From: terry@eece.ksu.edu (Terry Hull)
Newsgroups: rec.pets.dogs
Subject: Re: Hunting ability in Labradors (long)
Date: 19 Aug 92 20:50:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: moe.16uc69INNn3n
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: ralph.eece.ksu.edu

X005CB@tamvm1.tamu.edu (Chris Barnes) writes:

You seemed to have deleted my questions about breeds to recommend Mr. Joe
Q. Dogowner.  You say "Not Labs!"  Do you have a better suggestion for a 
40 - 60 lb dog who is good with kids, is relatively easy to train,
likes attention and exercise?  

>>>Because
>>>they *could* be getting one that IS "birdy" and should be used for
>>>hunting/breeding.
>>
>>With Rottweilers, we can usually tell at 8 weeks old if a dog will be
>>an outstanding working prospect.  Is this not true for Labs?  Can't
>>the breeder find this extremely "birdy" dog before he sells it?
> 
>Typcally, yes; the breeder can tell if the dog will be birdy.  And IF
>the pet buyer is buying from a breeder that cares, then it's not a
>problem.  But most breeders don't care (note:  by breeder here, I mean
>everyone that has a bitch produce a litter of pups, not just the
>profess. or informed breeder).  Most breeders will sell any pup to
>you that you pick out.....

Then I think your original proposal needs modification.  The problem
is not the *buyer* of the puppy, but the *seller*.  You proposed that
a Lab should not be purchased except for hunting because the dog
*might* be an extremely "birdy" one and those are rare.  It seems that
now you say it is not the buyer at all who has the problem, but the
greedy seller who will take money from anyone with a checkbook
regardless of the temperament or abilities of the dog.  You propose to
solve this problem by making sure that only serious hunting people buy
dogs from Mr. Incompetent Lab Breeder just in case the puppy the buyer
picks out happens to be a great one?  AKKK.  I think you are avoiding
the problem.

>>>As these dogs ARE rare, it should be prevented.
>>
>>Just how rare are they?  1 in 10?  1 in 50?  Even if "birdy" Labs are
>>1 in 50, how many Labs were registered last year?  100,000+ right?
>>That means 2,000+ "birdy" dogs registered in a single year?  Do we
>>really *need* this many dogs added to the breeding population out of
>>the puppies from a single year?  I realize we need more than this out
>>of a single year to maintain current numbers of puppies, but don't we
>>have an overabundance of puppies already?
> 
>An overabundance of puppies /= an overabundance of quality puppies.

Agreed.  

>To me, 2,000 quality pups seems to be a pretty small number....

Well, I understated the number of registrations / year and used an
extremely small number for the percentage of "birdy" pups.  If a
Rottweiler breeder was breeding for Schutzhund dogs and he can not
get more than 1 in 50 dogs to be good willing workers with good
temperaments, he had better make some serious changes in his breeding
program.  I assume the same would apply for Lab breeders.  

This discussion still begs the point.  If the problem is the
breeder and you will never solve that problem by trying to limit the
types of people he can sell to.  He will always be able to find
unsuitable buyers with an open checkbook.  

--
Terry Hull  -  terry@eece.ksu.edu
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Kansas State University