Fat Labradors: A Thought

[blacklabrador]

If a dog has been desexed though could he still end up being more broad and solid?

If the dog has been desexed earlier they are often a bit longer in the legs because the stage at which growth plates close on the long bones is affected by hormones. I am not sure how hormones affect breadth of skeletal structure but I'm sure there must be an influence. Hormones definitely affect muscle bulk.

I would expect a desexed dog to be less bulky generally.

That is probably true although my dog and one of his brothers were desexed at the same time and his brother is way bigger, much broader and a huge head. They are the same height though.

You can get several different sizes and builds of labs from one litter. There are lots of influencing factors. Mason isn't yet fully matured so he may be one of the slower to mature dogs in the litter. He may end up as big and broad or he may not - genetics are the key and only time will tell.

Edited April 7, 2010 by blacklabrador

[SparkyTansy]

I've posted this pic before but this is what a Labrador Retriever in hard working condition looks like

wow - that is one stunning looking dog - thanks for posting it PF...

WOOOAAHHH That's a whole debate that you don't even want to start on this forum. I am sure you can find some shitfights if you do a search on Show Vs Working dogs. It applies in many breeds - either different condition of the same dog or a different build of dog in the same breed used for working Vs showing. Border Collies, Kelpies, GSDs to name a few.

The shit fights occur because people passionate about their point of view can't stick to forum rules. Personally I think these are subjects that should be discussed here.

If people can debate the issues without becoming personal, there's much to be learned from hearing both sides of the argument.

I tend to agree - I wish that people could maintain their passion and enthusiasm but with healthy debate, not arguments... I have seen many a thread in this forum as well as others regarding working vs show - the debate is extremely live and well in most gundog breeds and other working breeds too i am sure... if you ever see a working type setter and a show setter THAT is extreme... I find that the only time the debate is not over the top is when there are plenty of the breed who do both and succeed - weimaraners, chessies etc... in weims the debate is certainly not as lively, although "type" throughout the world (europe vs UK vs US vs AUS) is part of a similar debate.

To illustrate SG's point.... I have two pictures of the same dog. I have posted these before to show how a dog can mature. Now this dog was a very chunky puppy with a lot of bone. He grew into an ugly skinny adolescent. I realised he would fill out because his dad was a big solid dog and his Grandfather was extremely solid. I didn't quite expect him to turn out how he did though!

Have a look at his head in the second picture. Whaddya reckon his body is like? He has a big, solid body to match. No amount of starvation is going to make this dog look "thin" because his skeletal structure is broad and solid. It's his bloodlines and diet can't change that.

My question, BL, is that if he was a keen dog that had all the instincts to work, would his structure and build slow him down or be an advantage to him?

[tdierikx]

OMG!!! Holly looks almost a twin for my girl Trouble! Exact same "death stare" and lovely coat colour...

Trouble would eat until she exploded if I let her - she gets a certain amount of food every meal, and that's it... Trouble is 4 years old, and was desexed at just over 2 years old.

My other dog Zeddy is a Rottie/Pittie - she also would eat until she exploded if allowed. as she is now going on for 11 years old and has creaky knees in Winter, we regulate her intake to keep her lean - and she moves well in Winter now (as opposed to when we used to feed her too much some years ago). Zeddy may be nearly 11, but her energy levels are almost the same as when she was much younger - and she loves playing with my foster pups too...

T.

[RubyStar]

.

Edited April 7, 2010 by RubyStar

[wolfgirl]

Btw, I'd love to see pictures of all the lean Labbies shown in this thread five years from now. I'd be surprised if some of them don't fill out to a bit of more than many of us would like.

Okay not quite 5 years but 4 years later She could easily put weight on but I make sure her diet is good and balanced, she eats a third of what my GSD does and he is very lean as well both have lots of activites to keep them in good physical condition

Pearl at 6 months

Pearl at 4.5 years

This is probably s a better shot taken on the same day

Edited April 7, 2010 by wolfgirl

[blacklabrador]

My question, BL, is that if he was a keen dog that had all the instincts to work, would his structure and build slow him down or be an advantage to him?

Not a question I know the answer to. I will tell you what I think though. I think heavy set doesn't mean that they can't work. Think of heavily set work horses - I think labs should be similar. They aren't built for speed, they are built for steady work all day. Put too much fat on any dog and it will impair their ability to work.

I do know that his mother who has great bone and muscle has more stamina, an effortless gait and enough rear end muscle to jump two feet up in the air (straight up). I can't say the same for my skinny, rangey lab who is very agile but doesn't seem to have the same stamina even when he's at his fittest. Gosh he's fast though and he can lurecourse like nobody's business when he's in the mood! However I am not about to make judgements based on my own dogs because that really doesn't do the argument justice.

[Aidan]

A very experienced Field Trialer and hunter told me some of the field-bred Labs could be a bit less leggy and a bit thicker to get through some of the heavier cover he works his dogs in. His ideal [conformation] seemed to be somewhere between show and field lines.

[SparkyTansy]

My question, BL, is that if he was a keen dog that had all the instincts to work, would his structure and build slow him down or be an advantage to him?

Not a question I know the answer to. I will tell you what I think though. I think heavy set doesn't mean that they can't work. Think of heavily set work horses - I think labs should be similar. They aren't built for speed, they are built for steady work all day. Put too much fat on any dog and it will impair their ability to work.

I do know that his mother who has great bone and muscle has more stamina, an effortless gait and enough rear end muscle to jump two feet up in the air (straight up). I can't say the same for my skinny, rangey lab who is very agile but doesn't seem to have the same stamina even when he's at his fittest. Gosh he's fast though and he can lurecourse like nobody's business when he's in the mood! However I am not about to make judgements based on my own dogs because that really doesn't do the argument justice.

I agree - their overall structure, which of course is what any breed standard is about, is what is going to determine whether a dog can work all day doing the work they are required to do... but then this is when the debate starts... it's not about weight on the lab, but it's overall structure and being able to determine (as a breeder, or a judge) whether the dog you have has the ability to work all day based on it's conformation and temperament. By having excess weight on a lab in the ring actually reduces the chances of seeing the dog in it's true form.

[poodlefan]

A very experienced Field Trialer and hunter told me some of the field-bred Labs could be a bit less leggy and a bit thicker to get through some of the heavier cover he works his dogs in. His ideal [conformation] seemed to be somewhere between show and field lines.

So I suppose the next question is whether field trialling (which is not the same as the job a working retriever does) is shaping the Labrador in one direction while the show ring shapes it in another.

And what sort of cover was the Labrador originally bred to work in?

I know the Clumber Spaniel was developed as a heavy cover specialist but a working Clumber is as different to the bench dog as a working Lab is to the bench one.

I like the working Clumbers.. quite a moderate dog.

Edited April 7, 2010 by poodlefan

[mrs tornsocks]

Just an interesting tidbit from a website:

With all these different types it's rather difficult to produce a Dual Champion, that is a Labrador which is a Show Champion as well as a Field Champion. Someone said, "Field breeders are producing the athletes and show breeders are producing the models". How difficult it really is, is shown in the phothographs above. Henk van de Waterlandspolder had to lose 9 kilos (almost 20 pounds) to be fit for Field Trials, and had to gain those 9 kilos again to be fit for the show. As a matter of fact Henk looks great to me on the photo on the right, so how come show judges won't value this dual purpose lab in his working condition? There must be something wrong

Henk fit for show (37 kilos - 81.5 lbs)

Henk fit for field trial (28 kilos - 61.7 lbs)

WOOOAAHHH That's a whole debate that you don't even want to start on this forum. I am sure you can find some shitfights if you do a search on Show Vs Working dogs. It applies in many breeds - either different condition of the same dog or a different build of dog in the same breed used for working Vs showing. Border Collies, Kelpies, GSDs to name a few.

Not looking for a debate -- I have no clue re show v working dogs in terms of types.

Just saying my own personal preference is for the look of the leaner labbie.

[SparkyTansy]

working a labrador in "field trialling" would consist of what? It was my understanding that labs were bred to retrieve only... that the job of finding the game was done by the spaniel (flushing) and/or the pointers. I take it the evolved labrador does a bit of both now?

[Bjelkier]

Btw, I'd love to see pictures of all the lean Labbies shown in this thread five years from now. I'd be surprised if some of them don't fill out to a bit of more than many of us would like.

My Lab is over 5 now, surely he is about as matured now as he will ever be?

[poodlefan]

working a labrador in "field trialling" would consist of what? It was my understanding that labs were bred to retrieve only... that the job of finding the game was done by the spaniel (flushing) and/or the pointers. I take it the evolved labrador does a bit of both now?

Lablover and FHRP are the experts but the dog either watches the fall of shot or is directed towards where the bird (or its imitation) has fallen and is expected to find it or be directed close to it by the handler. They are expected to use their nose to find downed game.

Retrieving dogs do "retrieving trials". "Field trials" are for pointers, setters etc I think and focus on finding, rather than retrieving game.

Your utility gundogs were bred to do and can compete in both.

Edited April 7, 2010 by poodlefan

[SparkyTansy]

Thanks PF - sorry i actually read it wrong anyway... i get what youmeant the first time now!

I love the photos of the clumbers btw

[poodlefan]

Thanks PF - sorry i actually read it wrong anyway... i get what youmeant the first time now!

I love the photos of the clumbers btw

I'm no expert on the lingo.. I think it's all "field work" then you have the separate types of trials and titles. We need FHRP to give us the definitive explanation.

[Aidan]

Retrieving trials are a similar sporting discipline to Field Trials. There are three types of Field Trial, Labs compete in "Spaniel and Retriever Field Trials". Retrievers do flush game, it is part of their work. In Field Trials they are expected to flush and retrieve live game. In Retrieving Trials the game is dead, shot into the air with a catapult and a blank fired at it.

http://www.actca.asn.au/Activities/gundogtrials.htm (brief overview of the different disciplines available to gundogs)

http://www.vca.org.au/assets/spaniel%20ret...0fieldtrial.pdf (a look at Spaniel and Retriever Field Trials)

[Staranais]

Just an interesting tidbit from a website:

With all these different types it's rather difficult to produce a Dual Champion, that is a Labrador which is a Show Champion as well as a Field Champion. Someone said, "Field breeders are producing the athletes and show breeders are producing the models". How difficult it really is, is shown in the phothographs above. Henk van de Waterlandspolder had to lose 9 kilos (almost 20 pounds) to be fit for Field Trials, and had to gain those 9 kilos again to be fit for the show. As a matter of fact Henk looks great to me on the photo on the right, so how come show judges won't value this dual purpose lab in his working condition? There must be something wrong

Henk fit for show (37 kilos - 81.5 lbs)

Henk fit for field trial (28 kilos - 61.7 lbs)

WOOOAAHHH That's a whole debate that you don't even want to start on this forum. I am sure you can find some shitfights if you do a search on Show Vs Working dogs. It applies in many breeds - either different condition of the same dog or a different build of dog in the same breed used for working Vs showing. Border Collies, Kelpies, GSDs to name a few.

Not looking for a debate -- I have no clue re show v working dogs in terms of types.

Just saying my own personal preference is for the look of the leaner labbie.

From that photo, the "show" lab looks like he's verging on obese to me. I hope that's not really the required look for the show ring?

[RubyStar]

From that photo, the "show" lab looks like he's verging on obese to me. I hope that's not really the required look for the show ring?

I don't think all show Labs are that big, there are some very nice ones out there who are stocky but not overweight (not knowing conformation lingo, that's the best I can put it!). But if I ever got into the showing game, I would choose to show a different breed because I like my own Labs to be smaller than show Labs. I'd be laughed out of the ring with my "skinny" Lab. Just my opinion

[SparkyTansy]

Retrieving trials are a similar sporting discipline to Field Trials. There are three types of Field Trial, Labs compete in "Spaniel and Retriever Field Trials". Retrievers do flush game, it is part of their work. In Field Trials they are expected to flush and retrieve live game. In Retrieving Trials the game is dead, shot into the air with a catapult and a blank fired at it.

http://www.actca.asn.au/Activities/gundogtrials.htm (brief overview of the different disciplines available to gundogs)

http://www.vca.org.au/assets/spaniel%20ret...0fieldtrial.pdf (a look at Spaniel and Retriever Field Trials)

Thanks for that Aidan i never realised that!!

[blacklabrador]

And what sort of cover was the Labrador originally bred to work in?

I am sure you know this so I'm not sure why you're asking the question but labradors were originally water dogs bred in Newfoundland to retrieve fishing nets from boats. This is partly why they are built the way they are. Well sprung ribs for buoyancy (that famous barrel shape which means that the maximum amount of lung is above the water) and a short coupled, powerful body for swimming and pulling.