I mean is that the original instincts should still be there. If the instinct is there, then it would still be possible to train a dog to do what it was originally bred for.

I'm just not sure that you can know the dog has the right instincts unless you actually engage in those activities. I *think* my dog has a strong instinct to hunt, but since I don't hunt and haven't trained him for hunting, I don't really know that. A real hunter might take him and say he's a dud for whatever reasons I've never considered.

I do agree with you in theory, and I would prefer if breeds retained their original instincts, you just can't know that unless you're working the dog in those areas. I see breeders end up on a slippery slope where they say that their dogs have the right instincts for the breed, but they never prove it or use the dog for those activities. I see this in my breed and it drives me nuts. I'd rather they just tell me what their dog is good at, instead of talking up drives and instincts they haven't tested in generations.

 

[PlottMom]

In coonhounds, pretty much, people are breeding for hunting or show. Or "dual purpose", but usually the emphasis is on one more than the other. I have one dog from pretty exclusively "show lines", and a dog from pretty exclusively "hunt lines" that is probably the more correct dog (though they both have their strong points). So honestly, I just find lines I like and stick with them regardless. When I bought Rage, I just told the breeder, "I need one with awesome structure - I know the parents, I trust the dog will hunt."

In the end, if I'm going to have a national level anything, it will be show not hunt (because I can't spend all night every night in the woods) - so I'm going to look for someone breeding correct and phenomenal dogs, and expose it to the woods/give it a chance to make a coondog.