Is “breeding out” certain traits from a dog breed acceptable…?
Just because owners typically no longer see a "need" for the trait?
I was told by many people yesterday that animal aggression should be bred out of Pit Bulls because as owners, they don’t want their dogs to be animal aggressive.
Does the same way of thinking apply to people who want a Beagle as a pet, and therefore, don’t want it to have the drive to hunt? Etc…
Is it okay to attempt to "change" a breed, to make owning them a little easier?
Related Entries:What is Horse breeding? What is Dog Breeding? Why can’t these same principles apply to Humans?
Dog breeding why is this not considered prostitution?
Dog Behavior Training – Choosing a Good Family Dog
Different Dog Breeding Methods
Is breeding certain traits out of a dog breed like evolution? Jul 06, 2009 | | How to Breed Dogs: FAQ
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
When it comes to the working abilities of the dog, absofuckinglutely not!!!!!!!!!!
We do not remove traits that have been purposely bred into a dog for hundreds of years simply because we do not want them anymore.
They were put there for a reason, they should be kept there too.
I have heard the lame argument from people on here that herders no longer herd, hunters no longer hunt, etc, but, that is the same poor excuse that got us all the crappy, wanna be, former working dogs that breeders removed all working traits out of and we now have shepherds and Dobies and Rotties that will run away from a pen falling in the floor.
Most dogs were NEVER bred to be "pets", they should be allowed the dignity to keep their unique traits and stay the way they always were.
Lazy assed people need to find a breed that will suit them for their needs instead of just destroying breeds with a few crappy breedings.
Hope I helped!!
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
Wait..
so the idea that if you don’t want a trait in a breed means the breed isn’t for you - no longer applies?
Yea I love aussies…but the fact that they naturally herd and take off after moving things bugs me. I want that bred out..k thanks.
Wow…
stupid.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
No, it’s NOT acceptable. If someone can’t accept the characteristics a dog was bred to posses to perform the task he was intended for, FIND ANOTHER BREED. There are plenty of dogs who were bred for companionship and there are plenty of dogs who weren’t bred for companionship, whose temperaments are still suitable for a domestic lifestyle. If you can’t control or tolerate a strong dog with a very strong "personality", you don’t belong with that dog and that dog doesn’t belong with you.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
IMO breeding out is not always a desirable thing to do. If your breeding out what the dog was intended to do and be in the first place then how is that going to benefit the breed itself?
You can breed out certain elements within a dog that are unhealthy but not to the extent that that breed no longer is either capable of doing what is was intended to do in the first place or changes what the breed is.
This to me would be very irresponsible.
If you bred out the hunting Instinct for a beagle then what kind of breed would it become?? A companion dog? See you can go too far!
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
The traits to which you are referring are the result of selective breeding to amplify sequences of the prey drive. To reduce one will amplify another. It won’t necessarily make owning them easier unless you breed to balance the prey drive. But in that case, you could just as well start with a wild species, domesticate it, and not selectively breed them.
"In all predators the prey drive follows an inevitable sequence: the search, the eye-stalk, the chase, the grab bite, and the kill bite. In wolves the prey drive is complete and balanced. In different breeds of dog certain of these five steps have been amplified or reduced by human-controlled selective breeding, for various purposes."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prey_drive
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
Absolutely not acceptable, in my opinion.
I think your "responsible" owners of a certain breed will research, understand and adapt themselves for all the traits of their breed of choice. If there is even one, tiny little trait you don’t find desirable, FIND a new breed.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
Nope. You love the breed for all of its traits, not just the ones you find convenient.
The founders/developers of the breed would consider dogs lacking the basic drives and traits associated with their function to be crap unworthy of being bred.
Can’t say I disagree.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
No, there are standards in place for every breed. The goal should never be to breed out a trait that may be undesirable to ’some’. Instead, the goal should be to strive for balance to prevent extremes.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
I think there would be some negative outcome for messing with nature.Like your pic,I love Rotties!
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
I think breeding out the natural traits inherent in any breed is disgusting!
I realize people think that greyhounds are nothing more than racing dogs, but when my dogs were a little younger and had a 3-acre dog run on the acreage, my oldest male came so very, very close to bringing down a deer. Watching him in flight was amazing! Not that I particularly wanted him to catch her, but that is what greyhounds do - they’re hunters first. And now that I live in the city, at the very edge of the city, he’s reminded that he’s a hunter every time he sees a rabbit and wants desperately to take off after it.
I would hate to have that bred out of them just for the convenience of those people who want to take greyhounds to dog parks!
And my Belgian shepherd at 5 months is still a baby, but he’s already showing a tendency to want to herd his "flock" of greyhounds and a beagle into a pile in the yard. It’s hilarious because they just don’t cooperate, but he’s trying! I’d hate for him to be only a lap dog.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
I agree with Golden Gal, breeding out the primary characteristics of a working breed doesn’t benefit the breed (and the only reason dogs should be bred is to improve the breed). If you like some characteristics of one breed and some of others, you can use them as a basis for a new breed, but you had better have very clear goals and plans for that new breed, not just to make money off of something novel.
I also wanted to add that pit bulls were not originally bred for either dog or human aggressiveness. (They were bred for bull baiting, in other words helping butchers control bulls). Some BAD breeders have allowed those traits to develop. If a breeder now was selecting for non-aggressive dogs, that would be a GOOD thing, and would be removing a trait that doesn’t belong in the breed anyway. However, there is not really much need right now to breed pit bulls, as about half of all dogs in shelters are pit bulls or pit mixes.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
Pit bulls are not naturally mean, their so-called "owners" think they are that way so they treat them like gum stuck on the bottom of their shoe and neglect them. All dogs are born kind and loving, unless their owner neglects them, starves them to death, and literally feeds them to
somebody’s other neglected dog. Dog fighting. An illegal action.
People do it for money. They kill their own pets for money. They kill somebody’s other pet……for money. For money to buy and trade drugs, to steal things and to do other crimes. The world is horrible.
Alot of us wonder- ‘ why do they do that?’ And nobody really knows, except the fact that they do it for money.
We all hope that the criminals will stop it soon.
This may have not answered your question, but it at least gives you an idea what people are like.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
No, breeders should not pander to people who want a Disney version of the breed.
It does a great disservice to the breed as a whole if breeders do not breed with the orginal function and form in mind and more importantly, in working breeds like the Dobermann, if you loose the function, you loose the breed.
In my breed of choice, the Dobermann, all too many breeders in the UK are rolling over and settling for a lap dog dressed up in Dobermann clothes, that couldn’t function as a guard/protection dog.
It’s fairly easy to find a Dobermann with flash for the show ring, but harder to find one that combines function and form. A Dobermann should have the ability to function for the purpose it was originally bred, regardless of whether it is sold as pet/companion or working dog.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
I am not sure you CAN breed a trait out. some breeds are over 100 years old and are bredd FOR that trait- i will use your example- APBT.
The APBT was bred FOR fighting, dogs, bears, people, what ever, but that is what they were bred for. today APBT are still very much aggressive dogs- BUT NOT ALL. My APBT is GREAT with other animals including dogs- but her father- if any dog comes near him he will try and kill it.
for a breeder to "breed out" a natrual occurance in their breed of choice, i would say that the breeder is irresponsible, if they didnt like that trait then they should not have breed the dog.
Can we "breed out" traits in people? My dad has a very dry sence of humor as do i, but my sister does not, if my sister has a 2 children and one does and the other doesnt, was it bred out of the one that does?! LOL!
to answer your question of to make owning them a little easier? dont get the dog if you dont like the WHOLE dog.
TO ASPCA67- APBT are a naturally dog agressive breed- that is that breeds trait! no it is up to the owner to control that or to build upon it
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
No dog is born aggressive its all in the owners. People stereo type "pit bulls" which are not even pit bulls they are called "staffshire terriers" because of how people fight them. The most attacks on humans is actually from chows… So overall its all in how you train your dog, if you train them to bite then they will.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
I have coonhounds and although it might make owning them easier - i would not want the original purpose bred out of them. I don’t hunt, but if I had time to train them for it and show my dogs in night hunts I would as they no longer kill raccoons on the hunt - they shine a high beam light up the tree and you get points based on what dog was there first and how many raccoons are up in the tree. I went on a training run once with friends when I got my first Bluetick Coonhound and it was fun, watching them trail the scent and tree the raccoons,and my dog did well without any training (she actually treed a coon before the "trained" dog did - but that might have been hereditary as her sire was a Grand Night Champion). If you got rid of the drive to hunt you might get rid of the howl, and I love to hear my hounds howl.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
Yes absolutely. That’s why humans domesticated dogs to begin with and the whole thing started. Those dogs that stayed around the human camps were the ones that bred together and the humans kept by default, but it in turn created dogs that were more amenable to humans. I own dogues de bordeaux and breeders have worked very hard (as have dobie and rottie breeders to name a few) in the past two decades to breed out the aggressive gene so the dogs will become more accepted in society. An aggressive dog is a danger to the people, which are the most important factor here. Dogs that are aggressive to other animals may also become aggressive to people, which should never be tolerated. It has been very difficult to change the overall behavior of an entire breed, but it is important. The hard task now is getting people to see that they are not the big bad dogs they used to be. Another example is labs. Labs are supposed to be high energy dogs because they were originally used for field and waterfowl hunting. Now you see many breeders who don’t use them for hunting breeding selectively for the mellow dispositions. The point of domestic dogs is to have them live peacefully within the realm of humans and to do a job. A good dog does both.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
Absolutely not.
It’s disgusting to me how Americans simply expect every dog breed to suit them and attempt to change everything about them to be nothing but a companion animal. It’s convenience. It’s a case of " I want it now and I have every right to get it". People are selfish and ignorant. A German Shepherd Dog should not be bred to be a pet. They are not pets. They are a herding and working breed. If people want a pet, they can buy a Pomeranian. They can buy a dog that was bred to BE a companion, a dog that was bred for that specific purpose!!
If I want a hunting dog, I want a hound that can hunt and I want the dog to have every characteristic that a hunting breed should have. I would look for maybe a Beagle depending on what game I plan on hunting. Now I would never expect nor want a Beagle to be a companion animal. They are a hunting breed. They are a hound. The breed should not be changed simply because people think they are adorable puppies and would make cute pets. That’s a real slap in the face to the creator of the breed. The characteristics of the breed that make it a great hunting dog should be preserved. Now if I want a companion animal, I know ahead of time not to consider owning a Beagle.
Simply put, if people do not desire a dog aggressive dog, they should never consider a properly bred Pit!! They were bred to be dog aggressive. They should be dog aggressive.
I will never expect any breed to change for me. Either I love every trait of that breed or I do not own that breed. It’s as simple as that.
July 6th, 2009 at 5:51 pm
A trait as important as "gameness" in an APBT should never be bred out and if it is the resulting animals have no value within their specific breed IMHO. (Can we say "CUR"?)
This goes for most dog breeds i can think of. I know a gal who is breeding redbone coonhounds and advertises them as very "quiet" and without the bawl. I think that is as much of a fault within that particular breed as an overbite or short ears would be and those individuals should be sterilized.
If you want an easy to own pet .. get a poodle and leave the good APBTs, Hunting dogs, and protection animals to the folks who can properly handle them.
This is obviously a pet-peeve of mine.
EDITED TO ADD..
Jen said .."Dogs that are aggressive to other animals may also become aggressive to people, which should never be tolerated."
Human aggression should NEVER be tolerated within ANY breed that is a given.
My dogs, who are highly animal aggressive, ARE NOT human aggressive in the least. One does not link to the other as you suggest. Let me ask you this ..If a labrador is prone to chasing chickens and has a good prey drive would you automatically assume that your small children would not be safe around him? OF COURSE NOT! He knows the difference between the human and the bird. He is not genetically driven to chase the child.
After all .. Isnt chasing chickens a form of animal aggression?