Page 42 - The Labrador Retriever
P. 42
The Standard also gives a detailed physical description of a dog whose form (physical appearance) allows it to perform its primary function (retrieving, particularly in water or marsh). It uses words such as strong, powerful, athletic to describe a medium-sized efficient working retriever. While the dog is described as strong and powerful, nowhere does the Standard say the dog should be fat and cumbersome. The Labrador is a breed that, because of its genetic background, which demanded that the dog be able to survive on very little in the harsh environment of early Newfoundland, is prone to excessive weight in the overabundance of our modern world. Often one of the main problems with conformation dogs is that they carry excessive weight. However, the powerful build of a Labrador should not be confused with being too fat. Judges need to be cautious that their placements do not reward excess.
The Kennel Club in England has instituted a review of all breed standards, “Fit for Function; Fit for Life.” Many breeds have been singled out for attention. One is the Labrador
whose standard has been revised to read, “well sprung ribs—this effect not to be produced by carrying excessive weight.” Another change is the inclusion of “very agile” (which precludes excessive body weight and substance.” Sadly, this problem of excess is more than evident in North American Labradors.
While the question of excessive weight has been in the forefront of discussions about Labradors, the important and more contentious issue of excessive substance garners less attention. Are our Labradors too massive? Are we caught in that particularly modern mentality that bigger and more are always better? If a broad skull is good, isn’t a bucket-head even better? Isn’t a too short, thick tail more desirable than a tail that balances the dog? Isn’t more coat what we should aim for? Shouldn’t a Labrador have the shortest possible coupling? PERHAPS NOT!
An early writer (1833) on the Labrador, Peter Hawker, described the breed as “very fine in the legs.” This was, one must note, in comparison to the Newfoundland dog. Pictures of early Labradors show dogs that do not
have excessive bone and substance. They are what I would call moderate, dogs that looked agile and athletic. Are we are getting away from that moderation because breeders are producing dogs with more substance that severely lack agility and athleticism because that is what is rewarded in the conformation ring?
The Labrador Standard calls for a medium-sized dog that is “strongly built” with good bone and muscle. This is a far cry from the ponderous, massive dogs of extreme substance and bone that can be found in some conformation rings today. Too often those who decry this situation are labeled as supporting the “generic dog” or advocating “field type.” However, there is a long distance between generic and medium, athletic, active and strongly built. If judges are committed to maintaining breed type, focused on maintaining the integrity of the breed, devoted to not betraying the history of the breed, should we not pay more attention to the form and function of the Labrador and less to rewarding a dog that is often an unfortunate caricature of what the breed was and should be?
“THE STANDARD ALSO
GIVES A DETAILED
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION
of a dog whose form (physical appearance) allows it to perform its primary function
(retrieving, particularly in water or marsh).”
“An early writer (1833) on the Labrador, Peter Hawker,
DESCRIBED THE BREED AS ‘VERY FINE IN THE LEGS’.”
