RE: [PyrNet-L] Pyr puppy prices

[David Wong <dkw02@gnofn.org>]

On Wed, 25 Mar 1998, Jennifer Lindsey wrote:

> This just sort of blew me away.  It definitely shows how different breeds
> have different complaints about the show ring.  In watching Shelties, I have
> seen far too many beautiful, typey Shelties who couldn't move than nice
> moving Shelties that weren't as typey.  I personally would give up some of
> the extreme typeyness (is that a word?) and excessive amount of hair (this
> is a working breed after all) for a Sheltie that can move and is sound.  I
> find the best thing for me is competing in performance events as well as
> conformation.  You get to see the beautiful type in the conformation ring,
> the intelligence in the obedience ring, the instinct in the herding arena,
> and the agility in the agility ring.  And performance dogs must be sound.
> It makes me want it all in one dog and that is what I breed for - a
> versatile Sheltie. 

I've noticed that as well.  While I'm not speaking about shelties or pyrs
specifically as I can see most of these dogs have retained their abilities
to work, it is true of some of the other breeds.  If the commentator at
Westminster who breeds and shows Afghan hounds is typical of some show
people, the thought that all of the breeds and specifically all the ones
that have been shown in Westminster can still perform the function in
which they were bred seems a bit ridiculous, if not funny.  It seems like
the only purpose for the remarks is for good story-telling and enlivens
a breed's history.

For instance, if that were really true, most of those dogs would not be
groomed the way that they are.  It wouldn't be practical in a working
situation for some of the dogs to have long coats that drag to the floor,
require brushings every 2 seconds for a hair that is slightly out of line,
or grooming that can take a week to do properly.

More importantly, many of the working dogs should have some kind of
working title. The AKC has several performance events and yet many of the
dogs that are shown don't have a single title.  How about some field trial
and hunting titles on the conformation retrievers, earthdog titles on some
of the terriers, herding titles on the herders, lure coursing with the
hounds?  It must be assumed that all of the top dogs have retained those
abilities.  The majority of the top show dogs at Westminster haven't
proven any sort of working ability. I would think that more people who
show dogs and have breeds which have a history of working ability be able
to prove it and more importantly want to prove it.  However, I don't think
it should be required but encouraged.  While the individual breeds as a
whole may be able to perform their duties, is that true for most that make
it to BOB? Are these dogs campaigned so heavily and groomed so much that
they don't have time to test their working ability? If so, then how can
anyone make a broad statement that every dog can perform work for which it
was bred?  Because these individual dogs are the ones who will be prized
for breeding after a big win at a dog show, shouldn't their working
ability be a big consideration?  ...And then there is structure in
standards that can't possibly aid a dog to perform their work. 

And to avoid confusion or unnecessary controversy, I'm not talking about
pyrs. 

David

------------
"All relationships are a mirror of the relationship you have with
yourself." - Deepak Chopra