working/show cockers

[Cazzie]

An interesting thread and it leads me onto another question, should the KC split the two strains in an attempt to make it clearer that there are two types of cocker spaniel, as it is not the first time that I have heard people say that they thought a worker was a cocker spaniel that worked as opposed to a different strain.

Not sure but a good question, leading on to another, there must be a difference, as if not, can I show sweepie along with the other show cockers 

[Jane S]

Yes of course you can show Sweepie - any KC registered Cocker can be shown. However as she was not bred to conform to the Breed Standard, you could not expect to be very successful in conformation shows just as a show type Cocker is not going to ever win a Field Trial.

[Cazzie]

Yes of course you can show Sweepie - any KC registered Cocker can be shown. However as she was not bred to conform to the Breed Standard, you could not expect to be very successful in conformation shows just as a show type Cocker is not going to ever win a Field Trial.

Aww  Thanks Jane  Yes as she has no coat she'd have no chance, but I dont think a show cocker is incapable of winning a trial, they are just as capable, infact Id rate some I look after higher than some of the mental workers ive seen 

[Helen]

I think within the current breeding there are huge variations of working cocker in size and look so the breed standard would read like war and peace....

remember the breed standard is based on a conformity of look...so in a working cocker breed standard how do you analyse what's right and wrong considering that 'looks' haven't been at the top of the list for working capabilities and many parti/solid breedings have taken place, plus a fair few springers and other gundogs have been introduces throughout the years...

i.e long ears/short ears, 15 inches to the shoulder or 20 inches to the shoulder, 10 kgs or 18 kgs , long body or short 'square shape' and on and on and on and on.  Would mis-marking (like pirate markings) be permissable?  Would more white than currently breed standard be allowed on solid dogs (like white paws etc....?)


You could show Sweep if you wanted, nothing stopping you - if she doesn't meet the cocker spaniel breed standard then you wouldn't get very far 

[miche]

As many of you know Herbie is a working x show cocker.  I already had Mikey my working cocker when I got Herbie and heard of some-one locally who had a litter of cocker spaniels.  Only one was left so I went to have a look.  I met the grandmother, golden cocker and mother, black cocker.  The mother was a working cocker x show cocker who was put with a stud dog who was a working cocker.  I was so so shocked to find out that they didn't know the difference between working and show types and had a look at Herbie's pedigree. I recognised many of the names on Herbie's pedigree from Mikey's pedigree and told the person who bred (and I use that word very lightly) Herbie that he had many FTCH in his pedigree, they told me that they chose the stud dog because he looked like Herbie's mum .  They really didn't have a clue!!.

I thought about having Herbie and decided that I would take him.  I could offer him a good home with my 2 other dogs and he would have a forever home with me.  I didn't know if he would look like a worker or a show type and he certainly looks different but he has a fantastic temperment and I did take a risk getting him but then again I took a risk getting Ronald from a rescue center, although I paid over the odds for Herbie.

So, for those of you who said that BYB's possibly don't know that there's 2 types of cocker you are sooooo right. Herbie came from a litter of 6 and I doubt if their owners know they have a working x show which could have turned out to be a shock because Herbie has the body language of a show cocker but he's very much working cocker, not for the faint hearted

Thought I'd share my story for Jane and her new FAQ article if needed.

[anita96]

Therefore if the workers don't meet the breed standards surely then that does support the arguement for splitting the breed.  Surely show breeders must also be concerned with the rise in working cocker ownership affecting them, in a sense dumming down the breed as a whole, thus by splitting them protecting the show cocker look and breed standard and allowing the working cocker people get there house in order?  These are only thoughts not statements   also before all the worker owners go mad, I am not suggesting for a moment that workers are dumming down things.

[Countrygirl]

Further to my earlier reply, I remember now asking the owner of, what I now know to be, working cocker puppies if the parents had been eye tested and he told me that cocker spaniels didn't need to be eye tested.  Thats why I didn't have one of his puppies.

[Cazzie]

There has to be a difference   One is good at showing and the other is good at working (as a general rule) but both are classed under (is it gundogs)  

I may add there is no difference to me as I find both stunning and infact think shows are pretty and workers are pretty but  rugged  

[Coco]

I think there was a double champion years ago, both a SHCH and FTCH. I know there hasn't been one in years but perhaps that's due to breeding making the two more and more different?  (I don't know, just a thought)

The Felstead site has a lot of info on working cockers and the difference. From is taken from published articles and some from the breeders own writing but it offers one opinion and I think it's an interesting site.

[Helen]

There has to be a difference  One is good at showing and the other is good at working (as a general rule) but both are classed under (is it gundogs) 

I may add there is no difference to me as I find both stunning and infact think shows are pretty and workers are pretty but  rugged 

but how would you define a working cocker breed standard if you don't use conformity to a certain look?
working trials?  Basis of pedigree?  Field trials?

And as for show cockers merely being pretty, check out the cockers in Europe - they have to do working trials in order to show as well.  There are no reasons I can think of that a Show cocker can't be a good working dog.

how would you 'judge'  Rodaidh for example against Jarv (forgetting for a moment that Jarv doesn't have half a good a trainer as Rodaidh).  Both are lovely looking dogs, but they have very few similarities looks wise (ok, 2 ears 2 eyes 4 legs yes....but to look at  no...)

thing is the breed standard may not suit working cockers, but what logical alternative can you offer?

[Nicola]

I think within the current breeding there are huge variations of working cocker in size and look so the breed standard would read like war and peace....

remember the breed standard is based on a conformity of look...so in a working cocker breed standard how do you analyse what's right and wrong considering that 'looks' haven't been at the top of the list for working capabilities and many parti/solid breedings have taken place, plus a fair few springers and other gundogs have been introduces throughout the years...

i.e long ears/short ears, 15 inches to the shoulder or 20 inches to the shoulder, 10 kgs or 18 kgs , long body or short 'square shape' and on and on and on and on.  Would mis-marking (like pirate markings) be permissable?  Would more white than currently breed standard be allowed on solid dogs (like white paws etc....?)


You could show Sweep if you wanted, nothing stopping you - if she doesn't meet the cocker spaniel breed standard then you wouldn't get very far  

Agree with this, deciding on what's 'right and wrong' as regards appearance for working cockers would be nigh on impossible. Take Tilly for example, she stands over 18 inches high at the shoulder and weighs over 18 kilos... there are probably at least a couple of other liver workers on here (so, similar dogs you may think) who could probably nearly walk underneath her and others who weigh literally half as much. Who's to say which is right and which is wrong and how do you decide? Different breeding lines have produced dogs very different in looks, build, drive etc. often based largely on the specific type of terrain they are working. If the breed was split and working cockers got their own breed standard and then people decided to then start showing working cockers with this new standard would you then get another split with some workers being bred to meet the standard for the show ring and other workers being bred purely to work.... it could go on and on.

Also, even if the KC did decide to split the two strains would most people still then really know the difference? Unless they changed the name you're still probably going to get a lot of people who'll still think that it's a 'cocker which works' as opposed to a 'working cocker'. A lot of, if not most, people don't go to dog shows etc. or keep up with developments in the KC breed list and to them a cocker will still just be a cocker.

[Jane S]

There has to be a difference   One is good at showing and the other is good at working (as a general rule) but both are classed under (is it gundogs)  

Of course there are differences but so what? It doesn't mean they can't be recognised and appreciated for their differences and still be acknowledged as Cocker Spaniels, the breed we all love. As with any other doggy issue, it's not really a change in the system we need but a change in attitude - we need puppy buyers to do lots more homework before deciding on a Cocker (whichever type) and we need a lot more responsibility from breeders so that their buyers understand what type of puppy they are buying in the first place. It all comes down to providing information and education in the end - doesn't it always?

[Coco]

Don't know if this is allowed but here goes, taken from www.felsteadgundogs.com - History

"Prior to the 1600's all types of spaniels were categorised together; the larger ones being used to spring game and the smaller ones to flush out woodcock. Hence the names Springer and Cocker were derived. In 1892, the Kennel Club of Great Britain differentiated the two breeds separately. In the 1930's, the Cocker was the most popular breed of dog in Britain and there he stayed for almost 20 years! On the other side of the Atlantic, Americans were using the same breeding stock to develop a slightly different Cocker. In 1940, the Kennel Club then split these Spaniels into American and English."

Perhaps one day they will split them?

[Helen]

Don't know if this is allowed but here goes, taken from www.felstead.co.uk

"Prior to the 1600's all types of spaniels were categorised together; the larger ones being used to spring game and the smaller ones to flush out woodcock. Hence the names Springer and Cocker were derived. In 1892, the Kennel Club of Great Britain differentiated the two breeds separately. In the 1930's, the Cocker was the most popular breed of dog in Britain and there he stayed for almost 20 years! On the other side of the Atlantic, Americans were using the same breeding stock to develop a slightly different Cocker. In 1940, the Kennel Club then split these Spaniels into American and English."

Perhaps one day they will split them?

but how?

there is such a variation within the breed - how would you 'define' a working cocker?

agree with Jane's post

[Cazzie]

There has to be a difference  One is good at showing and the other is good at working (as a general rule) but both are classed under (is it gundogs) 

I may add there is no difference to me as I find both stunning and infact think shows are pretty and workers are pretty but  rugged 

but how would you define a working cocker breed standard if you don't use conformity to a certain look?
working trials?  Basis of pedigree?  Field trials?

And as for show cockers merely being pretty, check out the cockers in Europe - they have to do working trials in order to show as well.  There are no reasons I can think of that a Show cocker can't be a good working dog.

how would you 'judge'  Rodaidh for example against Jarv (forgetting for a moment that Jarv doesn't have half a good a trainer as Rodaidh).  Both are lovely looking dogs, but they have very few similarities looks wise (ok, 2 ears 2 eyes 4 legs yes....but to look at  no...)

thing is the breed standard may not suit working cockers, but what logical alternative can you offer?

I couldnt as I know nothing about it and this thread is getting interesting, If I had to choose between Rodaidh and Jarv Id choose Rodaidh as I know him and I know what he is capable of, he isnt just handsome he is an all good rounder and ext obedient and completely focused on his owner which will make him one awsome dog when the day comes for him. Cant say more than that tbh. Im not an expert and cewrtainly dont claim to be one as cockers are a very new breed to me.