Tenho reparado nas fotografias, colocadas no album dos Bull Terrier, que há por aí muitos "Bulls", que não correspondem ao estalão da raça, nomeadamente na forma da cabeça/focinho, existem alguns, que até se pode dizer que têm o "stop", o que para mim retira completamente a beleza do cão (com o devido respeito para com o dono que certamente o ama).
[/img]
Cabeça Ovoide
Moderador: MariaJose
-
heliosardo
- Membro
- Mensagens: 63
- Registado: sábado set 17, 2005 9:02 pm
- Localização: Bull Terrier
- Contacto:
-
rasteirinho
- Membro Júnior
- Mensagens: 41
- Registado: sexta out 07, 2005 10:26 pm
ola
penso que isto deverà responder um pouco
1930
1950
1980
"...The pictures above are a physical and visible monument to what the show ring did to one terrier breed in less than 50 years time.
Bulldog and terrier crosses, which once had powerful jaws well-placed to do important work (gripping and holding semi-wild bulls and pigs so they could be altered or slaughtered), were rapidly transformed at the turn of the 20th Century to the point that the jaws of today's Bull Terrier, while still massive, are now no longer set at a proper angle to do the work the dogs were once bred to do.
If you look at the Fox Terrier, you will see a similar transformation over time -- once small and supple dogs transformed into large, stiff-legged creatures unable to move properly in the field and with chests too deep for the animal to go to ground after fox.
This is what show ring breeders do -- they ruin working breeds.
And it is not just the AKC show ring, either -- it's the UKC show ring and the JRTCA show ring as well. Give any show ring enough time, and it will ruin any breed of working dog -- it always has and it always will.
Former AKC President Kenneth Marden has acknowledged the role of the show ring in killing off working breeds:
"We [the AKC] have gotten away from what dogs were originally bred for. In some cases we have paid so much attention to form that we have lost the use of the dog."
The number of working dogs ruined by the show ring grows every year.
Irish Setters, once famed at finding birds, are now so brain-befogged they can no longer find the front door. Cocker Spaniels, once terrific pocket-sized birds dogs, have been reduced to poodle-coated mops incapable of working their way through a field or fence row. Fox terriers are now so large they cannot go down a fox hole. Saint Bernards, once proud pulling dogs, are now so riddled with hip dysplasia that it's hard to find one that can walk without surgery in old age.
In recent years, protectors of at least two working breeds -- the Border Collie and the Jack Russell Terrier -- have gone to war with the AKC in an effort to protect the working qualities of their dogs.
Unfortunately, those seeking to protect the gene pool of working dogs -- and the tradition of breeding worker to worker -- lost and both breeds are now found in the AKC show ring. While there are still working Border Collies and working Jack Russell Terriers, the number of honest working dogs of either breed in the AKC show ring is small and is falling rapidly. In time it is likely that these two breeds will in fact split off from their working roots as has happened with gun dogs where there are "working" labs and "show labs" and "working" pointers and "show" pointers.
Lesson One in the world of dogs is that if you put anything above breeding for utility, you will start to lose working abilities.
Work is a tough task master and it shows no favoritism. Fox and pheasant do not judge "up the leash" nor are they taken in by fads. Quarry is not much interested in nose or eye color, the set of the ear, or the "expression" on a dog's face as it creeps up a hedgerow.
In working dogs, utility is beauty, and "beauty is as beauty does."
E.L. Hagedoorn, a Dutch consulting geneticist to dog breed societies around the world, believed the show ring would ruin working dog breeds, and time has proven him right. As he noted in his 1939 book:
"In the production of economically useful animals, the show ring is more of a menace than an aid to breeding. Once fancy points are introduced into the standard of perfection, the breeders will give more attention to those easily judged qualities than to the more important qualities that do not happen to be of such a nature that we can evaluate them at shows. Showing has nothing to do with utility at all, it is simply a competitive game."
The "judge of the moment" in a show ring may know very little about real terrier work.
In the AKC, for example, most judges are experts in a half dozen breeds. In the terrier ring, it's almost a guarantee none has ever owned a deben collar or cut a shoulder into a trench in order to get down another two feet. As a rule these authorities are experts by dint of having spent far too many nights in bad hotels attending show trials. In 20 years of owning dogs, they have logged a thousand miles bouncing around show rings in plaid skirts and blue blazers. They may have driven to the moon and back to pick up rosettes, but few have driven 10 miles out into the country to even see a fox den, much less put a dog down one or dig to it.
A few will claim expertise because they have bought an airplane ticket and attended a mounted hunt or two in the U.K.. They have seen "the real thing" they will tell you, and know what is required of a working dog thanks to their two-week vacation in Scotland! Just don't ask them how to extract quarry from the stop-end of a pipe or how to treat a bite wound.
Theory always ends where reality begins, and it always seems to have always been this way.
The very first Kennel Club shows occurred in 1873 in the U.K., and 1874 in the U.S..
By 1893 Rawdon Lee Briggs was writing in his book, "Modern Dogs," that:
"I have known a man act as a judge of fox terriers who had never bred one in his life, had never seen a fox in front of hounds, had never seen a terrier go to ground ... had not even seen a terrier chase a rabbit."
By the AKC's own estimates, a majority of newcomers to the sport, obsessed with championship ribbons, stick with it an average of five years. When they give up or move on to a new hobby, they leave behind a trail of dogs that were not systematically bred to do a job -- they were bred to produce ribbons and often by people who never completely finished reading a book on their own breed.
Most of these back-yard-and-hobby-show-breeders do not do any genetic testing on their dogs, and when asked are quick to say their bumbling acquiescence to the destruction of a working breed is OK because "No one's hunting birds to feed their families any more," "We don't need strong jaws on a bull terrier, we have barbed wire now" "No one hunts fox anymore -- it's illegal in the UK you know."
I would suggest to these people that they get deeply involved in breeds that are not working breeds -- Shit-zoos, Peeking-ease, or Pappy-yawns, perhaps. Miniature Schnauzers or Minature Pinschers are nice dogs -- give them a try. Or better yet, get a dog from the local shelter and train it in to a high degree of perfection in agility, flyball or even circus tricks.
But please stay away from breeds that are working dogs!
As for those actually interested in terriers as working dogs (and if not, please read the paragraph above), we would do well to remember that we did not create these wonderful little dogs, and we do not 'own' a breed anymore than we 'own' anything in this world. Like most worthy things, we inherit our dogs from our forbears, serve as custodians for their gene pool in our lifetime, and have a responsibility to pass on this gene pool in a reasonably good condition for the future.
In the modern world, passing on the gene pool means breeding dogs that are the correct size as determined after you have done some real earth work.
It also means doing genetic testing (CERF, OFA, BAER) before breeding any litter.
For those looking to buy a terrier -- especially a Jack Russell or Border Terrier which are two breeds which still have some pretensions to being working dogs -- I would suggest embracing a working standard, not only for the dog but for the BREEDER as well. If the breeder doesn't own a deben collar, a $50 shovel, and a digging bar, I would suggest giving that kennel a pass. Ask to see pictures of the sire or dam in the field. No pictures, no cash.
A serious breeder takes the work of their dogs seriously, and a serious breeder will work their dogs at least a few times just to make sure they have the drive, the size and the temperament to actually do the job.
The standard for a working terrier is NOT in the ring, but in the field and it is only in the field that a dog can be judged worthy of being bred."
penso que isto deverà responder um pouco
1930
1950
1980
"...The pictures above are a physical and visible monument to what the show ring did to one terrier breed in less than 50 years time.
Bulldog and terrier crosses, which once had powerful jaws well-placed to do important work (gripping and holding semi-wild bulls and pigs so they could be altered or slaughtered), were rapidly transformed at the turn of the 20th Century to the point that the jaws of today's Bull Terrier, while still massive, are now no longer set at a proper angle to do the work the dogs were once bred to do.
If you look at the Fox Terrier, you will see a similar transformation over time -- once small and supple dogs transformed into large, stiff-legged creatures unable to move properly in the field and with chests too deep for the animal to go to ground after fox.
This is what show ring breeders do -- they ruin working breeds.
And it is not just the AKC show ring, either -- it's the UKC show ring and the JRTCA show ring as well. Give any show ring enough time, and it will ruin any breed of working dog -- it always has and it always will.
Former AKC President Kenneth Marden has acknowledged the role of the show ring in killing off working breeds:
"We [the AKC] have gotten away from what dogs were originally bred for. In some cases we have paid so much attention to form that we have lost the use of the dog."
The number of working dogs ruined by the show ring grows every year.
Irish Setters, once famed at finding birds, are now so brain-befogged they can no longer find the front door. Cocker Spaniels, once terrific pocket-sized birds dogs, have been reduced to poodle-coated mops incapable of working their way through a field or fence row. Fox terriers are now so large they cannot go down a fox hole. Saint Bernards, once proud pulling dogs, are now so riddled with hip dysplasia that it's hard to find one that can walk without surgery in old age.
In recent years, protectors of at least two working breeds -- the Border Collie and the Jack Russell Terrier -- have gone to war with the AKC in an effort to protect the working qualities of their dogs.
Unfortunately, those seeking to protect the gene pool of working dogs -- and the tradition of breeding worker to worker -- lost and both breeds are now found in the AKC show ring. While there are still working Border Collies and working Jack Russell Terriers, the number of honest working dogs of either breed in the AKC show ring is small and is falling rapidly. In time it is likely that these two breeds will in fact split off from their working roots as has happened with gun dogs where there are "working" labs and "show labs" and "working" pointers and "show" pointers.
Lesson One in the world of dogs is that if you put anything above breeding for utility, you will start to lose working abilities.
Work is a tough task master and it shows no favoritism. Fox and pheasant do not judge "up the leash" nor are they taken in by fads. Quarry is not much interested in nose or eye color, the set of the ear, or the "expression" on a dog's face as it creeps up a hedgerow.
In working dogs, utility is beauty, and "beauty is as beauty does."
E.L. Hagedoorn, a Dutch consulting geneticist to dog breed societies around the world, believed the show ring would ruin working dog breeds, and time has proven him right. As he noted in his 1939 book:
"In the production of economically useful animals, the show ring is more of a menace than an aid to breeding. Once fancy points are introduced into the standard of perfection, the breeders will give more attention to those easily judged qualities than to the more important qualities that do not happen to be of such a nature that we can evaluate them at shows. Showing has nothing to do with utility at all, it is simply a competitive game."
The "judge of the moment" in a show ring may know very little about real terrier work.
In the AKC, for example, most judges are experts in a half dozen breeds. In the terrier ring, it's almost a guarantee none has ever owned a deben collar or cut a shoulder into a trench in order to get down another two feet. As a rule these authorities are experts by dint of having spent far too many nights in bad hotels attending show trials. In 20 years of owning dogs, they have logged a thousand miles bouncing around show rings in plaid skirts and blue blazers. They may have driven to the moon and back to pick up rosettes, but few have driven 10 miles out into the country to even see a fox den, much less put a dog down one or dig to it.
A few will claim expertise because they have bought an airplane ticket and attended a mounted hunt or two in the U.K.. They have seen "the real thing" they will tell you, and know what is required of a working dog thanks to their two-week vacation in Scotland! Just don't ask them how to extract quarry from the stop-end of a pipe or how to treat a bite wound.
Theory always ends where reality begins, and it always seems to have always been this way.
The very first Kennel Club shows occurred in 1873 in the U.K., and 1874 in the U.S..
By 1893 Rawdon Lee Briggs was writing in his book, "Modern Dogs," that:
"I have known a man act as a judge of fox terriers who had never bred one in his life, had never seen a fox in front of hounds, had never seen a terrier go to ground ... had not even seen a terrier chase a rabbit."
By the AKC's own estimates, a majority of newcomers to the sport, obsessed with championship ribbons, stick with it an average of five years. When they give up or move on to a new hobby, they leave behind a trail of dogs that were not systematically bred to do a job -- they were bred to produce ribbons and often by people who never completely finished reading a book on their own breed.
Most of these back-yard-and-hobby-show-breeders do not do any genetic testing on their dogs, and when asked are quick to say their bumbling acquiescence to the destruction of a working breed is OK because "No one's hunting birds to feed their families any more," "We don't need strong jaws on a bull terrier, we have barbed wire now" "No one hunts fox anymore -- it's illegal in the UK you know."
I would suggest to these people that they get deeply involved in breeds that are not working breeds -- Shit-zoos, Peeking-ease, or Pappy-yawns, perhaps. Miniature Schnauzers or Minature Pinschers are nice dogs -- give them a try. Or better yet, get a dog from the local shelter and train it in to a high degree of perfection in agility, flyball or even circus tricks.
But please stay away from breeds that are working dogs!
As for those actually interested in terriers as working dogs (and if not, please read the paragraph above), we would do well to remember that we did not create these wonderful little dogs, and we do not 'own' a breed anymore than we 'own' anything in this world. Like most worthy things, we inherit our dogs from our forbears, serve as custodians for their gene pool in our lifetime, and have a responsibility to pass on this gene pool in a reasonably good condition for the future.
In the modern world, passing on the gene pool means breeding dogs that are the correct size as determined after you have done some real earth work.
It also means doing genetic testing (CERF, OFA, BAER) before breeding any litter.
For those looking to buy a terrier -- especially a Jack Russell or Border Terrier which are two breeds which still have some pretensions to being working dogs -- I would suggest embracing a working standard, not only for the dog but for the BREEDER as well. If the breeder doesn't own a deben collar, a $50 shovel, and a digging bar, I would suggest giving that kennel a pass. Ask to see pictures of the sire or dam in the field. No pictures, no cash.
A serious breeder takes the work of their dogs seriously, and a serious breeder will work their dogs at least a few times just to make sure they have the drive, the size and the temperament to actually do the job.
The standard for a working terrier is NOT in the ring, but in the field and it is only in the field that a dog can be judged worthy of being bred."
Rasteirinho,
As fotos eu já as conhecia e inclusivamente já as tinha referido num outro tópico aqui na Arca, agora o texto, com franqueza, onde é que você foi desencantar isto?
Andou a ler algum livro do John Broadhurst, defensor acérrimo da pureza dos Terriers ( http://www.terrierman.com/rosettestoruin.htm )? Ou andou nesses sites dos ingleses que querem acabar com todas as características que eles não consideram “funcionais”? Sabe que querem aprovar uma lei em Inglaterra que ao ser aprovada extinguirá perto de 200 raças de cães? Uns porque têm as orelhas demasiado compridas ou pequenas e podem ter otites, outros porque têm as pernas muito curtas e têm problemas de locomoção, e por ai fora…
Em relação às fotos propriamente ditas tenho a dizer-lhe o seguinte: são de facto um resumo da evolução do crânio do Bull Terrier ao longo do tempo, mas isto não quer dizer que sejam bons exemplares. O de 1980 por exemplo é prognata, não tem uma oclusão perfeita, característica que seria suficiente para o desclassificar em qualquer concurso decente.
O crânio do Bull Terrier tem de facto características únicas e apesar de eu não ser apologista das cabeças exageradamente curvas é uma característica que eu acho que deve ser preservada e que serve uma função, ao contrário do que o Sr. Broadhurst possa pensar e não é meramente estética.
As fotos eu já as conhecia e inclusivamente já as tinha referido num outro tópico aqui na Arca, agora o texto, com franqueza, onde é que você foi desencantar isto?
Andou a ler algum livro do John Broadhurst, defensor acérrimo da pureza dos Terriers ( http://www.terrierman.com/rosettestoruin.htm )? Ou andou nesses sites dos ingleses que querem acabar com todas as características que eles não consideram “funcionais”? Sabe que querem aprovar uma lei em Inglaterra que ao ser aprovada extinguirá perto de 200 raças de cães? Uns porque têm as orelhas demasiado compridas ou pequenas e podem ter otites, outros porque têm as pernas muito curtas e têm problemas de locomoção, e por ai fora…
Em relação às fotos propriamente ditas tenho a dizer-lhe o seguinte: são de facto um resumo da evolução do crânio do Bull Terrier ao longo do tempo, mas isto não quer dizer que sejam bons exemplares. O de 1980 por exemplo é prognata, não tem uma oclusão perfeita, característica que seria suficiente para o desclassificar em qualquer concurso decente.
O crânio do Bull Terrier tem de facto características únicas e apesar de eu não ser apologista das cabeças exageradamente curvas é uma característica que eu acho que deve ser preservada e que serve uma função, ao contrário do que o Sr. Broadhurst possa pensar e não é meramente estética.
-
rasteirinho
- Membro Júnior
- Mensagens: 41
- Registado: sexta out 07, 2005 10:26 pm
saquei de um outro forum
nao tenho nada contra raça sem funçao mas os caes devem continuar a serem funcionais e nao terem problemas se saude, pra mim criar caes que nem conseguem respirar bem, problemas de locomoção etc é tortura mas isso é a minha opiniao pessoal.
nao tenho nada contra raça sem funçao mas os caes devem continuar a serem funcionais e nao terem problemas se saude, pra mim criar caes que nem conseguem respirar bem, problemas de locomoção etc é tortura mas isso é a minha opiniao pessoal.
-
Bullie
- Membro Veterano
- Mensagens: 1347
- Registado: quarta mar 05, 2003 11:07 am
- Localização: Bull Terriers
- Contacto:
Concordo que, em determinadas raças, as chamadas linhas de beleza, foram levadas a extremos que originaram alguns problemas ás mesmas, como as que mencionou. Contudo, tal não ocorre especificamente com a raça Bull Terrier.rasteirinho Escreveu:, pra mim criar caes que nem conseguem respirar bem, problemas de locomoção etc é tortura mas isso é a minha opiniao pessoal.
Quanto à questão inicial, o post do "Rasteirinho" explica em parte o porquê de divergência tão grande entre algumas cabeças de BT actuais. No entanto, e apesar de essa ser a característica mais "sui generis" da raça, a correcção de uma cabeça de BT não se mede exclusivamente pelo seu perfil ou pelo downface. Há outras característas que, sem as quais, uma cabeça por melhor perfil que tenha, será sempre atípica e incorrecta, como a profundidade, a amplitude, o comprimento, o fecho ou o preenchimento da mesma. Até mesmo a inserção das orelhas e o seu tamanho.
<p><a href="http://www.bovisromani-bullterrier.blogspot.com"></a></p>
-
Bullie
- Membro Veterano
- Mensagens: 1347
- Registado: quarta mar 05, 2003 11:07 am
- Localização: Bull Terriers
- Contacto:
[quote:30d0961151=JosePe]O crânio do Bull Terrier tem de facto características únicas e [b:30d0961151]apesar de eu não ser apologista das cabeças exageradamente curvas é uma característica que eu acho que deve ser preservada e que serve uma função[/b:30d0961151], ao contrário do que o Sr. Broadhurst possa pensar e não é meramente estética.
[/quote:30d0961151]
E, na sua opinião, que funcionalidade é esse que a cabeça curvilínea do BT cumpre?
Quanto às fotos... das 3, pessoalmente prefiro a do "Admiral". Pela potência (profundidade, comprimento) e pelo total preenchimento.
[/img]
[/quote:30d0961151]
E, na sua opinião, que funcionalidade é esse que a cabeça curvilínea do BT cumpre?
Quanto às fotos... das 3, pessoalmente prefiro a do "Admiral". Pela potência (profundidade, comprimento) e pelo total preenchimento.
[/img]
<p><a href="http://www.bovisromani-bullterrier.blogspot.com"></a></p>
A ideia não é comparar os três mas sim dar uma opinião pessoal sobre cada um.
O Admiral não tem provas dar, é um campeão e muito se disse sobre ele, goste-se ou não, mas os outros são animais com cabeças de características bem acentuadas e eu gostava de saber o que os amantes de Bulls que frequentam este fórum pensam sobre eles.
Gostava particularmente que opinassem sobre o cachorro,… compravam-no?
O Admiral não tem provas dar, é um campeão e muito se disse sobre ele, goste-se ou não, mas os outros são animais com cabeças de características bem acentuadas e eu gostava de saber o que os amantes de Bulls que frequentam este fórum pensam sobre eles.
Gostava particularmente que opinassem sobre o cachorro,… compravam-no?
-
heliosardo
- Membro
- Mensagens: 63
- Registado: sábado set 17, 2005 9:02 pm
- Localização: Bull Terrier
- Contacto:
Já agora digam lá a vossa opinião sobre esta carola.
http://arcadenoe.clix.pt/popup-foto.php3?id=41097
http://arcadenoe.clix.pt/popup-foto.php3?id=41097
Se não é um Bull Terrier...é apenas um cão!