Re: [PyrNet-L] size

[magicm <magicm@ameritech.net>]

"Barb Bowes, Bo, Molly, Chelsea & Flopsy" wrote:
> 
> Perhaps the smaller dogs were the result of breeding for soundness,
> but I was only recounting what I was told. 

One of the breeders I know, been at it for a long time, probably has the
biggest Pyrs in the country and when tested - are also very sound -
kinda blows the theory that smaller is sounder - their dogs also live
longer than most.

As far as breeders not
> being honest about what is in their bloodline, sure this can happen.
> But when speaking to someone who is thinking of breeding for the first
> time, I am sure not going to tell them that their breeder is
> dishonest! Not only is this unethical, but chances are I don't know
> the breeder personally and would have nothing to base this statement
> on other than hearsay. I would like to hope that when someone presents
> a bitch to a stud, that both breeders have been honest with the owner
> of the bitch. Naive? Perhaps, but I am in no position to judge either
> way.
> 
I don't believe in telling a person that their breeder is dishonest
unless one knows that for a fact either, but I also believe if one is
dealing with a new person and one knows for fact, that there is a
genetic problem behind their dog, one should tell them. The key word
here is fact, if they can check your info to be true, such as look up
OFA info on hips - one should tell them.

Lisa