Re: Follow up article from Slimdoggy Maybe the answer is that the judges are not concerned with impermanent features (the dog can go on a diet and its offspring will only be fat if the new owner feeds it too much). Perhaps that's the answer. I don't know that it is though. If it is, the judges don't agree that their role includes educating the nation on the correct weight to keep a dog. This is all speculation of course, it would be good to know the answers. I don't know how influential shows are (compared to, say, an owner's vet). Crufts has a footfall of about 150,000 and not amazing viewing figures even when it was on BBC1. I suppose the dogs that win get greater coverage through adverts etc. There is a seemingly significant difference between the breed standard in the US and UK - in the UK a barrel chest must not be because the dog is carrying excess weight, that proviso isn't in the US standard. Don't know whether that matters at all. Again, it would be good to know.
Re: Follow up article from Slimdoggy I know there has to be a breed standard for a pedigree but I do have a problem with it especially when it's not in the best interests of the animal it's just what has been decided it should look like. I doubt the dogs care though.
Re: Follow up article from Slimdoggy [quote author=Jen link=topic=4493.msg55729#msg55729 date=1392916374] I know there has to be a breed standard for a pedigree but I do have a problem with it [/quote] Which bit of the breed standard do you object to? The UK's kennel club standard is here: https://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/services/public/breed/standard.aspx?id=2048
Re: Follow up article from Slimdoggy I don't object to the Labrador breed standard as it is at the moment but I would question whether the dog in the original article that started this thread fits the breed standard. It probably does although it doesn't look very agile but that is supposition. My original point was if that conformation of Labrador is winning best in breed at shows is that to be the new breed standard ? I think a breed standard should be a healthy looking specimen of the breed and not be based on looks. The breed standard for other breeds has been detrimental to their health.
Re: Follow up article from Slimdoggy I think there may be something in this and could imagine that if challenged they may argue that in terms of structure etc the dog was the best specimen in the ring. I have a friend who's still qualified to judge a working breed in the show ring but she chooses not to as the standard is not being adhered to in terms of height of dogs amongst other things. Next time I see her I'll ask her about 'condition' and what guidance judges get from breed clubs and the KC. With regards to the balance of this forum I think we have two main types of member.....those who work(or aspire) to work their dogs and those who have them as pets. Neither group seems overly concerned with the detail of breed standard and the aesthetics(to show standard). All care about fit for function(working ability, temperament for family life) and health. I think this means a general dislike of overweight dogs and a confused view of show dogs and their impact on the breed as a whole. Bearing in mind the membership I think we have a balanced, polite, informative and friendly forum that I find very valuable ;D
Re: Follow up article from Slimdoggy Thanks for including the link to the Breed Standards, Julie. I was particularly interested to see the following: Chest of good width and depth, with well sprung barrel ribs - this effect not to be produced by carrying excessive weight. Level topline. Loins wide, short-coupled and strong. If you search for the breed specific points that judges are specially asked to consider you find the following: Points of concern for special attention by judges Legs too short in proportion to depth of body and to length of back Significantly overweight However, I think the difficulty with this- and presumably all - breed standards is that the terms used are relative and open to interpretation. What is 'broad'? When is it 'broader' tipping over into 'too broad'? The same goes for 'deep', 'wide' etc. Written in this way, the breed standard seems to open to fluctuations in fashion over time. If the dogs currently winning show prizes appear to be getting heavier, when does a definition of 'significantly overweight' kick in? Looking at the pictures of the US, UK and Australian winners, to my eye it is only the Australian winner that looks to be moving towards a healthy weight - I fully accept I am making my judgement based on very limited photographic evidence, but it is all the evidence that many people will see. The topic of weight is an incredibly emotive issue - a read through of the comments on the facebook page makes that blatantly clear! To my mind, part of this stems from the fact that the majority of posters are fortunate enough to live in societies in which food is not scarce. We have effectively broken that link between calories consumed and survival, and instead food is often equated with love. This goes for the way we feed our dogs as well as our children. We show our dogs we love them by offering them food. We love them lots and so we feed them more (consider the owner of the Great Danes in the article found and posted by MMM - she gave them large mugs of sugary coffee to drink because she loved them). I was particularly struck by a number of posters who responded almost proudly, stating their dog's weight and following it up by declaring 'more to love!' If those same dogs were to require painkillers, would those owners cheerfully and proudly administer an overdose? Of course they wouldn't, yet they are overdosing on food. The adverse effects might not be as immediate, but they will follow. To me, it doesn't matter if we are talking about show Labs, field Labs or the vast majority that are pet Labs from either origin - I would far prefer to see them all at weights that do not place undue strain on their joints or hearts. I would like to see dogs fed according to their needs, not according to ours... I find those images of show labs disturbing, because to me, it does promote the idea that Labs should be hefty. Yesterday I encountered three other Labs whilst out on our morning walk. All three were from show strains. The yellow Lab could have been a coffee table. He was not overweight - he was morbidly obese. The two chocolate Labs however were drop dead gorgeous - they were nothing like my little dinky girl from field origins. These were big dogs, but they were muscular, with well-defined waists and they moved beautifully. It was a real pleasure watching them trot around. I'm not actually sure quite what point I am trying to make here, other than that of course it is perfectly possible for all our dogs to be healthy. I think one of the reasons the facebook comments got so heated is that some posters immediately retreated to their respective camps and manned the defences - there is an underlying tension between some field and show owners, that feeling that seems to surface that any comment is an attempt to assert superiority over the other camp, that they and they alone are the guardians of breed history - whereas I'd like to see those divisions put aside in favour of a discussion about the impact on canine health of being overweight, and following on from that, a review or clarification of breed standards. It's not about arguing over where we have all come from, but about deciding the sensible way to move forward. The fact that we can discuss it here, at length and without getting unpleasant about it is one of the reasons I'm so glad I found this forum. Clare
Re: Follow up article from Slimdoggy [quote author=ClareJ link=topic=4493.msg55790#msg55790 date=1392930185] Yesterday I encountered three other Labs whilst out on our morning walk. All three were from show strains. The yellow Lab could have been a coffee table. He was not overweight - he was morbidly obese. The two chocolate Labs however were drop dead gorgeous - they were nothing like my little dinky girl from field origins. These were big dogs, but they were muscular, with well-defined waists and they moved beautifully. It was a real pleasure watching them trot around. I'm not actually sure quite what point I am trying to make here, other than that of course it is perfectly possible for all our dogs to be healthy. [/quote] It's perfectly possible for show strain dogs to be healthy? Are you sure you'd go that far? ;D ;D ;D
Re: Follow up article from Slimdoggy [quote author=JulieT link=topic=4493.msg55799#msg55799 date=1392931292] [quote author=ClareJ link=topic=4493.msg55790#msg55790 date=1392930185] Yesterday I encountered three other Labs whilst out on our morning walk. All three were from show strains. The yellow Lab could have been a coffee table. He was not overweight - he was morbidly obese. The two chocolate Labs however were drop dead gorgeous - they were nothing like my little dinky girl from field origins. These were big dogs, but they were muscular, with well-defined waists and they moved beautifully. It was a real pleasure watching them trot around. I'm not actually sure quite what point I am trying to make here, other than that of course it is perfectly possible for all our dogs to be healthy. [/quote] It's perfectly possible for show strain dogs to be healthy? Are you sure you'd go that far? ;D ;D ;D [/quote] Can I add happy to that even? Happy and healthy??! I don't want to offend anyone, but I don't think we should ever assume that show automatically = overweight and field automatically = healthy... and I think that is often taken as an over-simplistic assumption, that's kind of what I meant ;D ;D ;D Clare
Re: Follow up article from Slimdoggy [quote author=ClareJ link=topic=4493.msg55803#msg55803 date=1392931742] I don't think we should ever assume that show automatically = overweight and field automatically = healthy... and I think that is often taken as an over-simplistic assumption, that's kind of what I meant ;D ;D ;D [/quote] I know - I was only teasing!
Re: Follow up article from Slimdoggy I've had both show bred and now field bred labs, and both have been slim, active dogs (though Bones was a lot bigger than Poppy; he weighed about 35kg, whereas she only weighs 25kg). Poppy is however, undoubtably MUCH cleverer than poor old Bones ever was. Now, THAT might put the cat among the pigeons on Pippa's Facebook site! 'Are field bred labradors CLEVERER than show bred labradors'. Gosh, I can imagine the comments already…
Re: Follow up article from Slimdoggy [quote author=Karen link=topic=4493.msg55967#msg55967 date=1392986641] 'Are field bred labradors CLEVERER than show bred labradors'. Gosh, I can imagine the comments already… [/quote] Go on. I dare you... sneak in there and light the blue touch paper.... Clare
Re: Follow up article from Slimdoggy Ok, then I'll start a 'show bred dogs are more confident, less nervy and more people friendly' thing and we'll see how that goes
Re: Follow up article from Slimdoggy Rofl, go on Rachel......will be amusing Sorry Pippa, really shouldn't encourage it :
Re: Follow up article from Slimdoggy [quote author=bbrown link=topic=4493.msg56105#msg56105 date=1393010170] Good lord you lot like to live dangerously! [/quote]
