This message is from: Tamara Rousso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Somebody stop me. Pleeaassse. Nope isn't happening. I'm jumping into
the fray which means no matter what I say you (Ruthie) will have an
extremely well thought out, sharp tongued response intended to make me
look stupid. I say save your breath- I do a fine job on my own.
Besides I am now donning my cyber anti-flaming armor of the most highly
developed technology. (bugle please) Charge
Here is the way I see it - you are comparing over-selection apples to
the evaluation oranges. I have not heard anyone say that the purpose
of evaluating those stallions is to limit the gene pool. Instead I am
hearing them say it is to improve a breeders' tools for selection.
Now, now I already hear you saying that people will only pick the one
that scores the highest thereby limiting the gene pool. If that is
true than what you have proven is that the breeders are stupid.
Therefore I submit that in addition to evaluating stallions we also
give IQ tests to breeders. That way if you aren't smart enough to use
ALL of the information at hand you can just become a backyard horse
enthusiast such as myself. To tell you the truth though from what I am
reading on the list I believe the breeders are smart enough to
understand that they need to look for a stallion that improves the
qualities their mare is lacking.
Another point I would like to make is that there is an inherent
difference in breeding dogs and horses. Especially when it comes to
"show" dogs. Let me explain. The gene pool for certain breeds of show
dogs became decreased because the breeders are going for one attribute
only - looks. In looking at other true working breeds such as hunting
dogs I think you will find a larger, healthier gene pool. With Fjords
there are many different breeders after many different characteristics.
That alone will mean that the breeder looking for a dressage prospect
will pick a different stallion than the breeder looking for a jumping
pony than the breeder looking for a farm draft horse and on and on.
This is what I think would be of the most benefit to the "should we
evaluate stallions?" discussion: all of you breeders that are on the
list please email in and say what qualities you use when picking your
stallions for breeding and if evaluation scores would be useful and how
much they would be a deciding factor. IQ tests may follow.
Tamara
Fallbrook CA soon to be Applegate OR where I will no doubt remember to
keep my mouth shut
On Sunday, August 7, 2005, at 01:56 PM, Ruth Bushnell wrote:
This message is from: "Ruth Bushnell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This past spring Phillip Odden asked me to gather together those facts
I could
find in support of the hypothesis that the over-selection of breeding
candidates eventually leads to a lessening of the breed population
gene pool
and results in inbreeding, which leads to all manner of degeneration.
This I am doing, because I care very deeply about Fjords and their
secure
future as a breed, just as you and many others do too. I may not be
able to do
as much as you have done, but I can do what I can and this issue of
over-selection takes my interest. I probably got interested in it
because I
know that it is over-selection that has ruined and destroyed many dog
breeds.
We can learn from their plight.. the dog, having a shorter gestation
and life
period, has come full circle much faster in their breeding
consequences. We
can learn from their mistakes.
This investigation should not detract from all the time and work in
the past
that has been devoted to conformationally evaluating Fjords, in a time
when we
weren't aware of protecting our entire gene pool, but now we should
know
better. Time and science marches on, with or without us. What was
relevant 20
or 30 years ago in breeding strategies is no longer.
I have offered professional resources and contacts to anyone that is
interested in determining whether or not the narrowing of breeding
stallions,
as Mark suggested, ultimately leads to over-selection, inbreeding, and
a loss
of genetic diversity. Why not respond by offering conflicting data
from a
professional geneticist? ..you can't find a professional that would
support
over-selection, that's why! Name calling and general hysteria is not
that
impressive, neither is sticking your head in the sand when new
information is
available. You have well illustrated the uniformed fervor and
inflexibility of
those who support the destructive practice of over-selection.
Twenty or thirty years from now, you will be remembered as having been
dogmatic and shortsighted. I only hope that someone within the breed
wakes up,
speaks up, and gets a professional second opinion on this issue.
It may interest you to know that many Universities publish on the
Internet,
and they're telling us to avoid over-selection.
Ruthie, nw mt US
