EZ

Hiep hiep hoera and bon anniversaire for Mosjan and Azat

Hi Rohana, welkom I think the site in your quote below copied the text about the Gampr from http://www.molosserdogs.com/modules.php?na...nt&tid=1024 ... since it's identical. So you might want to inquire there about who originally wrote it. I'll be in touch. Happy holidays. Elly.

Source: http://www.gampr.org (there's also a database with many pictures at www.gampr.net) Original thread: http://hyeforum.com/index.php?showtopic=6937 http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/webmensje/PennHIP/Gampr/uploaded14dog_b.jpghttp://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/webmensje/PennHIP/Gampr/uploaded52picto2.gifhttp://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/webmensje/PennHIP/Gampr/uploaded52dog1.jpghttp://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/webmensje/PennHIP/Gampr/uploaded31picto1.gifhttp://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/webmensje/PennHIP/Gampr/uploaded30dog3.jpg The History of the Armenian Gampr Armenian Gampr dogs are primitive, powerful, intelligent companions and guardians. The Armenian Gampr dog today has more similarity to the historical origin breed of all mollosser type dogs than other more well-known breeds. Historical evidence shows the development of livestock and companion dogs to have been in existence on the Armenian plateau before other ancient civilizations. Anthropological findings indicate that the current gampr type became what it is today at least 3000 years ago (Richard Ney, n.d.), and as the breed was developed out of necessity and continues to be a necessary part of human survival in its native area, the gampr has retained a surprising amount of its original characteristics. Various central Asian countries have closely related strains of the original shepherds’ dog. However, some of the other breeds also have had genetic manipulation in the last 200 years, which in most cases has meant the loss of the primitive soundness and depth of instinct that remains today in the gampr. Located in a very fertile zone, at the crossroads of travel between ancient Persia, Asia, and Europe, the Armenian plateau has given rise to some of the earliest milestones of civilization. Armenian innovations and products have been at the forefront of the development of humanity, and many steps of human progress appeared first here. Armenia was the first country to define the zodiac, adopt Christianity, use astrology, create an astronomical observatory and a calendar with a 365-day year, and the Armenians even built a Stonehenge thousands of years before the well-known European site (Ney, n.d.). As these developments spread across Asia, so too did the early breed of dog, protecting livestock and people as they traveled. Historical records show early breeds of domesticated livestock to have existed in Armenia 25,000 years ago, roughly 10,000 years before their existence elsewhere (Ney, n.d.). Although the oldest archeological evidence of settlements in Armenia are 90,000 years old (Ney, n.d.), under the current city of Yerevan, many early peoples were nomadic, and wealth was measured in possessions, including livestock. A dog such as the gampr is invaluable in protecting one’s possessions, particularly livestock. Even now, it is common knowledge among owners of sheep or goats and livestock guardian dogs that a good dog will save the owner thousands of dollars in prevented losses (Poynner, Robyn, April 2008). During the thousands of years of nomadic herding and trading, a good dog could easily have meant the difference between life and death. According to early petroglyphs beginning ca. 15,000-12,000 in the Armenian highlands, specifically “at Ughtasar and on the Geghama mountain range, up to 20% of the carvings resemble the modern gampr, while others show a remarkable diversity of dog that no longer exists.”(Ney, n.d.) The continued existence of domesticated animals at that time was most likely restricted to those which were particularly useful and relatively self-sustaining. Archeological records of early dogs are somewhat concurrent and very widespread. Many archaeological finds indicate that the “first” domesticated dog came from several origins. One fairly recent find is of two skulls that are quite similar to the gampr and other central asian shepherds, and it is postulated that this may be the first link between wolves and ancient dogs (Viegas, Jennifer, May 2003). Russian scientist Mikhail Sablin reported that the two dogs found were very similar to the wolves in the area at the time, but had shorter snouts, wider palates, and measured about 27.5 inches at the shoulder, which is about average for the gampr. Found near Bryansk, which is at the westernmost tip of the Russian Federation, the dogs were in a cave at the edge of the broad plain stretching through the Ukraine, northeast through Poland and south to the Caucasus mountains, Georgia and Armenia. The skulls are reported to be about 14,000 years old (Viegas, 2003). Another possible origin of the domestication of the dog is southeast Asia. Extensive genetic mapping indicates a genetic “age” of the domestication process, 12,000-15,000 years old. A landmark study lead by Peter Savolainen and involving a team of scientists from several continents organized mitochondrial DNA clades from modern dogs into 5 main groups. Since ninety-five percent of the dogs studied were from three clades, Savolainen’s team looked to the remaining clades which included the first three but had more genetic diversity, indicating a longer age of genetic development. The greatest differences in mitochondrial DNA were apparently from southeast Asia, indicating to the analysts that this was where the original domestication process had begun (Savolainen et al, November 2002). Since the Savolainen study was published, however, further study has been deemed necessary as the inherited genetic markers were strictly matrilineal (Verginelli, Fabio et al. August 2005) and did not disallow for included genes from males. Also, “loss of genetic diversity is clearly evident when comparing the Late Pleistocene/Early Holocene PICs with extant Italian/French wolves…[which] suggests that caution is necessary in drawing historical inferences from modern population data..” (Verginelli, 2005). Furthermore, cultural verbal histories indicate that allowing female dogs to breed to native wolves has been practiced for thousands of years in the Caucasus mountains (Ney, n.d.) The gampr and other closely related breeds are a product of the necessity of survival, rather than the desire for a specific possession, and therefore would have been subject to manipulation only to increase functionality. However, the influx of wolf characteristics was necessarily limited, as the shepherds needed a dog which was more powerful than a wolf, both physically and mentally (Kurrikov, Dovlet, n.d.), balanced by a strong sense of independence. Modern dog breed history is easier to trace, as there are ample records of the flow of humanity and written histories to match. Dogs are classified into groups, including spitz, sight hounds, pariah, scent hounds, and molossers among others. “Even the legendary Alaunt, the breed considered to be the key progenitor of all bulldogge breeds, is also originally descended from this Caucasian stock of mountain dogs.”(Wolf, 2007 February). Molossers are also commonly known as mastiffs and include, among others, the English Mastiff, developed over 2000 years ago in England. The dogs represented by the skulls found in the cave near Bryansk, in western Russia, were molossian-type dogs. It seems preposterous to compare a little French bulldog to an Armenian gampr, and say that the little bulldog descended from the same ancestors, nearly identical to the modern gampr, but all evidence indicates that to be true. Breeders of modern show dogs have a fairly high level of predictability when expecting a litter from known parents (Whitney, Leon. 1971), but the genetic variability inherent in the gampr is much less refined. It is more likely that a litter of gampr puppies will resemble the grandparents and great-grandparents than the sire and dam (Ney, n.d.), which is actually a factor that has frequently aided the perseverance of the gampr in its native country. Thousands of years of natural selection has given the gampr as much refinement as is useful, and no more. This genetic heritage includes the ability to produce any characteristic found in the other molossian breeds, and occasionally there will be a puppy that seems to have come from another breed, not just another set of parents (Ney, n.d. and Qadirie, Rasaq, n.d.), but this is a useful characteristic in a country that has been beset by wars since pre-history, famine, earthquakes, and even the first genocide of the twentieth century, when three-quarters of the Armenian race were annihilated by the Ottoman Empire (Morgenthau, Henry. February, 1920) This mass genocide, occurring from 1915 though 1923, devastated the Armenian culture and weakened the ancestral link to the gampr dog. For the previous one thousand years, Turkish raiders had already been consistently taking the dogs as war booty (Ney, n.d.), and even though the historical borders of Armenia had incorporated what is now a large part of northeastern Turkey, current Turkish nationalism is now making an effort to consolidate recognition of descendants of the Armenian dogs as their own Kangal-Sivas and Akbash. During the genocide of 1915 and for many years after, many of the best remaining dogs were taken to the newly formed Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (Ney, n.d.), and became a main portion of the founding of the Red Star breeding program, which has resulted in the recognition of the Caucasian Ovcharka, or Kavkastkaya. The Soviets originally intended to breed a police dog, and began introducing other breeds in an effort to make the independent-minded native livestock guardian more biddable, and more likely to attack on command. The “modern incarnation of the Russian show type also has some St.Bernard, Sarplaninac, Leonberger and Moscow Watchdog blood running through its veins, courtesy of ambitious Soviet breeders…”(Wolf, 2007). As they are, the gampr and other native guardians, such as the koochee of Afghanistan, are unlikely to actually physically attack without a direct unmistakable threat to their family, human or four-legged. Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the trend has been to breed the ovcharka larger and more defensive, which has created serious genetic complications for the breed. Even though there are some definite differences between the native dogs and the modern ovcharka, the ovcharka has the recognition of the Federacion Cynologue Internacional, an international dog breed club, and therefore the native breeds are not valued as such, but are pressured to prove themselves to be ovcharka. This poses a threat to the genetic soundness of the gampr, as the pressure to become a more widely recognized dog has the potential to disrupt the fine-tuning of thousands of years of natural development (Qadirie, Rasaq, n.d., and Trut, 1999). When analyzing characteristics of domesticated animals, it becomes apparent that the process of domestication is linked to certain physiological traits (Trut, Lyudmila N., March-April, 1999) which progress in a surprisingly consistent manner for all species. Fifty years ago, Dr. Dmitry Belyaev and his team at the Institute of Cytology and Genetics in Siberia pioneered a strict study of domestication in foxes. Beginning with 130 foxes, the team permitted only specific, timed, consistent interactions with the captive foxes, and allowed only a small percentage of them to be bred. Selection was based only on friendliness, and disregarded any other means of distinguishing those which were allowed to reproduce. A remarkable progression of developmental and physiological changes were recorded by the team, even after the death of Dr. Balyeav. With selection being based only on friendliness, the speed of the domestication process was dramatically increased, accomplishing inadvertently various developments in fifty years which had never been done, even with intention of doing so, in the history of the farm-fox business (Trut, 1999). Apparently the selection factor of friendliness is polygenic, bringing with it certain traits which can be observed in many other breeds of livestock. Three main physiological traits expressed themselves early and consistently. White pigmentation on first the head then the feet, flopping ears, and curling of the tail were all evident in the early stages of domestication. Developmental changes were remarkable as well. Dramatically, the basal levels of corticosteroids in the blood plasma of the domesticated foxes had dropped to slightly more than half the level in a control group by just 12 generations, and within another six generations had halved again (Trut, 1999) Lower corticosteroid levels indicate a lower level of fear, and also less energy usage in order to produce the fear reaction. With this comes a higher level of seratonin, which in turn affects neonatal development. These changes affect the timing of certain growth markers, such as “earlier eye opening and response to noises and the delayed onset of the fear response to unknown stimuli.” (Trut, 1999).These in turn affect an animal’s ability to be aware of and to accept interaction with humans. Other significant early changes in morphology were differences in skull proportions, more variety in fur color, and changes in size. Remarkably, these characteristics are all evident in the modern gampr, but the gampr appears to have stopped its domestication at that evolutionary stage; the following changes in the foxes, which are more similar to other modern dog breeds, are not particularly evident in the gampr. As domestication progresses, selection being based on a criteria arbitrarily selected by the desire of humans rather than functional need, many non-productive traits crop up. The Belyaev team began to see malformations of the jaw structure, short legs, bowed legs, extreme desire for closeness with humans, and less difference in size between the males and females (Trut, 1999). If the foxes had been living in a situation where their survival, and therefore ability to reproduce, depended on being physically functional, it may be safe to assume that some of these less desirable characteristics would not have become prevalent. However, since the study illustrates the connection between friendliness and these morphological differences, one could also surmise that the domestication of the foxes in a more normal environment would have also been halted or dramatically slowed at the point of non-functionality. The vast majority of modern breeds of dog, particularly those recognized by AKC and primarily judged by a bench standard, have many similarities to the foxes at the end of the Belyaev study. Genetic defects, which make survival without the intervention of a veterinarian and constant care and companionship, have become more and more prevalent. Luxation of the patella in many small breeds is fairly common, as is displacement of the cornea in bull terriers, epilepsy in Labrador retrievers, weepy eyes in chows, incontinence in the bichon, heart murmers in bulldogs, and among the worst, absolute incompetency to reproduce in English Bulldogs. All of the breeds above were at some point more functional and less prone to genetic issues, but the efficacy of human manipulation for the sake of our own imaginary needs, rather than actual realistic needs, has pushed many breeds to brink of disaster. In just the last one hundred years, the Russian Ovcharka has been “developed” enough to cause it problems, particularly poor hips and unreliable temperaments. A dangerous trend for dogs in Central Asia is the development of dog fighting as a sport. Historically, a nomadic tradition allowed for two dogs to be pitted against each other only long enough to assess which dog would declare dominance over the other, and no longer. There was very little risk to the dog, the contest rarely involved more than a wrestling match. Usually, showing teeth and attempting to bite the other dog was a signal of inferiority, because the contest of wills was more important: a dog that could dominate a situation, particularly with marauding wolves, without risking bodily injury was an invaluable resource. If a dog was afraid enough to resort to biting, that was a sign of mental defeat before possible physical defeat. During the last twenty years, the difficulties posed by widespread poverty coupled with a reduced reliance on tradition, have pressured many people into pitting their dogs against each other for money. In some areas this is the easiest and only opportunity to make money quickly and relatively easily. Even in more developed areas in Russia it is a somewhat common and lucrative sport. These modern dog fights have deviated from tradition, and it is now common for dogs to inflict some amount of damage on each other. This has resulted in a trend away from the inherent use of the breeds as they were developed to be. In the United States dog fighting is prohibited, as it is in many other countries, but the excitement and allure of a dog that is tougher than all the rest is still attractive to many people. The danger to the breed is that the calm, levelheaded self-determined intelligence may be lost, and a new version of the breed created that is less predictable and a lot less useful. In 1998 a man named Tigran Nazaryan in Armenia wrote software for a database of the gamprs he had knowledge of in Armenia, and it is posted at www.gampr.net. Tigran and a veterinarian friend by the name of Avetik arranged for the transportation of several dogs to the United States, in order to establish the breed here as well. Some of the dogs were lost, and a few were bred. There are now at least fifteen gamprs in the United States, mainly in California. The Armenian Gampr Club of America, www.gampr..org, was organized in an attempt at preserving the breed here in the U.S. This comes at a time when new regulations are coming into effect that require any dog that is not a registered breeding dog of a recognized breed in a recognized club, actively being shown, become spayed or neutered (Los Angeles Animal Services, 2008). Coincidently, the first county to adopt the new regulation was Los Angeles County, the very same county where most of the Armenia-registered dogs happen to be living. The Armenian gampr is still the breed it has been for thousands of years. In order for the breed to maintain its integrity as a useful, reliable guardian, strict and thorough measures must be in place to assure correct breeding practices. Outside of the native country, any gampr is at risk to a variety of misuses and misrepresentations. Armenia is a small country where there remain local shepherds in the hills, eking out a living the way their ancestors had for thousands of years. Many travelers to the cities never even know that the dogs exist, including Armenians who visit their homeland regularly. The native dogs and shepherds live the way they always have, and in so doing will hopefully be able to maintain the integrity of the breed that began 15,000 years ago. References Bedrosian, R, (1979) The Turco-Mongol Invasions and the Lords of Armenia in the 13-14th Centuries. Columbia University dissertation. Retrieved April 29, 2008, from http://rbedrosian.com/atmi3.htm Kurrikov, Dovlet (n.d.) Turkmen Alabai. Retrieved April 24 from http://www.alabaiusa.com/ Los Angeles Animal Services. (March 6, 2008) AB1634. http://www.cahealthypets.com/ca-healthy-pe...b-1634-home.php Morgenthau, Henry. (1920, February 28) Shall Armenia Perish? The Independent, New York. Retrieved April 24, 2008 from http://www.armenian-genocide.org/2-28-20-text.html Ney, Richard. (n.d.) Armenian Shepherds: The Gampr Deified as Aralez. Tour Armenia. Retrieved February 2008, from http://www.tacentral.com/nature/fauna_story.asp?story_no=2 Poynner, Robyn. (2008, April) Online web dialogue. Messages posted to http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/workingLGDs/messages Qadirie, Rasaq. (n.d) Introduction Part 4. Retrieved April 24, 2008 from http://www.koocheedog.com/intro4.php Savolainen, Peter, Ya-ping Zhang, Jing Luo, Joakim Lundeberg, Thomas Leitner. (November 2002) Genetic Evidence for an East Asian Origin of Domestic Dogs. Science 22 : Vol. 298. no. 5598, pp. 1610 - 1613. DOI: 10.1126/science.1073906. Retrieved April 24, 2008 from http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/298/5598/1610 Trut, Lyudmila N., (1999, March-April) Early Canid Domestication: The Farm-Fox Experiment, American Scientist, 87: 160-169. Viegas, Jennifer. (2003, May) Earliest Domesticated Dogs Uncovered. Animal Planet News. Retreived April 20, 2008, from http://animal.discovery.com/news/briefs/20...5/earlydog.html Verginelli, Fabio et al. (2005, August) Mitochondrial DNA from Prehistoric Canids Highlights Relationships Between Dogs and South-East European Wolves. Molecular Biology and Evolution 2005 22(12):2541-2551 Whitney, Leon F. (1979) How to Breed Dogs. New York: Howell Book House, Inc. Wolf. (2007, February) Caucasian Ovcharka Profile. Retrieved April 24, 2008, from http://caucasian.org/e107_plugins/content/...t.php?content.5

And what about my request to move this topic to Culture? Who's going to do it? I just did: http://hyeforum.com/index.php?showtopic=18...t=0#entry246725

Vava, have you Ever or Never seen one? Anyway, if I understood Movses correctly, you don't WANT to ever see one No, I haven't heard of any Gamprs in Canada, but that doesn't mean there are none.... Movses, likewise, I'll send you a PM.

btw. I still think this topic shouldn't be in General/Other. It clearly belongs in Culture and should perhaps have it's own category. So, I now officially request to move it there. ... Mosjan? Pachikner, Elly.

It would be a good idea if those owners would (at least) report their dog(s) to the club. They are seeking official recognition for the breed (in the USA), so the more that will join, the better. This could also help establish recognition of the Gamprs in Armenia in the end by kennel clubs elsewhere.

These days there is an Armenian Gampr Club of America http://www.gampr.org And the Gampr population in the US that consists of 15 dogs needs help: http://www.gampr.org/History.html “In 1998 a man named Tigran Nazaryan in Armenia wrote software for a database of the gamprs he had knowledge of in Armenia, and it is posted at www.gampr.net. Tigran and a veterinarian friend by the name of Avetik arranged for the transportation of several dogs to the United States, in order to establish the breed here as well. Some of the dogs were lost, and a few were bred. There are now at least fifteen gamprs in the United States, mainly in California. The Armenian Gampr Club of America, www.gampr.org, was organized in an attempt at preserving the breed here in the U.S. This comes at a time when new regulations are coming into effect that require any dog that is not a registered breeding dog of a recognized breed in a recognized club, actively being shown, become spayed or neutered (Los Angeles Animal Services, 2008). Coincidently, the first county to adopt the new regulation was Los Angeles County, the very same county where most of the Armenia-registered dogs happen to be living. The Armenian gampr is still the breed it has been for thousands of years. In order for the breed to maintain its integrity as a useful, reliable guardian, strict and thorough measures must be in place to assure correct breeding practices. Outside of the native country, any gampr is at risk to a variety of misuses and misrepresentations. Armenia is a small country where there remain local shepherds in the hills, eking out a living the way their ancestors had for thousands of years. Many travelers to the cities never even know that the dogs exist, including Armenians who visit their homeland regularly. The native dogs and shepherds live the way they always have, and in so doing will hopefully be able to maintain the integrity of the breed that began 15,000 years ago. The goal of the AGCA is to maintain the gampr breed in its most pure, original manifestation as the ideal livestock guardian and human companion, as physically and mentally sound as it was for the last several thousand years."

Thanks Ashot. I did occur to me that the silence I felt, had a reason. Anyway. I just translated a Dutch article from last week on the subject so I could show it to a friend. It might not be news to you, but to me, trying to understand what went on, it showed just a little more than what I found on regular news sites in the pas week. So, for whatever it's worth I might as well post the translation here.... http://www.wereldomroep.nl/actua/europa/08...menie_oppositie (dutch world broadcast) Opposition receives little support from abroad By Wendy Braanker 25-02-2008 The situation in Armenia remains tensed. The oppositions keeps on protesting from dislike over the election results from last week. The government has put the army in against the demonstrators. The question is who has the longest breath. Without international support the opposition has little chance. The opposition in Armenia says that at the presidential elections fraud took place at large scale and the result has been manipulated. The elections were won with large majority by Serzh Sarkisian, a trustee of the previous president Robert Kocharian. In the first election round Sarkisian got an absolute majority of almost 53 percent, so there won’t be a second round. The main rival of Sarkisian, former president Levon Ter-Petrosian, got no more than 21 percent. Fair play or not Opposition leader Ter-Petrosian immediately stated that serious irregularities took place at the voting precincts. Independent observers of the OVSE don’t agree. They say that the Armenian elections for the main part were fair. This however is being doubted by the Inter Church Peace Organization (IKV) and local organizations in Armenia that are in contact with the IKV. Also the Dutchman Jan Kloos, who lives in Armenia since 2000 and co-founder of the European Commercial Chamber in Armenian, think the OVSE is wrong. “They have declared the elections clean, but fraud is clearly the case. Each election fraud occurs, otherwise the parties in power for more than 10 years wouldn’t have been able to sustain themselves”. According to Kloos the Armenians are more than fed up with it. Situation increasingly explosive The arrest of several members of the opposition is causing the situation to be even more explosive, even though it has been quiet in Yerevan on Monday morning. The IKV fears that the situation will get seriously out of hand in the coming days. According to Koos the opposition is more powerful than before. “If you see the opposition in the broad sense of the word – so all parties that don’t participate in the government – they are now participating in the demonstrations organized by opposition candidate Ter-Petrosian. And this is a unique situation. After every election there is rumor in the city. This is the first time that the opposition is standing behind ONE man. Kocharian’s answer to the demonstrations is powerful. Last weekend he sent word out that the protests are meant to get into power illegally. “The answer of the government will be decisive and firm in order to maintain the stability and order in the state”. The army is ready and is positioned strategically at the entrance roads of the capital Yerevan. So chances are high that things will get tough in Armenia in the coming days. But the longest breath probably is that of the sitting president. The opposition clearly lacks support from abroad. And the OVSE has not called the election illegal. Protests, any which way, will fade out eventually.

Thanks That proves why I'm wearing those heavy glasses

Hi, After todays escalations in Yerevan I decided to come here and search for details on the supposed fraude during the elections. Am I blind or hasn't this been discussed here at all?

Translated from the Dutch newspaper Trouw The Netherlands, September 27, 2006 Turks removed from candidate list of CDA and PvdA Yesterday party boards of both CDA* and PvdA* have removed candidate parliament members of Turkish origine off their candidate list because of deep difference of opinion on the Armenian Question. In the evening the CDA decided to not maintain candidates Tonca (nr. 35) and Elmaci (56th) on the list of candidates for the upcoming elections. Direct cause for this was an interview in the Turkish Journal Sabah in which they again turned to their original opinion that there was never a question of genocide on the Armenians. Only last week in a special statement they had conformed themselves to the official CDA point of view that an organized genocide on the Armenians was committed. But yesterday in the Turkish newspaper the two denied having made such a statement. The PvdA removed the Turkish Dutch Erdinc Sacan from their concept candidate list. According to party chairman Michiel van Hulten Sacan had changed his mind on supporting the PvdA’s point of view. Sacan was nr. 53 on the list. Van Hulten: “It has been a very difficult decision, but there was no other way. Sacan did no longer share our point of view on the genocide. We wouldn’t have been politically credible if we had maintained him on the list. Cause was the report in Trouw that the candidate managed a website, where mainly Turkish nationalists rule and where the Armenian Genocide is being denied. Van Hulten: “Erdinc Sacan is a talented 27 year old man who is trapped between two cultures and who doesn’t want to choose. We are sad to have had to take this decision. Within the PvdA there are more local politicians of Turkish origin that share Sacans opinion. Van Hulten however says that it’s is up to the PvdA-devisions to start a dialogue with those concerned. Yesterday Sacan wasn’t available for comment. Source: http://www.trouw.nl/hetnieuws/nederland/ar...n_van_kieslijst * PvdA = Party of Labour * CDA = Christian Democratic Appel.

Hi everyone. I promised to pop in once a year or so and now I end up getting here more or less accidentally. I was looking for info on the Gamp'r and it turns out that the Hye forum has discussed it. I AM surprised though to find it here in General/other, why not put it in Culture? I also found the gampr.net link, but it seems as if not much new has happened around this breed lately? Anyway, the funny things is, I also found the 100 Gampr pics in the database and it turns out that not only is the Gampr the ancestor of our dogs (Leonbergers) but also I found some looking exactly like them. Gampr's found on gampr.net, last one female: http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/webmensje/leonbergers/0023_10.jpg http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/webmensje/leonbergers/0023_13.jpg http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/webmensje/leonbergers/0022_10.jpg Our own Gampr's (pure bred Leonbergers), last one female: http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/webmensje/leonbergers/DSCF0023.jpg http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/webmensje/leonbergers/DinoSneeuw.jpg http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/webmensje/leonbergers/DSCF0015.jpg

Wouldn't this movement have a tiny little bit to do with the desire to enter the EU?

That is not true Gamavor. It can very well be that you don't feel at home at all when you marry into your own culture. The reason is that everyone is unique, whatever culture they belong to. So my advice (and I am a very experienced woman) is: look for a person, a human being, not a member of a certain race or culture. The topic starter asked: "is it wrong?" .... this question is rediculous. What could be wrong about liking another person that happens to belong to a different culture? At worst, it could turn out to be the wrong person. No harm done, it's a learning process, just keep on searching until you find the right one.