[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [pyrnet] GPCA -- and dwarfs
I haven't been an owner of pyrs for very long and I have only seen pictures
of dwarf pyr's and I do understand the need to do the right think in
breeding for the good of the Great Pyr.but I must be honest and tell you
this letter as totally upset me.Dwarf children can not help the way they
were born and no they may not be physically beautiful to look upon,but to
come right out and as do we think their cute??I'm sure to the parents of
that dwarf child they are loved just as much as any normal child in
family.that was a very cruel and mean spirited think to say.I happen to know
a dwarf child and she as had to overcome the stares and comments of Adults
and children all of her young adult life and she has done it in silence.Nor
did her parents give her up because she wasn't normal but loved her just as
much.After reading the comment that was just made,I would say that child is
probably a bigger and better person than people with that kind of
opinion.Have you ever known a dwarf they are just like you and I and they
have a reason for being on this earth and the young girl that I know is a
very beautiful little girl with a great big heart.At the same time this is
being written if dwarf pyrs are not recognized as such at a very young age
do you that their owners love them any the less then we love our normal
pyrs.Wouldn't it be Grand if the world was so perfect.That's my opinion.
Peggy ,Shadow &Noel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Linda Weisser" <lmweisser@olywa.net>
To: <pyrnet-l@pyrnet.org>
Sent: Sunday, October 01, 2000 8:49 AM
Subject: Re: [pyrnet] GPCA -- and dwarfs
> Cindy,
>
> I sure don't think that you're being a pain. So, let's see where we can
go
> with this. We need to separate "litter registration" from "individual
> registration". I presume that all dwarfs are included in the count of the
> litter being registered. Most dwarfs are not even identified by the time
> that a litter is registered. One then has a choice to individually
> register a dwarf or not. Or the dwarf could have limited registration.
>
> Nothing in what the GPCA proposes to do will have any effect upon the
> ability of a dwarf owner to register the dog and show at any AKC event.
> Techinically full registered dwarfs could be shown in conformation. They
> would undoubtedly be excused for "lack of merit" but couldn't be
> disqualified because our standard has no DQs.
>
> What the GPCA would be saying is that the club will not recognize with its
> own private club awards an animal that demonstrates a genetic deformity
> which makes it totally outside the standard. We really are talking about
a
> great deal more than just not being "correct to the standard". I'm not
> interested in arguing here the "relative" merits of other Pyrs. Dwarfs
are
> clearly in a different category and we recognize that and the club has a
> general "policy" of striving to eliminate them. The fact that "The very
> people who know that he is a dwarf, that know it's a condition that is
> trying to be eliminated or
> controlled within the breed, and know that while he isn't 'correct to
> standard' he does currently exist within the breed" is at least partially
> behind the Board proposal. If the people who know most clearly that this
> is a serious genetic defect are willing to reward such with their own
> highest recognition, what does that say about the "seriousness" of the
> desire to combat the problem? As in "sure,we don't want dwarfs and we
know
> they are a genetic problem in the breed but heck, we'll make this one (or
> that one) a Hall of Fame dog and call it the best among the breed." At
> some level that may not make much sense. Just because you know something
> exists and you don't hate it and you don't banish it to the outer rings,
> does not mean that you need to honor it.
>
> How is this changing things in the public eye? Interestingly enough one
> officer of the club received close to a dozen phone calls over the year
> from people wanting to known where they could get a Pyr dwarf since they
> had just seen one and thought that they were *so* cute. Personally, this
> tends to strike terror into my heart. This situation is certainly not
> helped by putting the GPCA imprimatur of a HOF on them. This also connects
> somewhat to the earlier thread about breeding for dwarfs deliberately. It
> does seem increasingly clear that there may be a market out there.
>
> I really wish that we could strike some sort of balance here. Dwarfs are
> not "freaks" or horrors or to be banned and/or banished. They are what
> they are through a "mistake" of the genes. They are not anyone's "fault".
> They are not, or should not be, an embarassment to anyone. They simply
> "are". OTOH, they are *not* just like any other Pyr only smaller. They
> are not "cute". Do we see human dwarfs as "cute"?? I sometimes wonder if
> breeders who are so quick to trot dwarfs out into full public view and
make
> an issue of them, would be so quick to take into public and "promote" a
> normal size Pyr of their breeding who exhibited serious structual faults
or
> bright blue eyes or some other serious deviation from the standard. I
> suspect that these breeders would be *very* unwilling to have the public
> (and other breeders) see a dog so deviant from the standard. So what makes
> dwarfs different??
>
> There are probably more questions than answers, just as there is clearly
> more heat than light.
>
> Linda Weisser
> lmweisser@olywa.net
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@pyrnet.org with
> unsubscribe pyrnet-l
> as the BODY of the message. The SUBJECT is ignored.
>
>