The AIREDALE standard

[Maverick]

morgan said:

Your personal experience in development may not be universal, in other words: Just because length of leg, straightness of shoulder and weak croup was your outcome-it doesn't follow that it is the only, or best outcome. To know whether this is true or not we need lots of folks talking about relative strengths and weaknesses.

I'm sure less talking and more doing would be far more helpful. What counts is what works. Debating theory is good for filling hot air balloons!

Frighteningly enough, the trend that you observe in your close breeding program is exactly that of the show ring, and particularly Giant Schnauzers and Golden Retrievers. They got straighter shoulders and more dramatic profiles. They lost coat texture. Eventually they lost bone and substance-eventually. This is one of my primary arguments against selecting for bigger.

I would lay the blame on the judges! In the showring, they control the breed's direction.

I believe you may have been unintentionally doing exactly this. Without a collaborative group, without any "testing" but your own, without any effort to demonstrate physical conformation to any standard but your specific set of behaviors, you intentionally narrow your own breeding program's diversity.

And this is a bad thing why? Don is trying to develope the ultimate boar finding and stopping Airedale. Do you know of any lines of Airedales developed for boar hunting? This may be of concern as to the versatility of the Airedale, if the vast majority of Airedale breeders were concentrating on Don's Airedales and they became even more specialized. Right now, Don's efforts are less than a drop in a large bucket when it comes to the outcome of the Airedale as a breed.

This is good for you, and yet- If everyone did what you do the outcome would be bad for the breed. It's not just individual diversity, but some diversity in approach that preserves versatility. That's why we have a preponderence of ugly in East German Working lines and a preponderence of useless in English show lines.

Can't argue with that.

- Pete

[Maverick]

Suzanne said:

Does anyone reading these posts have a problem with the Airedale standard, as far as it goes? In other words what would you change and how would you write the standard if it was up to you?

Penalize any fuzziness! Most Airedale's legs and muzzle are nothing but burr magnets, and many coats hold too much mud and water. I would like to see a hard, tight fitting outer coat with a dense fluffy undercoat. There should be enough oil in the coat naturally to bead water sprinkled on their back. To my way of thinking, the only coat preparation to showing an Airedale should be a washing and brushing -- it should never need to be stripped, clipped, fluffed, blow-dried, or primmed in any other way!

A standard is nothing more than a written description of what some people imagine the perfect Airedale to be.

Now there we can agree! But, I don't imagine that you meant to trivialize the importance of the official breed standard!

The Airedale standard has not changed very much in 100 years and 100 years ago everyone hunted.

I have to disagree there! A hundred years ago not everyone hunted, and I challenge you to point out any serious hunter back then that cared enough about showing to have bothered to give their 2 cents about the show standard. The show ring was developed by people the couldn't or wouldn't hunt/work their dogs. Hunters only care about how good the dog hunts, especially 100 years ago!

I agree that a dog must be tested to determine it's performance abilities but what do all you who breed do with the puppies you don't keep? Not everyone hunts, does SAR or Shutzhund, some Airedales lay on the sofa and play with kids. Some track, do obedience and agility. Isn't there room for the versatile dog to do all these things? Is there a reason that so many people want to see all the differences rather than all the similarities?

Pretty much most people want to play with their dogs, socialize with similar minded people, and win fame vicariously through their dogs.

Breeding dogs because they are cute couch potatoes, make good animated teddy bears, or look good parading around a ring on a leash does not make for better H/W versatile dogs.

To breed good versatile Airedales requires determining which are the best at being versatile, and breeding those. It is that simple! Of course, the devil is in the details, especially defining "best".

Talking about the standard, what do you think about the "terrier front" versus the working dog front, and why?(meaning the group not an Airedale that works) Thant has been a big discussion for a while.

A lot to do about nothing. An Airedale is not a terrier in the true sense of the word. What does an Airedale go to ground after? Yeah, it does have the terrier temperament and fire, but so what? A rose is a rose by any other name. A lot of hot air being wasted that could have been used for a pleasant hot air balloon ride!

So is size. The Airedale standard has no disqualifying faults and size is rarely a factor, a dog must be 25" or more before he is considered too big and a firey bitch, full of bone and attitude could be 20" and still win.

Win what? What does it prove? The only important question in my mind, is what is the best size for the job.

While the show seen may be dominated by professional handlers they can be beaten - but if you've never tried you don't know what's involved and you don't know if your dog could hold up physically. If you have never shown you are baing your assumptions on hearsay. ACTC has over 700 members and many are doing things with their Airedales, perhpas not chasing mountain lions but there are other chanllenges.

As they say, "been there and done that". Got my fill of the games, tricks, and politics. But the BS from the expert breeders and handlers about how they could pick a great working or hunting dog just by looking at it, is what finally did me in. Turned my back on the AKC 20 years ago, never looked back, and never had a regret.

I am not against agility competition, obedience testing, or any other game you want to play. Basic obedience is a good foundation for any dog. I am not even against developing breeds for agility or flyball or whatever.

I do have a problem with people selling some unsuspecting newbie a show dog as a hunting or working dog when it and it's ancestors have not been in the field for generations. I also have a problem when the best of breed is determined by a few minutes being paraded around in a showring -- there are so many faults (mental, health, and yes, even physical) that can be covered up or at least never discovered that way that are then passed quickly throughout the breed. I've been there, and have most definitely seen it!

You want a versatile H/W dog? 1) Decide on the job description. 2) Develop the dogs to the best of their abilities through training and/or experience to fit that description. 3) Compare the dogs that do the best at filling that job description. 4) Breed the best to the best, trying to offset weak areas on one side to strong areas on the other. Then review step #1 for any fine tuning, and repeat steps #2 thru #4. When most dogs are meeting the job description and are performing in the same league, then worry about beauty pageants! And never forget it is not about the beauty pageants!!!! ;D

[Suzanne]

How do you know an Airedale when you see one?

[ed]

"Talking about the standard, what do you think about the "terrier front" versus the working dog front, and why?(meaning the group not an Airedale that works) Thant has been a big discussion for a while."

Suzanne your relating this quandary in breeding is the key to much of the previous discussion. The question for performance people would never arise. Its just too obvious. The front that made the dog more agile, faster,and allowed greater endurance would win hands down.

It would not be an intellectual aesthetic decision based upon a theoretical minds eye picture. Creating works of art to be posed and trotted for less than 20 yards is not how a standard can retain a breeds functional quality.
One needs only to imagine similar opining for German Shepherds until the back end became so grotesquely low the poor animal can neither jump or run. The show GSD is a caricature of a once functional working dog. It now is simply being replaced by other breeds when a real service dog is required.

It is not the standard that is the problem. It is unhinging it from from its originators purpose. They would have never had the problem of deciding what kind of front "looked" best. If the dog didn't work, jump run and wasn't able to knock the stuffings out of anything his own size he wasn't at the show.
The story of the original Airedale "Jerry" seems a good illustration of the early breeders goal.

[Suzanne]

Don said his board was interested in a discussion of Airedales not making the best boar hunting dog which by that description would be a specialist and not an Airedale at all.

"You want a versatile H/W dog? 1) Decide on the job description.
OK, what breed is it? This is a worthy cause for hunters but I don't see how this method would improve the Airedale. If it is based on the job alone there would not be any breed characteristics, how would you recognize it. As I versatile dog let's describe it as a dog capable of hunting all the vermin it was originally bred to do in England in the late 1800's. What characteristics would it need?

2) Develop the dogs to the best of their abilities through training and/or experience to fit that description. "OK"

3) Compare the dogs that do the best at filling that job description.
"OK, your test should include a test for fur and feather, land and water retrieving, protection, tracking, what else?"

4) Breed the best to the best, trying to offset weak areas on one side to strong areas on the other.

"How do you determine the best? Points for each activity and the one with the most points is best or the best being the one that can do all the above activities while some can only do a few?"

Then review step #1 for any fine tuning, and repeat steps #2 thru #4. When most dogs are meeting the job description and are performing in the same league, then worry about beauty pageants!

"Whoa, we started with an Airedale, are you now saying it doesn't matter what it looks like as long as it gets the job done? If that's the case why start with an Airedale?

I think this is a different perspective from those who choose to hunt, do shuntzhund, tracking, obedience, etc. with Airedales. They have first chosen an Airedale and second want the best Airedale for their activity however if they want a specialist then by definition it is not an Airedale. If they wanted the best dog for some activities it wouldn't be an Airedale.

Bottom line: If you breed for exceptional intelligence, a burning desire to please you as leader of the pack, This is certainly NOT a terrier trait!! Sounds to me like breeding out one of the main Airedale traits, independence. Goldens have been bred forever to want to serve man is that the attitude you want?

and an all around exceptional athletic body with an all environment coat, you will get a versatile dog that is helpful in any situation. Since we are Airedale people, you will need to season that mix with terrier fire and grit.

Since we are Airedale people shouldn't we start with what an Airedale looks like and how one can identify it?"

Any breed can be bred over time to excel at different activities, times change, people change, countries change but the one thing that allows people to identify an Airedale is how it looks. It would be a lot more challenging to breed for better performance while maintaining a "standard" appearance. In order to do that though you must have your first concern be the Airedale.

[Suzanne]

Don said his board was interested in a discussion of Airedales not making the best boar hunting dog which by that description would be a specialist and not an Airedale at all.

"You want a versatile H/W dog? 1) Decide on the job description.
OK, what breed is it? This is a worthy cause for hunters but I don't see how this method would improve the Airedale. If it is based on the job alone there would not be any breed characteristics, how would you recognize it. As I versatile dog let's describe it as a dog capable of hunting all the vermin it was originally bred to do in England in the late 1800's. What characteristics would it need?

2) Develop the dogs to the best of their abilities through training and/or experience to fit that description. "OK"

3) Compare the dogs that do the best at filling that job description.
"OK, your test should include a test for fur and feather, land and water retrieving, protection, tracking, what else?"

4) Breed the best to the best, trying to offset weak areas on one side to strong areas on the other.

"How do you determine the best? Points for each activity and the one with the most points is best or the best being the one that can do all the above activities while some can only do a few?"

Then review step #1 for any fine tuning, and repeat steps #2 thru #4. When most dogs are meeting the job description and are performing in the same league, then worry about beauty pageants!

"Whoa, we started with an Airedale, are you now saying it doesn't matter what it looks like as long as it gets the job done? If that's the case why start with an Airedale?

I think this is a different perspective from those who choose to hunt, do shuntzhund, tracking, obedience, etc. with Airedales. They have first chosen an Airedale and second want the best Airedale for their activity however if they want a specialist then by definition it is not an Airedale. If they wanted the best dog for some activities it wouldn't be an Airedale.

Bottom line: If you breed for exceptional intelligence, a burning desire to please you as leader of the pack, This is certainly NOT a terrier trait!! Sounds to me like breeding out one of the main Airedale traits, independence. Goldens have been bred forever to want to serve man is that the attitude you want?

and an all around exceptional athletic body with an all environment coat, you will get a versatile dog that is helpful in any situation. Since we are Airedale people, you will need to season that mix with terrier fire and grit.

Since we are Airedale people shouldn't we start with what an Airedale looks like and how one can identify it?"

Any breed can be bred over time to excel at different activities, times change, people change, countries change but the one thing that allows people to identify an Airedale is how it looks. It would be a lot more challenging to breed for better performance while maintaining a "standard" appearance. In order to do that though you must have your first concern be the Airedale.

[morgan]

Don,
My comment is that it's possible that you select for size because you sub-consiciously believe your leggy hypothesis. Maybe your dogs are faster and the size has nothing to do with it. Maybe it's 90 percent desire. My suppositions may be different than yours, but your's don't represent a large enough sample over a long enough period to have any validity except in the small picture. Unfortunately, you're using the same argument as Matt for the superior quality of dogs with no wire in their coat. I've seen people breed to ugly German dogs and produce more ugly German dogs, with no improvement in type or ability. I'm not saying it can't run, I'm saying that it may not run for the reasons you suggest. I'm not saying you don't breed to work, I'm saying nobody breeds "only" to work. Everybody breeds dogs they like.

You know very well I think you're doing a really good thing, I just don't think your conclusions are necessarily representative. I the bigger world, the sporting dogs become progressively smaller and racier as they improve. I know this to be true in several lines of working setters, Chessies and labs. It's the show dogs that get bigger and more upright. So I don't buy that Airedales are completely different.

Suzanne, I believe that the "terrier front" is just a bad front. It was developed to make smooth fox terriers look good standing still, then justified with pretzel logic. Terriers aren't meant to be mole dogs. Ratters sometimes dig in holes. Long legged terriers never did as a group. It's hocus pocus. But that's just my opinion.

Dave

[hicntry]

Suzanne, I am pretty sure that the tracking female from the Bay area was Dora. As I understand it, Dale Burriers dog did great, the two four mo old pups, Annie and Eric, and the one little female, all looked great through out the workshop. On the other hand, of all the show dogs present, none could track. They wouldn't even look at the bird often times. It is breeding for work Suzanne. It should have been more than obvious at the workshops. The pups had never been hunted and I don't know about what Dora had in the way of experience, but this isn't hunt. This is the natural, very basic instincts that are lacking in many of todays conformation only dogs.
Here is a picture of a dog Suzanne,



You can see the tail set and rear angle is different. possibly a little shorter in the shoulder, little more space between the rib and hips, possibly a tad to tall at 28" and 85lbs. Hip slightly higher than the back Not a bad looking airedale in my eyes. This is the same dog doing one of the things he does best. He tracks like a hound, he roads in front of the truck like a hound with his nose in the dirt the whole time he is on the ground. The very minor differences I have pointed out in the conformation.....make him the fastest I have been around. Hunter, his dad, is just a smaller version of Geronimo.



What I am simply trying to point out Suzanne, is that while the ring conformation dogs are hunters in many of the conformation breeders eyes, they are not really in the class that a hunter wants to see. One of my favorite picturs is the one that is on the top of this page. That is Roger Henion's dog Taz. That is a classic picture of the working airedale.
Now, I realize that all anyone is doing is talking, expressing feelings, thoughts and such. What can be done to bridge this gap between the two camps? This is where it is all leading. I am going to try to get the reps from the UKC to come in also. I feel the working people should hear both sides.

[hicntry]

"I think this is a different perspective from those who choose to hunt, do shuntzhund, tracking, obedience, etc. with Airedales. They have first chosen an Airedale and second want the best Airedale for their activity however if they want a specialist then by definition it is not an Airedale. If they wanted the best dog for some activities it wouldn't be an Airedale."

I see the breed as a versatile breed Suzanne. You can find individual dogs to do most any job. Those individual job can be done as well as the specialist. Every dog is not a versatile do. It is a versatile breed.
I ask you to read Karl's post again as to what happened to the airedale in the UK as they claimed to be maintaining the working traits.
The bottom line is it started as a working breed, not a show breed. Someone has to maintain a high level of working ability in the airedale because conformation isn't going to do it. The standard itself would change by itself if the conformation dogs were to hit the field regularly in a running venue.
Don

[Suzanne]

Don, I completely agree with you that Airedales must be used to to hunt or protect or .. to maintain their breed characteristics. Your dogs all look like Airedales and have some excellent breed standard characteristics in addition to their hunting ability. Many "show" dogs today no longer have the beautiful heads of earlier generations. From what I have seen of your breeding they all have excellent heads. No one knows what "show" dogs can do because they don't do it. You started with "show" dog offspring. Dora's pedigree has some of the great show dogs of the last century.

My question is: When is a dog no longer conformationally an Airedale? I think there could be more interaction if we could agree on some criteria. Although the Airedale was begun as a hunting dog it was not for big game. When the Airedale arrived in the US it was a much smaller dog than it is now.

A very clear example of a breed that has evolved for many hundreds or year with very careful record keeping for over 120 years in the US (more in England) is Fox Hounds. These dogs are bred for hunting to specific criteria. They must work as a pack, be biddable, have a keen nose, a good cry. They must be fast and tireless. Hound masters have (and do) keep meticulous records and you can see around the world how the hounds have changed based on the country they run and the game they chase. Now there are many variations of Fox Hounds with specific names based on their regions. There are studbooks in the US going back to the 1880's. There are records of over 66,000 Fox Hounds in the US alone. One requirement for registering a Fox Hound is:

C. HUNTING. All foxhounds registered in the Foxhound Kennel Stud Book and all sires and dams in the first and second preceding generations must be acceptably certified as having hunted (or having been entered to) fox, coyote or fox drag.

As an example, The Los Altos Hunt, where I was a member, has the history of 430 hounds starting in 1956 when the hunt originated. All hounds are registered by the hunt that whelps them, their name and the year:Los Altos Colonel 1962 {Crossbred M} D100196206
Los Altos Squire 1958 x Los Altos Tricia 1960

This type of information is invaluable. The AKC does not keep Hunt Test information for Airedales however it does for some hunting breeds (retriever, pointer, spaniels) and field trial information for other breeds (Basset, Beagle, Dachshunds, retrieve, pointer, spaniel). The AKC also has coon hound events.

Perhaps one thing we (is it possible) could all agree on is that Airedales should be able to participate in some, if not all of these AKC events. That is something that the ATCA H/W committee has been working on for a long time.

[hicntry]

There have been some excellent posts here. I wish I could express myself as well as most of the participants.
Dave, the information I put up as to the direction my dogs took, is not supposition. Believe it or not. I can tell which dog is bigger and which dog is smaller and, which dog is running more easily after three of four miles of roading up and down mountains. The faster, better dog is the one that is still in the lead and widening that lead after being pushed up hill, down hill, and across flats in front of the truck after five miles. Big game hunting is not sitting in a blind Dave, nor is it walking behind the dog as it works a field. It is about dogs that can traverse the same ground as a bear and stay with them for miles. I have bred these dogs from show dogs, through 10 to 12 generations. I have watched them cover several 1000's of miles in front of a truck in multiples of two and three at a time. Believe it or not Dave, my opinions on the validity of the standard vs the working dogs, fast vs quick, endurance vs lack of, has been arrived at through the experience of having started with show dogs and watching their abilities, and conformation get better over countless miles of objective observation of, specifically, airedales. I also know what desire is and how it can affect a long run. I suspect you are guilty of much more supposition's that I am. You have to keep in mind, just because I hunt hogs, does not mean that I just breed for hog hunting. Running ability and such has to do with a better equipped dog for most all venues that are not carried out in a ring, such as agility, some protection venues, obedience, conformation. Your views and mine often differ Dave, maybe because mine are based on experience, maybe not. I know, that is a supposition also, but it may just have a shred of validity.
Don

[morgan]

Don (I love this),
I get it. I agree that you're comments are all from experience. I have huge respect for that experience, but... It is your own, and inevitably prejudiced by your personality and perceptions. Mine is too. We're a factor in our own experiment. It makes our personal observations specific and not universal. I have no argument with your personal observations, just your generalizations. I'm not sayin' you're wrong-I'm saying that you may be.

See, I think you breed very nice typey Airedales (as Suzanne alluded to) and don't really believe that your selection process has been as pure as you believe. I also think that your foundation stock's soundness has a lot to do with the current success of your dogs. On a personal comment (with love) I am certainly guilty of a large amount of suppositions about this-but I'm aware of them. I'm twisting your tail to make you think about how and why it all works like it does.

I do think that the faster dog may have the edge in desire and not construction, for example. I also think that the longer leg, angled better would be even better than the long straight leg, in rough terrain. I just think these things, I don't know them

Dave

[hicntry]

I have to love it too as hard .....as it is for me to say that.

"I do think that the faster dog may have the edge in desire and not construction, for example. I also think that the longer leg, angled better would be even better than the long straight leg, in rough terrain. I just think these things, I don't know them

Dave "

Go back and read Ed's post Dave. I just run them...I don't sit back and say, "I wonder if the long straight leg is better than the angled leg". I run what I have and my "right" one steps up when he gets there and watches the wrong one finish the run. That is how working conformation is determined Dave. It is not "I think this is better, or I think that is better" As they say, the "proof is in the puddin". Talking and guessing does not prove anything. Neither does listening to others that talk, guess, and think. If you want to know what is best, take em out and put them to the test.

[hicntry]

The question of the day? Week? Year?
Suzanne said:
"My question is: When is a dog no longer conformationally an Airedale? I think there could be more interaction if we could agree on some criteria. Although the Airedale was begun as a hunting dog it was not for big game. When the Airedale arrived in the US it was a much smaller dog than it is now."

First, they didn't hunt big game because they didn't have any. It has been a big game dog where ever it has been since it's departure from England. Large, dangerous game is what made it famous in the hunting world.

"When is a dog no longer an airedale conformationally??? Is this possibly where part of the problem lies? I would have said," When is a dog no longer an airedale? You see Suzanne, if the dog hasn't got the goods to do a superlative job in the field, he is just as poor an excuse for an airedale as is the one that is poorly put together. I have been asked many times why I picked an airedale if I needed to change them to what I thought they should be? I could also return that with "what is everyone doing with an airedale if they don't hunt?"
Lets work on the conformation first. Where should the line be drawn? I have had really big dogs come out of show size parents. It happens all the time. I have also had bigger parents throw all much smaller dogs. They all looked and acted like....well....airedales.

This may be a good place to hear from some others. It would also be nice if a few of the others that received the invitation came and put in their 2 cents. Mr. Foley, Carol Scott, and the rest. I agree with Suzanne, there has to be a meeting point on the subject, not only concerning conformation but also working ability which was hunting both fur and feather.

[Doggitter]

Hi all. Gald to be reading all the responses here.

" Why isn't there a venue for tracking dogs, or scent detection dogs, or victim recovery dogs, or protection dogs within the H/W? "
I feel it's due to so much time and direction being spent on showing, and so many people being so wrapped up in showing that there isn't the desire to spread out the "fun".