Griffon Snob !

Pointer and setter breed specific questions. Kennel information requests, etc.

Moderator: Moderator Pack

Re: Griffon Snob !

Postby JONOV » Fri Jul 20, 2018 3:27 pm

flitecontrol wrote:
flitecontrol wrote:
JONOV wrote:Is that the case? I've never seen a pedigree so I guess its hard to say. If you bought a PP from a Bodo litter after he left NAVHDA would NAVHDA register it? Would FDSB register it? FCI?

Also, Bob Farris in his interview with the Hunting Dog Podcast said the Pudel was likely the Barbet.


When the Wirehaired Pointing Griffon Club of America (WPGCA) chose to outcross with Fouseks, NAVHDA refused to recognize any dogs from Griffon/Fousek breedings. Yet Bodo's outcrossed dogs were never questioned by NAVHDA. Seemed pretty hypocritical to a lot of folks, including Ed Bailey, one of the founders of NAVDA. He wrote a very strong letter of resignation to the organization. Wish I still had a copy, and could remember the name of the NAVHDA official who was responsible for the decision. I didn't know Bodo had split with NAVHDA, but that may have been the reason he left. I'll see if Ed Bailey knows and report back. All in all, a sad example of politics at its worst IMO. The WPGCA set up their own registry.

I can't remember the name of the individual that set forth the principle of developing one of the versatile breeds (DD?) but it went something like this: "Breed as you see fit, but be open about what you breed with."

I don't think anyone knows for sure what a Pudel was. It could have been a predecessor of the Barbet, the Barbet, or something else.


Got an email from Ed and he confirmed what had earlier been posted about why Bodo quit NAVHDA. Namely, he didn't like where the organization was headed, to wit the registry. When his efforts to get rid of it fell short by one or two votes, he left. Ed quit as mentioned above, but, like Bodo, was also seeing where things were headed; the registry, invitational, and the move toward AKC and American Field type trials.

It should be about breeding the best dogs possible, not about money or power, or politics, or competition, or producing enough pups to meet demand.

That's the problem. Define "best dogs possible." Your best and my best might be very different. What baby gets thrown out with what bathwater? At what point do you look at a temperament and say, "nope, not breeding that." I have yet to see a breeding that doesn't involve a compromise somewhere. You want a bit more run or a bit more motor? The dog might be hard to handle, more than what some people want. You want a great coat? Ok...What if the dog with the bestest coat (by your or whoever's definition) in the litter is a C student as far as everything else, but the A student littermate has a subpar coat? I think that NAVHDA and the JGHV systems are the best thing out there, but plenty of people disagree, and that doesn't make them wrong or me right.

And who gets to be the arbiter of what should or shouldn't be done? Korthals is dead, so is Mr. Armbruster, and everyone else that developed these breeds. Even Bodo just took an old breed and established it here. I wonder what the German Parent Club would have said about his outcrosses. So if I think that "geez, none of these Griff's want to point and they run like Clumber spaniels, I'm going throw in a Shooting Dog Field Trial Setter," what gives me the authority to do that? Even if I'm the Fuhrer of the club, that's where the split happens, because at some point interests diverge.

We have in this country two Munsterlander Clubs, and at least two Pudelpointer organizations. There are three GSP organizations if you count the DK club, (GSPCA, NGSPA, VDK-GNA,) and the same is true with plenty of other breeds I could mention.
JONOV
Master Poster
Master Poster
 
Posts: 391
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 1:14 pm

Re: Griffon Snob !

Postby flitecontrol » Fri Jul 20, 2018 8:05 pm

JONOV wrote:
flitecontrol wrote:
JONOV wrote:


Got an email from Ed and he confirmed what had earlier been posted about why Bodo quit NAVHDA. Namely, he didn't like where the organization was headed, to wit the registry. When his efforts to get rid of it fell short by one or two votes, he left. Ed quit as mentioned above, but, like Bodo, was also seeing where things were headed; the registry, invitational, and the move toward AKC and American Field type trials.

It should be about breeding the best dogs possible, not about money or power, or politics, or competition, or producing enough pups to meet demand.

That's the problem. Define "best dogs possible." Your best and my best might be very different. What baby gets thrown out with what bathwater? At what point do you look at a temperament and say, "nope, not breeding that." I have yet to see a breeding that doesn't involve a compromise somewhere. You want a bit more run or a bit more motor? The dog might be hard to handle, more than what some people want. You want a great coat? Ok...What if the dog with the bestest coat (by your or whoever's definition) in the litter is a C student as far as everything else, but the A student littermate has a subpar coat? I think that NAVHDA and the JGHV systems are the best thing out there, but plenty of people disagree, and that doesn't make them wrong or me right.

And who gets to be the arbiter of what should or shouldn't be done? Korthals is dead, so is Mr. Armbruster, and everyone else that developed these breeds. Even Bodo just took an old breed and established it here. I wonder what the German Parent Club would have said about his outcrosses. So if I think that "geez, none of these Griff's want to point and they run like Clumber spaniels, I'm going throw in a Shooting Dog Field Trial Setter," what gives me the authority to do that? Even if I'm the Fuhrer of the club, that's where the split happens, because at some point interests diverge.

We have in this country two Munsterlander Clubs, and at least two Pudelpointer organizations. There are three GSP organizations if you count the DK club, (GSPCA, NGSPA, VDK-GNA,) and the same is true with plenty of other breeds I could mention.


You make some good points. Let me try to address them. I agree, there are no "perfect" dogs (see my signature), and therefore deciding what dogs to breed requires more than "I've got a great male and your bitch looks good, why don't we breed them?" approach. I believe the best way to breed dogs, and hopefully improve the breed in the process, would be to have a group of independent third parties, who are familiar with canine genetics, breed standards, pedigrees, field performance, temperament, coat, and all the other factors that should be taken into consideration, decide what dogs should be bred. Individuals generally don't have that kind of knowledge, and they naturally tend to be biased about their own dogs. But that level of controlled breeding isn't likely to happen in North America, where people would consider it an infringement of their rights. So how should breeding decisions be made?

I know nothing about NAVHDA's, breeding program, and therefore cannot comment on it. I am only familiar with the Wirehaired Pointing Griffon Club of America's program as it was before I left the club, so I'll use that as an example. The club had a Breeding Committee made up of 3-5 people who had been judging Griffons for a long time. One or more members of the committee personally judged every Griffon that was tested that year. Yes, I know that may not be possible with breeds containing larger numbers of dogs, but large populations could be divided into manageable units. The committee would meet annually in late fall/winter to review that year's natural ability and intermediate test results and develop a list of promising dogs. Discussion would follow, and some dogs would be eliminated and others selected. If someone wanted to breed their dog and have it "approved', they could make that known to the committee, but there was no guarantee it would happen. There wasn't a "quota" on the number of dogs selected for breeding in a particular year. It all depended on how many dogs met their criteria. Some years, there were more approved breedings than others. Anyone with a registered Griffon could still breed their dog, but only certain breedings were endorsed by the committee. When I joined the club, Joan Bailey suggested that I get back copies of the club's newsletter, which contained every tested dog's results. After poring over test results, it was evident that, on average, pups from approved litters tended to get better test results than unapproved litters. They also had better coats, temperament, and conformation. Pups from approved breedings were sold with a Breeders Agreement that guaranteed a certain level of quality in a pup. So if for some reason you got a dud, you weren't without recourse. The Breeding Committee set the price for puppies from approved breedings. It was low enough that the dogs were't too costly, but sufficient for the breeder to (hopefully) not lose money. Having your dog selected for breeding was considered an honor, just as it is in many European clubs.

I think the committee was selecting "the best dogs possible." There were still decent Griffons being produced outside the approved breeding program, but they weren't as good as most dogs from the program.

In regards to outcrossing with a "Shooting Dog Field Trial Setter", that wouldn't come close to meeting the breed standard, would it? The Griffon was one of the breeds used in developing the Fousek, so breeding them with Griffons was breeding related dogs, just as Bodo was breeding back to one of the foundation breeds used in developing the PP.

I'm not sure what the number of breed clubs have to do with breeding the best dogs, unless their breeding goals are well defined.
I've had several really good dogs, but none were perfect. Neither am I, so keep that in mind!
flitecontrol
Seasoned
Seasoned
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 1:16 am
Location: Monroe, LA

Previous

Return to Pointers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests