挑选“异类” - 博美犬论坛

现在让我来详细阐述一下犬种标准的要求。对于该犬种来说，骨量充足且肌肉强健的后腿需要一个适中的膝关节弯曲角度才能够达成其被赋予的功用。同样的，强而有力、轮廓分明的大腿也是必须的。请注意适中一词；犬种标准中对此就有描述！那么那些腿部过长、骨量偏少（特别是胫骨与腓骨），肌肉组织不成比例的犬又是如何被繁育出来还带来比赛的呢？为什么繁殖者们总是企图挑选出具有某项极端特征的犬呢？根据犬种标准膝关节应该是这样的，我引用原文“强健且在运动或站立时不应该出现滑动”。跗关节则应该坚固且呈竖直放低状。难道我不该告知读者那些展示在我面前的犬只是如何跑动的吗？它们侧倾着身子快速跑动在赛环之中，从一边倒向另一边，随着华丽被毛翻飞的是不知为何拖曳在之后的庞大后驱，完全与前驱失去了平衡。毫无美感可言。我不断扪心自问：是不是这个犬种皆是如此还是这些只不过是特例？我想在之后的一年里，更多地参加几次全国各地该犬种的比赛之后大概就可以回答这个问题了，一定非常有趣！

在选择性血统繁殖过程中，我们的目标总是在过去的基础上不断改进。表面上看，我们是按照各个犬种的标准进行繁殖的，但是我们还是应该时不时地问问自己是否真的做到了尽职尽责。我们到底行使了多少特权？讲到之前说的情况之时，这个问题第一个出现在了我的脑海之中。问题现在变成了：我们如何定义改进？我们原本所不懈追求的是试图提高所繁殖犬种的遗传品质，然而现在看来我们所为之奋斗的可不是单单这一点。我们似乎被追求某种特征的极致所分散了心思。为什么总是非要将某些特征过分夸张作为目标呢？无论是脖子的长度还是膝关节的角度或是驱动力等其他方面，总是会把这里或那里夸大一些，似乎这样才可以算地上是对犬种的提高。可以这么说，我们集体专注于改变犬只的形态用来提高某项功能，朝一个方向不断发展变化着。因此，现今犬种的形态可能会与其二十或是三十年前的样子截然不同。许多犬种对比其最原始时期的状态已经发生了相当大的变化。当然我这里所说的是参加形态赛的赛级犬。尽管我们嘴上老是挂着犬种的形态和原始功能，但是在现实中进行犬只挑选时总是会脱离该信条。

那么当我们讨论犬种发展问题的时候重点是什么呢？变化从何而来又为什么会产生变化呢？变异的发生自然是基础的基础，这是我们进行挑选的根本。变异的存在使得一切成为了可能。一位繁殖者根据自己所希望得到的犬种特征进行挑选甄别。这个过程可能十分漫长，但必定是经过深思熟虑的。经过不断积累才会慢慢显现成效。繁殖者之间总有一种挑选某项特征极端犬只的倾向，有些人甚至对此直言不讳。挑战极限的时刻到来了，游走在边缘总能让人产生成就感。获得创造的机会、作为造物者本身就有着无法抵挡的诱惑力。不过问题来了，一旦我们在这条路上越走越远的话，所有的一切都将在顷刻之间分崩离析。目睹了之前所说的状况，警示着我们一旦过分放纵、沉溺于创造之中，一个犬种的本质将会彻底丧失。自然环境中，选择规律就是适者生存。一旦人类介入其中就打破了这一公式，我们应该警惕由此产生的后果和陷阱。

那么现在情况到底如何呢？多数人会同意犬种外形得到了很好的改进，还有人会说效果远远不止如此。某些犬种典型的特征得到了相对统一，而另外一些则恰恰相反。因此很难对此问题一概论之。只能说犬只的构造与形态的特征有着很大区别，如何防止在挑选犬只特征时走上极端、不遗失犬种基础特性最终还得取决于繁殖者的自觉。试图打破原有框架是会出现问题的。摆在我们面前的挑战是在维持犬种所有的特性同时，允许做出一定改变，达到对犬只进行改善的目标。对极致追求的诱惑不止存在于犬只形态赛，这种诱惑始终贯穿于突破犬只这个或那个特性极限。最终这场对犬只极限的恶性竞赛只会以失败告终。选择拥有更大后驱弯曲度的诱惑力似乎很难抵挡。这道选择题放在我们面前，一名尽责的繁殖者应该本着谨慎抑制的态度对之。走得太远可能会导致全盘皆输。

考虑到这个问题之时，了解这些年以来变化是如何产生的以及变化的原因十分重要。想要做到这些就需要精通该犬种并领悟繁殖先人们试图得到何种改进结果。此外，目标还必须有意义且能够实现。之后再谨记上文所说，任何事情都可能会走向歧途。正如我在前文中所说，事物的前因后果都可能会产生影响。对于很多犬种而言，都可以追溯其发展历程。有些经历时空变迁只发生了些微变化，有的则变化地更加多一些。任何时候外形的改变并不是繁殖所必须要求的，而要了解不良发展趋势的存在方式并不困难。希望夸大犬种特征现象到了随处可见之时，负责的繁殖者们会退回之前并告诫自己适可而止。同时也希望裁判们能够在对抗这类破坏犬种特征行为中起到关键作用。写下此文，我相信自己已经做到了这一点。承认并奖励极端犬型，尤其是已经到了妨碍犬只原始功能地步的犬只，最终只会是对该犬种的伤害。现在就请再好好回想一下你的犬种外形该是怎样的呢？

that few could stand foursquare on the table for examination with hocks held upright; they were instead invariably cowhocked. Some seemed almost ready to keel over behind. It was that bad and I’m not kidding. All of the dogs were in spectacular condition and groomed to perfection but yet underneath the glorious coats were bodies that were a far cry for what is called for in the breed standard.

Let me elaborate by mentioning the requirements. In this breed hind legs which are strongly boned and muscled with moderate angulation at the stifle are essential in order for it to be able to perform its function. Likewise, the possession of powerful, clearly defined thighs. Note the word moderate; it’s there in the description! So how come that dogs with disproportionately long, lighter bones (the tibia and fibula in particular), with inadequate musculature, are being bred and exhibited? Why are breeders intent on selecting for extremes? The stifle should be, according to the standard, and I quote, ‘strong and there is no slippage of it in motion or when standing’. The hocks are strong and well let down. I do not need to tell the reader how the dogs shown to me moved? They careened around the ring at great speed, discernably swaying from side to side, with coats flying and the hyper-extended rears dragging along somehow, totally out of balance with the fronts. Not a pretty picture. I kept asking myself, is all the breed like this or are these dogs an exception? I’ll probably find the answer to this question as I judge this breed some more in different parts of the country during the coming next year. Should be interesting!

In the process of selectively breeding pedigreed dogs our aim has always been to improve on what has gone before. We ostensibly breed to the standard of each breed but it is surely fair to ask, on occasion, whether or not we are all always as conscientious about this as we should be. How much liberty do we take? This was the first thought which entered my head in the situation described above. The question becomes: what do we mean by improvement? We are essentially attempting to achieve betterment of the hereditary qualities of the breeds with which we are involved but oftentimes we seemingly strive for something more than just this. We seem to be obsessively aiming for the extreme. Why does the excessive always have to become something aimed at to an unreasonable degree? More of something or other, whether it be length of neck or degree of rear angulation or reach and drive or whatever, seems to almost automatically be viewed as improvement. Collectively we are intent on changing the conformation of breeds for particular purposes and they move on, so to speak. There is a directional dynamic at play, if you will. Thus a particular entity today might be quite different in make and shape from the condition which it might have been in, say, twenty or thirty years ago. Many breeds are now appreciably removed from the form which they possessed in their original condition. I am referring here, of course, to dogs bred specifically for conformation competition. We pay lip service to the form and function factor, sometimes disingenuously to justify what we are doing in terms of selection decisions, but in reality there often seems to be a disconnect in this regard.

So what exactly are we talking about when we discuss the development of breeds? How have changes come about and why? The fundamental basis for this, of course, is the occurrence of variation. This is where the selection options originate and lie. That’s what makes it all possible. A breeder purposefully selects for certain traits which he or she deems desirable to consolidate and perpetuate. The process may be gradual over time, but certainly deliberate. A cumulative effect comes into play. There has always been a tendency among breeders to prefer the extreme and some make no bones about it. That’s when the challenge of pushing the limits kicks in. There is a certain satisfaction to be be gained from being at the cutting edge. The opportunity to be creative has its attraction; playing the role of creator is a temptation which is hard to resist. The problem is, if this is taken too far everything breaks down. Witness the condition of the dogs described above. The essential characteristics of a breed can be so readily lost by over-indulgence. In nature, survival of the fittest ensures natural selection. When man gets involved, this is taken out of the equation and there are consequences and pitfalls which we should all be aware of.

So where does this leave us? Most would agree that our breeds are in fairly good shape, some more so than others. Some are relatively uniform in those characteristics by which they are typified while others show considerable diversity. So it is difficult to generalize about this subject. What can be said is that structural and morphological characteristics do differ appreciably and it is ultimately up to the conscientious breeder to avoid trying to unduly push the limits and selecting for those things that are fundamental to the make and shape of a breed. Go outside of this mold and there’s often trouble. The challenge is to maintain breed-specific characteristics whilst at the time producing dogs that are competitive in their day, allowing for changes. If the focus is solely on the conformation show ring, however, the temptation is always there to try to exceed the typical extent of one feature or other. Ultimately this ends up badly and amounts to promoting and championing exaggeration. Selecting for more rear angulation is always seemingly enticing. The option is out there but the responsible breeder exercises caution and restraint. Overdoing things in this regard can lead to a breakdown.

When considering this subject it is important to try to understand how changes have occurred over the years and why. To do so requires thorough familiarity with the breeds and a comprehension of what breeders have been trying to achieve. Moreover, this has to be placed in a meaningful and realistic perspective. Within this context the recognition of how things can go astray has to be kept in mind. As I have suggested in previous articles, there are causes and effects at play here. In many breeds it is perfectly possible to trace their development. Some entities have changed very little over time, others more so. Evenness of form is not something which breeds necessarily possess at any one time but it is not too difficult to come to a realization of the existence of undesirable trends. When exaggerated features become commonplace and are there for all to see, presumably responsible breeders will step back and say to themselves enough is enough. Judges also, hopefully, play a pivotal role in combating the ruination of breeds. I trust that I did so myself on the occasion which stimulated the writing of this essay. Rewarding dogs that exemplify extremes, particularly if this amounts to an inability to perform a function, is ultimately a disservice. So what sort of shape is your breed in?