Re: [PyrNet-L] Pyr puppy prices

[BirdBugg <BirdBugg@aol.com>]

In a message dated 3/24/98 6:16:34 PM Pacific Standard Time,
caspyr@aristotle.net writes:

<< The only way to determine if a dog (of any breed) is a good example of
 their particular is to compete in the show ring.
 
 Your just kidding, right?
 
 All Pyrs are working -- that's instinctive.
 
 Again, I hope you are kidding.
  >>

I'm with Jerome, I hope this was a joke.  How on earth is competing in the
show ring going to determine if the dog is a good enough example of the breed
to be bred?  Last I heard there was no requirement that show dogs prove they
have been OFA tested or for that matter any other health testing (depending on
the breed).  Even the conformation of dogs is compromised when handlers do
their best to "diminish" a fault.  And with Pyrenees, excuse me, I may not
know what I am talking about cause I do not show, but these dogs have a LOT of
fur and it can and would be my guess DOES hide a multitude of sins.

As I have mentioned before, I belong to other lists and coincidentally, this
exact same discussion is going on within one of the Boxer lists I am on.  From
what I am hearing, conformation showing is different from breed to breed.
However, with boxers most handlers that win are professionals.  A lot of
breeders on the list justify this saying that the professionals win more
because they are better at hiding undesirable faults in the dogs.  To me this
is not helping the breed.  A judge needs to see each dog in whole, faults and
all, to determine the "best example of the breed" in the ring.  This is only a
minor step above surgically altering your dog to look better in the ring.

IF and I mean ONLY IF, conformation showing was judged more fairly on a
CONSISTENT basis then yes, I could agree that in most cases the dogs that are
being bred should wear that CH title.  But until the system is reevaluated and
the "BEST DOG WINS" consistently (instead of the best handler, or most well
known, etc.), I do not see how you can justify that.  Everyone knows that Dog
showing as it stands today if a political entity, in many ways as bad if not
worse than what we see in Washington, DC!

I would like to see the shows and judging removed from AKC and handed back to
the breed clubs.  What business does a Mastiff judge have judging a boxer?
What business does a Newf  judge have judging a Pyr?  I am not saying that
there cannot be overlap, but it is essential that the judge understand
INTIMATELY the breed they are reviewing.

By continuing to wear the "Conformation is the only way to determine a
breeder" blinders we are only hurting the breeds we love.  Many fine examples
of the breed(s) are only shown in obedience or agility.  Does this mean they
should not be bred?  I think what is happening is we are narrowing the gene
pool when it is determined that only conformation show dogs will be bred,
which can also be very dangerous and will irreparably damage the breed.

I can tell you this, if I owned a ranch (going back to a previous email I
posted) and needed a LGD and knew another rancher that had a pair they were
very happy with on their farm and they bred them, I can say with a fair amount
of certainty that I would purchase my "working" dog from a breeder that was
breeding "working" parents before I would purchase from a breeder that only
bred for shows.

This is again intended as food for thought and in no way is directed at any
one individual.  I will get down off my "soap box" now before I get stuff
thrown at me and fall off!!!! LOL

Sandy