From: liza@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Liza Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.pets.dogs
Subject: Re: Welcome, Bianca
Date: 16 Dec 1992 23:58:59 GMT
Organization: Stanford Univ. Earth Sciences
NNTP-Posting-Host: pangea.stanford.edu
Keywords: adult poodle, helpful hints wanted

In article <1992Dec16.233015.8092@u.washington.edu> diannes@milton.u.washington.edu (Dianne Schoenberg) writes:
>Hey! Does anyone else have a problem with this?
>
>> According to her breeder, even though Bianca is
>> show quality, at 10.5 inches she's too big to show, so the breeder had
>> been breeding her.  
>
>From what I understand, there are basically two definitions of "show quality":
>   1) If a good-faith effort is made to show the dog, the dog is 
>      capable of earning a championship.  (Many breeders will offer
>      a written contract guaranteeing money back or a replacement
>      puppy if the dog is incapable of earning a championship)
>   2) (the looser and far less preferable definition) The dog has no
>      disqualifying faults.
>I *can't* think of any possible definition under which a dog with a
>disqualifying fault (as size definitely *is* for a toy poodle--maximum
>allowable is 10") could be considered show quality.

	This is absolutely fascinating given the current situation in
Labradors (a posting on this will follow sometime this week).  If this
poodle is PERFECT in every way but one and that one is a disqualifying
fault.  Is it unethical to breed this dog?  In this particular
circumstance, I'd have to say NO.  If the disqualifying fault is height,
and that is the dog's only fault, then the dog is a very good
representative of the breed and should not be eliminated from breeding
stock.  The reason behind this?  Height is relatively easy to correct in
breeding.  Breeding this bitch to a male of the correct height will produce
puppies that will tend to be correct.

	Obviously I'm over simplifying the situation, but you HAVE to look
at the WHOLE dog.  I think breeding for ONE characteristic, and one alone,
is a serious mistake.  You breed to produce the best example of the breed
and you are never going to get the perfect dog.  It just doesn't work that
way so there will ALWAYS be faults that you are dealing with.  As faults
go, height is simply not a serious defect.  Now, bad hips or bad
temperament or undershot jaws or something along those lines, that's a
little different.  But, still, breed for the whole dog, not for one part.

>> Her third litter was weaned a month ago.  As her third
>> litter consisted of one puppy, delivered by ceasarean, her breeder
>> decided to find her a good home as a pet.
>
>Certainly I can consider many circumstances under which it might be
>desireable to breed a dog with a disqualifying fault--but I would
>hope that a reputable breeder (which I *hope* this one is) would be more
>concerned with the quality of her get than the quantity.  Have any of
>the puppies from her earlier litters finished their championships?
	Again, if the bitch was a wonderful example of her breed but just
over-sized, she would be perfectly capable of producing puppies with her
good qualities and without her size -- assuming that the breeder would take
size into account when choosing a stud.

>(P.S.: Debbie--I certainly hope you don't take this as a flame of you,
>your mother, or Bianca.  I'm just concerned because I've heard breeders
>say some really gawdawful stupid things in the past just in order to sell 
>a dog--there really aren't any controls on such things.)
	My remarks should also not be considered flames.  This whole
situation is really timely and I will get that Labrador post ready this
week.


--
Liza Lee Miller         My dogs are labradorable!     liza@pangea.stanford.edu
Cibola Labradors            Field * Show * Fun                    415/326-5309
Cibola's Misty Mountain Hop--Hopper                   Mistypoint Kashmir--Kash
	            Campbellcroft Cibola Rosette -- Rosie