Ch. Bridford Giddie owned by Moses Woolland. You can't tell me that such short legs are functional to a working spaniel.
Very few posts have resulted in more invective on this blog than my two posts on the Sussex spaniel. (You see them here and here.)
I have since researched this breed a little more closely.
There have been liver spaniels in Sussex for a long time. The one that Stubbs painted was probably quite similar to the original dog.
This painting was made in 1782.
In the early 1800’s, a particular strain of this liver spaniel was founded by a man known as “Mr. Fuller” from Rosehill in Sussex.
It was he who actually founded the modern dog called a Sussex spaniel
Now, maybe the dogs worked really well for him. And maybe the dogs do have some utility today–although most likely as museum pieces and “heritage breeds.” These spaniels do have good noses and a methodical hunting style that might be of some use.
However, the breed is not the working dog it once was. As a show dog, it was bred for shorter and shorter legs (as you can see in the case of Bridford Giddie.) The dogs stopped being bred for working traits, and the working spaniel people passed them by.
That’s why the breed is in such trouble today in terms of numbers.
The related field spaniel had exactly the same problem.
Ch. Bridford Brilliant, a black field spaniel owned by Moses Woolland.
It also suffered a rather severe drop in numbers from which it has not recovered.
However, its exaggerations have been moderated. In fact, they not only have been moderated, they have been replaced with a requirement for more moderate conformation. And the field spaniel, at least in this country, does have a somewhat more modest footing since the conformation changed.
Please do not assume that I dislike the Sussex spaniel. A spaniel of this type could reasonably have some utility, but when run against the English springer or even an upland game retriever (especially a golden or European working Labrador, both of which have very good noses), it is not going to come out well.
The Sussex might be able to save itself if it were marketed as a docile, non-Avalanche of Rage prone spaniel. I could see this dog as a yuppie puppy– the latest trend among urban professionals who want something unique for their canine company.
There is a use for the Sussex Spaniel — as a main course in a country where they eat dogs.
Other than that? Nope, not really.
It is an ugly and useless dog, which is why so few people own them.
Across the world, more people are killed by lightning while smoking a cigar and wearing a Tutu than have ever been seen in the field hunting with a Sussex Spaniel.
P.
I can see one limited use for them as a working dog. If you are after heavily pressured and wild game birds that will not flush from a quartering springer or cocker, I’d get one of these dogs, because through their own inertia, they eventually push those birds out. The other reason is that they flush slowly. If your dog reading skills are poor, you can tell when these dogs are about to make a flush a long time in advance. Some of them also bark just before a flush.
But other than that, the springer is the working spaniel. There is a working form of Clumber, which has longer legs and a lighter frame that you see in the show dog, but as far as I know, virtually all Sussex spaniels are like this.
Short legged, heavy dogs generally don’t have the endurance needed to actually do their work.
But I still hold out some hope that they will become a yuppie puppy. Being cute or ugly never stopped a dog from gaining popularity.
What I find interesting is the assumption that exists among Sussex spaniel people that their breed started with Mr. Fuller. Mr. Fuller merely “modernized” it. And it was popular to have very short legs on spaniels for a time.
I should post the photos of the field spaniels with smaller legs than you’d see on a basset hound.
Of course, if you are running a Sussex after pheasants, the pheasants will just run away. Pheasants are running birds, and they would rather do that than fly in most cases. That’s why most British flushing spaniels are fast dogs.
[…] It is definitely a myth that they always had very, very short legs. Like the dog in my earlier post. […]
I think the Sussex are fantastic! Just ask Stump who came out of retirement to win at Westminster. I know that probably does not impress this crowd but it sure impressed Stump.
The Sussex is not for those who don’t see joy in a tail that never stops wagging.
Some of us get the Sussex and others don’t. I like it that way!
Lastly, I must disagree with the statement, “Short legged, heavy dogs generally don’t have the endurance needed to actually do their work.”
You obviously have never seen bassets hunting. There is nothing general about it!
Gentlemen…..
Cat, Chaps and Emma Rudert
bassethoundtown.com
Actually I have.
Working-type bassets are okay.
The show type get worn out very easily.
My grandfather’s friends had a pack of the show-type that couldn’t run all day at all. After two hours, they had to lie down. One dog would just lie down in the middle of the road, waiting to be picked up after being hunted.
They wanted to run rabbits, but that’s all they had.
I have a post on them somewhere:
https://retrieverman.wordpress.com/2009/02/16/show-bassets-arent-good-rabbit-dogs/
Working bassets are very, very different, (as are all of those French bassets that are still worked regularly today) and do have endurance. It’s just they are inappropriate for my terrain of my area, which is thickly forested, steep mountains. The smaller size beagles are a better choice for rabbiting here.
Sussex spaniels are a museum piece dog.
Stump doesn’t impress me one little bit.
It slightly catch up my attention this kind of breed. It looks unique. It’s fun to know that you really researched for its bread history. That was cool!