Have you noticed that the phrase “for the betterment of the breed” seems to appear with ill-informed regularity in the breed? What does this buzz phrase mean? Does this statement of altruism have any meaning, or is it just another popular catch phrase that is used to make the user feel as if he is perceived as one who truly holds the interests of the breed as paramount?    From the standpoint of genetics, the breed cannot be “bettered”; the breed is, by virtue of its gene pool, the product of what it is genetically. Furthermore, this gene pool cannot now return to what it was even fifty years ago; the breed cannot “retro-evolve”. Knowledge of the early history of the breed, a correct understanding of the Standard, ethics, and informed decisions as they pertain to breeding are the keys to preserving the genetic soundness of the breed as it exists. Can cataracts be eliminated from the breed? I don’t know; the prospects are beginning to look dim. To my knowledge, no definitive opinion yet exists as to how cataracts are inherited. From the amount of scientific research currently being done, one might wonder if we even care. Are cataracts indigenous to the breed? Did the imports suffer from an array of eye anomalies? It seems to me that our own vision is becoming cloudy in the would-be attempt to “better the breed”, and that the stroking of the otherwise ungratified and fragile ego in some imagined way deludes many that they are mysteriously making the breed “better”.    How are we to grasp an understanding on these matters without studying the earliest history of the breed? There seems to be in the fancy an interest in returning to “the good old days”, yet the authors of the newest books on the breed seem to go out of their way to actively avoid pictures, meaningful information, and historical accounts of the ancient breed. Neither do the e-mail lists concern themselves with these fundamentally important matters of early history.    From what I understand, the traffic on the largest Siberian e-mail lists indicates that some of the old timers will condescend to mentor new people in the breed, but to do so exclusively on their own god-like terms. Many seem to display the notion that, “Ok, you can learn from me, but I’m going to devalue you in the process.” This attitude is openly hostile, pedantic, arrogant, and entirely self-serving, and is certainly not in the interest of “bettering the breed”. This perverted approach to mentoring is absolutely ego-based. It is my belief, based on observation, that there is in the fancy a certain contingency among the old timers which actively seeks to thwart and prevent the acquisition, growth and dissemination of knowledge within our breed, and to the mentoring process in general. Some of the old timers (rightly) observe that the new arrivals to the breed want instant knowledge, and instant success. The newer people to the breed, on the other hand, indicate that the old timers are snobbish, exclusionary, patronizing and controlling. From my vantage point, both viewpoints have validity, and neither serves to “better the breed”.    Among the old timers there is, indeed (and most unfortunately), a contingency that seeks to speak “ex-cathedra” in a manner which only enhances their own misguided sense of grandiosity and indispensability, and belittles the new people in the breed who genuinely seek to learn, all the while imparting all too little actual knowledge which begets understanding. The people who possess the knowledge seem to dismiss outright any idea which hasn’t met with success in their personal experience. When new people in the breed are confronted with haughtiness instead of graciousness, potential mentors alienate the very people whom they say they are trying to educate. Excluding and patronizing people certainly do not “better the breed”.    There, indeed, seems to be, among those new to the breed, the unrealistic desire for flashy, instant success, as if lasting success is obtainable without experience. E-mail, Web sites, and other means of “impersonal learning” seem to be what these new people want. People in both groups endlessly discuss whether it’s appropriate to announce litters, and upgrades to Web sites, and if such announcements are a form of advertising, rather than to use the venue of discussion groups to go through the Standard, point by point, in hopes of teaching and acquiring knowledge in the true interest of “bettering the breed”. But, to approach learning (and teaching) from an effective vantage point presents much less opportunity for ego stroking. Not long ago (in 1998), to a certain segment of the breed, the need to “re-invent” the Standard seemed more important than to foster an understanding of the Standard as it exists.    Do announcements of litters and Web site updates “better the breed”? How could they when the litters they announce are barely old enough to photograph standing, and when Web sites are void of any information other than “new arrivals”, and “contact me” links? Of course, announcements of litters and Web site updates are ego-based advertising!    More puppies do not “better the breed”. What’s the rush to breed a litter before understanding what color the resulting litter will be? What’s the rush to breed a litter before understanding how to care for a bitch in whelp? What’s the rush to breed a litter before understanding how to screen prospective buyers? With the number of dogs already in need of rescue, what’s the rush to breed a litter – period? Impatience and precipitous action certainly do not “better the breed”.    The people new to the breed would do well to acquire patience, and learn that ego gratification is not the key to success. The key to success is knowledge gained by experience, and by definition, experience comes only through time. The concept of apprenticeship strikes me as a prudent manner in which a person can prove himself before going out on his own. This manner of personal, and hands-on mentoring/learning, and proving oneself is required in the trades; are our Siberians any less worthy of proven knowledge and experience than plumbers, electricians, or carpenters?    Among both groups, there seems to be a tremendous need to mis-use (abuse) the breed for ego-gratification. The fancy discusses and re-discusses issues such as the breed’s Original Purpose, and, although these discussions are of vital and fundamental impact to the breed, they fail to point out that the breed’s function was (is) not one of ego gratification. Ego gratification is the function of the Toy breeds, and to debase our breed in this fashion certainly is not in the interest of “bettering the breed”.    The SHCA would do well to dedicate itself to the research and to publishing, authoritative documentation on the breed’s early history. Such a document would go a very long way to “bettering the breed” because it would, by necessity, detail the very foundation of the breed. We desperately need an “Illustrated Standard” similar to the 1981 SHCA document! This one-time expense seems to be at least of equal importance in “bettering the breed” than the “Annual Directory”, which amounts to a yearly expense (unless, of course the SHCA Board is again planning on re-inventing the breed with another Standard “revision”). The SHCA Web site seems to target the outsider looking for advice and information on the breed, but does little to advance the knowledge of those already in the breed. On-going education within the fancy itself is a fundamental responsibility of the parent club.    The prudent, and knowledgeable placements of puppies in permanent homes is certainly conducive to the conservation of effort, time and financial resources which otherwise strip an individual (and parent clubs) of his need to police irresponsible breeders. Shipping the breed to distant lands, foreign environments, and to unknown people certainly does not “better the breed”.    Can the breed itself be “bettered”? I think it is more precise, realistic, and honest to say that we want to “preserve the breed” as a population and a gene pool, and to breed to “better” than what currently exists in our own individual kennels. Knowledge of the early history of the breed, a correct understanding of the Standard, ethics, and informed decisions as they pertain to breeding are the keys to preserving the genetic soundness of the breed as it exists.    I think it’s more precise, and honest to say that, by “improving the breed”, we are dedicated to improving our understanding, and appreciation, of the breed as it exists. This is within our power!    Consider this: The only sure way to truly “better the breed” is to understand the breed. The only way understand the breed is to study the breed. Understanding comes only from experience, study, and applied knowledge. Ego only stands in the way of “bettering the breed”.   ### -- The above article is published in The Siberian Quarterly: Hoflin Publishing, Wheat Ridge, Colorado, Summer 2003 Issue, pp. 22, 23.

---

Back to
Artyk Siberians


All Web Pages and Images ©Copyright 1997-2005 Fredric R. Cornell, MIS
All Rights Reserved

Maintained By HarborNet