Conformation vs Working Ability
The Nihon Ken are, or were, all originally bred to be working dogs.
I wonder tho, how many of you consider conformation more important then working ability? Or is working ability more important then conformation?
Would you like to see the nihon ken keep their appearance & become more like regular "companion" house pets? Or would you rather sacrifice appearance to get a highly-driven working dog?
What would you like to see breeders breed for?~
I wonder tho, how many of you consider conformation more important then working ability? Or is working ability more important then conformation?
Would you like to see the nihon ken keep their appearance & become more like regular "companion" house pets? Or would you rather sacrifice appearance to get a highly-driven working dog?
What would you like to see breeders breed for?~
Comments
For me good conformation and working drive go hand in hand. There is a happy medium in breeding programs that breed for excellent health and conformation, as well as for the high drive dogs better for the diminishing working homes and softer drive dogs that probably make better living companions. A wise breeder might keep lines for both of those temperments around, and realistically, you will likely be getting a mix of that in the litters anyway.
If a working dog cannot "perform their function", then they were clearly not selected for that function; therefore the dog came from poorly selected/bred lines; therefore they are a bad representation of a working dog of that breed. Form follows function.
----
However, I've learned something from six years in Vallhunds. Unequivocally, THE MOST important aspect of breeding in a very rare breed such as these, is to maintain genetic diversity no matter what.
We have a Vallhund breeder who also raises horses and who has done significant research in genetics. What she advocates is something that it took me a LONG time to wrap my head around, coming from the AKC side of "improving" the breeds. She preaches and practices that you start by importing as good quality stock as you can possibly beg, borrow, buy or steal, and then you start breeding them together. You don't breed towards or away from any one trait, because you DON'T know what you're throwing out when you throw away those genes.
To give you a very simple example, in Vallhunds, we have some dogs that have a lot of white on them -- white collars, blazes, vests -- that some people don't like because it makes them look more like Corgis and we already have the stigma that the Vallhund must be some sort of Corgi cross, so we want to stay away from anything making it look closer to a Corgi.
Most breeders would stay away from breeding those dogs with more white in them. Not this breeder. She is not on this earth to improve an already great breed (the first principle that goes against anything written in AKC journals) -- she is simply trying to preserve it, and to insure that there are genes spread as far and wide as she can spread them. For awhile she wouldn't test her breeding stock for the normal things (hips, eyes) because who knows what favorable gene you are throwing away in THAT dog by not breeding it. She has slowly changed her tune about health issues, but the basic principals remain.
The numbers in these breeds are still so small that frankly, I don't think it's healthy to breed "pet" stock to pet stock and hunters to hunters, even if you could. You will need to branch out as far across the country and continent, for that matter, back to Japan as well, to insure genetic diversity. You probably shouldn't even be looking at like-temperamented dogs, or dogs that look like each other either. What I learned from her is that maintaining as much diversity and VARIATION in your overall breeding stock is what is MOST important right now, and may help the breed to avoid the pitfalls of genetic-based disease or problems in the future.
Outside of failing your basic health checks, the breeds here are so young and new that hopefully they are almost all suitable for breeding. If they're not, I'd ask why not. That's the burden you have to bear with a very rare breed -- you don't dare throw the baby out with the bathwater if you don't want to breed your bitch because she has slightly light eyes. You NEED her genes out there.
So, the answer for me to the question above? I'd like to see breeders breed for a diverse, varied, and healthy gene pool to draw upon ten years from now.
It's like asking which would YOU rather drive: A truck, a cross-over, or a sports car? Each person will have their own need in a car, and vote for the closest match. If more people choose the cross-over, that doesn't mean the truck and sports car should stop being produced, right?
----
I agree, and it is actually my personal philosophy as well. I think we need both extremes to create a good midpoint (in a breeding program and in a breed).
----
Why? I'll pull in a popular example used by population geneticists - the Australian dingo. The dingo was established in Australia via a bottleneck. If it wasn't a single pregnant female, it was something on a similar scale. Why is it that the dingo survived to be a top predator up until Europeans settled on Australia? Why didn't the "breed" collapse under in-breeding?
Population geneticists go by the premise that all animals carry some deterious gene. It's a matter of whether the genes double up in a negative way to undermine the fitness of the animal.
What your Vallhund breeder is doing is avoiding any doubling up for her dogs, but this is not the entire solution to the breed. You can outcross to every single line... but then your next generation is now related to that line. You eventually run out of outcrosses/lines within Vallhunds. If that happens, your only recourse is to breed to another breed, which is *not* going to be embraced by the dog fancy.
What determines whether a gene is negative is some pressure applied to the animal. This is how the dingo survived and even thrived. There was inbreeding but there was also selection against unfit animals.
As to what kind of pressure is appropriate to the Shikoku or other Asian spitzes, well, my thinking is along the lines of what Haru's owner (I forgot his handle and name) relayed. Utilize and recruit hunters, respect and support what hunters do, and lastly, go on hunts to understand what makes a good hunting dog. It's my belief that playing at hunting with AKC lure coursing and tracking is insufficient to really know if one has a hunting dog. (It does allow the owner to pick out nervy dogs or other undesirable traits though.)
In order to do this selection, that may mean supplying hunters for free a dog that would be considered very expensive as a pet dog. It does require an incredible amount of trust in the hunter though, so that even if the dog dies in a hunting mishap, the breeder knows 1) the hunter prepared the dog as much as possible, 2) the hunter did not use the dog frioviously, and 3) the hunter did all he could to save the dog.
As for dog-to-dog aggression in a hunting dog, it does sometimes depend on the upbringing and context. I like to use Dogo Argentinos as examples because I've studied their situation for a couple of years. The Dogo can be highly dog-aggressive. If there's an FCI show and there's growling, it's likely to be the Dogo area. Fights have broken out among Dogos at shows. However, the dogo is supposed to be non-dog aggressive as they are meant to work in a pack during hunts. Indeed, Dogos used for hunting are that way. Why the discrepancy? It is not so much lines as there are many imports from hunting parents. It is upbringing and also "giving the dog a job". A show or pet dogo is going to be somewhat pampered. A dogo that cowers is not that impressive at shows afterall. The dogo will challenge other dogs and even owners. (Experienced owners teach the dogo never to do that again, inexperienced owners get into alot of trouble). However, hunting dogos are under strict "guidelines," and they recognize and seek out the hunt more than squabbles. Sometimes spoiled show dogos that hate other male dogs in any other context will not show any dog aggression when hunting. They travel side-by-side in a confined dogbox and catch mouth-next-to-mouth. Just food for thought.
It was sparked by the fact that there are, quite clearly, to lines of Shikoku. The working ones, & the pet ones. While they LOOK similar, at the same time, they both almost look like two different dog breeds. For example, a "working" shikoku would NEVER pass in the show ring.
I was just curious to see if more people want nihon ken to be more along the lines of working & focusing less on aesthetic qualities [ coat colour, eye colour, height, etc. ] OR if they should focus on going towards a "softer" dog with more emphasis on appearance. [ must be this height, weight, etc. ]
As Brad has said, this thread is purely subjective, & to see what the mass majority of nihon ken fanatics desire.
These are Shikoku bred to "show standard":
Working dog lines from Here & the above "standard" photos are pictures of Ahi, Loa, Himiko, & Shoushou [ kei~kun ], I just cross posted. [ I included Ahi as even tho she is above the "height / weight" standard, her features, I think, are still spot-on. ]
Hope that helped
I knew purchasing Koda I would never show him. It was always my plan to have him neutered and live with me as a companion. I did not look at workability, but rather a breeder who would not kennel the pups and would have them in their house exposing them to sounds and socializing at birth. I looked for a companion who would have a good temperment. So, I guess in a sense conformation. That went in full circle huh? lol.
I can only name one breeder that I would even think would have good workable dogs in the US. I think the rest all breed to show. At least that's what they stress when they are selling puppies.
Thanks for the photos of the working and show Shikokus. Very interesting. I suspect that the working dogs also have other Japanese breeds somewhere in their backgrounds. The situation is probably very similar to mixes found in herding dogs where border collies/aussies/cattle dogs, etc. are intermixed based on the working ranch requirements.
If it's defined by drive, than how would you define drive? Is it the drive to attack and kill something, or maybe the drive to do what they can to please you. Or how about the drive to be near you. Is drive a desire or want, is it an instinct, or is it something more?
I chose 'a balance of both' as the breed should not really be led to focus on one or the other. It's also nice to have that 'prettiness' while working with the breed. I love showing off how handsome my boys look, and still be able to give them an active job to do (bikejoring, agility, hiking). Focusing on one aspect can limit the ultimate success of the breed, and cause greater issues in the future.
With the focus on showing, sometimes the breed will 'evolve' to be something totally different than what it originally looked like; causing it to not only be unable to do the task that breed was created for, but may also be unable to do some basic tasks (like walks or reproduction). English Bulldogs, not only are physically unable to handle a bull anymore, but many can barely handle walking down the street before stopping to catch their breath. Show Siberian Huskies aren't the best sled dog, as they are losing the shoulder structure and becoming stockier, making them slower runners and sled pulling less safe.
If the breed is only used for it's working ability, then there is the risk of losing the 'purity' of the breed or one of the dogs getting into the wrong hands. There are people out there that will see this high-drive dog, loves the way it looks and think they can handle it, gets a puppy and finds out they really can't handle it so they dump it off at a shelter where it is put down for being a vicious dog. Take the CO, Luytiy and Masha are absolutely gorgeous dogs, but their temperament can be too much for most people to handle, but that's not gonna stop someone from getting one. Even if all the reputable CO breeders says that that person can't handle the dog and refuse to sell them a puppy, than that person will just have to buy one from BYB type breeder. If there becomes a demand for a certain breed, even if the temperament is bad by pet standards, there will be someone ready to make a profit off of that demand. And to think, if current pet store puppies have so many issues (temperament and health) coming from companion lines, think of how much worse they'd be coming from working lines. And then you have the breeders who take a breed and breed it with other breeds to make it more suitable for that specific task (sled dogs, fighting dogs). Alaskan Huskies are a mix between a Sibe and another breed, usually a greyhound type, and was developed to make a faster endurance runner. Once you start breeding to other breeds, you start to lose the original breed.
I think it's great to be able to pick a companion puppy and a working puppy from the same litter.
I think the reason why many breeders advertise show over use is that fact that that's what the people looking for a pet want. You are told that a good breeder will show, and the puppy's parents should have a title and all that stuff. If the breeder doesn't show their dogs than they aren't a reputable breeder. Add in the fact that there are more people wanting pets than wanting a working dog, and you've got less of a demand to breed for workability. Also, if a pet seeker visits a working kennel, they are most likely to perceive that these high drive dogs are vicious and 'bad' dogs, so to this person that breeder must be a bad breeder.
This raises an interesting point. A position I've often taken in discussions on this forum is that breeding should never be done simply to meet demand. While in some sense the dogs produced from breeding programs are a "product", I would argue that standard market economics don't apply. Breeders should never be motivated by profit nor should they be motivated to meet demand. Health (I view genetic diversity as a part of health) and then temperament (I view workability as part of temperament) and then finally physical characteristics should be the only considerations when producing "a product" in this case.
So I guess the question is this, should breeders focus on producing pets over producing working dogs? I'm guessing you won't be surprised to hear my position is no. I will add that this position is not at odds with some of the positions stated above. Focusing on genetic diversity doesn't mean that breeders can't focus on producing good working dogs (or good pets either).
"I think the reason why many breeders advertise show over use is that fact that that's what the people looking for a pet want."
I ask this: Is it right of us to cannibalize a breed by softening their temperaments and selecting for physical traits over temperament simply to make them more suitable pets?
Absolutely not. If you take the shikoku-spirit out of the dog, why the hell are you buying a shikoku?
About your meeting demand point - I absolutely agree, but then, I'm sure 99.9% of all those on Shikoku/Kishu/Kai waiting lists are pet homes. Are the breeders then just breeding to meet that demand? There doesn't seem to be a working function in mind for most homes on waiting lists for these breeds.
The realist in me thinks Brad has the right attitude about having pet/show and working lines---although you'll never hear me argue for that point. At least not until I've been convinced that focusing on working lines will be to the detriment of the breed.
I'm having a hard time keeping each of the three or four threads on these related topics straight in my head, but in one of them someone pointed out that genetic diversity and health should be the primary focus of breeding programs at the moment. I agree with that, and I sincerely hope that all of the breeders out there are working in that direction right now. There was a thread a few weeks ago in which a breeder who (I paraphrase) "as a last-ditch effort" put a different dog in with a bitch in heat because the first dog they tried wasn't getting the job done. I REALLY do NOT want to get into a discussion about the details of that particular event (mostly because nobody has the real details); however, if, hypothetically, that situation occurred, then I would say that is probably an example of breeding to meet demand. At this point, breeding two healthy dogs that improve genetic diversity is a good idea provided health and temperament are appropriate. Those dogs need to go somewhere, and as long as those "pet" homes know they aren't getting 100% companion dogs, but high-drive working-type dogs, then who am I to judge?
What I would take issue with would be breeders intentionally selecting for "softer" temperaments just so all those people on their waiting lists can get dogs. I think you (Jen) hit the nail on the head, "If you take the shikoku-spirit out of the dog, why the hell are you buying a shikoku?" The Shikoku is what it is. It is a beautiful dog for sure, but it isn't a Shiba or a Lab. Having only met 3 Shikoku in my life, I clearly can't speak with great authority on the matter, but their temperaments are what really set them apart from other dogs. So if somebody wants a Shikoku, they should be 100% committed to working with what the Shikoku is (a working hunting breed), and not what they would like them to be (e.g. a companion dog).
Exactly! This was my question Dave, you worded it better than I could!
For example, I do not want a "soft" shikoku. I would like a Shika with moderate or a higher drive. When it's time for me to get a shikoku, I will ask for a shika with a slightly higher drive, more of a "working" shika. I don't care about Standard, so if a pup comes along with that temperament I am looking for I'm not going to care if it has perfect urajiro, or if he's too big or too small. & I will wait as long as it takes for that pup to come along. Even he's over standard, that's fine. If he's a cream shika, that's fine too. Do I have aesthetic preferences? Of course. I would prefer a black or darker red sesame shika, or a male, or even a slightly larger shika, but to me temperament of the dog is what I'm looking for more.
I want a pup who will easily take a 13 mile hike, or who I can take for a 3-day long hike of 30 miles. A dog that genuinely wants to be outside exploring & camping & who will love it. I want a dog I can eventually train to track wild game. We're not pork eaters, so odds are it would most likely be turkey or deer we'd hunt.
Now, could I get a shikoku with the perfect standard, a gorgeous black sesame of near perfect height, etc, etc. Yes, I probably can.
But in my scenario, the dog's function & temperament need to come first. [ as well as obviously genetic health ] I think all shikoku look gorgeous, yes, even the "working line" shikoku I posted above. [ that first pup is stunning to me ] However, when it comes down to it, my use for my future pup has little do with looks. A "softer" shikoku can't do what I want it to, even if it is drop-dead stunning & has perfect standard. Getting a softer shikoku CANT do what I want it to do, & is thus setting it up for failure.
The Shikoku, Kishu, & Kai are in a position [ unlike the Akita ] where much of their original drive is still intact. Us softening them, mellowing down their temperaments, is changing the breed for the people. Well, if we want the breed to become popular & just go to any home, yes, softening them is a wise decision in order for the breed to survive. [ like in the case of the Akita & Shiba ]
However, people already love these dogs the way they are, & softening them is just to expand demand IMHO, which for me, defies the point of a reputable breeder.
IMHO, a reputable breeder breeds as a hobby, to preserve the breed or improve upon it's already estabilished qualities. NOT to meet demand of the masses!
If people want a shikoku or kai or kishu or hokka then they should know what they're getting themselves into. Not get a Shikoku & hope for some super indoorsy dog. ~
Exactly Corina! And just to be clear, there are several definitions of "soft". It can relate to the ability of the dog to do "its job" as far as endless energy while hiking, not getting tired, willing to go and go and go (ie, not "soft") and it can also relate to how it interacts with is owner (ie, soft in the fact that it responds well to soft voices, soft commands vs requiring you to belt out a loud command with a "you better do it now" tone of voice).
Although I have only had 1 real experience with 1 Shikoku, I would say that he is soft as it relates to his owner and discipline but not soft as it relates to outdoor work, hiking, hunting etc. So he would fulfill what Corina posted above, very strong drive in the field (I think that "hunt" is never far from his brain and he is a rabid hunter) but he is soft in that he takes command and direction well (albeit slower when he is in high drive mode "on hunt").
Question for the Shikoku owners, how do you feel your dog's drive is relative to game, have you tested it?? I am guessing that Heidi and I have, given where we live (in the country) and our access to small game. In my experience, the drive is still there in the Shikoku (a very avid hunter who will hunt many types of game, if given the chance).
Sorry Corina, but this is a very general statement. Work in what field? Doing what? In what home? An apartment? A Farm?
What about coat colour? Eye colour? Tail type? Do you care about any of these traits?
Just trying to figure out what you were trying to say, I have the general idea, but not the specifics
So far Shoushuu shows drive (to take down prey) with sheep...he doesn't seem to be interested in smaller game thus far but does enjoy a good chase. And I have yet to test Kotomi.
---------------
Osy,
Well, I'll just assume that "health" speaks for itself as well as "structurally sound".
As far as appearance goes it might just be the result of a particular breeding in reguards to coat color and tail type. Eye color must be "dark brown". Also, coat color and tail type could be subjective to breeder preference so long as it conforms to NIPPO standard: "Set on high, thick and carried over the back vigorously curled or curved like a sickle. The tip nearly reaches the hocks when let down.".
I, for one, am attracted to the more "dark colored" dogs. I may not necessarily breed for it persay, but if I'm importing dogs with typically a darker contrast in coat color. I think it'd be safe to say that the Shikoku I'll produce may be a darker red sesame, sesame or black sesame.
Especially since I want to get a black and tan Shikoku someday
I like a well-rounded dog that may be used for a variety of working/performance venues. However, the main idea here is to "preserve" natural hunting instinct/drive and desire to track, chase and detain prey. However, this dog that will be highly active outdoors, will be the very same dog that will be calm and quiet to live with indoors. Whether it'd be an apartment, a townhome, a house, a house with an acreage or a farm.
I think this is a critically important statement. Much of their drive and instincts are hardwired into them. You don't have to breed FOR anything in particular, if that is the case -- softness, hardness, working ability, whatever; you breed to all types that are out there and you WILL maintain those drives in at least some of the dogs -- again, it's that genetic diversity that you want to maintain, at least for right now while you are building numbers and getting stock into the breeding pool. If you simply bred pretty good dogs to pretty good dogs, that "original drive" would still be there in subsequent generations. And you'd have something to work with, rather than soft/pet lines vs working/hunting lines. If I were a breeder, I would not go there, no more than I'd breed for dark sesame, red sesame, black and tans. We need ALL the genes right now. JMHO
How many Rotties are still driving cattle? How many Shikoku do actually still hunt? How many people wanting a Shikoku will actually hunt? If the breed doesn't adapt to the modern times, it will be on its way to extinction.
I've seen it here, with the Castro Laboreiro. With the demise of the Wolf, Castro Laboreiros found themselves jobless and the breed just fell under, and almost became extinct. It took almost 20 years to bring it back.
What's the point of having a very high drive dog, if you don't work that drive?
About the drive being in them, I'll quote what I wrote on the Japanese and american akita thread:
"...some of you might have seen the video of Kuma reacting to the horses. That was only a fraction of how he reacted to a horse the first time he saw one. So, I'd say the drive is there, but kind of buried deep :-) Maybe with some training it could come out. I say let's try to keep it in."
Kuma comes from a long line of show Akita.
Do Shikoku still hunt? Well, my roommate and I were checking out pics of Mochi last night, and when she saw a pic of Mochi and Ahi the first thing she said was, "Why do they have a Shikoku? Do they hunt?" I guess it's what your impression of the breed is. Where she comes from, they are hunting dogs. In fact, she went on to say that her parents would never own one in their apartment because they are too wild and need lots of land to run and catch animals.