NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/rec/pets/dogs/15404

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-22 | 4.4 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!darwin.sura.net!cs.utk.edu!carlsberg.cs.utk.edu!primeaux
From: [e-mail] (David Primeaux)
Newsgroups: rec.pets.dogs
Subject: Re: On the breeds' original purposes
Date: 21 Dec 1992 20:24:37 GMT
Organization: University of Tennessee, Knoxville - Department of Computer Science
Lines: 68
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail] (David Primeaux)
NNTP-Posting-Host: carlsberg.cs.utk.edu

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Chris Barnes) writes:
|> In article <[e-mail]>
|>    [e-mail] (David Primeaux) writes:
|>
|> >Toss up for discussion:  Are the original purposes of the breed so sacrosanct
|> >that they can not evolve to match today's purposes of the breed?
|>
|> MHO:  *IF* the new purpose is in effect serving the same purpose as
|> before, then yes.  Otherwise, no.
|>
|> example: IMHO, the purpose in the labrador retriever is to retrieve
|> things (usually from cold water).  If you want to breed them to dive
|> under the water to catch fish (or crabs, or ....) that's fine.
|> Breeding them to guard a liquor store is not.
|>
|> NOTE:  what the objectives are when a person breeds, and what an
|> individual dog does are 2 entirely seperate questions.  In that case,
|> if you happen to have a very protective lab (to extend my example above),
|> then (imho), it would be perfectly acceptable to USE him/her to guard the
|> store.  But unless it proves that it can accomplish the purpose of the
|> breed, then it should not be bred (no matter how good a guard dog it is).
|>
|>
|> >Since I own dalmatians, I offer a (rhetorical) followup question:  If my
|> >dalmatian is a wonderful example of the breed in every respect except that
|> >she will not (or can't) run for long distances alongside a carriage (her breed's
|> >original job), would breeding her harm the breed? Note that the question is
|> >entirely rhetorical, since she is spayed.
|>
|> yes.  (that's assuming you have correctly defined the purpose of
|> dalmations for us.  I don't know anything about dalmations.)

The "in effect serving the same purpose" seems a bit slippery to me, despite
the example Chris gives.  Let's get back to dalmatians, for example. And let's
for the sake of argument that the original purpose of the breed was to run for
long distances alongside a carriage.  Being a carriage dog is perhaps a trifle
archaic, agreed?  So we have a breed whose original purpose is passe. Some might
argue that the breed is no longer needed (I won't, and apparently Chris won't
either -- although I hesitate to put words into his mouth).  Others might argue
that the breed is needed so long as someone somewhere is willing to still get in
a carriage and run these dogs so that they can be tested (with regard to original
purpose) for fitness to breed.  Another alternative is the one that I *think* Chris
might champion is that they should be tested in performance of some task that is
"in effect serving the same purpose."  Running alongside cars is one such task
that comes to mind.  In my mind this would present a clear and evident danger to
such dogs, I don't want to be unfair about the issue.  What would a safe, suitable
task "in effect serving the same purpose" be for a dalmatian?

My opinion:  if the original purpose of the breed is archaic and the breed is
still valued for other purposes -- such as disposition or color or size or whatever
-- dogs of that breed can and *ought* to be bred with those values in mind.

My opinion, one step further:  if the original purpose of the breed is archaic
to some people but they still value the breed for other purposes (as above),
-- dogs of that breed can and *ought* to be bred with those values in mind.  I point
out (*not* to start a flame war, but only to illustrate with a controversial example)
that some people consider hunting archaic (I have been known to hunt, so don't
bother flaming me for this observation.).

|>
|>       -----------------------------------------------------
|> Chris Barnes            |   President - Bryan/College Station
|> [e-mail] |         Retriever Club.
|> [phone] (home)   |   "Dedicated to the betterment of
|> [phone] (work)   |               the retrieving breeds"

david
[e-mail]