Size of IS

[Christiane Lohmann]

We had a meeting of all show judges and aspirants last weekend (Verein Pointer und Setter/Germany).
Coming from Austria was a letter, asking to pay more attention to the size of IS.
Same was mentioned in a letter from German Kennel.
"Regarding IS the size in standard is:
males 58 - 67 cm
females 55 - 62 cm
Excellent can therefore be give for:
males 56 - 69 cm
females 53 - 64 cm
IS over or under that sizes are to be ranked one degree lower, i.e. VERY GOOD instead of Excellent.
Logically this indicates that
males over 71 cm / under 54 cm
females over 66 cm / under 51 cm
have to be disqualified."

How big or small are your IS around ?

regards
Christiane

[Melinda Auld]

Interestingly, the Australian (ANKC) standard for Irish doesn't include a size specification. I would guess, however, that most Irish here would fit into the above sizes - although I have seen some both larger and smaller. I am not sure why we don't have the size indicated in the standard though...I am sure a more enlightened Aussie (Myra, I'm looking at YOU!) could tell us why :)

[Ana Gaspar Kozelj]

Here are also different sized setters,you can see big and small ones. People are trying to reduce size in a short time. Personaly, I don't like small irish setters. If I would like a springer spaniel,I would buy it then. Niether to big. But,it's easier for me to except a big irish,than a male sized 56 :) That is just too funny,like kocker spaniel :)

[Myra Thomas-Rhodes]

In Australia ,we follow the English Kennel Club standard for most breeds, including all of the Setters, therefore there is no height mentioned.

[Christiane Lohmann]

You follow the 'english' standard and not the standard of the motherland Ireland ? Why that ?

C.

[Myra Thomas-Rhodes]

Powers that be! Maybe it is because we are a Commonwealth country and England is our mother country!!
Interesting too,where a standard states"disqualification" we as judges in this country, are not allowed to disqualify!!We have to "no award" but cannot disqualify! Make sense of that - and that is an Australian rule!

[Melinda Auld]

Does anyone know why the UK standard never included a height restriction? Was it a "breed development" kind of thing that just ended up being perpetuated as the standard was re-examined?

Conversely, why have the FCI and AKC for example included the height restrictions? Was it felt that the dogs were getting too big? Or was it to breed to an ideal size? (or both?)

[Christiane Lohmann]

Strange.
Ireland is the motherland of IS and a member of the FCI (see www.fci.be).
So Ireland is the only country that has a right to write or change the standard, which has to be followed.

Or each other nation can start and create its own 'type of IS'....

regrads
C.

[Catherine Carter]

I own and breed and show Irish Setters in Great Britain. I can quote from the chairman ( Brian Ross)of the Irish Setter Breeders Club in the Christmas Newsletter :" Whilst actual measurements may be tabled in some of the standards, it is a matter of fact that there has never been a measured height specified in the Breed Standard for Irish Setters as approved by the Kennel Club for use within its jurisdiction:i.e. the United Kingdom.I am indebted to Eve Gardner for the following succinct summary of the history of this part of the Standard:"When the Standard of the Breed was drawn up and approved by the Dublin Club in 1886 all references to height and size were omitted, and when the Standard was revised in 1930 the inclusion of size was discussed but firmly rejected in favour of overall balance. However the Irish Kennel Club passed the introduction of a height standard at their AGM in 1986. This was then adopted by the FCI as the Standard of the "Country of Origin" but not by our Kennel Club. My own View is that our standard is right to concentrate on construction and balance to produce a well proportioned Irish Setter capable of moving with the seemingly effortless grace which characterises the very best specimens of our breed." Brian Ross.

I hope this may help in your discussions

Catherine CARTER

[ursula wilby]

Christiane, other nations are in fact already breeding their own "type of IS", and have done so for a long time...:-)

[Ana Gaspar Kozelj]

I think the same Christiane.

[Susan Stone]

Sorry if you are not getting the response expected Christiane, but I fear the size topic may already have been discussed to the full in other posts.
For those who missed the discussion and are interested, go to the post started by the 'Frenchy' group with 'Quel avenir pour le setter irlandais en France' with 147 replies. The discussion is mainly in english, so don't be put off by the french title...
The other well discussed topic was 'American - English Type' with 89 replies. Both topics can be found in Forum search with 'avenir' and 'type'.

Just one point strikes me: does the FCI standard demand a disqualification?

[Alenka Pokorn]

No Susan, the FCI standard does not call for a disqualification. I think what they are thinking about is in regard to the letter that was published in S&P Nachrichten some years back. I think it was written by Mr Uwe Fischer. It said that with the breeds where no disqualification as to size is specifically given in the standard, FCI suggests a 3% (hope I remember it correctly) tolerance up and down to the prescribed sizes. Dogs that are outside these ranges should be given lower marks (very good or even good) and any dog that is 6% outside the limits should be disqualified. Please, if I don't remember it correctly let me know.
Alenka