Are English Springer Spaniel's overbred?

Question:
I also wanted to include; Is the 'quality' of the breed beginning to fade, into the title but ran out of space!


I want to try and word this correctly so i do not offend, yet still get my point across. Do you think Springer's are becoming too overbred, and do you think the quality of these spaniels produced in such a way is beginning to fault(i.e temperament, physical looks etc)?

Okay reason I ask..i see quite a few springers around these parts, and see a fair few on various forums etc, and they seem to be of varied looks, and i'm not just talking about the differences between show type, field type, and those who fall in the middle!
I've seen so many springers which are really lanky, with very ellongated face, strangely set ears..and generally just a curious body shape, and i do not meant field type springers-these dogs look nothing like field types, well to me do not look like springers at all. Yet nine times out of ten when talking to the owners I get told they are KC registered with a 'good pedigree', in many cases to the untrained eye..a 'good pedigree' is one with lots of fancy names n 'sh ch' 'ftch' dotted about-to me this isn't a good pedigree, just one with some succesfull dogs in.
Also these 'slight' looking springers allways seem quite nervy and insane...and i mean more than even Springer standard! They do actually seems nuts..and I know Springer's are generally quite hectic, all over the place dogs..but this goes beyond that.

They just do not seem to be the image of a springer that I think of, nor the temperament of the biddable, loyal, good tempered spaniel that is what the true breed is. To me Here hosts a good few good examples of springers, to me Rips' Isla, Het's Zack, Sal's Fenn and cause i'm biast Ralph aswell, look like Springers..and sound as if they have the desired springer character. All the springer's i've ever known have allways been quite 'solid' dogs, even the field types which is what I've mainly known, with great loyal,loving, charcters; but a lot of the springer's I see don't seem to be like this. I actually know of one that looks almost Collie'ish..but is a KC registered Springer Don't get me wrong I see a fair few good looking Springers, with matching charcters, knocking about..but it all does make me wonder.
Do you think Springer's are becoming 'overbred' as it were, in the sense too many are being bred willy nilly with not enough care about breeding stock, bloodlines, and the placing in suitable homes etc?
Hope I've made sense..apologies if I haven't

Answer:


Aww thanks Luke, glad you think that of Isla!

In short the answer to your question is yes. At least I think so.

My first English Springer was born in 1984. She was a farm dog and bred to be worked, but she still looked like a Springer. Like you say many these days vary soooo much, with the emphasis being more on their working ability than how they look. I'll be honest I'm not keen on the latest strain of working Springers, they look so much like Collies now. IMO obviously.

Now of course you can say that the Show fraternity has done the opposite and bred them with over exagerated looks and less working ability. Which would be true, but now quite a few of the show kennels are recognising the Springers background and taking an interest in the working side, at least they were. With the docking ban this is unlikely to continue.

All the above reasons are why I travelled 600 miles to get Isla. I want a dog that looks like a Springer, is healthy, has a good temperament and has the ability to work.

How sad it is that it's so hard to find this in a breed these days.

Answer:


Thanks Luke
Difficult question,
In every single breed,i think you get irresponsible breeders that breed for one thing only,money
Not to sure if they are overbred but i would imagine they are,with the amount that pass through rescue.One thing that did surprize me while checking out a kennel of gundogs in shropshire,the working Springer doesn't seem to be Line bred as much as other breeds are.I also noticed that all dogs that he owns,Labs,Cockers and Springers,have to work.
There are loads of Springers around these parts,but to be honest i don't usually take much notice.There is a guy that lives in our village and he has some fantastic dogs,all springers,he breeds and also does gundog training,i often stop and watch him working his dogs,fantastic to watch a springer in action.
Fen's background isn't known to us but to me and hubby he is a typical Springer,eager to please and loves to retrieve,you can see quite clearly he has come from a working background,he loves running through brambles and undergrowth and around hedgerows.

Answer:


I'm glad i'm not the only one who feels they are overbred, or to rephrase it 'bred not to their best' (as an uncle who has working gundog politely screamed down the phone at me when i used the term overbred).
When i found Ralph's breeder, I was only expressing an interest in the dogs they bred when contacting them..but they had a litter (which i had seen were available) and Ralph was the last pup remaining, i snapped him up. He is a nice type, in my eyes, not too showy..but not too field type. And i do not mean just in looks, but temperament wise.
I have seen so many really slight looking springers that are beyond wild and just tear off with rather red faced owners trying in vein to catch them. As Rips said, it seems to be too MUCH focus going on their working ability, which i do agree is a main factor, but surely conformation of looks and temperament should be a big factor when breeding too?
A friend of mine has a field type springer pup, but he is what I would expect of a field type springer. He looks NOTHING like a collie or an x breed, he looks like your image of a springer..just a little bit smaller/lighter with less hair,and is just calm compared to many field types I've seen of late.
But the faulting can't be laid all at the field type breeders as Rips said, i have seen some show type Springers who seem too have far too of an exadgerated skull..VERY VERY domed and with far too much feathering, would be totaly useless to have a dog that heavily feathered in the field, which regardless of being a show type, the spaniel should be able to do.
It just seems quite worrying how the breed seems to be having such worrying extremes from one type to another..very concerning indeed.

Answer:


Something i just remembered i wished to add was concerning the docking ban, only working dogs are to be exempt from this ban yes?
Meaning to have a docked dog, going to a working kennel will be the only option?
Does this mean that if we want a docked springer, regardless of whether for gundog or working type pet, it will have to be a dog that bears little resemblance *sp* to the springer as we know it?

Answer:


I think it's like any breed, once people start breeding them for the sake of breeding they don't pay attention to what is required, either breed standard or work or whatever so very quickly they will start to lose type etc.
I used to groom a 'cavalier' that was about 18" at the shoulder! Also had a similar size 'bichon', both puppy farm dogs.
Becky

Answer:


Luke

You may well have visited the The English Springer Spaniel Club site but if not follow this link to the 'code of ethics'. Have a look at the members gallery too. There's some good examples of some of the differences you've pointed out !



PS

I'm on a diet now coz you didn't mention me !

Fingal



Answer:


I'm sorry Phil, i knew there was another springer..i remember your fingal cause of his lovely head, oooh and Helens Springers are good examples of the field type too just to add these in!
And thankyou, i never have actually been on that site!

Answer:


hey luke.....what about my 2 babies??????

Answer:


i do know what you mean though luke. i've seen quite a few 'strange' looking springers. i have a picture in my mind of how i think a springer should look, and some of them fall so short of that image. they have really big square heads, very stocky almost like a staffy, and their eyes look really 'hard' if you know what i mean. i'm not saying mine are perfect at all, but they have the 'soft' eyes and face. bronte is from working stock and is quite small, benson was part show, part working so he was fairly big, i'm pretty sure sam is from working stock, he is quite small, but alot finer than bronte, and can he shift!!!!!?? (like a whippit!!)