Hi.  Here's what I wrote to the Kennel Club: 
"When is the Kennel Club likely to recognise the two very distinct breed differences in English Springer Spaniels?  There seems to be an acknowledgement in the UK of the difference between Working and Show, and  in the States the two types are more widely recognised.  I have a Working Springer yet people seem to think she's a crossbreed.  They seem to think I'd delusional when I say she is a Working Springer!".
And here's what the KC said back:
"Thank you for your recent enquiry. Any proposal to 'split' an established breed would require an application from the registered breed societies for the breed, as these represent the interests of the majoirty of UK owners and breeders. Should the Kennel Club receive such an application, it would be referred to the Breed Standards and Stud Book Sub-Committee for consideration."
Do any of you breeders agree that the ESS should have a KC acknowledgement of the diversity of the breed?  In the States, the Working Springer is known as the Field Bred Springer.  I think the Working and the Show Springers are different enough to warrant the breed being redefined, maybe in the same way that German Spitz are, i.e. German Spitz (Mittel) or (Klein).  Any comments?

The only thing is if they started this then every working dog would have to be changed as let's face it nearly all of the gundogs have a totally different type went it comes to working dogs, even my breed does!

I can't see the point in changing to two breeds.  Are those with the working springer likly to show?  and are those with the show springer going to work?

In both my main breeds there is a distingtive type between working and show.

Wow if that happend we could end up in the region of approx 250-300 breeds (couldn't do it for one breed and not the others!)

Like SWD said, basically all gundogs have a working type and a show type, and it isn't just gundogs either. I think rather breeders should aim to breed dual purpose dogs . :)

Not GSPs! GSP breeders have ensured that the lines have both working and show. Show champs are often working dogs as well ;)

I know that in my breed that even in their native country they have changed a lot since I first saw them 13 years ago.  Most of them were of the bigger type with the odd smaller dog thrown in, now it seems the other way round and those of us with the bigger type are called. 

At least with my breed there is a large variation in size anyway.

That is excellent!! :D

I don't really see the point either.  Although it's essential to have a kennel club registration most people with working springers get them purely because of their working ability.  I am not interested in knowing if my dog has the right colour formation/size of ears, etc to conform to the breed standard, just that he has the potential to become a FTCh and do the job he was bred for.  I can be assured of this somewhat by knowing his breed history.

As mentioned in another thread, in my area there are mostly working springers and nobody has ever suggested his is anything other than a springer.  The show variety I know doesn't have an ounce of working instinct in him and although does look like a different dog, this doesn't really worry or interest me.

ALL HPR breeds have no difference in type & long may it stay that way.

There are a few ESS breeders with show bred dogs who work them successfully, I've been contemplating a pup from such a breeder!  (Oooo that'll be gossiped about now in Munster circles!!!!!)

Out of all ESS registered with the KC each year, the vast majority are working bred Springers, thats all I ever see around here.

How about something different?

A really radical idea........... try breeding show springers that work and try breeding working springers to fit the breed standard better?

Hmm well considering the dreadful state of affairs the KC have thrown my breed into over the last 6 weeks then be very careful as they are capable of literally taking matters into their hands & causing no end of trouble without any consultation from breed clubs :(

Speaking as a working springer owner, trialler, & potential breeder, I have no reason to want such a split to take place. I dont think that there is any real demand for this split to happen. The difference with the Akita split is that there are two different types within the breed that people want to show. I really can't see any demand from the working breeders to be able to show their dogs.

Even within the working type there are significant differences of type and conformation. The nice thing about this divergence of type is that you can find a pup that suits both your own perferences and the type of work that you use the dog for.

With regard to dual purpose breeds, I hear rumblings from those quarters that it seems to becoming more and more difficult to win with working type dogs. The show habitually seems to favour the larger dog.

Where did you hear those rumblings?  I have to confess I'm not an expert but from the GSP sites that I visit the champions seem to work no problem.  There is a breed standard for size so how can they favour bigger dogs?

Chez swa,

To be honest I know more flatcoat people than HPR, but I have heard some discontent that in some shows the dual purpose stock is finding it harder to get placed.

Stock owned by people who work their FCR's are not always handled to their best advantage, I work my FCR's and know I am a crap handler. I therefore tend to be choosy who I enter under and try to enter under judges who do work their dogs, with the exception of the breed championship show.

Even with my appalling handling my young dog has done well at the last two breed shows. When I first started in FCRs the presentation was not as professional as it is now and so the working dogs and their handlers would do very well. I must admit that when judging I do not worry so much about presentation, but I do expect a clean dog, and one that is correctly put together.

The show ring these days is very competitive, and to be honest unless you can turn out a dog no matter what the breed to it's very best advantage then you will not do as well as you could. I know I hold my dog back all the time, but he is predominantly a working dog for me, so does it matter?

Hi Havoc.  Firstly, I wasn't aware that there was an Akita split.  I must live in a cave!  Secondly, it's not that I think Working Springers should be shown - far from it - I just want an acknowledgement in the KC Breed book/websites/any other dog resources that there is another variation apart from the Show Springers.  They never describe the Working Springers or show their picture.  I didn't know they existed until I got mine - and then I didn't believe she was a Springer.  Other people have asked if she's a Brittany or a BC cross - I come from near Gatwick, by the way.  We must have different dogs down here to elsewhere in the country.  Maybe I'm missing out what the KC is all about.  Is it all about showing or is it about breeding pedigree dogs that conform to type?  If the latter, then my Working Springer doesn't conform to the ESS description but that doesn't mean she ISN'T one!!!!  Blow the showing!  And as for this dual purpose breeding, have breeders not learned their lesson from bloodhounds/pugs/chows etc with their distorted features?  I'm all for jigging around with nature if it improves health problems but not playing God for the sake of it.  We don't need a generic ESS - the two are fine - I would just like the differences to be acknowledged in a more widespread direction.  I would state that I am not having a pop at anyone, before the nasty postings start.  Anyone who has a problem with my opinions is welcome to post a new topic stating their own views. 

Tingalay,

Thats interesting as most of the springers I see (even in pet homes) are of working rather than show type.

I'm not sure that the KC themselves would be worried whether the split happened or not (other than the logistical implications), however they would only sanction such a change if there was a strong demand from the breed clubs. I can't see the breed clubs wanting a change, as there is not a strong demand to show working type springers. I cant really see any other benefits.

I would guess that the formal line from the breed clubs would be that breeders should be striving to breed dogs that meet the standard from both a physical and working aspect.

I can't see any evidence that showing has improved (or even maintained) the working ability of any breed of gundog, and in most breeds produces an animal that can't hold a candle to a pure working-bred version. Some clumber spaniel breeders have made great strides in the working ability (as well as health and hip scores) of their dogs by moving to a working only basis for their breeding.

To be honest within the working springer world there are more pressing issues to be addressed. The succesful lines within field trials have been condensed down significantly in recent years, and it is getting harder to find outcross lines that will still produce competitive offspring. Additionally care needs to be taken that the working springers do not end up splitting between pure field trial performers and dogs suitable for ordinary shooting work.

This is from a complete ignoramus on gundogs, so shoot me down if you will. :) But it seems to me that if there is a split between a working and a show ring type, the show ring type has almost by definition got to have gone astray. After all, (almost?) every working dog Standard was based on a conformation designed to enable the dog to do a job of work so if the show ring type can't do the job surely either the Standard must be wrong or more probably it is being misinterpreted/exaggerated?

Now putting helmet on and taking cover :D

Jas,

I'm inclined to agree with you. However, its important to remember that the working ability of a dog has got far more to do with whats going on in its head than what it looks like. A show cannot test a dogs ability and inclination to retrieve and to tear apart the most punishing bramble patch. It also cannot test the trainability and temperament. Thus even those breeds that look like they could do the job, frequently can't.

I agree with Jas - now take Yankees. I think the show Yankees look gorgeous, don't get me wrong - but could they work in the field with all that coat? And more to the point, the breed standard says their coats should not be so profuse as to obscure the body lines!! I think working and breed show people should try to bring the types closer together, not split them completely apart. :-)

Very interesting and informed points that you make.  I think my dog would like to work but I don't want to shoot as I personally don't have the need or inclination.  My bitch's nose is constantly searching out game and she is like streaked lightning when she is off her lead. I've been hiding treats around the house and sending her off to find them - she loves this game and is very quick to find.  We are hopefully starting agility soon and we have just started obedience classes - any ideas as to what else I can do with Tilly to stimulate her brain and her interest (that doesn't involve any killing)?

You could try field trials.  It is something I wish I had started doing with my dog.  Keener nose you'll never find.  For a pet from both show and working lines she has very strong instinct to work.  She is never happier than when she has her nose in a fresh meadow, her tail does not stop.  She flushes pheasant and rabbits with remarkable ease.  I don't know if there is an age limit to start but it is something you could find out about.  I know that can do some sort of test to check their capabilities to find.

Id still like to argue that GSP are good at both work and show.  There are plenty of examples on this website.

Chez swa,

Field trials for retrievers, HPRs and spaniels involve shooting game. Working tests on the other hand, are simulated and do not involve actually shooting of game.

Thanks for clarifying that for me Havoc.  Working tests would be what I was thinking of then, someone else told me they were working trials, maybe we were talking at crossed purposes.

Tingalay have a good hunt around your area because I had my dog more than a year before I heard of a really good training club for my dog.  They do tracking days sometimes, which I have not been able to go to yet.  Everyone I spoke to who has done these said they are great fun for dog and owner alike.

Chez swa,

Working tests are simulated gundug work. Working trials are more in-line with police / patrol dog work. Working trials involve tracking. Hope that makes sense.

I suppose unless I get into one of them myself it won't sink in, but what you have explained does make sense.  Our club does tracking days but these are for fun. The club does offer professional training for security services so that would fit in with what you are saying for working trials, club is just offering pet owners a bit of fun in that area.  There is a lady to attends the club who after watching my dog suggested I take her to some other club that would assess her abilities.  I can't remember what she called them but it was to do with gundog abilities, flushing game etc.

tingalay,

If Tilly is a keen hunter and retriever then there are plenty of things that you can be doing with her.

Try hiding tennis balls in deep cover and encourage her to try and find them. As her confidence grows, you can get her hunting longer and longer before she gets a find.

You can make use of a whistle, which can be used to stop her at a distance, recall and even turn while hunting.

Get her steady to a thrown retrieve article. You can get specific training dummies for gundogs, but alternatively the toys that look like an elongated tennis ball on a rope are ideal. They are lighter than dummies, and I find that the ladies in my gundog class are more easily able to throw them. Once you have her steady to a retrieve, you can throw your article in increasingly more difficult places for her to retrieve - start easy and build up. You can progress to throwing into and over rivers, ditches etc. You can also develop memory retrieves, where a dog sees the article thrown but is taken away, made to wait and then sent back for it. This can then progress to handling onto blind retrieves.

Teach her to quarter. When she is hunting around in front of you, teach her to turn on command (usually a double pip on the whistle). In this way you can keep her hunting around you within about 15 yards.

While she is running around you can teach her to stop to the whistle and/or a thrown article. Once you have this in place it is easier to be able to stop her chasing wildlife.

It is quite possible to replicate the majortity of work that a springer will do in the shooting field without ever going shooting. There is nothing a decent springer would rather be doing!

If your springer has got a bit of go in her, it is quite possible to give some serious exercise in a 15-20 minute session.

Not all breeds have this work/show split - the ideal should be to breed dogs that conform to their breed standard for both breed type and temperament -including working ability. In my own breed ( BSD) we have many dogs that 'do it all' - indeed most Belgian breeders find that  pups from the same litter can go to a really wide variety of homes - ranging from agility/obedience/working trials/police training/PAT dogs/assistance dogs/guide dogs/search and rescue as well as the show ring.

Several have gained both Obedience AND breed Challenge Certificates and many owners alternate working and showing with the same dog.

The problem seems to be when more importance is placed on one quality than the other- some of our 'working line only' bred Malinois certainly look nothing like their show cousins and have even been interbred with Great Danes to increase bone and overall size -they would never be able to compete in the show ring and therefore cannot be a true dual purpose dog. In my opinion there has to be a strong element of breed type maintained in all breeds ( including the working varieties) otherwise you lose the essence of the breed itself. 

Yvonne

Once again, Havoc, thank you for some stirling advice.  Do you know of any clubs in the Gatwick/Crawley/Horley area that I can contact?  I wouldn't know how to teach her to quarter but she does circle back to me at frequent intervals and only rarely (typically in woods) disappears for any length of time - when she does, I hide and wait for her to find me.  She likes taking toys out of walks but tends to drop them in undergrowth the minute she catches a decent scent - the other day, she lost a ball, dashed off and came back with one she'd lost a week before!  Eventually, I might get my leather glove and her frisbee back but dare say a fox or another dog has already located them!  Tilly is very eager to have things thrown for her but her willingness to "give" is sadly lacking.  I might have said, but will reiterate, that Tilly is just over four and I have had her six weeks, since getting her from the RSPCA.  I think she's doing very well.

Tingalay I agree with what you are trying to say.  I personally would like to see a lot of working dogs, who let's face it are completely different in size, temperaments, abilities and looks from their show dog types, represented in a different catagory instead of all put together under the same breed by the KC.  It would save a lot of confusion as to dog type, joe public get terribly confused and do not understand that a working type bred dog is not the same in looks, temperament etc, as a show type.  I would like to see a divide.

Another reason for this is also to keep the two types seperate, as it stands now, show and working can be bred together which can undo all the hard work by breeders to seperate the two in the first place.

But it seems to me that if there is a split between a working and a show ring type, the show ring type has almost by definition got to have gone astray.

I can't agree with this, if the show type Springer/Lab/Golden Retriever/Cocker etc. conforms more to the breed standard than the working one who is at fault?    A Standard is written for a purpose, the better a dog is in conformation the more likely it is to be able to work efficently all day.    There are still people who own/breed 'show' type dogs and work them - look at the top winning ESS bitch Ch. Mompesson Remember Me , not only did she win in the showring she won a qualifier in the field hence her Champion title as opposed to Show Champion.  Now show me a working bred Springer who would be lucky to get a place at any show let alone a CC or RCC!   

Personally, my thoughts on this are purely on looks of the dogs.  The two strains LOOK so different now, that I believe they should be divided.

If they are divided as two now different breeds what is to stop a working type being shown in the ring as a working type, and a show type as we know able to win a FTCH if it so wishes. I would like the best of both worlds.

show and working can be bred together which can undo all the hard work by breeders to seperate the two in the first place
Are breeders working hard to separate Springers then? Surely show breeders concentrate on producing dogs which conform as closely as possible to the standard and working breeders concentrate on producing the best workers. Maybe there are some breeders who are trying to do both? Not my breed at all, but surely anything which reduces the gene pool so drastically and so finally is not in the interests of the breed?
 

Unfortunately, the breed is split.  The working dogs are English Springers but probably bear little resemblance to their 'show' cousins or the Breed standard, the only considerations are working ability, conformation bears little part in most working breeders criteria.   Whereas the show ESS is a better constructed animal, this has been to the detriment of his working ability, thankfully there are a few breeders/owners who work their dogs so some ability still remains.

One thing, and I don't want to over generalise here as there will be exceptions but I have found the 'show' people are far more willing to health test their dogs whereas the working people tend to think that if no visible symptoms are shown the animal is healthy & ok to be bred from!

Also, going off breed slightly........ look at the show cocker and the working cocker.  Both known as the English Cocker, they are so drastically different!  In this case the working cocker has been bred to be a much healthier type in my opinion than it's show cousin. Why can they not be divided as a breed?

On what grounds are you assuming that your working cockers are healthier than the show ones ? - In my experience it is the show world that is forging ahead with health testing and working towards eradicating genetic health problems across most breeds - the working world seems ONLY interested in the way a dog works.

Many breeds can be interchangable in the type of work that they do - it is mostly their physical differences/appearance that make them separate breeds - if all that is focussed on is a working ability the ultimate conclusion will be generic 'retreiver,spaniel,terrier 'types' without the huge diversity of wonderful breeds that we now have - after all why bother to have both Field and Sussex spaniels ? - Curly coat and Cheasapeake Bay retrievers or indeed Cocker and Springers ?

There seems to be a kind of inverted snobbery in the working world which takes pride in denigrating the efforts of generations of breeders who have worked to keep their breeds faithful to their unique breed standard - any dog who does not LOOK like the breed it is supposed to be is hardly an example of good breeding irrespective of how good a worker it may be.

Rather than splitting breeds I believe that the show and the working world should be striving together to produce dogs that can fullfil both criteria. Perhaps the Kennel Club could make a start by combining some showing/working events so that the two worlds can understand each other a little more ;) !.

Yvonne

gosh around here rural west somerset,they are ALL working lines,thata what people around here think a ESS looks like. Infact there is a smallish Show lines ESS up the road,when i first saw it i thought it was a large cocker x (much to my embarressment cos i do think that i know my breeds!!)-its tri coloured ,that confused me!!!!!!!

anyway,so far round here its a pretty even spilt with the cockers,slighty more show lines around,but the working lines have FAST started to catch up!!!!!!

In border collies we have ISDS dogs & KC dogs & then the KC working reg dogs. dsome KC breed dogs are also reg on the ISDS reg (dual reg) & aRE SUCCESSFULLY SHOWN against the KC breed dogs. & bred with to maintain working instinct & drive in some of the breed lines.Of course some breed lines arent really bothered by herding ability,so they dont like to mix the two.
however SOME of the isds dogs however look nothing like a show border collie at all.

i think with the ESS debate it really comees down to wether the types are ever going to be bred together? if not why not spilt them?
i guess it depends what the people in the breed want at the end of the day. Tingay you should move to the countryside,you certainly wouldnt feel alone then!!!!

I agree that they look so different.  I've been around dogs all my life and recognised my first "in the flesh" Swedish Vallhund in the summer, so I'm no stranger to identifying different dog breeds but, having never seen a picture of a Working ESS before, when I saw Tilly in kennels, I thought the RSPCA were trying to increase her homing chances by calling her a Springer Spaniel.  Surely the KC has a responsibility to acknowledge such a difference in this breed?  I have no wish whatsoever to show but if I did, Tilly would get laughed out the ring (and I don't have a pedigree for her).  According to breed standards, she is too short and too light.  Why is a Working dog not worthy?  Seems daft to me.  As I've said, if they can differentiate between Mittels and Kleins, why not do the same for ESS? I dare say the AKC will lead and the our KC will follow.

It might be like I said below in that if breeders of working dogs might not be interested in conforming to show standard but working ability.  I take it the working Springer has just a sound a pedigree but just does not strictly comply to breed standard.  If KC decided that working Springer should be recognised in it's own right would that not mean that you would have to conform to the aesthetics rather than the working instinct? Those working the Springer might still not bother.  What do you think?

You're right.  It's a stupid idea.  Show dogs are all that matter in the world and Working ESS are no better than mutts.  If a dog can't be shown, it has no right to a pedigree and should hide itself away from the shame of not looking like Show ESS.  I'm going to hide away in a cupboard for the rest of my life because there is no way I would ever win Miss World.  My life has no meaning if I don't have a long legs and ideal statistics. LOL  :-)

Breeders of Working dogs would prefer their dog wins more practical awards than have to worry about getting the dog to stand nicely and show off.  But what is my dog if the KC don't acknowledge the difference between the two strains?  As she is not tall enough to call herself a Springer and not heavy enough... as her ears aren't long enough and her coat is too thin... does this mean she is an abomination? Is she a throwback?  No.  She is a Working ESS and I'm bl**dy proud of her.  Say it loud and say it proud "Working ESS - Keeping It Real".  I'm going to get t-shirts made.

I'm not sure if you've taken offence to my post or what?

It's only my opinion but I'm not saying that recognising the ESS working strain in its own right is a stupid idea, what I am suggesting is that you might end up with a Show Springer, a Show Working Springer and a Working Springer because those people who are only interested in the working instincts of the Work Springer might not be interested in whether their dog conforms to standard only that their dog can do the work they want it to do.

I am not suggesting working dogs are mutts, as you put it. I assume that it is very important for those that work their dogs that THEIR standards are upheld but those standards are not necessarily aesthetic but instinctual.  The KC breed standards seem to be about specific looks, height, colour etc so by recognising the ESS working strain separately you end up constricting it's working strain.  Those only interested in working are still not going to conform.

Jeepers, that was hard work. I've not explained that very well but I hope you can see I am definitely not negative about recognising different strains but trying to be realistic as to what people might actually do.  If breeders of working dogs don't support the separation what would be the point?

I didn't take offence.  I am just very proud of my poor little rescue dog who has been beaten up and mistreated generally.  I only want recognition for her "breed" - not in a show ring but just a line in the KC dog breed book and on their website etc.  I don't know why it's Show ESS or nothing.  I think I miss the point of KC.  I'm not into pedigrees, only good health and the rapid breeding out of health problems - my rescue pedigree Sam died last year after suffering hip displaysia - it was horrible.  I'm just very protective of my beautiful little girl and get fed up with people asking:

A):  is she a puppy?  Puppy WHAT for goodness sake  :-)
B):  is she a Collie cross? 
C):  is she some kind of Spaniel cross?

These are other dog owners! 

I'm jumping off this post now.  I love my dog. I know what she is and I'm going to make sure her next 10/11 years are the best a dog could have. 

Well you've hit on the most important point and that is that she is very special to you.  Doesn't matter what other people say or think.  Your dog is very lucky to have someone now who loves her and cares for her.

Incidentally some people have thought my GSP was a Dalmation - mind boggles.  I couldn't care tuppence though.  :D

Did it have measles as the time?

She is marked 'flashy' is how it's termed (mostly dark but chest and underneath looks mottled)  but still nothing like a Dalmation

I think if you have a breed standard you ought to try to stick to it, and not diverge by increasing the amount of coat, for example ;) or by letting the body shape change from the blueprint. Many spaniel breeds seem to have dramatically diverged - perhaps they should be brought closer together, rather than split completely. If there were to be a separate standard for working-types (drawn up by working-type people of course) I can't envisage there would be a sudden change of mindset to take appearance into account. However, there are hound shows for hunting hounds, where they're working hounds who are also judged on appearance. Not all people who take pride in their dog's working ability are blind to its looks!

Hi Christine

>> if the show type Springer/Lab/Golden Retriever/Cocker etc. conforms more to the breed standard than the working one who is at fault?>>

The people who wrote the standard.

Most breeds were formed long before shows and breed standards were ever thought of and dogs were a product of the function they performed.  Working gundogs have evolved into the form they are because this is what suited the purpose of the job they did.  Excess of coat or any other feature that hindered working performance would probably have been selected against. 

Taking on board Havoc's comment about temperament being the overriding factor in a gundog's performance, conformation, coat, movement etc all play an important role in defining the dog's suitability to its job.  *Form follows function*

Julie

Julie V

This is the first post that makes sense to me.  I feel I am speaking from the outside looking in as I don't show or work my dog.  So from an outsider's point of view if a dog is bred to do a job of work and the breed has evolved specifically around this criteria then the breed standard has along the way been developed accordingly.  Then what seems to happen is that you have breeders who rigidly stick to the breed standard in order to compete at show on this criteria.  Meanwhile the original form is still bred for the working characteristics which continue to evolve. You then have a breed standard show dog that loses it's keeness to work because this isn't essential for aesthetics and the working type who may not be able to adhere strictly to the aesthetics because it impedes the working ability.  The breed standard is failing the breed because it doesn't include the working ability within the standard and the working characteristics is what produced the breed in the first place. 

I hope that makes sense

It's a no-win situation! People complain when 'show' dogs have evolved a breed from the original standard, and yet accept that 'working' dogs can evolve from that same standard without comment - in fact even encourage it! Far better that it's impossible to tell by looking whether a dog of any particular breed is shown or worked.

I do agree with that, they should look the same IMO.  Do you think that because the breed standard is interpreted at show that this can change the appearance of a dog?  If you have a high profile show such as Crufts where the judges appear to pick out a particular dog could this then determine how breeders will develop the breed.  A less controversial characteristic such as colour for example - in the breed I have there are variations of L/W or B/W and I was toying with the idea of getting a B/W pup but was told that if I want to show that this was not the ideal colour because they don't do well.  Both variations are breed standard so show bias is driving the breeders' actions and not the breed standard which might be why there are the variations between show and working.  Could a show labrador work the field as effectively as a work lab?  They have shorter legs and are chunkier, surely the breed standard wasn't designed on this form?  If not then how the standard was interpreted and judged has changed the overall appearance - hasn't it?