ACS as best of Sporting Group

[fishvik]

Anybody else a little peeved that a American Cocker was picked as best in the sporting group at the National Dog Show on Thanksgiving. Isn't it time to move all three of the American cocker breeds to the Non Sporting or Toy group. Another thing was only the toy and non-sporting groups had non-coated breeds as their best in group. At least the toy group should have had some furry little thing representing it. That show really is nothing but a beauty pageant.

[Neil]

But not all shows, at the recent Brittany National Speciality the winner came out of the Field Trial Class. And Westminster still seems to have some field capable looking winners.

There is enough blame on the Field side, too. I see dogs winning trials that are not close to their breed standard.

[shags]

I don't want my setters to look anything close to the so-called breed standard!

[Mountaineer]

I would say the dogs match "sporting" to the extent the owners and handlers are able to define the word or recognize the meaning....the show is nice contest for those interested in the fiddly, finicky and fastidious.
More power to their gig.

Actually, I have seen hunters afield who do not well define "sporting".

[Gertie]

I don't want my setters to look anything close to the so-called breed standard!

Absolutely! Pretty sure those big, long-haired, heavy things wouldn't last 10 minutes in the country I hunt in. Maybe I'm missing something but it really seems like the setters are the extreme opposite when it comes to form following function in the beauty pageant arena.

[ezzy333]

I don't want my setters to look anything close to the so-called breed standard!

Absolutely! Pretty sure those big, long-haired, heavy things wouldn't last 10 minutes in the country I hunt in. Maybe I'm missing something but it really seems like the setters are the extreme opposite when it comes to form following function in the beauty pageant arena.

There are a lot of those awful show type setters hunting birds. You can't keep that hair coat on them but otherwise they are pretty darn good. There doesn't have to be a big difference in how our dogs look to perform well.

[KwikIrish]

That cocker is a darn nice example of the breed when it comes to show/confirmation standard. Though the cockers are not known for their dual ability, not all show dogs lack ability. My Irish and many bench type setters I know can hold their own. They won't average at 11+ mph and they won't have the 12 o'clock syndrome, but they work hard, hunt smartly, and put birds in the bag. Personally, I own both bench and field bred Irish and I love both in the field for different reasons. No one is forcing anyone else to purchase one, so how is it hurting you? They fight the same animal rights agenda legislation as we dog regarding owning our dogs. In that sense, one team, one fight.

[shags]

Ezzy,
It has nothing to do with hair, and everything to do with stamina, conformation, gait, style, heart, intelligence, and desire.
Why is it that my setters should conform to a standard that supports only appearance and that being detrimental to performance afield, but the dual types do not need to adhere to a performance standard?
Why do my English setters resemble setters of 100 years ago, yet the English setters in the conformation ring look nothing like them? The breed's function hasn't changed, why has its form?

[KwikIrish]

In all honesty shags, most breed standards have not changed significantly in the past 100 years. What has changed is the interpretation of each breed standard.

[fuzznut]

Shags, what in the English Setter standard works against dogs in the field?

[shags]

The question remains, why are performance bred dogs deemed unacceptable vis a vis the show standard, yet the current 'interpretations' of the standard are not held to any performance standard other than trotting around a ring a few times?

When I attended a local breed club meeting for the first time, several members asked if I had any pictures of my dogs. Of course I did, and showed pics of a couple of my guys. The reaction was priceless - "Oh Honey, don't worry...lots of us have some of those way back in our closets too!" LOL!

[ezzy333]

Ezzy,
It has nothing to do with hair, and everything to do with stamina, conformation, gait, style, heart, intelligence, and desire.
Why is it that my setters should conform to a standard that supports only appearance and that being detrimental to performance afield, but the dual types do not need to adhere to a performance standard?
Why do my English setters resemble setters of 100 years ago, yet the English setters in the conformation ring look nothing like them? The breed's function hasn't changed, why has its form?

I hope they resemble them because they are setters. I don't remember the dogs a hundred years ago but I do remember them from seventy years ago and we saw the same difference we see today. There were setters that were bigger and heavier like most of the Llews were and the Old Hemlock lines that came straight from England and there were what we call the field lines of today that were smaller shorter but were nice dogs that had been Americanized. Those differences in conformation still exist but the other factors you mention are not as different as you think. SHOW DOGS ARE GROOMED AND FITTED TO LOOK PRETTY just like our beauty pageant contestants but when you take the hairdos and cosmetics away they don't look a lot different than many others. I am not arguing that there are no differences but they are less than most people think and anyone will be hard pressed to confirm their dogs are the way the breed was originally since our dogs here in America have been changed considerably and to argue differently is saying our breeding programs have been a total failure.

[shags]

Shags, what in the English Setter standard works against dogs in the field?

Start with rear angulation, shoulders, second thigh, hocks, length of loin, tail set. Then move on to the current 'interpretation' and look at poor crappy fronts, rib spring, and shallow chests. The several recent examples ( locally) I could stick my arm up the elbow in hair and still not feel a brisket. Watch the gaits - inefficient rocking horse types or lumbering ground pounders.

Each to his own. Eye of the beholder and all that. Most of us with filed bred setters know rhat our dogs will never be successful as bench dogs But deficiencies in the 'interpretation' of the standard as pertains to performance* needs to be recognized as well.

*for this discussion I mean by 'performance', competitive field events eg field trials of various types. Personal gundogs have no performance standard other than what each owner desires or tolerates, so I don't include them in this discussion.

[shags]

Define failure. I'm sure strictly field breeders of setters would consider the bench bred dogs' breedings as failures. Just as strictly bench breeders would consider field-only breedings as failures. Funny, but each thinks theirs is the correct type.

I have a large collection of 19th and early 20th century sporting dog prints and books. Not one of them features an English Setter that comes close in appearance to the modern bench bred dog. Very different animals.

[Mountaineer]

It is always a shame to see the term "personal gundog" used in any offhand or sidling manner re evaluation and performance.
Might be better to apply the same scale to bird shooters themselves....goose and gander.

[fishvik]

I guess my question is still how do the current three versions of the American Cocker Spaniel even come close to the form and function of a bird dog. I don't see how a short muzzle, bug eyes, short legs and silky coat have any field function. The English version of the Cocker has not been bred for any of these characteristics and they still remain a good breed for bird hunting.

[CDN_Cocker]

I'm a bit lost. I thought there was only one type of American cocker spaniel....

[KwikIrish]

I'm a bit lost. I thought there was only one type of American cocker spaniel....

Three varieties. Ascob (any solid color other than black), black, and parti (broken color).

[KwikIrish]

Define failure. I'm sure strictly field breeders of setters would consider the bench bred dogs' breedings as failures. Just as strictly bench breeders would consider field-only breedings as failures. Funny, but each thinks theirs is the correct type.

This is sort of why I own both types. Best of both worlds, and I find myself too competitive to strive for mediocrity in one or the other.

[Gertie]

I don't want my setters to look anything close to the so-called breed standard!

Absolutely! Pretty sure those big, long-haired, heavy things wouldn't last 10 minutes in the country I hunt in. Maybe I'm missing something but it really seems like the setters are the extreme opposite when it comes to form following function in the beauty pageant arena.

There are a lot of those awful show type setters hunting birds. You can't keep that hair coat on them but otherwise they are pretty darn good. There doesn't have to be a big difference in how our dogs look to perform well.

There may be some show dogs hunting something somewhere but they sure aren't here. Those huge dogs would not have the stamina to handle hours of hunting in steep, rocky terrain for several days on end. If they were capable then I'm sure I would have run across at least one out there hunting or even seen one on a preserve string but I haven't. The ones I do see hunting and guiding look like field trial type dogs that are capable of covering the ground. Form follows function and, when it comes to hunting this country, show setters are dysfunctional. I'd even put money on it! Grab any one of those beauty queens and let's go huntin'. If they're still working by lunch time I'll buy dinner.

[ezzy333]

I'm a bit lost. I thought there was only one type of American cocker spaniel....

there is only one type but somehow they got the classes split into three different colored groups. I too would like to see them moved out of the sporting dog group as they have bred them eith so much coat they couldn't hunt in heavy cover though there is a very small faction that are still breeding them to hunt.

Ezzy

[Gertie]

Ezzy,
It has nothing to do with hair, and everything to do with stamina, conformation, gait, style, heart, intelligence, and desire.
Why is it that my setters should conform to a standard that supports only appearance and that being detrimental to performance afield, but the dual types do not need to adhere to a performance standard?
Why do my English setters resemble setters of 100 years ago, yet the English setters in the conformation ring look nothing like them? The breed's function hasn't changed, why has its form?

^^^ Well said ^^^

[shags]

It is always a shame to see the term "personal gundog" used in any offhand or sidling manner re evaluation and performance.
Might be better to apply the same scale to bird shooters themselves....goose and gander.

The term 'personal gundog' is not meant to be a perjorative. How else to describe dogs which do not participate in competition, but which do the work for which they were bred? There is no performance standard for that work other than to find and produce game. The manner in which the work is done is deemed acceptable or not by the owner's taste and sensibilities. If you take offense because these dogs are not available for public evaluation, and perhaps accolades, while others are,that's on you.

[Mountaineer]

It is always a shame to see the term "personal gundog" used in any offhand or sidling manner re evaluation and performance.
Might be better to apply the same scale to bird shooters themselves....goose and gander.

The term 'personal gundog' is not meant to be a perjorative. How else to describe dogs which do not participate in competition, but which do the work for which they were bred? There is no performance standard for that work other than to find and produce game. The manner in which the work is done is deemed acceptable or not by the owner's taste and sensibilities. If you take offense because these dogs are not available for public evaluation, and perhaps accolades, while others are,that's on you.

The description itself would not be my reason for note....that you do not understand is on you and I don't find it worth the keystrokes to clear away the fog.
That you consider a comment as representing taking offense...is on your noggin as well.

I have been happy with my preference of field, washed-out of FTing setters for all my birdhunting for years.....with evaluation being a fine part and parcel and directly leading to the continual development of which I take advantage.
Accolades tho, are often simply an offshoot of the process and I reckon I care as much for accolades....as do my dogs.
However, some do dwell on them as a chicken does a junebug.

[KwikIrish]

Absolutely! Pretty sure those big, long-haired, heavy things wouldn't last 10 minutes in the country I hunt in. Maybe I'm missing something but it really seems like the setters are the extreme opposite when it comes to form following function in the beauty pageant arena.

There are a lot of those awful show type setters hunting birds. You can't keep that hair coat on them but otherwise they are pretty darn good. There doesn't have to be a big difference in how our dogs look to perform well.

There may be some show dogs hunting something somewhere but they sure aren't here. Those huge dogs would not have the stamina to handle hours of hunting in steep, rocky terrain for several days on end. If they were capable then I'm sure I would have run across at least one out there hunting or even seen one on a preserve string but I haven't. The ones I do see hunting and guiding look like field trial type dogs that are capable of covering the ground. Form follows function and, when it comes to hunting this country, show setters are dysfunctional. I'd even put money on it! Grab any one of those beauty queens and let's go huntin'. If they're still working by lunch time I'll buy dinner.

Next time I'm doing the west coast shuffle, I'll be sure to hit you up. I prefer filet and crab legs, but I also prefer company which doesn't belittle some one's dogs because of their appearence. I love how people assume that because they haven't seen it, it isn't possible.

[Neil]

Gertie,

There are a number of dual dogs that excel in the Field; GSPs, Viszla, Brittany clubs have all maintained the proper interpretation of the standard and those dogs will hunt.

So I fully agree those breed clubs that have not properly applied their standard should be removed from the sporting, hound, and working groups. It is a disservice to the proud histories of so many great breeds.

But it is the breed clubs, not AKC or the shows that are to blame.

[CDN_Cocker]

there is only one type but somehow they got the classes split into three different colored groups. I too would like to see them moved out of the sporting dog group as they have bred them eith so much coat they couldn't hunt in heavy cover though there is a very small faction that are still breeding them to hunt.

Ezzy

I know there are a few people out there trying to breed a more... "field type" american cocker. They certainly don't work quite like an english one of working lineage but I have seen a couple sharp little dogs. When I have people ask me what type of dog I have once we get talking about hunting they look at me like I'm half retarded when I say an english cocker. Up here there really aren't many english cockers, especially not field bred ones. Everyone only knows the long haired foo-foo american type cockers... It is always nice when you get to go out on a hunt with someone new who has a "real" dog like a lab (usually not field bred, but they assume all labs are equal) and your little "lap dog" is the only one that will pick up ducks and geese, or whatever else you may be hunting hahaha.

[S'setter]

Hunting all day is not inclusive of the "field trial type" vs. "show type"!

Dual Ch Can Ch Set'r Ridge's Solid Gold CDX MH HDX CGC owned by Setter Ridge English Setter

[mnaj_springer]

I'm a bit lost. I thought there was only one type of American cocker spaniel....

there is only one type but somehow they got the classes split into three different colored groups. I too would like to see them moved out of the sporting dog group as they have bred them eith so much coat they couldn't hunt in heavy cover though there is a very small faction that are still breeding them to hunt.

Ezzy

Seems like you haven't really thought about this much. If you're throwing dogs out of the sporting group because of more coat on bench lines we would lose nearly all the spaniels. There are hard working folks trying to breed hunting ACS who rely on hunt tests to prove their dogs' hunting ability (trial wins are unlikely for an ACS). Removing them from the groups may result in not having a venue to prove their dogs.

[madmurph]

Hmmmm.....something different. We've never gone down this road on GDF before.

[KwikIrish]

Hmmmm.....something different. We've never gone down this road on GDF before.

Dead horse.

[crackerd]

I'm a bit lost. I thought there was only one type of American cocker spaniel....

there is only one type but somehow they got the classes split into three different colored groups. I too would like to see them moved out of the sporting dog group as they have bred them eith so much coat they couldn't hunt in heavy cover though there is a very small faction that are still breeding them to hunt.

Ezzy

Seems like you haven't really thought about this much. If you're throwing dogs out of the sporting group because of more coat on bench lines we would lose nearly all the spaniels. There are hard working folks trying to breed hunting ACS who rely on hunt tests to prove their dogs' hunting ability (trial wins are unlikely for an ACS). Removing them from the groups may result in not having a venue to prove their dogs.

Good call, mnaj - maybe Ezzy would be for throwing these out too -



I personally would be rather averse to the idea - as would this grande dame who's been through many rigors of woods and water, with her coat not keeping her from any of it.

Also, mnaj just for Ezzy's edification - and gundogguy, please correct me if I'm wrong - the only trial St. Keith Erlandson ever judged in the US, he put up an American cocker (Trish Jackson's Madison) over a field full of fbcockers for the blue ribbon.

Lastly, I'm pretty sure Polmaise, personally, can attest even from the UK as to whether or not ACS have retained any of the working ability they originally were bred for:



MG

[nevermind]

Hunting all day is not inclusive of the "field trial type" vs. "show type"!

Dual Ch Can Ch Set'r Ridge's Solid Gold CDX MH HDX CGC owned by Setter Ridge English Setter

Good looking Setter... the only problem hunting him would be mine. I would surly not want to brush the hounds tongue and cockleburs from that coat. Maybe you have a technique to brushing that I don't know how to do, if so how about a pm... my clipped Setter is still some work after a hunt.

[Neil]

For my long haired goldens and mid-length Boykins and Britts I have long used a razor sharp dematting rake. 5 minutes will do it, and the hair protects.

[crackerd]

Also, mnaj, just for Ezzy's edification - and gundogguy, please correct me if I'm wrong - the only trial St. Keith Erlandson ever judged in the US, he put up an American cocker (Trish Jackson's Madison) over a field full of fbcockers for the blue ribbon.

mnaj - had the call name wrong for the FC - yes Field Champion - American cocker:

http://www.tjmadisongundogs.com/2014/03 ... mh-na-naj/

MG

[RyanDoolittle]

Ezzy,
It has nothing to do with hair, and everything to do with stamina, conformation, gait, style, heart, intelligence, and desire.
Why is it that my setters should conform to a standard that supports only appearance and that being detrimental to performance afield, but the dual types do not need to adhere to a performance standard?
Why do my English setters resemble setters of 100 years ago, yet the English setters in the conformation ring look nothing like them? The breed's function hasn't changed, why has its form?

I hope they resemble them because they are setters. I don't remember the dogs a hundred years ago but I do remember them from seventy years ago and we saw the same difference we see today. There were setters that were bigger and heavier like most of the Llews were and the Old Hemlock lines that came straight from England and there were what we call the field lines of today that were smaller shorter but were nice dogs that had been Americanized. Those differences in conformation still exist but the other factors you mention are not as different as you think. SHOW DOGS ARE GROOMED AND FITTED TO LOOK PRETTY just like our beauty pageant contestants but when you take the hairdos and cosmetics away they don't look a lot different than many others. I am not arguing that there are no differences but they are less than most people think and anyone will be hard pressed to confirm their dogs are the way the breed was originally since our dogs here in America have been changed considerably and to argue differently is saying our breeding programs have been a total failure.

I dunno my trial GSP looks pretty darn close to these guys. The show ring has ruined more breeds of dogs than any field type of work has. Last I checked a border collie was meant to work livestock not prance around a ring. Id hate to be a duck hunter and try to haul one of those 120lb show labs into my duck boat.

[S'setter]

Hunting all day is not inclusive of the "field trial type" vs. "show type"!

Dual Ch Can Ch Set'r Ridge's Solid Gold CDX MH HDX CGC owned by Setter Ridge English Setter

Good looking Setter... the only problem hunting him would be mine. I would surly not want to brush the hounds tongue and cockleburs from that coat. Maybe you have a technique to brushing that I don't know how to do, if so how about a pm... my clipped Setter is still some work after a hunt.

I do use Pam cooking spray repeated through out the day! It helps with the brushing!

[polmaise]

I reckon ,when folks concentrate on Colour and texture they don't know how to train a dog no matter the breed .

[ezzy333]

I reckon ,when folks concentrate on Colour and texture they don't know how to train a dog no matter the breed .

I would think a dog trainer worth his salt would know better than to try and paint people while having so little info to go on.

Ezzy

[S'setter]

What does breeding for color & texture have to do with training? Trainig is training... Whether it's for hunting, obedience, or show. The trainer teaches the dog to accomplish the task to be performed! Be it for the show ring , hunting ,obedience or field trails...

I reckon ,when folks concentrate on Colour and texture they don't know how to train a dog no matter the breed .

[Neil]

Why is it we cannot have an exchange of information?

It almost always becomes an argument void of fact.

[polmaise]

Like every post on here
IMO and IME

[mnaj_springer]

Why is it we cannot have an exchange of information?

It almost always becomes an argument void of fact.

"He who is without sin among you...."

[Neil]

Why is it we cannot have an exchange of information?

It almost always becomes an argument void of fact.

"He who is without sin among you...."

No question I have often contributed, but on this thread I don't think I did.

[crackerd]

Why is it we cannot have an exchange of information?

It almost always becomes an argument void of fact.

"He who is without sin among you...."

No question I have often contributed, but on this thread I don't think I did.

Pretty sure you'll "atone" by commenting how happy you are that Boykins were added to the sporting group -



- 'specially them that carry good conformation and health clearances - and other things, too...

MG

[Neil]

Still have mixed feelings about the AKC Boykin thing. Had the Boykin Spaniel Society agreed and were accepted as the parent club I would be happy. Just not sure. BSS has done a good job protecting the integrity of the breed for sometime, we will see what happens without their stewardship.

[CDN_Cocker]

I think realistically in this day and age - true hunting type dogs just don't fit within the new norm of the average household. Most people are happiest with a low drive, low energy dog. Coincidentally, focusing on looks has made most "sporting" dogs fit that niche more than their field cousins.

[Neil]

I think realistically in this day and age - true hunting type dogs just don't fit within the new norm of the average household. Most people are happiest with a low drive, low energy dog. Coincidentally, focusing on looks has made most "sporting" dogs fit that niche more than their field cousins.

True , but if I did not have a job for them, I would get my companion dog from the shelter. Other than for hunting, herding, or protection; I do not understand the purebred dog thing. A mixed breed make great pets.