Labrador colours, a guess anyone? Discussions

I said I wouldn't post pictures - but - grrrr

This boy is a FT CH - nothing snipey or whippety about him





Nothing whippety about this FT CH Bitch



Take a search on Google for IntFTCh Conneywarren Spike - nothing whippety about this grand old gent - plenty of substance

Four superb FT dogs from years gone by

FTCh. Ben of Mallowdale, FTCh. Swinbrook Twig, Symington Coral und FTCh. Tibea Tosh (

Nothing light or whippety about those three prolific FT CH - all would pass muster against the showdogs of years gone by and today

When did I say I objected to the way ANY dog looks?

That is just my point, you are so busy jumping to defend something that hasn't been said that you don't read with any kind of understanding.

rune

I have several really old books and mags----from the 20's onwards and the labs do look different-- as do many other breeds,

I don't have a scanner unfortunately.

Whatever preople want for whatever hobby they choose is fine by me---but I don't think they are 'correct' because they might fit the KC standard---or incorrect because they don't!

rune

rune

Yes, because the breed has evolved and the breed standard (still predominantly by working folk) has changed.

The dogs above are from recent times since that change of the breed standard - and it doesn't take a genius to see that they are NOT typical of what many refer to as the 'correct' labrador - i.e. the whippety dogs we often see out in the field - yet all have got to the top (in more than one country in some instances)

Many dogs will have faults against the breed standard, that doesn't mean we love them any less - far from it - but at least the dogs look like the breed they are meant to be - and many of us aim to improve on that with future generations - providing it doesn't have a negative impact on health or temperament (which for labradors is inherent as part of the breed standard) then what's the problem.

If you don't have a standard to breed to - then you may as well just breed anything - a dog not fit for it's working purpose or resembling the breed it is supposed to be.

There are a MINUTE number of breeds who have suffered in recent years - yet all pedigree dogs get tarred unfairly with the same brush - when show breeders have in the main, led the way in initiating health testing and breeding for a better healthier dog.

It's interesting that many of the so called 'cross breeders' are suddenly starting to health test their breeding stock - and often at the same time trying to create a 'type' which many intimate they hope will, in time, be adopted by the KC.

If hybrid vigour carries so much weight, and breed standards are so naff - why then are these 'breeders' pursuing the routes they are?

To prove the point

I don't happen to think hybrid vigour is valid---in spite of my own experience to the contrary!

Health testing is happening because the ethical breeders of crossbreeds care about their pups as much as the ethical breeders of KC pedigree dogs.

Goodness knows why they want the dogs to be KC recognised---personally I think the less the KC has to do with ANY dog activity the better it is!

rune

Just nipping in quickly before getting the dogs out, but there are some lovely, lovely examples of working dogs there Swarthy, exactly the sort of thing that I've tried to point to in my posts. These well made working bred dogs, resemble some of the past dual champions, to my eye at least, and shows to me at least, that this was an acceptable match to the breed standard, does that make sense? And yet I doubt, as I've said before, if they would be as popular today in the show ring, and so would never make it up to the same champion status.

I'd add these to the 'good looking' FTCH list:

I never said my list was exhaustive ;-)

What cracking looking dogs, and the head on the first one - lovely

Prove what point exactly?

Rune - history tells us that people start health testing because they are concerned about a problem within their 'breed' (or cross breed as the case may be) - once those tests are well and truly embedded in the breed - yes, then it could be put down to 'caring'.

I was absolutely staggered to discoverthat some breeders are now hipscoring WHWT - never a breed you would automatically associate with HD.

=======================

As for breeding to a type - someone wants a Labrador Cross Poodle - they might get a curly haired looking labrador, or a long wavy haired poodle, it might moult, it might not, it might be the side of a standard poodle, or a lab. How many of these dogs end up in rescue because what the owners expected isn't what they got?

Yet - now a lot of these breeders DO want a type and DO want them to be KC registered - the very thing some of you guys argue against.

I understand exactly what you said, you said breed standards dont matter, my post you quoted explains why they do.

Without a breed standard, you aint got a breed!!

Sorry, I haven't had a chance to read all the posts on this thread yet, but will as soon as I get enough time.

However, I just wanted to say with regard to the comment about breed standards, how is it that working border collies are still very recognisable as collies yet they aren't bred to any breed standard?

Also, there are so many different "types" already within a breed standard, so many different interpretations of a standard, that how much relevance is actually in a modern breed standard (other than for the latest fashion in the show ring?).

I am not against breed standards as such, but not sure how relevant they are today.

Yes you have---you had breeds before breed standards---you said so yourself!

rune

Many many dogs of all shapes sizes and breeds end up in rescue because what the owners expect they don't get.

Yep---some of them do want them KC'd---and I have already said I think they are mad to want the KC involved in any way shape or form!

I don't have to agree with them any more than I have to agree with you!

rune

The hybrid vigor thing.....not saying I agree that it is always the case....but I expect that is why the cross breeders health test. to 'prove' thier dogs are healthy and thus justify the cross....

NOT that I agree....Just giving a possible answer to your question.

Did I???
................

Some people want to own a breed, not a breed type.

Well I own two breeds - two ISDS reg border collies and two KC reg GSDs (which are both longcoated). Now none of my dogs look like the type of their breed you see in a show ring - but that doesn't bother me a bit.

So is Mace 'More' of a Border collie because he is bred to conform to a breed standard?

As opposed to the breed types you get one farms?