Tommee in describing a breeder of Labradors said :

"She does not have the modern show type nor the working type, hers are dual purpose as all such dogs should be."

What do you think, is the diversion in type of certain breeds a good or a bad thing ?

Bad thing, as it splits the available gene pool, which might not be so bad if it meant that when needed people  dipped into the other camp to keep on an even keel, but they don't, or very rarely, so that in effect they are separate breeds. 

Might not be so bad for Labradors who are in huge numbers in both types but less good for example for i5rish Red and White Setters, or Bloodhounds where suggesting outcrossing to working dogs has met with strong opposition by some.

It's why the system in Scandinavian countries requiring dogs to be adequate in both arenas to achieve any level of championship.  This applies to my breed and ensures that there is no split between show and working type.

To be fair you could say except outside Scandinavia all of the breed is working type, but dogs bred from UK and US stock where they are not worked have been successfully taken to Sweden and worked well.

English setters in Scandinavia seem to be far less overdone for example.

Bad thing. It makes no sense at all. Why should we breed dogs that aren't proper examples of their breed? A good dog should have ALL the breed's qualities, not just looks or just working ability. (Of course, when it comes to working ability, we also MUST consider what abilities are still relevant in today's world!) The working people will claim they don't need looks, just ability, but why do they need a particular breed at all, then? The show people will claim they don't need working ability -but why pick a breed originally bred for a specific purpose then? As long as the original purpose wasn't something like bull fighting, then the entire POINT of a breed is that the individuals all look the same, and have the same abilities. A Golden Retriever not wanting to retrieve is not a proper Golden Retriever.

My own breed is very much split into two. This has happened worldwide BUT in its country of origin and nearby countries you far more often come across dogs that still look like the breed should AND have the working qualities as well. Indeed at the major shows character tests and working ability tests are carried out and only dogs that have looks AND ability are officially recommended for breeding. I feel very passionately about this myself and so have both imported a proper "dual purpose" dog from the country of origin, and added working blood to my show lines, in an attempt to produce pups that do have it all.

> What do you think, is the diversion in type of certain breeds a good or a bad thing ?

It can never be a good thing. A good working dog of a particular breed should look like that breed, or why choose it, why not get a mutt to work. A good show dog of any breed should still be able to do the job it was bred for. Though as Goldmali rightly says there are some jobs that simply do not fit into todays society and some breed temperaments do have to be adapted.

I would love to see a working element brought into all show titles, like gundogs - a show champion until you have proven working ability then you can be called a full champion.

I believe most sighthounds could pass this now. For other breeds it may be a stretch, but it ensures that breeders are going the right way.

In silken windhounds most of the UK population race and at our club event 2013 the fastest dog and bitch where the countries only two show champions - great, this for me is a breed that is truly dual purpose.

We have working flatcoats and working cockers.      Some of our flatcoats show very well, some don't.      All of our cockers work exceptionally well - none of them would do anything in the show ring as it is today, although they are of good conformation.

Both of our breeds are proven in the working field - with the flatcoats I don't just mean the show dog qualifier, but many of them have their Shooting Dog Certificate and their KC Working Gundog certificate.   One of ours has  FT  awards.  Many of them have working test achievements, but it my book they should be tested on game as priority, not dummies.

The Flatcoats haven't diverged as much as the cockers - maybe because only a select few are successfully Field Trialled against the 'robotic' Labradors, so haven't been so severely selected .        

Now the cockers are a different kettle of fish entirely -  many are bred to compete seriously as well as to work on shoots, and the competition is fast and furious.   It's not unusual for a working cocker  to have at least 3/4 of its pedigree as FTCHs.   Now this may or may not have a down side, depending on the way you look at things.    Almost inevitably the average COI in working cockers is high.    It is essential that you have a thorough knowledge of the dogs in your pedigree to cope with this, and most certainly the triallers will have this, and won't take any prisoners in their breeding plans.
Sadly, since working cockers have the Wills and Kate 'effect' now, many litters are being bred from stock untested in the field, and the outcrossing which they are advised to do, I believe, will create more problems than it solves.

I believe the split in working cockers and their show cousins is permanent, and I do spend many hours replying to emails via the assured breeder scheme from folk who don't know the difference

Puts hard hat on

Jo

Hi Jo

You mention outcrossing because they are advised to do so , can you expand and explain this further please. On who and why and your thoughts on that.

I have being trying to get somebody  to give me a valid reason to why there seems to be an outcrossing surge in the last few years although understand outcrossing has been going on for many years beyond that which I understand originates from many of the estates in Scotland ( according to an 'expert' in springer / cocker breeding )

Why take two such lovely breeds and do this I still can't quite get ?

It is also quite funny that the name sprocker originated at the same sort of time the Labradoodle and other such crosses with quirky names became known and exploited in the pet market. Coincidence or the same bandwagon ?

I don't mean outcrossing as it applies to breeding crossbreds (:-( ), but to outcrossing within the breed - different lines bred together in an attempt to negate any deleterious genes.

In my personal exerience, whenever we've gone to a completely different line we've introduced problems we didn't have before - albeit mostly minor, but still not what I wanted......

Jo

Ok understand.

It is a good thing amongst breeds where the working ability is threatened (ie there are not many good workers left).

It is the only way to preserve working ability in some breeds, is to select exclusively for that.  To compensate for the ridiculous number of breeders breeding purely for show and pet. 

If you don't select ONLY for working ability in these breeds, it will be bred out and diluted in the wider gene pool.

I agree but are you saying that the gene pool for both springers and worker cockers is that small  that crossing is the option people are using or is it easier to do that than travel further a field as perhaps somebody from show lines would perhaps tend to do ? Not saying that is happening but a possible reason ? Sorry assuming you are replying to my first post ?

I like my bitches to pass the fist draft to show that they have the ability to do the job they once did and still do in some pars of Switzerland. Not many showers of my breed do any carting at all.
Aileen

> I believe the split in working cockers and their show cousins is permanent,

It has been of such long duration They practically are different breeds though, as different as any spaniel breed from another, and maybe should be recognised as such, as two breeds..

I would not say this is so much so with English Springers and Labradors.  You can find the far extreme of working and show being very different but there are workers and show dogs that are pretty similar, anf could easily be outcrossed to, as in typical looking workers used in show breeding, and less so I suppose some show stock that still had good working instincts, though unproven could be sued to help narrowed working gene pools.

I don't think any serious working dogs would entertain a show dog in their breeding programme - afraid I certainly wouldn't unless (very unlikely) it had been made up to a Dual Ch, or at the very least had a recognised working certificate on game.  

Just as an aside - just had a phone call - 'I've just seen your details on Champdogs - would   you be willing to use your cocker on a standard poodle bitch?'      You're 'aving a larf........do you know how small my cocker is?

Jo

I think in some gundogs someone with an interest in both fields would perhaps outcross to a more dual purpose dog in either camp, but as has been said the Working cocker and Show Cocker really are different breeds in their confirmation.

Better than the other way round Jo!!!!

In my breed the dog in the show ring should be recognisable as the dog in the field,  and fortunately we have a strong body of owners / breeders who strive for duality. My current young male is out of my multi show titled bitch sired by a german bred field trial male. Likewise we have strong working kennels who will use show dogs .. Our latest FT CH bitch ( made up just before close of season ) is sired by a Sh Ch male who is used as a personal shooting dog out of a FT Ch Bitch. Long may duality be the goal !

In our breed,  there is a split between working bred dogs and show dogs,  but it's a strange one.

Most working people declare that the show dogs are useless to work.  Quite frankly,  they are positively scornful.    But it's doubtful that every pup in every working litter would make a useful working dog.   And having been on the working discussion foums,  this is indeed the case,  and not just with Bedlingtons.

But the show people find that a good proportion of their show bred dogs can and do work.   Sometimes against their owner's wishes

Some show people have ensured that their lines remain dual purpose and regularly work their dogs.

There are at least two Bedlingtons who work in the field,  picking up game and/or beating.   At least one works with hawks.

My own dogs are from Show/Working lines.   The parents of my first bitch were worked regularly on rats.   And the fathers of both my remaining bitches worked regularly too.   All my dogs have shown huge interest when rats/fox have been scented and a willingness to engage.   My oldest bitch really fancied her chances with a Harris hawk and had to be put in the car for safety.   The other two have shown similar interest.

In addition,  some of the dual purpose dogs have  been entered in working terrier shows and taken first place etc.   These dogs are also winning at Ch Shows including Crufts.  

In Bedlingtons,  at least,  the more refined looking Show dogs are just as capable of doing the job they were bred for.   And long may that continue.