So how do they justify it?

[Ravenwood]

Watching that American Cocker win today I was wondering how they justify breeding and developing such a dog that couldn't possibly do a days work in its life, and yet it still comes under the Gundog section.

What justifies breeders to create such a dog so far removed from its original reason of being?

And not just that Cocker but show Labs, Clumbers (and I am sure there are many more) are also built in such a way that would render them useless in the Working Gundog field.

And another rant (sorry!) Why do the BBC refuse to show the Gamekeepers ring on TV?

 

[kirstyhen]

I think its awful when a breed is so overbred that it become detrimental. I used to work in boarding kennels and saw so many bulldogs, king charles spaniels, bassets, pointers, etc that had been bred to try and resemble a breed standard so closely that they couldnt breath, see, walk or do any other doggy things! Think alot of that is due to bad breeding.
My mums friend breeds Irish water spaniels, which are classed as a rare breed, she works so hard to insure that people dont just breed alot of poor quality dogs. Our dog is part owned by her and part of the agreement was that if any reason arose that made him a less quality stud dog, hip scores etc, he would be castrated.
Some of the dogs you see out working, show people would struggle to class! Yet they do their job amazingly!
I would love to see a top working dog of each breed next to their showing conterparts, just to see the difference!

 

[becca114]

I dont see why the American Cocker spaniel cannot do a days work. Have a look at the breed standard here:
http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/111
The cocker spaniel in question would have been chosen because it has the qualities needed to be able to work. I think this dog, correctly trained is capable of flushing out and retrieving game.

Having said that it would be nice to see more show dogs doing what they were bred to do.

 

[Foxfolly]

Don't get me started on this... I could rant for hours!!

My hubbie had Chesapeke bay retrievers and his used to work and show but they have been bred so badly that Homer and his sister were both put down at a really young age as they lost the nerves in their back ends and had no control over their back legs, very distressing to see an otherwise healthy dog deteriorate.

They were from a so say reputable KC breeder who had bred from dogs who they knew had this condition... DISGUSTING!!

Aso did you see the weepy eyes that Clumber had?
Surely a dog shouldn't have weepy eyes if it is 100% correctly bred....

This is why we went for Patterdales, they haven't been messed with as they aren't recognised by the KC.

We have just started breeding them (Second litter due April) and we will only breed for temperament and conformation!!

 

[prose]

[ QUOTE ]
Also did you see the weepy eyes that Clumber had?
Surely a dog shouldn't have weepy eyes if it is 100% correctly bred....

This is why we went for Patterdales, they haven't been messed with as they aren't recognised by the KC.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think KC/AKC reg means much these days. I've come across AKC Boston Terriers with luxating patellas, cherry eyes and stenotic nares. I think that you have to go one step beyond AKC registration and find a breeder who does old standard health testing and isn't so hung up about creating the standard to the latter. I started with the local BT club in my area and interviewed my breeder as much as she interrogated me (and she did!). Stella's five now--so young still, yes--but she been healthy in every single way and can outpace any Labrador or Jack Russell when it comes to fetching balls and twigs.

I agree, though--nothing makes me crosser than seeing a hyper, badly bred Boston, with terrible allergies or nostrils too small (both concerned by sloppy breeding) for the dog to run around and be the active little terriorists that they're supposed to be.

 

[Starbucks]

I think the GWP should have won - at least he was a proper working dog as well!

*not that I'm biased or anything*

 

[kirstyhen]

Taken from the breed standard of the American Cocker Spaniel,
"Coat
On head, short and fine; on body, medium length, with enough under coating to give protection. Ears, chest, abdomen and legs well feathered, but not so excessive as to hide body lines or impede movement and function as a sporting dog. Texture most important. Coat silky, flat or slightly wavy. Excessive coat, curly, woolly or cotton texture undesirable."
Now how does the coat they have not impede there function as a working dog!? They would literally become stuck in any cover they entered!

 

[Ravenwood]

Quite right but not only would they get tangled up in cover but nor could they retrieve a bird across water with that coat - the practicalities are ridiculous - it would freeze to death in winter and take hours to dry. It would possibly serve as a peg dog but thats about in all IMHO.

 

[Damnation]

I agree with this. We have 3 labs, one of which we have bred ourselves. Our old boy is a drakeshead dog, working bred, was very fit in his days and was the first lab that the vet had felt with a 6 pac

We spend alot our time walking our dogs to keep them fit and healthy and in good condition to show by keeping the weight of and building up the muscle.
It drives me mad when I see fat labradors, or dogs that just look good, but couldn't perform the function that they were origionaly bred to do.