is the black dog out running wild again?

[meangirlnurse]

i do think that, unfortunately, being a really, really good dog trainer is almost mutually incompatible with being a popular dog trainer for general audiences/pet owners

[meangirlnurse]

good pet dog training will almost never look sexy on tiktok or youtube or animal planet or national geographic

done properly, most pet dog training is slow and technical and incremental and frankly pretty boring to watch

and to be honest, there aren't a lot of people who are highly competent dog trainers and have a ton of on-camera charisma

so basically any idiot with sufficient chutzpah and personal appeal will grab that audience's attention instead, no matter how mediocre, unethical or lazy they might be

[meangirlnurse]

hey you're like. really passionate about small dogs so. why are Chihuahuas always so angry??? it's just confusing. why are they so mad?

i fucking love chihuahuas, man. i think there are a few factors involved, but i think the problem first and foremost is how chihuahuas are treated by humans.

chihuahuas are rarely allowed to be real dogs. they are treated like decorations and accessories and stuffed animals and cute little novelties

so not only are they rarely trained or thoughtfully socialized and taught to be comfortable with different things, but their autonomy and sense of personal safety is very often disregarded or intentionally threatened by the people around them

people pick them up with little consideration for the dog’s feelings, manhandle them at will and physically force them to comply with human desires. sometimes people intentionally antagonize them because they think it’s funny – for a while there was a very popular Tik Tok by some twenty-somethings dedicated to harassing and frightening an elderly, disabled chihuahua because he made funny noises when he was upset and uncomfortable.

it only stopped because the dog died.

the people responsible claimed to “love” the dog.

chihuahuas’ attempts to communicate discomfort are almost always ignored. dogs usually start out with relatively subtle body language that most people don’t ever learn to read. they might have the whites of their eyes showing, or yawn and lick their lips, or look away, or pin their ears down, or get tense. and when chihuahuas do this, it is almost always disregarded.

so they learn that polite and subtle communication of their discomfort gets ignored, and they start to escalate in an effort to be understood. they might start to growl or snap or bite. they might learn that the best defense is a good offense, that people who approach them are rude and frightening and the only way to get them to back off is to try and be intimidating.

and a lot of the time even that doesn’t work. because hey, look, the chihuahua is growling. isn’t that funny and cute and nonthreatening

there’s more involved but fundamentally at the end of the day, the issue is that chihuahuas are often profoundly mistreated for their entire little lives, psychologically and physically, with no way to communicate or be understood or have their boundaries and needs respected.

and as much as people have made ~aggressive chihuahuas~ into a funney meme, i think that’s fucking tragic.

i’d want to bite people too.

[why-animals-do-the-thing]

This is spot on. If you learn that the only way you're going to get any bodily autonomy is to use your teeth, you're going to be very willing to bite. If you're never listened to when you say "no" to something without growling and snapping, that's going to be your go-to.

Because little dogs can't do the same level of physical harm as bigger dogs, people tend to laugh off their very genuine distress and anger. It's absolutely not okay, and it's way too popular on social media.

My rule of thumb is always that if you wouldn't do something with a 75lb dog, you shouldn't do it with a 5lb one. And it's never too late to start! Even littles that you've had forever can benefit from being allowed more voluntary engagement in their world, more choices to consent to things, and more freedom to say no.

[canisitsnotlupus]

Punishment in Animal Training | BARKS from the Guild

This article examines the growing body of research indicating that reward-based training, and the subsequent absence of stress, anxiety, pai

This article examines the growing body of research indicating that reward-based training, and the subsequent absence of stress, anxiety, pain, force, and fear, may improve an animal’s ability to learn; and that aversive training techniques can have adverse effects on a dog’s behavior.

[how2skinatiger]

Two Words: Behavioral Euthanasia

Let’s get real for a minute. Behavioral Euthanasia is a thing. It happens every day.

“You contemplate keeping this sweet soul, but remind yourself that this is how hoarding starts and no one needs a dozen aggressive dogs under one roof. One of them is bound to turn on you, at some point, and that would get very ugly, very fast.

Then you think about how small their world is. How their quality of life (and yours) isn’t ideal. Because when you take on a dog that can’t do dog things they are, in fact, suffering. They are prisoners of strict management and safety. They are prisoners of their own broken, little brains!

So, on the day of, I fill out a contract and adopt my 4 legged land-shark, we do sniff walks, fetch, snuggles, and all the swimming they desire! They have their cheeseburgers and chicken nuggets, we go to the vet, we hug long and hard. I tell them I love them and I’m sorry they were damaged in their life before me. I tell them I’ll save another one in their honor… and I let them go….peacefully and selflessly.

I get to my car and break. Doubt and shame come into my head. “I could have done more!” “I should have just kept him!” “I should have tried harder!”

But the fact is I DID everything I could. And if I, a well-educated dog professional, struggle to manage this dog…how can I ask the general public to keep him safe? How can I put this dog into a place where he is bound to make a bad choice? Which will ultimately lead to the same fate…just not nearly as peacefully.

I want to sum it up like this. Every dog can not be saved!

I mean, they can… but at what cost to the dog? A lifetime of confinement? Such strict management that they only have a little time out of their crate a day? We are their guardians and it is our job to make these decisions when we see our dog is suffering.

And, if we see someone making these difficult decisions, I hope we can show compassion. Because no one, bringing a pet home, brings it home with the intention of Behavioral Euthanasia.”

[justslowdown]

Truly mind blowing that some Dog People consider it inherently ethical and responsible to breed dogs who have a good chance of requiring surgery to fit all their teeth in their head/to breathe/to see through eyelids that aren't curling inward/etc etc etc, as long as they're bred to fit a standard and are show titled.

[hazard-and-friends]

i joined a shar pei FB group because the boy’s half shar pei and i wanted to know what i was in for and... what the fuck? it’s not just “a good chance”, it’s virtually guaranteed for shar pei pups to require tacking (not surgery but sutures are put into the eyelid to hold it away from the eye) until they grow into their skin, and on the very likely chance that they don’t, they get surgery. the majority of the breed.

and yet i got torn into (in a different group, but still) for looking for aussies with tails. 

[blueboyluca]

correct me if I’m wrong but I thought one of the crucial issues with muzzle length is teeth

[kiwiaussie]

Kiwi, australian shepherd

[everythingfox]

Sky puppies

[socialistexan]

[blackberryvulpine]

When Pigs Fly book review

When Pigs Fly! Training Success With Impossible Dogs by Jane Killion

So I was recommended this book as one to read of you have a hard to motivate/strong willed dog. It’s written by Jane Killion of Puppy Culture fame. She breeds Bull Terriers and competes in agility with them. I really enjoyed reading it and found some use in it, even if some of it didn’t quite apply.

The main premise of this book is shaping. Jane is seeking what she calls the “operant” dog. So she uses shaping in EVERYTHING and sometimes spontaneously in the dogs life to foster interest and create a dog waiting to be given a command. I loved the breakdowns on getting better at shaping because it’s something I struggle with. Especially her info on how to play “101 things to do with a box” in a way that’s not stressful to the dog. However I don’t really like this approach myself. The techniques are very useful and I will be using them. But the idea of having a dog at my beck and call, always waiting to learn doesn’t appeal to me. She seems to be very into the school of dogs should do nothing unless you are actively trianing, sort of “nothing in life is free” lite.

She does mention luring as being of use, but I think she is seeing it as compulsion rather than communication. I use luring and then shape that into the behavior I want, she only uses luring if the start to the behavior is hard to capture.

I liked the use of “hot reinforcers”, sort of a premack of releasing the dog to AWESOME THINGS once you are starting to proof a behavior. Definitely something I want to incorporate.

Not a fan of her methods of introducing dogs to new places. Her method is to just start shoving amazing food in their mouth and having them look at you only. I’d much rather have a dog that can watch the environment and find it boring than one that HAS to look at me to ignore everything. She’s also a big believer of “putting something on cue means the dog will only do it when it thinks it can be paid” and uh. That’s incorrect. Maki learns something and does it all the time because it’s fun. I taught her to shake and now she SLAPS everything because I gave her a new way to explore the world.

In genral while I like some of the methods, I wish I had more training resources for dogs that are truly not biddable. The terriers are wild but very driven. Maki is...not. She will ignore hotdogs and beef jerky to stare into the field. This is good advice for a dog that needs to learn how to cooperate for training and what is up to earn, but not so great for a dog that knows the game and simply does not care. And I personally don’t want to teach my dog to stare at me all day in the gamble that a treat might drop.

The biggest disappointment BY FAR was the LLW chapter. It was the same old “just stop or turn around when the dog pulls”. I’ve been doing that for 2.5 years!!!! My dog does not give two shits which way we are walking or if we stop. She is here to look at things and stopping is just fine. (And if I turn around she races me to be at the end of the leash again 🙄)

I really really liked the chapter on play, and the bit about cheerleading a dog. The idea is that cheerleading is super confusing to dogs because it sounds like you’re rewarding them with the tone of voice. It’s better to shape until the behavior is solid than throw the dog in and have to heavily encourage them through it. Great breakdowns on how to teach common manners tricks.

But complaints aside I do recommend this book! Especially if you have a terrier or hound dog.

High points: great chapter on play! Great breakdown of shaping, and teaching a few common behaviors. Lots of good quotes. Hot reinforcers are a great idea, and there’s lots of good advice on getting to know the dog better, and learning what that particular dogs finds reinforcing.

Low points: too much desire in having a dog that is always on or asleep. Crappy LLW chapter. Not great book for dogs that do enjoy training but only in that context and find just being in the environment reinforcing. Avoids flooding in some methods but then uses it to introduce new places.

Result: give it a read! Lots to learn! Take some stuff with a grain of salt.

[oregonforestdog]

[darkwood-sleddog]

Please tell me more about the poodles running the Iditarod I'm begging you

In the 1970′s, John Suter was stationed in Alaska while in the United States Army. During his time there he witnessed a pet Miniature Poodle running alongside a snowmobile. Taken with the dog’s athleticism he became inspired. Poodles could make great sled dogs.

John returned from Alaska to his native California and began to acquire Standard Poodles. He shipped them north to Alaska and his project began. The poodles did not have a natural instinct to pull, but they were versatile and athletic. To compensate for their lack of instinct, John raised his puppies with Alaskan Huskies. After a few generations he had bred mushing specific Poodles that enjoyed pulling. John explained the difference between the mushing Poodles and the Alaskan Huskies as such: If you fall off the sled, huskies will keep running. The poodles will do a U-turn and come pick you up.

In 1988 John ran his first Iditarod with the poodles and didn’t do half bad (finishing in the middle-low end of the pack). He would run them again in 1989, 1990 and 1991. You can see his Iditarod standings, times and winnings HERE. This was also during the time in dog sledding where Susan Butcher was crushing the competition. People often joked that “Women win the Iditarod and men run poodles.”

The poodles fared pretty well during their races, John kept their coats long to protect them from the elements, but their feet had serious issues with sticking that were difficult to deal with. John often had to resort to spraying them with Pam. Because of the impact the weather had on the dogs, the Iditarod no longer allows non-northern breeds in the race. A controversial choice, considering that many Alaskan Huskies have short coats and pedigrees that include Salukis and pointers.

By the early 90s running the poodles had become too expensive for John. He had liquidated his retirement, gotten a second mortgage on his house and gone into a lot of credit card debt. Running Iditarod is expensive and John had only ever won a total of $2,000. John retired from dog sledding and let the poodles that remained from his project live out their lives. His daughter still runs sled dogs, although her team is made of Alaskan Huskies.

So the lesson is: don’t let breed stop you and also...poodles can do anything.

[fjordfolk]

i think my main question to people who are against outcrossing is just “why”

because what are the real risks for the breed as a whole? you’re going to get some wonky individuals for a bit, sure. that’s what conformation shows and critiques are for. and you’ll be keeping track of the bloodline anyway because… we do that. have been. for a minute.

like obvs there’s the ~purity aspect~ which is bullshit in regards to the vast majority of breeds, and there’s the cultural and meddling aspect which imo is actually legitimate.

but most of the time when i see anti outcross comments in breed groups it’s either about ~purity~ or about losing significant unique characteristics which. i mean. the only breed weird enough to warrant that sort of protection, off the top of my head, is the lundehund. and they’re already outcrossing that. so.

[justslowdown]

Closed studbooks are incredibly modern.

In horses, goats, cattle, and even purebred cats careful crossing is allowed… because it’s literally necessary to keep populations viable for hundreds of years.

Ask anyone involved in endangered wildlife conservation. I’ve taken a class in it and if I had gone to my professor with the effective population size, average coefficient of inbreeding, rates of genetic disease, etc of MOST modern breeds (not just rare breeds! Collies and German shepherds are incredibly inbred)… she would wish me luck.

People managing actual endangered populations would be thrilled to have the resources we have.

After a couple of generations of careful selection, an outcross absolutely is its breed. If you disagree, ok. let’s let shows, sports, and work decide that :) as they have for literally the entirety of our history with dogs beyond the last 200 years. Even during the first ~50 years of kennel clubs, crossing was publically discussed and accepted

[queer-adhd]

‘You’re going to get some wonky individuals’ is a very disingenuous way to say ‘you’re going to get some dogs suffering’. It’s not about purity, it’s about not knowing which genetic diseases your dog will end up with. If you breed two dogs of known heritage and the same breed, you know what you need to screen for and your chances of getting a healthy puppy. If you’re breeding two dogs of different breeds, even if you know their genetic health backgrounds you can’t accurately predict how those genetics will interact - you can do your best, but you have to do a ridiculously high number of health screenings, and you still won’t be sure that the puppies will end up healthy because there’s just too much that could happen.

Extremely careful outbreeding programmes for breeds that are already prone to a specific genetic disease, like the one with Dalmatians to reduce uric acid levels, do take place and are helpful. But just breeding in other dogs when the breed already has a sustainable number of healthy individuals isn’t just unnecessary, it’s creating dogs for whom their health and wellbeing comes down to a dice roll.

EDIT: I don’t know where you’re getting the information on collies and German shepherds from but that just isn’t true. They’re hugely popular breeds for dog sports, with a massive genetic pool and many different lines, including European and American lines. They certainly aren’t massively inbred on a breed level.

[fjordfolk]

Actually, ‘you’re going to get some wonky individuals’ was a fairly colloquial way of saying ‘you’re going to get some dogs that don’t conform to standard.’ But by all means, go ahead with your story 😘

[everywolf]

Hey, @queer-adhd​

Here’s a fun graphic for you, showing COI values in different breeds:

And here’s a link to the source, where you can get a better look at the data: https://www.instituteofcaninebiology.org/blog/inbreeding-of-purebred-dogs-determined-from-dna

Which is based on this article: Dreger DL, M Rimbault, BW Davis, A Bhatnagar, HG Parker, & EA Ostrander. 2016. Whole genome sequence, SNP chips and pedigree structure: building demographic profiles in domestic dog breeds to optimize genetic trait mapping. http://dmm.biologists.org/lookup/doi/10.1242/dmm.027037

Notice how collies are number 5? And GSDs, while lower, are still well above 25% (= full sibling mating)? Not too difficult to explain that, once you distinguish between population size and effective population size. It doesn’t matter that there’s a whole lot collies in the world or that there’s different lines in GSDs, if every single dog in the breed population is more closely related to every other dog than the offspring of two full siblings. You can’t create any more diversity there, except by outcrossing. So do you have any hard data to back your statement about inbreeding not being a problem in these breeds?

And I’m not really sure what exactly you were suggesting by “you still won’t be sure that the puppies will end up healthy because there’s just too much that could happen”. Assuming, of course, that you test all your purebred stock for the genetic diseases they are at risk for and that you test all your crossbred stock for the genetic diseases that their foundation breeds are at risk for. What’s going to happen? Where’s all this ‘suffering’ coming from in your scenario? Again, do you have some data to back your statement? And I mean it, too. I genuinely want to see the research, if you have it. 

Finally, I really really don’t want to speak for tumblr user fjordfolk who is more than capable of speaking for themselves, but jfc your tone is shit. Might want to give respectful discussion a go one of these days.

[boringlittleman]

Cool so anyway don’t cite US Kennel club data as if it accurately represents the world situation of dog breeds, particularly since kennel club includes all ‘purebred’ dogs including puppy mills and backyard breeders. And, you know, some of the most popular dog breeds out there will inevitably have a higher demand, and thus more unethical breeders. The pool of responsibly and ethically bred dogs who actually conform to breed standard are genetically healthy, and responsible breeders take great care to ensure that they aren’t mating closely related individuals.

Unethical breeders behaving unethically and operating puppy mills doesn’t mean that irresponsible crossing will improve the situation.

And, yes, purebred stock by responsible breeders is tested for their breed specific genetic problems? And breeding, for example, a poodle (usually tested for hip dysplasia and other joint problems specific to that breed) and a cavalier king Charles spaniel (usually tested for congenital heart problems) means that you may end up with unexpected health problems - responsible breeders don’t make health decisions based on the individual genetic tests of the parents only, you need to take into account the profiles of as many relatives as possible. So if you’re trying to find, for example, heart screening data for that poodle’s line, it won’t be there. So your puppies can be born with heart defects, because they’re ridiculously common in those spaniels and you don’t have the right information for the other line.

Anyway, responsible breeders won’t let you purchase a dog knowing you’re going to breed mixes with it, so 99% of the time you’re starting from bad stock anyway. Which again, isn’t gonna help.

As for attitude, frankly I don’t particularly care how happy you are with mine :) breed standards are there for a reason, and it’s so that people can know what they’re getting into. There are a ridiculous number of crossbreeds out there in pounds because they inherited some truly unfortunate combinations of characteristics, and actively adding to that supply is actively immoral. As is breeding unhealthy dogs.

[queer-adhd]

Lmao wrong blog but who cares

[everywolf]

“responsible breeders take great care to ensure that they aren’t mating closely related individuals” 

So you're suggesting that all responsible breeders test for genetic diversity (i.e. internal relatedness) prior to breeding? That's the only way I can think of to actually ensure that you're not breeding dogs that are closely related on a genetic level, since just looking at their pedigrees isn't going ot help, unless you can go all the way back to the founding dogs of the breed. AFAIK this test is offered by UC Davis Veterinary Genetics Lab, not sure about anywhere else, and I have seen it used by breeders here and there, but it is certainly not being performed on a regular basis. Not yet anyways. 

So what exactly do you think breeders are currently doing to ensure that they aren’t mating closely related individuals? Again, closely related on a genetic level. Other than sending the dogs' DNA to be tested by a lab, I'm not sure how even the most responsible of breeders are supposed to determine just how genetically related their breeding pairs may be.

'Unethical breeders behaving unethically and operating puppy mills doesn’t mean that irresponsible crossing will improve the situation.'

Yes. And no one's suggesting it will. This discussion has very little to do with irresponsible crossing, since adherance to ethical breeding practices was always assumed - by everyone involved, except for you.

'responsible breeders won’t let you purchase a dog knowing you’re going to breed mixes with it, so 99% of the time you’re starting from bad stock anyway'

I've always loved this argument. It's so spectacularly circular. 

Why are purpose bred mixes bad? Because they come from poor stock. Why do purpose bred mixes come from poor stock? Because they are bad.

Awesome.

'anyway y'all are annoying as hell'

Well idk dude. Of all of us, only one is consistently failing to assume good intent. Throwing a fit over a post that was obviously written as a joke. Rejecting data provided and failing to support their own claims with anything other than anger. 

That's uhhh... pretty annoying actually.

[fjordfolk]

i think my main question to people who are against outcrossing is just “why”

because what are the real risks for the breed as a whole? you’re going to get some wonky individuals for a bit, sure. that’s what conformation shows and critiques are for. and you’ll be keeping track of the bloodline anyway because… we do that. have been. for a minute.

like obvs there’s the ~purity aspect~ which is bullshit in regards to the vast majority of breeds, and there’s the cultural and meddling aspect which imo is actually legitimate.

but most of the time when i see anti outcross comments in breed groups it’s either about ~purity~ or about losing significant unique characteristics which. i mean. the only breed weird enough to warrant that sort of protection, off the top of my head, is the lundehund. and they’re already outcrossing that. so.

[justslowdown]

Closed studbooks are incredibly modern.

In horses, goats, cattle, and even purebred cats careful crossing is allowed… because it’s literally necessary to keep populations viable for hundreds of years.

Ask anyone involved in endangered wildlife conservation. I’ve taken a class in it and if I had gone to my professor with the effective population size, average coefficient of inbreeding, rates of genetic disease, etc of MOST modern breeds (not just rare breeds! Collies and German shepherds are incredibly inbred)… she would wish me luck.

People managing actual endangered populations would be thrilled to have the resources we have.

After a couple of generations of careful selection, an outcross absolutely is its breed. If you disagree, ok. let’s let shows, sports, and work decide that :) as they have for literally the entirety of our history with dogs beyond the last 200 years. Even during the first ~50 years of kennel clubs, crossing was publically discussed and accepted

[queer-adhd]

‘You’re going to get some wonky individuals’ is a very disingenuous way to say ‘you’re going to get some dogs suffering’. It’s not about purity, it’s about not knowing which genetic diseases your dog will end up with. If you breed two dogs of known heritage and the same breed, you know what you need to screen for and your chances of getting a healthy puppy. If you’re breeding two dogs of different breeds, even if you know their genetic health backgrounds you can’t accurately predict how those genetics will interact - you can do your best, but you have to do a ridiculously high number of health screenings, and you still won’t be sure that the puppies will end up healthy because there’s just too much that could happen.

Extremely careful outbreeding programmes for breeds that are already prone to a specific genetic disease, like the one with Dalmatians to reduce uric acid levels, do take place and are helpful. But just breeding in other dogs when the breed already has a sustainable number of healthy individuals isn’t just unnecessary, it’s creating dogs for whom their health and wellbeing comes down to a dice roll.

EDIT: I don’t know where you’re getting the information on collies and German shepherds from but that just isn’t true. They’re hugely popular breeds for dog sports, with a massive genetic pool and many different lines, including European and American lines. They certainly aren’t massively inbred on a breed level.

[fjordfolk]

Actually, ‘you’re going to get some wonky individuals’ was a fairly colloquial way of saying ‘you’re going to get some dogs that don’t conform to standard.’ But by all means, go ahead with your story 😘

[everywolf]

Hey, @queer-adhd​

Here's a fun graphic for you, showing COI values in different breeds:

And here's a link to the source, where you can get a better look at the data: https://www.instituteofcaninebiology.org/blog/inbreeding-of-purebred-dogs-determined-from-dna

Which is based on this article: Dreger DL, M Rimbault, BW Davis, A Bhatnagar, HG Parker, & EA Ostrander. 2016. Whole genome sequence, SNP chips and pedigree structure: building demographic profiles in domestic dog breeds to optimize genetic trait mapping. http://dmm.biologists.org/lookup/doi/10.1242/dmm.027037

Notice how collies are number 5? And GSDs, while lower, are still well above 25% (= full sibling mating)? Not too difficult to explain that, once you distinguish between population size and effective population size. It doesn't matter that there's a whole lot collies in the world or that there's different lines in GSDs, if every single dog in the breed population is more closely related to every other dog than the offspring of two full siblings. You can't create any more diversity there, except by outcrossing. So do you have any hard data to back your statement about inbreeding not being a problem in these breeds?

And I'm not really sure what exactly you were suggesting by “you still won’t be sure that the puppies will end up healthy because there’s just too much that could happen”. Assuming, of course, that you test all your purebred stock for the genetic diseases they are at risk for and that you test all your crossbred stock for the genetic diseases that their foundation breeds are at risk for. What's going to happen? Where's all this 'suffering' coming from in your scenario? Again, do you have some data to back your statement? And I mean it, too. I genuinely want to see the research, if you have it. 

Finally, I really really don't want to speak for tumblr user fjordfolk who is more than capable of speaking for themselves, but jfc your tone is shit. Might want to give respectful discussion a go one of these days.

[fjordfolk]

i think my main question to people who are against outcrossing is just “why”

because what are the real risks for the breed as a whole? you’re going to get some wonky individuals for a bit, sure. that’s what conformation shows and critiques are for. and you’ll be keeping track of the bloodline anyway because… we do that. have been. for a minute.

like obvs there’s the ~purity aspect~ which is bullshit in regards to the vast majority of breeds, and there’s the cultural and meddling aspect which imo is actually legitimate.

but most of the time when i see anti outcross comments in breed groups it’s either about ~purity~ or about losing significant unique characteristics which. i mean. the only breed weird enough to warrant that sort of protection, off the top of my head, is the lundehund. and they’re already outcrossing that. so.

[justslowdown]

Closed studbooks are incredibly modern.

In horses, goats, cattle, and even purebred cats careful crossing is allowed… because it’s literally necessary to keep populations viable for hundreds of years.

Ask anyone involved in endangered wildlife conservation. I’ve taken a class in it and if I had gone to my professor with the effective population size, average coefficient of inbreeding, rates of genetic disease, etc of MOST modern breeds (not just rare breeds! Collies and German shepherds are incredibly inbred)… she would wish me luck.

People managing actual endangered populations would be thrilled to have the resources we have.

After a couple of generations of careful selection, an outcross absolutely is its breed. If you disagree, ok. let’s let shows, sports, and work decide that :) as they have for literally the entirety of our history with dogs beyond the last 200 years. Even during the first ~50 years of kennel clubs, crossing was publically discussed and accepted

[loubatas]

Also last time I checked on the lundehund outcrossing project, which was in 2018 so they were starting to get F2 crosses (I think they have F3 outcrosses now), they found some of the lundehund caracteristics like polydactyly were already starting to come back. Same with the dalmatian/pointer outcross from decades ago, the outcrossed puppies got the caracteristic dalmatian spots back after a few generations of backcrossing to dalmatians while keeping the healthy pointer gene. Dalmatians from this bloodline are now physically indistinguishable from non-outcrossed dalmatians, but they still have the gene allowing them to have healthy levels of uric acid So even the “we need to keep the breed’s unique characteristics” isn’t a valid counterpoint because these characteristics will come back.

Unless they’re linked to the problem in the first place (like extra-short snouts in brachycephalic breeds) in which case, good riddance!

[fjordfolk]

They’ve had two F3 buhund litters so far! One in 2019 and one in January of 2020. I had hoped the first one would be appraised at the special last year, but since that was cancelled for some strange reason…

But yeah, you’re right! Polydactyl or polydactyl siblings was a factor already in the candidate selection iirc, and on rear legs they got doubles already in F1, like with Frøya here (Kimura, they didn’t name the photographer):

And then again already on the front legs on Varga B2 (Photo Helge Bjerke/Gunn Haugstulen):

Erik, F1 icelandic sheepdog, also preserved the extra toes all over the place (Photo: Bård Mathias Andersen):

And finally seeing some type returning not just with Varga B2 above but also Bure B2 below, who… I mean… He’s not 100% but god damn 😍 (Photo: Bård Mathias Andersen)

Other traits may prove more challenging, but the mood I’ve seen from people involved is yknow. General optimism.

And that’s my point: If it works on these fuckin weirdos, it should work on anybody

[labrasmore]

Hey guys, got more information on Aussies? What are they like? Energy levels? Personalities? Health problems? Reactive? Etc

Taggings @pantsthepuppy and @achoirofcritters if that’s ok !!

[ausdogofmischief]

Thanks for tagging me @fiendish-whispers I had a bad sleep and I’m post exam so hopefully what ive written makes sense😅.

I agree with what has been said so far. Loki is my first Aussie so my experience is pretty limited. For background: Loki is from a sketchy breeder, but his parents were from reputable ones so I may have lucked out temperament wise. Please note that Loki is Showline NOT working, and he’s on the larger end at approx 52lbs. I’d put him at mid to high energy levels.

When I first read this post the only words that came to mind were: “That’s too high to jump” doesn’t exist in the Aussie Vocabulary. In my experience they are 100% Velcro dogs, if you don’t want a second shadow don’t get an Aussie. People pleaser, Smart, energetic and incredibly Loyal. Loki is timid with people, but if he wasn’t he would make an excellent therapy dog as he’s quite gentle and has a very calming effect. Loki likes dogs a LOT, his best friend is a Lab. they are perfect playmates with matching size/weight and energy levels. Loki is very food and play motivated. He does catch mice and I’ve found him playing with a prairie dog of some kind so he has some prey drive? (am I using that term correctly? Sorry, not as knowledgeable as you guys). But he’s a baby against our cat amd doesn’t chase the neighborhood cows or chickens. Loki does well with my nieces and nephews (2-10yrs).

As I alluded to at the beginning, Aussies are jumpers. I got Loki at 4months and I haven’t been able to train the jumping around me out of him (partially because I’m lazy and not consistent enough) It isn’t an issue with other people in my house or visitors.If it’s in the direct path then a jump is usually attempted. (Loki has ruined the tall plants in my flower pot 😭) This makes the whole joint health thing particularly important (not that health certifications weren’t already important) According to Aussies The Booty does not have an actual corporeal form in this world. There is a good possibility that something you own will be wrecked from either their trademark wiggle bum, or just daily life. Loki’s vocal. He doesn’t bark unless given a reason, but he’s very grumbly. I love it when he gets super happy and starts talking to me.

Sensitive stomach. If he isn’t on a lower fat&protein kibble Loki will get soft poop. Loki is 3 and allergies are his only health concern. He has a chicken allergy. Ivermectin needs to be watched for in meds, I would probably still avoid it even if Loki didn’t have the MDR1 gene. Loki doesn’t have any issues with thunder, but is afraid of fireworks and gun shots. I can pretty much do anything to Loki and he doesn’t care. He has no issues with me looking in his ears, handling his feet and mouth, getting dust gunk from his eyes, taking food from his mouth or my hand in his food bowl. He’s great with our groomer as well. (I’m the aunt of many toddlers so I worked hard to make sure he wouldn’t have any food aggression in the event a child gets out of site.)

Sorry, I’m post exam and my brain is fried. I wish I could come up with better answers. Feel free to message me with any questions. I’m usually better with direct focus. I promise I’m friendly and don’t bite.

[dndeactivated]

[1/4] Listen. Since you explicitly asked for this. Here's a big question that's been sitting on my mind... I'll be getting a dog next year (the first dog that will be Truly My Dog) and I'm still inbetween 2 breeds: field line golden retrievers and show line Aussies. What really scares me about Aussies is the possibility that I might fuck up, in which case the dog may grow up to be reactive, neurotic, anxious, a nuisance barker etc.

[2/4] But what's even more scary is that, apparently, these traits can just show up in the breed, so I might get them even if I *don't* fuck up. And I feel like fucking up a golden would be far less catastrophic than fucking up an Aussie... For context, I'm looking to get into some sports (obedience, mainly), but I have no prior experience with that. I've worked at a shelter for years and can handle virtually any dog, but I've never raised one myself. So how do I know whether I can handle it? [3/4] I guess my question is - were you worried about messing up when you got Indigo? Do you think that going to a good breeder who has (or at least appears and claims to have) stable dogs behind them, would mean that I don't have to worry about messing my puppy up? Should I take the safer path with my first puppy and go for a golden (which, for the record, is a breed I love anyway)? And is the golden even a safer path to begin with? [4/4] Sorry, that was such a barrage of questions. I've been marinating in first-time-puppy-owner anxiety, can you tell? :-)

hello! i love this question and you have my full support whichever direction you go but also you’re gonna get my life story before my answer:

you asked if i was worried when i got Indigo and the answer is no. i was almost a TEENAGER and i had been interested in dogs for two whole years: i knew everything and no one could stop me. my $300 farm aussie grew up into a reactive nuisance-barker with a fear of loud noises and a bad light-chasing habit. because of that experience, I was riddled with anxiety at age 25 when Dune came into my life.

at this point i had a decade of actual, professional dog experience under my belt. i was about to become a certified professional trainer after spending years completely changing my methods trying to correct the damage i did to Indigo as an over-confident kid with less-than-stellar mentors. i was determined to stack the Next Puppy deck in my favour.

when I first reached out to Dune’s breeder, we set up a meeting at a local dog show. she walked me to her setup, pulled out a two-year-old male from her breeding, stacked him up on the table and told me [i am paraphrasing] “this is the worst temperament i have bred in a long time, he does x thing. his owner is doing a lot of work with him and he is improving enormously. i believe it is because of y and z, i will be avoiding those things going forward.” and then went over him physically from head to toe, telling me what she did and didn’t like about him. she didn’t know it but she had my implicit trust from that exact moment on.

i met a lot of her dogs. i talked to puppy owners who had dogs from her. over and over again i saw stable, confident temperaments doing well in both experienced and less experienced homes. i was still terrified that i’d be the one who broke one of these apparently perfect animals. a week or so before Dune came home I remember asking “would you take him out to _________?? is that too soon??” and his breeder said, “i know what i would do... but he’s about to be your dog. it’s not up to me.”

so here’s what i did, knowing that i was already purchasing a dog from a show line breeder who put a premium on solid temperaments: i sat down and decided what a bad dog would actually look like. i didn’t worry about ‘reactivity’ or ‘neuroses’ as intangible concepts; i found concrete examples of those things that i considered to be untenable. i didn’t want a dog who alert-barked at everything. i didn’t want a dog who snapped at new dogs entering his space or resource-guarded from people or dogs. i didn’t want a dog who couldn’t settle in the house or hyper-fixated on lights/movement. i didn’t want a dog who was neophobic, who couldn’t handle new environments. and i didn’t want a dog who couldn’t be crated or separated from me without having fits of anxiety. SO, because i was confident that i wasn’t getting a dog genetically-predisposed to any of those weaknesses, i was now free to think about what i could actively do to prevent their development.

and? unbelievably to my anxiety brain? that actually worked. i have a two and a half year old who is perfect in so many ways and of whom i and his breeder are really proud.

IN CLOSING:  i cannot tell you whether or not a field line golden specifically is a safer option. if i had a specific aussie breeder to compare to show line goldens, i could probably answer with confidence but my breed has such variety in quality of breeders and i do not know many field line goldens personally at all. anxiety and neuroses and reactivity should not just exist in aussies. good breeders believe that and care about reducing the appearance of those behaviours in their lines. you can and should find those breeders if you decide to go with an aussie; doing so will absolutely minimize the risks. and finally: your anxiety is normal and understandable and completely unnecessary. the fact that you are worried about it at all tells me you and your puppy will very likely be FINE no matter what. :)

[vilescorpio]

could you describe how mudis and aussies differ and what they have in common? how did you pick your breeds and are you happy with your picks?

this is uhhh a big ask so. i’ll do my best to organize my thoughts but pls keep in mind my experiences are based only on living w my two dogs and the others of their breeds i have met. readmore for length

physically:

both require very little grooming, but mudis even less so than aussies on account of how they don’t really need regular brushing

size, obvi, mudi are smaller and more portable/less expensive to own due to needing less of... everything

tiberius has greater physical endurance than basil but not to the point that it affects any daily activities and difficult to tell if this holds true for all aussies vs mudis

both healthy breeds with similar concerns so other physical differences are minimal. overall similar conformation. 

both are flashy enough in looks to draw a lot of attention out & about

temperamentally:

similar in energy level (high) and drive (pretty high), a lot of variability in drives per breed but in general mudis tend towards greater toy drive and lesser food drive. herding and prey drive variable in both.

mudis seem to settle more naturally, tho both should settle well at home

sensitivity varies in both breeds but in general is greater in mudis. it is a point of pride how emotionally in tune the breed is with their owners

u may not believe it but mudis are even clingier than aussies, velcro af

aussies are LITTLE BABIES at the vet, if u have one don’t fucking argue with me to save face, they’re awful. seem to be more sensitive to pain than a lot of dogs which is probably the reason. my mudi is great at the vet but idk about others

mudis more prone to reactivity, probably as a result of being more observant & environmentally sensitive, though aussies can be reactive

a lot of variation in friendliness towards dogs and people in both

aussies are a lot more forgiving in training. they can handle a lot of repetition, they handle mistakes or missed rewards easily and without taking offense. they learn quickly. mudis have a lower threshold for frustration, and if you make a mistake they ensure that u know. for this reason aussies are WAY more user friendly and an awesome first sport dog

otherwise pretty similar herdy dog temperament