Thread
:
Are Registered Dogs Superior?
View Single Post
06-19-2012, 09:52 PM
#
15
HedoShoodovex
Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
492
Senior Member
I think Boogieman hit the nail on the head. The papers serve a purpose for some but in the end the proof is in the dog not the pedigree. That is how is was when the American Pit Bull Terrier was routinely tested. Show me a dog that won matches and he started his own bloodline. My main point is for a pet in this society papers mean nothing. For those that appreciate the lineage and take pride in it it obviously has some value. I don't want to seem like I am putting down the desire of some to own a registered dog but I do find it ironic that the one thing that separated the American Pit Bull Terrier from other AKC registered breeds is that originally the APBT was all about gameness in the pit, a trait that had to be found in offspring of champions and was not considered automatic based on blood. Now the APBT fancier that puts too much emphasis on the bloodline pedigree, has ironically done exactly what the AKC registry did to Am Staffs and that is to make a conformation version of the original. If we were talking about field tested Labs I would put more emphasis on the offspring of field champions of course as the work they do is legal and can be maintained as a breeding standard. In the case of fighting dogs, you just can't breed em any more without breaking the law, which is why to me the papers are sort of a moot point.
Quote
HedoShoodovex
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by HedoShoodovex
All times are GMT +1. The time now is
12:21 PM
.