|
Post by Doggitter on Mar 11, 2006 22:10:02 GMT -5
Thanks for the reads guys. JSF, is there a name behind those letters? So how did the AKC arrive at the standards? Adopted from another organization? The top dog within the AKC says "this is what it'll be? Assemble a mass of text and eeny miney moe from it? Gleen the stats from ole Ch. Master Briar and say he's the golden child? Eeny miney moe would probably be the most vaulable method of the ones listed. I'd hate to think it was actually someone within the AKC that "decided" what was what. The omni-importance some show people express just doesn't seem like a good thing to let into power, be it laying out guidelines or manegment of an organization. Loren.
|
|
|
Post by jsf13 on Mar 12, 2006 0:07:15 GMT -5
Hey Loren, it,s Joe. I'm not sure about the AKC but with the UKC I believe the standard is put forth by a breed club which the UKC then accepts as its standard.
|
|
|
Post by melanie on Mar 12, 2006 2:02:26 GMT -5
>The same story is true in bird dogs, hounds and racing >greyhounds.(they are not even AKC registered). There >are dogs that do and dogs that pose. Racing Greyhounds are registered with NGA. NGA's standard is "FAST". NGA will breed anything if they get fast. Problem is, they breed cancer dogs to cancer dogs and rotten mouths to rotten mouths, and most racing Greyhounds lose their teeth and die of osteosarcoma. Of course, the AKC hates this (we all do!), but NGA hates AKC. The dogs don't even look the same. But racing is all about the money. Since the racing career of a GOOD dog is 3-4 years, 1-2 for most, the dogs are tossed. Then all the rescue people adopt them and deal with the osteo. My friend lost 3 Greys in Dec. all to osteo. All under age 9. The NGA breeders don't care, Greyhounds are a commodity and no one gives a rat's behind what happens to the dog after it's VERY short career. What happens is they all die of cancer with a life cut short. I've lucked out with a 12 yo whose only problem is all his teeth have rotted out - and that's WITH yearly vet care. I was just thinking about the need for a standard or COE or just plain [glow=red,2,300]ethics[/glow] . Ethics of some kind, and a standard of some kind, could help prevent what alot of breeds experience. Most Scotties die of kidney disease. Cairns are bred for either one fault or the other, whichever one you can tolerate in your lines. I guess this didn't have much to do with the real subject here, but it got me to thinking about standards and registries and what they actually mean - they mean your dog is registered. Nothing more. Correct health is what breeders should be working on. Natural abilities shouldn't even come into question with a healthy dog. One of the main health issues is auto immune disorders, which are caused by genetically faulty adrenals. I know nothing about animal husbandry other than I've bred a few litters, but the science is there to determine genetic markers and eliminate them through exceptionally selective breeding. It's probably available if one wants to check the genetic markers on a bunch of dogs till they get the prefect match. Then you have an genetically engineered dog, and it seems I've come in a circle and can't think of a damn thing to offer this thread except it's late and I'm babbling. So I see a need for a standard of some kind, but also see the conflict that because the Airedale is black, or an Airedale weighs 90 lbs, it's not a good Airedale. A good dog is a good dog, whatever color or size. Same goes for a lousy dog. Just late Sat. night thoughts. [glow=red,2,300]Mel[/glow]
|
|
|
Post by hicntry on Mar 12, 2006 10:16:47 GMT -5
Mel, if you were that tired you should have gone to bed sooner. I don't see where much of that has to do with the ATCA wanting "everyone" to breed the same as they do ....especially since their dogs are largely very weak in the work area. The standard is the quideline but it is also more open than the ATCA to some variation. The UKC works off the same standard but they don't have the elitist attitude. They value the working ability more. The ATCA values the looks, period.
|
|
|
Post by southern on Mar 12, 2006 10:41:26 GMT -5
Just read the standard for the British. Well heck , I got 5-7 mo old pups that big. Also the British have a better idea on DNA which was brought up during the Supreme Court battle back in 93, on the blacks. If the parents are dna'd, and the pup shows to be from the parents, no matter what its color, green striped, pink poke-a-dot, or solid black, it is considered a purebred. Well, I have that, the dna, that is, maybe I should have moved to England back then. I will never be invited to join the ATCA, I can guarantee all of you that, due to the issue on the Blacks, but I keep telling anyone who will pay heed to the truth., If they came after me on color, they will eventually come after any breeder on size, just a matter of time
|
|
|
Post by lauregen on Mar 12, 2006 17:45:33 GMT -5
Mel, if you were that tired you should have gone to bed sooner. I don't see where much of that has to do with the ATCA wanting "everyone" to breed the same as they do ....especially since their dogs are largely very weak in the work area. The standard is the quideline but it is also more open than the ATCA to some variation. The UKC works off the same standard but they don't have the elitist attitude. They value the working ability more. The ATCA values the looks, period. How would you know whether or not UKC has any more or less of an elitist attitude than the AKC? It is not the AKC that sets the breed standard, it is the parent club (AFTC). Also, how would you know what percentage of Airedales could work or not? Very few Airedales bred for conformation ever get a chance to work. That doesn't mean that they couldn't do the job. I showed a dog (another breed) in the field that was an AKC champion, with 15 generations of champions behind her. NONE had been any fieldwork. To my surprise (because I had never tried it and she never had any exposure), my conformation champion excelled in the field. She achieved titles with absolutely no problem. I think that most dogs could do this, but they just need the opportunity to show what is in their genes. It's like health testing, you don't know what is in your dog's genes until you test for it (unless your dog gets sick). Laura
|
|
|
Post by hicntry on Mar 12, 2006 19:32:54 GMT -5
Mel, if you were that tired you should have gone to bed sooner. I don't see where much of that has to do with the ATCA wanting "everyone" to breed the same as they do ....especially since their dogs are largely very weak in the work area. The standard is the quideline but it is also more open than the ATCA to some variation. The UKC works off the same standard but they don't have the elitist attitude. They value the working ability more. The ATCA values the looks, period. How would you know whether or not UKC has any more or less of an elitist attitude than the AKC? It is not the AKC that sets the breed standard, it is the parent club (AFTC). Also, how would you know what percentage of Airedales could work or not? Very few Airedales bred for conformation ever get a chance to work. That doesn't mean that they couldn't do the job. I showed a dog (another breed) in the field that was an AKC champion, with 15 generations of champions behind her. NONE had been any fieldwork. To my surprise (because I had never tried it and she never had any exposure), my conformation champion excelled in the field. She achieved titles with absolutely no problem. I think that most dogs could do this, but they just need the opportunity to show what is in their genes. It's like health testing, you don't know what is in your dog's genes until you test for it (unless your dog gets sick). Laura Every one I know has UKC dogs only.....as in bear dogs, bobcat dogs, and such. You see Laura, hunters don't care what size or anything else a dog may be. They don't even care if he is ugly or a show dog.....as long as he hunts. Read the post Laura, I know who sets the standard. I just read it at AKC because I think the ATCA board links you to the AKC for the standard. "Also, how would you know what percentage of Airedales could work or not? Very few Airedales bred for conformation ever get a chance to work. That doesn't mean that they couldn't do the job." It isn't rocket science Laura, if they don't work them, they can't breed them for working ability= a low percentage of outstanding workers. To hear them tell it, they can all do it all. Only the most naive of people would swallow that. If it were true, then all my dogs are show champions because I breed for working abilities. I agree with you , many of the show bred dogs still have potential and some can even look good competing against other show dogs. Hunters are no different than show people....they want the best dog in the field and don't care what kind of dog it is if it is outstanding. That is why they have turned to the other breeds. The airedale is no longer considered in the running by most hunters. Under the ATCA's watch, the working abilities have deteriorated to lack luster at best. I am not talking working ability that would make an ATCA member proud, I am talking about working ability that would make a hunter proud. There is a big difference. I am drafting a letter the the ATCA president, three vice president and all other at the top in the ATCA, to come over here and state their case as to what their primary goals are. In the process, they might explain how they breed such good working dogs when no one works them. I am speaking in general terms Laura, there are a few that do justice to the airedale.....darn few. Lets see if they are willing to come and state their case. As I said earlier, you breed for show dogs...what you get is show dogs. With this in mind, yes, you are bound to get a lucky one on occassion, but it isn't because they were working on it. I started with two show dogs years ago. I thought they were fantastic hunters myself....then I started breeding them for working traits. If I had those original dogs now I would get rid of them. The couldn't compete.
|
|
|
Post by texasdales on Mar 14, 2006 10:03:14 GMT -5
I can somewhat understand limiting size, my big male Trevor is 128 pounds. i have never seen another dale his size that wasnt morbidly obese. But, i also think that there should be no difference in the standard between a working dog and a show dog. if that means changing the standared to allowe for bigger dogs, and more houndy ears, then fine. but i really hate to see the sporting dogs where the working animals look nothing like the show bred dogs ( or vice-versa) it is my personal oppinion that dogs should do what they were bred to do, and animals that excel at it should be the ones we breed and compare to (ie, they should be the standard) Has anyone else ever looked at the differene between german bred rotties and american show rrotties? its astounding! and thats before we even look at temperment and working ability. anyway thats all my humble personal opinion. deanna
|
|
|
Post by jsf13 on Mar 14, 2006 15:41:31 GMT -5
Lauregen, as you posted the following in response to a post about Lurchers,
"Posted by Lauregen on February 26, 2006, 12:34 pm, in reply to "Re: Airedale (?) Puppies" 70.108.2.245
If you want crosses, go to the pound. There are thousands of them, many with a lot of talent. There is no need to create more mutts."
you'll have to forgive me if I question your definition of "excelled in the field". Perhaps you could elaborate?
|
|
|
Post by melanie on Mar 15, 2006 0:15:51 GMT -5
Mel, if you were that tired you should have gone to bed sooner. I don't see where much of that has to do with the ATCA wanting "everyone" to breed the same as they do ....especially since their dogs are largely very weak in the work area. The standard is the quideline but it is also more open than the ATCA to some variation. The UKC works off the same standard but they don't have the elitist attitude. They value the working ability more. The ATCA values the looks, period. We can't generalize so much about all the members of the ATCA. Yes, the main intention of AKC shows is breeding pretty dogs. But over the past 15 years there has been an increase in Airedales working, and that's the outcry for recognition. There are hundreds of people doing advanced obedience, tracking, hunting, Schutzhund, and they are ATCA members who are making noise to the ATCA. Agility wasn't accepted by AKC for a good 10 years and it took lots of letter writing and dogs doing it, and AKC came around. (too far IMO, it's become so competitive and took the fun away) I grew up with BIG Airedales, and now have dogs who are of the standard. I think a standard is necessary, I see the logic in it, I understand the reasons for it. But if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it must be a duck... Beagles, Poodles, and more, have varieties within their breeds, from small to large. Maybe Airedales should, too. 21" - 24", and over 24". If the dog's structure is correct, what does size matter? There are breeds that have varieties of color. I realize that this would be very difficult to achieve in Airedaleland. THere are many closed minds that won't ever be opened. But if we keep earnestly working on it, it could happen. Maybe not in our lifetimes, but we'd have set the bar for Real Airedales. I suppose that means we keep proving our working dogs and making noise about it. I like working with my dogs, and strive for a meshed team and precise maneuvers, ( I said strive.... ) but I'm not doing it for recognition of any kind. I'm doing it because it makes me and my dogs happy, and it challenges us. If the ATCA wants to throw me out because we do bitework, it wouldn't make any difference. [glow=red,2,300]Mel[/glow]
|
|
|
Post by texairedale on Mar 16, 2006 15:11:36 GMT -5
It is incumbant on those interested in a specific activity to organize, support, promote, and develop that activity for Airedales. You cannot expect those not interested in that activity to do the work, nor expect them to participate. It seems obvious to say this, but these "real working" boards have a lot of "challenges" to ATCA members, officers, and discussions of what "real" Airedales are. All of that misses the point. If you want something to be, the ones interested have to do the work! How many BREEDERS are interested in Shutzhund in the US? How many BREEDERS are interested in bear and boar hunting? I am thinking the number is VERY small. If you want to have an impact on the breed and its future, you are going to have to try to understand and work with the perspectives of show breeders, they are the dominant force in the breed...... like it or not. AND they will remain so, there is not much need for very many bear packs anymore. Luckily, there are a number of "show breeders" that are interested in some performance activities; obedience, agility, bird hunting (H/W committee). That would be a starting point. The breed needs performance interested people to avoid becoming like bulldogs, cockers, and collies. (Or a split breed, like so many other "performance" breeds). Engage, but don't start by assuming "showbreeders" are stupid, ignorant, misdirected, and malintended. You might find out many are more savvy than you think. Dave Post
|
|
|
Post by texairedale on Mar 16, 2006 15:16:52 GMT -5
Someone mentioned the idea of organizing a nutria hunt/trial for Airedales. I think this idea has promise and would be very promotable. It is easy to image where this kind of event could be staged that would be relatively safe for both novice dogs and novice hunters. I hope some hunter/Airedalers get behind the idea. Sounds like an event that would be in the south, too. Another plus! Dave Post
|
|
|
Post by hicntry on Mar 16, 2006 15:52:29 GMT -5
I agree whole heartedly Dave. It is a great idea and a safe way to go because a nutria can't hurt an airedale. I also think some good coon hunts would prove an eye opener and they are only 20 to 25lbs normally. You did mention the "novice" hunter and dog. Everything is a novice at one time or another. The only way not to is to be is to jump in and do it. A good dog will be catching hogs before his first birthday but some are late bloomers and it may take a little more time to get the feel of it.
|
|
|
Post by melanie on Mar 16, 2006 17:48:09 GMT -5
It is incumbant on those interested in a specific activity to organize, support, promote, and develop that activity for Airedales. You cannot expect those not interested in that activity to do the work, nor expect them to participate. It seems obvious to say this, but these "real working" boards have a lot of "challenges" to ATCA members, officers, and discussions of what "real" Airedales are. All of that misses the point. If you want something to be, the ones interested have to do the work! How many BREEDERS are interested in Shutzhund in the US? How many BREEDERS are interested in bear and boar hunting? I am thinking the number is VERY small. If you want to have an impact on the breed and its future, you are going to have to try to understand and work with the perspectives of show breeders, they are the dominant force in the breed...... like it or not. AND they will remain so, there is not much need for very many bear packs anymore. Luckily, there are a number of "show breeders" that are interested in some performance activities; obedience, agility, bird hunting (H/W committee). That would be a starting point. The breed needs performance interested people to avoid becoming like bulldogs, cockers, and collies. (Or a split breed, like so many other "performance" breeds). Engage, but don't start by assuming "showbreeders" are stupid, ignorant, misdirected, and malintended. You might find out many are more savvy than you think. Dave Post Well said, Dave. [glow=red,2,300]Mel[/glow]
|
|
|
Post by Maverick on Mar 16, 2006 19:04:06 GMT -5
I can somewhat understand limiting size, my big male Trevor is 128 pounds. How does he compare to a wolfhound in height, speed, and agility?
|
|