Sad statistic at vets office/vent

This is a sore subject for me, too!  Luke is a Lab/Shepherd mix -- at three, he stands 27" and weighs 92lbs.  In the last year he really filled out (muscle-wise) and thankfully now I don't get as many comments.  He was incredibly scrawny in his first couple of years, though, and I constant comments about how I must not feed my dog.  People would try to slip him food all of the time, and my dog does NOT get people food.  It is shocking how little regard people have for your wishes when it comes to feeding your dog treats....
 
My dog is an athlete and is fed & exercised accordingly.  I work hard to keep him as fit as he is.  He runs alongside my bike into work each day (just under 2 miles each way), plays fetch a couple of times a day, runs agility a couple of times a week, goes swimming at least once a week, etc.  He gets 1 1/2 cups of Evo twice a day --- my brother feeds his fat Basset Hound at least twice this amount (cheap Wal-Mart food) and she gets 1% of the exercise that my dog does.
 
Personally I think many dogs are fat not only because of the amount of food they are fed, but also the TYPE.  When I convinced my parents to switch over to Innova Evo, both of their dogs (Scotty & Westie) lost fat and gained lean muscle mass.

I think I have one of each- bench and field.  Zoe is stocky, blocky and very muscular and strong.  She runs 25 miles a week.  Zuma is taller, a little longer and narrower from head to hips and does not run- she just walks with me a couple of miles a day.  Zoe can handle a cold water retrieve but Zuma cannot.  They both weigh exactly the same.  I would say Zoe (the stock one) looks thick and Zuma looks quite thin. Which one is which- field and bench? 

Just because a dog is winning in the showring, doesn't mean he's fit. 
 
An interesting article from Dr Chris Zink
[linkhttp://www.caninesports.com/fatdogs.html]http://www.caninesports.com/fatdogs.html[/link]
 
 
"Julie Daniels, a well-known agility competitor, was showing her female Rottweiler, Jessy, in conformation. After she got her first major (5 points), Julie decided that she would rather compete with Jessy in agility. Now Rottweilers are not ideally structured for agility. So she took 21 lb (yes 21 lb.—this is not a typo) off the dog. The dog looked lovely, and in the process lost 1 1/2" in height at the withers. . . . Jessy is the all-time top winning Rottweiler in agility (USDAA National Finalist 5 years in a row) and is healthy and injury-free at the age of 10 (and still competing in Veterans)."

ORIGINAL: agilebasenji

Just because a dog is winning in the showring, doesn't mean he's fit. 

I totally agree with this, I have seen some actually FAT dogs win show titles. However, bench bred labs really are stockier, with a much bigger frame, than field ones. []

I was actually really shocked at the weight of the coonhounds being shown at the Western PA Kennel Club show I went to this spring. They were....well, they were chunky, and HUGE!! Even my mom who knows nothing about dogs whatsoever except that they are cute was really surprised. The black and tans being shown looked NOTHING like Marlowe from a body-structure standpoint (Mar is from UKC working lines). They were twice as big and I'm sorry they were fat.

After seeing that, my mom finally shut up about how lean I keep my dogs. Nobody could believe me last summer when I mentioned that our vet wanted Conrad to loose a little weight. To everyone else he was skinny but I could tell he was starting to chunk up a little (transition from a rural lifestyle to an urban one--less exercise). We got 10 lbs off him and this year the vet was just off her head with joy at his new weight.

To be honest I have no idea what the "recomending feeding amounts" are for the foods I feed. I never have even looked at them. I go by how my dogs look and behave and if they are starting to chunk up we reduce the food and if they're starting to look a little thin, we increase until we reach a good balance (right now that means 2 cups a day for Marlowe and 3 cups a day for Conrad). I mean, having those amounts on dog food bags is basically like saying that Lance Armstrong and me should eat the same amount just because we are the same height. It's silly.

where i grew up, people who had coon dogs hunted their dogs. a few people i knew had black and tans, but most had bluetick hounds. their dogs were almost gaunt looking. they were well fed, but they ran off any excess during the hunting season.

i guess from that, my idea of a sporting dog had always been a skinny one.

Honestly, Ben eats quite a lot...he gets 3 cups a day of good food, plus high-quality training treats when we are working on a behaviour I still use treats for. He gets additives to his food once or twice a week, like a lightly scrambled egg, or sardines in olive oil. But Ben runs at full tilt for more than an hour every day, swims 2-3 times a week during the summer and gets ordinary leashed walks (for training) several times a week.

I actually don't view Ben's leashed walks as exercise...I know they are, but their value for us is for training, not for burning calories. It's easier for me to view only his off-leash time as exercise.

Ben needs a lot of food because he's a highly active dog...if for some reason he was less active, I'd reduce his food accordingly. For the 10 days after his neuter operation I fed him less, because he wasn't allowed to run it all off. I increased the food again when he'd healed. The idea that all dogs need to be fed a standard amount is ludicrous.

To address Edie, AnimalLover505 and Benedict's comments:
 
Edie - yes, a "bench bred" Lab is a lab that comes from show-titled lines and is generally destined for the show ring.  The dog meets the breed standard in type as per the AKC. 
 
In the picture I posted of the show labs that I just *knew* some of you would say were "fat" - these are dogs that are titled in BOTH SHOW AND FIELD.  They have been extremely successful in field trials - some of whom are JH - as well as attaining CH status in the show ring - woo hoo for them - and for the breeders that breed for the MODERATE TYPE AKC standard.   The bottom photo is of none other than Dickendall Arnold and he is a foundation dog in MANY field AND show pedigrees.  Granted, Arnold is considered VERY typey and many of the more "moderate" type breeders feel that he's a bit overdone - but regardless, that dog could still perform. 
 
Proper Labrador coat is VERY VERY thick - and a dog with proper coat will look awfully beefy and the abdominal tuck may not be visible in a stacked photo.  That's why show judges put their hands on the dogs AND watch the dogs move in the ring.  Ribs should be felt easily and you should be able to see the last rib when the dog moves.  This is much more easily observable by eye in a typically pet-bred Lab with improper coat. 
 
It is absolutely incorrect to say that a Lab bred to the AKC standard is unable to perform as it was intended to perform in the field.  The problem with the diversion with the field Labs is that the breeders are breeding these dogs to behave more like pointers, and also to have greater speed than a traditionally-built Lab would have in the field.  They breed them taller because they think it will make them faster through the brush.  The field Labs don't have proper coat and in some cases don't even have much of a double coat!  My own dog comes from field lines and he does not have proper Labrador coat, so I am not prejudiced against FT line Labs - I love my boy!   Now granted, the same will go for bench breeders who breed only for type alone.  Neither is fair to the breed as the dog was meant to look a certain way in order to PERFORM a certain way.  Form and function are inherently related. 
 
 

ORIGINAL: Zoe and Zuma

I think I have one of each- bench and field.  Zoe is stocky, blocky and very muscular and strong.  She runs 25 miles a week.  Zuma is taller, a little longer and narrower from head to hips and does not run- she just walks with me a couple of miles a day.  Zoe can handle a cold water retrieve but Zuma cannot.  They both weigh exactly the same.  I would say Zoe (the stock one) looks thick and Zuma looks quite thin. Which one is which- field and bench? 

Typically the shorter, blockier build that is closer to AKC standard is considered a Lab with a "bench" look.  The taller leaner Labs with less coat look more like the field line labs.

A breeder friend of mine has a great page about Labrador type.  Bench Labs are often referred to as "English" Labs and the field line dogs referred to as "American" style Labs.  Both are misnomers.  [linkhttp://www.woodhavenlabs.com/english-american.html]http://www.woodhavenlabs.com/english-american.html[/link]
 
Edited to say that my dog Cole's pictures are on this page as an example of a different kind of field type. 

ORIGINAL: g33


It is absolutely incorrect to say that a Lab bred to the AKC standard is unable to perform as it was intended to perform in the field.  The problem with the diversion with the field Labs is that the breeders are breeding these dogs to behave more like pointers, and also to have greater speed than a traditionally-built Lab would have in the field.  They breed them taller because they think it will make them faster through the brush.  The field Labs don't have proper coat and in some cases don't even have much of a double coat!  My own dog comes from field lines and he does not have proper Labrador coat, so I am not prejudiced against FT line Labs - I love my boy!   Now granted, the same will go for bench breeders who breed only for type alone.  Neither is fair to the breed as the dog was meant to look a certain way in order to PERFORM a certain way.  Form and function are inherently related. 

It's incorrect to say they CAN'T perform as they were intended to as a whole...but not incorrect to say that many Bench labs ARE incapable of performing field work. There is a great deal of concern in the lab world, at least here, that the Bench labs currently showing and winning really are unable to do what they were bred to do. So it's not true as a whole, and double-titled labs do happen, but it IS true in many individual cases.

ORIGINAL: Benedict

ORIGINAL: g33


It is absolutely incorrect to say that a Lab bred to the AKC standard is unable to perform as it was intended to perform in the field.  The problem with the diversion with the field Labs is that the breeders are breeding these dogs to behave more like pointers, and also to have greater speed than a traditionally-built Lab would have in the field.  They breed them taller because they think it will make them faster through the brush.  The field Labs don't have proper coat and in some cases don't even have much of a double coat!  My own dog comes from field lines and he does not have proper Labrador coat, so I am not prejudiced against FT line Labs - I love my boy!   Now granted, the same will go for bench breeders who breed only for type alone.  Neither is fair to the breed as the dog was meant to look a certain way in order to PERFORM a certain way.  Form and function are inherently related. 

It's incorrect to say they CAN'T perform as they were intended to as a whole...but not incorrect to say that many Bench labs ARE incapable of performing field work. There is a great deal of concern in the lab world, at least here, that the Bench labs currently showing and winning really are unable to do what they were bred to do. So it's not true as a whole, and double-titled labs do happen, but it IS true in many individual cases.

 
Breeders are "overdoing" it on both sides of the line.  Field Labs are overbred for performance, Show labs are overbred for type.  Both sacrifice the wonderful qualities of the breed.  I have a fantastic Lab and I love the way he looks, but he could never win in the show ring.  Some of the benchier Labs are not in condition enough to perform in the field.  If you want a Lab that has the traditional Labrador appearance AS WELL AS being able to work as a gundog, look for a breeder that prefers moderate type that has balanced dogs (as in, titles on "both ends") []
 
The point is - just because a show Lab doesn't "look" like a leaner FT-line Lab does not mean that the dog is fat, or that the dog cannot perform and those assumptions are unfair. 

ORIGINAL: g33

The point is - just because a show Lab doesn't "look" like a leaner FT-line Lab does not mean that the dog is fat, or that the dog cannot perform and those assumptions are unfair. 

No arguments from me there. []

Field Labs are overbred for performance

but if you are looking for a dog that is great at say duck hunting, isnt your main concern performance?

i guess i am not getting what you mean by "overbred".

ORIGINAL: cyclefiend2000

Field Labs are overbred for performance

but if you are looking for a dog that is great at say duck hunting, isnt your main concern performance?

i guess i am not getting what you mean by "overbred".

Field Labrador breeders tend to breed for performance over anything else, including TYPE.  What I mean by type is - what a Lab is supposed to look like. 
Breeding for either peformance OR appearance to the exclusion of the other is not what's correct.  If you want a tall, lanky dog with a shorter coat that's fast in the brush, why would you choose a Labrador?  Go for a GSP or something.  The balanced dogs I've seen can do just as well in the field as the "field type" Labs - and they also look how a Lab is supposed to look. 

Here is a direct quote from the AKC breed standard for Labrador Retrievers: [linkhttp://www.akc.org/breeds/labrador_retriever/]http://www.akc.org/breeds/labrador_retriever/[/link]

The Labrador Retriever is a strongly built, medium-sized, short-coupled, dog possessing a sound, athletic, well-balanced conformation that enables it to function as a retrieving gun dog; the substance and soundness to hunt waterfowl or upland game for long hours under difficult conditions; the character and quality to win in the show ring; and the temperament to be a family companion. Physical features and mental characteristics should denote a dog bred to perform as an efficient Retriever of game with a stable temperament suitable for a variety of pursuits beyond the hunting environment.

The most distinguishing characteristics of the Labrador Retriever are its short, dense, weather resistant coat; an "otter" tail; a clean-cut head with broad back skull and moderate stop; powerful jaws; and its "kind," friendly eyes, expressing character, intelligence and good temperament.

Above all, a Labrador Retriever must be well balanced, enabling it to move in the show ring or work in the field with little or no effort. The typical Labrador possesses style and quality without over refinement, and substance without lumber or cloddiness. The Labrador is bred primarily as a working gun dog; structure and soundness are of great importance.

Size--The height at the withers for a dog is 22½ to 24½ inches; for a bitch is 21½ to 23½ inches. Any variance greater than ½ inch above or below these heights is a disqualification. Approximate weight of dogs and bitches in working condition: dogs 65 to 80 pounds; bitches 55 to 70 pounds.

Proportion--Short-coupled; length from the point of the shoulder to the point of the rump is equal to or slightly longer than the distance from the withers to the ground. Distance from the elbow to the ground should be equal to one half of the height at the withers. The brisket should extend to the elbows, but not perceptibly deeper. The body must be of sufficient length to permit a straight, free and efficient stride; but the dog should never appear low and long or tall and leggy in outline. Substance--Substance and bone proportionate to the overall dog. Light, "weedy" individuals are definitely incorrect; equally objectionable are cloddy lumbering specimens. Labrador Retrievers shall be shown in working condition well-muscled and without excess fat.

Kate, it is interesting that you stated this thread because my stepdtr and I always have this conversation when she comes over and sees my “skinny looking” dogs.  Her mom and stepdad have labs that are never exercised (they have a yard so they figure that is all the need), they are fed absolute crap for kibble and canned food, and then they load them up with all the leftovers they bring home from dining out every night. These leftovers are things like, steak that has purposely had butter poured over then top and things like that.  They also are constantly giving them treats and these labs are the largest, fattest labs I have ever seen.
 
 Her grandma and a few of their families friends have had littermates to the last few labs they have gotten and the littermates are trim because they are fed a decent quality food, are not over fed and get daily exercise from their owners.  But their labs don#%92t even look like they are the same breed, yet alone from the same litter. They actually have lost one lab at age 6 and one at age 8 from overall “system failure”…the vets couldn#%92t identify the exact cause in either case. SO what do they do, go out and get more puppies and within 6 months these are the fattest dogs you have ever seen.  Every time they go to the vet, the vet lectures them, but they don#%92t change a damn thing. Every time my stepdtr goes to their house she lectures them too on how they are being cruel to their dogs by making them so obese.. they just laugh her off. 
 
I agree that this borders on animal cruelty.