FDSB pulling Hank and Dash registration ?

[kninebirddog]

Actually Lewellin was not the first to start working with the Duke Rheobe LAvarck crosses he caught on much later but he was instrumental about shipping these dogs here to america and was a great promoter thus he got credit for that cross
I will have to go back and look as to which kennels but there were quite a few that already knew how the cross was working well
A very interesting read is the Modern Setter written back in the early 1900 which explains much of the trials which were primarily run by setters which is dominated by pointers today

and it is true there are very few lines of setters today probably none that do not go back to gladstone which goes back to dan and petrel


Yeah I am a brittany person but I found this book and have read it was very interesting

http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/16778584

[rockllews]

Thank you Keith for your posts. I wasn't sure if Herb would mind me quoting him, but his is a good answer. I editted my own slightly because it did seem misworded about being recognized as ES. Yes, they are recognized separately. Thanks for the clarifications. And good luck this weekend if you make it to OK.

[live4point]

[quote="Wa Chukar Hunter"]"To be registered in the Field Dog Stud Book as a Llewellin a dog must have no ancestors who do not trace to Field's Duke, Statter's Rhoebe Can you see how this would cause so many questions? You are talking about dogs that died over 100 yrs. ago.How in the world could you accurately trace a dog back to them.Are Duke and Rhobe enshrined somewhere,and they dug them up and got DNA from them like they did Jesse James? I somehow doubt it

[Flush]

I have also never figured out why they ever allowed a Llewellin,English setter litter cross to be papered as English setters as it was documented that the Llewellin setter blood was not pure.Seems to me they knowingly tainted the pure English setter bloodline.

I understand your point, but I think you need to have an understanding of the history of setters prior to Llewellin to really understand the situation. When Mr. Llewellin was alive and breeding dogs, they didn't have the AKC, UKC, or FDSB like they have today. There were no true "pure" breeds then like we think of them today.

A "Setter" was a type of dog that had a certain type of look and way of hunting. There were no "Gordon" "Irish" and "English" Setters, there were just different "Setters" from different places and of different colors. It wasn't until much later under the AKC, UKC, and FDSB that these narowly defined setter "breeds" came to be. It should be noted that in the early development of hunting dogs, they were mainly owned by royality (they were the only ones with land and hunting rights) and these royal families would often have their own "strain" of dog. These different strains would often be referred to as a "breed". Again the definition we have today of a "breed" wasn't as clearly defined back then. I can't find any details on the "south Esk" but it likely just another type or strain of "setter" that existed at the time. It wouldn't have mattered anyway if it was a completely different breed. When these South Esk dogs were bred with the black, white, and tan setters (you will read they were bred with Gordon setters, but no "Gordon" setter existed at the time) the offspring were considered "Setters" because they looked and acted like setters, it was as simple as that. This notion you have of them not being "pure" English setters had no bearing at the time.

When Llewellin was alive there was no such thing as a "Llewellin" setter. He didn't even line breed this strain. The initial dogs that were so successful had already been bred and developed by other trialers of the time. Llewellin simply bought up all the blood and capitalized on it, he himself never even considered his dogs a different breed. Later these "Llewellin" strain of dogs became very valulable in large part because of how successful they were in trials. By this time registration organizations like the AKC and FDSB existed and breeders wanted to be able to show and prove that they had "pure" dogs tracing back to Llewellin dogs, and the Llewellin "breed" was started. You should note only the FDSB recogonizes the Llewellins as a seperate breed, under the AKC or UKC they would simply be considered English Setters (even with the South Esk blood, whatever that is). For whatever reason the AKC did not feel the Llewellin warrant a seperate "breed".

There are actually quite a few similarities between the Llewellin and the English/Irish/Gordon setter. At one time they were all just "Setters". For the Irish and Gordon the distinction became based on color, for the Llewellins it was a very particular pedigree. They are all Setters and it wasn't until fairly recently that we decided they needed to be broken into more narrowly defined "breeds". If you look at the very beginning of each of these types of setters you will see it is somewhat arbitary how and why they got started exactly the way they did. In our country Irish setters need to be basically completely red, that has NEVER been the case in Ireland.

Here is one of better short histories of the setter breed that I have found on-line:
http://www.drummersglen.com/historyofthesetter.html

[live4point]

I have read all that info before,but good you posted it for others who haven't.You brought up that I mentioned the breeding of Llewellins to the English setters.Someone had to decide that there was a difference,thats why they are papered seperately as English and Llewellins.Since that is a fact that they are,why would a Llewellin and English cross be titled as a English setter,see the contradiction?The more you research this subject the more unanswered questions you will have.It makes an interesting discussion,but in the end it makes no difference to me,as I have never been caught up in the paper thing anyway.Like I said before,you can research and research this subject and not know much more than when you started,there is a lot of smoke and mirrors out there concerning this subject.

[Flush]

I think your question is actualy not that difficult to answer. The Llews are just a specific type or "strain" of English Setter, they are still English setters. Apparently the FDSB did agree the Llews diserved their own registration but the FDSB didn't really decide Llews were a whole seperate breed, they just decided to let certain English Setters with very specific pedigrees be registered with the title "Llewellin Setter" which is a very specific type of English Setter. The FDSB doesn't determine what constitues a breed per say, they are just a registration body. The AKC, another registration body, does NOT recognize the Llewellins as a seperate strain/breed. To the AKC a Llewellin setter has always been an English Setter.

Frankly I don't think the FDSB should have recognized the Llews seperately in the first place, but since they did it makes sense that if you breed a Llew to an English its "just" an English. They were both english setters to start with, one just happened to be a very specific strain of english setter.

It would have been exactly the same if they recognized Elhew pointers as their own strain. "Pure" Elhews would be registered with the Elhew title, but they would still always be English Pointers. You cross a pure Elhew with a "regular" pointer you couldn't register the offspring as "Elhew" anymore, but they would certaintly still be English Pointers.

Do you follow my logic?

[mudhunter]

Every Llewellin is an English Setter, not every English is a Llewellin, What is so difficult to understand, all it is a bloodline that happen to get its own registry due to timing more than anything? Frankly I don't know why some people are so about insulting the Llewellins, they are just another thing that makes these different breeds so interesting. And as to them being a marketing ploy I have never seen a Llewellin selling for anything I wouldn't pay for a well put together English Setters. As of this year the price I was quoted for a pup out of what I consider two of the most successful Llewellin alive today that are competing in competitions was half what the price of a Decoverly English Setter would cost you.

[Flush]

was half what the price of a Decoverly English Setter would cost you.

True but DeCoverly is a whole nother can of "marketing" worms in its own right.

Thats like saying Roseanne Barr is skinny and your only point of reference is Rosie Odonnel.

I agree though, both the Llew supporters and Llew bashers both go overboard on occassion.

The thing that makes me chuckle the most about Llews is how for the most part they are now touted as old time foot hunting dogs (with some notable exceptions) but their entire foundation was built on field trials. Yes trials have changed somewhat over time, but not as much as some of these Llew marketers would have you believe. Horseback trials have been around for over 100 years and they are the "big" trials the early Llews were winning in this country. There are detailed writeups of trials at the turn of the centurny, and those dogs got out there! Additionaly there are still lots of walking trials today, but for the most part Llews are completely absent from that scene too. With that said I do admire folks like HighCotton and Wa Chukar Hunter who are indeed trialling with their Llews.

[BirdDogDesire]

I love my Llewellin no matter what she might go back too.

[live4point]

Why is it in any way taken as an insult or somehow degrading to want to cut thru the bull and get at the truth.Somehow questioning the Llewellin setter is some kind of taboo.Notice how there are no answers to any of the DNA questions-why-because no one knows.It doesn't take much brain power to figure out that our modern Llewellins have not really been DNA matched to the Duke and Rhoebe dogs,those dogs have been gone way way too long,they were gone before the automobile came along,let alone DNA testing.Somehow,someone had to decide in recent years,that this certain dog is a Llewellin.To determine DNA test,you have to have something to compare it with right?What Llewellin is it that they somehow determined was a true Llewellin?And can you imagine the hundreds of thousands of pups that have come along since the Duke and Rhobe dogs in the timespan since they were living,and to in recent years decide that a certain one is what we will define as a Llewellin.As for it being so easy to understand,that all Llewellins are English setters,but no english setters are Llewellins is about as clear as mud,and if I would have been raising English setters at the time,and trying to keep my bloodlines pure,I would have been mad as heck that the Llewellins with the gordons and south esk and whatever else blood could be bred to an English and still be called an english setter-----It would be no different than me breeding a Pointer to a Dalmation to get the size and coloring I like,throwing in a little lab blood for good retrieving abilities,calling my dogs Live4point Pointers,and then being able to breed to someones English pointer,and being legally allowed to register the dogs as English pointers--How well do you think that would go over.

[ezzy333]

live4point,

I have a feeling everyone understands what is happening except for you. It would be my opinion that when FDSB agreed to register them as Llewellin's they said they would if someone can prove they are just that. And the breeders who were wanting it decided they would require a DNA test to prove the parentage. Now if that didn't happen that way, nobody cares.

They are English setters that are of a special linage that dates back a hundred years. They are also nice dogs. That should take care of the problem and we can get back to looking to see what is going to happen with them in the future instead of criticing what has happened in the past that we can do nothing about. That is the truth

Ezzy

[dlfl]

OK, now I must make a comment . Dogs DNA makers have come a long way and many can be identified as to breeds used in its past. I propose all pointer breeders send their dogs DNA to one of the centers that will evaluate for breeds making up their dog. How many pointers will come back with greyhound in the mix? Sure see some pointy noses on them now!

As of now the FDSB only requires that the dogs DNA matches the parents. Maybe all should be tested to find out what breeds are in its make up also!

I believe that U of Davis in Cal. is trying to identify if Llewellins have a particular marker make up compared to those with American setter in them. I may have the college wrong.

[Wa Chukar Hunter]

What makes a llewellin a llewellin - is the same thing that makes a GSP a GSP - bloodline. The FDSB when it recognized the llewellins in 1902 - determined what was a llewellin setter. The breeders then took this and bred llewellin setter to llewellin setter down through the years to present day - just like any other breed of dog - In 2003 their was a parentage issue with ONE sire - the breeder in this case could not come up with the correct DNA'd sire and was suspended.

The FDSB with the parent clubs (we have two - the North American Llewellin Breeders Association and the National Llewellin Gun Dog Club) determined that to continue the strain - all parents of offspring would need to be DNA'd. We have been working under this for 6 yrs now. This requirement has since been expanded to include any champion dog of any breed - but only requires champions to be dna'd.

It is less likely that shenigans with breedings will happen with llewellin setters than any other breed of dogs, because of this requirement that each individual llewellin must be dna'd but not every individual of any other breed.

If you want to look at a recent problem similiar to what happened with Al King and llewellin setters, one only needs to look at Ferrell Miller and Millers On Line recently - here you have a National Champion that did not DNA to his parents.

Additionally, many breed clubs in the AKC require DNA and microchipping on each dog to run in their National Championships or futurity.

I hope that if it becomes practical to DNA trace the entire lineage of a dog that this is not pursued. Because, if this happens it is likely whole lines/individuals of many different breeds will get thrown out. And the breeds will suffer for it.

Just some thoughts from a guy that loves/owns/trains and trials two minority breeds - llewellin setters and Irish/red setters.

[live4point]

Go back and read the first post on page 4 by Wa Chukar Hunter stating as to what the rules of the field dog stud book say is a Llewellin setter,and then think about how DNA testing of your pups parents match this criteria.I didn't make the rules.

[Flush]

The DNA testing is NOT to prove that dogs go all the way back to Duke, Rhoebe, Laverack.

The DNA testing is simply to prove a pups parents are who you say they are. It's to prevent problems going forward, not prove anything about the past. This DNA issue became important when prominent Llew breeder had a problem proving PARENTS, just like happened with a prominent English Pointer breeder. This is not unique to Llewellins, other breeds have to submit DNA evidence too. It's different depending on the venue AF vs. AKC etc. but the DNA thing is not anything special that only applies to Llews.

One more time because it does appear you are getting this:The DNA testing is NOT to prove that dogs go all the way back to Duke, Rhoebe, Laverack. It's to prevent problems going forward.

[live4point]

Flush,I understand totally what the DNA test is for,and did from the start,but dont you see how many could misread this,and I'm sure manny puppy buyers do.Many are led to believe that because the parents of their pup was DNA'd that it does trace them back to the original Llewellins.If you give this just a little thought,you can figure out that there would be no time better than now to make Llewellins out of English,hope no one does,but I would bet someone will.

[dlfl]

I too understand what the testing is for and why it was put in to effect. I might of been stirring the pot!

[Flush]

.If you give this just a little thought,you can figure out that there would be no time better than now to make Llewellins out of English,hope no one does,but I would bet someone will.

Actually for the last 100 years it would have been even easier than it is today. Until very recently ALL breeds have been on the honor system. The window that has been there for a very long time is now closing thats all.

I guess I really don't get your point. You are complaining about the DNA testing since it implies a Llew is proven to trace all the back,yet doesn't. The DNA testing technology they have today isn't capable of going that far back, it only works for dogs you have in your database. What they have isn't perfect but would you rather have no DNA testing?

It seems as though you are arguing and being difficult just for the sake of argument.

[live4point]

I dont think discussing is argueing.That's how we learn things is by discussion.I think the issues I brought up probably helped some people figure this Llewellin thing out a little better,and sort thru some of the implied information out there.You could have this same kind of discussion about other breeds and it doesn't seem to make you a bad guy,but for some reason a logical one about a Llewellin does,some are kind of touchy on this subect.I'm not afraid of the truth and I own Llewellins,and probably did before alot of people on here may have.The truth should never have to be a touchy subject or offend someone.

[Dave Quindt]

What makes a llewellin a llewellin - is the same thing that makes a GSP a GSP - bloodline. The FDSB when it recognized the llewellins in 1902 - determined what was a llewellin setter. The breeders then took this and bred llewellin setter to llewellin setter down through the years to present day - just like any other breed of dog - In 2003 their was a parentage issue with ONE sire - the breeder in this case could not come up with the correct DNA'd sire and was suspended..

Keith,

That's a nice theory, and I know your fellow Llewellin friends would like it to be true, but you don't have the science to back it up. And you probably never will.

What makes a GSP a GSP is not just "a bloodline" but a set of contributing breeds to the foundation dogs, and a set of traits carried forward, that are unique to that breed and no any other breed. A GWP is not just a rough-coated GSP; it is a completely different breed that comes from a different mixture of foundation dogs and breeds. A slick-coated GWP is still a GWP, and not a GSP, even though they may be virtually physically undistinguishable. But genetically, they are different and distinguishable.

The problem you have is that when you go to the "foundation" dogs behind the Llewellins they came from the same dogs that other "English" setters of the day did. There are no unique physical characteristics of the Llewellin that separate it from the English Setters. There's no evidence that there is any genetic difference; unique markers that every Llewellin has but no English Setters have, that can be used to distinguish the two "breeds". You can't say that a pedigree or bloodline alone makes a breed, as you have no way to verify that pedigree is actually correct.

The fact that strain and breed were interchangeable at one time does not change anything. Especially when those designations were made decades before the understanding of DNA and genetics.

If you continue to treat Llewellins as a separate breed, you are ultimately dooming the “breed” as it’s not big enough with enough genetic diversity to support itself.


FWIW,
Dave

[Wa Chukar Hunter]

If what you say is true - then the FDSB irish setter is doomed too - there are as many members in the NLGDC as there are in the NRSFTC - and based upon different websites for both breeds/strains - as many breeders.

When is the last time any serious trialler bred to a show dog in any setter breed. So, you are already limited in gene pools based on what function you breed for. :roll:

[Greg Jennings]

Dave,

To be fair, there is a somewhat analagous situation between DKs and GSPs.

This in that while there is no genetic difference between DKs and GSPs (except perhaps closer-up pointer in some lines ) you can breed two DKs and get a DK, but if you breed a DK and a GSP, you get a GSP.

[Dave Quindt]

If what you say is true - then the FDSB irish setter is doomed too - there are as many members in the NLGDC as there are in the NRSFTC - and based upon different websites for both breeds/strains - as many breeders.

When is the last time any serious trialler bred to a show dog in any setter breed. So, you are already limited in gene pools based on what function you breed for. :roll:

All dog breeds are doomed to a certain degree. But the larger the gene pool you have, the more you delay the inevitable.

The Red Setter isn't necessarily doomed because they can breed back to the AKC Irish dogs if they like, or more likely cross again with the English Setter to give themselves some genetic diversity. The Red Setter folks have accepted the fact that they can cross with English Setters, breed pure for a few generations and the resulting pups are considered Red Setters. The Llewellin people have not gotten there yet; eventually they will have to. All you have to do is look at some of the continental breeds in Europe that are struggling for their survival (Stichelhaar, Cesky Fousek, Braque D’auvergne, etc).

Greg Jennings wrote:

Dave,

To be fair, there is a somewhat analagous situation between DKs and GSPs.

This in that while there is no genetic difference between DKs and GSPs (except perhaps closer-up pointer in some lines ) you can breed two DKs and get a DK, but if you breed a DK and a GSP, you get a GSP.

Greg,

The DK thing is a great example of the hypocrisy in trying to call a strain a breed. You can breed a DK to a GSP and get DKs; it has been done and approved by the DKV. How do you think Checkmate's Dandy Dude got in the pedigrees of so many DKs here in the US! A former president of the DKV believed that unregistered DKs (GSPs, whatever you want to call them) could be registered as DKs if they met the testing requirements. Others in the club disagree.

There are some that believe that the DK is a separate breed. Try asking them what do you get when you breed a DK to a DK without breed warden approval (i.e. the sire/dam don't meet the testing requirements). If you can get them to answer that question you are doing better than I am.

What we have here is the intersection of tradition and science. As we further map the unique genetic identifiers that separate one breed from another, groups like the Llewellin folks are going to be further challenged to defend this kind of stuff.

FWIW,
Dave

[Greg Jennings]

Greg,

The DK thing is a great example of the hypocrisy in trying to call a strain a breed. You can breed a DK to a GSP and get DKs; it has been done and approved by the DKV. How do you think Checkmate's Dandy Dude got in the pedigrees of so many DKs here in the US! A former president of the DKV believed that unregistered DKs (GSPs, whatever you want to call them) could be registered as DKs if they met the testing requirements. Others in the club disagree.

There are some that believe that the DK is a separate breed. Try asking them what do you get when you breed a DK to a DK without breed warden approval (i.e. the sire/dam don't meet the testing requirements). If you can get them to answer that question you are doing better than I am.

Hi Dave,

I feel pretty much the same way you do about the whole deal. Just wanted to point out the similarity for folks. I, frankly, don't have as much problem with the "strain" issue (though I do have problems with it) as I do the elitest attitude of some of the folks involved.

Doesn't seem you can get away from it "I've got an Elhew", "I've got a white dog", "Ive got a DK", "Ive got a Llewellin", "I've got a black GSP", "You've got a K-80, but mine is a Krieghoff", "Yeah, it's got a Hemi", "I've got a King Ranch". Yadda, yadda, yadda.

I don't think the dogs know what's on their pedigree.

[ezzy333]

Greg,

The DK thing is a great example of the hypocrisy in trying to call a strain a breed. You can breed a DK to a GSP and get DKs; it has been done and approved by the DKV. How do you think Checkmate's Dandy Dude got in the pedigrees of so many DKs here in the US! A former president of the DKV believed that unregistered DKs (GSPs, whatever you want to call them) could be registered as DKs if they met the testing requirements. Others in the club disagree.

There are some that believe that the DK is a separate breed. Try asking them what do you get when you breed a DK to a DK without breed warden approval (i.e. the sire/dam don't meet the testing requirements). If you can get them to answer that question you are doing better than I am.

Hi Dave,

I feel pretty much the same way you do about the whole deal. Just wanted to point out the similarity for folks. I, frankly, don't have as much problem with the "strain" issue (though I do have problems with it) as I do the elitest attitude of some of the folks involved.

Doesn't seem you can get away from it "I've got an Elhew", "I've got a white dog", "Ive got a DK", "Ive got a Llewellin", "I've got a black GSP", "You've got a K-80, but mine is a Krieghoff", "Yeah, it's got a Hemi", "I've got a King Ranch". Yadda, yadda, yadda.

I don't think the dogs know what's on their pedigree.

And this is the same thing we are going through with the Brits and French Brits. Me thinks many people just need something to argue about and try to convince people that what they have is a little bit better.

Ezzy

[Dennmor]

Greg,

The DK thing is a great example of the hypocrisy in trying to call a strain a breed. You can breed a DK to a GSP and get DKs; it has been done and approved by the DKV. How do you think Checkmate's Dandy Dude got in the pedigrees of so many DKs here in the US! A former president of the DKV believed that unregistered DKs (GSPs, whatever you want to call them) could be registered as DKs if they met the testing requirements. Others in the club disagree.

There are some that believe that the DK is a separate breed. Try asking them what do you get when you breed a DK to a DK without breed warden approval (i.e. the sire/dam don't meet the testing requirements). If you can get them to answer that question you are doing better than I am.

Hi Dave,

I feel pretty much the same way you do about the whole deal. Just wanted to point out the similarity for folks. I, frankly, don't have as much problem with the "strain" issue (though I do have problems with it) as I do the elitest attitude of some of the folks involved.

Doesn't seem you can get away from it "I've got an Elhew", "I've got a white dog", "Ive got a DK", "Ive got a Llewellin", "I've got a black GSP", "You've got a K-80, but mine is a Krieghoff", "Yeah, it's got a Hemi", "I've got a King Ranch". Yadda, yadda, yadda.

I don't think the dogs know what's on their pedigree.

And this is the same thing we are going through with the Brits and French Brits. Me thinks many people just need something to argue about and try to convince people that what they have is a little bit better.

Ezzy

What DO you get when you breed two similar pure bred dogs without permission? (I ask this question instead of posting a long winded rant, having to do with other breeds; that I may or may not have anything to do with.)

[GsPJustin]

Me thinks many people just need something to argue about and try to convince people that what they have is a little bit better.

Ezzy

So sad, but so true...