DS: New breeds vs. Old breeds?

This link shows the 6 new breeds of 2012....officially recognized and registered with kennel clubs.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2091282/6-new-dog-breeds-ready-dog-eat-dog-world-annual-Westminster-Kennel-Club-show.htmlMy questions:Do you support new breeds? Why or why not?For the extinct breeds (or becoming extinct ) or rare breeds, would you support breeders and scientist that are trying to bring them back with strict breeding programs?http://www.dogbreeds.net/extinct-dogs.htmlhttp://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Extinct_dog_breedshttp://listverse.com/2007/11/20/top-10-rare-dog-breeds/For the older breeds, do you support the breeders and animal scientist that are trying or fix, expand, or shorten the genetic pool of many breeds?I can't find the article, but there was a breeder trying to fix a genetic issue with Pugs. And mandatory spay and neuter laws are taking some well bred dogs out of breeding programs ( which could help future breeding and genetic issues ). Which leaves people producing "genetically challenged" purebreds.......if someone can find the article, please post...it was from January 2012.When I say fix, I mean alter or curve genetic traits in breeds, like aggression, intelligence, and overall traits that are associated with specific breeds.Sisyphus....it makes sense to me. Rayven answered properly....the "new breeds" ....officially recognized.....means the list in the link are not necessarily new breeds but newly recognized.And WTH....I think curve is a better word though we are not in the English class but on YA.Again SISYPHUS....breeders aren't scientist and vice versus, but research the issue yourself before trying to be a smart as*. I could've sworn I said breeders and scientist....scientist ( able to study the gene code in dogs ) and breeders ( actually mating the specific dogs together AFTER the DNA testing and such.....

When millions of dogs are taken terrified into rooms reeking of death and killed why support any breeding at all?http://www.animal-pounds.com/how_are_pets_killed_in_pounds_and_shelters.html

They are not "new" breeds in the sense that they've just been invented. The Lundehund and others have been around for centuries but are in need of new enthusiasts to keep the breeds going. The UK kennel club already have a Vulnerable Native breeds list - even the English Setter is low in numbers.Good breeders have always tried to breed for the traits that distinguish their breed from another and to improve temperament - especially these days when the original purpose of the breed is no longer desirable eg dog to dog aggression. Not aware of any breeders deliberately trying to "shorten" the genetic pool for their breed although sometimes it happens when breeders are trying to eliminate an inherited disease.

NOT "new"!REAL breeders IMPROVE w/every litter. Nobody "shortens" or "expands" any real breed/s."Scientists" are *NOT* breeders!There are ZERO "genetically-challenged" purebred ANYTHING.This babble has ZERO sense anywhere"wiki" is ***NOT**** research!CURB,not "curve",ferkrissake

I don't think any of those are particularly new in the sense of newly thought of/created. American English Coonhound - early 1900's(?)Entelbucher Mountain Dog - First described in 1889Finnish Lapphund - Old reindeer herding breedNorwegian Lundehund - Described as early as the 1400'sXolo - Described as one of the world's oldest breedsCesky Terrier - 1945 - not the "oldest" but still not entirely new.Old breeds that are newly gaining recognition as a result of proper breeding, I see no problem with.It's those that mash 2 entirely different breeds together forming a relatively "useless" dog that I have a problem with.At this point, each purpose for a dog has an established or near established breed to compliment it. There's really no viable reason that I can see to continually try to "create" new breeds when so much more can be done by simply bettering the ones we have now. As for extinct breeds, well there's a reason they went extinct in the first place. There was either no use or they did not excel where they needed to. Why bring them back?

They aren't "new", they are just new to the list of recognized breeds for the KC. Honestly there is need to go around bringing back old breeds.MSN laws really only put a dent in the population of dogs who shouldn't be bred. all areas with MSN laws make exceptions for breeders, people who show their dogs etc. not to mention permits depending on where you live are not hard to get and usually only require that the dogs be entered in anywhere from 1-3 shows a year.