Does Disaster Loom for Setters?

[Ann Millington]

How deep and wide is the split between 'Working' and 'Show' Setters?

Will breeding for excellence in only one discipline cause, through inbreeding for single particular traits, the decline of breeds?

What is wrong with just breeding healthy dogs that can succeed in the field and the ring?

Is the extreme of performance or beauty worth risking your breed for?

[ursula wilby]

I can not speak for other countrys, but at least as far as I can tell, the split between "working" and "show" is VERY wide indeed in Sweden.
You can normally tell at a glance which "side" a dog comes from.
And it is normally not just looks but also temperament that differs greatly.

I am not a show-person, but would only consider show-lines when it comes to breeding for dogs to work with obedience-wise.
Yes, it sounds great to have it all in one package...but my dogs would never be quite fast enough for the field here in Scandinavia. I believe that rules for field-trials differ in differant countrys, perhaps that is one of the problems in this part of the world? Field-trials have become too speeded up, just like the obedience-ring.
Nowadays to succeed with anything but a Border-collie in champion-class is almost a miracle. The BC sets the standard and everything else has to follow...or try to.

[Susan Stone]

I'll stick to the breed I know best - the Irish Red Setter

Doom and Disaster? If I were to agree then that would have to mean the end of my involvement in the breed... so I can't agree;-)

I agree there is a split if you only look at the extremes. But there are still dogs around that could neither win at Crufts nor could they win a trial, but they would be fully capable of doing a day's work and look decent whilst doing it!
I'd say there are big differences depending on what country you have in mind. In quite a few european countries there are dogs that are capble of winning in the show ring and doing a decent day's work - albeit not at the extreme trial speed that is required at a spring trial in France for example.

Just speaking of the Irish Red Setter, I would wish for an increase in awareness amongst breeders of both spheres. Even a 'show dog' should have the mind, spirit and intelligence it takes to enable it to be trained to work. And a 'trial dog' should have the construction and type to enable people to recognize it as an Irish Setter;-) If you look at Katariina's photographs I think most will agree that these really are Irish Setters, in body AND mind.

When you say 'breeding for excellence in only one discipline' this to my mind is a contradiction of terms. Because if you do that, then you are not breeding for excellence... as you have lost sight of the complete picture, ie a dog physically and mentally capable of a day's work.

What is wrong in just breeding healthy dogs that can succeed in the field and the ring? Nothing, except for the little word 'just' as I fear it will be d....d dificult!

So start retraining the judges - show and field!

[Katariina Roiha]

Thank you Susan for your lovely comment on my dogs!

To quote Susan "So start retraining the judges - show and field!" this is the key to everything! Espesially the showjudges have forgot the true meaning on this breed. Those in the showring(the largest ones) are hardly capable of performing in the field. The irish setter on the other hand does not have to be lightboned. As a matter of fact the endurance suffers just as much as in a larger dog when a dog is too small.
The loss of muscle tissue is a remarkable change in dogs and I have not yet found a clue to that.

For the areas that I hunt and eventually breed for, require most certainly a strong body with both bones and muscletissue. Otherwise the dog gets hurt and broken. I can see a lot of the old setter in my goals. The appearance will follow when these are taken into consideration. The setter has to work head up high that is why its body can not be heavy in the front, like in some showdogs. The gallop just doesn´t come easy when the upper or in dogs case the front of the body is too heavy. That is pure physics and the laws of physics don´t change even if man wants them to...

The gap is there but I have seen quite beautiful showdogs in Finland that are of the right size which makes them look as if they could work if the mind had what it takes :)

The true meaning of a hunting dog is not the amount of training you do to get it work but it is the meaning of letting the dog loose and follow her or him to the game. Because the mind is set to the right tracks from birth, you just make the dog work with you

[Susan Stone]

Re training to hunt
It sounds so easy... but you and I live in very different areas... Here birds are non existent (ok, we have sparrows & blackbirds)
When I say 'training' I am thinking of my situation where I live, with no natural game for setter work. I have to take my dog to France for 'training' so that he can learn about game and develop a working attitude.

re muscle tissue: I don't understand - do you feel muscle tissue has changed?

[Katariina Roiha]

Sorry I never answered your question Susan! I meant muscletone, the way muscles are built. I seldom see setters built muscular, even in the huntingtypedogs.

I now these dogs are not meant to be "bodybuilders" but I require some kind of strength in dogs that are made to run. Even if the dogs sceleton is narrow or lightly built you can make the dog look better by training some muscle on him.

The dogs also feel soft, meaning the muscletone of a normally exerzised dog is strong not soft. Many times seen the muscles of the back do not exist. That is one of the most important muscles of a creature moving on 4 legs. Why is that?

[Ann Millington]

I started this topic in response to the implication that 'closed registries' are the way to to disaster for dog breeds. That they are so closely bred that their high Co-efficient Of Inbreeding results in such genetic problems as to threaten the very existence of the breed in the future.

It is argued that Setters should only be bred with Working as the raison d'etre........ and that cross-breeding is the only way to go.......

My argument is that litters should be produced with healthy, breed typical dogs as the goal and that the dogs should be able to do whatever interests their owners.
I am endlessly disheartened to hear breeders say, "I wouldn't consider breeding to 'xxxxx' dog, it doesn't work." or, "I wouldn't consider breeding to 'xxxx' dog - I don't like it or its owner!" - all regardless of the other plus points such matings would add to the future generations.

The split into 'Working' and 'Show' in my opinion is not between the dogs, but between the owners/breeders - their attitude towards each other shows the biggest rift of all - both are equally scathing about the other and, except in a few cases, equally misinformed and prejudiced.

Thirty five years ago, I approached 'working people' about working my Irish Setter. The hoots of derision that greeted the fact that she was Wendover and therefore could not possibly work, certainly convinced me!! Believing them, I took to the showring until my last Irish Setter, 'show-bred' for generations out of sight, to my great delight, proved that he COULD work and with very little help from me!

Being involved with 'proper Setter' Gundog Training for IRWS (and others) as I am, I am convinced that the dogs - (you cannot tell by their performance whether they are 'show' bred or 'working' bred) actually know how to work, but it is the total lack of knowledge of their owners that requires 99% of the training!!!

Now, there is Work and there is Field Trial and there is a big difference here too. I am told to succeed in a FT you need a lightweight, very fast, stylish dog and producing this type is being consistantly bred for - dogs that work well, find birds but at a slower, more comfortable pace are not so desirable.
This brings us to breeding for a small group of particular traits and the excluding of other qualities that make up the 'whole' dog.
The same example can be used for the breeding for a small group of particular traits and excluding other qualities in 'show-bred' dogs.

If Setter breeders continue to breed along these lines the future looks grim. Meanwhile, given the chance, our dogs will show that they can work and look beautiful.... moderation and mutual respect for all the activities our dogs, through us, are engaged in is where we should be aiming and more interaction across the whole of each individual breed.

The trouble with Dogs is People!

[Susan Stone]

quote: "This brings us to breeding for a small group of particular traits and the excluding of other qualities that make up the 'whole' dog."

... and of course makes breeding so much easier, as it is possible to alter just a small group of traits within a couple of generations. Breeding gets so much more complex when you have to keep the whole picture in mind...

Moderation and mutual respect are the key words.

[Henk ten Klooster]

Ann your question "Does Doom and Disaster loom for Setters?" is best answered by scanning the history of Irish red and white setters. When we already have answers provided by history lessons, why wait umpteen years from now?

Since closed registry began, one of the main targets of selection in Irish setters was removing white on red. How is a question mark and differs per culture, but for sure simply killing was one instrument. This is the most hidden part of Irish setters history. Hidden, because most of our breed history is proven biased.

While cuddling our complete redcoats, we often forget nowadays that it was that history, providing our favorite breed its main attraction. Other color varieties such as white on red/ shower of hails, nearly vanished. Not in the working fraternity where quite a few still knew performance tells its own and better story and color is just that.

So your question is already answered by history: the red and white Irish setter would not even exist today, when the "leading show opinion" would have been the only rule obeyed. And in this case, most kennelclubs did not safeguard a rich culture & history, for red and whites documented by a lot of -sometimes famous- paintings. Until just a few decades ago....

Your questions. "How deep and wide is the split between 'Working' and 'Show' Setters?" Luckily so deep and wide, that the red and white Irish setter still lives amongst us today.

"Will breeding for excellence in only one discipline cause, through inbreeding for single particular traits, the decline of breeds?" Yes, that is documented by under more the IRWS.

"What is wrong with just breeding healthy dogs that can succeed in the field and the ring?" Nothing. Start doing it or in your case: promoting. So invite for example people that DISAGREE with the leading opinions of the showfraternity of your club for your 25th anniversary lectures. And don't forget: the best friend tells you the truth.

"Is the extreme of performance or beauty worth risking your breed for?" Probably Nobody will say YES here. But in practice, almost every topic or blog post here shows people think it is worth the risk or they don't know its risky. From whatever place on this world there are successes in showrings, most are related in an alarming degree, not showing up in a four generations pedigree....

Although in our setterworld it is possible to breed coi's around zero so the best assurance of a healthy future it is nearly not done. Why?