My question is what is in place here in the States to enforce the standard? Is the European requirements working/enforced/bettering the breed?
May I ask what is in place other places to "enforce" a standard that is made of millions of recessive genes that no one can control when they pop up???? Do you think the ZTP enforces good breeding practices???? Just read about the corruption that goes on in the "testing" it is still one judges opinion on any given day- ONE DAY....The true test is in numerous trials and venues were the dog continues to perform and achieve. How that dog holds up over time
Good breeders who are passionate about their breed are not going to breed for junk. Liars is a different matter and if they lie you will not be able to weed them out. All you do is eliminate good breeders and some dogs that might truly add great things to the gene pool but are eliminated just based on one criteria. No I have not seen better temperament coming out of dogs that have passed the ZTP any more than I have seen perfect dogs ONLY coming out of champion dogs.
Many standards have a DQ for height, but it is extremely rare that anyone including the judge will call for a wicket. What about the breeder who continues to breed the over standard dog? Who holds them accountable? How many breeders will cull a pup? What is done to eradicate a genetic issue once it has been identified in a line? Examples: Great temperament on a dog who throws bad hips? OFA Excellent who is timid and skittish? Are both of those dogs worthy of breeding? What happens when they are bred together? Are we willing to dilute a desired trait to correct a bad one and then have a plan to staunch up the desired trait again? Knowing that traits are often stronger in the 3rd generation, are we willing to sacrifice the 2nd gen to get what we need?
In a free country the cream does rise to the top and reputation is everything. What many seem to miss is good breeders hold themselves accountable. So do you honestly think a breed can prosper and succeed when any breeder only considers one aspect of the standard??? You have to look at the majority of what any dog throws not one or two that were not desirable. Who on earth would breed a timid or skittish dog for any reason especially in a working breed??? If we cull the vast majority because one person likes this but another want something different then where do you go????
So a good dog who throws bad hips - Do we have a test that predicts the future of puppies???? What part do you think the bitch played??? Was it just that one breeding that produced problems???? So who do you eliminate and based on what criteria??? How do you tell if a dog is OFA excellent that he will produce bad hips - so then OFA is useless???? Should one consider numbers-- say an ofa excellent dog produces 10% bad hips over a 5 year period??? Would you eliminate that dog if all the bad hips came out of one bitch???? How do your regulate successfully genetics?????
Breeders cannot look at just one dog - they have to consider so much more than one dog - they have to consider the impact on future generations, future pedigrees 10 years from now. I go to dog shows and unless it is a provisional judge who is not as familiar with every particular breed standard, the judging is very fair and most times they pick really nice specimens. You have to remember that sitting ring side you did not see the mouth, you did not feel the shoulder lay back and feel the rib spring - you did not put your hands on the dog which is a part of judging.
I do think a lot of losers have been very successfully in promoting the--- its political theory. Far too many of those who criticize have never shown a dog period. But something to consider is that judged a different day the same judge might pick a different dog. It is their evaluation on that particular day in that particular ring. I always make my picks based on what I can see and the majority of the time the dog I liked comes in first or second, so if I agree with the judging I see going on am I political??? Most of the time people who spend their money to send a dog to a handler send a nice dog because they can't afford to campaign a dud. So yes handlers win more often - but they also show more often.......so just the law of averages they win more often. I do not see anything out of balance with that. So much of the dislike is based on rumor, speculation and just down right sour grapes. A good dog will finish in a decent amount of time.
Do we honestly want the future of any breed in the hands of some PAID breed warden???? With that payment comes corruption. Breeds just need to stay focused on working to improve the breed they have - they need the freedom to create and develop - if you stifle that creativity you stifle progress.
For buyers who are primarily interested in temperament then they can CHOOSE a dog who has passed the WAE, but with that choice will come more responsibility for the owner to socialize and train that dog.
