This Site Chosen By Microsoft As THE Afghan Web Link for Encarta
Afghan Hound Database and Breed Information Exchange
(Afghan Hound Debate- preserve the original Afghan Hound?)AFGHAN HOUND DEBATE
Response 007
Date: 21 April 1997
From: Jim Coudriet (Coudriet@nb.net)
To: Jhickie
Hi Jim,
It doesn't seem to matter how you bring it up, the debate always seems to turn out one sided. But it always sounds to me like everyone is saying, everyone else is wrong but me. So I'd like to bring up a couple of points, to at least put another side to it.
The afghan we see today, is remarkably close to those first imported from the country of origin. Yes, it is very easy to find examples in today's show ring that are a mockery of the standard, and a caricature of early examples of the breed. But in general, they are remarkably similar. If you aren't fooled by the obvious change in length of coat, many of the dogs in the ring are a good example of breed PRESERVATION. Some of the early pictures of the first dogs in the west, are not good examples of what the standard became. Conversely, many of the dogs shown in early pictures, Rudicki, for example, would do well in the ring today. I also believe that some of those aboriginal afghans mentioned in this debate would also do well in the ring. A Ms. Danuta Spaeth has a line of native bred Afghans she has preserved since the sixties. They are of remarkable quality, but are unmistakably AFGHAN. Except in terms of coat, my own observation of these dogs is that, they aren't much different from mine. Ms. Spaeth is trying to get a separate standard written for FCI, as she feels this "desert type" afghan wouldn't get a fair shake in today's ring. A valid point, but not according to the standard.
This also brings up another point. What did the original afghan look like? There is much variation in type even in Ms. Spaeth's closely bred line. Perhaps the standard isn't wrong, but the modern day interpretation. I don't think native breeding was so constricted. The similarities between Saluki's and Afghans are almost certainly the culmination of selective breeding from a" type" of hound, the debate of which was first, is endless, but I think irrelevant, to native breeders. However, we have chosen to preserve a type, the aesthetic points of which are spelled out in the standard. They then become no less important than the functional aspects of the standard. I hope in the World Congress discussion of the " true Afghan Hound" this is addressed.
Lastly, the discussion on function. Some would have you believe the hound in native settings, woke up in the morning, strode from the tent to catch the day's food. A romantic notion, but there is much evidence to say that the Afghan was much more than a "hunting machine". Afghan's with pierced ears, necklaces, and other finery would indicate an afghan's other functions in it's native land. Breeding a dog solely for it's ability to catch jack rabbits, is as one sided and wrong as breeding a dog for wide open side gait. The afghan was a multi-faceted hunter over varied terrain. Today's performance test's are useful in evaluating a dog's hunting potential, and health, but none speak of it's true function as a hunter. Recreating a native environment for the hound to live in today is virtually impossible. So the speculation will be endless, as to the current state of the breed. What is important, is to learn as much as possible about what the hound should be, this extends to all in the breed. Exhibitors, breeders, and judges. Becoming a judge, doesn't mean there is no more knowledge necessary, but rather, people will accept your opinion of their dog. Both parties must be knowledgeable to come up with the right choice. The exhibitor must know what is truly right, to know if the judge does. That will lead to preserving this unique and fantastic breed!
Jim Coudriet
(23 April -- The following is follow up to response 007 and in which Jim Hickie and Jim Coudriet further discuss the debate topic)
Jim Hickie to Jim Coudriet There is one very important point that you have not addressed and that is the question of temperament. There is no question that since the breed was introduced to the Western World we have selected for temperaments that are more reliable, easier to live with, much less agressive, frequently anxious to please etc. I am certain that if this had not been done there would be no Afghan Hounds in modern urban areas and certainly none in the showrings and most likely early into the next century the breed would have banned because that is the way the world is moving. Already in our country there are four breeds that are considered too dangerous to be allowed to be imported and the Scandanavian countries have even more. It is certain that worldwide there will be more and more restrictions on the keeping of dangerous dogs (and/or dogs with unreliable temperaments)
Jim Coudriet to Jim Hickie I was addressing temperament, when I spoke of the native breeders adorning their dogs with jewelry. These dogs were also family pets, not in the western context certainly, but none the less treated in much the same manner as we do. Certainly not like their guard dogs or dogs of lesser utility. Afghans are reported to sleep with the children at night, while the bigger dogs stand guard. Not a place for a dog with anything less than a stable temperament. Did the breed come with a unstable temperament, or was it bred in later by unknowing, or unscrupulous breeders?
Jim Hickie to Jim Coudriet Now my point about all this is that once you change one characteristic you have an effect on many other characteristics even some that would seem to be quite unrelated. For example a softer temperament may well affect the way a dog carries himself, his attitude to his environment (including Human environment) and even the way he moves, the way he carries his tail, his expression etc. Then after growing more coat on him, giving him more angulation (particularly in the rear) is there really much of the original left except in some aspects of conformation ?
Jim Coudriet to Jim Hickie Yes, maybe, but it's a huge leap, from possibly changing the temperament, to a completely different breed. The environment a dog is raised in, in my mind, has a lot more to do with a dogs carriage, than inherited temperament. Some very well mannered dogs strut around as king. Coat is simply that, coat, it should fool no one as to the quality of a dog. The coat of our modern day afghan, is the result of many factors, not the least of which is diet, and better care. I see many dogs in the ring today, that are clearly of the desert type, and those of the mountain type, all have a longer coat than their native counterparts, but not necessarily do to genetics. Angulation is a matter of debate. Of course, there are over angulated dogs, there are also some with not near enough. Do you suppose this never happened in Afghanistan?
Jim Hickie to Jim Coudriet And what "original" are we talking about ? The original desert type or the original mountain type. If these two "types" were introduced today would we classify them as one or two different breeds. So what are we really talking about - preserving an amalgamation of two different breeds that some early breeders wrote a compromise standard about and that has been modified on at least two occasions since to suit the whims of the "breed preservationists" of the time ? That may sound very cynical but it is a point of view. Further I would not even attempt to enter a debate on the the original environment of this breed ( these breeds?) since I am sure that most opinions are the result of the fantasies of people who have never seen their native environment.
Jim Coudriet to Jim Hickie Well if your not entering a debate on the original environment, too what do you compare this softer temperament? What, besides coat was the difference between the two types of afghans you mention. There probably was much more variation in type in their native setting, but which are you suggesting, a broadening of the standard? Or a less inclusive standard, based on coat differences?In an article to the Afghan Hound Review in 1993, Bear Rowell, in addition to the statements about jewelry, say's that in her travels, the more to the West the more Tazi's looked like Saluki's, and East the more like Afghans. Perhaps this is the cause for the debate on the standard, even in the very earliest of times of the introduction of the Afghan to Western countries