 |
|
|
|
No sooner has one topic been covered in one of our regular articles on our website
than another matter crops up which, it turns out, has great resonance with the
matter discussed in the first article. In this case I am referring to a statement
on a website about the 2007 Crufts winner and UK dogs in particular. Regretably
the original article was removed from the site and in its place an 'explanation'
was posted. This follows :- "After my statements about the Cruft 2007, it seems as some foreign breeders felt inequitably criticised. Even though I use harsh words (which perfectly reach the intent) to express my ideas, I claim my right of criticism towards the way of judging and breeding the breed I am fond of. Not even one of my criticism has ever had something of "private", but accusing the situation is one of my rights. I consider the situation of the Tibetan Mastiff of the "élite" rotten because of small size dogs, minimum bones and scanty typical characteristics. At the same time who brags about having pure nepali bloodlines or who shows males of 40 kg (88 lbs) makes me smile. I am not weird when I say little Tibetan Mastiffs win the most important exhibitions (and not only the Cruft), because this happens under the eyes of so many watchers and in this field we have been talking of this topic for years. Everybody can think what he wishes, but please allow me to say that a little dog is "small dog" I think that the 'explanation' does give some idea of what the original article might have said especially when read in conjunction with another statement on the same website. This reads as follows :- "I don’t know what is happening in the corrupted world of TM’s exhibitions. I think we should improve the quality of this breed, but on the contrary we are facing a total destruction of what we have made until today. Ugly and small dogs with light bones, which don’t belong to this breed are still winning at the most important European and Italian exhibitions. Why does this happen? Maybe important judges are totally crazy and the younger ones do not use their brains! Probably the lack of Clubs of quality, which should provide them right information had a bad influence on this framework. This is happening in France, where Saint Bernard Club manages TM breed since the disappearance of Dogue du Tibet Club (Tibetan Mastiff Club), and the consequence is the destructive process which selection is living. I have always been coherent in doing my work because coherence represents my lifestyle and it is fundamental in doing a good job. For this reason I will still breed those big and typical dogs, which 15 years ago did the European TM story. I know this improvement will be continuous and very slow, but I am really proud of my dogs because each new litter is better than the previous one. I must admit just a few people have adopted these guidelines, and I am speaking of Italy and France. I believe in the lovers of this breed and I want to give them a speech: Don’t be afraid if you don’t find the mastiff you dreamt by visiting kennels and exhibitions. You will find just some dogs you have to forget, but you must know the real TM exists, you just have to find it out!" I know from my experience on another website where I am the moderator for TMs, that the man who owns the website is very critical of the majority of European and so-called, Nepali dogs and has said to me that he particularly does not like the British dogs. He is also very critical of the FCI and British, and possibly even the AKC, TM Standards, claiming that they give the green light to breeders to breed dogs which do not meet his ideal of a large dog or the 'correct' giant dog. It is not necessary here to discuss this kind of argument but I cannot help but smile wryly when I know that this man's views are well known among the TM fraternity and yet those who are being effectively criticised for their breeding programmes over the last few years, have said absolutely nothing publicly to address such criticisms. These could be the same people who seemingly were so upset with what Peter wrote that they allegedly bombarded the Club here with letters of complaint and yet nothing Peter said was anywhere near as cutting nor contentious as the words in the above statements. A case of double standards perhaps? Are you breeders really so unsure of your own achievements that attacks such as these should be allowed to stand without a reply being made? I don't know about anyone else, but I, for one, feel agrieved when British owned or bred dogs are written about in this way, whether or not what is being said is true, and if I happened to be one of those breeders, I would not remain silent. But perhaps not everyone feels as strongly as I do about the Tibetan Mastiff. Coincidentally, I do agree with much of what has been written on the abovementioned website, having expressed such views for many, many years now. I just do not happen to agree that Alexa Sutton's Yogi is a small dog, - 74cms is small????? and to unjustly denigrate a dog in this way does nothing to enhance ones reputation when it comes to being taken seriously. My view is that healthy exchanges of ideas are a positive thing. Ignorant and ill advised comments are not the sign of an adult discussion and unlikely to lead to a better understanding of the breed |