You could always send them by puppy-mail :D :D Och, come on, I know you have one large enough to throw a saddle on in that mess o' yers ;) ;) :D :D

Maybe that's why Lewis has been avoiding me for the last few days :D!

The alternative isn't puppy-mail, its cycle mail. Getting to the PO by bike is easy, but there's a great big hill on the way back, so much as I love Phil ...... :-) ;-)

Ooooo naughty Ian!!! Dont blame you for not wanting to cycle up that hill either. Wolfhounds well, as long as I have been in the breed there has always seemed to be two def. types, the bigger boned, all round heavier type and the much much leaner houndier, racy type of wolfie. I feel that each individual type has stayed fairly constant over the years, with rises and falls in popularity with the judges. In mho, the type swings around approx every 4-5 years. Along comes a big winning dog of one type and all the breders go hell for leather and try to breed that type in their next litter, then it goes the other way. Me? Well, I like what I like and thats what I breed for, with as you know, temprement above all else!!!! THE most important thing to me. I think overall the standard has improved slightly, but with def, troughs along the way lol

My own view, which has changed since I first started, is that a variation in type, as long as it is still within the broad terms of the standard is a good and necesary thing.

When I firts started I thought there was a perfect dog, and all the others should be like peas in a pod to this ideal.

I think I have grown up a bit in my views and can see that if an acceptable variation is maintained then the breeds can be saved from exageration. for example say the dogs are geting too heavy, short in neck, rangy or whatever, as long as there are dogs with qualities to counterbalance, things will stay on an even keel!

JMHO

Agree with you on this Brainless, you only have to look at the breeds that have been bred for coat in the past how confirmation has suffered and the coat has become out of proportion to the dog and the purpose for which it is used. Ja:)kie

It does not only apply to coat of course but the result can be seen more easily that say a change in bone.

Whilst in my breed (American Cockers) there is an enormous varitation of type, I cant agree attention to coat has resulted in loss in other areas! Careful breeders are looking for excellence of conformation, with good coat as a plus point - one of my partners dogs came out of 'early retirement' earlier this year, in puppy trim, and took the CC at a club show - the judge commenting "only the truly great can afford to show this much" (And yes, when in full coat, he was magnificent too!)

Like many other gundog breeds our working specimens look very diffferent from our show dogs, yet because of our very small gene pool the breeding is identical (at least one of the current very small crop trained to the gun is a grand-son of our Top Dog '97, an undoubted show dog!) Of course, in American Cockers this may be more to do with the personal preference of the small band who are devoted to the field, rather than to a deliberate choice of what is most suited. The biggest perceivable difference is in the heads, with a less pronounced stop and longer muzzle - perhaps this improves the pick-up?

Was not thinking of A. Cockers at all. But must tell you a story, last year I was at a show and all breeds were being judged outside because although it had rained it had stopped in time for the judging, that is all breeds except the A. Cockers because the exhibitors complained that their dogs were getting their feet wet. It caused a lot of amusement that a gundog would worry about such things. Gwen, sure you would not think like that. Ja:)kie

Hi Phil & Sharon
Well, I was attracted by the title of this thread and scrolled down to write about IW's and what do I find but you 2 beat me to it! Both with the thread and what I wanted to say! :P
I can't much think of anything to add to what you have said Phil so all I'll say is that I'm with you in that I like what I like and no new fad or *type* will sway me, same as you! :D
Nicky

Hi Nicky, glad to hear you feel the same as sharon and I. Cant see the point of trying to change what you like just for the sake of a trend!! Hurray, three days to go!!

Clumbers all look different. TH is of the working type - i.e. leggy and skinny. Someone with another clumber asked if she was a white springer?

Show types are definitely heavier set. Not saying which is best, just that TH looks like she could last all day in the field . . . . :D

At training on Sunday I met a wide variety of GSPs, one man had two, a magnificent big male dog, who he told was an inch over standard, and a small bitch who was just on the lower end, he works them both regularly. I must say I did like the male dog, but obviously size doesn't make a lot of difference in the working field. Ingrid

Spanish Water Dogs vary greatly by height. Females start at 15.5" and males can grow to 19.5". I have a bitch who is 18.5 which is too big for a female but I still occ. show her as she is a nice looking bitch and everything is in proportion. At her first ever show she won best puppy and best import, over her grandmother who is exactly what the standard asks for.

I do think it's a shame if everything else is overlooked if a dog is slightly over height or under, why should one that is in the correct height but everything else is wrong win over the incorrect height.

When at a open show last month the Siberian Huskies had large classes
as they had a breed judge. The Sibes I saw vary considerabley in build
and size.

In Pharaoh's our breed standard says 21'' to 24'' for bitches and 22'' to
25'' for dogs. Their is quite a variation despite being a minority breed.

Pam & hounds

In my breed (American Cockers) there is an enormous variation between dogs! However, I cant agree with the post wondering if breeds majoring on coat are losing other characteristice (sorry if I have not quoted exactly). One of my partners dogs came out of his early retirement earlier this year, in puppy trim, and won the CC at a club show, the judge commenting "only the truly great can afford to show this much" (and yes, he had always looked superb in coat, too!)

Whilst very few American Cockers do work in the field, a small and devoted band have continued to train them to the gun, and yes, they do look different, but I think this is down to preference and choice - we have a very small gene pool in the UK, and the working dogs tend to be closely related to the show dogs (one of the current field 'crop' is a grandson of my Top Dog 97, an undoubted show dog) However, they do tend to select those with a more 'old fashioned' head - less stop and longer muzzle - perhaps this is better for 'pick-ups'?

I think that the great variation in 'Yankees' is due to less than selective breeding by some people - mating a less than good bitch to a mediocre dog, perpetuation the faults of both parents, perhaps this is so in lots of other breeds?