|Tiller- (Skansen's- Ira in the M|
I DO Exist...To- Drive You Batty
|Barked: Sun Feb 24, '13 7:06pm PST |
|I don't think it's a question of the "only," Gus, but rather hinging on the phrase "most likely."
Collies are really a great example. Great dogs. Bred down, so you are not getting near the herd-y behavior of so many other herding breeds. However, they are prone to SA, need strong socialization when young as they do have a timidity trend, etc. They are every bit the nanny dog and benevolent guardian a Newf can be, but of a more nervous and vulnerable temperament. Now conversely, Collie to Newf, they are exquisite precision dogs, absolutely a strong choice if you were interested in titling in OB. And are of legendary devotion....rep in the breed is that they are telephathic, although minimally history supports them as the most famed breed to find their ways home and/or to their owner over insane distances. So it is not as if the Collie doesn't have his own niche and appeal, and he does not lack a flexibility, but in terms of "the most" amongst the bombproof, he is not the ace that some breeds are.
Or comparing Lab to Golden. Labs are wonderful, but they are more of a pushy, boisterous breed and not as soft as Goldens are. They also don't have the sense of responsibility that a GOOD Golden does....they are natural nannies. Labs LOVE kids, no doubts. But in the scenario that you put the dog outside with your nieces and newphews, unless we are getting into a seriously upper elite line, they'll be his personal playthings vs the dutiful Golden, who will be both perceptive and gentle, and if they jar open the gate, the Lab is the far higher candidate to book it, the Golden the far higher candidate to not leave his appointed sentry.
It's not that Labs can't be great, but a question of who is the more qualified, if what you want is to start with the best qualified candidate. Goldens were far more developed for handler work than Labs, who are somewhat more independent and a bit more self agenting with their drives. Either is a great choice as a family dog, although if you want one because your boys are driving you insane you might opt for a Lab, whereas if you want a mommy's helper a Golden may be more your deal. Either is fine for either, but each is more explicitly suited over the other to the roles specified.
We can set ourselves up for success....many do....or it can come down to a breed that we really like and then making it work. As with me and Giants, the fundamental problem is that I need them to be pretty open-minded when it comes to strange dogs coming into their home. That is not exactly a Giant thing (understatement), and I have had to make extended efforts, laying down a ton of foundation before it can become a problem then guiding them as they get into the age set where it might become one, finally coming out on the side I wanted. Now with a Kerry Blue, I knew that role was expecting too much, so I did not pursue that breed in earnest. With Giants I knew it was somewhat fault line, but once I felt I had the chops to pull it off proceeded. If I get a Giant one day who is just a bit beyond it, that is a price I pay for willing a breed to be something it isn't naturally. My fault. If I want assurances, I need to start with the breed that best qualifies. If I start with a breed ill qualified, I feel I ought to be slapped. If I start out with a fair candidate, I need to be prepared for extra effort, and being prepared to accept things if they don't turn out as I had hoped.
There are various ways we can pick a breed. Find the one that calls to us and see if we can make that work (*before* proceeding, please, lol!) or thinking of our expectations and seeing what the ultimate choices are. Either is fine, but the OP wanted the best, and when it comes to social center, stability, an easygoingness along with earnestness, the kingpins have been getting listed.
|my posts | my page | msg me | my family's posts | gift me | become pals|| [notify]|