Tommy Coyote Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 www.majesticbordercollies.com. I just happened to stumble onto this site. And these might be the nicest people in the world but this made me crazy: The glue their dogs ears so make them look really weird. I guess that's better than cutting and splinting them. I went back and looked again. These are show dogs. So are these show dogs supposed to have the perfect little collie semi prick ears? Too funny. Tommy's ears are all over the place - sometimes straight up, sometimes tipped over, sometimes one up and one down. Her funny ears are a whole lot of her appeal. She is just plain cute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue R Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Folks not only glue (or stick pennies or other similar weights on them) to get them "right", but they also tie with string if that's "needed" also. Another reason why "cosmetic" aspects of dogs are an aspect of the show world (and any other situation that promotes appearances above real values). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Coyote Posted March 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Folks not only glue (or stick pennies or other similar weights on them) to get them "right", but they also tie with string if that's "needed" also. Another reason why "cosmetic" aspects of dogs are an aspect of the show world (and any other situation that promotes appearances above real values). They seem to be turning these ears so they go to the front. They really look odd. I used to know some people with show malmutes. Their ears were supposed to stick straight up. If they flopped over it was a serious fault - I think. I always thought it was so odd to be so concerned about ears on a dog that could pull 2,000 pounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattinky Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 That is crazy... I don't get it and I hate seeing BCs made into show dogs, that's just not what they're all about Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juliepoudrier Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Well, you know those perfectly tipped ears, set at the perfect height on the head, are an absolute requirement for any dog that's likely to be worth its salt when it comes to stockwork..... J, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Journey Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Now wait a minute...there's a perfectly good reason they do it....but it's a secret Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Billadeau Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 AND it is acceptable to get your dog's ears to set according to the standard (supposedly based upon genetics) using a popsicle stick or penny. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juliepoudrier Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 That's what always leaves me shaking my head. If you have a standard and the dogs who meet the standard are the ones who win and are bred from (so as to, presumably, perpetuate the "perfection" of the winning dog and his/her bloodlines), then how could it possibly make sense to alter parts of the animal that are imposed by genetics? If your tip-eared stud constantly throws prick-eared offspring, then clearly he's not carrying the genetics for the "perfect ear" and therefore should be culled from breeding (I know that's an oversimplification, but you get the idea). But of course it's much easier to alter the appearance of the animal with the "wrong" phenotype than it is to actually breed for the "correct" phenotype.... It boggles the mind. And of course it doesn't happen just in the world of show dogs. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurae Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Of course, much conformation showing isn't actually about improving or maintaining "ideal" genetics (however misguided)—it's about winning, prestige, and money. (Where is the sick-faced icon?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnLloydJones Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 If you have a standard and the dogs who meet the standard are the ones who win and are bred from (so as to, presumably, perpetuate the "perfection" of the winning dog and his/her bloodlines), then how could it possibly make sense to alter parts of the animal that are imposed by genetics? I think TerrierMan has it when he writes that it is not about the dogs, it's about the Rosettes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debbie Meier Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 If your tip-eared stud constantly throws prick-eared offspring, then clearly he's not carrying the genetics for the "perfect ear" and therefore should be culled from breeding. But of course it's much easier to alter the appearance of the animal with the "wrong" phenotype than it is to actually breed for the "correct" phenotype.... It boggles the mind. And of course it doesn't happen just in the world of show dogs. but, but...cull a dog for a trait that has nothing to do with working ability when they can fix it with alittle tape, glue and string? Are you asking them to select for appearance before the simply awesome working ability they are preserving by opting to not select for that particular trait? One could argue that modifying the ear after the fact is way better then breeding for that ear when you consider what you lose when you breed for physical traits. I'm looking at it this way, breed for the flavor of the day (tulip ear) everything ends up tulip eared, set the ears so they have the right appearance and they don't risk changing or losing other characteristics that the breed is known for in an effort to produce the flavor of the day. If you can fix it without breeding to create that change, more power to them. Sorry to play devils advocate, but which is the lessor of two evils? Deb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juliepoudrier Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Yeah, I know--it was a rhetorical question really. ETA: the above was a response to Laura E and John Lloyd Jones that seemed something of a nonsequitur once Debbie's post appeared in between theirs and mine (so I added this little bit to make it clear who I was responding to)! J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juliepoudrier Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 One could argue that modifying the ear after the face is way better then breeding for that ear when you consider what you lose when you breed for physical traits. One could argue that, but in the example to which we are referring (show dogs), the whole breeding for show culture has already proven that it don't really give a rat's ass about anything beyond physical traits, so if physical traits are what you are breeding for, then why not actually breed for them? If I want to develop a horse with a small muzzle and a lovely dished face, I'm not going to start with a draft horse. Anyway, my comments weren't meant to be an argument for culling dogs that don't have tipped ears (hence the comment about oversimplification), but rather commentary on an entire culture that is geared toward rewarding the breeding of animals for the perfection of appearance but then produces myriad animals that don't meet that standard of perfection and so turns around to alter the individual animal rather than altering the breeding program. This isn't about whether the dogs can perform in any way, and for conformation shows it pretty much never has been. So, if the conformation world says a particular dog needs to look a particular way and looks are all that count, why wouldn't you try to produce dogs that looked like they were supposed to without having to be physically alter them after the fact? I'm pointing out a hypocrisy of thinking on the part of show breeders here (which we all already know, but...). J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurae Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Yeah, I know--it was a rhetorical question really. J. Oh, like "how can you tell how well a dog will work by watching it trot around a ring when it has never even seen sheep?" or "just what, exactly, does an ear set even have to do with working livestock?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurelin Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 but, but...cull a dog for a trait that has nothing to do with working ability when they can fix it with alittle tape, glue and string? Are you asking them to select for appearance before the simply awesome working ability they are preserving by opting to not select for that particular trait? One could argue that modifying the ear after the fact is way better then breeding for that ear when you consider what you lose when you breed for physical traits. I'm looking at it this way, breed for the flavor of the day (tulip ear) everything ends up tulip eared, set the ears so they have the right appearance and they don't risk changing or losing other characteristics that the breed is known for in an effort to produce the flavor of the day. If you can fix it without breeding to create that change, more power to them. Sorry to play devils advocate, but which is the lessor of two evils? Deb I was actually about to say something similar- just to play devil's advocate. My sheltie had his ears taped before we got him (we got him as an adult). We didn't bother with our others ever. I've heard that something like 90% of shelties have the 'wrong' ear set anyways. I'd rather they keep breeding the dogs with 'poor' ear sets (even if they have to 'fix' them) than ruin the breed even more. Shelties have a lot more problems to worry about than ears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenajo Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 maybe they pass the popsicle stick and the penny down the generations too? LOL Sort of like they do those fake poodle topnots.... AND it is acceptable to get your dog's ears to set according to the standard (supposedly based upon genetics) using a popsicle stick or penny. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juliepoudrier Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Okay, then if shelties have more to worry about than ear sets, why not require judges to place shelties with prick ears (all other body parts being equal--that is, if two dogs are pretty much identical structurally, then the dog with prick ears should have an equal chance of winning)? It would take just a few judges at important shows to do that and then voila prick-eared shelties would be all the rage. I have to ask if 90 percent of a breed has the "wrong" ear set, then is it the ear set that's wrong, or the judging that's wrong? That's my whole point and I think we all know the answer to that question. Right now it looks like breeders want to have their cake and eat it too. Either breed healthy dogs who don't match the latest fad (and by doG leave their unmatched parts alone!) and require judges to honestly judge to the standard or breed dogs that exactly match the standard. If you're calling it a breeding program and you have a breeding standard, it doesn't make sense to breed for something else and then alter what you get, surgically or however, to get something that does match the standard (judging). This is an argument that I think is entirely consistent with how we argue for the working border collie. The only real difference is that you can't use tape and popsicle sticks or surgery to make a dog work that has no talent. So when we breed for our standard we actually have to pay attention to the genetics behind the individuals to get offspring that meet the standard--work--because there's no changing what you get after the fact. J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elizabeth77 Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 I really thought I must have been in a space capsule and it was now April 1st. I don't know exactly what gluing the ears entails but it sounds weird.What lucky people to have no worries except their dog's ears are not facing in the right direction!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurelin Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Okay, then if shelties have more to worry about than ear sets, why not require judges to place shelties with prick ears (all other body parts being equal--that is, if two dogs are pretty much identical structurally, then the dog with prick ears should have an equal chance of winning)? It would take just a few judges at important shows to do that and then voila prick-eared shelties would be all the rage. I have to ask if 90 percent of a breed has the "wrong" ear set, then is it the ear set that's wrong, or the judging that's wrong? Oh, I agree completely. It says something if 90% of the dogs have one ear set and the standard calls for something else. Neither of mine that we didn't tape (had no need to because they were just pets) had a nice ear set. One had prick ears and the other had one tipped ear and the other was erect. Of course neither of those came from a breeder anyone could call good. No telling what Trey would've had if his ears weren't taped before we got him. His ears are the least of his problems though, he's got about every bad trait a sheltie could have temperament wise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colton's_Mom Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 They're show dog owners isn't that enough? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shetlander Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 I glued both my Shetlie's ears when they were pups. Didn't bother the dogs at all and with the girl, it even took. I admit to preferring the looks of Shelties with tipped ears. With Quinn, it was fun and a nice break to just wait to see how his ears turned out. For about 6 weeks when he was a puppy, he had one ear up and the other down which I thought was beyond cute. He has goofy helicopter ears now which I also find cute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liz P Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Male BC for sale. Excellent genetics, great on sheep. Must be neutered prior to placement because his ears don't behave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juliepoudrier Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Really, Liz? You trying to sell him into a conformation home? J. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BustopherJones Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 "Sure, winning isn't everything. It's the only thing!" (Henry Russell [Red] Sanders) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liz P Posted March 23, 2009 Report Share Posted March 23, 2009 Really, Liz? You trying to sell him into a conformation home? J. Nope. Frankie is not for sale for any price, mismatched ears and all. I don't think I could pay a conformation home to take him anyway. I do have an odd sense of humor sometimes. Don't mind me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.