# Then and now. For better or worse?



## Guest (May 23, 2012)

I've chopped together some pictures of breeds from today in comparison to how they looked years ago.

Add your own breeds if you want and tell me if you think the following breeds look better or worse.

*Pug* - Worse.
I like them with a muzzle and not to mention the lack of breathing problems they'd have had compared to today's Pug.



*Pomeranian* - Better.
I prefer the Pom being smaller, I think it was Queen V who wanted to breed the Pom down to lapdog size. I do like Poms, the smaller the better IMO so long as they are healthy.


*English bull dog - Worse* - Worse
Like the pug, I don't mind flatISH muzzles but not so flat they are non existent and causing bragging problems for the dogs. I love the look of the old EBD


*American Pitbull Terrier* - Better
It doesn't looks like much as changed from these pics and today's pit bull varies in looks but I believe through pet breeding they have lost their fighting drive or at least weakened so for that reason, I chose better.


*Bull Terrier* - Worse
Sorry to owners of Bull Terriers but I really don't like their whole head. I feel their eyes are too small and the snout is just too big and weird for me . I chose worse as todays is more bold looking.


*Yorkshire Terrier* - Better
Even though you could possibly get today's YT to look like an old YT, the old ones remind me of cousin it. I think YTs are cute with mid length and short length hair. I also prefer that they aren't as long.


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2012)

WarDoll said:


> *American Pitbull Terrier* - Better
> It doesn't looks like much as changed from these pics and today's pit bull varies in looks but I believe through pet breeding they have lost their fighting drive or at least weakened so for that reason, I chose better.


the red / white dog is an amstaff , technically the same breed , but the show type version of the pit bull , pits bred for the pit haven`t actually changed all that much! show types; amstaffs are bred for the showring and many are over exaggerated and much more heavier set than the pit bull terrier!


----------



## catz4m8z (Aug 27, 2008)

Id agree with most of those...I think there was more emphasis on working dogs back then rather then show dogs so they were naturally more healthy looking.
Im not too keen on the Pom picture though..The problem with such tiny muzzles is that it causes problems with their teeth and they are more prone to gum disease. I like Poms that are small but still foxy looking!


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2012)

catz4m8z said:


> Id agree with most of those...I think there was more emphasis on working dogs back then rather then show dogs so they were naturally more healthy looking.
> Im not too keen on the Pom picture though..The problem with such tiny muzzles is that it causes problems with their teeth and they are more prone to gum disease. *I like Poms that are small but still foxy looking*!


Yes, me too. I like the small fluffy bodies with the mature fox like face .


----------



## Bella Beagle Mum (Jan 24, 2012)

WarDoll said:


> *Pug* - Worse.
> I like them with a muzzle and not to mention the lack of breathing problems they'd have had compared to today's Pug.


Is this not a REALLY extream example of the breed today?
I agree that some pug's appear to have a very short muzzle, but I've never seen one this extream!


----------



## WhippetyAmey (Mar 4, 2012)

I agree with most of these - I think the bassett hounds are another one that look completely different now...

I don't understand though... I look at show whippets and then at Merlin (working whippet) and I literally can't tell the difference... so how do breeds change that much?!


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2012)

Bella Beagle Mum said:


> Is this not a REALLY extream example of the breed today?
> I agree that some pug's appear to have a very short muzzle, but I've never seen one this extream!


Yes I suppose it is but it seems to most pug lovers the more "rolls" the better. I just wanted a close up of a pugs face, I don't suppose it matters as everyone knows what pugs look like .


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2012)

WhippetyAmey said:


> I agree with most of these - I think the bassett hounds are another one that look completely different now...
> 
> I don't understand though... I look at show whippets and then at Merlin (working whippet) and I literally can't tell the difference... so how do breeds change that much?!


I'm trying to think of other dogs that have changed dramatically through the years via selective breeding, some breeds have changed dramatically in my lifetime.


----------



## WhippetyAmey (Mar 4, 2012)

WarDoll said:


> I'm trying to think of other dogs that have changed dramatically through the years via selective breeding, some breeds have changed dramatically in my lifetime.


Basset hounds and is it Neopolitan Mastiffs? I think they used to have less rolls... it's all about the rolls isn't it! 

I'm not old enough for any to change in my lifetime I don't think :blushing:


----------



## catz4m8z (Aug 27, 2008)

Bella Beagle Mum said:


> Is this not a REALLY extream example of the breed today?
> I agree that some pug's appear to have a very short muzzle, but I've never seen one this extream!


I dont think its a very flattering pose TBH...If you look at Pugs on Youtube most of them seem to suffer this effect when laying down like that! Kinda like a turtle disappearing in its shell!LOL
I prefer the look of Puggles though, even though they arent a breed as such.


----------



## Bella Beagle Mum (Jan 24, 2012)

catz4m8z said:


> I dont think its a very flattering pose TBH...If you look at Pugs on Youtube most of them seem to suffer this effect when laying down like that! Kinda like a turtle disappearing in its shell!LOL
> I prefer the look of Puggles though, even though they arent a breed as such.


Yes, I agree....."Puggles" are very cute!

Great thread though WarDoll.......I looked up Beagles and couldn't see much change in that breed............................appart from when their crossed with pugs of course


----------



## Jobeth (May 23, 2010)

I believe the yorkie on the left is how they should look for the breed standard. The yorkie on the right isn't as the ears should stand up. Mine would look like the one on the left if I wanted her to.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

Jobeth said:


> I believe the yorkie on the left is how they should look for the breed standard. The yorkie on the right isn't as the ears should stand up. Mine would look like the one on the left if I wanted her to.


actually agree, to compare you need the show dogs of the past compared to show dogs of today to show the standard changing, any pet dog can look very far off the standards set for the breed.


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

A couple of Eric Halsall's sheepdogs:

















And how they have become since the breed clubs decided to write standards and make them into something else:









Working sheepdogs and border collies are now separate types of dog according to the KC but give me a WSD over a show type BC any day.


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2012)

emmaviolet said:


> actually agree, to compare you need the show dogs of the past compared to show dogs of today to show the standard changing, any pet dog can look very far off the standards set for the breed.


My bad.


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

Rough Collie 1800's:









Today:









Waaaaaaaaaaaay too much coat IMO, prefer the dogs of old. I dont like extremes of any kind.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

Gorgeous Collie that looks like the ones I grew up with and that my grandfather bred.

I tend to like dogs without profuse coats and really short muzzles, or going the other way really long narrow muzzles, or any overly exaggerated features, so I find myself liking, much better, photos of dogs in the past.

That does include Poms as well. I took in a lovely Pom 30 years ago and I don't even recognize the showring Poms as the same type of dog. I much prefer the pet bred Poms with a foxier head and way less coat.

CC


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Leanne77 said:


> A couple of Eric Halsall's sheepdogs:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


i believe Gael is a shetland sheepdog not a border collie lol

.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

Leanne77 said:


> Rough Collie 1800's:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


to be fair though this kind of coat is not the norm and not the type you do see on every rc!

the coat is more abundant then the first and has had a mane and frill that is very full and abundant since the standard has come in.


----------



## dandogman (Dec 19, 2011)

I think it is disgusting that pugs are allowed to be bred, it is ridiculously cruel. 
Every time I see a pug its panting and struggling to breath. I saw one a few weeks back that actually started choking! (not sure of how else to put it) 
The one that was at Pippa's puppy training had to have its eyed wiped all the time too.


----------



## PaulRyan (Aug 17, 2011)

dandogman said:


> I think it is disgusting that pugs are allowed to be bred, it is ridiculously cruel.
> Every time I see a pug its panting and struggling to breath. I saw one a few weeks back that actually started choking! (not sure of how else to put it)
> The one that was at Pippa's puppy training had to have its eyed wiped all the time too.


Surely you mean how they're being bred & not that we should just give up on the breed?


----------



## dandogman (Dec 19, 2011)

PaulRyan said:


> Surely you mean how they're being bred & not that we should just give up on the breed?


My bad wording 
I should have said 'bred the way they are currently' or something along those lines.


----------



## button50 (Apr 16, 2012)

my 3/4 Pug looks so much like the original Pug photo.


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2012)

Buttons, Dexter too is Puggy looking but he has a muzzle and quite a good one at that although his nose turns slightly up he never makes any weird breathing noises. They could get pugs healthier by selective breeding and I suppose they better had as I believe they were banned from Crufts due to breathing issues. It's not fair on them and even a slight muzzle will reduce those problems by a lot, I personally don't know what they were bred to be so flat faced.


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

WarDoll said:


> *American Pitbull Terrier* - Better
> It doesn't looks like much as changed from these pics and today's pit bull varies in looks but I believe through pet breeding they have lost their fighting drive or at least weakened so for that reason, I chose better.


The downside to that is they are now more people aggressive than they were when they were bred purely as a fighting dog


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Early RRs (or African Lion Dogs as they were known) apparently resembled hyenas or jackals but with a ridge of hair down their spines (mid 1800s). By the late 1800s the breed had been developed further for life on the veldt and looked like this painting from 1896.









I think the present day RR looks pretty similar.


----------



## springerpete (Jun 24, 2010)

Dogless said:


> Early RRs (or African Lion Dogs as they were known) apparently resembled hyenas or jackals but with a ridge of hair down their spines (mid 1800s). By the late 1800s the breed had been developed further for life on the veldt and looked like this painting from 1896.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Kilo's some handsome chap Dogless, you must be very proud of him. Pete.


----------



## button50 (Apr 16, 2012)

WarDoll said:


> Buttons, Dexter too is Puggy looking but he has a muzzle and quite a good one at that although his nose turns slightly up he never makes any weird breathing noises. They could get pugs healthier by selective breeding and I suppose they better had as I believe they were banned from Crufts due to breathing issues. It's not fair on them and even a slight muzzle will reduce those problems by a lot, I personally don't know what they were bred to be so flat faced.


Bubba has a Pug friend that lives down the road and i always feel sorry for him as his breathing sounds terrible, and people say its not right to cross breed lol


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

WarDoll said:


> Buttons, Dexter too is Puggy looking but he has a muzzle and quite a good one at that although his nose turns slightly up he never makes any weird breathing noises. They could get pugs healthier by selective breeding and I suppose they better had as I believe they were banned from Crufts due to breathing issues. It's not fair on them and even a slight muzzle will reduce those problems by a lot, I personally don't know what they were bred to be so flat faced.


pugs have never been banned from shows, infact it was a pug who took 2nd in the toy group at Crufts this year.


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2012)

noushka05 said:


> pugs have never been banned from shows, infact it was a pug who took 2nd in the toy group at Crufts this year.


I don't know where that's come from in my memory then .


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2012)

noushka05 said:


> pugs have never been banned from shows, infact it was a pug who took 2nd in the toy group at Crufts this year.


I've just done a quick search, it was because a vet asked for them and bulldogs to be banned and I remember they were talking about it at Crufts.


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2012)

On that note.

Googling Pugs+Crufts I came across this picture and thought "MY GOD THEY OUT A WIG ON A PUG" ut:










I've never heard of Pekingese Dogs :blush2::blushing::blushing:


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Certain people don't like it but pekinese are being compared in the http://pedigreedogsexposed.blogspot.com/ . The old look :


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Managed to dig this site out as it's one I've bookmarked on a different PC but mentioned before. If after comparisons:
Dog Breed Historical Pictures pictures by Pietoro - Photobucket is worth looking at.


----------



## Thorne (May 11, 2009)

WarDoll said:


> *Yorkshire Terrier* - Better
> Even though you could possibly get today's YT to look like an old YT, the old ones remind me of cousin it. I think YTs are cute with mid length and short length hair. I also prefer that they aren't as long.


The only major difference in your pictures is the style of grooming (ie hair away from eyes), not the dog underneath!

A modern Yorkie in the show ring, very similar indeed to the old illustration:


----------



## Mysterious (May 12, 2012)

hawksport said:


> The downside to that is they are now more people aggressive than they were when they were bred purely as a fighting dog


Sorry, need to disagree with your statement completely! By the way who said that?

Any dog can be human aggressive if trained to do so, not specifying the breeds.


----------



## Guest (May 24, 2012)

Thorne said:


> The only major difference in your pictures is the style of grooming (ie hair away from eyes), not the dog underneath!
> 
> A modern Yorkie in the show ring, very similar indeed to the old illustration:


Yes I agree all though I was comparing the YTS I see, floppy ears and short coats and not as long . They look exactly the same in your picture comparisons except for the little bow, I find it quite endearing that even the most respectable yorkie owners will put hair accessories in their dogs hair to keep it from the eyes.


----------



## Guest (May 24, 2012)

Oh and they (today's YTs) seem shorter in length and longer in leg. I'm probably wrong though but I'm no dog expert, just an observer who is interested to see the changes in selective breeding.


----------



## Tigerneko (Jan 2, 2009)

WhippetyAmey said:


> I agree with most of these - I think the bassett hounds are another one that look completely different now...
> 
> I don't understand though... I look at show whippets and then at Merlin (working whippet) and I literally can't tell the difference... so how do breeds change that much?!


I don't think the whippet will ever change very much because I don't think there is anything to exaggerate, and they're still far more 'working type' than most of the exaggerated breeds. Whippets don't have short snouts, short legs, long coats or long ears so there's nothing for breeders to exaggerate (as those are the features that seem to be exaggerated mainly) so hopefully they will stay the way they are, because they are beautiful  the only thing that I think _could_ happen is that they might end up becoming too fragile, a bit like the Italian Greyhound. People like whippets to be quite dainty and light, and maybe that's something that could eventually be a problem, but probably not 

Also, I really like the old fashioned Bulldogs and Pugs, they look far better! Can't see the attraction to the flat faces. I also remember watching PDE2, and it showed a 'working' type Neo Mastiff.... my gosh that dog was beautiful! Totally different to the show type and you could really see the beauty, strength and muscle on the dog, instead of rolls of droopy skin 

ETA: this is the picture they used, what a beautiful dog there is under that flesh!


----------



## hawksport (Dec 27, 2009)

Mysterious said:


> Sorry, need to disagree with your statement completely! By the way who said that?
> 
> Any dog can be human aggressive if trained to do so, not specifying the breeds.


It can but when you participate in a sport that require a dog to be stiched back together with no anesthetic any dog with the slightest inclination to bite a human is removed from the breeding program


----------



## Bijou (Aug 26, 2009)

This dog:










looks very similar to the first Groenendaels









who in turn are very similar to the present day Groen !!


----------



## Bijou (Aug 26, 2009)

Eric Hassels Collie is not really a true representative of what the early collies looked like - here's 'Old Hemp' ( 1893)










the modern day BC is much more similar that Eric's one is










remember that you have to allow for better grooming and presentation nowadays but the basic shape and head properties are very similar


----------



## Melissa27 (Mar 15, 2012)

Leanne77 said:


> Rough Collie 1800's:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It may be because I am from a different country, but I have never seen a Rough Collie with that profuse of a coat before. While I cant speak for other areas, where I am that would be a very atypical representation of the breed.

The coat of the dog in the photo below is much more typical of US Rough Collies. It is still very fluffy, but isn't quite so overdone as that Rough Collie pictured, IMO.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

yes melissa that is in no way the norm to coat amount in the uk really.

hope this pic comes out, here is a champion in england and sire and bob crufts winner twice, not the same amount of fur as that pic! that to me is an extreme!

http://images.dogforum.sk/files/ecxgajcjls88mxzaly7i.jpg

or attached as didnt show!


----------



## Mysterious (May 12, 2012)

hawksport said:


> It can but when you participate in a sport that require a dog to be stiched back together with no anesthetic any dog with the slightest inclination to bite a human is removed from the breeding program


Yes I agree, all dogs can bite a human if he/she was trained to do so, so how about protection dogs? For instance - dorbermans, rottweilers, who are most popular breed for guard dogs, police dogs and with given commands attack people, so they should not be bred?

Originally you posted: "The downside to that is they are now more people aggressive than they were when they were bred purely as a fighting dog".

I stated that it is just your opinion, with no releasable sources to back it up.


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

Bijou said:


> Eric Hassels Collie is not really a true representative of what the early collies looked like - here's 'Old Hemp' ( 1893)
> 
> 
> 
> ...





noushka05 said:


> i believe Gael is a shetland sheepdog not a border collie lol
> 
> .


I have one of Eric Halsall's books and am aware of Old Hemp, and many of the older WSD's. My point was, that before there became a standard for these sheepdogs, and they became officially known as Border Collies, it didnt matter what the dog looked like, it only mattered how it worked. Collies became 'Border Collies' and the show types have been turned into what is depicted in my third picture.

As for Gael, I can see no reference to her being a Shetland Sheepdog (who were only created to be a companion IIRC), the only reference I can find is that she is merely a "collie", and quite similar to Eric's Meg.

With reference to the Rough Collie, although it may not be the norm for the coat to be so thick, there are obviously some being bred like that to compete in the show ring. It may be an extreme example but even the non extreme examples are quite far removed from the breed in the 1800's IMO.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

The sheltie was created for the shetland islands as a herding dog smaller than the collie for cattle i believe.


----------



## springerpete (Jun 24, 2010)

I've been reading this thread with interest, because of my passion for proper working dogs I dont feel able to comment on breeds that I have no experience of. However, looking at some of the photos of the modern toy breeds that are shown it does worry me that quite a few of them would find it very difficult to live their lives as ' Dogs', The dogs I'm familiar with, and love, are never happier than when running free in the countryside or on a beach, to be honest I just cant see some of these breeds ever being able to live the kind of life that I believe a dog should be able to enjoy. Just my opinion and I expect to get shot down in flames for holding it, Just as well that I'm thick skinned.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Mysterious said:


> Yes I agree, all dogs can bite a human if he/she was trained to do so, so how about protection dogs? For instance - dorbermans, rottweilers, who are most popular breed for guard dogs, police dogs and with given commands attack people, so they should not be bred?
> 
> Originally you posted: "The downside to that is they are now more people aggressive than they were when they were bred purely as a fighting dog".
> 
> I stated that it is just your opinion, with no releasable sources to back it up.


Many dogs bite due to a LACK of training!! I dont think Hawksport was dissing his own breed, lol!!

Who says Dobes and Rotts are the most popular for 'protection' dogs?? Where is your proof on this please? I think you will find neither breed is the most popular in the UK, lol!

Also, to be picky, the two pug piccies, the older Pug looks to me to have terrible comformation, those elbows look over-loaded and its deffo weak in the pasterns. I cant comment on the other Pug as its not standing up. Perhaps its a case of same breed, different problems!


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

I prefer generally the old type dogs as they look healthier....and probably are...like straight back GSD...or less hairy biger boned collies...

Bassets also were lighter with less sloose skin if i remember well...and pekes could breath!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Leanne77 said:


> I have one of Eric Halsall's books and am aware of Old Hemp, and many of the older WSD's. My point was, that before there became a standard for these sheepdogs, and they became officially known as Border Collies, it didnt matter what the dog looked like, it only mattered how it worked. Collies became 'Border Collies' and the show types have been turned into what is depicted in my third picture.
> 
> As for Gael, I can see no reference to her being a Shetland Sheepdog (who were only created to be a companion IIRC), the only reference I can find is that she is merely a "collie", and quite similar to Eric's Meg.
> 
> With reference to the Rough Collie, although it may not be the norm for the coat to be so thick, there are obviously some being bred like that to compete in the show ring. It may be an extreme example but even the non extreme examples are quite far removed from the breed in the 1800's IMO.


 sorry for being so pedantic lol ......

He also wrote Gael: Sheepdog of the Hills (1985 Patrick Stephens), more a naturalists book about Halsall's Shetland Sheepdog and the British countryside he explored with her; BC Museum: Eric Halsall ....

& imo the books cover you posted, clearly depicts a sheltie not a working border collie.

.


----------



## hayleyth (May 9, 2012)

Pugs are the worst!!! something seriously needs to be done.. id never have one as i dont want to give breeders the money for something which shouldnt be bred!


----------



## Bijou (Aug 26, 2009)

> it only mattered how it worked. Collies became 'Border Collies' and the show types have been turned into what is depicted in my third picture.


Leanne - tell me how this:










is so very different to this ?










both are essentially the same type of dog - they both are slightly longer than high, they both have moderate angulation and good bone, their heads both have a pronounced stop an equal skull to muzzle ratio and tipped ears and the coat type and pattern remains the same - the show dog is not in the typical collie crouch and so appears to have a longer neck and a more level topline but essentially they are VERY similar.


----------



## Mysterious (May 12, 2012)

Blondie said:


> Many dogs bite due to a LACK of training!! I dont think Hawksport was dissing his own breed, lol!!
> 
> Who says Dobes and Rotts are the most popular for 'protection' dogs?? Where is your proof on this please? I think you will find neither breed is the most popular in the UK, lol!
> 
> Also, to be picky, the two pug piccies, the older Pug looks to me to have terrible comformation, those elbows look over-loaded and its deffo weak in the pasterns. I cant comment on the other Pug as its not standing up. Perhaps its a case of same breed, different problems!


It depends how they bite, as there are two different bite strategies: one on command when the dog is trained and second when dog is aggressive. There are a number of types of aggression. The most common forms are dominant and territorial aggression. Some dogs show fearful, possessive or intra-sexual (male to male and female to female) aggression while others have a predatory form of this trait. Some dogs have more than one type of aggression.

The research says that dobermans and rottweilers and also german shepherds are the most popular guard dogs 10 Most Popular Guard Dogs From Around the World | Gomestic there are many more webs confirming that statement


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Leanne77 said:


> A couple of Eric Halsall's sheepdogs:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





noushka05 said:


> i believe Gael is a shetland sheepdog not a border collie lol
> 
> .


You are correct Noushka. Gael is indeed a a Sheltie, so not much use in Leanne bemoaning the fact that border collies don't look like him! 

Leanne, if you want to compare the border collie of today from the original border collies, it's no good trying to compare them with shelties! If you really want to assess the differences, you could do no better than look at the following two photos. The first one is of Old Hemp, who was the progenitor of the border collie:










and the second is my own girl at Crufts:










Not much difference between then and now, really. My girl is much closer to the progenitor of the breed than the one pic you did post of a border collie, and much more like the border collie of yester-year than your pic of a sheltie(Gael) 



Leanne77 said:


> As for Gael, I can see no reference to her being a Shetland Sheepdog (who were only created to be a companion IIRC), the only reference I can find is that she is merely a "collie", and quite similar to Eric's Meg.


As anyone with any knowledge of sheepdogs knows, Gael was a sheltie - a famous sheltie. Check this reference about the very book you pictured:

#_00179e Gael, Sheepdog of the Hills by Halsall, Eric
1985 Patrick Stephens Ltd., Wellingborough, UK.
Hardcover. Appears new with dustjacket.
This is more a naturalist's description of the countryside, but it is also a tribute to Halsall's beloved Shetland Sheepdog, Gael, and her herding abilities._
http://www.theshepherdsdog.com/books.html


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Leanne77 said:


> With reference to the Rough Collie, although it may not be the norm for the coat to be so thick, there are obviously some being bred like that to compete in the show ring. It may be an extreme example but even the non extreme examples are quite far removed from the breed in the 1800's IMO.


Sorry Leanne, this seems like I am picking on you and I'm not - it's just that what you are saying isn't true. I don't know where you got your information from but Rough collies are not being bred that way for the show ring. Coats are much less profuse than that. Have a look at this video from Crufts this year if you don't believe me.

rough collies at Crufts 2012 - Yahoo! Video Search


----------



## Shrap (Nov 22, 2010)

Mysterious said:


> It depends how they bite, as there are two different bite strategies: one on command when the dog is trained and second when dog is aggressive. There are a number of types of aggression. The most common forms are dominant and territorial aggression. Some dogs show fearful, possessive or intra-sexual (male to male and female to female) aggression while others have a predatory form of this trait. Some dogs have more than one type of aggression.
> 
> The research says that dobermans and rottweilers and also german shepherds are the most popular guard dogs 10 Most Popular Guard Dogs From Around the World | Gomestic there are many more webs confirming that statement


Dogs bite on command, out of fear, defence, and out of prey drive.

Protection dogs bite in defence drive, or on command. Not out of fear. They are controllable, but dependent on the dog's threshold will either not be taken certain places or will be muzzled.

Hawksport was merely saying that although dog-dog aggression has been reduced in certain lines of pitbulls, that there are other downsides and more things to base a "better or worse" opinion on. He has a Dobermann so I highly doubt he is saying they shouldn't be bred lol!!


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

I'm going to give up about the border collies, I dont appear to be making my point. Yes, I see that Old Hemp looks like todays BC's, maybe I should start a different thread about WSD's and Border Collies.

I acknowledge the fact that Gael is a Sheltie. In the book I have and when I Googled it, I could find no other reference than 'collie'. Still, she looks different to todays shelties in my eyes.

With regards to the Rough Collie, somebody is breeding them to look like the photo I posted! And it wasnt the only photo that came up, i've seen RC's with my own eyes with a ridiculous amount of coat which they appear to get lost in.


----------



## SpringerHusky (Nov 6, 2008)

German Shepherd 1915

















Now

The working has hardly changed at all compared to the show.









Pembroke Corgi 1938









Today

Corgi's haven't changed that much, slightly more rounded.


----------



## Shrap (Nov 22, 2010)

Working GSD:


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

SpringerHusky said:


> Pembroke Corgi 1938
> 
> 
> 
> ...


errmm... THE LEGS on the 'modern' Corgi are shorter with heavier bone; the BODY is longer & lower. 
the HEAD is larger in proportion to the body, too.  How can U say they haven't changed much?!


----------



## Shrap (Nov 22, 2010)

Working vs show:

The same working I posted a min ago:










SHOW:










Ohhhhh the way facts can be skewed


----------



## ozrex (Aug 30, 2011)

There's none so blind as those who will not see.

I think it starts with a type of dog with a long back/short legs/thick coat/loose skin/whatever. They get shown, the dog with the longest back/shortest legs/etc wins and is used for breeding and away we go.

Someone with "fresh eyes" looks at the dog thirty generations on and sees a horror. Those of us who grew up with/show/train/breed the dog can only see "close to breed standard" and a Good Thing.

The tragedy is the inability of people who breed/show a wildly imperfect dog to see what is painfully obvious to the rest of us; that the dog is suffering, its body doesn't work well.

People dedicated to the breed, those who cannot/will not see its problems become very defensive. They deny that there is anything wrong with their breed. They lash out at byb or puppy farms (yes we all know the horrors of those); they lash out at measures designed (however imperfectly) to re-design their breed and they lash out at anyone who dares to state the blindingly obvious (that's not a good shape for a dog).

I think that the only hope for these dogs is education of the people responsible for them. Some breeders/show people will learn some will die first.


----------



## Thorne (May 11, 2009)

Shrap said:


> Working vs show:
> 
> The same working I posted a min ago:
> 
> ...


I'm not a GSD owner or expert by any means but I often think that the show stance must be a big factor in created the "roached" topline that people bemoan these days? Earlier I was in the garden with Scooter and he froze while getting up in much the same stance (spotted a pigeon in the tree). The result = curved topline, his is usually dead straight.

Not to say that I haven't seen GSDs with over-exaggerated toplines, especially in photos of West German and American show stock - again the posing probably has a lot to do with the overall impression.
After meeting a couple of very wobbly, older Shepherds I'd be more concerned about their hind leg conformation than back shape, unless of course it's very exaggerated. Not fond of over-exaggeration of any part of any animal.

Does anyone know the show stance came to be? My assumption is that it's to show off the reach of the limbs, am I far off the mark?


----------



## ozrex (Aug 30, 2011)

I think that the GSD roach back is exagerated by the show stance and the way that they are shown moving. All the GSDs that I've seen at shows are taught to wear a harness and pull, which makes the back look worse than it is and the back legs weirder than they are. Check out the photos at the Victorian GSD championship.

The worry is that the roach back and weird back legs is the desired "look". It's a very short step from creating a fuctional "roach back and banana legs stuck out the back" due to posing the dog and having dogs with those deformities bred into them. The fact that such an unnatural pose is required in the show ring shows that breeding for that look will be in progress. 

There are some seriously deformed GSDs around in Melbourne. However they move and stand they have a roach back sloping down to ridiculously shaped back legs that stick out behind the dog. They often have sickle hocks too (or what I was taught to call sickle hocks in a horse). Please fogive my lack of correct terminology. These are NOT dogs from puppy farms or similar either.

I really hope the GSDs in Britain are not going that way. If it continues it will all end in tears.


----------



## Shrap (Nov 22, 2010)

ozrex said:


> All the GSDs that I've seen at shows are taught to wear a harness and pull, which makes the back look worse than it is and the back legs weirder than they are.


That is a VERY old fashioned way of training. The exhibitors/breeders that I'm friends with discourage that way of showing. The dog should pull out to the end of the lead but not be driving and digging into the ground. It's that way of training that makes the dog drop its shoulders and cause the upward roach look - sacrificing forward reach for rear drive. When gaiting withers should still be the highest point on topline.

The topline is not the problem. It's breeders breeding for more and more angulation in the rear that causes "frog legs". The majority of placed dogs don't have this (at SV shows). The german dogs you see at crufts are not all the best german style dogs. Some of the worst are there too. At crufts I saw more loose hocks and broken toplines than any other show I've been to!


----------



## Bijou (Aug 26, 2009)

> I'm going to give up about the border collies, I dont appear to be making my point. Yes, I see that Old Hemp looks like todays BC's, maybe I should start a different thread about WSD's and Border Collies.


yep perhaps a thread that states the truth that todays Border Collies far from being 'ruined' by the show ring have in fact hardly changed in over 100 years and that the assumption that a Border Collie should look like a WSD is somehow 'proof' of it's down fall is deeply flawed -they are a different breed - just as BSD are not GSD !!


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Mysterious said:


> It depends how they bite, as there are two different bite strategies: one on command when the dog is trained and second when dog is aggressive. There are a number of types of aggression. The most common forms are dominant and territorial aggression. Some dogs show fearful, possessive or intra-sexual (male to male and female to female) aggression while others have a predatory form of this trait. Some dogs have more than one type of aggression.
> 
> I know that
> 
> The research says that dobermans and rottweilers and also german shepherds are the most popular guard dogs 10 Most Popular Guard Dogs From Around the World | Gomestic there are many more webs confirming that statement


They may be most popular in the world, but certainly not in the UK.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Bijou said:


> yep perhaps a thread that states the truth that todays Border Collies far from being 'ruined' by the show ring have in fact hardly changed in over 100 years and that the assumption that a Border Collie should look like a WSD is somehow 'proof' of it's down fall is deeply flawed -they are a different breed - just as BSD are not GSD !!


Excellent post! Well said! :thumbup:


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

Leanne77 said:


>


I have to say that personally I think above is a stunning looking dog :frown:



Leanne77 said:


> Today:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Whilst he does have a lot of coat how much is just over zealous grooming, looks as though been back combed in places. If I was so minded I could groom my dog "big" he would look like an explosion


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Not being in the show scene one of the things I would like to see in threads like this are the pictures showing recent positive changes to breeds to enhance health. They do exist but I am unable to lay my hands on decent examples at the moment. One of the best examples I know of is unfortunately contained in a video rather than pictures. The video below at around 15:00 shows changes to a bulldog.

[youtube_browser]rrWjVFKuAg8[/youtube_browser]

One would hope that given time many of the negative changes made over time impacting health for some breeds can be reversed and actually highlighted. Of course the changes in the first place rely on buy-in by the breeders which is not always happening and examples of the continuation of the poor practices can also be found.

When it comes to looks does it really matter that much if it doesn't impact health? It's very much based on opinion. I know we've had comments "she's gorgeous" and "she's ugly" about the same dog. They are both right.


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

Bijou said:


> yep perhaps a thread that states the truth that todays Border Collies far from being 'ruined' by the show ring have in fact hardly changed in over 100 years and that the assumption that a Border Collie should look like a WSD is somehow 'proof' of it's down fall is deeply flawed -they are a different breed - just as BSD are not GSD !!


So, what would you call these dogs?

















Are they border collies or WSD's?

Oh, and I dont recall saying anything about the breed being ruined or that it was in any way a lesser dog than what it used to be. I simply expressed a preference for the more diverse look of the working collies than the show type.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Bijou said:


> ...the assumption that a BC should look like a [Working SheepDog, but does not, & this] is somehow
> 'proof' of [BCs' ] downfall is deeply flawed - [BCs & WSDs] are different breed - *just as BSD are not GSD*!




beg pardon, but aside from minor differences in coat & frame-sizes, a modern BSD-Malinois looks a helluva lot 
more like the 1920s, 30s & 40s GSDs than any modern show-type or pet-type GSD, with their roached spines, 
sloped croups [*called a 'goose rump' in horses, it indicates weak hindquarters which lack muscle*], 
& cow-hocks!

i watched the THEN-top usa-GSD, *Dallas*, move down-&-back at the Eukaneuba Invitational, 
& recorded it from Animal Planet's broadcast - FOR ONCE, the camera stayed on the dog 
as he walked away, & the top of his hocks was clearly seen to draw a figure-8 as he picked up a rear paw, 
moved it forward, flipped pads-down, & placed it again. THE TOPS OF HIS REAR TOES DRAGGED on the floor, 
with every step: as he brought the paw forward, pads-up. I was appalled, & have seen this in many 
other "modern" show & pet GSDs. It's p*ss-poor structure, muscular inefficiency, & bad for joints: 
IME, it causes early arthritic changes; & bear in mind, for 20-years or more, GSDs were my favorite breed. 
:nonod:

a very simple test is to paint the dog's rear claws with *nail polish* & see how fast 
the color wears off, & *where* - i'm betting the upper side of the claws would wear-off 1st.

it's a crying shame to see what a formerly athletic & versatile dog has degenerated into - 
all for the sake of fashion. :mad5:


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

Ah! I have had a lightbulb moment and see where some confusion may have arisen (thanks leashedForLife!)

By 'WSD', I mean working sheepdog, not Welsh sheepdog!


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

springerpete said:


> I've been reading this thread with interest, because of my passion for proper working dogs I dont feel able to comment on breeds that I have no experience of. However, looking at some of the photos of the modern toy breeds that are shown it does worry me that quite a few of them would find it very difficult to live their lives as ' Dogs', The dogs I'm familiar with, and love, are never happier than when running free in the countryside or on a beach, to be honest I just cant see some of these breeds ever being able to live the kind of life that I believe a dog should be able to enjoy. Just my opinion and I expect to get shot down in flames for holding it, Just as well that I'm thick skinned.


Keep in mind that companion dogs have been bred for thousands of years, and they have as much a claim on 'being dogs' as any working breed.

I know companion dogs that do not want to set foot on grass and love being pampered. That is not MY preference but THEIR owners love them that way and the dogs enjoy an incredible quality and enjoyment of life in They ENJOY the indoors with their people. They ENJOY being pampered and brushed and bathed. These are things my more rugged small dogs hate, but each to their own.

Those same people might look at a rugged more aloof type of dog, and in retort to a comment like yours would suggest they can't see how it can enjoy life as it doesn't enjoy being preened (in fact my sister says just that).



Leanne77 said:


> . . .
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Leanne77 said:


> So, what would you call these dogs?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Leanne, I find the bottom two breathtakingly beautiful dogs. I love that border collie gaze. I find the top dog less attractive, but that has to do with an aversion I have to fluffed up coats - and its head looks off to me (too high, too much stop), but that could be the photo angle. For my cattle and for my own ownership I would have avoided that coat, myself. My brother, who farms still, likes a bit more coat than I do. He'd favor the coat on the shaded sable, but that is the joy of the Border Collie - the variation. Here we would call all three Border Collies as long as they could do the work.

CC


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

comfortcreature said:


> Leanne, I find the bottom two breathtakingly beautiful dogs. I love that border collie gaze. I find the top dog less attractive, but that has to do with a aversion I have to fluffed up coats. For my cattle and for my own ownership I would have avoided that coat, myself. My brother, who farms still, likes a bit more coat than I do, but that is the joy of the Border Collie - the variation.
> 
> CC


You probably understand the point I was initially trying to make then. Before a standard for the BC was created, it didnt matter what the dog looked like, only how well it worked. Yes, some of the old dogs, like Old Hemp, look very much like todays BC's, but that wasnt intentional I dont suppose. Todays BC's have more focused placed on how they look, rather than what their original purpose was, and they have ended up looking very 'samey' IMO.

I have no doubt the KC would class the top two collies as working sheepdogs and not Border Collies.


----------



## Shrap (Nov 22, 2010)

leashedForLife said:


> beg pardon, but aside from minor differences in coat & frame-sizes, a modern BSD-Malinois looks a helluva lot
> more like the 1920s, 30s & 40s GSDs than any modern show-type or pet-type GSD, with their roached spines,
> sloped croups [*called a 'goose rump' in horses, it indicates weak hindquarters which lack muscle*],
> & cow-hocks!
> ...


ASL GSDs are a disgrace.

But do please tell me. The picture of the working line GSD I posted. I take it that you also think it's a cripple, not athletic nor versatile?


----------



## Bijou (Aug 26, 2009)

the origins of the Border Collie breed are shown here :



> Almost all present-day Border Collies can trace their pedigrees back to a dog known as Old Hemp. Hemp was born in 1894, bred and owned by Adam Telfer, who lived in the Northumbrian region of England. Hemp was a cross between a very strong-eyed, black bitch with a reticent temperament and a black and white tri-colored dog with loose eye and a good natured, outgoing temperament. Hemp was a powerful, keen worker who sired over 200 puppies. Physically, Hemp was the epitome of the Northumbrian type: medium-sized with a rough coat and very little white trim.












you can clearly see what the ORIGINAL Border Collie looked like ...and how closely it resembles the present day show type....and they did in fact all look very 'samey ' even as far back as the 1900's.


----------



## Nicky10 (Jan 11, 2010)

Cairns a few years before they were recognised although they're a much older breed









This year's Crufts winner









Not a lot of difference some breeds have changed for the worse whether it's exaggeration in the show ring or the american field bred labs being bred for hardness and ability to take a shock collar over working ability but the majority haven't changed much especially the less popular breeds

Irish water spaniel 1882









The gorgeous Merlin who won the gundog group


----------



## Thorne (May 11, 2009)

Bijou said:


> the origins of the Border Collie breed are shown here :
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for posting, nice to see how close these dogs are to modern BC's! 
Old Hemp is the spitting image of a BC I looked after called Bubbles, Armstrong's Sweep looks like Jade, a regular in kennels and before rehoming Breeze we considered rehoming a BC named Panda, very similar to Craig.
Wouldn't be surprised to see a BC that looks like any of the above out on a walk these days.

Lovely to see how close the Cairns and IWS' have stayed to their ancestors' appearances too.


----------



## PaulRyan (Aug 17, 2011)

hayleyth said:


> Pugs are the worst!!! something seriously needs to be done.. id never have one as i dont want to give breeders the money for something which shouldnt be bred!


Although I agree with you to a point in terms of how some are bred, to say they shouldn't be bred seems a bit rash, maybe a less judgemental stance on it would cause less offence to people who own Pugs or the people who make ever efforts to breed the good traits rather than the bad (I assume such people exist).

I'm going to assume you meant to say "Only the Pugs with healthy traits should be bred from"


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

Bijou said:


> the origins of the Border Collie breed are shown here :
> 
> 
> 
> ...


How can you say "they did in fact ALL look very 'samey'" from selected pictures of a few dogs?

Here are the other types - again with a select few photos of each. They all came in numerous colors as well, but black is the predominant one.




























sources: http://www.bordercolliekennel.nl/the_border_collie.htm and http://www.bonnidune.com/info.html

Queen Victoria's Border Collie 'Sharp' is here.










CC


----------



## Guest (May 26, 2012)

Goblin said:


> One would hope that given time many of the negative changes made over time impacting health for some breeds can be reversed and actually highlighted. Of course the changes in the first place rely on buy-in by the breeders which is not always happening and examples of the continuation of the poor practices can also be found.
> 
> When it comes to looks does it really matter that much if it doesn't impact health? It's very much based on opinion. I know we've had comments "she's gorgeous" and "she's ugly" about the same dog. They are both right.


From what I know, selective breeding can eliminate or at least reduce breed specific health defaults. I guess it's easier said than done though as breeders aren't one exclusive organisation.

To answer your questionnon physical appearance nattering (or not), to me it doesn't matter, at least not compared to my priority to great health in a dog. The thread was started to highlight and discuss differences from years ago to know in pure breeds and the differences in both looks and health (both good and bad). Not that "looks" matter, it's just a discussion.

_I know we've had comments "she's gorgeous" and "she's ugly" about the same dog. They are both right._

Yes, as the saying goes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. What's beautiful to one may be harsh on the eye to another and it's great to see the huge difference in opinion on that and we shouldn't screw our noses up and turn bias if someones opinions don't fit ours.n:thumbup:


----------



## Bijou (Aug 26, 2009)

> but the majority haven't changed much especially the less popular breeds


I think this is an important point ...and I do wonder if it's the over exaggeration in popular breeds like Pugs GSD and Bulldogs that people like - there are after all loads of alternative less extreme breeds out there...

perhaps the fact that Cairns. IWS and other breeds remain in the hands of a small band of breed enthusiasts, has been their saving grace


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Leanne77 said:


> So, what would you call these dogs?
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Leanne77 said:


> You probably understand the point I was initially trying to make then. Before a standard for the BC was created, it didnt matter what the dog looked like, only how well it worked. Yes, some of the old dogs, like Old Hemp, look very much like todays BC's, but that wasnt intentional I dont suppose. Todays BC's have more focused placed on how they look, rather than what their original purpose was, and they have ended up looking very 'samey' IMO.
> 
> I have no doubt the KC would class the top two collies as working sheepdogs and not Border Collies.


to me those dogs both look like working sheepdog & actually the bottom pic is of working sheepdog lol, it has kinloch sheepdogs in the bottom right hand corner

but evenso if they were both kc registered Border collies than thats what the KC would class them as, they might not get anywhere in the ring but then a lot of pure bred pedigree dogs dont fit the breed standard Leanne

in the show ring in this country my breed has perhaps the widest variation of type of any breed you'll see, but they should all still clearly look like a Siberian husky having the attributes that make them a husky.

.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

WarDoll said:


> From what I know, selective breeding can eliminate or at least reduce breed specific health defaults. I guess it's easier said than done though as breeders aren't one exclusive organisation.
> 
> To answer your questionnon *physical appearance nattering (or not), to me it doesn't matter, at least not compared to my priority to great health in a dog*. The thread was started to highlight and discuss differences from years ago to know in pure breeds and the differences in both looks and health (both good and bad). Not that "looks" matter, it's just a discussion.
> 
> ...


Out of interest is Dexter from health tested parents? Or do you think that health testing should be applied when people are breeding pedigree dogs only?


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Dogless said:


> Out of interest is Dexter from health tested parents? Or do you think that health testing should be applied when people are breeding pedigree dogs only?


Hope you don't mind me jumping in as this is something I do feel strongly about. All dogs should be tested wherever possible. "Pedigree" is a label and a name in a registry only. Any dog deserves the best chance as possible for a healthy life.

As pictures show a thousand words, the video below isn't of a pedigree dog but simply an "unrecognized" breed (american bulldog). The issue shown could have been avoided with a health test and is actually used to push the need for health tests in general.

[youtube_browser]mS1iHh1XbKE[/youtube_browser]


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Goblin said:


> Hope you don't mind me jumping in as this is something I do feel strongly about. *All dogs should be tested wherever possible*. "Pedigree" is a label and a name in a registry only. *Any dog deserves the best chance as possible for a healthy life*.
> 
> As pictures show a thousand words, the video below isn't of a pedigree dog but simply an "unrecognized" breed. The issue shown could have been avoided with a health test and is actually used to push the need for health tests in general.
> 
> [youtube_browser]mS1iHh1XbKE[/youtube_browser]


Absolutely agree with you. The reason that I phrased it as I did is that I am frequently asked if Kilo is 'pedigree' and when I answer in the affirmative I am then asked what health problems Kilo has. There appears to be a common misconception that only KC registered dogs are susceptible to problems and others are exempt around here.

ETA 'here' being where I live as opposed to PF!


----------



## Thorne (May 11, 2009)

comfortcreature said:


> How can you say "they did in fact ALL look very 'samey'" from selected pictures of a few dogs?
> 
> Here are the other types - again with a select few photos of each. They all came in numerous colors as well, but black is the predominant one.
> 
> ...


As I wrote in response to Bijou's original picture post, I wouldn't be remotely surprised to see BCs of any of these types today! That's what I love about Border Collies, the sheer variety within the breed. They're no more or less diverse these days unless you focus on a single strain.
Our old Collie was very much of the Nap type you've pictured, remains my favourite "look".


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> [/COLOR]
> 
> to me those dogs both look like working sheepdog & actually the bottom pic is of working sheepdog lol, it has kinloch sheepdogs in the bottom right hand corner
> 
> ...


I'm going to bow out of this thread after I have posted this.

I know those dogs are working sheepdogs, I was interested to see if other people would class them as working sheepdogs or border collies. I know what I posted pictures of!

My point is that the KC, unless a collie is registered with them, will class other BC's as working sheepdogs. I also know that dogs like the ones I posted pictures of, wont win in the show ring because they dont fit the standard, KC registered or not, but that is precisely the point i'm trying to make! At the end of the day, they are all border collies but they have to look a certain way if they want a chance at winning, hence why the show type look the way they do, with the domed head and the classic markings.

To me, that shouldnt be what the BC is about, it's not what the breed was intended to be about, but I guess we could argue that applies to very many breeds.

To summarise, before a breed standard was set, it didnt matter what the dog looked like, so we had lots of diversity with collies. I know we still do, but if the judges, KC and show breeders had their way, they would all look the same - domed heads, shorter legs, glossier coat, flashy ruff etc. I would hate to see all border collies go that way.

Anyway, thats me done because i'm getting tired of trying to make my point of why I posted those pictures and it's being missed.


----------



## Shrap (Nov 22, 2010)

Leanne77 said:


> I'm going to bow out of this thread after I have posted this.
> 
> I know those dogs are working sheepdogs, I was interested to see if other people would class them as working sheepdogs or border collies. I know what I posted pictures of!
> 
> ...


The only point you've made is that you don't like the look of show BCs.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

The point I gleaned - about Border Collies at least - very much matches what can be found on the site that provided those wonderful old photos of the 'types' - regarding 'judging'.

http://www.bonnidune.com/info.html

Judging

_"When evaluating Border Collies in the show ring against a breed standard, the qualities that make the Border Collie the premiere sheep herding dog should be considered of primary importance. Border Collies' working style is different and unique from other herding breeds. Specifically, Border Collies use "eye" to control the stock. All Border Collies have some degree of eye, the amount depending on what lines they come from. When using their eye to move stock, Border Collies lower at least their heads, and often the entire front portion of their bodies, into a creeping or crouching position. Border Collies have the ability to drop to the ground instantaneously, which is called "clapping." Additionally, the amazing stopping, turning and general agility of the breed is unsurpassed.

*It is only after the dog can meet the physical standards required for its job should other, non-functional traits be considered.* But, some things that may be thought of as "cosmetic" actually have a working purpose. Pigmentation is one example - a well-pigmented dog is less likely to suffer sunburn. Even the white tip on the end of a tail carried in an upward swirl has a purpose. It is known as the "shepherd's lantern" because many times the tip of a tail would be all that would lead the shepherd home in the dark after a long day's work.

Border Collies historically have four distinct types. None of the types is preferred over the others. This can be confusing to those who are unfamiliar with the development of the breed. It is the judge's job to pick the best representative, regardless of its particular type, in the ring that day. *A final lineup that includes a variety of type does not mean that the judge doesn't know what he or she is doing. Instead, it reflects judging that respects the range of variety acceptable in this breed. *Only if two dogs are of equal quality should a judge then choose based upon any personal preference of type.

Herding instinct and ability cannot be assessed in the conformation ring, but the physical qualities that allow the dog to work can be. For instance, only a dog with a well-angulated, sound front will be able to crouch in true Border Collie fashion. This posture also requires the scapula to be further apart when the dog is standing than many other breeds. Because of the need for agile, fast turns, the Border Collie's length of body should be primarily in the ribcage, not in a long loin, which might be susceptible to injury. Border Collies should move out on a loose lead, with their head carried low. Correct movement covers ground efficiently, with good reach and drive, and minimum lift of feet. Finally, Border Collies must have moderate bone - light enough for speed, but substantial enough for stamina." _​
IMO this judge says it well.

I knew they had held out from AKC recognition until the mid 90s but I also found it interesting to learn that they weren't recognized by the KC until 1976.

CC


----------



## Leanne77 (Oct 18, 2011)

^^^ Very interesting reading.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Leanne77 said:


> I know those dogs are working sheepdogs, I was interested to see if other people would class them as working sheepdogs or border collies. I know what I posted pictures of!


:lol: Well, as you didn't even know you were posting a picture of a sheltie in your first post (and were even bemoaning the fact that show border collies didn't look like it  ), you will have to forgive people for assuming you don't really know what the dogs are in the pictures you post. 



Leanne77 said:


> My point is that the KC, unless a collie is registered with them, will class other BC's as working sheepdogs.


Erm - and your problem with this is? The KC will not recognise ANY dog as belonging to ANY breed if it is not registered with them. It is no use Mr X bleating that he has a pedigree rottie (or lab or malamute or springer spaniel - pick a breed, any breed) - if the sire and dam aren't registered with the KC. Unless the sire and dam of any breed are registered with the KC, the offspring cannot be registered and will not be recognised by the KC as a pedigree. Why do you want the border collie breed to be treated differently? Joe Bloggs will still call a non-registered border collie a border collie, just as he will call a non-registered rottie a rottie.

Perhaps you don't know that all the border collies registered with the KC in 1964 (and from which all present-day registered border collies are descended) were originally working sheepdogs registered in the ISDS stud book? In other words, the present day border collie is the oriiginal border collie. All the rest are working sheepdogs. Live with it.



Leanne77 said:


> I also know that dogs like the ones I posted pictures of, wont win in the show ring because they dont fit the standard, KC registered or not, but that is precisely the point i'm trying to make! At the end of the day, they are all border collies but they have to look a certain way if they want a chance at winning, hence why the show type look the way they do, with the domed head and the classic markings.


And here you show your ignorance of the subject. Border collies in the show ring come in all shapes and sizes and degrees of coat length and colours - look at the picture you posted as opposed to the picture of my girl. I presume the pic you posted was of a winning border collie. (who is it btw? Did yoiu just c&p it from the inernet?) My girl was the winner of the minor puppy of the year, was at Crufts this year, and has been placed at every show she has been at this year. My Quinny is a blue - not a black - and he has his stud number and has qualified for Crufts for life. All this sort of proves you wrong, doesn't it?

Here those pics are again:



















How can you possibly argue that these two border collies look the same? Not the difference in the head, the body shape, the length of the coat, and the length of the legs. In addition, Xia doesn't exactly have classic markings - she has a white line on her face instead of the keyhole shape and she has one almost totally black leg (both of which you can clearly see in the pic) and her white ruff doesn't go all the way round her neck (which you can't see in the pic). None of this has prevented her winning at champ shows, though!

As for head shape, there are two distinct head shapes in the show ring. As well as the head shape you mention, there is a flatter, less domed head shape with a slightly longer snout - much closer to the pic of the working sheep dog you posted. You can see this clearly in the two pics above, but below is another example of the two from my own dogs:

Quinny (who has the flatter head)









and Neo (who has the type of head you speak of)









Also note Quinny's less dense coat, and the fact that he is blue, not black (although his colouring doesn't come across very well in this pic). Both pics were taken at a championship show, both dogs were placed in their class. Again, sort of proves you wrong, doesn't it?



Leanne77 said:


> Anyway, thats me done because i'm getting tired of trying to make my point of why I posted those pictures and it's being missed.


Your point isn't being missed. People are just trying to let you know the actual facts.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

actually i was thinking about this and thought how will the people whose dogs people have posted from online as bad examples of where the breed have gone feel if they were to find this?

i thinking not good!!


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

emmaviolet said:


> actually i was thinking about this and thought how will the people whose dogs people have posted from online as bad examples of where the breed have gone feel if they were to find this?
> 
> i thinking not good!!


There have been instances on the past where people have not been members and have objected to pictures of their dogs being c&p and put on here - even (from memory) in an instance where a dog had been held up as a good example of the breed.

That's why I use pics of my own to illustrate my points wherever I can. Plus, I think if you are able to use your own pics then it shows you at least have some sort of working knowledge of the breed/subject you are talkling about


----------



## Guest (May 26, 2012)

Mysterious said:


> There are a number of types of aggression. The most common forms are dominant and territorial aggression.


Source?

Id bet an important body part that the most common form of aggression is fear aggression.

APBTs were far less human aggressive when they were a strictly fighting breed because any dog that showed any objection to handling under the most stressful of conditions was culled. Now that they are bred willy-nilly by any Tom Dick or Harry, such measures arent being taken and HA APBTs are creeping in to the gene pool.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

ouesi said:


> Source?
> 
> Id bet an important body part that the most common form of aggression is fear aggression.


Have to go along with this. All the DA dogs that I know of are aggressive based on fear.



emmaviolet said:


> actually i was thinking about this and thought how will the people whose dogs people have posted from online as bad examples of where the breed have gone feel if they were to find this?


Surely if you are putting your dog out as an example you cannot complain if it's actually used as an example simply because it may be negative. I know the copyright issue is frequently pushed now in an attempt to frighten even if legally not applicable. The issue cannot now be hidden simply by hiding.


----------



## Guest (May 26, 2012)

Dogless said:


> Out of interest is Dexter from health tested parents? Or do you think that health testing should be applied when people are breeding pedigree dogs only?


:confused1:.

Dexters parents were not health tested as far as I'm aware, no and I do not recommend buying a dog that isnt from health tested parents. This is opening a whole can of worms, one I hoped I'd closed a while ago Dogless. I made a mistake when I bought Dexter and this may be a huge surprise to you (seen as though you've singled me out) but there are a lot of people who have made the same mistake on this forum, especially when buying their first dog.

I for one am glad I have learnt about health testing, ethical breeding etc and I'd wished that I had done so long before I bought Dexter.

I'm wondering what your quoted post intensions are? Are you wanting to start a debate with me or are you wanting to point out that I am in some way a hypocrite for not buying from health tested parents. If so the latter, hypocritical it may seem but via self educating on the subject of ethical breeding I now would only buy pups from health tested litters. It's not as if I am saying "I only care about the health in a dog" and after saying that, buy a pup from a BYB, then I'd be a very good example of a hypocrite.

Do you think that I would be that much of an eejit that I would think only pure breeds should be health tested? Of course not.

I live and learn on this forum, I cannot even say that I prioritise a pups health over appearance without dodgy remarks. I'm ending this debate as quick as it started and hope I've answered your question fully.


----------



## Guest (May 26, 2012)

emmaviolet said:


> actually i was thinking about this and thought how will the people whose dogs people have posted from online as bad examples of where the breed have gone feel if they were to find this?
> 
> i thinking not good!!


*Stands forward* I have only posted pictures I obtained from google which have been added to the public domain.

Public domain - 
* The state of belonging or being available to the public as a whole.
* Not subject to copyright.
:thumbup:

I wouldn't take someone's pictures from Facebook, for example as that's cheeky. I don't know where other pictures, added by other members have come from and quite frankly I don't care.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

WarDoll said:


> *Stands forward* I have only posted pictures I obtained from google which have been added to the public domain.
> 
> Public domain -
> * The state of belonging or being available to the public as a whole.
> ...


That's a myth.

A photo is only in the public domain if the owner has specifically stated that it is in the public domain. I can't c &p the details because this sie only allows links, but scrawl down to the public domain section and you will see the true facts.
UK Copyright Law: The Myths and the Facts. Free copyright notice.


----------



## Guest (May 26, 2012)

Spellweaver said:


> That's a myth.
> 
> A photo is only in the public domain if the owner has specifically stated that it is in the public domain. I can't c &p the details because this sie only allows links, but scrawl down to the public domain section and you will see the true facts.
> UK Copyright Law: The Myths and the Facts. Free copyright notice.


I see. I thought I could share images from google onto a public forum so long as I don't edit them etc.  I also thought if I were to put my own photo onto a public website I am allowing people to do what they will with it.


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

Luckily my two main breeds have been Staffs and Malamutes both who have not changed at all apart from idiots breeding Staffs willy nilly and making them all leggy and not the short stocky guys they are supposed to be.  Neither breed has problems with breathing and the coat of the Mal is just what it has always been, originating in Alaska that's how they naturally are.

I can't abide what's been done to some breeds though and that's why I like PDE for showing the gen pub just how much some breeds are suffering due to changing standards. Doesn't matter who's fault it is what matters is trying to put it right - at last!


----------



## Guest (May 27, 2012)

Malmum said:


> Luckily my two main breeds have been Staffs and Malamutes both who have not changed at all apart from *idiots breeding Staffs willy nilly and making them all leggy and not the short stocky guys they are supposed to be*.  Neither breed has problems with breathing and the coat of the Mal is just what it has always been, originating in Alaska that's how they naturally are.
> 
> I can't abide what's been done to some breeds though and that's why I like PDE for showing the gen pub just how much some breeds are suffering due to changing standards. Doesn't matter who's fault it is what matters is trying to put it right - at last!


I always think a long legged Staff is a cross and the owners say they have papers . I love the little stocky short legged staffs that havevthe waddle walk.


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

WarDoll said:


> I see. I thought I could share images from google onto a public forum so long as I don't edit them etc.  I also thought if I were to put my own photo onto a public website I am allowing people to do what they will with it.


Not according to the site I gave you a link to. If someone puts something on the internet it does not automatically mean people can do anything with it - even c&p it. For that to happen it has to be in the public domain, and unless the owner has specifically stated that they are putting the photos, words or whatever into the public domain, then they are not in the public domain. Just being on the internet does not place them in the public domain.

As for editing them - using them as examples of whatever would probably be construed as some form of editing. You are, after all, attributing text to the photos that the owner of the photo didn't intend to be attributed to it.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Use of some images could potentially come under fair use for criticism if you want to be pedantic. 

However by the same token according to copyright law, you could be done everytime you quote someone within this forum for breaking the original owners copyright even if used within the same thread.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

WarDoll said:


> :confused1:.
> 
> Dexters parents were not health tested as far as I'm aware, no and I do not recommend buying a dog that isnt from health tested parents. This is opening a whole can of worms, one I hoped I'd closed a while ago Dogless. I made a mistake when I bought Dexter and this may be a huge surprise to you (seen as though you've singled me out) but there are a lot of people who have made the same mistake on this forum, especially when buying their first dog.
> 
> ...


I'm not trying to pick on you in any way at all - was simply asking a question based upon a statement that I'd bolded in your quote. I wasn't aware that I'd made any 'dodgy remarks'.

Responding to a statement that you had made is simply debating and being interested in your views; you singled yourself out as you were the one who wrote the post. Not sure where you made the jump to me calling you a hypocrite or an eejit - I have no idea about how you obtained Dexter (or have forgotten if I did know!). I was just interested in your opinion, but as I've said before, I often don't ask for it as you seem to take it as a personal slight every time and I always feel as if I have caused offense.

Thanks for your answer - genuinely.


----------



## BullyMolly (Sep 26, 2011)

As an EBT owner, I do agree that they looked better before. They looked more refined IMO. However, I haven't found the head shape to give any problems to breathing. But they way the eyes are set does give a small issue. They have blind spots so would class that as a downfall. 
I was very shoked at the amount of breeds that were introduced to the EBT to get todays look, for instance the BC was mixed in for stamina along with GH and would never have guessed that the Manchester Terrier was also mixed in!


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Goblin said:


> Use of some images could potentially come under fair use for criticism if you want to be pedantic.


Pointing out the law is not being pedantic - and if it were, you are the one who brought up copyright law in the first place. 

To copy a picture and have it be classed as fair use you would have to have the owner's permission and credit them as the owner. If you are using the picture to illustrate your own point, then legally the owner could argue that you were using their work to enhance your own. That sort of use does not come under fair use.
UK Copyright Law: The Myths and the Facts. Free copyright notice.

Armchair critics on this forum may think that reading an article here and there or watching the odd TV program gives them full knowledge about a subject. They may think that they don't need practical knowledge or experience of a subject to know and wax lyrical on it. If it's their own original work then all they do is make themselves and their lack of true knowledge and experience a laughing stock. However, they have no right in law to steal peoples' photos to make their derogatory and often untrue comments or to illustrate their often erroneous points.


----------



## Guest (May 27, 2012)

Spellweaver said:


> Pointing out the law is not being pedantic - and if it were, you are the one who brought up copyright law in the first place.
> 
> To copy a picture and have it be classed as fair use you would have to have the owner's permission and credit them as the owner. If you are using the picture to illustrate your own point, then legally the owner could argue that you were using their work to enhance your own. That sort of use does not come under fair use.
> UK Copyright Law: The Myths and the Facts. Free copyright notice.
> ...


Im trying to find something to reply but I can't, I'm really not in any way interested in the specifics although I'm glad you corrected me.



BullyMolly said:


> As an EBT owner, I do agree that they looked better before. They looked more refined IMO. However, I haven't found the head shape to give any problems to breathing. But they way the eyes are set does give a small issue. They have blind spots so would class that as a downfall.
> I was very shoked at the amount of breeds that were introduced to the EBT to get todays look, for instance the BC was mixed in for stamina along with GH and would never have guessed that the Manchester Terrier was also mixed in!


I never thought they had breathing problems but I did think their eyesight might be restricted due to the sizing and placement. Im going to have a search on EBTA to see which breeds added to the bold looks. 



Dogless said:


> I'm not trying to pick on you in any way at all - was simply asking a question based upon a statement that I'd bolded in your quote. I wasn't aware that I'd made any 'dodgy remarks'.
> 
> Responding to a statement that you had made is simply debating and being interested in your views; you singled yourself out as you were the one who wrote the post. Not sure where you made the jump to me calling you a hypocrite or an eejit - I have no idea about how you obtained Dexter (or have forgotten if I did know!). I was just interested in your opinion, but as I've said before, I often don't ask for it as you seem to take it as a personal slight every time and I always feel as if I have caused offense.
> 
> Thanks for your answer - genuinely.


Of course you can ask me my opinion on any subject and I'd happily give it. I'm just curious to know if you'd ask every cross breed owner the same question if they have said they prioritise health over appearance. I doubt it, I really, very much do. I take a post for what it is and it seemed to me that you were questioning my integrity as Dexter wasn't from health tested parents, I may be wrong but I'll take it as I do. I never said you did say I was a hypocrite, I was pointing out that the intensions of your post *could* have been to say so.

I also don't see how stating I prioritise health over appearance is singling myself out to be subjected to personal questions like that. You say that you genuinely didn't know the history of Dexters breeding so maybe you were just genuinely interested but I answered how I took it.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Spellweaver said:


> Pointing out the law is not being pedantic - and if it were, you are the one who brought up copyright law in the first place.


Actually use of pictures was brought up by someone else. Fair use does not necessarily mean adding any additional information and it would be up to courts to decide if ever it was taken that far. It's admittingly a risky defence. The link you provided was interesting but if you look around there are often various interpretation of law.

Regardless of the ins and outs legally it would go to show unfortunately that if things were taken to court that the people knew the problems and couldn't justify their position. It's already been seen in various locations the show fraternity aren't above stating they own copyright simply because their dogs are in a photo, even if they don't own the picture.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

WarDoll said:


> I always think a long legged Staff is a cross and the owners say they have papers . I love the little stocky short legged staffs that havevthe waddle walk.


But surely this same trait is seen in bulldogs, which has been criticised as a conformational deformity? How short is too short & where do people draw the line?
Personally, I prefer a more natural gait


----------



## Guest (May 27, 2012)

simplysardonic said:


> But surely this same trait is seen in bulldogs, which has been criticised as a conformational deformity? How short is too short & where do people draw the line?
> Personally, I prefer a more natural gait


I'm taking about SBTs not bulldogs. Again, personally I think they look more staff with shorter legs than the long legged ones. They are after all meant to be of medium size but the long legged ones look more large. Personal preference, that is all.


----------



## BullyMolly (Sep 26, 2011)

You may be shocked at some of them, as I was  
I would never have though that a Foxhound was part of the mix


----------



## 2Hounds (Jun 24, 2009)

British Pathe has some interesting old dog clips.

Crufts BIS Primley Sceptre 1928








 Crufts 2012 Fionn Clann Paramount At Sober









Not much difference i think in these pics, hard to say if show is any better or worse but i personally didn't like the look of this years crufts BOB greyhound when i saw it on TV.
Fearless Footsteps 1847








Hattie my ex-racer


----------



## Thorne (May 11, 2009)

WarDoll said:


> :confused1:.
> 
> Dexters parents were not health tested as far as I'm aware, no and I do not recommend buying a dog that isnt from health tested parents. This is opening a whole can of worms, one I hoped I'd closed a while ago Dogless. I made a mistake when I bought Dexter and this may be a huge surprise to you (seen as though you've singled me out) but there are a lot of people who have made the same mistake on this forum, especially when buying their first dog.
> 
> I for one am glad I have learnt about health testing, ethical breeding etc and I'd wished that I had done so long before I bought Dexter.


I think that unless people are members of forums such as this where information about the importance of health testing is so freely available, or has done a lot of research (which obviously I would advocate to anyone getting a dog!) then they may simply not be aware that dogs should be health tested before breeding, or not know which breeds should have which tests.

Scooter is from untested stock. When my mum bought him nearly 10yrs ago there was less public knowledge about health testing and because she'd grown up with Labs and knew that the breed was suitable all that was researched was a breeder! No health tests were mentioned at any point by my parents (who've never owned dogs from tested dogs before) nor by the breeder, I didn't hear about testing for several years after he came to live with us.
Whether or not the breeder knew about testing or not I don't know, they were breeding for working ability and temperament as priorities. More research should have been done on our part but at the end of the day it wasn't; we live and learn and are otherwise responsible dog owners.

Any future dogs I own, except rescues, will be from health tested stock as I wouldn't want to gamble on their health for the sake of finding a cheaper pup with less time spent researching. 
Breeze is from tested stock but she would've come to live with us regardless.


----------



## emmaviolet (Oct 24, 2011)

Goblin said:


> Actually use of pictures was brought up by someone else. Fair use does not necessarily mean adding any additional information and it would be up to courts to decide if ever it was taken that far. It's admittingly a risky defence. The link you provided was interesting but if you look around there are often various interpretation of law.
> 
> Regardless of the ins and outs legally it would go to show unfortunately that if things were taken to court that the people knew the problems and couldn't justify their position. It's already been seen in various locations the show fraternity aren't above stating they own copyright simply because their dogs are in a photo, even if they don't own the picture.


it was me who mentioned the pics.

what i thought was of the owners of these dogs that people add as a bad rep of a breed, some of them are not show dogs either so not asking for judgement and when people say they are ugly i think we forget that they have owners who love them and would be hurt if they knew people were taking the mickey.

i know personally if someone held my dog up as a terrible example (look what they have done to the breed) and people were saying horrid things i may not be happy about it and if people were taking the mick, even less happy.

maybe its worth thinking about, how would i feel if it were mine?


----------



## Spellweaver (Jul 17, 2009)

Goblin said:


> Actually use of pictures was brought up by someone else.


Actually I never said it wasn't. What I said was you were the first to speak about copyright. The person who originally spoke about the use of pictures never mentioned copyright.



Goblin said:


> It's already been seen in various locations the show fraternity aren't above stating they own copyright simply because their dogs are in a photo, even if they don't own the picture.


:lol: :lol: :lol: Oh shock horror! Some people in the show fraternity don't understand copyright law! My goodness me, how dreadful! Contact JH; make a documentary about it; shoot them immediately! Of course, everyone *not* in the show fraternity knows about copyright law, don't they? Oh, wait a sec - this thread has shown that some people not in the show fraternity don't know about it either. Well, how about that? Looks like you'll have to shoot everyone. :lol: :lol: :lol:

I await with bated breath to find what dire thing you are going to accuse the show fraternity of next. Actually, if I'm honest, I don't do anything of the sort. I'm off out to enjoy the sunshine and play with my dogs - far more interesting.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

WarDoll said:


> Of course you can ask me my opinion on any subject and I'd happily give it. I'm just curious to know if you'd ask every cross breed owner the same question if they have said they prioritise health over appearance Yes I would if they made that statement. Plus owners of purebred dogs too. I doubt it, I really, very much do Why?  Sounds as if you are questioning my integrity too which is something that I know you object to . I take a post for what it is and it seemed to me that you were questioning my integrity as Dexter wasn't from health tested parents Nope, I may be wrong but I'll take it as I do. I never said you did say I was a hypocrite, I was pointing out that the intensions of your post *could* have been to say so .
> 
> I also don't see how stating I prioritise health over appearance is singling myself out to be subjected to personal questions like that. You say that you genuinely didn't know the history of Dexters breeding so maybe you were just genuinely interested but I answered how I took it. Because you made a statement expressing your _personal_ views *physical appearance nattering (or not), to me it doesn't matter, at least not compared to my priority to great health in a dog*


. If I had made the same statement I wouldn't object to being asked the same as I asked you.Why assume a hidden agenda?


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Spellweaver said:


> :lol: :lol: :lol: Oh shock horror! Some people in the show fraternity don't understand copyright law!


That's not the issue. I'm not a lawyer although I know from current personal experience how nothing is ever cut and dry when it comes to interpretation of law (nothing to do with copyright or dogs). Likely to lose in this court, win in this one, year later still not actually decided if it will go to court. What is disappointing is the use of threats to limit free speech and criticism as this is what it comes down to.

Although I can imagine people don't like pictures of their dogs being shown in a negative light based on looks, it's opinion only. I don't like what some people say either. Doesn't matter what they think, I'll love and cherish my dogs regardless.


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

emmaviolet said:


> it was me who mentioned the pics.
> 
> ...the owners of these dogs [whose pix] people [use] as a bad [representative] of a breed,
> some... are not show dogs... so [the owner is] not asking for [judgemental opinions of their dogs]
> ...


are we supposed to get the permission of the owner to discuss any dog's visible physical appearance?!

 Let's face it, unless we're going to praise their dog to the skies, if it was the OWNER's choice, 
we'd never be allowed to say "boo" about anyone's dog.

The photos of the blind, deaf, & badly-constructed DOUBLE-MERLE sire of the WKC / NYC Rough-Collie 
2012 BoB is a radioactively-glowing example of bad breeding, & precisely the sort of dogs we'd never 
be allowed to say one *word* of criticism about, if the breeders of that MATADOR *blind, deaf, 
& badly-made dog* had their preferences.

Do U really think they'd let the dog-breeding & dog-buying & dog-showing confraternities, explain 
to the general-public just WHY their dog is so appalling, & why the very idea of deliberately producing 
a double-merle is horrific? - _Let alone deliberately selling him as a 'desirable' stud to other 
Rough-Collie breeders, which goes beyond appalling into grotesque, IMO._ :mad5: :incazzato:


----------



## leashedForLife (Nov 1, 2009)

Goblin said:


> Although I can imagine people don't like pictures of their dogs being shown in a negative light based on looks,
> it's opinion only. I don't like what some people say either. Doesn't matter what they think, I'll love & cherish
> my dogs, regardless.


yup - it's opinion; but IME, a dog with serious structural faults that impact their day-to-day lives badly, 
such as an inability to run if the temps are over 60-F due to overheating & an intolerance of exercise 
due to an INABILITY TO BREATHE adequately, is also a fact - not an opinion.

the "look" is appealing or unappealing; the "impact" is factual: wrinkle dermatitis, rotting teeth, 
corkscrew tails & deformed spines, cherry-eye or ENtropion / ECtropion & visual pain, etc, 
those are facts - they exist in the dog, or they don't, & the physical traits which give rise to them 
are heritable.


----------

