Do you breed towards a breed standard?

[KingstonTodd]

Do you breed towards a breed standard? I know most of us are early gen breeders, so we don't really pay a lot of attention to the ALAA labradoodle breed standard. But, do you look at your labradoodles to see if they measure up in more catagories other than coat? I know a non-shedding coat and temperment are the most high profile things we talk about in Labradoodles, but there is more to a dog than that. For example:

from the ALAA:
"Body: Height (to wither) as to length (from sternum to point of buttock) should appear square and compact. Deep chest and well sprung. There should be a good tuck up. Loins should be strong and muscular."

I think this descibes Hershey's structure well


In contrast to our friends pet doodle, shallow tuck and not a deep chest.




I'd like to hear the points that you all place emphasis on in your program, for example, I know of breeders who could care less about tail carriage.

[Jac]

While I respect what the ALAA is trying to do, I cringe at the thought. It is sooooo AKC! Sure, I try to breed the most healthy, sound and beautiful dogs. I try to better the breed, but only to a certain extent.

Frankly, I hate the short ears that they think are important and I have to wonder...where DO these short ears come from? My Poodles have very long ears and my Doodles tend to have them too...and I think that there is nothing cuter...and what the heck difference would short ears make in a breed standard? I think that the little, high set ears may come from another infused breed, but I don't know...?

I hate that they think that the teapot tail is a fault...c'mon! It is adorable!

Why can't they just say, "Here is the standard for Australian Multigen dogs" and "Here is the standard for American lines"?

I know that many people love the Australian Multigens, and I agree that they are very cute and wonderful dogs...but I love my American lines...I love the early generation and I don't want to make them look like Australian Multigens.

So, the short answer is, no. I don't breed to the ALAA standard.

Longer answer is that I hope that Doodles NEVER find their way to being accepted in the AKC.

Longest answer is...for me, health and temperament is the first consdieration, then appearance...because the Doodles do have unique temperaments and I hope that they never lose that...even for high set ears and saber tails.

IF the standard is based on a health issue, I will embrace it...but not for appearance conformation. One of the things I love about Doodles is their diverse appeal.

Oh...and, breeding to standard often leads to culling. I won't even go there!

[KingstonTodd]

Some nice points Jac, thanks for your comments. I hear you on not liking everything about the ALAA standard. I like blockier "labish" heads, and that big broad head does not have high set ears, so I guess in this regard I am against theALAA ears. They dont call for short ears, just to hang to the jaw, which I think would be hard for them, given the cocker influence, especially on infusion litters. I would love a seperate standard for american lines, since without the addidtion of cocker and others they are bound to look different.

I do like the idea of having a goal of what the dog should look like apart form temperment, since we all agree that temperment is #1. This is different than writing an unrealistic standard, breeding towards it and making unhealthy choices along they way, which is so AKC. But a standard describing what the american multigen already looks like would be nice. Purebred dogs have changed so much over the last 25-50 years, I would like that to NOT happen to our doodles by so many breeders breeding what they like the look of, and we have dozens of different multigen american labradoodles going in different directions. Kind of like different ALD lines (Aside, I was in Central Park and saw an ALD and knew the breeder it came from in Indiana from the dogs "look" from accross the feild. I confirmed it with the owner who thought I was a crazy nut, but appreciated the compliments I made about their doodle).

I like the idea of a community goal but the standard just needs to be correct in describing the current dog so we dont have to change anything to follow it but it will keep the doodle in the future the same as it is today. Think about what calling them square does. It discourages breeding a standard size dog to a mini/toy to downsize because those puppies are short legged, but tend to have longer backs, which is bad, and they are definately not square or healthy.

Does anyone on "the inside" know if the ALAA working towards AKC recognition or is it just working to promote a very specific ALD.

[Lucky Me]

As a breeder for reg. dogs for years...I have my views.
First off, I don't see how I could possibly make my early generation look like an Australian.
Once you get past health & temperament (the most important things), then you work on the other stuff.
I don't mind teapot tail, doesn't knock stuff off the tables, but I do like some body, not the slight build of a poodle.
I kept Tuesday to breed because she retained a lot of Lab features. Since she would be bred to a Poodle, I wanted the chance of some Lab features to be retained.
If you look at her, she also has the strong Lab brow, another feature that gets lost with the poodle in there.
Another thing I don't want is "hare feet", it's a poodle thing. Tuesday has pretty Lab feet!
The coat & color is a whole different thing...and the most frustrating!


I have said before..... many of us here are early generation breeders.
When you read about the history of the development of purebred lines, you'll read how someone bred their line that they developed, to another line that someone else developed....and so on.
I don't see how Labradoodles will ever disappear. Many prefer the American lines over the Australian.
Us early generation breeders all have an idea in our head how we want our dogs to look. In breeding to our ideas, we are actually developing "our line".
Down the road, if there is talk of a dogs lines....there could very well be talk of Gabby Jack Ranch lines, Canadian Chocolate lines, Doodlesville lines, etc.
All the more important for us to carefully ponder each step in the development of the line.
In researching pedigrees & talking to a poodle breeder, she was quick to tell me that so and so line was heavily in-bred and this other line threw really big pups...see?
I don't want to be the line that they say "oh oh!"
There are some doodle breeders out there that I would be VERY proud to own one of their "lines".
They took careful baby steps and have developed some beautiful & very healthy dogs.
With the lines I have bred Tuesday to, the breeder has bred 5 generation of puppies from so she knows her line's weakness's & strengths.
To find a line like this & a breeder that will be honest with you on both the bad & good stuff is priceless!
This whole breeding thing is so frustrating, but also so rewarding!!

[Jac]

I absolutely agree...with both of you.

I know that Linda (who used to be a moderator on this forum) is or was on the board of directors for ALAA, if that helps.

What I found in the BBC expose' was that the dangerous alterations to certain breeds of dogs happened as a result of breed standards! If you watch that, look at the original breeds, those accepted as a breed long before they were acknowledged by a club, and compare them to the messed model of the kennel clubs. I just really don't see how we can play with some of the things nature gives these dogs. Certainly not so that they will conform to a breed standard, with no purpose other than to make it uniform!

If, say, the ears were more healthy if they were set high, that might make a difference (maybe not...it would depend on the health issue and the other related considerations.)

I like the idea that I will be held accountable for my lines. I am more than willing to explain why I do what I do...and why I don't follow the directives of a kennel club.

I would much rather see the ALAA insist on common sense health issues, such as, no breeding standard sized dogs to minitures/toys or teacups! They "recommend" that, but they do not require it! Go figure.

I would also like to see them insist on every single dog being DNA tested and matched to the pedigree. This may not be possible for some of the foundation stock...but I know, for certain, that there are false records out there...I know this. And no one is willing to open the can of worms to correct it!

So, until the kennel clubs take a common sense stance to protect the intregity of the lines and curb the silly impulses of the breedes' whims, I don't place a lot of value in their efforts. To me, the goal is AKC acceptance, not bettering the breed.

In fact, if you look at the "Retriever" lines...there are, literally, hundreds of different types...each one was connected to the original retriever at one point...but breeders passed along their own lines and those lines became well known and standards were created that followed the desire of the breeder of those lines. Same with Terriers...look at the many types of terriers!

Okay, I will step off of my soapbox...for now.

[KingstonTodd]

In addition to the BBC video, here is a nice article http://www.dogsincanada.com/extreme-...re-exaggerated. I think it is the judges rewrding of the extreme interpretation of the standard that leads to problems, not the existance of the standard itself. Care should be used to not use extreme words, like my "big blocky head" that I love would be perverted and lead to terrible results if that wording was ever used in a breed standard.

I understand the idea of having a kennel line that you develop, as I am trying to doin the face of adverity (another story for another day), but should mine and yours, or Joes or Janes be so different that they are recognizable from accross Central Park since we are breeding the same breed? By the way, I recognized hers in a good way, so I would think other lines would be aspiring to look similar. The ALAA breed standard allows for every colour combiation out there and different coat types, so culling for those obvious reasons shouldn't be an issue (and culling never should be done!).

Judi, what did you breed as reg. breed, labs?

[Lucky Me]

Judi, what did you breed as reg. breed, labs?

Are you talking about Tuesday? She has a bunch of champion Field Lab in her...
They can be more active, but the trade-off is their intelligence.
This is old & fat Tuesday's mom with 2 of Tuesdays sisters.

It is hard to tell here, but I love the well defined brow bone she has.....
Tuesday has it, that is what caught my eye when I picked her.
Just a little thing that keeps the Lab look in there...

but should mine and yours, or Joes or Janes be so different that they are recognizable from accross Central Park since we are breeding the same breed?

Even with-in a breed, there are different looks.
When I bred my mini-pins, I did not show, but I had a look and size that I went for. I did it without in-breeding. My look was different from the one gal that showed and won.
Yet the one that she showed that also won, looked like mine..... does that make sense?
I have a picture of 3 generations of my dogs sitting together that I will post....and a picture of her dogs line that came out in my line when I bred. The pups from the same litter looked different. I saved back what I liked the look of.
Zorro, the pup than I posted on this forum (that Marley broke his leg), went to a home where he will be bred.
She is going to send pictures when she has pups and they are 8wks.
I am curious how strong my line carries to the 4th generation.
Man I love this stuff!

[Jac]

Todd, fascinating article! Thank you...It is so true that the show judges and competitors actually cause the changes by focusing on the exessive trait...but the breeders are the ones that go all ga-ga for those shows...that happens when you have an AKC or other kennel recognition. It could happen to Doodles...maybe their big, boxy head will become the standard and turn out to be too big!
I think that it is funny that the ALAA doesn't have color restrictions, but they do have clear restrictions on things that actually matter...things that, if they go out of whack, they could destroy the health of the dog.
I thought that this was an interesting quote:
"But sadly, the Bullmastiff is now changing, with the help of show ring judges, from being 60-per-cent Mastiff 40-per-cent Bulldog to being 75-per-cent Bulldog 25-per-cent Mastiff – not what the pioneer breeders sought at all."
We are pioneer breeders...what will happen to our beloved Doodles if they become a registered breed, complete with idiot judges and "creative" breeding to "enhance" their appearance?
Ugh! I don't even want to think of it!

[KingstonTodd]

Akin to the mastif quote, doodles started 50% lab/50% poodle, and now in some cases are almost 90% poodle and untracable lab!

[Jac]

Originally Posted by KingstonTodd

Akin to the mastif quote, doodles started 50% lab/50% poodle, and now in some cases are almost 90% poodle and untracable lab!

Exactly!

[SamsonsMom]

I personally hope the breeders never stop breeding first for temperment - I hate any "standard" on how a doodle should look. I really like the fact that I have to convince people Henry and Samson are the same breed, even though they look so different. I love the diversity. What other breed can give you such different looks, but basically the same great personality traits?

[KingstonTodd]

Originally Posted by SamsonsMom

I personally hope the breeders never stop breeding first for temperment - I hate any "standard" on how a doodle should look. I really like the fact that I have to convince people Henry and Samson are the same breed, even though they look so different. I love the diversity. What other breed can give you such different looks, but basically the same great personality traits?

We all love our different looking doodles:



Playing devil's advocate for a second. If there is no standard as to the looks of a Labraoodle and all breeders care about is tempermet, what do you really get with a Labradoodle as far as structure? They are a combination of two sporting/retrieving breeds and some of that form-function should be maintained. If we dont also pay attention to structure we will end up with a load of skeletal health problems. I come back again to short legged-long backed doodles.....but they have the right temperment. I think having a desciption of what they should look like helps keep the breed healthy if adhering to the standard is not abused. There is nothing to say the standard couldn't be written to include both yours (and my) doodle types in the description, by allowing different coat types and sizes.

Originally Posted by Jac

Exactly!

The ALAA mandates that poodle can only be used a maximum of 2 times in 6 generations after the initial F1, but its easy to see how this will be used to the max, both for coat correction and the number of available unrelated studs (more poodles than doodles around). It would be nice if they also said that every 3 generations or so you had to infuse back in either a nice fleece coated F1 or an F1b to inject some Labrador back into the breed.

[Jac]

I would like to see your suggestions implemented. By the way, your picture is gorgeous...perfectly showing the variety!
I think that they should create a standard for two types of Labradoodles, the American Lines and the Australian Lines...they are very different.
Currently, it seems, that they are trying to bring the American lines up to the standards for Australian lines and eliminate the early generations all together. The reason this would eliminate the early generations is because they are ALWAYS going to be unpredictible in conformation and coat...so, you get back to the question, if they are eliminating the first generation dogs, how could they infuse them back in?
Seems to me that they MUST find a way to accept the diversity of the early generation, in order to keep that infusion viable.
My fear, based on my personal knowledge of some of this, is that the ALAA will do what the AKC does, take false registrations and not challenge them. Where will this take us? Who is to say that the breeder has not infused a Poodle "illegally"? They could claim that the stud was one of their early generation dogs...who would stop them?
I think that if they INSIST on DNA matching with every litter submitted, they would be onto something viable...but until then, they are relying on the honesty of the breeder...and I know for certain that we cannot rely on that. Unfortunately.
Soooo back to the standards...if they have standards in place that do not accept the variety of early generations, how can they infuse early generations into the lines? If they have standards for certain qualities, who will regulate the breeders so that those qualities don't get over emphasized.
I think that when they establish standards, they need to take these things into account and have a method in place to monitor and control the problematic issues that will certainly arise.