Try telling our true hairless that there meant to have bad mouthes!
You do get the cobby typed, the deer type and now there is also the in between type (which is what I perfere). There can be a massive variation in this breed in all areas.

Judges do like different types, some still want the true hairless, deer typed. where as others (most) are leaning more towards the hairy hairless that are more flashy type of the breed.

Also even the true hairless (mostly) still need abit of shaving, alot of people seem to think that its only the hairy hairless that grow bits in odd places but its not. The true hairless also can and do grow stubble in areas that get clipped off - clipping has been a part of this breed, for as long as them!. Powderpuffs have their faces, and a V necked shaved for the showing ring.

Hope I have answered what you wanted.

Soz DD, I heard somewhere that the true hairless because of something to do with their genes have bad teeth, I was going to ask how common it is also is there a way to breed it out to reduce any problems?

Must admit I've become more intrested in teeth after a odd convo at a Greyhound walk where I was asked about Honey and when I mentioned Saluki I got a reply 'she must have good teeth then' to say I was confused was a understatement until I asked them more about the comment, (aparently Greys have problems with their teeth, but when crossed with the Saluki the teeth are meant to be better), so I was wondering about other breeds with teeth problems, and the true hairless came up

Its alright, true hairless are said to have poor dentition and against the hairy hairless they do. One of the reasons that its said people started breeding the hairy hairless was to better the hairless mouthes, and also add glamour to the breed.
You can better mouthes by simply using perfect mouthes, there are true hairless out there with fab dentition. One breeder I know has nothing but true hairless, she is very agaisnt the hairy hairless, I have seen a number of her dogs and not one has had anything other than a perfect mouth. Their not the best shape wish (in my eyes) but regarding teeth, body hair and the like their nice examples. She may like the shape of her dogs but for me their to straight in the front (another thing assiocated with true hairess)!


Ohh and I cant stand to see a dog with a bad mouth...

I don't think dogs with bad mouths like it either can I ask though, as the breed were ratters were they ever docked like some terriers or did they always have a full tail? Its just something I've never thought of, but don't the CC have a thin tail?

Cresteds have never been docked. Yes they have thin tails, with fine hair.

I was just wondering because of the typical working terriers (with terriers I got told once that border terriers aren't docked because they have a strong thicker tail, and if you can't throw a BT by the tail its not a BT, but don't think that would be used at shows somehow lol), and thought that the CC was a skinny tailed breed, but then I suppose if a CC got injured on a ship by a rat or summat they would be used for their other purpose.

A Border should have a shortish tail that is thick at the base then tapering. Much like a carrot, except many look like whips and rat tails, HATE that!!!

Yep skinny tailed breed.. I love their tails! Heres Lyrics, you can see the tail through the hair!

I've not really seen too many border terriers, but there is a guy who owns a small holding who has a couple that he has bred before, but he takes pride in a good tail, he was the one who told me about being able to throw them by it, I think he said over a wall too, but I can see thin tails causing a problem for a working bred, espcially one that isn't traditionally docked. Is it certain breeders that bts with thin tails are coming from, or can it appear in different litters?

Lyric's tail is lovely, just be glad that your dogs aren't bigger, as then they aren't whip like tails, but whips, and hurt whoever is near when any wagging occurs

Thanks for all the Crested background - really interesting.

Not all ratting dogs have docked tails. I think docking is more important in terriers that work thick cover and especially that go to ground. Also, not all ratting dogs are automatically 'terriers'.

Plenty of breeds ended up in certain KC Groups because of the time in their history they were 'recognised' and the ineterests of the people who pushed for their registration.

For example, the Kerry Blue is one of my favourite breeds, but if you look at really old books, they were actually general purpose farm dogs; able to work livestock, keep down rats, do a bit of rabbitting on the side and were even trained as rough-shooting dogs. In other words, a good all-rounder

Irish Terriers were also more general-purpose, being bred up from earth dogs to create a general-purpose sporting dog able to work above ground, like a small lurcher - hence the longer length, racy outline and slight arch over the loin and muzzle that should be long enough to hold and retrieve a rabbit with ease. They were also expected to be good guard dogs.

Schauzers and pinschers both (I believe - but please feel free to correct ) came from the general-purpose German farmyard dogs - who moved beasts round the yard, kicked up a stink when strangers arrived and keep the rats down. I love the name Rattenfanger which is a type that is mentioned on some of the pinscher and schnauzer history sites.

Heelers were never docked and they are another multi-purpose farmyard dog (ratting and getting animals to move)- but officially in the Pastoral group.

It depends how you define 'terrier' I guess: do you start (and end) with the KC Group the breed falls into; or do you define it as a dog that goes to ground (terra being Latin for earth) or do you extend the definition to include a dog bred soley or partially for ratting and / or rabbiting?

I've gone waaaaay off-topic!

So, to bring it back (albeit tenuously) what do folk think about the way Kerries and Soft Coated Wheatens are being presented in the ring? Does it enhance the appearance of the dogs, or is it trying to make a 'classic terrier' out of breeds that were intended to be multi-purpose?

I've not mentioned Wheatens up til now because I know what I've read - but is it true?!!! I think the Kerries were identified as a separate breed to wheatens when the occasional blue pups were bred deliberately to create a distinct type. Not sure which of the 2 breeds was officially recognised first though. However, it seems to be the wheatens that found favour with the badger-diggers, so a few wheatens in the past did get very broad heads and fronts, while others were more racy and suited to less specialist work.

I hasten to add - I have never worked a terrier on badger - digging or baiting and nor will I!

In fact, why are Irish shown 'strung-up' the same as fox terriers, Lakies and Welsh, when the whole conformation is different and they should present the appearance of a dog capable of speed and agility?

where's that Border Dawn when you need her contribution? - Calling Dawn........