Congrats to Maya, she looks lovely. And her pups are adorable!!!
Pups :-)
-
I have to agree with Linda, in that I didn't find anything too objectionable about any of the dogs shown in the pics. All of them (full Afs) had good enough type (IMO) and most of them had some fairly obvious faults…but the goal for imports is not to be a winning show dog, the goal is to have something significant to add to the breed. I was (am) a little concerned that the three female Avuvis looked terrified, but since Kathy was helping handle, maybe she can elaborate on the 'whole' story...by that I mean, maybe the pics captured the worst moments, and not the best...
-
It is good to know that they get assessed properly before being accepted into any breeding programmes
Um… people are breeding them as they want. BUT they do have to be evaluated before being registered as a Basenji.
Debra which Ntomba dog did you not like? N. Mobengi or N. Mosika who I see actually won, defeating an AKC registered and AKC pointed 1/2 African, or both?
I think Mobengi looks like a mix of a GSD/Ridgeback and something… not Basenji so much.
I like the body much more on Mosika but the pictures don't impress me as being great. Field champion, nice, but I certainly lack the experience and eye to see a BOB conformation in him. -
Kathy Britton, since you started this thread, are you still interested in showing us current photos of the pups you first posted?
-
Sharron,
I am pretty sure that the pups pictured in the first post are the same ones in the link Pat (Tanza) posted for the African match a couple pages back. The top pup is Miflissor, the tri is Dodougbe, and the third pup is Minhoudo. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be any real good stacked photos in that group of photos so it is hard to tell what they really look like now. -
Thanks for that information, Robyn.
-
Ok so I dont wade into too many debates on here, but…
I have been thinking about these dogs that were shown at the Af match, (since yesterday), and from the pics that Pat put up, the 3 Avuvi dogs are IMHO, worrying. Im not talking about their Basenji type, I just dont feel qualified enough to comment on that, albeit, I do have my opinion :D... I dont know if the pics from Pats linky is just taken at the wrong time, (as Quercus mentioned) BUT, these dogs dont look at all like the type of temperament that we need to introduce back into the breed, (IF, they were presented and accepted by the BCOA)...
A recent thread had comments about how much the temperament had improved in the breed over the last 10 or so years. Comments about their biting, growling, human and dog aggression etc, etc, painted a pretty nasty picture of them. I know I have spoken to many Aussie breeders about their, (overall), temperaments, and all agree that we also, have improved this in Australia as well. I have also had judges, normally All Breed judges, commenting that B's have had a HUGE improvement in their temperaments over the last 10 or so years as well. Some admitted that the Basenji is the one breed of dog that still frightens them :eek:...
So my question is...
If the pics taken at the Af match are a true representation of these dogs temperaments, do we really need this 'bred' back into the breed as a whole ???
Flame suit on, while running backwards, out of the room, very quickly
-
If the pics taken at the Af match are a true representation of these dogs temperaments, do we really need this 'bred' back into the breed as a whole ???
I'm wondering how you assessed temperament based on photos?
-
I'm wondering how you assessed temperament based on photos?
I am pretty sure that she is going by body language of the dogs in those pictures. I came to the exact same conclusion. To me, they look frozen with fear.
-
I'm wondering how you assessed temperament based on photos?
The saying 'a picture paints a thousand words' jumps to mind here ;)…
I am pretty sure that she is going by body language of the dogs in those pictures. I came to the exact same conclusion. To me, they look frozen with fear.
Frozen in fear explains it perfectly…
-
They sure looked scared to me.
-
I agree that they look scared but the question is, are they scared because they were born that way or because they haven't been socialized and trained for showing?
-
I agree that they look scared but the question is, are they scared because they were born that way or because they haven't been socialized and trained for showing?
Be hard to determine that now…. so people can only assume. At this point I would not take the chance in breeding them.
-
Here is video of the tri girl from this weekend.
-
I've hesitated for a long time in entering into this debate and have posted and deleted a few times. It really doesn't concern the UK Kennel Club because we no longer have the facility to import unregistered dogs.
As somebody who saw one of the very early imports here and also several of the first generations bred in the UK, I would say that these puppies/dogs definitely do not resemble those that I saw.
I don't really understand the debate, as in my opinion if they are born in West Africa they can't be Basenjis as described in our original standard. I don't understand either why any move wasn't made to register them as Avuvis rather than Basenjis if I have that correct? Please enlighten me, somebody. I do know that dogs with the Avuvi affix are on Sally's Basenji pedigree website and so am rather surmising.
The current UK standard is not brilliant in describing the Basenji and I'm sure that I could breed a dog to it's descriptions that is a mongrel!! Perhaps the AKC Standard is better?
Personally I would have thought that a requirement to breed African to African would be essential before considering the acceptance for registration of dogs from areas where other breeds exist. To each his own!
Just because a dog resembles a Basenji it doesn't make it a Basenji and vice versa.
Please pardon my presumption in entering the debate but I do feel a bit qualified as i'm about to become an honorary co-mother to a USA registered DRC baby.
-
Patty, IMO any dog brought over from Africa is only a village dog until the BCOA accepts them as basenjis. Some folks want to make a name for themselves, "make" a new breed or claim dogs are basenjis when in fact that isn't the case. Its a shame as the dogs are the ones who lose with this type of thing.
-
I agree that they look scared but the question is, are they scared because they were born that way or because they haven't been socialized and trained for showing?
Either way I wouldn't be happy to use them in my very new
breeding programme…If these are the same pups that were on the first page of this thread, and I believe they are, it appears to me they have had a deterioratition in their temperaments, quite a significant change, too. They were able to be handled and stacked, with their tails loosely held in the correct position... I dont know why, and Im not saying anyone is to blame, but I actually find it incredibly sad that these little pups appear to have gone downhill in their temperaments
-
As far as I know, I am pretty sure these are the same as the puppy pictures.
-
I couldn't tell temperament, but I did think they were either very poorly trained or socialized when you can't stack or get a relaxed picture.
That said (putting on my own flame retardant material)… not about these dogs, but the African ones in general. We need more genes. The problems of such a limited gene pool results in sometimes catastrophic problems (read up on heart problems with Cavaliers, where many countries CLAIMED 'not our lines' and then when real testing done, it's wide spread). If we get in some African stock that are more, well anything temperament wise, that issue can be bred out of them. I'd risk that over a diminishing gene pool any day. I for one am grateful for those who pushed to open the registry each time to include more dogs.
-
Here's the thing, are you really adding genes if you are just going to quickly breed away from what is added?
In order to have a significant impact, new dogs have to make significant contributions, percentages, of pedigrees in a breeding program. If what you are adding has so many faults that your next few steps is to breed to away from it to fix those faults then you are not truly adding anything new, it will be washed away quickly in the next couple of generations.
It is in the best interest of the breed that we select dogs to add to the studbook that are most likely to be used by many different breeders in different combinations. Though we have now on several different occassions added new founders, we seem to whittle them down so that only a few have signifcant impact on the breed within 20 years time. Look at the 87/88 imports and see how many of those are no longer represented in the modern population. We need to add dogs with traits that we want to keep, otherwise we get the feel good sensation of doing something right without the actual benefit.
-
I couldn't tell temperament, but I did think they were either very poorly trained or socialized when you can't stack or get a relaxed picture.
That said (putting on my own flame retardant material)… not about these dogs, but the African ones in general. We need more genes. The problems of such a limited gene pool results in sometimes catastrophic problems (read up on heart problems with Cavaliers, where many countries CLAIMED 'not our lines' and then when real testing done, it's wide spread). If we get in some African stock that are more, well anything temperament wise, that issue can be bred out of them. I'd risk that over a diminishing gene pool any day. I for one am grateful for those who pushed to open the registry each time to include more dogs.
The belief that registering "African dogs" as AKC Basenjis because we need more genes, is something very interesting to me.
The premise seems to be that we have such a limited gene pool that our breed is headed for disaster and a house of cards where health is concerned.
Perhaps we could start a new thread and discuss the idea that the Basenji gene pool is actually diminishing in such a calamitous way as to be cataclysmic.
Is our breed in such a dire situation?
What are the reasons?
What does it mean to "add new genes" by registering "African dogs?"
