From: X005CB@tamvm1.tamu.edu (Chris Barnes)
Subject: Re: Hunting ability in Labradors
Organization: Texas A&M University
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 16:24:28 GMT

crs = Charlie Sorsby   lm=Liza Miller
 
crs> But--you knew there would be a "but" didn't you?--Liza's final
crs> point is, I think, the thing that must be considered in discussing
crs> what is happening to the breed (or any other breed, for that
crs> matter).
 
lm> I agree with what Charlie says here.  It is important to discuss
lm> what is happening to the breed.  I guess I just wanted to point out that
lm> the prognosis is decidedly not as grim as one might have supposed by the
lm> earlier discussion.
 
I have an immense respect for what Charlie says, and I again agree with
him completely.  And even though it may sometimes not sound like it, I
almost always agree with Liza too.  The reason I have such a bad
prognosis for Labs is because I can forsee them going the way of other
breeds that lost their usfulness due to popularity.
 
 
 
crs> I'd like to expand on what Liza said with some views of my own.
crs> First, popularity has been the (at least apparent) ruination of
crs> many a breed.
lm> That is absolutely true.
 
 
crs> Whether Labradors have
crs> reached this state is something that I am not qualified to say.
 
lm> Well, Labradors are a strange  situation because there has always
lm> been a dichotomy between "show" people and "field" people.  The two camps
lm> are pretty well-defined and pretty antagonistic towards each other.  I
lm> think that is too bad.  But it does make the problems of popularity more
lm> emphasized.  In my opinion, neither of these camps is in danger of ruining
lm> the breed.  They are the backbone of the Labrador breeding program --
lm> albeit they breed for different purposes.  The real danger is the people
lm> who latch on to the popularity of a breed and breed for profit.  I suspect
lm> that each and every breed that has been damaged by popularity can point to
lm> these folks as the true culprits.
 
And THAT (popularity of the breed for other purposes) is what I was
trying to subdue in my post that started this long thread.
 
 
lm> The point is that when you decide to change the dog's
lm> original purpose, you change the dog.
 
*applause*
 
 
crs> But real problems are produced as well.  As inferior dogs are bred
crs> to satisfy demand, the gene pool is poluted.  The genetics of
crs> complex traits such as hunting ability are complex too.  It becomes
crs> difficult to weed out the results of such a breeding explosion even
crs> by those who bother to try.  As it becomes more and more difficult
crs> to locate good dogs true to the breed, fewer will bother.
 
lm> However, I think that the backbone of the breed will continue to
lm> breed to their own goals and thus, will not loose that original, strong
lm> gene pool.  Look at the way that German Shepherds and Dobermans have made a
lm> recovery after their personality.
 
But those breeds only started to recover after they lost favor with the
masses as pets.  I don't forsee that happening to Labs, so WE have to
do more to protect the breed.
 
      ----------------------------------------------
Chris Barnes            |
x005cb@tamvm1.tamu.edu  |  Only 15 more days until the start of
(409) 846-3273 (home)   |           hunting season (in Texas)
(409) 845-8454 (work)   |