Re: [PyrNet-L] size

[Charlotte & Jack Perry <pyreau@erols.com>]

I guess I qualify as a long-time breeder having gotten our first Pyr
from Paul Strang in 1969.  Although we do not breed as frequently
(average a litter every year and a half) or show as much as many Pyr
breeders, we have been fortunate to have belonged to the local and
National Pyr clubs and to have had as mentors and good friends many of
the most knowledgeable breeders of the past and present.

Barb, I do not think that any of the breeders of the past deliberately
bred down the size of their dogs.  I think what they did do was to
choose the soundest dogs to breed and those dogs happened to be smaller
(some of them did believe that the very large dogs would not be sound). 
Then, in order to set that soundness and other good qualities of the
breed, they line-bred and in-bred their dogs which produced some of the
most important bloodlines of the past. Although bringing many good
qualities to the breed in the US, they also carry genes for small dogs. 

I do remember some really big, sound Pyrs such as Ch. Soleil Pierre de
Blu Crest and some of his offspring.  Pierre was huge and could really
move.  He also had a wonderful temperament and produced some big
offspring.  Unfortunately we no longer see much of those bloodlines on
the East Coast.  

Cindy, you have to remember that even the most concientious breeders
trying their best to learn about their dogs and do all the health checks
cannot predict exactly what those pups will look like.  I think I
mentioned my litter of last year where both parents were quite large
with a common ancester who was very big and produced very large
offspring.  Although they are not under standard, those pups all turned
out to be much shorter than their sire and dam.  A long-time breeder of
some of the most famous dogs of the past  used to say "you can study
dogs and pedigrees and think you know what this breeding will produce,
but Mother Nature is going to fool you every time".
Charlotte
Virginia