Developing a new breed
There are so many subjects that have come up, that either have no influence on what the Deckers were originally bred for or traits that Milton Decker himself has said he has no problem with, and would have done himself if the opportunity presented itself, without causing any negative influence on the traits that make the Deckers what they are, or intended for.
First, lets take a look at what the Decker Terrier was developed to do. They were bred to hunt, and not only hunt, but hunt a variety of game species, as well as to be an all around farm and family dog.
Well, that would leave out a number of things that people "believe makes a Decker or is improving the Deckers. I will outline and explain my feelings on a few of these traits.
Color
It has no bearing whatsoever on a dogs abilities, and warrents no real importance to what a Decker Terrier is.
I read at one time that Milton would have liked to see a brindle Decker Terrier, well, in most registries for even the Rat Terrier it is frowned upon.
Yet some people don't believe that dilute colors should be bred into our Deckers even tho, it is a naturally occuring color.
Milton stated that he had a gray pup show up in a litter. There is little doubt in my mind that that gray pup was in all accuality a blue. So yes, it is, or very possibly, already in some of the Decker lines.
We have breeders saying we don't want blue in our decker lines, the original deckers were not that color.... well, in my opinion thats the pot calling the kettle black, since many of these same people are trying to breed Deckers in more of a blanket pattern than piebald..... Milton bred mostly piebald Deckers because that was the pattern that everybody wanted.
I have yet to hear an argument on color that would hold a drop of water.
Standard/Conformation/Showing
This is a bit of a sore subject with me. I don't have a problem with people showing Deckers, however I do have a problem with how these dogs are aquiring these show titles.
Whether or not breeders can agree on if a Decker is a breed of its own, or just a line of Rat Terrier, the one thing that most do seem to agree on is that there is major differences between the Rat Terrier and the Decker Terrier.
So what is all the hipe about the titles these Deckers are earning when they are being judged under the Rat Terrier standard when the Deckers have a standard of their own? Yet it's many of these same people that don't want the Deckers to be their own breed..... so are these breeders really wanting to preserve the Deckers or just use them to improve Standard Rat Terrier?
In what I am seeing, the later seems to be more likely.
Lets take a look at what a standard really is. It is the standard of perfection, A written description of what it takes to have the perfect animal, whatever the animal may be, however, most standards don't even touch on what really makes a Decker. I don't care how close to perfection a Decker comes in the eye of the standard. If they don't hunt they are NOT a Decker.
I would just love to see breeders spend as much money and time as they spend at these shows, spend it in the woods allowing their dogs to truely prove themselves as they were meant to. Not in a ring moving at just the right gait, but out in the woods running hell bent for glory behind the game of choice.
I have heard excuse after excuse.... we can't hunt animals in my state with dogs, i'm not a hunter, I don't know the first thing about hunting, I don't have time to hunt...... the excuses go on..... I have one thing to say to all the people who have used these excuses...... What to hell do you have a hunting breed for then?
Ears
There isn't much I can really say about the ears. Its a personal prefrence. However there are a couple of things that I would like to point out.
The majority of breeders seem to prefer the upright ears, as I do too and that is what Milton Decker prefered as well.
But, the fact is it doesn't make the dog hunt. And the major thing I would like to point out is the fact that in all the dogs that Milton bred, i'm not sure he would have taken any one of them over Henry. And in saying that, just take a look at Henry's ears..... ?????? The ears don't make the dog.
These are just a few traits and ideals that I believe, too much emphasis is being placed on. None of these make the hunter that we are striving to preserve, and are not traits that hadn't showed up while Milton was breeding, and are more of a preference not a necessity. It is fine to concern yourself with these traits provided everything else is in place to complete the dog.
For one, In my opinion, anyone that doesn't hunt their Deckers, doesn't have any place to speak up as to the importance of Deckers having or not having these traits.
After all, they are neglecting the most important trait of all, the hunting ability of the dogs they are breeding.
I know this will realy raise some hackles, but so be it. Nothing raises my hackles more than seeing Deckers that parade around pretty in the show ring but have never seen a woods. Or more importantly tasted the hide of a prey animal.
I have made my share of enemies within this breed, but I am only here for one thing, and thats the best interest of the breed.
I refuse to stand by and wait to see the opionions of the majority, before I speak my own.
By showing Deckers rather than hunting them is doing nothing more than developing a new show dog, NOT adding to their abilities. Especially when the Deckers in the show ring arn't even being judged under a Decker standard but under the standard of the Rat Terrier.
What truely needs to be done, is breeders to consentrate their efforts on traits such as, tracking and treeing, among the many other traits that makes a dog in the field worth its weight in gold.
Nuff said (for now)
Clyde Green - Wildwood Decker Terriers