|
|
Post by anne on Dec 16, 2005 23:21:06 GMT 1
One of Irena's comments in another thread is inspiring this question.
There are no right or wrong answers, but I'd be interested in hearing from others.... How do you view the breed right now in terms of improvements needed or improvements made? What are the strong areas? What do we need to be working on?? For those that are breeders, what are your breeding goals for the upcoming year, 2 years, 10 years?
|
|
|
|
Post by Sylvia on Dec 16, 2005 23:43:34 GMT 1
Difficult to answers, because there are so many things. In the first place I want a healthy, goodworking Weimaraner that also looks good. So all 3 are important. For the diversity of the breed we will go over borders to get new blood here. We important dogs, and we also want to use foreign dogs for Felicia (if she grows out well) If we get a deadly disease, you have a problem if you only stay in your on country with only the same lines... The dogs which I will use will have a good health, as far as I know (Still breeders are not honoust). And who has a good workingability and looks right as well. It is hard to ban out all "defects", because there are no "clean" bloodlines, and the ones who still think, they didn't open the eyes.  My choice goes out to outcross, with that you get diversity and you don't stay on the same lines of the genes that are given further (and that are the good and also the bad genes) I hope my english is good to understand |
|
|
|
Post by Irena on Dec 16, 2005 23:45:20 GMT 1
Not to ruin this discussion, but I wonder if I may post my comments on here too so that we don't mess up the results and reports thread. The reason I said I have some negative thoughts is that it just seems like some people really go for only one litter, without any future plans or consideration about WHAT valuable traits that litter will add to the breed - the bitch is just mated and then her offspring shown once or twice and that's it. Secondly, when you see the same dogs still untitled in the same class a few years later, AND you see already their offspring being shown. Are they really that good if they can't even be titled where there was practically no competition? Were they worthy of being bred nevertheless? Are they not producing mediocre dogs just like themselves? I don't mean everyone has to be a flashy Westminster winner, but IMO they do have to have at least SOME virtues and be at least somewhat correct. Thirdly, it seems like a lot of people really think that if you breed by outcrossing, that is really the way to avoid problems and everything will be ok. However, is there enough selection done from each litter, and are only the worthiest dogs bred from, or is it according to the principle of "they don't have common ancestors in their pedigree and they seem to "complement" each other, so it is a super idea to breed those two"? And then whoever gets a puppy from that litter can breed him/her too if they want to have puppies? It is just sad to see that in every country there seem to be people that have "dabbled" in breeding, probably because they were the only ones to have those cool grey dogs and every friend wanted a puppy.  It may very well be that I am overreacting, I don't know, I would like to hear other opinions. I would also like to say that I don't think everything has to happen according to my taste, I know we all see the Weimaraner in different ways (even within the standard s) and we also focus on the few traits we can select as the most important to breed for (and so will I when I breed some day), but I here mean cases when it seems like no selection seems to be done - the dogs don't have either working or conformation titles, and the litters seem to be just casual matings. On the other hand maybe the people didn't have anything better to breed, etc, but then again you'd hope they would choose only the best dogs they managed to produce to breed them further, etc.? Or maybe they never thought of researching better and driving those 700 km each way to a better stud than in their own capital? Europe is not that big, and if there is nothing in your country, the breed may be very well developed just across the border! Maybe they just don't have any "taste" developed, or aren't critical enough, or even have enough knowledge of conformation? (A Weimaraner breeder once told me that "all the puppies from my litters are show quality" -   ) |
|
|
|
Post by Irena on Dec 17, 2005 0:00:05 GMT 1
I am off now to try to type something more structured. This is a great topic to discuss.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sylvia on Dec 17, 2005 0:01:22 GMT 1
Well this are the litters and dogs which gave is diversity. Everybody always ran to that big champions, but do they ever look further? If you always use the same dogs the diversity will go. How many people buy a dog for breeding later? How many dogs will be shown much in the further, are will be worked with? That aren't many, so there is not so many left if we all have to go to the dogs with titles.... Look around in the countries. Look in the bloodlines and see that everything comes back on the same dogs, where is the diversity? That is what me bothers.. I think as well that a part is up to the breeders. Try to get the people interested in working / showing with the dogs. |
|
|
|
Post by Irena on Dec 17, 2005 0:47:33 GMT 1
Sylvia, that is a problem that kind of bothers me too. Like what if a popular dog that is in fashion right now with owners of bitches will be found to be a carrier of something not so good, will there be any other lines to choose from to start all over that would not have that dog in their pedigree? But that doesn't mean that the diverse litters that are being produced have to be ugly (or unable to work, if that is a breeder's priority) and bred without knowledge or discrimination. I wouldn't go to such studs either.
|
|
|
|
Post by daniela on Dec 17, 2005 0:58:22 GMT 1
I need to probably read through all the entries you have kindly typed up again to get a better perspective on why you feel the way you do but whose to say that those dogs entered at that show, just showed at that show year on year in? They were not harden campaigners, they just went to that show every year because it was local/ a day out/enjoyed it?
Perhaps they tried the first litter, had a bad experience and decided never to breed again? Surely, that is better than to keep breeding?
Also, what other factors came into play when some of these shows were on? Maybe CCs (or the national equivalent) were not even on offer back then? Maybe approved judges were not so readily available so the same judges cropped up time and time again hence same dogs winning? I don't know, I am just trying to create other possibilities.
As for titles. Dogs who have titles do not necessarily make the best producers. The top brood bitch here who produced many Show Champions never had her title but she did have her stud book number.
As for virtues - who decides whether a dog has virtues? Other judges verifying by waving awards in your direction? Other people around the ringside? Or the breeder him/herself? If they are an experienced breeder, surely they don't need any endorsement, experience has taught them who will work in their breeding programme and who won't? No matter how many awards a dog has won or not as the case maybe?
Don't get me wrong I am not trying to provoke and I can understand your concerns but I do believe there is a bigger picture here and many other attributing factors come into play.
|
|
|
|
Post by Irena on Dec 17, 2005 10:40:33 GMT 1
"I do believe there is a bigger picture here and many other attributing factors come into play."
Yup, and like I said, I may well be overreacting but those were my first impressions. Maybe after all the people focus on the working qualities and only came to those shows to get their "excellent" or "very good" grade for conformation, to prove that the dog looks like a Weimaraner, and they then went back to the fields and practised the other sides of their Weims to perfection. That could well be, too. (Not all working ability titles go in the dog's name, at least not in our country, I myself don't know where to attach Audry's hunt test qualifications.)
|
|
|
|
Post by daniela on Dec 17, 2005 21:38:58 GMT 1
That may also be very true Irena, I hadn't thought about that.
It is the same here in the UK, there are some titles that the UK Kennel Club does not recognise such as 'World Winner' and also, some dogs have won so many titles and awards now, there is hardly space to include them all!
I was also thinking about how the world is more open to us now with the pet travel scheme. Back then, if people wanted to use dogs, they most certainly would have had to face quarantine.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alkemist on Dec 17, 2005 22:29:57 GMT 1
Irena I think you have some really thought provoking views. I will just add a little to the debate at the moment. In the UK, especially at the moment, it is pretty difficult to get 1st places in classes, let alone make up a show champion. There are many people out there who try and try and try, and still can't break thru, because the exhibitors are judges and give tickets.
Personally I think it is the breeders ethics that make all of the difference, not whether their dogs are champions. I would prefer to have an assessment of the sire and dam made by the relevent body (ie Weimaraner Club of Great Britain) than a couple of tickets anyday. The kennel club already makes enough money from the breed as it is ;D.
Nina
|
|
|
|
Post by Irena on Dec 17, 2005 22:56:45 GMT 1
One of Irena's comments in another thread is inspiring this question. There are no right or wrong answers, but I'd be interested in hearing from others.... How do you view the breed right now in terms of improvements needed or improvements made? What are the strong areas? What do we need to be working on?? For those that are breeders, what are your breeding goals for the upcoming year, 2 years, 10 years? Anne, I think it is very different for different countries. Can't just talk about such matters in general! I am concerned about conformation. We may all like different "types", a shorter or a longer neck, more bone (and "meat") or more elegance, more tuck-up or less tuck-up, more chest or less, but I think no one would admit to being a fan of sway or roached backs, easty-westy feet, and such. I personally see the Weimaraner first and foremost as a work of art. That is, what breeders in some parts of the world are focusing on, not what we find in old pictures of the early German Weims. To me, movement (from the side especially) is important, as well as elegance combined with power. And I am convinced that when hunting with them, these features do not hurt any, either. This past autumn I took both Audry and another Weim (of a completely different "type") to some hunt tests, and I could soooo see the difference. Audry was a living picture when she was working the field - every move was absolutely spectacular. The way she sniffed up in the air, stretching her long beautiful neck, the way she quartered, powerfully driven by her rear legs and nicely reaching out with the front legs, and the way she looked at me with her beautiful expression in the eyes. The other Weim, with her low tail-set and thick stubby tail, short neck, (and I don't even know how to describe her head and eyes), and no angulation front or rear, just looked like a piglet let out in the field. Apologies for my dilettante description and comparions, but that is the most concise way to put it. It's easy to guess what kind of animals I would like to be able to produce when I do breed. |
|
|
|
Post by Irena on Dec 17, 2005 23:21:21 GMT 1
I should also say that I mean to breed dogs that have interest in what they were "bred to do". I have said from the start that I will do it with my puppy purely out of respect for this breed, and certainly would hope that people could hunt with dogs of my breeding in the future if they wanted to. But as far as I am concerned, I will do the minimum, use wings and dummies as much as possible, then have the dog qualify, run out of the field and go wash my hands and brush my teeth. I am a vegetarian and it has it's impact on my feelings about it, I just can't help it. (I thought it would be easier but, alas). If I do it or even plan to do more with my dog, it is purely because I know it "has" to be done to keep this breed what it was meant to be. I know I could ask someone else to do the job for me and in the future I probably will, but I like any kind of opportunity to work with her and learning more about her personality myself.
And I am sure that a lot of people feel the same way about conformation - it is something that would be nice to have but not at the top of the list, because the working ability is at the top, and I don't blame those who think so at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by anne on Dec 18, 2005 1:45:48 GMT 1
<<Anne, I think it is very different for different countries. Can't just talk about such matters in general!>>
I still need to digest all the posts, but wanted to comment about this in particular right now.
I agree. But wanted to hear about what the concerns were in the different countries. Are they similar to the problems we have here in the US for instance? And of course all breeders have different goals and idea of what the perfect Weim is....
For instance, for me, one of my huge problems with what is happening to the US Weims is the giant split between show and field....
|
|
syrinx
Intermediate
Posts: 335
|
Post by syrinx on Dec 19, 2005 13:58:43 GMT 1
I see a beautiful creature that is too tempting for unethical people to make money from. Growing popularity is not a good thing, just look at what the rescue groups in the USA have to deal with and the puppy farms that are there.
I see breeders who breed, not for the betterment of the breed, but to promote their kennel. When you overhear a breeder say ".......even if she has a pet litter for us,........." well, that is not for the betterment of the breed. A breeding results in a big winner, those genes are produced. The mating is repeated, OK, maybe they want a bitch, but to repeat the mating twice??? I feel that is not to improve the breed, it is to try to produce another big winner.
I see breeders that have not even a basic understanding of genetics, and no interest in genetic diversity all rushing off to the 'Next Big Thing' - where a huge percentage of members of a generation are all related.
I see pedegrees that are so close they go in circles.
I see a growing number of immune system problems, an inherited problem.
I think it might end up that a few intelligent and educated breeders may end up being the people who save this breed one day, if there are enough of them, if it doesn't prove to be too late already.
Sorry to be so negative, but you wanted to know!
Wendy
(Of course, I might feel a bit better about it all tomorrow......)
|
|
|
|
Post by marjolein on Dec 19, 2005 14:43:50 GMT 1
Hmm, difficult question. Where is our breed heading towards??? I don't know, that's my answer. The opinion of the public on hunting, has changed drastically over the last decade. And that's one of our problems I think. I think a Weimaraner should be beauty combined with hunting abilities. And the latter is the issue. More and more people have their Weims as pets and only go to shows. I don't really care about this, but the problem arises when they want to breed. They'll look for a stud who may be confirmation wise perfect for their bitch, but what about hunting abilities? ? If this goes on for several generations, I'm sure we'll get Weims that are gun shy and don't do anything in the field. And this is something I don't want to happen!!!!! If I were the one to make rules regarding breeding, I wouldn't care about obedience tests. What I want to see, is natural ability, whether people want to exploit that or not. I'd love to see a system like they have in Germany. You cannot breed, unless you've shown the world that your dog has natural ability and is obedient. I like their Zuchtschau too, although I think they should be stricter. Some dogs I've seen on a Zuchtschau, were not really good examples of the breed but according to the judges, were good enough to breed from. But that's just MHO. When it comes to line breeding or outcrossing, I think we should look at an inbreeding index before we decide to take a stud. In Holland, we've had major problems with Friesian horses, like 50 years ago. There were only 3 stallions left, which resulted in severe problems in somelines. I think that shows that excessive line-breeding can't be good. Yes, you do double the good qualities, but you can double bad qualities too. And some of these bad "qualities" won't show up untill it's too late. With Friesian horses, they don't want you to have more than 5% inbreeding percentage. For the health of the breed. Yes, I know we have a wider gene pool with our dogs, but if we go on like some do now, we could end up with a very small gene pool. Why not try to avoid that and try to look in other countries too, for new blood. |
|
|
|
Post by Irena on Dec 19, 2005 18:26:07 GMT 1
Hmm, difficult question. Where is our breed heading towards??? I don't know, that's my answer. I feel the same way, especially since we can't even agree what a Weimaraner should be like. Anne mentioned the split between show and working lines - and to me, this sounds fine. German Shepherds are like that in Europe (and the German lines in America too) - there are working lines that really have the working ability to do SchH etc, and you just don't see them at shows, or hardly ever. And the proud breeders call them lovingly their "ugly working dawgs", and I applaud this healthy attitude. They proudly breed for exactly the traits they want, and you should see the working titles on some of those dogs! The show lines people do test working ability, and do a good job of it, but the drives of those dogs can't be compared to a real working line dog. And not everyone needs that kind of drive and determination, either. I don't think the Weimaraner is going to disappear as a hunting breed, not at all, it will always live with the people that are dedicated to just that. What those Weims will look like, that is another question (and to me a very important one). I don't know how true it is with Weims (the few others I have seen all had some ability for sure), but I am told that with Greyhounds, you can raise them on the sofa's for generations, and when you take them to the field and show a rabbit, you'll see their working ability alright! I would definitely want to see trainability, to me that is highly important, especially for normal day to day co-existance with the dog. I have heard so much about temperament problems, Weims described as "hyper", "crazy", "uncontrollable" etc, that I appreciate it when I see obedience titles on a Weim, it just makes me feel better. I would not want a dog, no matter how pretty or birdy it was, if it was an uncontrollable beast because no one ever cared about that trait. Oh Mar, this is so much easier said than done sometimes. I recently saw a British Weim in a magazine, made a note to myself that this one looked nice, and what do you know, the ad said it combines "the best of British and American lines". There you go, back to square one, there goes "new blood". It always boils down to the same in my case, and I think it's pretty awful in a way. |
|
|
|
Post by daniela on Dec 19, 2005 21:45:30 GMT 1
I have been reading all the posts and it certainly makes for interesting reading. I think it’s fair to say, we want dogs that can do it all. We want brains and we want beauty and there’s certainly nothing wrong with that but oh if only it was that easy! I think if one is going to breed you have to weigh up the merits and faults of both the dog and bitch and these should be measured in proportion (in other words you have to weigh up the positive and negative). For example, someone may forgive a short back over hunting ability especially if the dam in question, has good length. Everyone has different motives and values when it comes to breeding and some may have better motives and values depending on what one is looking for in a breeder. Twisting the example above, some breeders may prefer a dog with better length over hunting ability. That decision lies with the breeder (well certainly in the UK) whether any of us like that or not and we could sit here for a long time trying to justify whether their decision is right or wrong. That said, at least in the case mentioned above, the breeder would be making an educated decision, they are at least considering aspects of the breed which is a whole lot better, than someone mating dogs without any thought or consequence. On another note, I am just wondering what you guys deem by the word ‘pet’? |
|
|
|
Post by marjolein on Dec 19, 2005 22:42:14 GMT 1
Anne mentioned the split between show and working lines - and to me, this sounds fine. What I really ment Irena, is that I want to see a combination of working abilities and perfect confirmation. Not just a good working dog or just a confirmation wise good dog. If I had to chose between them, I would go for the working dog, but that's not the only thing I'm looking for. I want beauty compared with brains, nothing more, nothing less. And I do agree with you on the trainability factor. Of course this is important, but it's judged during the VJP and HZP. So there would be no need for obedience tests. |
|
|
|
Post by marjolein on Dec 19, 2005 22:43:30 GMT 1
A pet for me is a dog who is not used in any way. It was not meant to be negative or something Daniela.
|
|
|
|
Post by anne on Dec 19, 2005 22:49:52 GMT 1
Great discussion guys, thanks for your input.
Here is something that I have been thinking about. I read somewhere (don't remember where) that someone can come into a breed at a certain point and get an entirely wrong impression of the breed based on what is popular at that time. Especially with the American standard being so vague in general, and with nothing required as far as proving working ability.... I can see how this could happen.
I see differences in type with the American Weims and some other countries. It's not a question of right or wrong... but again, someone getting into the breed today could possibly get a very different impression of what is desired in the breed based on the big winners of that time.
With that said.... are there any trends in your countries that you think are positive or negative?
I personally dislike the trend we see in the US today with show Weims being so large. I feel it is detrimental to hunting and many times size is outside of standard, and being at the top of the standard is becoming the norm.
|
|
