As a percentage how many show type springer's do you get in, and of those with issues which type are they.

I have no idea about the amount of show springers in rescue, but judging by the fact a friend of mine really struggled to find a litter of show bred springer pups when he was looking (going back a good few years now though) I would imagine they are few and far between.

[QUOTE=Moobli;2171141]I have no idea about the amount of show springers in rescue, but judging by the fact a friend of mine really struggled to find a litter of show bred springer pups when he was looking (going back a good few years now though) I would imagine they are few and far between.[/QUOTE]

Me too,

As far as my job goes, I find working type Springers the absolute worst dogs to groom. They tend to be totally hyper and very highly strung. I've never had an issue with a show type Springer however. I think the working type are far more indiscriminately bred with no regard for temperament. I have also seen some terrible conformation issues with them, and also with other popular pet breeds. Needless to say these are all the product of back yard breeders.

Back yard breeders breed to sell dogs. Show breeders (mostly) breed when they want a pup for themselves, meaning that more thought and consideration has gone into the mating. I'm not saying that all show breeders are wonderful, I can think of some straight away who do see their dogs as livestock, but I don't believe that they are the norm. Most people who show don't breed anyway, and most of those who do breed do it with care and consideration. The main problems with pedigree dogs today are IMO caused by back yard breeders. Yes there are some breeds with issues which needs addressing, but there are many many more that are healthy and sound.

great post

[QUOTE=Jackbox;2171145] And I wonder what makes working bred springers or working bred collies the first choice as a pet for some people? Is it the fact they are more widely available? They are cheaper? You can in many cases go with your money and take your pup away without any questions asked?

I don't have these answers, just pondering really.

I agree that indiscrimate breeders (neither show nor working people - but just dog breeding for breeding sake ie to make money) have a large part to play with the huge problem of dogs in rescue in this country The other huge problem is people buying a dog when a) they don't really want one b) they don't realise the work and commitment involved in taking on ANY dog c) they see dogs as disposable and/or d) they buy the totally wrong sort of dog for their lifestyle.

I think most springers round here come from the farms---every farm seems to have a collie and a springer---which is also why there are so many crosses of those two breeds.

Coincidentaly I have a show springer here at the moment and he doesn't seem to have anything like the stamina Etta has----but that could be that he isn't used to so much rushing about. He seems quite calm for 7mths---and very big!

rune

I am on the fence when it comes to the show vs working.
In my eyes, they should be one and the same. Plus I think that show dogs should be required to "do" what they were bred to do as part of the showing/breeding process (if that makes sense) In my eyes, a cocker should be able (and do) a days shooting, and then be in the ring the next day.
In the case of breeds who were bred as companion dogs, they should have to be PAT dogs, or similar. On top of that, all dogs should have health testing, and temperament testing before being allowed to breed (which should again be part of the working/showing/breeding process)

There are very bad show breeders, as there are very bad working breeders. The reverse is also true. I have no problem with people x'ing breeds to make an animal more suited to what they need (for a job or a sport) IF health tests are done, and permanent homes can be found (ie no morons allowed)

In the case of "working" bred dogs being too much for people, is it not the case that these people maybe shouldnt have got a Springer/Cocker/Lab in the first place, and should have got a breed that is more suited to their lifestyle? Getting a show bred one purely because you may get one that is easier to manage is (IMHO) a daft logic.

As for whether working breeders stick to the breed description, same can be said for show breeders. Some Rough Collies I have seen look like giant Poms, and some of the GSD's around here are very badly bred (and Having spoken to their owners come from a show breeder here in Kent)

I dont mind the concept of Crufts (tho having been, I got annoyed with not being able to move) but I do think the whole show concept needs to be completely overhauled, and health testing enforced.

The English Setters were deliberately bred to be different...there are the laveracks and the Llewellyns, one for show and one for working. I have the show variety and have to admit that the working type do not appeal to me at all...I like a large dog with plenty of glamorous coat and feathering, these dogs have stamina and still have the hunting instinct in them, well mine always have anyway, but they would be seriously hampered in the field because of their coats and size.

With regards to PAT dogs you cannot just insist that the companion dogs should be PAT dogs, PAT dogs have to be tested and not all companion dogs would be up for the job, but there is nothing to say they can't just be well loved pets. I know of show dogs that are also PAT dogs

How would you police the temperament test of a dog before allowing it to be bred from? There is no governing body that tests temperaments as there is for hip scoring etc., it is, as always, down to the good breeder/bad breeder syndrome. If all of us that breed, and consider ourselves to be good breeders that only breed from health tested and good tempered dogs, still did everything we do, there will always be the puppy farms and BYB's not adhering to rules and regulations...they are not policed now and never will be.