Labrador Retriever Forum

General Forum
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
Big to small

I have a small lab bitch, just under standard. Not short legged, just downsized. Would it be possible to breed her to a larger male without complications?

Re: Big to small

You'll get some small and some large. Is her dam and granddam good whelpers? I usually find that is more important.

Re: Big to small

Done that and it should not be a problem. Her puppies would be the right size for her when she whelps.

Re: Big to small

As long as she is balanced, I would breed her to a correct sized male who is also balanced. I would not breed her to a male who is larger than I like.

Re: Big to small

Not every dog should be bred. If a Labrador is not to standard I'd suggest to improve the breed one should not be breeding dogs who's traits can be passed on.

Isn't this why we have such a variance in the size of Labs today? Having a good mentor is very important.

Labradors were intended to be medium size "Gun Dogs", not small or large. If the intent of this breeding is to correct your lines I'd think finding a correct Bitch to breed builds your line. Not one who is incorrect. Reason is 50 % of the genetics is coming from your Bitch, so there is a 50% chance the pups will be small and not turn out medium.

While you are worried if she can have a normal whelping, you should be more worried that you have just kept the same issue in the pups.

What ever happened to seeing that a Labrador had Titles or Major Points before even thinking of breeding? Does this below average size "Bitch" even have any points?

Re: Big to small

I'm not sure how to say this without sounding snarky. If only bitches with titles were allowed to be bred, some of our most influential labradors would never have been born. Personally, I would rather be dealing with a bitch that is just a bit small as to be fighting some of the "hidden" problems in the breed. This person asked for an opinion on ease of whelping, NOT a lecture on whether or not their bitch should be bred. When one of us has absolutely NO problems in our own line, then maybe we can tell others what they should be doing. Stepping down off of my soapbox now....

Re: Big to small

I think I would find out what size the stud dog's mother and grandmothers were if you want to improve on size. His X chromosome is coming down from them.

I also would not breed to an oversized male to improve on size. Just breed to the most correct dog with a pedigree that works well with your bitch.

Re: Big to small

I have 2 girls here there are a product of using 3 straight generations of imported males. Yes, I now have girls near the lower end of the standard than on the high side like I use to. I actually prefer what I have now. There is more balance, and good qualities that I was looking for. In this process, I have had 2 of my pick(s) end up being 21 inch and another one slightly below. Most are consistantly between 22 and 22.5 inches. Right where I like them to be. I use males that fit my girls type and pedigree wise, while still trying to improve them. I use males of correct size, and have had no problems. You want to stay away from fixing any points by using "exagerations" to over compensate for a fault or failing.

The 2 girls both have been bred and I have had no issues with size. In fact, the only whelping issues I have had was with one of them. She is a little short in the loin and could use a little more length in the back. She has had 2 c-sections, one half way through, and the second after only delivering one puppy. this I feel is more of a result of her lack of length than her size. When you research the potential sires bitch line, keep in mind their size. Remember, just stay away from small.

I would take a small balanced bitch over alot of other faults and failings. Some of the best producing lines out there have bitches that were near the bottom of the standard.

Re: Big to small

Anon
I have 2 girls here there are a product of using 3 straight generations of imported males. Yes, I now have girls near the lower end of the standard than on the high side like I use to. I actually prefer what I have now. There is more balance, and good qualities that I was looking for. In this process, I have had 2 of my pick(s) end up being 21 inch and another one slightly below. Most are consistantly between 22 and 22.5 inches. Right where I like them to be. I use males that fit my girls type and pedigree wise, while still trying to improve them. I use males of correct size, and have had no problems. You want to stay away from fixing any points by using "exagerations" to over compensate for a fault or failing.

The 2 girls both have been bred and I have had no issues with size. In fact, the only whelping issues I have had was with one of them. She is a little short in the loin and could use a little more length in the back. She has had 2 c-sections, one half way through, and the second after only delivering one puppy. this I feel is more of a result of her lack of length than her size. When you research the potential sires bitch line, keep in mind their size. Remember, just stay away from small.

I would take a small balanced bitch over alot of other faults and failings. Some of the best producing lines out there have bitches that were near the bottom of the standard.


What a nice answer. I have larger bitches and prefer they were smaller. It's not easy going larger to smaller and I will probably have to start over with a new bitch. The labs here are getting to far away from what a lab should be. The huge size and wavy coats are too much (even down the back IMO). I want to try importing semen. Your dogs sound wonderful.

Re: Big to small

I thought that I had the average size bitches that were certainly not looking "too small" in the breed ring. But..........when I actually wicketed them last year - all but one was under the standard. and......the one that measured to the standard was actually taking the 1/2' allowed (shorter)

It would be interesting to take an entire entry of dogs entered under a breeder judge - and wicket them. I bet that 75% would be under the minimum height.

Not to beat a dead horse - but the standard is not the best.

Re: Big to small

Some friends and I got a wicket and measured our dogs. We were all amazed that our bitches were not a big as we thought they were. And the "big" boys weren't as big as we thought either.

Re: Big to small

The AKC Standard is not the best.

The way height is handled in the English Standard is much better.

http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/services/public/breed/standard.aspx?id=2048


Lab Breeder
I thought that I had the average size bitches that were certainly not looking "too small" in the breed ring. But..........when I actually wicketed them last year - all but one was under the standard. and......the one that measured to the standard was actually taking the 1/2' allowed (shorter)

It would be interesting to take an entire entry of dogs entered under a breeder judge - and wicket them. I bet that 75% would be under the minimum height.

Not to beat a dead horse - but the standard is not the best.

Re: Big to small

"It would be interesting to take an entire entry of dogs entered under a breeder judge - and wicket them. I bet that 75% would be under the minimum height."

I wasn't there, but I understand that this was actually done at a specialty about the time the new standard first came out. My memory was that it was at Potomac or the National specialty in the Best of Breed class. Something like 65% of the CHAMPIONS were below the standard in height. Anyone else remember that?

Re: Big to small

Still think the U.S. should have the same standard as the rest of the world! Isn't it more important that the dog is overall balanced? Enough leg to fit the body - not too deep of a body either - good balance to do the job!

Re: Big to small

http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/services/public/breed/watch/display.aspx?breed=2048

Breed Watch...

Re: Big to small

Yes I do Peggy and probably today the same results would be seen.

Re: Big to small

Is being shorter than the AKC Standard dictates a problem in itself in terms of function? Therefore, does the Standard require a good height or is it too tall?

Is the real problem that many dogs are too short relative to their body length? Is being on the smaller side relative to the what the Standard requires actually a good thing, or at least neutral, where the problem lies in balance of height to length?

Which Standard is better, focusing on height only...The AKC Standard or The Kennel Club Standard?

GreggT
Yes I do Peggy and probably today the same results would be seen.

Re: Big to small

always heard the bitch determines the size of the pups…like, if a Lab bred a taco dog…the pups would not be so big they would kill her…guess its the grace of the man upstairs???