[doganjo]

Crufts just depresses me. Poor dogs.

Oh please don't worry about the dogs - they aren't depressed by it at all.  In fact mine love all the extra attention they get from the lots of lovely people who want to say hello to them.  Please don't judge how the dogs might feel by how you would feel and certainly not till you've shown a dog and been to crufts itself.

[Ideation]

Not quite what I meant . . . . and no offence to yourself meant. Sounds like you had a lovely time with your dogs.

However. . .just seeing some of those dogs. . . . . the kennel club really has a lot to answer for, with people trying to breed animals to conform to a totally daft breed standard that was artificially invented some time much later than the breed of dog was created (usually for a specific purpose). . . . . and often they do so despite the obvious health problems it causes.

A lot of those dogs are abominations in my eyes.

I'm sorry if that sounds harsh, but I was raised around working dogs, that were fit for purpose.

[in the hills]

Agree with some of your sentiments Ideation. But ....

I was showing our Flat coats at Crufts as a young girl. Dad worked and showed them. They always seemed very happy when showing. So not ALL 'poor dogs'. Flatties are in general very outgoing, extrovert dogs and it was a good opportunity for them to kiss lots of people and annoy lots of other dogs. 

They did prefer working though I think 

[Ideation]

You make a fair point.

I wasn't trying to insinuate that dogs did not enjoy being shown. I've been around enough dog shows to notice that some dogs really enjoy it . . . . . mine are not so keen on having someone running their hands over them, that they don't know, and i'd imagine they wouldn't know how to stand for toffee lol.

What I meant was more a long the lines of . . . . . look at the German Shepherds . . . . and all of the other dogs who are bred to conform to a certain look regardless of the cost on their health and well being.

It also makes me chuckle when they talk about a breeds working history - look at the Beddlington terriers, they are about as far from what beddys originally looked like (and still do in the working world) as could be. Same for many other breeds.

The show cockers and hounds are other good examples.

But them i'm a bit of a miserable git! I don't really begrudge anyones enjoyment of the thing, but wish the general public would understand that the Kennel Club doesn't always have the best intentions of the canine world on it's mind. . . . .

[bigchicken]

Never been and wouldn't want to, pedigree dogs and showing not my thing, I've had many dogs over the years and none of them have been pedigree ability was my pedigree. Used to show terriers at working terrier shows and was proud of there working ability didn't much matter if they got a rosette or not that was many years ago when most of the terriers did work, nowadays very few will do any work.  Just my opinion and no disrespect to any pedigree folks.

[Ideation]

Big chicken -

I'm a lurcher and terrierman - and even the little hunt shows are seeing more and more show ponies. . . chasing rosettes all summer, with a dog that's never been a day under the turf in it's life.

Sad really. At least with crufts they don't pretend they work them I guess.

[in the hills]

Yes, breeding to extremes ..... I do understand where you are coming from and agree.

".... they don't pretend they work them" 

I have a working line lab now and have discussed with others the differences between working and show lines with other people on another thread somewhere in this dog board. I get where you are coming from but that is a bit of a sweeping statement (if you don't mind me saying  ). My father definitely did do both and didn't 'pretend' to work them. His Flat Coats picked up on several shoots, competed and won in A.V. working tests and Field Trials. They competed and sometimes won    against working line labs bred and handled by some of the top working people in the country. That's not pretending. Dual purpose dogs!

Don't show now but there have to be at least some people showing at Crufts and truly working their dogs. Of course probably the minority for lots of reasons but SOME people doing both. Won't be me as my lab is not going to win in the show ring 

[Ideation]

What I meant was - the majority of people showing say - beagles, whippets, spaniels etc, don't work them (at crufts) and don't pretend that they do.

Whereas you get a lot of 'working' dog shows in the terrier and lurcher world, and they are full of folk who claim they work their terriers / lurchers but they don't, they just keep them to go round the summer shows and chase ribbons.

[doganjo]

Never been and wouldn't want to, pedigree dogs and showing not my thing, I've had many dogs over the years and none of them have been pedigree ability was my pedigree. Used to show terriers at working terrier shows and was proud of there working ability didn't much matter if they got a rosette or not that was many years ago when most of the terriers did work, nowadays very few will do any work.  Just my opinion and no disrespect to any pedigree folks.

Mine work too, and if they could talk would probably prefer hunting woods and rough ground, but it doesn't stop tehm enjoying the attention at shows; and if you check history you'll find that showing began with working terrier people vying with each other as to whose terrier was the best.

mine are not so keen on having someone running their hands over them, that they don't know, and i'd imagine they wouldn't know how to stand for toffee lol.

That is down to training!

I do take your various points about SOME breeds having been exaggerated over time but that is not the KC's fault, breeders will always try to go one better than their counterparts!  The KC has very few legal powers so that is Government's fault.

A friend of mine has a full coated American cocker which came to my training classes.  Gumbo goes out stalking, shooting, falconry, bird counting - and won 3rd place in his class of 19 at Crufts last month!
So don't DARE tell me show dogs can't work!  ALL gundogs will work to a degree given the right environment and training!
And in the Continental gundogs the majority are dual purpose, or rather triple purpose - work, show and companion - what more could you ask of man's best friend! 

[Ideation]

I'm not trying to get at you doganjo, and i'd imagine that a lot of what i'm talking about isn't the whole picture of crufts and shows like that. Of course it's only the worst bits that probably catch my eye, so I apologise if I'm coming across like i'm trying to attack you, or what you enjoy.

With regard to the show thing starting with working terriers. Well as true as that may be, most working terrier contests in the early days were the 'trails' which were simulated digging and drawing contests.  In general the show world has done its best to ruin most terrier breeds, a long with driving the price right up! £600 for a Border terrier that can't even do what the breed was created for? No thank you!

Yer, you are right, mine are not trained to stand properly, or to be handled by strangers, it's not on my priority list. In fact I usually try to encourage a wariness of strangers . . . .  it's better in the long term. All of my training focuses on the working side, recall, retrieve, stock breaking, jumping etc.

I do see plenty of show dogs that quite clearly LOVE being preened and handled, so I understand that some dogs love it, it's their 'thing'.

Funnily enough I know that Gumbo dog - seen photos of it retrieving a goose!  It's fairly impressive but not very 'usual'. As for all gun dogs can work . . . . well it depends what you mean by work! Maybe we class it a little bit different. Most dogs will 'have a go' but there is a world of difference from a dog going out and having a crack and a dog that grafts day in day out!

I don't think many of those show dogs would last very long working here :-)

But each to their own and i'm glad their owners get much happiness from their dogs.

[in the hills]

I do agree that 'work' can mean different things to different people. A Flattie breeder told me that there dog worked and gave a little demonstration  . Bless! Think it was one of those 'having a go' situations. But having said that, It's quite possible that that particular dog could have worked well in the right hands. The breeder showed her dogs and aimed to get them 'working' to a certain extent/level in order I think to qualify as full champions but her interest was in showing. No crime in that.

So are terrier breeds split in the same way as say Labradors. Basically show or working line but not much chance of a dual purpose dog?

[Ideation]

I think the gun dogs have it a little easier, as in general to perform their 'working' role to a basic level isn't too challenging, as long as the trainer is up to task. I.E most of what is required for a gun dog in a basic working test (not a trial), would be to follow commands, find a dummy (or shot bird) by scent and retrieve it. That kind of thing, is something that most dogs should master with a little training, especially if they have a little inclination from their genes.

With regard to terriers. . . . . . I'm sure I will get my head bitten off here (I have a habit of setting myself up for it). But the word 'terrier' originally derives from the latin word 'terra' meaning 'earth'. Terriers, in all forms were created for hunting and dispatching vermin below (and occasionally) above ground. The main quarry being fox, badger, otter and rats in the early days.

Obviously many of the terrier breeds were 'ruined' in terms of work a long long time ago . . . . .thinks like scottys, westies etc, once upon a time, looked very different. However, others have been degraded in recent history.

When I say that they have been degraded etc, I mean both physically and mentally. Now i'm not saying that no pet terriers should exist, and all should be hard core working dogs. And if folk really want to breed for other attributes, that's fine. . . . but it just grates on me, when they start talking about breed standards, good examples of the breed, and try to talk about what the breed is used for etc.

Working borders, beddys, russels, patterdales, lakelands etc look far far different than their show counter parts, and are mentally and emotionally a world away. The problem is, the daft hunting laws have made it difficult to practice what the terriers were originally bred for, and I fear that one day there will be no true, original type, beddys, borders etc left and all we will have will be the show / pet type, which as lovely as they are and as happy as they make their owners. . . . . are a mere shadow of the originals, and it would be a real shame to lose the ties of dogs that gave us those pet types in the first place.

The beddy is a great example, look at the show ones, big, light bones, leggy things, with a really arched 'roached' back, and a silly top knot and light whisky, curly hair. Then look at the working type, which are half the height, stocky, with no top knot and good wiry curly coats, are straight backed, and for the most part spannable (which means you can hold then around the back and chest with your fingers touching). And most of all, those working types have the heart, grit and determination that makes a terrier, what a terrier is.

Now i'm not saying that one is better. . . . well maybe I am. . . . but please don't tell me that the show types are either good examples of the breed, or the original type. . . .. they are not.

Also, all of my working dogs are excellent family and companion dogs, are fit, healthy and mentally sound. And they amaze me all the time with how mentally and physically capable they are.

Oh yer, and I wouldn't expect to pay more than £200 for say a border, who's family lines I can trace back for decades, and who I expect to work hard for me. Whilst I see pet borders who don't need to do much other than be cute. . . . . being sold for £600? Madness.

Like I said, each to their own, and I don't mean to offend anyone, I just feel that its important to give both sides.

[doganjo]

Perhaps so Ideation - but this thread says what's in the tin - QUOTE - was anyone else at Crufts?  A simple question, not  an invitation to dismiss all show dogs as worthless.

I actually agree with a lot of what you say about fit for purpose (the KC is actually trying to improve that, us judges now have to observe a new dictum, and sign a declaration, and to be honest £600 is not a lot for a well bred champion lined Birder, and not only that I had a friend in Aberdeenshire (sadly now deceased) who regularly worked his champions!  So generalisation is definitely not a good thing.

[Ideation]

I didn't think you would get away with showing at crufts. . . . . any terrier that is regularly worked to it's true vocation  Can you? Maybe i'm wrong, but I would have thought not many judges would be favourable to a scarred dog, with the odd missing tooth, and a variety of other minor facial disfigurements.

Aye, i'm sorry if I've hijacked your thread a little (or a lot) but I always thought forums were a good place for a healthy debate and different opinions, as long as everyone is civil and understands that's all it is and not a personal attack.

I commend any efforts by the K.C to improve the breed specs and make them a little less over exaggerated. That can only be a good thing for the long term health and sustainability of the breed.

£600 seems like a ridiculous amount to pay for a dog . . . . especially one that is bred out of dogs that . . . . . well, stand there and look pretty . . . . . I don't understand how people justify it? I can trace all of the dogs that I have in my kennels, on both sides, further back than my own birth. The amount of effort, time and thought that goes on to creating, maintaining and testing these working lines is (I would say) a hell of a lot more than it takes to maintain a good line of show dog. And pretty much all of the pups are gifted to working homes anyhow.

 When you attach a real high price tag on a dog, it just encourages people to breed for money. . . . look at all of the stupid x breeds 'cavapoo', 'cockerpoo', 'labradoodle'. . . . . yours for a mere £800??? How do people justify that kind of thing? I suppose, though if someone is willing to buy that for scatter bred mongrel, then a line bred, show border, if probably cheap to them at £600.

Aye, you are right, generalisations are never a good thing. . . . . . but alas, often they are in general . . . . true! That doesn't mean that there are not plenty of cases that disprove the generalisation though, and I accept that.

[doganjo]

Yes, you're right. £600 is chicken feed when you get to designer cross breeds and mongrels - Labradoodles, cockapoos etc  - £1000 plus sometimes    How do you justify that?  It's not that they have hypo-allergenic coats because as a cross-breed they can have any coat at all, and anyway it';s usually the dander that causes allergies not the actual hair

Yes, wounds and tooth loss in working dogs are acceptable so long as it's not a health issue, even if it is primarily a beauty show - I know of one dog which has been through cancer treatment and has been shown since because he just loves it.  He has hair missing on one of his feet - still won his class recently.

I can trace my dogs ancestry back to the original Epagneul Breton in France (1800s) if I look back the databases that I maintain for our breed(back to 1982) and the French Club one for further back.  Most breeds have their own databases  - so you are not alone in that.

ps I don't mind the hijacking so long as it's based on fact not generalisation. But there have been other threads which discussed this very subject.