Labrador colours, a guess anyone? Discussions

I appreciate the picture is of an American lab - but if you look at the UK breed standard, it very clearly says

General Appearance
Strongly built, short-coupled, very active; broad in skull; broad and deep through chest and ribs; broad and strong over loins and hindquarters.

Head and Skull
Skull broad with defined stop; clean-cut without fleshy cheeks. Jaws of medium length, powerful not snipy. Nose wide, nostrils well developed.

Neck
Clean, strong, powerful, set into well placed shoulders.

Body
Chest of good width and depth, with well sprung barrel ribs - this effect not to be produced by carrying excessive weight. Level topline. Loins wide, short-coupled and strong.

Size
Ideal height at withers: dogs: 56-57 cms (22-221/2 ins); bitches: 55-56 cms (211/2-22 ins).

the point is - this breed standard has been in place for a long time - written by a mix of show and working people - the only recent amendment is about using the weight to create the barrel ribbed effect.

If words such as "Width", "Depth", "Broad", "Deep" and "well sprung Barrel rib" aren't indicative of what is required from a labrador of breed standard (i.e. substance and broadness) then I don't know what is. (and it is a dog of substance not lean, lithe and tall)

I am not taking anything away from your Labs whatsoever - however - it is plain to see that many (not all - because there are some beautiful working labs out there with considerable substance) - DO NOT meet the Breed standard - i.e. created to enable the dog to be able to do what it is bred fror

A Labrador is a workhorse not a sprinter - it needs stamina to go all day at a steady pace in order to what the dog was bred for.

even IF the build of these rottie sized dogs was the 'right' conformation for a lab based on the type of dog that was about 100 years ago
But why do you think people working their dogs have evolved to a more athletic build?


What about things like eye colour, again I ask
If a certain eye colour does not effect the dogs vision or health and it is a normal (although less common) colour.pigmentations/whatever that the genetics of the dogs can sometimes produce
WHY are these excluded from the standard? Why are these dogs penalised when it is purely asthetics?
If there is no reasoin for it on the breed standard why dont people in the showing world question the standard?

Because working folk do want a faster leaner dogs - so if the job has changed - why hasn't the breed standard which these people ARE involved in changed? I am not into putting pictures of other people's dogs onto the forums because it breaches copyright - however, there are a number of current FT CH who actually would pass muster in a showring - that's not hearsay -that's fact - so if this is possible - why are some breeders changing when it has been proven that substance and success can live side by side?


No dog is 'exempted' from the standard - when a Lab goes into the showring - it is measured on 53 conformation points - occasionally, you will see dogs that do meet all of these points and are exemplary of the breed standard - others however may have minor faults - and they will be assessed alongside each other as to which is the best example for placings - there will be an element of subjectivity, I think that is without question.

It's not difficult to see that a light eye on any colour lab is wrong, but particularly so in a chocolate or black

I have one here (and yes, I bred her) - she is a super colouring with good pigmentation, she has a superb double coat, is nice conformationally although her upper arm is too long. I don't show her, but she has a LOT of good qualities I want in my breeding and subject to health test results, I will seek a dog who can correct some (or hopefully all) of these weaknesses to produce me a better dog.

She is quite small - but has proportionate substance - yet fast and agile really don't cover how she is - she can scale heights that make my eyes water - she moves at a speed that can keep up with greyhounds and lurchers - and she can go ALL day without showing the remotest hint of tiredness.

It doesn't take anything away from the fact that I adore her - she's a lovely pet and great fun to be around - which are my main drivers for all my dogs, pets first and everything else is secondary - but in the same breath - I know what I would like to aim for in my breeding - and hopefully one day I will get there.

Unless I am mistaken there is only ONE breed standard for the Lab... so surely that woudl mean those that adhere to that standard MUST be able to do the job they were bred for??



What type of the working type do you prefare, because from my experience of working labs, they are pretty similar to the working Springer, no conformity to their "type" so given lets say you like the working springer do you like the shorter ones with Queen Ann legs, or the taller ones, stockier ones , longer ears , shorter ears... because the facts are if you are not bothered about a breed standard, you get a melting pot of "whatever the bred is supposed to be"!


And that goes for Labs to, do you prefer those that look like a flat coat (without the coat) those that look like a cross breed , take your pick, there are enough "types" out their to suit your working type.

Funny enough I have a friend who breeds working labs, her dogs are fantastic and much sort after, yet funny enough they resemble the breed standard to a tee!!

Am lost on that one, Labs are not my breed but I have yet to meet one I mistook for a Rotti:?


thats like saying you like the English Setter, but you might as well have a Irish or Gorden, because they are the same size:?

Thats if those who breed working labs have actually set a preferred breed standard down for their working dogs..

Or more likely we have a split , not due to a blueprint set down, but to the fact those who work their dogs , dont care about breed standard and just breed a good worker to a good worker, and as with the Springer, you get diversity.. by default , not design.

Not sure I understand what you mean, why would you get "looks" becuase you walk a Lab with your lurchers???????:?

One that was that big yeah it would really look then that my Lurcher and Longdog are starved and that the dog lives up to the Lab rep and eats everything, walking that Lab with one of mine really would be opposite ends of the scale .

Not to mention the fact that the dog isn't fat, but looks in excellent condition and is built as they should be.

What some are forgetting is that the original purpose of a Labrador was that of a waterfowl retriever. That meant long periods of sitting and waiting in the freezing cold in and out of freezing water. They are NOT a HPR or hunting breed and shouldn't operate as such, nor should they be built on the leaner lines of such breeds. That is a reason they should be heavier in bone and mass (but NOT fat) and have a thick double coat; features that the vast majority of field trial/working bred dogs lack.

If we talking about which 'type' would trump which when used for their original purpose, the show type by far remains true to the original examples of the breed.

Any person knowing anything about dogs would know the difference between fat and fit!

So? I walk my Lab who isn't built dissimilarly to that dog with my 3kg terrier and my skinny pointer type...I don't get 'looks'? :?

Shame, coz some people don't know fit or starved I had a woman ask me whether mine were rescues the other day coz mine were so skinny, no love their not she then says well her poodles skinny but you can't see it, they were only at the vets the other day (and a new one) who said that they were ideal, but many people don't realise dogs can be different, mind you funniest thing thats ever happened to me, when I was younger the RSPCA came round to look at my Deerhound coz someone rang up about a starved Irish Wolfhound.

Whether you like that bitch or not (and that is your prerogative not to like her) to me, that contains more 'undertones' of vain-ness' than what those in the showring are often accused of,

That labrador bitch is NOT fat - she is an excellent example of the breed standard (remember she is in the States and Labs are shown globally to a common standard (with minor variations between countries, for example, in the States there is a weight range) - so it's not something that has been made up for the UK market.

Out of my 6 Labs, I've got one here who really will eat anything and yes, I do have a constant battle with her weight - I don't have any such similar problems with the other .

Anyone with an ounce of common sense would see that the dogs are in keeping with their breed - whether that be Labs, Lurchers, Greyhounds or any other breed - and if someone is that opinionated in public about your dogs, then they are not worth worrying about anyway.

As I said, people who know anything about dogs......

Still dont get your point, so you would get "looks" if you walked a Rotti, Staffie , Boxer ,( pick your breed) with your lurchers :? :? your lurches would look starved,and your thicker set dog woudl look fat

These in my opinion are beautiful quality Labradors. Uk ones too!

http://www.pbase.com/woodmist/image/111312432

http://www.pbase.com/woodmist/image/119569174

http://www.pbase.com/woodmist/image/104673560

http://www.pbase.com/woodmist/image/102672589

http://www.pbase.com/woodmist/image/102942775
(Even with the calflick! )

http://www.pbase.com/woodmist/image/96233352
(Classy youngster)

http://www.pbase.com/woodmist/image/88623308

http://www.pbase.com/woodmist/image/87508914

http://www.pbase.com/woodmist/image/87508852

I'm not saying she is fat, she is a big build though, a lot bigger then the everyday Lab, what I will ask though, well it might not look like a question to start off with, but wait, more weight on the joints can increase problems with the joints like HD, although not being over weight there is more weight there because of how they are built, are things like HD more of a problem in the show labs (although I suppose that would only really be answerable if every breeder hip scored, and there was no BYB breeding only for cash)

I've heard of Rotties having their tails cut off with a knife, and will never forget or forgive myself for the time I was there when someone I was living with at the time sold a Rottie pup, a gorgeous cute pup to a family that lived in a masionette over the local chippy, I was in the car when they handed the pup to a guy at the back of the shops and the horror I felt in seeing a knife be passed down and the guy look at tail before paying for her, oh how I wanted to stop what was happening, but even when I tried nothing happened, I moved out soon after wards, haven't spoke to anyone involved since, and the family moved away, I never got to know what happened to her

Are rare ;-)

They certainly must be by you.

Thats a lot of links for this slow computer but I'm looking through them.

Theres something about the dog in this photo that I find stricking, have to say.

http://www.pbase.com/woodmist/image/104673560

Love 3, 5 & 7 Dawn! Beautiful dogs.

From one of the top show kennels too!