I enjoy checking out Labrador breeders websites, and one of the things I've noticed when viewing the field Labs sites is the use of English Labs for stud. My question is If you have a Ch. English lab stud why would you breed him with a field lab? I'm not a breeder, but if I was I don't know if I'd want to mix the two. I'm just curious as to why a breeder would let her males lines go into the field lines. Please be nice:)

I would allow it to a bitch with proper health clearances that is competing in field work.
Why not?
After all, isn't it all breeders goals to produce the best all around labradors anyway???

$

It could be for the same reason they are allowed to breed to any bitch - to help improve upon the structure of the bitch while attempting to maintain a strong desire to retrieve. If the bitch has all of her clearances and has proven herself in some way (i.e., the field)then why not? There are plenty of stud dog owners that permit breedings to mediocre show-bred bitches that have never proven themselves at all.

Well, considering I just did such a breeding (except I called it a field/show cross), I'll tell you that I wanted to improve the looks of a wonderful retriever.
There are some field breeders out there who are trying to work towards the standard while retaining the strong desire to retrieve....
I surely hope you wouldn't fault us for that....
I'm certainly glad the owner of the stud dog I used trusted my judgement.

I prefer to call it field vs. correct type. All Labs go back to English stock. And when they call my dogs "blockheads" it just makes me crack up.

Nancy, don't you just love the "blockhead" term!! I actually had a puppy buyer call and tell me she had a 10 year old female blockhead and would like to get a puppy blockhead. Must be a new breed, hmmm??

There are plenty of show dogs with alot of drive for field. There are nice field dogs that the owner wants to improve on looks. Alot of hunt test guys really want a better looking working Lab. Why not help improve both. More power to the stud dog onwer that goes in that direction. Saying that, I wish the field breeders would do more Limited Registrations. This part I don't agree with.

Wow a new breed varietal? *G* Me, well I get the call for the Otter Tail breed!!

The distain you show for the folks who call in hopes of offering a good home for the puppies you breed never ceases to amaze me. Now go ahead and say you didn't mean it that way and criticize me for mentioning this. I don't think it's funny to have inside jokes about these people. How often to you think they get a new puppy? So what if they don't use the terms you like.

I think saying "field versus correct type" implies that ALL working dogs are ugly and not of correct type. That is an inaccurate assessment.

I frequently combine "show" and "field" lines, but I also have field lines that are of correct type according to the breed standard (which may be differnt from whatever style is popular in the breed ring at the moment).

MK

Nancy,Who do you mean by 'they ' ? that cracks you up.

I happen to agree with your analogy. We all get calls or emails asking if we have block heads, English or American type or for white labs.

We can educate gently or just ignore the improper terminology. I prefer to educate a puppy buyer willing to learn. They are not showing their pups, they are looking for a family pet and prefer a certain look. If you read some of the puppy mill style websites incorrect terminology is used, sure that's where some people find it. The didn't make it up or look to insult quality breeders that they might want a puppy from.

I agree.

Show-bred dogs with little or no desire to work have no more type than field bred dogs with incorrect conformation. Type includes both temperament/desire to work AND correct physical appearance. Yes, there are many show bred dogs that have a strong instinct to retrieve, just as there are field bred dogs with correct structure. However, there are many from both styles that are missing one or the other. I think part of the reason for this is that many field breeders are breeding more for desire than physical type, and many show breeders are breeding for physical type without any consideration for drive. The dogs may or may not have this drive, but it is not always an attribute that is regularly evaluated or specifically selected for when breeding.

MK, you are absolutely correct in saying that not ALL field dogs possess incorrect type. However, I'm always careful about using terms like all, always, never, etc. If only one in a hundred field dogs had correct type, you would still be correct in saying not ALL have incorrect type. So? I still think you are more likely to find field dogs that can lick the last drop out of the bottom of a coke bottle, than you are to find conformation dogs that don't have a clue when it comes to retrieving. In my humble opinion, the future of our breed would be well served if obtaining a CC was a prerequisite to running in performance events. I know the flames are coming, but life is truly too short to hunt with an ugly dog.

I think requiring a CC to obtain a full Field Trial CH is a good idea, but I also think obtaining a full breed CH should require at least a WC as well.

According to the bylaws of The Labrador Retriever Club, Inc., members aren't supposed to use "CH" for a dog unless the dog has also earned at least a WC as well.
---------------------------------------------

"ARTICLE VI
Standards for Use of the Title "CH"

SECTION 1. Restriction. No member of the Club shall use the title "CH" in front of the name of a registered Labrador Retriever dog until said dog, having won a conformation championship, shall also receive a working certificate or the equivalent as defined in this Article.

SECTION 2. Requirements. The minimum working certificate requirements shall be designed to establish that the dog is not gun-shy: accordingly, the dog will be expected to retrieve a shot game bird at a distance of 50 yards or greater on land; further, the dog will be expected to retrieve two ducks from swimming water 1 in immediate succession to establish the dog's willingness to reenter water. Shackled birds shall not be used for a working certificate test. Only shot birds shall be used on land, and only shot birds or freshly killed birds shall be utilized on the water. Steadiness is not required so a dog may be held on line, however the dog may not be released for the retrieve until the bird has fallen. Any reasonable command and gesture may be used to direct the dog to retrieve and return. Nothing may be thrown and no coercion may be used to encourage completion of a retrieve once the dog has been initially released to retrieve.

SECTION 3. Qualification. Any dog that has satisfactorily completed both a land and water series in a field trial licensed by The American Kennel Club, or has received a placement or judge's award of merit in a field trial sanctioned by The American Kennel Club, has successfully completed an AKC Junior Hunter Title, or has achieved at least one (1) leg on a Senior or Master Hunter Title shall be deemed to have satisfied the working certificate requirements. In addition, a working certificate requirement may be satisfied by establishing to the satisfaction of any current member of the Club's Board of Directors that the dog in question has performed in accordance with the minimum requirements set forth above."

Did want a silver or white blockhead???

I must agree with Greg....Life is to short to hunt with an ugly dog. I also have to say that I admire people with "field bred" dogs who want to improve upon their breedings by going to a "confirmation" bred dog. I can't tell you how many times I have been told that my dog is too fat or my personal favorite "what is he mixed with???". My standard answer has become "he is bred according to the standard of a labrador".

I have a nice healthy boy that is not of the field look. People always ask me what he is or what he is mixed with. Always the same response, he doesn't look like the Labs I grew up with.

From now on when people ask what he is, I am going to tell them, He's a Poodle!

Life is also too short to hunt with a dog that is stubborn, lazy or has no interest in putting in a long day's work, and I admire conformation breeders who prove their breeding stock to ensure that work ethic is maintained in each successive generation.

WOW
I guess I never read all of this, but it is a great idea that we will never live to see. I have show dogs that are very birdy except one bitch who would rather not Thank You. I like the idea but just imagine if every breed had to show function for which it was originally intended - Dog Shows would maybe have 30 entries
I also get puppy people calling for a blockhead pup, kind of cracks me up but if I am in a good mood then I take the time to explain, I also get calls for a tall and narrow Labrador. I would hope that most of our Labradors can and would pass at least a WC, SIGH ....in a perfect world.....

At least you don't have people asking if your dark Lab is a Golden because of his color.

I don't think dog shows would lose entries, I just think there would be fewer true champions. The UK has show champions and full champions and I think their show entries are fine. A dog that would rather not retrieve should not be called a Champion Labrador Retriever.

As far as the LRC requirement goes, it only applies to LRC members. I just wish they would have a similar CC requirement for Field Trial Champions.

"I've noticed when viewing the field Labs sites is the use of English Labs for stud. My question is If you have a Ch. English lab stud why would you breed him with a field lab?"

I don't think this practice is very common in field trial breedings; hunt test breedings, probably. If you bring show blood into field trial lines or vice versa, you pretty much guarantee that the offspring (at least at the first generation) won't be competitive at the Open and Amateur level or in the show ring. They will probably make great obedience, agility, hunt test and hunting dogs and can probably compete in the Qualifying stake successfully (my trainer has a field/show cross Lab that just got his first Qual JAM about a month ago) and probably will look more substantial. However, such outcrosses are unpredictable (you can get a show looking dog with field trial desire or you can get a field-looking dog with little or no desire or any combination of the above) and probably less popular because of that.

No, but....I have had him called a Burmese Mountain Dog! People are so funny! That is why I have decided to tell people he is a Poodle. Let's see what they say then.
I too giggle when I hear them called Golden Labs and White Labs. I am definitely not an expert and did not know this either before doing my research for my boy. It is great to have kind Breeders who are willing to educate us. I really appreciate it!

Or a pit bull 'cause he's red...

Someone once asked if a boy that I was putting a CD on, was a chow mix. To be fair, he's short and has an open coat.

Thanks everyone for the input. If I could ask one more question. How did field labradors come to look different than English labs. Example: leaner face, taller, more energy! thanks again.

I'm not going to say I didn't mean it that way, because I did mean it that way!! Wouldn't you think it was funny if you got an email that read "We have a 13 year old Blockhead and would like to get a puppy Blockhead." They didn't even mention the word Labrador. I'm sure I crack people up too when I 'm entering into a conversation subject that I don't know much about. Go ahead, laugh at me....it's all good!

"If I could ask one more question. How did field labradors come to look different than English labs. Example: leaner face, taller, more energy! thanks again."

Selective breeding for different traits.

Have read before that in some instances there were other breeds introduced into Labrador lines. The ones I have seen in writing are the Border Collie and Greyhound or Whippet. If you look at some Feild LInes it is easy to see. Look at the eyes, ear sets, tuck up of belly and long whip like tails.

"The ones I have seen in writing are the Border Collie and Greyhound or Whippet."

I'd be interested to see the sources that you've found. I have heard Greyhound and Whippet before but only in online forums or on webpages w/o concrete evidence. Never heard the border collie one.

It is documented in respected sources though that in England breeds like Setters were crossed with Labradors and "interbred" (with other retrievers not sight-hounds) dogs were allowed to compete in early field trials in the US. Lorna and Tom Quinn come immediately to mind as discussing these crosses.

In his excellent book "The Show Labrador Retriever in Great Britain and Northern Ireland. 1945-1995, Volume One", Richard Edwards, Lasgarn, UK, tells it all. Edwards write: "Foreign blood was introduced because it was felt that it had something to contribute to the Labrador."
In the early days there were crosses with Flatcoats, Pointers, Whippet/Greyhounds, Sheepdogs, Foxhounds, Elkhounds and Chows.
"The Whippet influence still exists with the very lightly got up dogs with their fine bone, arched backs, all very tucked up throught the loin, and their little bits of string for tails", Richard Edwards write.

Anki, thanks, that is a great response to all. Hoping none of that pops up in my next litter. What a surprise. Whoa !

"If I could ask one more question. How did field labradors come to look different than English labs. Example: leaner face, taller, more energy! thanks again."

There is another thread going on right now ("What breed is it?") that evolved into a discussion of this topic as well. The thing I have noticed is that what is referred to now-a-days as English Labs does not look anything like dogs from England. It seems to me that actual English/British Labs are somewhere in the middle of American Show labs and American Field Labs. Also, American Field labs look very much like the old time English labs that were the foundation of the American Show Lab.

It is to the point when someone calls my home looking for an English puppy, I have to clarify......Do you want a big blocky dog that is often referred to as being English, or do you want a more moderate dog like the ones actually being shown in England?

The funny thing is that I am a boring moderate and can see both sides. I find that a dog with more substance is more pleasing to the eye, but it also seems to me that all other things being equal, a slighter dog is much more functional in many hunting situations. If I were King of the dog world I guess I would like to see more value and acceptance given to different types. The key would be to recognize quality within each type.

Now having said all that........it still bugs me that the phrase English Lab appears to be used very much incorrectly. And also that many show people assume that the big, bulky lab is better breeding, often to the point of arrogance. Again, I am not saying the more substantial lab is necessarily poorly bred, but it is equally valid to prefer more moderation.