I had an interesting debate with a good friend of mine this week. I've always made it clear I'm breeding for agility. In the opinion of this friend, that means I'm breeding away from the breed standard because I'm endorsing traits like lighter bone and longer legs.
I told him that my goals as a breeder are very simple: I am trying to create a great dog for ME to use in agility. That's it. I'm not breeding to sell puppies. I'm not breeding to affect the breed as a whole. I'm not breeding in devotion to the breed standard. I'm breeding for objective results in a scored competition.
He says to me that this means I'm not honoring the breed standard. I'm sorry, but I disagree. We have a fairly vague standard full of words like "moderate". Unless you breed dogs with serious faults or DQs, you are not disrespecting the standard.
I will never breed a dog who is blatantly out of standard (prick ears, illegal colors, grossly mismarked). I do not care about the height DQ and even the MASCUSA Code of Ethics states that this is an acceptable practice. Subjects such as bone and angulation are wildly open to the interpretation and I will not dogmatically adhere to the show community's version of what is correct. If a dog is successful in the agility ring, I don't care if his height to length ratio is perfect or whether he has "correct" angulation according to AKC judges. If a dog is PROVEN in the agility ring, has acceptable colors and ears, is healthy, and has a correct temperament, I will breed that dog! I also find it ironic the number of people in the show community who claim to care about the standard while breeding dogs with extreme traits, extreme coats, heavy bone, houndy ears that sit low on the head, etc. You don't get to lecture people about the breed standard and then pick the parts you don't want to follow because show ring fads are favoring those out of standard dogs.
Equally frustrating are the show ring breeders who *brag* about producing low drive, low energy dogs. Imagine my shock when I actually saw a supposedly reputable breeder describe one of her breeding prospects as "a couch potato"! No part of the breed standard indicates this temperament to be correct, yet many show breeders have zero qualms with reproducing this. If you're going to preach "breeding to the standard", that should include temperament too, should it not?
If you're breeding MAS with the coats of show-line shelties, the bone of show line standard aussies, and the temperaments of golden retrievers, you don't get to sit in judgement of sport breeders who breed MAS with the leg length of border collies! If the show breeders can cherry pick the standard, so can sport breeders.
I do not consider any dog I own to be "out of standard", but the standard is not what informs my decisions. It's more of a check mark on a long list of traits. "Does this dog obviously violate the breed standard? Yes or no?". If it doesn't, we go on to look at other things.
The breed standard is a set of guidelines and not laws. And if a dog has proven himself in some form of OBJECTIVE competition (herding, agility, obedience), I would forgive a breeder for using that dog in their program even if he DID have something like prick ears or a mild mismark. Now if the dog has a total white head, white ears, etc, I would not be ok with that. But the breed standard should never be considered more important than a dog who is truly successful in scored competition. Such things may affect success in subjective arenas like the show ring, but a good herder doesn't need perfect ears. A good agility dog isn't hindered by some extra white at the wither. I wouldn't PERSONALLY use a dog with prick ears but I understand why some might . It's a fixable trait (and half the "reputable breeders" are gluing ears anyway and have no idea what ear genetics they're working with, so it's really a moot point).
In the agility ring specifically, this lends itself to what some call "border collie traits" being propagated. Straighter shoulders, longer legs, lighter bone, longer bodies. I'm FINE with this. I'm fine if every dog I own gets mistaken for a border collie at first sight, or a "baussie" cross! They need those traits because they're competing against border collies.
"Well just get a border collie" some may say. Well it isn't that simple. A Border Collie is an entirely different dog with a different temperament, different health issues, generally larger in size, different energy/enrichment needs, different style of training, etc. They are not interchangeable with an aussie of any size and especially not with a MAS. That isn't to say that I don't like BCs. I do, and I will likely buy one eventually after I retire. For now, my lifestyle isn't conducive to living with a BC because I work 50hrs a week and don't have time to provide for one.
But if I can buy and breed MAS with a lot of BC traits, I will do so, and do so without shame because those traits lend themselves to success.
Comments