Are there any new breeds being developed?

 The three setters, the Irish, English and Gordon were bred for different terrain in their three respective British Isle countries. The Irish were bred to hunt over flat open terrain hence their racey appearance. The Gordon's, which is the setter with 'plenty of bone and substance', was bred to hunt slowly over the rough terrain of Scotland. They were not bred to be fast, because hunting in that terrain is rough on hunters. In America, we have events called 'field trials'. In these field trials, Gordon and English people were finding that their dogs couldn't compete with the smaller quicker dogs like the Brittany or the GSP. So, even though both were bred to be slower, closer to the hunter dogs, field trialers bred the 'field setters', in the English they are the Llewelyn setter and in Gordon's they are the Springset gordon's, and hyped them up to be 'the hunting setters'. Yes, they hunt, but they hunt like a Brittany. They don't even come close to the hunting style in the breed standards, much less the appearance standard.
 
The breeding out of the spots in English Springers was started by Julie Gasow of Salilyn Kennels about 50 years ago. She wanted to make her mark on the breed, and boy did she ever! Her line is still taking Best in Show at Westminster (this years winner).  I don't think there is anything wrong with breeding for looks as long as the original purpose of the dog is kept the same!

The new breed I can think of are Mi-kis (ME-key). My Auntie is actually helping CREATE the breed, and has a baby named Dot whose the foundation bitch for her new kennel. They're delightful dogs...very intelligent, responsive, playful, love to work for you, and they excel in the "lower" levels in agility.

Bodie's the dog on the left, Dot's the bitch on the right.

If you go to Ireland, the Irish Setter is much different than the American version of the Irish Setter.  It is heavier boned and closer to the ground with out the long profuse coat.  the shoulder is angulated more so the dog can travel easier over longer distances.

What is now the bench style english setter is not the original English Setter either.  If you ask any upland birdhunter about todays bench setter, he will tell you that the hunt is, for the most part, bred out of the dog.  Besides, what bench setters do hunt must be clipped before it can go out into the field. 

Here is a quote about the development of the Llewellin Setter:

[size="3"]"In the mid-1860s, R.L. Purcell Llewellin of Pembrokeshire, South Wales, began his breeding program utilizing dogs obtained from Laverack. Llewellin was primarily interested in developing dogs for field work, and he experimented with various crosses before discovering the nick that would ultimately establish his name as a synonym for topnotch field-bred English Setters." As an aside, confusion also stems from the fact that the AKC does not recognise the Llewellin separately from English, and they refer to all "field-type" English setters as "Llewellin" which is technically incorrect....but we all know what the AKC has done for field dogs [/size]

The English was always the lightest of the setters even before Llewellin developed the field setter back in 1860.

The Gordon is built for an entirely different type of hunting and terraine.

There is a strain of English Setter that is suppose to be the best of both worlds:  The Ryman English Setter out of the Decoverly Kennel. 

It alledgedly performs beautifully out in the field  and does will  on the bench, too.  It is probably closest to the old English  Setter that Laverack produced before the split.
 

Sorry Diane, I seem to disagree with you on most points. There is no need to 'develope a setter' that is used for both hunting and field work. I don't know how often you hunt your dog, but I am usually either at a conformation show or hunt test every week-end. Doogie my boy got his fourth leg and therefore his JH title the week-end before last, and will be shown as a special on Labor Day week-end. No way would I cut off all his hair to be in the field! I do however spray his down to keep the burs out of his hair.
 
In Europe to be a champion you have to have a working title and a conformation title. Many Irish and Gordon breeders import stock from the British Isle. However in England, as with breeders in the US, they still are doing some 'mixing' to try and make 'the best' hunting dog. When I breed Maxine next time she comes into season, I am importing semen from a dog that is in Germany and took a Group 2 at Crufts three years ago. 
 
Do these dogs hunt? Yes, but they are straying away from the breed standard, and I believe that is what this thread is about. People developing their own breeds for their owen purpose.
 
If you go to any hunt test in Michigan you will see them well represented by the Irish and Gordon Setters. These are the same dogs you will see at the shows. We take pride in producing dogs that have 'Beauty, Brains and Birdsense' and special award are given by the National Breed Club when a Gordon can get a Confirmation Title, Hunting Title and Obedience title. Our goal is to breed a dog that can do it all without having to spin off a 'hunting' version and a 'show' version.
 
A cute story I have is from lhis years Cobo Hall Dog show in Detroit. Maxine was being shown as a special, and I was walking her around getting used to the action since she doesn't go to many 'benched' shows. We were walking by a ring, she in her pink 'coat' I have her wear to keep her hair flat, and she goes on full point. I am like 'what the hey???' Then I notice we are at the ring were they will be doing the bird dog demos later in the day. a guy that was sitting across the ring got up and asked me 'do you know where the birds are?' I sai 'No, but they are around here somewhere, LOL!' He said 'they are under the table over there in the box'. so Maxine knew that there were live quail, in Cobo Hall downtown Detroit, with 2000 other dogs and people around, and still went on point. Then she went in the ring and took Best of Opposite Sex to the number 5 Gordon in the Country.
 
So no, in my opinion there is no need to develope a new breed of setter.

I don't know much about Gordons, but I think that there is more of a "split" amongst English Setters than any other of the Setters.  There is a huge devide between the bench type english setter and the field type english setter here in the US.  The Ryman English Setter is not a "new" setter, it is a "moderate" setter that is breed for both ability and looks.  Any upland bird hunter here in the US who is looking for a practical hunting bird dog would not purchase a bench setter.  I am not talking about field trials here, I'm talking about actual bird hunting.

Actually, my original post was not intended to be about breeding a new setter. I think we have enough gun dog breeds to fill the bill. My original thought was whether or not breeders were breeding for function instead of trend or money. It was about developing new breeds of dogs to fill certain modern niches like search and rescue, companion, therapy, etc.  It was really more a tangiant to the "designer dog" idea.  I think that Becca (Brookcove) addressed it and submitted some really good information.  (She absolutely rocks!)

The only reason I bring up the English Setter split is because Llewellins and Laveracks look like two different breeds. I'm not even saying that the bench dogs are inferior. Most Laverack people don't really breed for function and the Llewellin breeders breed only for function (although form follows function-IMHO).  Most  bench people aren't even aware that the Llewellins exist.  It happened again this weekend at an obedience show-n-go.  Someone actually asked me if she was a border collie mix!  I feel like bringing a copy of "Hunting with Hank" with me to show people that Trudy is very typical for her breed. 

I also have a field bred pointer.  There is much less of a split between bench and field here.  Many pointer breeders breed for both, which I think is the way it should be.  She is smaller than a typical bench dog, though, and extremely intense out in the field. 

I too agree that there are plenty of pointing breeds to go around, so that would be my point exactly in this thread. I would be shocked if a bench bred English person didn't know what a Llewellen English setter was. Trust me, they know. So wouldn't that be a perfect example of developing a new breed? Taking a sporting breed and 'improving' it rather than just breeding a dog that can actually hunt in the first place (as it was ment to do), then giving it a new name, then convincing people that it is better than the original. It is marketing at it's finest. there is absolutely no reason a Setter bred for conformation shouldn't be able to work in the field. It is in their breed standard to do so.
 
I also disagree that a hunt test isn't actual hunting. At a hunt test, the dog must run off leash with a bracemate, show that it is hunting, (the full 30 minutes out there), find a bird in the field, point the bird, have the handler (hunter) flush the bird, have the gunners shoot the bird, retrieve the bird, and continue to hunt birds. At more advanced levels the dog must also honor the bracemates point. Why wouldn't this be considered actual hunting? You can even take the dead birds home if you want.
 
It's not unlike the Blue Weim people trying to start a new breed because blue Weims are a disqualification, so they are 'starting their own breed' and calling them Blue Pointers. Or heaven forbid people try to make the red and tan gordons into a new breed.
 
In my opinion, creating new breeds is just a way for people to make money.
 
 
 
 

I believe that bench setter people are familiar with llewellins.  I don't think that other conformation people know Llewellins, because all they see is Laveracks (bench setters). 

It is believed that the modern Laverack setter has had it's drive to hunt bred out of them in favor of a tall elegant dog with profuse silky coat and a manageable temperment, just like the bench labrador retreiver has lost much of its hunting drive.  There are bench retreivers, performance retreivers, hunt retreivers etc.  and they all look different any where from short, stout and boxy to tall, slender, and snipey.  There are herding border collie, performance border collies and bench border collies - they all look different. 

Not arguing that field trials are not as important as hunting, what I'm saying is that actual upland bird hunters choose Llewellins and will be the first to tell you that Laveracks are no longer hunting dogs.  I know people with bench dogs that take them hunting...good for them. That's a great dog.    My point about the Ryman English Setter is that these people are trying to create the ultimate English Setter (I think that is a good thing) not a new breed. ..but this really doesn't have much to do with my original post. 

I really do believe that there are people who are trying to develop better search and rescue dogs (work ethic of a shepherd or malinois and the nose of a hound) and therapy dogs (low shedding, good work ethic, gentle people oriented disposition). And there are people who are developing large companion dogs without the almighty dollar being the reason because the majority of people who waht a dog don't want a draft dog, a herding dog, guard dog, or a high energy hunting dog.   I also think that conformation is pretty subjective and breeds are being refined to the point of unsoundness (German Shepherd, Old English Bull Dog, Collie, etc.) - and leaving the original function that they were originally bred for. 

I really don't care about the blue pointers or the silver labs or the...whatever, that is not what I was talking about in the first place.

Diane - I would say that it's not only that conformation people don't know about field-type ES- it's that they don't recognize them. I know I hurt someone's feelings at a UKC event a few weeks ago by assuming her dog was a BC X there for agility instead of a ES- and I know darn well what Lewellyn setters are, I just don't ever see them down here!  

just a thought, and i know very little about genetics, but it SEEMS when you have certain colours, like liver aka chocolate lab, then you're going to come up with some variation of it. i mean look at pit bulls, we have red white and blue and black as well as liver... so just by that example alone should give some idea of what to expect out of livers, silvers.. or is it blue?
whats the difference between blue and silver anyway? or is there just a slight variation in tone?
Also.... why was it ever allowed to have a standard colour in working breeds anyway? as Diane said "form follows function". i know albinism should be disqualified because that is a genetic defect that can lead to deafness not to mention putting the animal at risk for sun sensitivity, but that is albinism. why is the white GSD disqualified? they obviously are not albinos, i've never seen one with a pink nose and pink rimmed eyes anyway. GSDs are not really my area so pardon my ignorance on the breed. I also have never seen a black shepherd in the show ring. i have seen black and tans and saddle backs and sables, but never a solid black. is it just that no one has done it yet or is it a disqualification too?

it SEEMS that when a club disqualifies a certain colour that is when the breed is split and a new breed is formed. From a working dog fanciers POV it doesnt make sense to disqualify a colour as long as the dog can hunt. If someone brought in a red merle pointer to a field trial would they kick him out because of his colour? i only ask because i once read an article in a Field & Stream magazine about a man who trained a Doberman to hunt pheasants just like a pointer. she even managed to run circles around some other seasons bird dogs. i cant find the article anymore or i would post it here, but it seems like he was actually allowed to hunt his dog in a competition, but thats no big surprise since dobies have weim blood in their background, among other things.

Belgmal_girl, what exactly is that dog a mix of? does their hair grow like that on their own like a papillion or are they clipped?

Pwca

Geez, I know. [sm=banghead002.gif]   You really only see the Llewellin type setters on a regular basis at field trials.  If you do a search on English Setters, you will see that they are very distictively typical.  The funny thing is the Field Dog Stud Book registers 1500 of them compared to the AKC English Setter registry of about 500. If you go to an English Setter rescue site, 99% of the dogs up for adoption are field type english setters.  They can be very energetic and not everyone can handle the energy and drive that they have.  Also, if they don't work out in the field (not birdy enough, gun shy, etc.) they are given up.
 
It's amazing to me how little they resemble the bench variety, though. 

By the way, when someone asks me if my little Trudy is part border collie, I consider it a compliment [].  The Llewellin variety can be really drivey and agile out on the agility course.

DumDog, I know nothing about dog genetics either, but maybe the genes for certain colors also carry genetic problems?  For example, a pure white cat with normal colored eyes, while very rare and desireable to some, will likely be deaf.  Maybe the same type of thing is true for dogs?

dumdog
Yeah, go figure.  I love the English Pointer color standard.  It's "there is no bad color on a good pointer". []  I know that hunters prefer a white dog so that they can see it out in the field, but even that seems to change with different breeds.  The Irish setter as we know it came from the red and white Irish setter.  The dog fanciers found the solid red dogs attractive and distinctive  and encouraged the breeding of the all red Irish Setters.  The Irish hunters kept the red and white in existance as a separate breed because they prefer them in the field (actually they look kind of like the Lllewellin - fancy that), but the AKC doesn't recognize the red and white Irish setter. 

I think it's human nature to regulate and rate what they can engineer.  [8|]

i remember the episode of Breed All About It when they were focusing on the Irish Setter. if memory serves, the red and white was favoured because he stood out easily in the fields of RED heather.... imagine that lol

Maybe you're right, Liesje, it could be that some colours come with genetic malfunctions. Dalmations and Australian Cattle Dogs arent solid white, but ... have a lot of white in their genetics.. and they can still come up with deafness.
But something i dont understand is my breed, the American Bulldog, is predominantly white too. but i have yet to hear of a case of deafness. i dont know why not, but i wont question it too much. maybe there have been cases and i havent heard about them yet. i dont know about health defects in the silvers, blues, and livers though. i would have to talk to a breeder that specialises in those colours and actually knows about the genetics. there are a LOT of chocolate labs and blue pit bulls, but most of their breeders are in it for the profit that comes from a rare colour.

now, speaking of new breeds, or mixes... the red nose pit bull is a curiosity and a favourite of mine. i read somewhere that it is thought that they have french mastiff in their background, but.... no one is talking. i see a lot of similarities in the two, especially in the supersized red nosed pits.

and does anyone have info on the purpose of a king shepherd? the first time i saw one i was stunned. His name was Sigmund and he was with his foster mom at pet smart. this dog was the size of a great dane! he was found wandering loose in town and was picked up animal control. there was a breeder of King Shepherds but she has retired from it for many reasons. she worked for the vets office we went to before we moved. i owned one of the great grand dogs from her stock (via my cousin the shepherd breeder extraordinare) i know she took a lot of pride in her work with the dogs, because when she saw the condition he was in (underweight, lanky, looking like a giant coyote) she was very disappointed in my cousin. my cousin couldnt see it but i did. i never met any of the dogs from this woman but i hear a lot of stories from my cousin about the female she purchased from her. how she was a natural guardian and herder, how she mothered two orphaned goats and protected them from local strays. she was the mother of Boss, the dog i had. Boss couldnt mother anything..... he was a high prey driven dog that could snatch squirrels off their trees, he climbed on cars to chase cats, and even got Kaydee in trouble once when he went after the dog across the street. Boss supposedly had some wolf in his background a few generations back. maybe so... he was certainly a good hunter and killer!!