English Type GO-TO GOLDENS...Circa 2014

   What strikes me as interesting is that the breeders of the English-Type Golden Retriever here in America do NOT appear to have a "Go-To" Golden stud dog. This is not necessarily a bad thing, considering the great number of breeders in the States who have lined up to breed Goldens you could count on one hand. Elsewhere on this blog site I have pointed this out-- without naming names. Certainly this does nothing to expand the gene pool for our breed.
   There are some possible reasons for this.
   First, rarely indeed is the English- Type Golden awarded an AKC championship in America. Most imports possess a coat color which judges are encouraged and instructed to penalize under guidelines developed by the GRCA. And breeders love to use title holders in their programs. This is understandable in the general sense, since a titled dog has been deemed worthy of the breed by his evaluators in the conformation ring.
   Second, there is a tendency on the part of many hobby breeders to purchase their own bitches and their own stud dogs. Most, if not all, pups are then sold with limited registrations; thus of course adding nothing to the gene pool overall. While a breeder may retain one or two with full registration for himself, other pups that might be of merit are denied the opportunity to influence the breed's development.
   Many English Types never show up on the national scene. Most are NOT entered in AKC-sanctioned events at all. And the IABCA and United Kennel Club shows are largely local in nature, with limited entries.
   For many American breeders of the English Type the answer lies north of the 49th parallel. That would be Canada, of course. A significant and growing number of American fanciers have traveled there and earned titles for their Golden Retrievers.
   While the Canadian and American Breed Standards both speak of lustrous gold of varying shades, the Maple Leaf venues have no trouble providing equal treatment for the cream-coated Goldens. Hardly the case in America. It is NOT the standards which differ but rather the instructions-to-judges documents that are at odds.
   It should be added that there is a long history of "go-to" Goldens north of the border. True, especially, of imports brought into Canada from Europe and Australia.
   Perhaps most noteworthy was Dewmist Davenport from Sweden, sire of at least 109 litters in his lifetime. Another prolific producer was the Norwegian, Mjaerumhogda's Kyon Flying Surprise credited with no less than 57 litters. Giltedge Traveller (Australia) gave us thirty or so litters as did Cheek To Cheek Steve MacQueen (France). Twenty or more litters were the result of breeding to Majik Mr Darcy (Finland), Stanroph Secret Weapon (Great Britain), and Guldakra's Ivan Lendl (Sweden). Quite a considerable concentration of genes for a Golden community far less in number than that found in the United States. While color was usually a key element in their selection-- most were born-cream Golden Retrievers --not all were of this lighter hue. What they had in common was strong pedigrees replete with outstanding producers behind them.
   If there is truly a Canadian- Type Golden Retriever , it is the result of blending many American-Type Goldens with this rather more limited number of overseas imports. But perhaps this is being a bit unfair to our northern neighbors. True, many American lines were used in Canada, but truth be told, the Golden Retriever arrived in that nation BEFORE the first Golden ever set foot on United State's soil.

  

WORDS OF WISDOM...OR Just Words?

The following quotes are worthy of revisiting.
     "Those of us who drew up the standard of points in the early days realised that the foundation colour of the original Guisachan strain was cream and knew the difficulty, if not the impossibility, of completely eradicating this colour. I thought then, as I do now, that a mistake was made in forbidding the cream colour, but my views were in the minority." --Mrs. Charlesworth
     
      "One of the most appealing qualities of the Golden Retriever is the wide range in colour of coat. If we are to breed and judge to the Breed Standard, all shades of cream and gold should be acceptable and no judge should accept a judging appointment unless they can be completely unbiased when judging colour."  --Valerie Foss

     "...let us resolve that there will never be one group of dogs for show and a totally different group for the field."  --E.F. Rivinus 

     "To judge is a great responsibility, because judges can change a breed, for it is the dog that wins in the show ring that is used for future breeding programmes."  --Valerie Foss

   Why have I selected these four quotations?
   First, Charlesworth makes it clear that CREAM was the foundation color for the breed. She was there. She should know. No need to apologize, "Charlie."
   Second, Foss states judges should be bound by the color range found in the breed standard, even if judges may have personal and subjective opinions and preferences. The key here is what is ACTUALLY IN the standard itself.  The reference is to the British show scene and British Standard.  BUT, please note, the breeder/judge/author speaks of all SHADES OF CREAM AND GOLD. Is there any way to interpret this phrase-- or rewrite this phrase --in such a way that cream is simply a shade of gold? No way.
   Third, the concern voiced by Rivinus in 1940 has been summarily dismissed by the GRCA ever since. The American Type show dog could well be mistaken for another breed when compared with the American-bred field Golden Retriever. I would argue that this is because the Breed Standard is NOT written for ALL Golden Retrievers but rather for those destined for the show ring.
   Fourth, as Foss points out, breeders breed to winners. If a dog (or dogs) look or style or whatever wins over the judges who rate him, he will be rewarded with a lifetime of stud service. Regardless of coat color, the overall gene pool will be restricted by those who flock to the winning dog-- regardless of whether a bitch has a complimentary pedigree or relates well structurally to that would-be sire.
   If coat-color bias in the conformation ring prevents cream-coated Goldens from winning championship titles, they will be largely eliminated from the gene pool. How can this be good for the future of the breed here in America? 
   Trouble is, the AKC/GRCA Breed Standard is what Club Committees say it is, NOT what it actually says. The word CREAM never appears ANYWHERE in our standard. The GRCA Judges' Education Committee has assumed and presumed to tell us what the proper color range is. Nor is the color RED mentioned in the standard. We are left with interpretations of "extremely pale" and "extremely dark." And these phrases are defined NOT by the breed standard BUT by a GRCA Committee of five who CLAIM to know what these terms mean. And the GRCA Board of Directors assert the Committee's RIGHT to do so.  Conclusion: the Golden Retriever Breed Standard is what a five-member committee says it is. Their OPINIONS are then sent to judges to educate them on proper coat color. Assuming, that is, that the judges pay attention to that document.
   And if commentators are to be believed, each ten-year period seems to have produced a wide variety in what the "current" Golden Retriever should look like.  If you can identify winning dogs by decade, what does this say about breed consistency? To Foss' point, what role have the judges played in this-- by "playing" with the breed standard? Or is lack of precise language in the standard to blame?

ALL English Type Goldens Are CREAM--WWRROONNGG!!

   Here we have two examples of GOLD Golden Retrievers of the so-called English Type (bred to the British Breed Standard). Both reside in Canada; both are outstanding examples of the breed.
   Thornywait Paparazzi (Tesoro De Ria Vela For Thornywait x Putjade Partypingla  at Thornywait) is still a youngster though Canadian titled; Sundowner De Ria Vela (Ritzilyn Rick O'Shay x Dolce Candy De Ria Vela) had already won a Spanish championship title before his arrival.
   Both possess the "blocky" headpiece of Goldens bred to the British Standard.
   It's nice to see "colorful" additions to a European- type gene pool in North America which is more typically cream or light gold in hue.

Not So Hip RE : Hip Scores

   At a time when the number-one health concern among Golden Retrievers was hip dysplasia, this highly esteemed champion dog was bred repeatedly; in some cases to bitches whose hips were no better than his. The question : Even though F is a "passing grade," was it wise to use this dog in so many breeding programs?  His name is not important in order to make my point. But how many of his progeny were added to the gene pool-- and did anyone care?
   As you can see from this diagram, the dog's paternal grandsire had only Fair hips, despite the fact that his parents were E- and G-rated.
   Given the opportunity, would YOU have bred your bitch to such a stud? The breeder in question would most certainly be considered to be a "responsible" breeder by GRCA standards; neither a backyard breeder or puppy mill. Do you have a problem with that?
  

Good GOLDENS ...from Start to Finnish

   A good many years ago Canada was introduced to Golden Retriever MAGIC by way of Finnish import, Majik Mr Darcy. He was responsible for adding noteworthy dogs to the gene pool both north and south of the border.
   Now North American Golden Retriever fanciers are being introduced to imports by Majik Finders Keepers, and his sons-- Majik Truth Or Dare and Majik Zero To Hero. The latter two out of Majik Vissi D'arte. You can find out more by pulling up the dogs on that invaluable website-- k9data.com. If you like what you see, check 'em out.