Thread: Breeding Goals?

I am drawn to your signature phrase
"Utility is the true criterion of Beauty"
Tony

[/quote]
I know with Rottweilers V rating does matter but then maybe i am a perfectionist and want both sides of the coin!

Robs other half speaking,

This is so important. You can't have half the breed standard when you breed, you must strive for the whole dog. Conformation and temperament. This makes for a healthy Rotti. I don't like showing but I always take a potential dog/bitch that I am considering to use in our breeding program to a Speciality Show just for the critique.
This is an important tool for future breedings.

When i breed my bitch and then her daughter I want to know after years worth of consideration on her stud, that it positively adds to the gene pool, I want to know that when I have Grandchildren they (hopefully) choose to have a line of Rottweilers that their mother has bred and a dog i know i did my best to achieve shaping.
Thanks for the replies..

Cheers
Amy

The problem with conformation is that it is always changing. Dobermans, Rottis and GSD's now for instance look nothing like the original dogs did. So whos idea of the correct conformation are you going by? Yours or some people somehwhere else? Surely those who invented the breed get that honour? Shouldnt the Dobes and GSD's look like what Herr Doberman and Captain Max put forward? When the German Shepherd conformation standards dictated a sloping back, were the people who bred for this sloping back the good breeders? And the people who didnt bad? And now that it has been recongnised that sloping backs were a huge mistake, who was in the right? Not long ago big GSD's were winning the shows, now females that look like foxes are more conformationally correct?
Thats my problem, the conformation standards are constantly changing and what is the flavour now isnt going to be in 10 years.

I agree with the sentiment of keeping the breeds as our inventors intended them wholeheartedly Chris. The written standards are not changing however, it is the breeders and the Interpretation of it that has divided and conquered it.

If we do our research properly we can breed of it accordingly, not getting caught up in trends/types etc

Amy

As for the open to interpretation of the standard, would not the current trend be the subjective basis of a Judges view. If you believe in your interpretation over trends, what is the use that subjective view. lf a dog can do the job, and you like the look of him , for what you want, then he would fit your interpretation.
l think it strange that if you could put one of the old foundation studs of many of the working breeds in a show today, under a different name, he would be placed last and ignored.
l have no interest in showing and have no fixation on breed, so my opinion is from off the field really. l preferred the days when dogs were known by their job description. War dog, bird dog, sheep dog, bull dog, rat terrier , guard dog . People bred up useful dogs based on success at their job, sadly most of the real jobs are gone and aesthetics dictates the direction of "breeds".
l am too old fashioned, l know Tony

Hey tony I tottally agree with you 100%. Gone are the days where this type of breeding would happen, breeding for the use not the look, and people wonder why there are so many health issues out there these day regarding dogs of today. There are so many interested in the most beautiful dog so they can get comments on the street and lovely ribbons to put on their walls so when friends come over they can say "look what fido won today best in show bla bla bla" now i wonder though if good old fido can protect the family if situation arises mmmmmmm I wonder. The family probly try and protect fido so he does'nt lose his good looks for the show ring. lol sorry to all the show enthuiasts out there i mean no harm just stating my opinion.