Working Bedlingtons 2005

[david2363 42]

She is comparing your Tyke to the only type of "Bedlington" she knows - the KC reg snow white fluffy show type.

This dog is well and truly fvcked as a working terrier (in most cases) In America they have all but ignored the breed standard and dogs of 19 and 20

inches are champions, dogs with poor heads, fluffy white coats and no discernable aptitude to work.

Its arrogance in the extreme to change a dog for aesthetic reasons and for monetary gain. BUT why should we call our dogs Rothburys or anything but a Bedlington when our dogs are more like the Bedlington of old than the show dogs are.

I could go on and on but Its all been said before but my dog is a Bedlington Terrier - he may be a bit darker and have a bigger head than the show dogs but a Bedlington none the less.

[swanseajack 227]

I could go on and on but Its all been said before but my dog is a Bedlington Terrier - he may be a bit darker and have a bigger head than the show dogs but a Bedlington none the less.

 

I'll drink to that....

 

Rothbury my arse!!!! sure this has been discussed on a different website... Rothbury Terrier.... oh f**k here we go, romantisicism....

 

Not knocking you Topper, just winds me up, people giving names to certain lines of dogs,

 

 

 

JUST TOPPED 40,000 VIEWINGS

[TOPPER 1,809]

I know what you mean chaps my bedlingtons are bedlingtons and just that i currently have 2 x bedlingtons 2x lakelands and 2 x patterdales and 1 english bull lurcher. i had somebody around to look at the pups last night and you could see straight away they expected to see show style fluff balls so i just had to educate them as to what a proper bedlington was then showed them the door and quick , sod them let them go and buy a kc fluff ball.

 

oh i nearly forgot congratulations jack 40,000 this has to be the most hits any topic on here has got and its still going, these forgotten breeds must be doing something right to get all this interest!!

[david2363 42]

Incidently, Vetgen (vetenary genetic research company) are compiling a database of dog breeds to help combat inherited canine disease such as copper toxicosis. The thing is, I'm hearing KC reg "Bedlington" breeders are shitting themselves to have their dogs tested in case it shows up the "fluffy" gene which is probably poodle and/or Bischon.

These same sanctimonious barstewards were the first to shout down George Newcombe when he started outcrossing to Lakelands.

Edited December 1, 2006 by david2363

[mick the fish 9]

TOPPED 40,000 .well done

 

Happy Hunting Mick

[TOPPER 1,809]

wouldnt it be nice if all these show fairies showed up poodles etc just goes to show what goes around comes around, just a shame it not done the breed any good, george had the right idea worker to worker always looking to improve the stock.

[Nipper 0]

Well done for this cracking thread!

 

On another KC note and similar to the bedlingtons scenario, I was at Stoneleigh show a few years ago with my dad watching a lakeland class. Along came a couple on the outside of the ring with the KC version and you could see by their faces that they were thinking that they had the genuine article......my dad and I thought this was hilarious!

[swanseajack 227]

ANYONE BEEN OUT DIGGIN WITH THEIR BEDLINGTONS

 

bit of a pisser for me today, dug 4' to Milly on a FECKING RABBIT

 

To say we weren't impressed was an understatement, she's never done it before, have marked them but when I call her away she comes, everytime... Today she entered a large fox earth, we got a mark on her dug down only to find her stuck up a tube with a rabbit in her gob.....

 

feck feck feck feck.....

[Bedly 1]

This question (when is a Bedlington not a Bedlington) is of interest to me, as I'm about to buy a show-bred Bedlington - which is all I can get in Australia. I agree with what has been said above on the degeneration of working ability and temperament in the show dogs, but I really want a pet that'll poke about with me and chase rabbits. I don't really want to be digging down yards into fox earths every time I go for a country walk.

No doubt, this pup will have a pedigree going back X generations, will fit the current interpretation of the breed standard, and be a Bedlington through and through. Will he be a truer Bedlington than the working ones you blokes have, that in blood really are 1/4 Lakeland or some such related terrier?

To me the answer is no. Breed in dogs is a shaky reality in biological terms, and almost all were created by blending and selecting not that long ago. You can close a gene-pool and call a group of dogs a pure breed, or you can keep the breed open to occasional crosses to improve vitality, performance, looks or whatever. If allegations of poodle crosses into the show dogs are true, this is an under-the-counter example. Working types can be more open and honest about crossing.

A Bedlington is more than a dog bred from registered-as-Bedlingtons ancestors. It is a dog that has a function as well as an appearance. Is a show-dog that has tip-top Bedlington looks a real Bedlington if it has none of the working ability or temperament that characterizes the breed and which led to its creation? Is a working dog that has a dash of, say, Lakeland blood, but which looks like a Bedlington and works like a Bedlington less of a real Bedlington than a show cousin that is useless for work? Is it function or mere looks and pedigree that determine breed identity? Is a beautiful show dog that has no working ability merely an empty shell - a nicely packaged Bedlington box with no Bedlington inside?

I won't labour the point, as I think it's pretty clear.

I won't even discuss the issue of show dogs gradually changing in conformation as new interpretations of the standard and fads come in. That's a whole new issue, but an important and relevant one.

If I had working Bedlingtons (and I hope to in the future) I wouldn't be defensive or apologetic in the face of criticism and snootiness from pedigree fetishists. I'd be proud to be doing my bit to keep the old breed going.

Having said all that, I can't wait to get my show pup, and I'm grateful to the breeders who have maintained these fabulous little dogs. I'll let you know how he goes over time.

[swanseajack 227]

This question (when is a Bedlington not a Bedlington) is of interest to me, as I'm about to buy a show-bred Bedlington - which is all I can get in Australia. I agree with what has been said above on the degeneration of working ability and temperament in the show dogs, but I really want a pet that'll poke about with me and chase rabbits. I don't really want to be digging down yards into fox earths every time I go for a country walk.

No doubt, this pup will have a pedigree going back X generations, will fit the current interpretation of the breed standard, and be a Bedlington through and through. Will he be a truer Bedlington than the working ones you blokes have, that in blood really are 1/4 Lakeland or some such related terrier?

To me the answer is no. Breed in dogs is a shaky reality in biological terms, and almost all were created by blending and selecting not that long ago. You can close a gene-pool and call a group of dogs a pure breed, or you can keep the breed open to occasional crosses to improve vitality, performance, looks or whatever. If allegations of poodle crosses into the show dogs are true, this is an under-the-counter example. Working types can be more open and honest about crossing.

A Bedlington is more than a dog bred from registered-as-Bedlingtons ancestors. It is a dog that has a function as well as an appearance. Is a show-dog that has tip-top Bedlington looks a real Bedlington if it has none of the working ability or temperament that characterizes the breed and which led to its creation? Is a working dog that has a dash of, say, Lakeland blood, but which looks like a Bedlington and works like a Bedlington less of a real Bedlington than a show cousin that is useless for work? Is it function or mere looks and pedigree that determine breed identity? Is a beautiful show dog that has no working ability merely an empty shell - a nicely packaged Bedlington box with no Bedlington inside?

I won't labour the point, as I think it's pretty clear.

I won't even discuss the issue of show dogs gradually changing in conformation as new interpretations of the standard and fads come in. That's a whole new issue, but an important and relevant one.

If I had working Bedlingtons (and I hope to in the future) I wouldn't be defensive or apologetic in the face of criticism and snootiness from pedigree fetishists. I'd be proud to be doing my bit to keep the old breed going.

Having said all that, I can't wait to get my show pup, and I'm grateful to the breeders who have maintained these fabulous little dogs. I'll let you know how he goes over time.

Is a pedigree on a bit of paper, worth the time and effort that it took to write???

Are the pure bred bedlingtons pure bred, how did they become the size they are ???

LOOK at them !!!! look at some of the American dogs, look at some of the KC registered dogs over here and tell me they haven't delved into something else... read back through this thread, ask yourself why or where did the roach back come from, the bedlington of old has gone... it has to have gone, same as most ohter breeds.....

 

different times produce different dogs.... but and a big BUT who the feck knows... if I was a 100yr old perhaps I could tell you.... it's all guesswork..

Good luck with your new dog, I don't and wont knock em...

 

puzzles me!

[matulkoh 66]

just one question where y want to buy a show one which is also working one? because i think only my Akela and Babsy are pure workers with FCI pediree. only thing which i can add the the bedlingtons of these lads are more bedlingtons that the show one. y ll see that 99 percent show dogs are not anymore interested in hunting and 99,9 in digging. their bones are weaker, coat softer and no so consistent, skin is sheer, jaws weaker.......................

so which one is closer to real bedlington, to standart

 

have a look on milly, she is in my eyes 100 percent pure bedlington terrier,

or y think that sheeps with 45cm at withers and more are the BEDLINTONs , may be they are bedlingtons but surely they are not bedlington TERRIERS.

 

only think which count is if the do can do the job.

Edited December 4, 2006 by matulkoh

[Stabs 2]

This question (when is a Bedlington not a Bedlington) is of interest to me, as I'm about to buy a show-bred Bedlington - which is all I can get in Australia. I agree with what has been said above on the degeneration of working ability and temperament in the show dogs, but I really want a pet that'll poke about with me and chase rabbits. I don't really want to be digging down yards into fox earths every time I go for a country walk.

No doubt, this pup will have a pedigree going back X generations, will fit the current interpretation of the breed standard, and be a Bedlington through and through. Will he be a truer Bedlington than the working ones you blokes have, that in blood really are 1/4 Lakeland or some such related terrier?

To me the answer is no. Breed in dogs is a shaky reality in biological terms, and almost all were created by blending and selecting not that long ago. You can close a gene-pool and call a group of dogs a pure breed, or you can keep the breed open to occasional crosses to improve vitality, performance, looks or whatever. If allegations of poodle crosses into the show dogs are true, this is an under-the-counter example. Working types can be more open and honest about crossing.

A Bedlington is more than a dog bred from registered-as-Bedlingtons ancestors. It is a dog that has a function as well as an appearance. Is a show-dog that has tip-top Bedlington looks a real Bedlington if it has none of the working ability or temperament that characterizes the breed and which led to its creation? Is a working dog that has a dash of, say, Lakeland blood, but which looks like a Bedlington and works like a Bedlington less of a real Bedlington than a show cousin that is useless for work? Is it function or mere looks and pedigree that determine breed identity? Is a beautiful show dog that has no working ability merely an empty shell - a nicely packaged Bedlington box with no Bedlington inside?

I won't labour the point, as I think it's pretty clear.

I won't even discuss the issue of show dogs gradually changing in conformation as new interpretations of the standard and fads come in. That's a whole new issue, but an important and relevant one.

If I had working Bedlingtons (and I hope to in the future) I wouldn't be defensive or apologetic in the face of criticism and snootiness from pedigree fetishists. I'd be proud to be doing my bit to keep the old breed going.

Having said all that, I can't wait to get my show pup, and I'm grateful to the breeders who have maintained these fabulous little dogs. I'll let you know how he goes over time.

 

I've sent you a pm mate

[david2363 42]

Bedly,

I might be able to put you in contact with someone who breeds Bedlingtons In Oz. They are in Penrose NSW (I DONT KNOW HOW FAR FROM YOU THAT IS) The dogs in question are to all intents and puposes show dogs But they are worked and bred for size, temperament etc (so I'm told)

Pm me and I'll give you the details.

 

Dave

[swanseajack 227]

 

 

 

 

just been browsing Yahoo images...

[Stabs 2]

Nice dogs mate. Do you do anything with them? :11: