Is the Irish setter a ruined breed?

[Henk ten Klooster]

Breeders say they are active to improve the breed. Statistics on health, scientists and independent setter-experts claim exactly the opposite. Topics on health here inspired this topic. Did breeders make a mess of the Irish setter (called a "ruined breed" by expert Florence Nagle) or not and why, when & how yes or no in your eyes?

[ursula wilby]

As far as I know, all facts regarding the average age of all breeds come from insurance-companies. I doubt if there were that many insured dogs about in the 70`s.
I certainly had no dogs insured at that time.
What I do know is that ALL breeds thrown together have an average life-span of 10 years. This is information from the insurance-companies.

Yes, I understand that my setters are nothing to base any statistics on...but they are the ones I can be 100% certain about.
As for my litters, yes, I keep files. But they only contain the information that is public or that I receive from the puppybuyers. Not all tell me when their dogs die of old age. But any that were to die young, I would certainly know about.
I dont fancy going through more than 20 years worth of papers until I am forced to.... :-))))

[Henk ten Klooster]

The observation theres now polygenetic problems unlike PRA etc. not easy to battle was already made by Rasbridge. Therefore he promoted in 1980 using some of the old techniques to battle with this....

[Henk ten Klooster]

Frances wrote: ..."those of us who stick to the same old sound Irish will prevail!!!" ....

Hey hi Frances thats what I help you hoping. So far, discussions on this site demonstrate the opposite. Those of the showring sticking to the "same old sound Irish" are becoming a minority. Both Rasbridge and Florence Nagle told show winners often had wrong movement (degenerated says Rasbridge). You detail why.

Where are the Brackenfield Harstbourne Bronzes and Wendover Beggars in the UK or Milsons O'Boy in the USA now? I bet many a nowadays judge would not even put up these dogs. What dogs in your eyes can beat those of yesteryears and why?

Discussions on this site demonstrate clearly that many a showjudge would even penalize an Irish setter for having a small star or blazes on the forehead. Not one of the best (UK and USA) Irish setters in the fifties/sixties would have been born when facts and feelings on white on red for example shown here was breeding practice those days... Improvement?

Well ok, nobody would object to the fact that everyone has many more facilities to use science. And that you can win a lot for your breed by using those facilities. Thats an improvement. We agree.

These facilities and our chances of learning more from critics like scientists and our own experts by simply using media like this one better, should make chances of improvement of the breed a lot bigger. Did it?

So still waiting for lists of improvements of the breed over last decades. Your point was made: use of sience. Next?

Henk.

[ursula wilby]

I have a feeling that perhaps the temperament of the irish setter has improved a lot over the years. I can honestly see no other explanation to all this "nervous" setter-talk that seems to be the first thing people tell you when you mention the breed. Somewhere along the line setters must have been nervous wrecks. And this can not stem from the odd dog either as this way of thinking about the breed appears to be world-wide.
Of course I knew no setters before the 70`s so I can not speak from first-hand experiance..

I have made up one of my dogs to be an army dog, and that requires pretty stable nerves. To be able to work and concentrate under heavy mashinegun-sound and (when told to do so) to be able to totally relax under those circumstances can not be done by a nervous dog.
So ill go for the temperament.
As they say: No smoke without fire...somewhere there have to have been some pretty nervous dogs...

[Henk ten Klooster]

Interesting. Nervous dives up in sources since the beginning of the Irish setter. Nearly all publications. And most authors on this subject tell nervous is often confused with lots of temperament. Certainly when theres not enough exercise.

So chances a stamp of nervous is given are bigger, when the breed is more popular. Because theres more chances of non-informed people owning the breed. That was the case in the sixties/seventies.

Chances are in, that character has changed over the decades.

UK-author Gilbert Leighton-Boyce provides examples of that in his book, pointing at the way his mother selected her puppies on temperament. In my words: if you search for the most dull one and do that many generations, average temperaments will change. So: loss of temperament - smaller chances of a stamp nervous....

Question is, if this loss of temperament is a gain or a loss, Leighton-Boyce chose last.... Your opinion?

[ursula wilby]

I once thought that would be the reason as well = getting mixed up with livley and nervous, but then thinking about it there are plenty of other lively breeds that are not being called "nervous" and never have been.

It was more a thought.

And yes of course you change the temperament by selective breeding, just as you change looks. Personally I always choose one of the the wildest puppies for myself, BUT also one that I feel I have contact with.
I do feel that I have noticed that there has been some change towards a more docile Irish setter, but then also one that is easier for puppy-buyers to handle. Perhaps thats not such a bad thing either.
We live a totally different life now to, say 50 years ago.
We humans have had to adapt...perhaps its all just part of the same deal.
They are still plenty of setters with "go" out there!

[Carmel Murphy]

there are different temperaments within one litter! My Rua is quite relaxed and her brother is a real live wire! Same with Rua's puppies :most of her pups so far are lively get up and go setters(Megan could run rings around her mother!!) But I try to put Rua to lively type stud dogs so as not to get puppies that are too laid back!! But also I have not come across nervous dogs in her family either! But I have come across shy, worried dogs at shows(some are working types also!)but some of it could be dogs unhappy in the show ring and yet could be different in the field! Not all dogs like to be shown, but can be good elsewhere!

[Susan Stone]

I think I'd agree that temperaments in general have improved, although lately at shows I have seen irish that seemd too timid for my liking. Some will say they prefer a more timid dog to an aggressive one. But fear and aggression are closely linked and I wonder if people are aware of this.

I own one Irish who's 'get up and go got up and went' (translation for non english mother tongues: who is a couch potato) and this is not typical either. However she is the easiest of all to live with and it takes her a minute to react when the other three have already taken off... so the so-called nervousness probably also has to do with the high level of reactivity that would be expected in a good hunting dog.

Personally I prefer an Irish with lots of 'joie de vivre' - but warn my possible puppy buyers accordingly. If they want a teddy bear they must go elsewhere;-)

[ursula wilby]

I warn all my puppybuyers so much that when the dog is two years old, they tend to ask: Was this all? They are never as bad (wild) as I make out.
Temperaments vary of course, I have not seen any shy ones for a long time, but now and then you come across some "stroppy" dogs, and thats not correct either.
We have a dog-behaviourspecialist here in Sweden called Anders Hallgren. He claims that practically all breeds are getting more aggresive males due to shows. Meaning that we want the dogs to LOOK like dogs and the bitches to look like bitches. So we are breeding MORE masculinity into our dogs to please the judges.
As a result we end up with more problems conected to this.
I must say this makes sense to me.
At least in theory.

[Susan Stone]

It does not help putting all fault on present day breeders... nor on breeders of the past. Knowledge on genetics and medicine has changed tremendously over the last century and dogs that died of fits (epilepsy?) were in those days considered to be victims of distemper or other disease. I do not think our breed is in such 'a mess' - but as breeders we must try to be aware of risk factors and make 'informed decisions'.

Even people like Florence Nagle were convinced you had to inbreed to fix type. In those days the breed was not as homogenous as it is now. Today we must think differently.

[Henk ten Klooster]

There is no written standard on the character of the Irish setter. But most experts -all timelines- say its the most important propertie of an Irish setter and more typical than conformation standards.

More words in literature were dedicated to the character than conformation standard. It was character inspiring some of worlds best dog literature - quite a lot on Irish setters. That stopped a few decades ago for Irish setters. How come?

Who protects the half devil/half angel character to vanish into a teddybear-version already seen in nowadays most influential UK stud? Teddybears are much easier to sell for the pet-market.... And often this seems to correlate with the more dull looking head...

As for Susans saying people like Nagle "were convinced you had to inbreed to fix type".

Yes - but also if needed use a Great Dane to update the Irish Wolfhound...And the old saying is the difference between inbreeding and linebreeding is lack of crossing so not enough different lines behind. Last came to an end in IS-circles Uk and USA decades ago, all are inbred. Why do you think Nagle got some Scandinavian stock to update her stock????

Who makes informed decisions and informed by whom? Who teaches teachers?

There was a quite succesfull breeder here, asking her husband his opinion. "Well you changed heads in a few decades, but unfortunately brains vanished" he said.

What system protects the Irish setter from becoming the Red Irish Teddybear?

[Loma I. Clark]

What system protects the Irish setter from becoming the Red Irish Teddybear? Henk says



Interesting thought Henk. What is in place for any breed to keep it as it originally was? I suppose the breeders themselves, those who try to follow the standard of their country, those that truly care about the breed.

There are no set rules or penalties set forth to force a breeder to do much of anything. Who would arrest them, or not let them register a litter they bred because they thought they were the ruination of the breed. Here in the United States I can't imagine anyone stepping in to someone elses breeding program and trying to stop them.

I think our Irish Setters are a healthier breed today than it was 30 years ago. I know my first Irish were very old at 10 years of age years ago, but now its not uncommon to have one live to 12 to 15 years of age.

Big dogs just aren't known to live as long as the smaller breeds. Look at the Great Danes and Irish Wolfhounds. They are old at 8 to 10 years of age.

Intersting question indeed..........Loma , USA