| Archive for workinghprs.myfastforum.org Chat forum for owners of working HPR and Versatile gundog breeds. |
| guy |
conformation faultsIt would be most interesting to read different peoples 'order of priority' for things and the point at which it doesn't matter anymore.As - is out at elbow a worse fault than too tall? is lack of rear angulation better than cow hocks? (before any think I am trying to 'get at' any judge this post is in response to the new direction another thread is taking, I thought I had better start a new topic) |
||||||
| windem bang |
To be honest Guy it doesn't matter too much to me. If a dog works well then I am likely to like it. By work well I mean a dog that wants to and which can run on and on - work on and on. If it can do that then whether its hocks are conforming to some breed standard or other hardly matters at all.
Bill T. |
||||||
| cressy |
Having had a dog out at elbow, a dog with lax pasterns and a dog who is too tall I know which I prefer.
Freddy the WSS struggled after he was 5 to maintain his activity as he was out at elbow and also he had arthritic feet, possible due to early nurture (or lack of) and it was sad to see. Brice the deeriehound has lax pasterns that so far don't seem to be giving him problems BUT he is a large and athletic dog who will be 5 on sunday, he may well have problems down the line and I will manage him to keep him fit and active as long as possible. He isn't worked but he is from an active live so as much as a pet can exercise with an owner who wants to keep a sofa hog active  he will be forced to run  .
Now Chase is on top of breed standard and over if he is on his toes , otherwise he is very soundly made and can run and run - no contest, my rather large breton is the one I prefer to own as he is in proportion and as such is unlikely to overstrain any specific area of his body. Yesterday he spent 2 hours running in full sun even if it was unproductive (dam trail bikes on private land) and would have carried on but he was getting frustrated not finding anything so we called a halt.
Moo was a sturdy, sound dog who aged 12.5 and having a touch of arthritis was still working as his desire outweighed any physical reason to rest. But had he been like Fred I can't imagine will would have outweighed pain. Aesthetics in one sense don't matter to me but construction and what it can cost does - can you tell I was an orthopaedic nurse in the past  ?
|
||||||
| guy |
Bill - I was thinking more on the lines Sue has come back with not conforming to a standard - i meant dogs in the big picture.
I think in a hunting dog the ability to find game has to be a given - much like an airplane has to be safe. |
||||||
| BritAnnie |
All of those are faults but one doesn't judge by faults alone. IMO A dog that is out at the elbow is incorrect, a dog that is cow hocked is incorrect. Angulation in our breed is specific - a dog that is over or under 140 degree angulation at the rear or 120 degree at the front is incorrect. A dog with equal angulation front and rear is incorrect. These dogs are all likely to be moving unsoundly and /or atypically.
A dog that is above 52 cms is also incorrect as being above standard but may not be unsound, nor incorrect in any of the above ways. Therefore, in a ring where all dogs present have such faults the tall dog would be placed before the others. Size is actually fairly easy to control - mate a large dog to a small one and you will get a variety of sizes. Mate a medium dog to a medium dog and you will get (mostly) medium dogs. |
||||||
| munstyman |
Not sure my contribution will be worth it, as articulating the finer points of conformation isn't my thing  I know the basics but at the end of the day when I cast my eye over a dog I tend to evaluate it as an complete package, especially on the move. Now I know some will be able to say the reason a dog moves a particular way will be due to a specific `slope of shoulder' or `turn of stifle', but to me it will either move right or not and it will either catch my eye or send it elsewhere
I must admit to not being a fan of `stacking' a dog in the show ring, as it plays into the hands of those hiding faults, a dog standing loose is much more inclined to show its natural `balance', I will be interested in others views on this 
I also have to admit I have a real bug about `moving close behind!' and I would love to be educated. In all the years I've watched dogs trotting around a ring, I've never been convinced that a dog trotting square looks right or even comfortable/natural. At the same time I've studied video of wild dogs wolves and even foxes and they all move `close behind' and look right when they do it, so has nature got it wrong 
I think endurance is very important in our breeds, after all there is nothing worse than training a dog for five years only to find at seven its joints are worn out due to it not being made right, and the best way to see that is not in a show ring where a dog is `veteran ' at seven but watching `grand parents' of ten or more still running about a field
Peter |
||||||
| Mike |
Re: conformation faults
I think it is all a matter of degree and the root cause. Heavily muscled dogs can be out at elbow and still go flat out all day (thinking of the heavily roaded American Field trial dogs) Moderate angulation at the rear has surely got to be better for the long term working ability of a dog (thinking of the bloody awful GSDs who seem to have absurd rear angulation and bugger all stability, surely the worst of all worlds) but I would think more important is a good balance front to rear? Cow hocked may not look great but IIRC is in moderation a desireable feature in working sheep dogs and as peoples livelihoods used to depend on them I am pretty sure it is there for a reason... As for to tall, I guess it isn't a problem in smaller breeds but I really hate the modern trend towards bigger and bigger dogs, whilst I am no great fan of the fine detail of breed standards I really do think that size is important on a number of fronts, not least in helping to define a breed but also bigger dogs suffer more wear and tear to the joints over the years, they have to shift more weight around which means they can tire quicker, they can make more noise, it is harder for them to jump obstacles etc. etc. Obviously there are exceptions but it stands to reason that bigger isn't necessarily better. I prefer my dogs to be medium to bottom end of breed standard (but still inside )
Must admit I have changed my mind about slightly roached backs, which whilst I don't like the look of them do seem to offer the dog plenty of advantage in terms of "springiness" in the mid section and seems to reduce the required effort for movement at speed and improve reach at speed. I guess it all comes down to what you want to do with your dog and for how many years! |
||||||
| windem bang |
I know just about nothing about conformation but a bit like Peter I know what I am looking for when a I see a dog "getting about the place."
I've never had to retire a dog due to bone or muscle problems. Nearly every dog I've had has succumbed to one filthy form of cancer or another. How I hate that disease ! Bill T. |
||||||
| langhaar |
You won't find cow hocks, roach backs, lack of rear angulation and elbows out in racing greyhounds , foxhounds and racehorses.
May be Huntsmen are true dog breeders, looking at the conformation in a modern pack one can see genuine breeding " fit for function ", they are realistic about conformation faults and working faults such as when a hound pays too much attention to deer. Perhaps we accept a far lower standard in gundogs. Is a beautiful head with a body containing minor faults preferable to a "workmanlike " head with a body with no faults? |
||||||
| terrier |
I have spent many many years in hunt kennels.Most,not all,huntsman and/or masters are true "hound" men/women.Hounds have got to perform in the field before being even considered in the breeding plans.A hound that can hunt maybe 50-60 miles a day,at least twice a week,is built for the job."out at the elbow" or "incorrect angulation of hock" makes the hound unable to do such a punishing job so they are culled.I would say the biggest advantage hound breeding as got over gundog/any breed of dog breeding is NO MONEY IS INVOLVED in breeding hounds
|
||||||
| BritAnnie |
Probably because hunts have so many of them they are worthless! We are talking here about individual dogs that are of correct breed standard, not hundreds of mediocre ones that can run like stink after a fox. |
||||||
| terrier |
And that post sums up this forum to perfection.Good night and good bye  
|
||||||
| josie |
I really hope you're not going to leave us, "terrier", and that, if you disagree with Annie, you feel able to take it up with her and explain why...
|
||||||
| munstyman |
BritAnnie wrote:
This is where I get a tad confused, if a dog does not meet the breed standard or is not sound, why is it given an award in the show ring? I thought it was a requirement of all dogs entered to meet the breed standard, and that judges were capable of removing those that weren't ( assuming they know the standard for the breed in the first place )
Surely, that while a judge may have preference to a `type' within a breed or a heirachy of faults and perspectives and place accordingly, they should not be placing stock outside the breed standard, or am I being a little niave or perhaps expecting too much
I would suggest that IF the REAL `value' of a dog or hound is based on ability to function in its required environment there are many hunts sitting on a pretty penny The fact that there is more money washing around in the `dog world' and fools prepared to spend it on un-proven `mediocre' stock thus creating market value to all stock does not mean you get a better product at the end of the day
Peter |
||||||
| BritAnnie |
I said that the 52 cms plus dog would be placed above the others I didn't say it would definitely get a place in real life. This was a hypothetical proposition from Guy, not actual fact. Every judge has the ability to withhold any place. | ||||||
| countrygirl |
And how I wish judges would withold more too incorrect dogs as hight is my personal bug bear and I hate to see Gwp's and other hpr's creaping up bigger and bigger and no longer 'medium sized hunting dogs' more like small sheltland ponies.
I have to disagree with Annie over foxhounds, as if they were not correctly built they could not work the long days they do, you may not like hunting, but the fact is they only breed from the best and anything that dosent come up to scratch is culled,(much as our dogs home countries have done) and not passed on to some unsuspecting mug that then decided it would be 'nice' to have a litter from their badly constructed, ill tempered sub stangered dog or bitch.  or better still cross it with something else to make a nice new 'breed' to make a bit of money
Caz |
||||||
| Bareve |
OK then as a hunt follower with the Cottesmore and Fernie hounds for many a year how is it that so many hounds are virtually upright in pastern, stand over at the knee and toe in - do these dogs eventually break down or do they keep going year out and year in? And can anyone explain why they "love" the "wheelbacks" over the level toplines?
I agree that the true huntsmen are real dog men and they do have an eye for "balance" and "quality" probably more in general terms than most but I still think the biggest asset a hound has to be a successful member of the pack is to have "desire" 
|
||||||
| Bareve |
Say nothing about the close hind quarter movement - some of them wouldn't need matches to start a fire
|
||||||
| langhaar |
You won't find a hound more than 6 years of age in a kennel if that, unless its a really good broodbitch or stud. They will pay the price earlier if they can't keep up with a pack thro conformation or working faults. In my own experience with the Pychley, Bicester and Grafton I've never seen such conformation faults in their packs, only in the riders to hounds
They can run like stink because they are built to do this.
Hunts have stud books going back to the 18th century unlike our gundog breeds. As for their worth in the 19th century a pack ( the Berkley ) was sold for over a thousand guinea's which was a phenominal amount at that time. I know a beagle huntsman who wanted a pack at a certain height and culled until he achieved it and those who had a tasting for deer were culled too. In our breeds we may sell off our poorer stock to the pet market and give owners the right to breed as countrygirl so rightly says. As for judges withholding this takes a strong one to do this and I've listened to the stories of venom directed at the judge who has with held in our house. As for desire this seems to be of little significance at some levels of testing in the UK , a dog at a trial who has poor desire to enter water but eventually swims and retrieves may not to be penalised.How much desire do you need in our breeds in a 10 minute run at a trial
|
||||||
| munstyman |
BritAnnie wrote:
I think that this is one of the problems I have with the `show' system, in real life they ARE getting placed and IMV they shouldn't. Even if first is witheld, giving a place still panders to the illusion or dillusion of the owners AND the breeders.
Bareve wrote:
This adds to my earlier post in that are these actual faults to the dog or faults in our understanding of conformation ( what the hell is a `wheelback'  )
I can see the problem with `very close' hind movement but I'm still waiting for an explaination of why close is worse than square, I'm trying to learn something here and find out if it is correct or just fashion, after all we may think we can improve on nature, but lets face it we haven't got a good track record in the long term  My own theory is that much of what we see ( of conformation) has come from the horse breeders and breeding and not all that is good for horses is good for dogs
Peter |
||||||
| windem bang |
Much ,much more than they need for a two minute trot around a show ring !
If I had a top class working dog I would probably breed from it even if it was unsuitable for the showring . The show people do the same , they breed from what "works" in the ring even if the dog is an unproven worker. Bill T. |
||||||
| langhaar |
iN THE STANDING POSITION THE DOG'S LEGS ARE PARALLEL AND MAY SEEM TO BE PARALLEL AS HE STARTS TO WALK BECAUSE AT THE WALK THE BODY IS SUPPORTED BY 3 LEGS WITH EACH STep and there is a problem with balance. However as the dog moves faster there is a natural tendancy for the limbs to reach inwards called " convergence " or the tendancy to single track. When a dog breaks into a trot his body is supported by only 2 legs at a time which move in alternating diagonal pairs. He must therefore balance himself as nearly as possible over a centre column of support in order to travel easily and efficiently, otherwise he will stray from side to side. To achieve balance his legs angle inwards towards a centre line beneath his body and the greater the speed the closer they come to tracking on a single straight line much as a human runs with one foot in front of the other to keep his body from rocking. Variations in the dogs height, breadth of body and length of leg influence the extent to which the legs incline inwards.
The angle of inclination begins with the shoulders and hips and in the majority of breeds the limbs should remain relativley straightt even if they flex or extend.Such action is described as moving straight. Flexion in the carpol joints keeps the swing legs from interfering with the supporting legs. The natural law of balance is on of the most important factors in understanding gait as dogs come and go from the viewer. Normal convergence should not be confused with the fault of " moving close ". " Dogsteps " Rachel Page will answer all your questions on gait Pete
That'll change when you have show judges at trials Bill
|
||||||
| windem bang |
Yes I read somewhere about that. It is a step in the right direction but I don't think I'll be happy until the show judges dogs are running in trials with the show judges handling them.
In order to do well in trials the show judges will then have to not just see what they are seeing but understand it too. Bill T. |
||||||
| BritAnnie |
Well, there are a few up and coming in the Brittany world, Bill, and I think you'll find a number of people on here are not only Championship Show Judges but also run their own dogs - with considerable success! Sharon Pinkerton springs immediately to mind! |
||||||
| langhaar |
Seems you're more optimistic than I am 
What is a show judge going to learn perhaps only that the working and show side are deeply divided in their ideals and too entrenched to be changed. This is a sorry state of affairs in the UK. |
||||||
| windem bang |
Yes Annie there are a few who do compete with their dogs in trials and who also compete and judge at dog shows .........but I'll bet that for every one who does that there are many more who dont !
I do try to be optimistic ................. maybe we will all see sense and split the breeds into show and work 
Bill T. |
||||||
| magyar viz |
is this a wheelback
sorry thought i might lighten the mood
|
||||||
| BritAnnie |
mood already lightened, Den - didn't you see Bill's smiley? | ||||||
| Mike |
And what do they all have in common? They are all selected purely on the basis of function, not infered function from "idealised" terms in a breed standard. I must appologise because it is precisely the arching of the back that you see in sight hounds that I thought was a "roached" back, you know the slight rise rather than a level topline? As for racehorses if you stop and think about the differences between a horse and a dog it is fairly obvious that the correct construction of one has little to do with the correct construction of the other. A typical HPR probably weighs in around 25-30Kg vs. 500Kg for a racehorse, a dog is a multi toed animal and a horse a single toed animal, a dog spine is constructed to bend vertically and horizontally whereas a horse's is constructed to restrict bending, a horses radius and ulna bones are fused (restricting rotation) but they aren't in a dog etc. etc. Fundamentally if a dog is selected on the basis of being able to do its "job" well and for prolonged periods of time (if relevant, as it should be in an HPR) and is bred from at a sensible age (i.e. older) when it is still able to do that job (which will remove those dog with construction faults that are relevant to the "job" in question) then it will be constructed correctly. |
||||||
| windem bang |
Yup - I'll agree with that. Bill T. |
||||||
| langhaar |
Cannine terminology came from the horse world. If you can understand the gait of a horse you can understand gaits in other breeds. The breeding of horses was fundamental as this was the only mode of transport for centuries,that's why breeders looked for correct balance ie angulations in the front and the back. Most early hunting was from horseback with falcons so hunting dogs had to be as balanced to keep up with their handlers. Horses were not only bred for function, the foundation of the thoroughbred came from stallions who were also pleasing to the eye such as the Darly Arabian. The Arabs have continued this philosophy down the centuries including those countries they conquered such as Spain and Southern Europe. Our original breeds were derived from the Silk dogs imported via the Silk Road "The DL's origins go back to the Seidenhund or Silk Dogs ( Canus Extrarius ) from the East, probably from China. The Silk Road became a link into Europe around 100 BC and lasted until the 15th C .It has a fascinating history of migration, military conquests, exploration, pilgrimage, interchange of philosophy and merchants who risked their lives for trade and profit .Many luxury goods were moved including dogs who were imported in vast quantities into middle and southern Europe. They were rather short with a stocky body and robust with strong, straight legs and a long coated tail with a flag. In Spain they became known as the “Spanieln” and were described as being the most beautiful of the Silk dogs, easy to teach, excellent swimmers but often had a difficult nature. They were especially adapt at hunting wild game and they became known as quail and partridge dogs or Huhnerhunds in Germany".
A combined history that goes back for centuries, no horses, no dogs, no hunting, no food. |
||||||
| langhaar |
|
||||||
| BritAnnie |
The Brittany or Epagneul Breton, is actually modelled on a French Cob Horse - there is a statue in the village of Callac of such a horse to which all French breeders aspire too. Callac was where the breed originated.
An outstanding dog in France was SKA DE SAINT TUGEN ( a black based tri-colour ), himself a Grand Champion and Grand Trialler, and also sire, grand-sire and great-grand-sire of many champions and triallers. SKA was the epitome of the Callac horse, being well ribbed, short coupled, well muscled and having great presence. Many British dogs are descended from him. |
||||||
| langhaar |
|
||||||
| guy |
Will Ska still be influencing dogs? he was of the 80's born 81 I think.
SKA 
The Callac Cob 
Champion Cob and Champion French Brittany at Genouilly a couple of years ago. 
Just need a picture of the current UK record holder for comparison. |
||||||
| BritAnnie |
There was such a lot of duplication of Ska in pedigrees that I still see his influence yet. That isn't the best photo of him though, not at a very good angle - Pierre might have a better one. The short loined, cobby body and rounded rump is typical. Too many dogs nowadays are being placed that have longer bodies(loins) and no 'bottom to them. I don't mind a bitch being a little longer - for carrying puppies - but the dogs really should look like that horse! (apart from the dippy back and the hump over the rump   . Never noticed that before! Must be the angle again)
|
||||||
| munstyman |
Langhaar wrote:
Absolutely brilliant explanation, many thanks Brenda Now just a matter of getting some `judges' to understand it
Now I know I might be blundering into a minefield but why `model' a hunting dog on an animal bred for draught work
Peter ( Still want to know what `wheel back' is )
|
||||||
| Bareve |
Gosh they are chunky cobs aren't they I would say they are more like a draught horse than a cob.
Wheelback - is the hound term to what Mike explained where the topline makes a very definite rise/arch across the loin making the topline "very slightly" curved - not like the arched loins that you get on the Greyhounds and Whippets though. |
||||||
| windem bang |
I can't believe that anyone would actually model what a hunting dog breed should look like based on that statue ! I would at once get rid of a dog that looked like that. A hunting dog is a running dog and the horse statues originator looks like it would have trouble beating the average donkey in a race !
If that's what is being aimed for in Brittanies then if I were a Brit breeder I would opt out . I would breed dogs that can do it in practice ,not in theory . I would be very pleased never to win a damn thing in the showring if my dogs had to look like that to do it ! Thank god they don't yet look like that. Bill T. |
||||||
| BritAnnie |
The Brittany doesn't 'run' like other gundogs. They have different angulation front and rear and a short loin. This creates a 'stilted' gait not a running one.
I hope to run a seminar early next year in the Edinburgh area where the movement can be demonstrated |
||||||
| langhaar |
You've never hunted on a cob then Bill ?
|
||||||
| BritAnnie |
They have been bred to resemble this cob for almost 160 years. They should still look like this. Mine do. They win in the show ring and they can hunt as well as any other gundog if not better. Anyway - enough of this for the moment. Perhaps we can agree that this is beautiful - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yb3XAP0c8WU |
||||||
| windem bang |
Nope I've never been hunting on a cob . Been on a carthorse to shoot foxes though ! It was steady to shot thank goodness and made a superb "stalking horse ."
I have also been on an Arab and on a "cold blood" - but I didn't try shooting from their backs !
So why would a stifled gait be wanted in a hunting dog ? My original brittany bitch would win no shows whatsover now but she did win two trials on grouse moors competing against G.S.P.'s and the other "big boys." She was not "cobby" - she could open out and really run. She had to in those grouse trials . The judge kept her running for 25 minutes on her 1st run - longer than any of the other dogs because he wanted to see if she could keep going - she did and she won. How many "proper or cobby" Brits have won a couple of grouse trials ? I really don't know the answer to that but I don't think there'll be many. I like dogs that can run with some fluidity - it seems like the brittany is being bred well away from my idea of a good running dog. Bill T. |
||||||
| langhaar |
personally I prefer a young colt to a mare
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzj9z8QDTfU |
||||||
| BritAnnie |
Not 'IS BEING' - ALWAYS HAS BEEN. Remember Vicky was half American - a different breed altogether nowadays, they have really changed it. |
||||||
| windem bang |
And so have the French . I have seen the old pics of brits - some looked like what you are breeding and some looked like Vicky ...........rather setterish. I prefer the settery type ,you prefer the horsey type. We always have just got to agree to differ.
Bill T. |
||||||
| guy |
I think a little confusion is creeping in. The Brittany was not a dog that was originally bred for the grouse moor but to work woodland and small pasture. The ability to weave in and out of thickets and around fallen trees, an ability to do that for an extended period. It was developed by a peasant economy for a peasant economy - it therefore had to be a good house dog as there were not always kennels. It was a dog about putting game in the pot not about 'sport'
The fact it is fast and it has endurance and is totally hung up on game finding brought it to a wider audience - it is now the most popular hunting dog in its home country. If you want manoeuvrable you need short, if you want endurance you need muscle and lung volume. What is it they say - Horses for courses. |
||||||
| windem bang |
It's nice if the dog can handle the grouse moors and the close in stuff though Guy . As you say its horses for courses, I just happen to like "dual purpose !"
Bill T. |
||||||
| guy |
I had two of mine out on heather the other day and was pleased with their performance; I enjoyed watching their two different styles. It was only a 40 min session - but neither stopped; although I think the dog had more still in him at the end than the bitch, but I think he is generally fitter.
I have an invitation to come North and work them your way later this year - am looking forward to that. It is all very well me saying my dogs are good - but much nicer to see them being good alongside other good dogs - that is real pleasure. Getting back to the thread a bit - these two dogs are of different conformation - it is hard even working them together to separate endurance because of conformation from endurance from physical fitness - I suppose it is an age thing? |
||||||
| windem bang |
An "age thing" is something I have great sympathy for !
I noticed years ago that Vicky the Brittany who when young could easily keep up with G.S.P.'s - or even outrun the less able ones - on a grouse moor was having trouble accepting her age. I had two G.S.P.'s by then and both of them were "grouse moor dogs." The younger G.S.P. was about 4-5 years younger than Vicky and he happened to be the best running dog I've ever owned . Vicky could never accept being left behind by him .........I eventually ceased to allow her to hunt with him because I think she would have killed herself trying to keep up. The "age thing" is a bugger ......................... 
Bill T. |
||||||
| Greymaster |
The original working cocker? Here
|
||||||
| langhaar |
A true Yorkshire Terrier bred to type
Brilliant ! |
||||||
| munstyman |
Bareve wrote:
Thanks Sharon, so whats the difference between wheelback and roached back And to answer your question as to why some hunt kennels are moving to a `wheelback' would that be to increase a turn of speed ( on the lines of the speed dogs  )
I have a soft spot for the Brittany ( mainly because I can enjoy their work while their handlers are pulling their hair out )
I can understand the reasoning to build a well muscled/small levered `power house' as a hunting dog, but I still can't see the logic in using a horse designed for pulling as the design blueprint, its abit like building a Formula One car on the designs of a John Deere, but then again dog breeders are a weird bunch ( Although some of them have good taste in music )
If certain conformation characteristics are determined by breed (historic), and certain characteristics are determined by the work they do ( which may be slightly different due to their location now) How does this balance out for the future Given that show judges may be attending trials to put function into form, will the function they see be representative for the breed, or will we see a divergence of trials to suit particular types of `historic' hunting similar to groupings on the continent, to validate their conformation
Peter |
||||||
| windem bang |
Those were some good questions Peter.
Personally I don't believe in sticking slavishly to what our great grand dads bred. The world has moved on since then. I don't believe in breed specific trials , if a dog is good enough it will beat the opposition. Some types of ground may suit one breed or one hunting style more than another. I don't mind at all if an owner of a close hunting dog enters it only in cover work trials that suit it . I would mind a lot though if those same trials were restricted to close hunting dogs only. If a handler is good enough to pull in a long range hunter and win a tight cover trial with it then good luck to him. His dog has proved it can handle both wide open ground and tight cover - that would be the kind of dog I would want. A real all rounder. If I had a dog that could only win in breed specific trials then I would consider it to be a second rate dog. Bill T. |
||||||
| Bareve |
From what I was told by the huntsman the wheelback on the hounds are very slight and barely noticeable whereas a roached back is more extreme rounding of the spine. Certainly the hounds that hunt with the Cottesmore and Fernie are only "slightly" rounded over the loins and I would think to the average person they would barely notice it wasn't a flat topline. As for why - it has to do with speed/turning ability as they would need to do when actually hunting but not the extreme speed or turning ability needed with a Greyhound so they wouldn't need the greater rounding over the loins that they have. JMO mind and I could be wrong
|
||||||
| langhaar |
Continental trials were based on English traditions up to the late 19th century ie on paired partridge in the spring. In 1883 Karl Brandt wrote in the " Illustrierten Jagdzeitung " ( a hunting magazine ) " at field competitions which should be part of a breeding programme, the dogs will hopefully prove that they have not lost their natural hunting ability during the years when only looks dictated breeding ( pre 1878 ) . The field trials held so far are useless in influencing the breeding programme of all round German dogs because they have only tested their ability to hunt in spring pointing tests." One has to remember the influence of Darwins theory on selection for breeding only became influential at this time. Before this there were no organised breeding programmes. With more knowledge on genetic influences a structured programme for the testing for all round working ability combined with conformation assessments became essential for breeding the best to the best. It also became acknowledged a formulated pattern of training was required to exploit and retain the hunting characteristics in a breed. The UK with its specialist emphasis in gundog breeds retained its trials on paired partridge and other game bird species were added when driven shooting became more accessible to the middle class . The trials for HPR's have always been influenced by these tradition for dogs working reared birds while in the rest of the world with a few exceptions like the US with planted birds, all work is on wild species. One could suggest the true definition of a UK field champion is a dog who can work reared and wild birds. Purists may insist a true champion in pointers and setters has won both grouse and partridge/pheasant trials. HPR's are not only field dogs but this is all we test for in the UK while other countries such as Australia and New Zealand are now more willing to protect the mutli game instincts in these breeds. Has the UK HPR field specialist dogma influenced breed type ? An example can be found in the GLP where their are 2 distinct types.
An Englishman will say yes while a German will go home shaking his head thinking why no tests for prolonged swimming and tracking
|
||||||
| munstyman |
Thanks again Sharon, I surmised as much but its always good to have it clarified from those that know I've increased my vocabulary two fold and no longer need to call it the wiggly bit
Langhaar wrote:
Think we will have to run our trials over two days then Brenda and go for a `McNab Trial' , itinerary: Day 1. A little jaunt across the moors to hunt some grouse. 3 ish break for lunch Move to Loch and hunt for duck Day 2. Early morning stalk. Breakfast ( Rounding up all those that drank to much the night before )
Off to wood to hunt some more feather and fur 3 ish finish Trial Congregate in the lodge for a fine supper and award the prizes.... " Sadly I have to announce that the only competitor that made it through both days was the Shetland pony bred to look like hunting dog" But on the positive side the two attending show judges improved their understanding considerably, they will now make sure that they only award dogs that make `clip-clop' sounds on the move, and fart when you pick their feet up
Peter |
||||||
| langhaar |
Peter You've not added the most important factors Peter , only if the shetland pony is kennel club registered and if its handler is a a kennel club member b is a friend of the show judges c if the handler can offer them something back in return
|
||||||
| Lynn |
|
||||||
| windem bang |
Ooooooooooooooh You are norty .........but how very true !
Bill T. |
||||||
| johnhod |
|
||||||