eye of the beholder

dog dr · Post by **dog dr** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:07 pm

Ive got a client and freind/hunting buddy that has, in my opinion, some of the best setters i have hunted over. excellent at finding birds, retrieve well, and are just a joy to hunt with. he is breeding his older bitch to a dog owned by a freind of his. my freinds bitch wont stand for any male, so we AIed her this past week. anyway, like I said, the female is a great dog, and the male, according to my freind, is the only dog of their group that they dont have to "substitute" for on their trips to Kansas. In other words, hes got great stamina and will go all day.

Heres my question. how much does "beauty" matter to you?? these pups should be great birdfinders, and very biddable dogs, hopefully with alot of go. but in my opinion, neither of these dogs are very attractive! in fact the bitch might be one of the homeliest setters i have seen. the male isnt bad, but definitely not much of a looker. Of course, theyre all alot prettier when theyre on point!

I am fairly confident I could have one of these pups for nothing, and that it would be a great pup. but i like a good looking dog (not that I am gonna let that stop me....)!

What do you guys think?? is physical appearance an issue with you on picking or enjoying a dog??

sjkennels · Post by **sjkennels** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:14 pm

it cost the same to feed a pretty dog as it does a ugly one. so why have a ugly one?

Post by **ezzy333** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:32 pm

sjkennels wrote:it cost the same to feed a pretty dog as it does a ugly one. so why have a ugly one?

I couldn't say it any better and if I have to go look at them everyday I want them to look good. Maybe I am too aware of looks but I have no use trying to breed better working dogs if they don't look good in the first place. And the nice thing is I don't see it as an either/or situation as there are just as good field genetics in dogs that meet a standard as there are in dogs that don't. So since I have limited space in the kennel and in my home I will pass on the ugly ones and find just as good of a pup that is put together the right way.

Ezzy

dog dr · Post by **dog dr** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:42 pm

ezzy333 wrote:
sjkennels wrote:it cost the same to feed a pretty dog as it does a ugly one. so why have a ugly one?

I couldn't say it any better and if I have to go look at them everyday I want them to look good. Maybe I am too aware of looks but I have no use trying to breed better working dogs if they don't look good in the first place. And the nice thing is I don't see it as an either/or situation as there are just as good field genetics in dogs that meet a standard as there are in dogs that don't. So since I have limited space in the kennel and in my home I will pass on the ugly ones and find just as good of a pup that is put together the right way.

Ezzy

Besides, if theyre not Britts, theyre all ugly anyway, right Ezzy?

birddogger · Post by **birddogger** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:01 pm

I won't buy a dog that I don't like the looks of [ I love a good looking gun dog ]. However, if I had the opportunity to get a free one from excellent hunting dogs, the looks may not stop me, providing I had the time and room.

Charlie

mcbosco · Post by **mcbosco** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:11 pm

What exactly makes these dogs "ugly"?

Post by **ezzy333** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:18 pm

mcbosco wrote:What exactly makes these dogs "ugly"?

Big, slow, and lots of hair LOL

Ezzy

mcbosco · Post by **mcbosco** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:22 pm

better than fragile, hyper and snippy,

ymepointer · Post by **ymepointer** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:35 pm

As a rabid wild birdhunter, I always lean on the side of performance....I will keep a great working dog that is not beautiful but I will NOT keep a beautiful dog that won't hunt! Besides, you never know what the pups are going to look like until they hit the ground

Just ewait and see you might get a looker in that litter that really has the goods on wild birds too.

mcbosco · Post by **mcbosco** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:48 pm

That's what I think, I would take the pup. I have seen some pretty homely dogs come out of great parents and lines before and vice versa.

Mountaineer · Post by **Mountaineer** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 2:59 pm

Hmmm....sure glad dogs don't judge the looks of the birdhunter.

dog dr · Post by **dog dr** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:05 pm

mcbosco wrote:What exactly makes these dogs "ugly"?

"ugly" might be a little harsh, particularly with the male. but the female is what i call "dish faced", kind of like a jersey cow, and she is pretty short and squat as well. course it is the off season, and she has put on a little weight. i just think she is kind of barrel chested for a setter, too. salt and pepper coat with one blue eye and one brown.

the male is just a small, wirey kind of dog. just not what i am used to seeing, i guess. course most of my interaction with him has been prety up close and personal, with my hand firmly planted around his manhood. needless to say, he really likes me!

mcbosco · Post by **mcbosco** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:15 pm

dog dr wrote:
mcbosco wrote:What exactly makes these dogs "ugly"?
"ugly" might be a little harsh, particularly with the male. but the female is what i call "dish faced", kind of like a jersey cow, and she is pretty short and squat as well. course it is the off season, and she has put on a little weight. i just think she is kind of barrel chested for a setter, too. salt and pepper coat with one blue eye and one brown.

the male is just a small, wirey kind of dog. just not what i am used to seeing, i guess. course most of my interaction with him has been prety up close and personal, with my hand firmly planted around his manhood. needless to say, he really likes me!

Is she from South Bend?

Shadow · Post by **Shadow** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:20 pm

neither are very attractive- bitch might be the homeliest you've ever seen- are these purebread or just real good bird dogs

dog dr · Post by **dog dr** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:29 pm

they are purebred setters, AND real good bird dogs. i couldnt tell you anything about the blood lines, but have hunted enough with the female, her sire, and one of her pups to know they are the real deal. kind of taking my buddys word for it on the male, but he knows what he is talking about, and i can trust him.

Shadow · Post by **Shadow** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:37 pm

ok- my third pointing dog was a small English Setter- wife had her under the Christmas tree- she was 8 weeks old- I had no idea what she'd look like- 13 years later I thought she was still one beautifull bird dog- and she always hunted with my male Britt- I was just thinking- if you think they're ugly- something missing

daniel77 · Post by **daniel77** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:50 pm

"Pretty is as pretty does" Forrest Gump

"Marrying a woman for her looks is like eating a bird because of it's song" Samuel Clemens

"Beauty may be only skin deep, but ugly is to the bone." unknown

How do the dogs look after a few beers?

Personally, it would depend on just how "homely" you mean. If she's just not very good looking, I wouldn't mind much, but if she's just pure fugly, that'd be more of a problem. All in all, I'd rather have a real good dog that's not so pretty, than a real pretty dog that's not so good.

dog dr · Post by **dog dr** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:53 pm

Shadow wrote:ok- my third pointing dog was a small English Setter- wife had her under the Christmas tree- she was 8 weeks old- I had no idea what she'd look like- 13 years later I thought she was still one beautifull bird dog- and she always hunted with my male Britt- I was just thinking- if you think they're ugly- something missing

i understand where your coming from. i may be overstating the ugly part, and i will most likely take a pup if the oppurtunity arises. i guess i mostly just got to wondering if anybody else takes that into consideration.

Shadow · Post by **Shadow** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 4:13 pm

my female weighed 34 lbs- she didn't quite have the nose or run of my male Britt- but she was beautifull to look at, run, hunting, swimming, and backing- but on point her tail was always stright to a slight rise- mom painted me a picture based on a photograph- I treasure it

to this day my two grownup kids say she was the best dog

birddog1968 · Post by **birddog1968** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 4:33 pm

Personally, it's too easy to get a dog with the whole package. Nothing against the less that perfect looking dog
that hunts well but at this stage in my life I want it all, looks , drive, stamina, style, the whole package.

TAK · Post by **TAK** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 4:34 pm

What is ugly? I from time to tip surf the TV and find one them fancy dog shows.... These are to be the best of the best of the breeds and I think... Ugly, like ugly as falling out of the ugly tree and hitting every branch! And staying around and pounding its head on it!
Or is it the markings, or since it is setters, is the coat matted or not kept high and tight?

mudhunter · Post by **mudhunter** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 6:42 pm

You got to enjoy looking at them! I have one little male setter that I think is kinda ugly, and hes tiny, I wasn't going to keep him. But then I started to see him run, he carries his tail straight up to the sky as he runs and can flat out fly, when ever I see him running an edge with that tail high and crankin he makes me smile so I kept him! Plus when he hits a bird he seems to grow about a foot taller and has his tail at 12:00 as straight as an arrow.

Point being if I only saw him in a kennel or around the house I would have never taken him, but when he hunts I love him!

mountaindogs · Post by **mountaindogs** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:21 pm

You say one is kinda dish faced? Is the bite level or under. An underbite is a deal breaker for me. Also what my hubby and I call "knotheads" with heads that are not clean on top. Can't stand that. And easty-westy or sagging pasterns. Hate that, but I'll forgive a lot of fine boned, or offset markings etc. It's kinda all about what you can deal with and what eats at you...

A dog, as you know, is a funny type of love. But your kids are always beautiful, even when they are not, so maybe a dog is the same.

ALso my hubby had a lab trainer friend that had a little snippy ugly lab that was amazing. Looked like a whippet in solid black, but she could run quad marks, and handle like a dream on 300 yard blinds. He put a MH on this little thing easily and kept her for years as a "novelty." Eventually someone offered him like 8,000 for her and used her to guide duck hunts - continuing on the "novelty" with all his clients. She's a bit of a legend in his circle.

ACooper · Post by **ACooper** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:26 pm

Sure who doenst like a pretty dog? But I prefer an ugly dog that finds and handles birds to a pretty dog that can barely find his dinner any day... Looks are secondary to hunting ability in my opinion ( excluding health issues etc).

birddog1968 · Post by **birddog1968** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:37 pm

ACooper wrote:Sure who doenst like a pretty dog? But I prefer an ugly dog that finds and handles birds to a pretty dog that can barely find his dinner any day... Looks are secondary to hunting ability in my opinion ( excluding health issues etc).

That's the great thing, you can have both in just about any color and flavor you like !

dudleysmith · Post by **dudleysmith** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:56 pm

Too many worry about looks and not about preformance....Give me a ugly as sin dog and i could care less less if it was getting it done...Owned way too many pretty ones that were pieces of junk....

birddog1968 · Post by **birddog1968** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 10:24 pm

due diligence......

I couldn't imagine , or want to, if all we bred was performance without care for looks and style...they are not, or don't have to be mutually exclusive.

That's not to say I would take a pretty dog over a superior hunter, but fact is, there is no need to compromise. But I guess as said before, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

sjkennels · Post by **sjkennels** » Thu Jun 17, 2010 11:06 pm

mcbosco wrote:What exactly makes these dogs "ugly"?

anything that is not a pointer or gsp or like ezzy said with a lot of hair

mountaindogs · Post by **mountaindogs** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 7:04 am

birddog1968 wrote:due diligence......

I couldn't imagine , or want to, if all we bred was performance without care for looks and style...they are not, or don't have to be mutually exclusive.

That's not to say I would take a pretty dog over a superior hunter, but fact is, there is no need to compromise. But I guess as said before, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Yes, I think that is the part that bothers me. By saying it doesn't matter, and buying or taking the dogs, you are inadvertantly supporting a lack of concern for breed type. You are saying it is okay to breed faults as long as they are not performance faults. Well some people will do the opposite as well and say it is okay to breed low drive, and weaker scenting as long as it is beautiful. I guess as a BREEDER the responsibility is to pay attention to both. BUT as you say some is the eye of the beholder. I have met show title dogs that I wouldn't have and think are really unattractive.

There is always a bit of supply/demand issues rolling around in my mind with breeders. I have seen some awful things bred to one another, not even the same breed and by no mean exemplary and all went well, and family and friends took all the pups and the folks repeat that breeding saying, "boy that first litter sure was popular - must have been a good breeding." But then that is somewhat dashed by the great litters that have pups left for months, for who knows why. :roll: all very wishy washy stuff these buyers.

JKP · Post by **JKP** » Fri Jun 18, 2010 7:20 am

Take away the physical standard and the outward appearance that characterizes the individual breeds, and you may as well drop all the paper work and just breed anything to anything....have them all look the same. Its not performance that separates the best dogs in the various breeds, its appearance.

Beauty is a meaningless term...mental stability, structure, sound movement, stamina, and breed characteristics are all that matter to me. I like a proper breed representative...but mental soundness, talent and physical ability have to have higher priority...then I go looking for the dogs that are better bred to type.

There is a danger in breeding only for performance....extreme performance DOES dictate type....example, IMO big running trial dogs will sooner or later gravitate to 50 lbs...racy build...short coat....it does have an influence....but in the end, for most breeds doesn't have a great affect.

Gun Dog Forum

eye of the beholder

eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder

Re: eye of the beholder