I don't like ad's like this

[dsirkle]

I would like to point out, German Shepards(and a LOT of AKC breeds) have not "been around for centuries".
German shepards as they are known today are slightly over One century old. Many other breeds are not even fifty. Most of the toy breeds came about very recently.
That's still a LOT of generations, and some breeds HAVE been around for a long long time(usually the Japanese, or chinese breeds).
Any dog being bred can have genetic issues, or defects. The breeder should always be aware of the dog's health and possible issues prior to breeding it, and if they just don't really care, they shouldn't be breeding dogs.
The lack of specifics in the original ad shows that they don't seem at all concerned with the quality of dog, and in fact, very few breeders would part with a quality intact female of breeding age.

German Shepherds have been around for centuries with the same basic drives and instinct but the standards used today were only around for about a century. You can see photos of dogs referred to as German Shepherds from the mid 1800's but they differ greatly in appearance from the dogs of today. If my memory serves me correctly, a German military guy from the Kaiser Wilhelm era drew up the current standard. The general appearance of most breeds constantly evolves as change is not preventable. Everything that you said is essentially correct, I am just being a nitpicker.

[littleindiangirl]

German Shepherds have been around for centuries with the same basic drives and instinct but the standards used today were only around for about a century. You can see photos of dogs referred to as German Shepherds from the mid 1800's but they differ greatly in appearance from the dogs of today. If my memory serves me correctly, a German military guy from the Kaiser Wilhelm era drew up the current standard. The general appearance of most breeds constantly evolves as change is not preventable. Everything that you said is essentially correct, I am just being a nitpicker.

And also on that note, the standards for breeding the GSD in Europe are different than the American version. So much so, I think they will begin to look startingly different in the future. My future dog will hopefully be the black color phase, or the white. I love the classic black and sable, but you don't see very many pure blacks or whites.

[NightLad]

All dogs. Are the same species. Just with different physical Attributes. So yes. It is akin to breeding two different kinds of ball pythons.

All dogs may be categorized in the umbrella Canis familiaris, yet they differ radically from breed to breed. I’m not just talking about physical traits, either. Anybody who has owned dogs of different breeds will know that the inherent qualities of the dogs, such as mental ability, instinctual reaction, personality traits typical for the breed and general temperament (to name a few) differ greatly.

BPs, on the other hand, will exhibit the same BP traits no matter what morph they are – because a BP morph is only a superficial (aesthetic) difference between snakes. When you mix breeds of dog, you get a mixed bag with who-knows-what inherited and/or warped from the sire and dame. This point is discussed widely in dog breeding circles. The following points were made by one long-time breeder:

1. Purebred dogs are not mixes, because they breed true. That means that you can predict what they will look like, grow to become, act like, and what capabilities they will have from the moment they are conceived. This is NEVER the case with a mixed breed dog...you have no idea which genes you will get from which parent, nor which they will resemble, nor which breed in their background will most influence their temperament.

It takes many, many generations of selection to breed true. You can't breed one litter from two different breed parents and say that you have created a "new breed".

2. The purebreds we have today were never "designer" breeds -- they were never developed specifically for sale to the public as pets. They were never bred for "marketability". They were bred and developed for a PURPOSE -- a better hunting dog for lowland game; a better herding dog for the rough, hilly terrain of the Shetland Islands; a better Guardian for a tax collector; a better sled dog to ensure the SURVIVAL of a native tribe.

The "designer dogs" being mass-produced and sold to the public like Ugg Boots or Hollister jeans these days were developed for no noble, useful reason. THEY WERE DEVELOPED TO MAKE SOMEONE MONEY AT THE EXPENSE OF THE DOGS INVOLVED.

3. If people research their breeders, they will get what they pay for with a purebred. The same is NEVER true of a "designer" mix.

While all dogs may be members of Canis familiaris, they are not equal.

* Above emphasis/capitalization as appeared in original.

[wolfy-hound]

Actually a lot of the toy breeds were designed specifically for marketability to the upper class and people of the royal courts, when toy dogs came into fashion.
Yeah, I know.. I love to nitpick too. But I've been pet grooming for 17 years. Dog info/trivia is fun and impresses the clients.

[gmcclurelssu]

my question is this- who says that all ball python morphs are limited to coloration differences? just because breeders are selectively breeding for those colors, who says that there are not other traits that 'morph'? lets face it, based on body structure, there aren't that many visible traits we can use for spotting differences compared to dogs. there could easily be health traits in the wild that are still being naturally selected. how many other distinct morphs would breeders come up with if they weren't selecting for color, but rather other traits? blood hounds have a better sense of smell than many other breeds, and i would be willing to bet money that this is a trait that breeders could actively select for if you had a way to measure this sense. if people spent 500+ years breeding balls for these types of traits, it is possible the ball python species would be just as confusing as dogs are today.

[Argentra]

This is what it all comes down to, snake or dog:

You Shouldn't Breed Just For The Money!

Even if you had a champion show dog with perfect traits, you should not breed that dog just to get the green. If you aren't interested in bettering that breed with your dog's genetics, then don't breed it.
If you had the latest BP morph, a crazy wild pattern and bright outstanding colors that never faded with age, you should not breed that snake just to get the thousands of dollars a new morph may bring.

From individuals just looking to make a buck, to those horrid puppy mills, NONE of those people should be breeding their animals. Same goes for the new snake owner who saw the price tags at a show. Cats, Birds, Reptiles... all the same.

Never breed an animal, potentially effecting it's health and future, if you're only interested in the almighty dollar.

[mooingtricycle]

my question is this- who says that all ball python morphs are limited to coloration differences? just because breeders are selectively breeding for those colors, who says that there are not other traits that 'morph'? lets face it, based on body structure, there aren't that many visible traits we can use for spotting differences compared to dogs. there could easily be health traits in the wild that are still being naturally selected. how many other distinct morphs would breeders come up with if they weren't selecting for color, but rather other traits? blood hounds have a better sense of smell than many other breeds, and i would be willing to bet money that this is a trait that breeders could actively select for if you had a way to measure this sense. if people spent 500+ years breeding balls for these types of traits, it is possible the ball python species would be just as confusing as dogs are today.

100% Correct! Its not generally thought of in that sense. If ball pythons are kept for nearly as long as dogs have been as pets, by golly we might even see some different ball pythons down the road. Selective breeding is what its all comes down to, regardless of species.

All traits do not need to be visible for them to relate in the same manner that they do dogs. Comparing the two in the first place, is kind of a silly notion though. But hey. whatever.

[sg1trogdor]

Ah I dont care either way all dogs in Fact came from wolves. If i werent for selective breeding then we wouldnt have any of the cool dog breeds. And yes they are dog BREEDS not individual species. There is only one species of dog and it is Canis lupus familiaris. look it up. And yes I do think this is the same as breeding snakes for certain traits. Only difference is that most dogs were bred for a purpose and snakes are purely for hobby. Not speaking badly about breeding snakes but we arent breeding snakes to aid in hunting or herding. I am sure I will take some crap for this post but what the hell.

[icygirl]

We need to define the difference between a BREED and a MORPH. As far as I can tell the word MORPH indicates purely a color/pattern difference, and BREED means a group within a species with particular characteristics, which can include both physical and behavioral. Am I correct?

[wolfy-hound]

Not really. Norwich and Norfolk terriers are nearlu identical, both have the same general look, and disposition.
That's the same across many of the dog breeds, and of course dogs are individuals. When you add in the environmental element of how the dog is raised, what temperment the family has, are there other dogs in the household, then you'll end up with many differences within even littermates.