 Barked: Tue May 14, '13 8:10pm PST |
 | |  | | That can boldly vary, absolutely, but ANYONE breeding in twenty years should better what ever it is they are breeding, per their own vision. Or one would hope that's a goal, otherwise they got into breeding simply to produce puppies. I suppose with some rarer breeds that in and of itself is reason enough, but once a breed has that basis, that becomes a little funky....the hope is that the breeders involved are trying to improve the dog. That "improvement" can be whatever their vision is.
So it doesn't have to just a structural improvement, let's say. It can be temperament, working ability, etc. Or if someone says a breed has gone too extreme, you can work towards improvement breeding for less. Quite a few people seem interested in longer legged Dachshunds, in example, and are quite dedicated about it.
One way or the other, you should be improving. That's sort of the core reason for being inspired to breed, unless a breed simply needs numbers. Twenty years of breeding, I'd hope to see a breeder who had come far, outside of that context.
I know that for me, in example, when I do start to breed Cockers, I will be breeding for less coat. Chester has the coat I consider ideal. His breeder was a sporting spaniel breeder, and she started with show dogs and bred "backwards"....but that's still improving. Improving = moving step by step towards your vision, bringing each generation a little closer. My goal is to recreate that old school Cocker temperament, and that would take a very long while. I would start with good temperament, but I want that UNIQUE temperament that made the Cocker the Golden Retriever of its day. That's what Daniel is supposed to be. His type stinks, but he has that bombproof master of merriment thing going on. Labor of love, his breeder actually breeds primarily field Labs (nationally titled and all that jazz), but always has one Cocker litter a year, which she has been doing forever, trying to get that temperament she knew as a kid. It's a side hobby for her and as small as a breeder can get, but she's still dedicated, and giving her points that Daniel is ridiculously kid proof....that's how they used to be. Ideal kids dog.
Tiller's breeder puts out dogs you can pick out from a crowd. Her dogs are REALLY distinct. She actually started with Dobermans and you can see a touch of that in her Giants, and she's also a horsewoman....a Dogster pal who wants a Giant says she wants that "horse like" Giant, meaning those with that sort of look. I was walking into PetSmart a few years ago and this woman ran up screaming "is that dog from California?!" She was a groomer there who had transferred from GA, a slightly Giant heavy region, and as a groomer her eye was that trained. Pretty amazing as his breeder is always importing, so she is taking those import lines then putting her vision on them. Even working within standards (not to say you have to, 'natch), a breeders interpretation can be dynamic. |  |  | |  |
|
| my posts | my page | msg me | my family's posts | gift me | become pals | [notify] |
1
Put that in the "no good deed goes unpunished" file....I think it's fantastic. Take it as it comes....she looks darling and is lucky to have, erm, "arranged" her way in 
To be frankly honest, if I really liked a breeder and things were getting all set to go forward and I learned they were utilizing a dog from twenty years ago, I may well stop to wonder how good a breeder could they be, if this is about improving each generation, to here we are many generations later and he's still of that sort of value, to where he would be the selection over many generations of improvement?
I mean, heck if I know, but it's def naturally improbable to impossible. Then again, I have funk with horses birthed from surrogate dams. I think even as humans, some people embrace that and others struggle with the concept, just because it is against the "natural order."
