In another thread I asked for people to explain what they believed made a European dog "European". Nobody answered the actual question, so I'm giving the question it's own thread. I'd like to understand what others think, and if appropriate discuss those thoughts. I'm not interested in insulting or arguing, just a civil discussion.
**This thread is a question about European dogs. It is NOT a Euro vs. thread. Please, please, please can we try not to turn it into one?
I think most of us are in agreement that it's a technically correct and common use of the term “European” when referring to dogs bred in places like Germany, where a combination of conformation/working titles/breed surveys/wardens/whatever are used. It became obvious to me in the other thread that beyond this point of agreement, some of us seem to be talking apples and others are talking oranges in regards to what actually makes the dogs "European".
My view has been that technically only a dog who has jumped through every single official hoop (or a puppy born from parents who have jumped through the hoops), can be truly be called European. Any dog used for breeding that hasn’t been through all the hoops is simply a plain ’ol dog that happens to have a European ancestor. Depending on what was being discussed, one might still refer to that plain 'ol dog as European, but technically it 's not. If you call that dog European, then you are using the term loosely. More or less as a slang term.
IMO there isn't anything wrong with using slang, as long the person you are speaking with understands the meaning of the slang word. Kind of like calling any carbonated drink a "Coke". That's not a problem as long as everyone in the conversation understands that a "Coke" is also a 7up, Pepsi, and a Mountain Dew. Slang becomes a problem when the people involved in the conversation don't understand what the word means, or they can't agree on the meaning.
Now, if you think as I do that the breeding methodology is what actually makes a European dog "European", one can use slang and say that a breeder in the USA who adheres as closely as possible to the European methods of breeding, is breeding European type dogs, (or just European for short). Not genuine real actual European dogs unless they went through all the official European stuff, but “European” in the sense that the breeder is complying with the European model. Odds are that any breeder in the USA who is adhering closely to the European model of breeding is also using dogs with European in their pedigree, but really the names in the pedigree would be irrelevant. Either the dogs can make it through the European process or they can't. The pedigree increases the odds but doesn't guarantee it.
Again using the term loosely, even a non-breeding dog in the USA who received a conformation title or rating and working title (plus good hips, etc) would be a European type dog. For example, an AKC Ch, SchHIII dog would fit the basic European mold regardless of pedigree. Of course it doesn’t magically change pedigrees or become “European” in the technical sense. (IMO anyone who pretends that’s what this means- is being an ass, so please don’t go there.) It’s obvious that what is being said is that the dog is now more aligned with the general European ideology of testing conformation and performance/temperament, rather than just documenting a pedigree through a breed registry.
Conversely, two European puppies imported (or born) here are not truly in the purest sense “European” for breeding purposes, unless they pass the entire realm of official European hurdles. If those dogs are bred without using the entire scope of European methodology, then the resulting offspring can only be called European as a slang term. The odds are good that the resulting pups will have some, if not all of the parents/grandparents characteristics, but if just one of the imported puppies now being used for breeding couldn’t have actually passed the European vetting process, then the offspring will probably be missing something too. The principle behind European breeding methodology just went down the drain. After a couple of generations, the dogs may be quite a bit different from the parents of the original imports, they would just be dogs with some European names in the pedigree. Calling them European is using the term very loosely. I think it's OK to refer to them as European, as long as everyone in the conversation agrees that it's being used as a slang term and that they are not really European dogs. It's a problem when someone in the conversation believes they are. Describing a AKC Ch, SchHIII dog as a European type of dog would be more appropriate because it's been proven to fit into the European idea. Still, it would be using a slang term to describe the dog and not technically correct in either case.
In the other thread, several posters informed me that my way of viewing this is wrong. I was told that the European method of breeding is not what makes the dogs European. OK, so school me. Help me out here- explain to me how you define a European dog.
[Someone is bound to try explaining how sometime in the past the original imported dogs from Europe became “American”. OK, I get that!!! Let’s ignore that for now and focus- What do you believe makes the dogs European, that is the question.]
In the other thread I was informed that-
1) The method of breeding used in places like Germany is NOT what makes a dog European.
2) It makes no difference what country the dog is born in.
3) How long the dog’s ancestors lived on the continent doesn’t matter.
So, then what is it that makes a European dog actually “European” in the strictest technical sense????? Not as a slang word or used loosely, but what is it that defines what makes a European dog actually "European"?
**This thread is a question about European dogs. It is NOT a Euro vs. thread. Please, please, please can we try not to turn it into one?
I think most of us are in agreement that it's a technically correct and common use of the term “European” when referring to dogs bred in places like Germany, where a combination of conformation/working titles/breed surveys/wardens/whatever are used. It became obvious to me in the other thread that beyond this point of agreement, some of us seem to be talking apples and others are talking oranges in regards to what actually makes the dogs "European".
My view has been that technically only a dog who has jumped through every single official hoop (or a puppy born from parents who have jumped through the hoops), can be truly be called European. Any dog used for breeding that hasn’t been through all the hoops is simply a plain ’ol dog that happens to have a European ancestor. Depending on what was being discussed, one might still refer to that plain 'ol dog as European, but technically it 's not. If you call that dog European, then you are using the term loosely. More or less as a slang term.
IMO there isn't anything wrong with using slang, as long the person you are speaking with understands the meaning of the slang word. Kind of like calling any carbonated drink a "Coke". That's not a problem as long as everyone in the conversation understands that a "Coke" is also a 7up, Pepsi, and a Mountain Dew. Slang becomes a problem when the people involved in the conversation don't understand what the word means, or they can't agree on the meaning.
Now, if you think as I do that the breeding methodology is what actually makes a European dog "European", one can use slang and say that a breeder in the USA who adheres as closely as possible to the European methods of breeding, is breeding European type dogs, (or just European for short). Not genuine real actual European dogs unless they went through all the official European stuff, but “European” in the sense that the breeder is complying with the European model. Odds are that any breeder in the USA who is adhering closely to the European model of breeding is also using dogs with European in their pedigree, but really the names in the pedigree would be irrelevant. Either the dogs can make it through the European process or they can't. The pedigree increases the odds but doesn't guarantee it.
Again using the term loosely, even a non-breeding dog in the USA who received a conformation title or rating and working title (plus good hips, etc) would be a European type dog. For example, an AKC Ch, SchHIII dog would fit the basic European mold regardless of pedigree. Of course it doesn’t magically change pedigrees or become “European” in the technical sense. (IMO anyone who pretends that’s what this means- is being an ass, so please don’t go there.) It’s obvious that what is being said is that the dog is now more aligned with the general European ideology of testing conformation and performance/temperament, rather than just documenting a pedigree through a breed registry.
Conversely, two European puppies imported (or born) here are not truly in the purest sense “European” for breeding purposes, unless they pass the entire realm of official European hurdles. If those dogs are bred without using the entire scope of European methodology, then the resulting offspring can only be called European as a slang term. The odds are good that the resulting pups will have some, if not all of the parents/grandparents characteristics, but if just one of the imported puppies now being used for breeding couldn’t have actually passed the European vetting process, then the offspring will probably be missing something too. The principle behind European breeding methodology just went down the drain. After a couple of generations, the dogs may be quite a bit different from the parents of the original imports, they would just be dogs with some European names in the pedigree. Calling them European is using the term very loosely. I think it's OK to refer to them as European, as long as everyone in the conversation agrees that it's being used as a slang term and that they are not really European dogs. It's a problem when someone in the conversation believes they are. Describing a AKC Ch, SchHIII dog as a European type of dog would be more appropriate because it's been proven to fit into the European idea. Still, it would be using a slang term to describe the dog and not technically correct in either case.
In the other thread, several posters informed me that my way of viewing this is wrong. I was told that the European method of breeding is not what makes the dogs European. OK, so school me. Help me out here- explain to me how you define a European dog.
[Someone is bound to try explaining how sometime in the past the original imported dogs from Europe became “American”. OK, I get that!!! Let’s ignore that for now and focus- What do you believe makes the dogs European, that is the question.]
In the other thread I was informed that-
1) The method of breeding used in places like Germany is NOT what makes a dog European.
2) It makes no difference what country the dog is born in.
3) How long the dog’s ancestors lived on the continent doesn’t matter.
So, then what is it that makes a European dog actually “European” in the strictest technical sense????? Not as a slang word or used loosely, but what is it that defines what makes a European dog actually "European"?
