Quote:
Originally Posted by yukidomari
And actually, if you think about it, all dogs except those few bred expressly for companionship (and even then, a large number of the littles were ratters) all have a job. Just because almost of today's Rough Collies and Retriever types have been relegated to companionship/family dogs only means that their direction as a breed has gone away from work - not that they were always there from the start.
|
Isn't this the whole point everyone's trying to make?
Don't repeat history! These breeds are being brought up as an example of how real, functional, working dogs have been watered down to the point where they're just soft companion animals with different looks for different tastes. There are plenty of breeds out there that we don't need to turn the CsV into "another pretty face." Divisions in a breed are NOT inevitable if we stop it in its tracks! Just because it happens and it's the norm, it does NOT mean it has to be tolerated!!
I just want to clarify that when I said breeding needs to be open to interpretation (regarding rules of a breed club) I meant in more subtle ways of testing a dog's working character, I don't in any way mean that a breeder could go & say, "Eh, I want my dogs to be more calm & easy to manage, to make great pets!" when the dog should not in any way have that sort of temperament. The whole point of purebred dogs should be
breed preservation, which means holding to and testing correct temperament. When a breeder strives to develop their line, it's to come as close as possible to their vision of the breed standard, not to bastardize it. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but it's how I feel on the subject.
