DS: Breeds whose function has vanished or changed?

Question

OK, so I'm a strong proponent of maintaining working instinct and ability in purebred dogs, in my breed (Belgian Malinois) there are still things to be herded, so I can test and prove my dog's ability to do that. But my breed also has a new job (personal protection/military/police). My breed was originally chosen for this job because they had what it took, so pursuit of that function does not seem antithetical to preservation of the original function.

My question more regards breeds whose original function has vanished: Otterhounds now that otter hunting is outlawed, Lundehunds now that puffin nests are protected, etc. What should a breeder do to "protect, improve, and preserve" these breeds? They can't test otter and puffin hunting abilities nor produce "working dogs" to perform their original task without breaking the law. Should breeders:
1) develop an artificial trial and produce dogs able to perform their original function even though that function no longer exists
2) find an analogous function that uses many of the same traits (i.e. protection sports or agility for a herding breed)
3) refocus breeding towards an entirely different function, perhaps even creating a dog that can't perform it's original function but has a function today (i.e. Labrador Retrievers being bred as service dogs, but in the process losing much of their hunting type and instinct)
4) allow the breed to die out.

Thoughts?

Answer 1

If I had to choose between numbers 1-4, I'd go with a combo of number one and two if the money were there. At least number two, which is what many do with their herding breeds nowadays.



If the breed truly had no purpose, I would reconsider my choice in breed. I would likely save the dogs genes just in case someone ever wanted that breeds characteristics again, but at the point of not being able to prove abilities there isn't much to keep going with. A lot of what I'd do would depend on what other members involved with the breed choose to do.

Answer 2

I don't think there is a clear, definitive answer here.



And I also have some migivings about your definition of "analagous functions". A herding breed is supposed to be non-aggressive towards humans (so the humans can direct them) so I don't think that re-purposing a herding breed for protection work is necessarily "analagous", but rather a redirection and selection for one of the breed tendencies above others. You don't see those Border Collie protection dogs, do you? ;) A GSD or a Malinois either never was purely a herding dog or hasn't been a pure herding dog for quite some time as they have been rather successfully used as protection dogs. I wouldn't call that an "analagous function", I'd call that prioritizing one function above others in a more general purpose breed.



What most commonly occurs is your first proposition (artificial environment to demonstrate breed job). You see this with field trials, agility, etc. But with many of the hunting breeds, actual hunting still goes on. It's quite common for pet owners to buy a bird dog from a show breeder and expect it to hunt and use it to do so--the buyers go to the show breeders simply because they do better health testing and produce better conformation. The dogs are still capable of the breed job (if you pick the right breeders) but are less likely to suffer preventable health issues that will sideline them as young dogs (hip or elbow dysplasia, etc. ) or make them totally unsuitable for the breed job (like deafness, blindness, etc.).



I think that there is actually a lot of blending between your options 2 and 3 (analgous function or repurposing). And your own example shows it. Labs make good service dogs because of their affinity for humans, and their proper conformation would actually make them more effective service dogs for longer periods of time. A dog in poor health is not worth the investment in training as a service dog if he can only do the work for a few short years, right? Why should conformation be sacrificed simply because you are repurposing or prioritizing his desire to work with humans and his generally aggreeable nature with people and animals? And service dogs do a fair bit of retrieving, though it's generally not dead water fowl. Maybe he wouldn't be the world's best retriever in the field, but why would it follow that he'd be blind and dysplasic?



Can't think of very many examples where you'd need or want a breed to die out (and God forbid I name them as that will be too much invitation to malicious reporting). Can you? It would have to be breeds so unhealthy or so aggressive that there's no way to use them.

Answer 3

many breeds are used for their original intent or similar where they are from, also if you look at old breeds...many breeds while mostly over time was used only for one thing or two, originally were used for several purposes



its not abnormal too see in old descriptions that its a hunter/shepererder, but was also used as a farm dog and/or guard dog, and many hunting dogs were used for a variety of prey as well...which means in most cases there is a practical type of work avaliable within the breeds original intent, its just not always the one who over time become the most predominant one



Take the Grand Danois, it was used as a war dog, but also as a cattle dog and for hunting big game.The Afhgan hound was used mainly as a guard and house dog, but was also used for hunting, and sometimes herding.Rottweiler was a herding dog, but at the same time it was too protect the livestock and the herders while on the road, too then adapt it too a military and police dog is not far fetched, but lays within its original usage.



The fact is a lot of the old breeds which the newer breeds are created from, had multiple functions, and there are just as much use for those skills today, the world never stagnated, what should happen is too keep using the breed in work tasks where you utilize their natural skills breed into them. Because it just changed where and how we need them, and its far simpler containing them by keeping using them, then having too try and repeat work that has taken very long time too get the dogs needed. And in most cases its perfectly posible too keep using them for their original intent, herding dogs are still being used for herding, hunting dogs for hunting, sled dogs for mushing and so on...because even with all the technology we have, we have not managed too replace the value of animals in our society.



And in many cases new tasks are being solved by taking old traits and use them on new areas, which demand the same type of traits really. Look at drug dogs, what are they if you break it down really doing? they are hunting, and labradors are a popular breed for that. Search and rescue dogs...hunting and retrieving by geting the owner and leading it back too the person needing help.



Its the same reason its imporant too preserve old genetics of different spicies, because even if it today may not be the most apt producer of say food, new diseases, changed enviroment, temperature and so on and forth, may in the future make it more capable then those most capable today. As such preservation is important, but in lieu of tradition, where the skill/trait set fits, there is no reason there cant be a multi usage of the dogs.

Answer 4

Malinois more so than GSDs were to be herding dogs, but as soon as man figured out dogs could be used with success in police work they were both conditioned to that work. Sheep herding exists, but much like hunting, it's an unnecessary hobby. But, much like hunting, it does have a strong, albeit small following and will have one for the foreseeable future. Somebody mentioned nothing the Pitbull was bred for is still legal...hunting is still legal...and even though I don't think they were ever intended to be any sort of hunting partner, they can do it well and it incorporates everything they were originally bred to do. Toughness, a competitive drive to fight, and a high tolerance of pain. I think every breed has a job it CAN do although it may not have originally been bred to do the work.



To be blunt...man no longer NEEDS dogs...at one point in time we literally, had a higher likelihood of survival if we owned hunting dogs. Now, we don't. At one point in time we were limited to the livestock we could contain and move without a dog. Now, we do not. Now it's all about want, we want to be hunters, we want to be "old school" and herd sheep with a dog, we want a pet, we want a show dog, we want to title a dog in sport, we want a police dog. Since it's want vs need we're seeing the decline of some breeds in respect of their originally intended purpose because either A: Their purpose is now illegal. B: Their purpose is obsolete. And C: Because most people nowadays don't want a dog for a purpose, they just want a dog. And where there is demand, there is a bum with an open palm ready to give you whatever it is you think you want in exchange for money.



As far as the solutions for these breeds where their working heritage in the "new world" is in question. I think all 4 are happening, right now, to one breed or another, in many different breeds. Some of the "rare" breeds with defunct jobs are on their way out, for good. Some are being bred for traits and drives they didn't originally have like these new "sprint race" sled dogs. Some are finding functionality in jobs they weren't intended for ie Malinois in protection (I believe the GSD was created with police work in mind, I believe it was an after thought for the Malinois who actually functions just as good for that purpose). And there are numerous artificial trials for many breeds...Schutzhund, Ringsports, Earth Dog, HGH.



It was mentioned that trials and breeders play no profound role in dogs...really? They are what help people see which dogs have what they want, and which don't, in a controlled setting. They are a place where breeders can go and watch, and learn the behaviors of not only their breed, but dogs in general. They'll learn what's good, what's not, what's acceptable in terms of faults and the degrees of faults in the real world, and what isn't. They're also giving access to contact with people who have similar breeding goals. Trials, shows, and breeders are the only reason we have modern breeds with specific purposes. Before, we had dogs who can't even be called mutts because they weren't mixed breeds, there were no breeds, they were simply dogs. Some were good at hunting, naturally, some were good at being guard dogs, naturally, some were good herders, naturally. Because of the breeder, specific breeding practices, trials, shows, competition...man has separated the traits he wants in dogs into different categories and even into different looks. Now you don't have to see which pups will be useless, which will be good hunters, and which will be a good guard dog, you have a dog who has a high probability of being useful for that task simply by choosing a breed, and a good breeder. You can even suit the breed to your style of training and situation. Small herd and softer training style? Get a BC. Large herd, harder training style, get a Malinois. Limited space? Like bird hunting? Cocker Spaniel. Do you have more space and prefer a larger dog? German Shorthaired Pointer. Have a warehouse to protect? Like a big dog with floppy ears who can get mean when he has to? Rottweiler. Erect ears, slightly softer disposition but can still do the job? Malinois, GSD...etc. Because of trials, breeders, and shows...not only do we have a dog for every purpose, we have several dogs for precise niches within that purpose, within that function. Some will continue, some won't, it depends on the people who love them, the role they play, and how good they are at it and at adapting if need be.

Answer 5

Jessie raised good points. My GSD would likely kill a sheep rather than herd it. Its hardly analogous.



As far as function changed for dogs - well, yes, the world is no longer filled with hunter gatherers. I admit whenever I read stuff here about the importance of keeping dogs true to their origin, I wonder what planet some people live on.



Example: Hunting dogs. In Ontario Canada anyway - we don`t NEED hunting dogs. We have agriculture. We have shopping malls. Yes, people still hunt - mostly for sport and for recreation. The Federation of Hunters and Anglers is one of the most powerful lobby groups in Canada - possibly NA - because people like to shoot and kill stuff. It also happens to be a huge revenue stream for the government (in the form of bag limits and fees plus lodge tourism)



But the vast majority of these people are doing it to hang out with the boyz. Many will kill and not eat the animals. A small percentage of people in Ontario hunt for actual need (ie instead of shopping at Walmart). I knew a guy that had a Yorkie that he took partridge hunting - and he ate the birds. But he didn't trial that dog - or test it. He took it out in the bush and just DID it.



The irony : people that actually need dogs to hunt for food can not afford to pay $2000 for a titled dog from some fancy breeder. Nor do they hang out in agility rings. Or play expensive games.



They get a dog from a shelter - and take it out in the bush - and if it cannot perform - they shoot it dead. If it gets lost - they leave it. This guy told me its not uncommon for dogs to be killed by wolves up north because people leave them outside in a fenced yard - the wolf just hops the fence and kills them.



So, without a mocking tone- I find this idea that trials or breeders have some profound role to play a bit arrogant. Its not breeders - its society that dictates what is and is not desired in a dog. Its the reason why breed lines have and will continue to evolve to satisfy two distinctly different purposes - one is actually a functional dog bred to work, and the other looks nice and is housebroken. Only when (and if) society revisits their values and ethics will we see a more congruent outcome. I wont hold my breath waiting.



Big picture - dogs for the most part live very different lives from their ancestors. It was not through artificial trials or breeders - it was and continues to be an evolution of humanity - and its intrinsic in everything we do. Dogs as companion animals will continue to be bred to change with us.



Examples of some change: fly into Pearson airport and what do you see: Labs and Beagles - checking your luggage. What has drugs and search for illegal contraband got to do with hunting partridge. Nothing. Except a good nose and a desire to please. No big mystery there. Could the dog flush birds - I dont know. Its an interesting idea - I suspect the answer is: maybe. Some will. Some wont. Training and conditioning count for alot.



Bulldogs and Mastiffs have long since outgrown their original function. When was the last time you were in a coliseum with a bunch of lions in need of a mastiff to protect you. We don't need dogs to kill large game - heck, most of the large game that is left is either endangered - or living on protected farms. Its the reason most giant breeds are very soft, and gentle. Who can afford to have their neighbor killed by a Mastiff.



As far as your solution to test and trial: Sports are not true tests of anything - in life, or in dogs. Its just people having fun. If people enjoy working their dogs in a sport - and they do so humanely - sure, why not. It is healthy and I`m all for it. Beyond that - to test a dogs gameness by pit fighting - well, its no better than a circus filled with dancing bears and tigers jumping through flaming hoops - and most civilized society refuses to endorse, let alone participate in these selfish acts of cruelty.



Your last point - allowing the breed to die out. Sure, I think some breeds should be extinct. The Japanese Tosa (for example) and some fighting breeds have no purpose in my world. I dont need a dog with a resume that is limited to killing dogs. And (some) farmers are now realizing coexisting with nature requires a different mindset - killing off all the predators is NOT the answer. We have come a long way baby since the frontier.



Final point: what should a breeder do. Well, its not easily answered. I guess first and foremost breed a dog that is functionally sound and healthy and stop pretending to meet some arcane standard of perfection - and if you cannot do that - revisit your program. I care less if your dog stands pretty in a ring if it drops dead at 4 with cardio.

Answer 6

I actually have a Lab I use for what it was purposely bred for..........fishing in Alaska. Well she doesnt do much but go get some spawned out salmon but that dog doesnt give a **** about ducks or geese. No, she is trying to catch herself a fish. Also if I drop something in the river I can have her go get it since the current is too strong for me to swim in and she is a great swimmer.



Anyway I go with 4...let the dogs go if they can not do what they were bred for. Just my opinion...dogs need a job.

Answer 7

PIT BULLS - nothing legal remains of what these dogs were bred for.



.............. and that's not a thought; that's a FACT ! ! !