Thursday, May 29, 2014

How NOT To Enlarge the Gene Pool

   At a time when health issues and temperament concerns have become more pronounced in our dogs, the American breeder of Golden Retrievers has apparently determined that the solution can be found by LIMITING the available gene pool for the breed. At least the decisions being made in recent years have led to that result.
   The unintended consequences produced are a by-product of policies and decisions which were supposed to improve the breed, and are fueled by those who insist that they are the RESPONSIBLE breeders and the rest of us are nothing more than a collection of uneducated backyard hobby breeders or belong to that horrid group of "puppy mills" (no names, please). 
   Would-be puppy buyers are warned against dealing with anyone who is not a responsible breeder, which appear by definition to be those NOT identified by the GRCA. Never mind that some of those on the recommended list offer Goldendoodles for sale. Not to worry; they are few and far between. And the GRCA has gone out of its way to provide articles which condemn such "designer dogs." 
    The parent organization warns us, as well, NOT to pick a pup based upon coat color. That should be your last and least important concern. While no article appears to even discuss red-coated Goldens at all, the public is discouraged from buying "white" Goldens offered by unscrupulous breeders who lie about their litters. No, they are not white, no they are not rare, and no they are not healthier nor do they possess better temperaments. We know this because an article on the GRCA website says so. So, what is the safest bet: Buy GOLD Goldens, of course. 
   As for TYPE, the GRCA website appears to believe that silence is the best policy. Where can we find an article that compares and contrasts the American-type as distinguished from the English-type Golden Retriever? I can't seem to find one. And yet a family or individual who desires to buy one can find hundreds of kennels in both the United States and Canada which offer either one type or the other or perhaps even a blending of the two types. We are left totally in the dark as to whether one type is to be preferred to another; whether there are any advantages to purchasing one type rather than another. 
   How do breeders limit the gene pool?
          (1) By selling virtually all their available pups with a non-breeding contract.
          (2) By breeding only to the bitches and stud dogs which they own.
          (3) By breeding only to show stock-- preferably champion x  champion --                failing to consider others of quality but lacking in conformation titles.
          (4) By breeding to coat color. This can be done in two ways. Either you breed                  only gold coats to gold coats OR breed only cream to cream. In either case,
               you are limiting your options. Both are restrictive; but the GRCA claims that
               in the latter instance, you are breeding an "undesirable" dog to an "un-
               desirable bitch."  In fact, responsible breeders should not-- by implication--
               breed their gold stock to such an "undesirable" color.
          (5) By breeding a single stud dog to vast numbers of bitches. One dog of note
               was paired with no less than 132 different females. Others may have 
               perhaps matched or exceeded that number. Was that dog so outstanding 
               that it was worth limiting the gene pool?
          (6) By breeding only for purpose-- field, conformation ring, agility and such. 
               We are told that we should never forget that the Golden Retriever, first and                 foremost, is a HUNTING breed. But how many breeders cross their "field"
               Golden with a "show" dog? 
                  The GRCA website has articles written by authorities in the breed. Judges
               are asked to guess whether a particular dog could accomplish his bred-for 
               task by watching the dog move about for a few minutes in a ring and by
               examining his overall structure.  It is even suggested that AT LEAST ONCE
               before judging the Golden Retriever breed, the judge should actually watch
               a dog IN THE FIELD or at least at a field trial.
                  Because the Golden is now a multi-purpose dog, we are even told by the
               same leading authorities in the breed that it is now permissible to have and 
               expect to see allowable differences in temperament based upon the task
               or purpose for which the dog was bred.
           (7) By breeding exclusively to type and proudly advertising that type. There
                 is a broad range of coat color available among the English-type Goldens in 
                 America (if the color issue concerns you). But why the deliberate    
                 decision to breed only the American type or only the English type?
                 While at the same time you insist that there is but ONE breed, ONE
                 Golden Retriever. This goes well beyond the issue of style or aesthetic
                 preferences. It carries with it an assumption that one type is superior to 
                 another. That one is DIFFERENT from another, at least to the extent that
                 they can be distinguished-- one from another. So much for the MYTH that 
                 there is but ONE Golden Retriever. 
                    Nor is it possible to assess each type fairly against a Breed Standard 
                when that breed standard is written to reflect the IDEAL AMERICAN-type 
                Golden Retriever. At the very least, fairness would dictate that you judge 
                the English type by using the English Breed Standard. Would you think it 
                fair if the judges applied the English Breed Standard to dogs exhibited at
                an AKC venue? Why should the reverse be acceptable? But that is what we 
                do in America.

                 
                            

No comments:

Post a Comment