The following was taken, with permission from the author, from a thread on the Spanie-L List regarding breeding for competitive events vs. breeding for a well-rounded representative of the breed:
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 14:54:39 -0500
From: Bob Sergeant
Subject: The unexamined breeding program
The variety of people on the list is extensive. Many are strictly owners or trainers of Spaniels. And for these owners there is truly only one responsibility and that is to love and care for their dogs no matter what they may choose to do.
I have always felt breeders, including – and especially – myself, should be held to a higher level of responsibility to their breed and those who buy their puppies. My responsibility is to breed the best English Springer Spaniel I can, and if in doing so they are considered worthy to win events in the field or in the show ring, great. If they do not, but live up to as many expectations that one might make of an English Springer Spaniel as a physically and mentally sound companion, hunting dog and breed representative, then I am succeeding as a breeder.
When a breeder of show dogs is not breeding actively to instill instincts as a requisite part of their selection process, or when a breeder of field trial dogs is breeding without consideration of soundness, conformation and breed type as a requisite part of their selection process, they are not breeding the best Spaniel, they are breeding “event dogs” that compromise the true character of the breed.
By simply saying we should all be satisfied to end this debate by saying “you do your thing and I do mine” is simply a way to avoid the issues and not take responsibility —–sweeping the issue under the rug to avoid controversy.
Simply put, if you take a position of “I am breeding the BEST as a show dog” or “I am breeding the BEST as a field dog”, the end reward is personal satisfaction of winning the event. It has little to do with putting forth the best effort to breed the best Spaniel.
(editor’s note: There was comment that in some cases proving ability would be impossible or impractical, example being the Rhodesian Ridgeback which was developed and used for Lion Hunting)
With regards to Rhodesian Ridgebacks, that breed is their responsibility. The fact that they have a breed that can not be easily trained for the task originally intended does not alleviate me from my responsibilities to maintain my breed.
With regards to not being a hunter or being turned off by killing birds, again, that does not remove the responsibility that one has as a breeder to maintain the breed. While you may not test your own dogs, that does not mean that you cannot breed to dogs that have been tested and proven. The (AKC) Hunting Test program can make a difference even if it is used passively. And indeed a WD (Working Dog) or a WDX (Working Dog Excellent) on a dog 3 or 4 generations back does not mean much relative to instinct.
Nature and the market place abhors a vaccuum. If show bred Spaniels were consistantly good hunters and overdone coats were not a problem the field bred Spaniel would not exist today. I spoke to a group of English Cocker Spaniel show enthusiasts over 10 years ago and suggested that if they did not soon get out and prove and promote their dogs that soon they too would have a distinctively split breed with an emerging field bred bloodline. (Editor’s note: This has already been the case with English Cockers in the UK for decades.)
To the credit of the Welsh Springer Spaniel, Clumber Spaniel and others, they are preserving the integrity of their breed. I hope that more breeders of English Springer Spaniels, English Cocker Spaniels,and American Cocker Spaniels decide that they, too, want to preserve the identity of their breed rather than evolve it to suit their personal competitive desires.
If these debates cause one to reflect on their responsibilities as a breeder to their breed, than they are worth it each and every time they occur.
If I may quote an ancient Greek Beagle breeder, “the unexamined breeding program is not worth feeding”
BobSgt
AfterBen@aol.com
