So you want to know FACTS about the Golden Retriever. Where do you turn for such information? An obvious place to look would be to access the websites of the breed clubs, especially those which have been designated as "parent" Clubs by the all-breed club of the various nations. The AKC has chosen the Golden Retriever Club of America; in Canada there is the GRCC .For its part, THE KENNEL CLUB (I capitalize this because of its somewhat silly pretentiousness) has designated The Golden Retriever Club (of Great Britain). And so it goes from nation to nation.
Information about our breed is regularly to be found on their websites. And of course there are hundreds of regional Golden Retriever clubs which can be accessed as well. They, too, can be informative.
The national clubs of record often have their own magazine. In America, one can consult the GOLDEN RETRIEVER NEWS (at least if you are a member); in Canada there is something called GOLDEN LEAVES, which can be found on line by its membership.
Leading members of Golden Retriever clubs have written books, or have from time to time had articles printed-- not only in publications solely Golden-related , but in all-breed magazines as well.
It is not unusual to find these appearing on individual breeder sites. Offered in their entirety or quoted in part. Sometimes the articles have been revised or updated; often unnoticed by the folks who have posted them in original form..
All of these sources may be helpful, though on occasion the messages they contain may appear, or are in fact, in conflict. It would be helpful if these documents-- whatever the format --included footnotes. That would allow the reader to do additional research; and when necessary and if possible, to separate fact from fiction. As a former teacher I am amazed and irritated when I see entire books written without a SINGLE footnote. Though most have included a bibliography of sorts, this is no substitute in a publication wishing to be considered serious scholarship.
To be fair, most disagreements involve differences real and imagined between the two TYPES most often seen and recognized in the United States-- the English and the American TYPES.
What is called the English Cream Golden Retriever is more correctly termed the English TYPE Golden Retriever. Some, if not most of those which have been imported by American and Canadian breeders are either born cream or very light gold at birth. But the entire color pallet from cream to even what some would describe as chestnut exists and is legitimate under international breed standards (in all but one case-- can you say USA?). And, truth be told, there have been and continue to be born-red Goldens on both sides of the Atlantic-- though they are universally frowned upon (wrongly I feel).
And at the opposite end of the color spectrum it is scientifically possible to have a born-white Golden. That would only happen if for some reason genetic factors lined up in such a manner as to block all expressions of color. ( The pup would not be an albino, since albinism includes red eyes and lack of leather pigment and such.)
In contrast, there has been developed in the United States what is referred to as the American TYPE Golden Retriever. Most folks think that the difference is purely one of coat color. That is simply NOT true. There are differences in structure which distinguish the TYPES. But for the most part, these have been ignored by fanciers of the breed on this side of the Atlantic Ocean. In fact, if you enter the conformation ring with a European TYPE Golden Retriever, that dog will be judged NOT by the standard to which he was bred BUT RATHER the American standard and its unique requirements. This is in keeping with the idea that there is but a single breed-- the Golden Retriever. End result-- if an English TYPE cream-coated Golden enters the show ring he has virtually two strikes against him-- one based upon color; the other based upon structure. What could be more fair than that?
Do English TYPE Goldens have less health issues? It has been said that they are less cancer prone. Two studies have been done-- one here and one in Great Britain. The number of dogs used in each study differed considerably. But the results indicated less incidence of cancer in the European-bred dogs. Some say the studies are inconclusive. Some websites cite the British study as incontrovertible truth. Fair or not.
What about hip dysplasia? There are some who argue that the BVA system of evaluating the dogs is more accurate than the OFA system. In part because each side has a numerical designation assigned to it. But it has been said that typically a dog rated 0:0 mated to a bitch with 0:0 hips will have a litter which averages a total 13 per pup. The problem persists despite the best efforts to discover the cause. I do not believe that either TYPE has anything to crow about in this regard.
Do English TYPE Goldens have better temperaments? Unlike European breed standards, the American (and Canadian for that matter) Standard speaks of the conformation ring. If you expect to do well in show competition-- especially if you aim higher than Best of Breed --you need a dog who is a showman bordering on being a clown. The audience and the judges (sometimes, and perhaps too often) love it. If you breed for a dog who is "up" on the show circuit, you may get one who may be overly energetic or hyper all the time. It has been said that the European or English TYPE has a more laid back demeanor. A more level-headed disposition. Anecdotally this appears to be so. But there is no substantial evidence to support that claim.
Does the English TYPE Golden possess superior hunting instincts? Oddly no one seems to care. While they may talk about coat texture, or size, or even coat color, advocates for neither TYPE claim superiority in this regard. If we are truly breeding for performance based upon ORIGINAL INTENT for the breed, I would think that this would be stressed far more than it is. I account for this mainly because the Goldens bred for hunting rarely see the inside of a conformation ring. And those who hunt their dogs appear to have little interest in the "show biz" aspect. And most of the show exhibitors rarely place their dogs in the field (God forbid they ruin their coat). I even wonder how many breeders/owners/handlers own a hunting rifle(?)
Are English TYPE Goldens rare? Well there are far less living in the States when compared with the American TYPE. But that hardly makes them rare or exotic when you view the world scene.
To sum up Part I of this essay (yes, you can expect Part II to follow shortly) the English TYPE Golden is no healthier, not in possession of a better temperament, not superior though somewhat different in structure, certainly not as rare as claimed, and NOT white. I've covered all the bases except one. Are they ridiculously PRICED? Caveat emptor-- let the buyer beware. Some breeders charge astronomical prices. Others do not. And this is equally true of breeders marketing BOTH TYPES. But we live in a capitalistic society which operates under the rules of "supply and demand." And clever advertising can create or accelerate demand. Do breeders make exaggerated claims? How many websites assert that they have searched the entire world for the absolute best breeding stock? And that they have succeeded in doing so? And lest you think I'm choosing sides, how many breeders advertise "blond" Goldens and tell potential puppy buyers that the mature dog will retain its birth color? What exactly is a blond dog anyway? Does blond appear on the color spectrum? Platinum blond? Strawberry blond? Ash blond, perhaps? Maybe even dirty blond? Some help here.
Do breeders lie? Is the Pope Catholic?
Part II
True or False: ALL Goldens are born gold or a shade of gold.
According to one view, there is something called the "extension yellow" series which produces very pale cream to the deepest red. Part of this range is considered "truly golden" in color (OPINION, NOT FACT). That portion of the color range is acceptable in the show ring-- described as yellow or yellow-orange .Proponents of this view admit that Golden Retriever history has exhibited the entire range, however unacceptable the extremes may be viewed by American fanciers of the breed. Somehow we are asked to believe that ALL are some shade of gold. But is red actually gold? Or coats described as reddish yellow, deep reddish gold, deep rich red-gold? Or even chestnut? Is gold whatever you say it is? All these terms are used to identify proper coat color.. But coats of "colorless" cream or ivory require a penalty; as does Irish Setter red. Even though they are "shades" of gold(?)
A second view is based upon the idea that ALL Golden Retrievers are produced by the red MASTER gene for coat color. If that gene is affected by modifiers, pups will be born cream OR some shade of gold. In this view there are THREE birth colors-- red, cream, and gold. Each may vary in intensity depending upon the interaction of various genetic elements. In many breeds and many other animals cream is considered a dilute of red. (The black MASTER gene is not found in Golden Retrievers even though the first yellow retrievers had black littermates.) Each birth color is likely to darken over time in a Golden. But pale cream becomes a deeper cream; red a deeper red; and gold a deeper shade of gold. And, under this scenario, a born-cream pup CANNOT become a gold or red Golden as an adult. The genes don't work that way.
The first view is held by the GRCA/AKC. You MUST register your dog as either GOLD or LIGHT GOLD. These choices have been determined by the GRCA leadership in recent years. So your born-cream dog is considered to be a pale-to-light gold and your born-red pup is simply a darker gold (OPINION, NOT FACT). Most record keeping once done by the AKC is now done by the parent club for each breed. So there is no way of ascertaining the number of born-cream Goldens, since no such information is gathered or retained for such a category. Nor for that matter has it ever been.
The same GRCA leaders claim that the British Standard--when properly understood-- likewise recognizes one birth color. What the Brits really mean by cream-- according to these American observers' supposition -- is pale shading on an otherwise gold dog or simply a very light shade of gold. An interesting opinion with no facts to support it, But presented as fact in books and articles, none the less. (OPINION, NOT FACT) When you say a Golden may be either cream or gold, major word gymnastics are required to rewrite that as "gold or the shade of gold described as cream." If that was intended, why single out only ONE shade? Either list all possibilities or offer none.
It is bothersome when the word cream is sometimes called a COLOR and at other times it is referred to as a SHADE of color. You can't-- or at least shouldn't --have it both ways. The same thing is being done with the word English when used as a modifier. The phrase "English Golden" properly applies to the nation of origin; the words "English Type" is used to describe Goldens who are bred to the British STANDARD rather than to the American standard-- regardless of where that breeding occurs. Think English Cocker and American Cocker. Now two breeds, bred to two different standards. It does not depend upon country of origin. Interestingly, the generic term "cocker spaniel" is used to reference American Cockers here in the States, while it is used to identify English Cockers by the folks in Great Britain.
What should we call a Golden Retriever pup bred in America out of two English TYPE imports? You figure it out. I'm confused. It's American-bred (meaning BRED IN AMERICA) BUT....NOT an American TYPE Golden.
It's like the phrase, "To be TRULY Golden a dog must be truly GOLD in color." Now, substitute all of the words which have been viewed as part of the arbitrary (and solely OPINION-based) allowable color spectrum under the American breed standard. "...a dog must be truly YELLOW ORANGE in color." Or COPPERY RED, or REDDISH GOLD or CHESTNUT, et al...." Borders on the ridiculous, doesn't it? But this one phrase, and stubborn adherence to it by TRUE BELIEVERS, is what stands in the way of an accommodation or compromise which could bring the breed to greater unity and make real the belief (so often asserted as FACT) that their is only ONE Golden Retriever. Anyone who really believes this to be true should work to make it happen. Instead the bickering continues. The way things stand, can you identify a major venue in Europe where American-bred Goldens would take away top honors in the conformation ring? Crufts, perhaps? The World Dog Show? And are Europeans and Australians flocking to our shores to purchase American-bred Golden Retrievers for their breeding programs? I think not. Doesn't that tell you anything at all about the BELIEF IN ONE BREED claim? You can believe in anything you wish, but wishing does not make it so. Belief is NOT FACT, in the absence of emperical evidence to support that belief.
No comments:
Post a Comment