Working abilities ought to be clearly defined in the breed standard and a basic performance standard given where possible. Clearer and more detailed descriptions of desired temperament and of qualities bearing on trainability ought to be part of the new standards. Standards should be holistic descriptions of the breeds they identify, brief statements of essential breed qualities, rather than typological blueprints. It is imperative to subordinate typological thinking to considerations of utility, genetic health and hardiness. It might eventually be found desirable to quietly merge scarce and consistently unpopular breeds, as well as closely similar breeds, with populations nearest to them in general characteristics, possibly initially designating them as breed varieties.
Reasonable numbers are necessary for the maintenance of a healthy population.
The number of breeds recognized has continued to grow, yet the total number of dog owners in the country may not have grown proportionally. Breeds known to be of low viability due to their dependence for breed identity on anomalies such as achondroplasia, may have to be dropped from the registry unless evidence is advanced that they can be upgraded to certain minimum standards of health and structural soundness.