The flat-coat's body is without exaggeration. The breed's standard calls for "power without lumber and raciness without weediness." It's a good standard to follow for all breeds of retriever.
The flat-coat maintains a less exaggerated body type than the other show version of British retriever, except for the Curly, which has developed a conformation very similar to the flat-coat, just on a larger dog.
This body type provides enough power to swim quickly and enough volume to keep the dog from losing body heat in the water (which is a concern–a whippet is a sorry water dog because its lithe frame loses too much heat). But instead of going overboard (no pun intended) with bone and body volume, the flat-coat still maintains spry body that can move quickly on land and over hedgerows.
The show golden has gone away from this ideal, producing heavily coated dogs that have a great deal of “lumber.” The field Labrador has gone the other way. It is becoming very lanky, almost like a water greyhound.
It is truly a shame that this flat-coated breed is so riddled with cancer that its life expectancy is significantly shorter than that of its closest cousin, the golden retriever.
It is also a shame that North American retriever trials are not really designed for the two “setter-retriever” breeds, which are upland game retrievers first and foremost. Both goldens and flatties will cast into the wind, naturally quartering into long runs into the wind. Their setter ancestors gave them this talent. We don’t have any real trials or tests for a grouse retriever in North America, except to use them in that capacity and breed from those that do the task well. After all, doesn’t North America have a greater diversity of grouse than all of Europe?
Goldens once had this body type. This body type was preferred over the lumbering beasts we often see. If you don’t believe me, have a look at this. Ignore the article, just scroll down until you get to the photos of early champion goldens. This article’s text defends the creamed colored Newfoundlandy type dog, but the pictures included at the bottom speak a thousand words. They contradict the article so completely. I don’t even have to say it. Compare those dogs with the flat-coat pictured above. Very similar, aren’t they? Those dogs in the photos represent a compendium of the early golden, a dog that is being distorted through the caprices and vagaries that have become conformation dog breeding. (Some of those early dogs have a Tweed water spaniel/Tweed water dog appearance, such as “Ch. Bruce of Drewstraw.” He has a shorter coat and spaniel’s ears. Some of the dogs also have the setter’s sloping topline, which was rightly corrected in one of the standard revisions, simply because it destracts from the dog’s hindquarters, which need more power in order to swim quickly.)
These dogs are really far removed from the modern dogs that are depicted with the article. It’s a great juxtaposition.
The flat-coat, unlike its close cousins, the golden and the Lab, has been able to maintain a working standard. It has done so with a much narrower genetic base and with a retriever fancy that once spread rumors that it was a borzoi crossbreed. This rumor still pops up now and again, and it has never been substantiated. It is very similar to the rumor that was spread about Irish water spaniels. They were said to be too surly with other dogs to ever be used, which is one reason why this breed is so rare in Europe and rather uncommon in North America.
I think you do Flat-Coats a disservice. Yes, cancer is a problem in our breed, but I would hardly say we are “riddled” with it. It is in Goldens as well. I just read on the National Club’s website that cancer is the number one killer of Goldens. Come to think of it, five of the seven different breeds I’ve lived with have died of cancer (my FCR is thankfully still with me). The life expectancy for both Goldens and FCR’s is 10-11 years. However, the important thing to note is all the energy and funds FCR people are channeling into cancer research, databases, and diligent breeding practices. There’s a lot of hope here.
In goldens, though, the cancer rates are much lower, only 38 percent of the study population in the KC’s morbidity study. In Flat-coats, it was 54 percent.
Actually, the life expectancy for a golden is 10 to 13 years. I’ve had dogs that lived 14 and 15 years, both were of field breeding. My first dog’s dam lived to be 17. It’s the “show” goldens that live 10 years and die of something horrible.
The golden’s life expectancy is longer than the flat-coat’s on average. I can show you the morbidity statistics, but it will take a minute.
I happen to like the flat-coat a lot.
I actually did not do the flat-coat any disservice here.
I actually complemented the breed on its “real world” working standard, something that goldens don’t have.
Here’s the morbidity data:
http://users.pullman.com/lostriver/breeddata.htm#Sporting%20Retriever
Of all surveys, the golden lived about 12.04 years, which is, I’d say, an acturate statistic. And the flat-coat: 9.02.
3 years, when you’re playing with averages, is pretty statistically significant.
Having just lost a boxer cross at age 11 to osteosarcoma, which I hear is a big cancer in flat-coats, I don’t think I could go through it again. The two field goldens I mentioned living to the old age, both died of cancer (one of cancer of forebrain and the other of hemangioscaroma). But to me, there’s a big difference between a dog dying at 9 with a cancer and one dying at 15 with it.
Point taken. Thank you for recognizing something that is very important in our breed: the same standard for the whole breed; no split between show and field dogs. I like to look at some of the breeds in the ring and wonder if they could still do what they were originally bred to do – and not just physically. I remember seeing a Ridgeback so shy it was shaking and trying to hide behind the handler. I wondered if it was likely to face a lion, even with a pack to back it up. And I wonder if some of the hefty Labradors would be able to keep up for a whole day of field work. I know my Flattie can…and does. And at 2.5 he’s a CH in the breed ring too.
But I do watch longevity closely, especially in lines near my guy. I really believe things are getting better and not just because of improved medical treatment. Maybe wishful thinking, yes, but I know how important it is at the National level and how much research is being done. I am hopeful. I enjoy your blog very much.
I really love the flat-coat, and I hope that its dedicated breeders can reduce the cancer rate in the breed. I just happened to luck into that line of goldens that has a long lifespan. I know that there are some lines that have much higher cancer rate. I’ve known goldens to develop malignant tumors at under a year of age. Cancer is definitely a top concern with the breed, but what’s worse is joint and growth deformities, which I think are exacerbated by breeding for too much bone and not enough leg.
I’m glad you like the blog. I think I have more flat-coat people viewing this blog than those of any other breed.