Are there any new breeds being developed?

Color genetics is very complicated in dogs. You have breeds such as the gordon, where black and tan id predominate, the red and tan recessive and a disqualification. That breeding would be the standard BB X bb genetics. Same as the Weims. Then you have the Afghans, whose color is much more complecated. Then you have breed where deafness is attached to the recessive gene, that is more than likely the trait that also carries the white coloring.
 
Back to the original thread, and in response to Dumdog, yes, there are Llewellyn setters at hunt test, though I must admit, at least here in Michigan, not as moany as bench Irish and Gordons. That is the problem of the English Setter people not promoting their dogs in the field. I think they should do that before they go and promote another 'breed' that looks like their breed.
 
As any person that holds true to their breed knows, the more 'birdy' (or in the case of hounds, the more in tune they are to their prey) the less likely they are to be good house dogs. That is why we have issues, that is why we have breeder education of our breed.
 
My dogs were bred to have to show you where the birds are. I may not want to know where the birds are, but that is in the very core of my dogs being. So I may have 'issues' with a Gordon Setter. You get a Golden Retriever, who probably could care less what a bird is, you get a good house dog. That is why hound people have such a hard time with their dogs. Hounds are still very close to doing what they were bred for, that is, getting the game for you, without you.
 
A bench bred Irish Red and White Setter does not look like a Llewellyn Setter (Go to a show in Canada, where they are registered, there are quite a few. Actually, I've see more Red and White Setters at hunt test than English Setters!).
 
My opinion is, breed for conformation, breed for function, breed for friendliness, NEVER breed for color, or fashion. If you want an upland birdaog that hunts fast, get a Brittany or a Viszla, or one of the Pointers. If you want a slower, closer to the gun, dog, get a setter or a spaniel. No need to 'Make your mark on the breed' by developing a 'strain' of the breed with your kennel name, or even worse your last name attached to it.

Sorry, my post should have said in response to Diane, not Dumdog
.

Again,  the discussion about English Setters was a tangient to the original thread. 

My opinion is, breed for conformation, breed for function, breed for friendliness, NEVER breed for color, or fashion

I agree with you, here. 

Hey I purchased my dog because I loved her personality.  I do agility and obedience with my little Llewellin. I don, occasionally lurk on an Upland Birddog forum and find that most hunters prefer the field type English setters to the bench type.  I don't know about Gordons.  Maybe they've stayed true to the original purpose.  Maybe there isn't such a chasm between the field and bench type.  I do believe that the original English Setter was somewhere between the two current varieties, and the one kennel is trying to return to that standard.  I don't know if that is such a bad idea.  It still is, after all, an English Setter and not a new breed.

 I have no problem with bench setters.  It is the general AKC person who doesn't recognize my variety that seem to have a probem with my Llewellin.  I really don't want to change a thing.

I live in Michigan, too.