[2bully]

Papers on a dog are worth only the cost of the paper they're printed on. There is no registry that doesn't suffer paper hanging. Most equate the "purebred" to quality and it just isn't so.
THE PURITY OF PUREBRED DOGS, by David J. Arthur

 

[2bully]

Oh now comes the romanticized origins. It's about time people get a grip on reality. The AB came about much as the OEB did. Just a bunch of breeding what ever to what ever to get a result. David Leavitt used the same EB as Johnson. There are no regional pockets that have some bulldogs that can trace their lineage back to the mayflower. Bulldog historically was a job description not a breed description. Any dog that did the work ascribed to the bulldog was a bulldog it's really that simply. To those that think that bulldogs weren't used on men in the past are mistaken.

 

[2bully]

A, my brevity comes from my lack of patience to deal with stupidity. I lack the ability to suffer fools.

I understood your regional reference. Mine was simply targeted at the romantic origins. The notion that there are several pristine bulldog types that can trace their lineage back to the original bulldogs of England is absurd. That somehow several like minded people traversed this nation and found these bulldogs hidden in various regions untouched by their regional seclusion is ridiculous. OSW, WEB, ABBB, and the AB share very similar origin stories. Stories are exactly what they are.

 

[2bully]

Yes I talk to people in person as I speak on the board.

I also don't cling to some romantic made up story about a "breed's" origins. I have my feet firmly planted on the ground. You came with stories, hardly a knowledge base worth debating. Should I apologize because you're uninformed? Should one side step your ignorance just to spare your feelings?

I don't make excuses for my dogs. I have a yard full of them and not one has displayed a sudden fear to children at any stage in their lives. I guess my dogs just aren't normal. I don't tolerate unwarranted aggression on my yard.

You can cling to your romantic origins. I won't loose sleep over it.

I find it humorous that the most outspoken against outcrossing in the thread don't have breeding programs or actively working/testing their dogs according to their ideal type/breed to the best of my knowledge. Seems like they want to arm chair quarterback those that do.

 

[2bully]

A little over the top? Several spoke on outcrossing in different breeds/venues that echoed pretty much what Alison said at length and I in short. I wish for the life of me I could remember the books name or even the author. It's a very interesting read on the dog's history in America. Even talks about the breeding programs of Ben Franklin and George Washington, programs based in part on outcrossing to suit the task.

Truly life would be so much simpler if dogs where identified by the task they performed rather than what it looks like. Just look at any standard, they're more detailed on a dog's appearance than they are about temperament and function. It's sad that a breed is more defined by how they look rather than work they can actually do. Most people seem to forget that breeds were built upon an actual function. Some times that function falls to the side, but few find a new suitable test. Dashunds were badger dogs, so the next time you see a wiener dog ask yourself does that dog have the brass ones to scramble down a badger hole, face that badger, and have the character to drag it back up the hole to the hunter? Would a little dose of APBT add enough temperament to make that little dog a badger dog again? When temperament isn't being tested and selected for it's lost. Temperament is the single hardest trait to maintain, yet is the most often overlooked trait in a breeding program. In just a few generations one can loose the very temperament traits that drew them to the bulldog to begin with. Yet those with the courage to color outside the lines to maintain temperament are often criticized for stepping outside the box.

 

[2bully]

The book's titled "A Dog's history of America" authored by Mark Derr.

 

[2bully]

The definition of purity is adjective. The definition varies from one individual to the next. If we accept that paper hanging is prevalent, how does one ensure that they have pure stock going to pure stock? Are we to accept that a piece of paper is the defining evidence of purity? Does it put it in perspective that there are registries that will paper a dog with a couple of pictures and some money? Are those dogs any more or any less pure, they have papers? Papers and the significance that they provide is nothing more than hype. You are no more assured purity with papers than you are without.

In many OEB registries it's not uncommon to have ABs and EBs dual registered as their respective breed and OEB within the same registry. It's also a common practice that as long as the parents are registered with the registry that an AB/EB pairing results in the litter being registrable as OEB. Is the breeder dishonest when working within the established rules of the registry or do we lay blame solely at the feet of the registry? Are the dogs registered any less of a dog because of this?

It's not until one is able to look past the ingrained constraints of purity are they able to appreciate the dog for it's abilities. A dog's worth should never be decided by what papers accompany it, it's pedigree, are any of the multitude of arbitrary traits that are so often defined as making a dog worth something. A dog's worth should solely rest on it's ability to perform.

 

[2bully]

Just google the silver fox experiment. It demonstrates how quickly a breed or species can become watered down. Temperament is by far the hardest set of traits to breed for, yet are the easiest to lose if proper selection isn't adhered to.

A standard calls for a wide range of attributes that designate a dog as a particular breed. This ongoing ideal that pedigree alone makes a dog of a particular breed is futile. Who cares if a dog has a stacked pedigree with all the AB greats, if the dog doesn't meet the standard it's not an AB.

Man I long for the simple days when bulldog was a job description and the dogs that did the job were called bulldogs. Dogs that got the job done being bred to other dogs that got the job done producing more dogs that get the job done.

I got a yard full of dogs that get r done and only one of them can claim being "pure bred". Yet I have another that is more tightly bred yet doesn't carry the "pure bred" status.

With so many breeders breeding for fads and trends within a breed that the complete dog is lost, is it any wonder that those that demand function and purpose step outside the box to breed for it?

I'm sorry but if an AB can't perform as an AB should it's no more an AB than an F1 outcross.

 

[2bully]

But what is the standard? A dog who is broad, well-muscled and with a blocky head could be any number of breeds. Pitbull? Lab? Mastiff? Change one little thing here, and one little thing there, the breed suddenly changes. Where do we draw the line at how many changes it takes to preserve the AB as it was meant? A big concern of mine is not so much what the dog looks like but what has became of the temperament of the breed. Temperament is, imo, far more important than the looks of the dog. The direction the AB is headed, in part due to popularity and bragging rights of having the biggest, baddest, pitbull on the block has pretty ruined the way these dogs are wired. The AB, by standard, has a specific temperament. To breed for pet quality is an attempt to soften the breed, to "dumb down" an AB is not only an insult but a liability as well. To try and soften temperament is like playing with a loaded gun. It creates weak nerve. The AB is a working dog. AB's aint for everyone. Those that change characteristics to make it "for everyone," are not breeding for AB's. There's enough "for everyone" kinda breeds out there without having to ruin yet another one.

Exactly my point. The further people/breeders move away from a purpose bred dog the more trouble comes about within a breed. When looks becomes the focus, rather than function, the breed suffers in temperament, health, and structure.