Archives for 2014

Some commentors on an earlier Open Thread were discussing Vox‘s latest clickbait about the “(somewhat)definitive ranking” of the “most overrated and underrated” dog breeds:

This chart, from David McCandless‘ fascinating new book Knowledge is Beautiful, ranks 87 dog breeds and compares those rankings to the actual popularity of the breeds in the US.

The ranking is based on a number of factors: trainability, life expectancy, lifetime cost (including the price of food and grooming), and suitability for children, among others.

The result: Border Collies, according to McCandless, are the finest dog breed in existence. Labs, Beagles, and Golden Retrievers, while not at the very top, are other popular dogs (at the top right of the chart) that he rates highly…

I’m not gonna post the chart here, because fair use, but it’s a specimen example of GIGO (garbage in, garbage out). Apart from some obvious clangers — that’s a Cardigan corgi icon at the center top, not a Pembroke, which is like confusing a Rottweiler with a Doberman — there’s a lot of shaky assumptions and conflations even to my informed-amateur eyes.

First big mistake, IMO, is that there’s vastly different size pools to draw upon. There probably aren’t as many Welsh Springer Spaniels registered in a year as there are Labs in a good week, and I suspect every Pharaoh Hound owner in America is no more than two degrees separated from every other PH owner. That’s going to skew the statistics for factors like ‘costs’ and ‘aliments’, because people who breed and buy rare(r) breeds will, as a group, pay more for those rare puppies and spend more to keep their expensive acquisitions in the best of health.

Secondly, both ‘longevity’ and ‘appetite’ metrics are inherently skewed against the larger breeds. Individual exceptions abound, but as a rule of thumb, the bigger the dog, the shorter the lifespan. No responsible dog buyer expects a Great Dane or a Newfoundland to live as long as a Beagle or a Miniature Schnauzer; the people who choose to live with big dogs are aware that they’re trading ‘purchase cost per day’ for factors that are, to them, more important. And, yeah, big dogs cost more to feed than little dogs, but that particular expense should be waaaay down the decision curve when it comes to picking the “best” dog breed for a particular situation.

Most seriously, the chart is seriously wrong about its definitions of “dumb” and “clever” (and I say that as someone whose chosen breed, Papillons, are scored clever). Notice that Australian Shepherds, Dachshunds, and most of the sighthound breeds (including Great Danes) are labelled “dumb”, while Labs and Cocker Spaniels are labelled “clever”. Not to hurt anyone’s feelings — I’m sure your Lab or Cocker is well above average! — but when it comes to which breed is quickest to learn new behaviors or solve novel problems, Labs and Cockers would score firmly in the mid-ranges. Labs and Cockers are smart enough dogs, in general; they may not be laboratory super-geniuses like Border Collies, but they’re compliant. Cooperative. As the sales literature says, “eager to please”. Dachshunds, Basenjis, even Aussies… not so compliant; the term “willful” or “self-directed” is used more often when describing them. The graph confuses problem-solving intelligence with temperamental compliance. Which is like ranking food based on cost-per-kcal and appearance; they’re both factors in food preferences, but if you overweight them against metrics like palatability or local custom, you’ll end up giving the top score to granualized Soylent^tm run through a 3D printer and nobody will come to your dinner parties.

No matter how elaborate the spreadsheet, there is no one “best” dog breed because there is no single “dog purpose”. People love dogs, and own dogs, for a whole host of purposes — companionship being the most important for the average American. Dogs have adapted, brilliantly, to meet our utilitarian, emotional, and aesthetic needs, which vary not just from person to person but from year to year. Someone living in an apartment will be happiest with a small dog, or at least a low-key couch potato dog; someone who loves to exercise will be happier with a high-energy dog; people living with children have different requirements than those of who don’t, and parents of toddlers different needs than parents of teenagers.

What you, Novice Dog Buyer, want is a dog that will pick up and respect basic rules: “don’t pee in the house, chew the furniture, challenge the household humans for dominance, molest the other pets in the household; always be happy to share a cuddle or go for a walk”. What you don’t want is a dog that is smart enough to get bored when it’s left alone for fourteen hours a day, or one that needs more exercise than you can reliably provide. Border collies fall into both these categories — to be healthy, to stay sane, they need regular mental and physical stimulation. They may be “the best” but they are not beginners’ dogs, any more than a Maserati or a NASCAR racer is a commuter’s car. Unless you have a flock to herd, or you work from home and can commit to at least an hour of outdoor exercise every day for the next ten years, getting a Border Collie is setting yourself up to break a good dog and your own heart.

Late-Night BS Open Thread: <em>Don’t</em> Get A Border ColliePost + Comments (91)