Nice article by Mary Weist in the new issue of LQ.

I wonder if Hoflin ever though about advertising for "advertising" an extra issue out. I saw the ad that said get a Performance ad in for you dog by March 1...which was 2 days after I got the magazine. I know the back tells what's coming up and after getting it for years, I kind of know. But I think if they want to keep the advertising fresh in folks minds, THIS issue should have advertised for the STUD issue...then some folks might think to do it.

My LQ arrived today and the first thing I did was to look for Mary Wiest's article. Her words ring true and they come at a very important time. I hope everyone reads the article and takes her words to heart. She is a great breeder and an insightful, intelligent woman.

I read the article and liked it very much also. Think she is right on. We have some lovely dogs and some that are somewhat over the standard. Good article, let us hear the message.

Me too! I liked Mary's article SO much in the last issue that I couldn't wait to see which topic was in discussion this issue. If you missed her article in the last issue it's a must read for sure!

I read the article on my lunch hour at the office today. Great read, very insightful, well thought out, and very true, sadly enough...

I wish there were more breeders like Mary out there who consider the overall affects the overdone dogs are having on the breed.

I attended a Specialty recently and was astonished by the size of some of the boys, in particular. Huge dogs, heavy boned, coarse heads, etc. Fortunately, the judges both days found beautiful, moderate Labradors for their BOB and BOS, as well as Winners Bitch (sorry, can't recall Winners Dog at the moment, but I suspect the same is true). I was also astonished by the size of the 6-9 month puppy dogs, they look full grown already.

I am a relative newbie, and I take it all in, then listen to folks like Mary who are the voice of reason and who give me inspiration to avoid the popular trend of "bigger is better" these days...

Unfortunately, I see other newbies getting puppies from and being mentored by popular breeders who insist that they "push the food" to help the puppy "grow more bone".

I get the "to each his/her own", but I'm saddened that there are those people who are compromising the breed...

Mary, keep it up. There are many of us listening to you!!

Whilst I trully admire Mary Wiest as a Pioneer in the Labrador in the United States community, I have to disagree with her opinion that we are getting too big, too much, etc. We as breeders are able to make our own decisions as to the "type" of Lab we like. There are breeders out there with dogs that are way too short on leg, so you can say we as breeders are breeding stock too short. I realise that this is only one person's opinion, and that is fine as long as that breeder-judge doesn't take it upon themselves to try and prove their point while they are judging

"Take it upon themselves to prove their point when judging" Isn't this exactly what a judge is supposed to do? Judge to the standard and give "their" opinion of which dogs on that day meet the standard as they see it?

I respectfully disagree. I believe we should be trying to achieve a Labrador that is as close to the standard as we can get. That is, a moderate dog with all the attributes that contribute to the working water retriever it was originally meant to be.

Actually, breeders shouldn't be breeding the "type of Lab we like". If everyone did that, we would lose the original breed type. Some people like heavy boned, some like longer open coats, some like coarse heads, some like no necks, some like feathering on the tail, some like short legs, and so on. I hope you can see my point.

If we all breed the "type of Lab we like", the Labrador breed and the Labrador enthusiast all lose.

Amen to that!

but that's why the same dogs don't win under all of the breeder judges, because they also like a "type" of labrador, that is within the standard. I think the one poster was just saying they would hate to see a breeder judge change what they usually would put up to make a point of how they'd like the dogs to change. That's how interpretated it.

Judges are people too, and consequently are subject to the same feelings as everyone else. If we didn't think some judges were better than others, we wouldn't be trying to figure out "what they like". That implies that a good judge likes what we as individuals like. So all things considered, judges who do not judge to the standard should not come as a surprise. And that is a shame. A vow to preserve the integrity of the breed should be required to become a judge. And that said, as suggested in the article, the FCI standard could well be followed in good conscience by a judge. It would be a good guideline as it virtually has world wide acceptance. It is not beneficial to lab people in the states to breed dogs that increasingly do not resemble labs in the rest of the world.

Except the FCI standard is NOT (unfortunatetly) the standard that is currently in place I the US. So even if judges in US are judging to FCI standard, they are not judging to our
standard :(. Catch 22 problem. Nobody is winning:(

So maybe if more people joined the LRC and were ACTIVE members maybe we could change the standard to FCI!

I agree with Mary Wiest that dogs are getting too big/too much. Recently saw a picture of a young bitch going Best in Sweeps at a young age - she was MASSIVE! What are we coming to? Labradors should not look like Newfie/Mastiff crosses!

Take a look at the dogs at Crufts vs what wins here much of the time - shocking! We need to understand moderate doesn't mean as big as you can possibly breed!

"Take it upon themselves to prove their point when judging" Isn't this exactly what a judge is supposed to do? Judge to the standard and give "their" opinion of which dogs on that day meet the standard as they see it?

Yes- they do, just as Mary did when she pulled the wicket when judging right after the standard passed. It was purely to prove her point.

Judges are supposed to find the best dog on any given day- and what is the "best" to one is not to another. That's what opinions are and standards are based on interpretation. To say that it's not is to treat looking at animal as if it were something mechanical that could be reproduced identically every time. It cannot. What is moderate to one person is heavy boned to another- and the list goes on. Just keep doing what you're doing and be happy with your dogs and quit worrying about everyone else. The breed will be just fine.

Yes, I suppose there will always be labradors, one way or the other. But if our labs continue becoming bigger boned, heavier, with more coat - overdone, English labs as opposed to American labs will take on an entirely new meaning.

What about the other end of the spectrum - dogs/bitches that are too short, and some 'fat' also! It seems every show I attend there are a handful of entries that look like sausages on short legs. I know, I know - you can't judge if a dog is fat unless you get your hands on them. But come one - rolls and rolls, short legs with no upper arm - that is hard to miss!!

I was at a show with a friend recently. This friend has another sporting breed. These people were commenting on how short and fat the Labradors they see at shows are - and they wonder how they could ever hunt? I really didn't join in the conversation because I know what they are talking about and I didn't have an answer for them.

I like reading Mary's opinions. I just don't get this size thing. I have a nice male, just about at the top of the height standard and 10 pounds over the weight recommendation. He has a normal coat, not the overly fluffy kind. He's solid as a rock. He looks thin compared to the other labs in the ring. I could never drop his weight to meet the standard without bones showing. I am not sure how we can even get a lab that's in shape to fit within the weight recommendation. Even my small male (from the well known lines we all know that tend to throw shorter legged dogs) and IN SHAPE he's 90# too. I can see why folks just form a picture in their head and try for that instead of looking at the standard too closely. We'd have to be breeding mini labs to get them into the standard or get used to seeing THIN dogs.