Size versus "Standards"

[Hagar]

I wasn't sure if this should go here or under the Best of Breed heading. There have been several topics here about the size or weight of our Cairns, so I'll ask the question here. I won't be offended if the moderator feels it should be in another area.

In some of my recent fiction books, I have seen several references to other breeds being very different in the U.S. compared to their country of origin ( especially European breeds). OK, the books were fiction, but the topic seems to have some basis in fact. One example was that a German Shepard bred in Germany is vastly different from a U.S. bred German Shepard.

Using the "German" German Shepard and comparing it to a "U.S." German Shepard, there are considerable differences in size and temperment, and other things. Similar comparisons seem to apply to some other breeds. The differences seem to go beyond simply breeding down in size to create "Miniature" or "Toy" breeds.

So, the Breed Standard ( AKC) that most of us are familiar with calls for a Cairn to weigh approximately 14-15 pounds. Yet a lot of us have healthy Cairns in the 20+ pound weight range that are not considered to be overweight.

So, if we go back to the origin of the Cairn in Scotland, we find a dog thet was bred to deal with foxes, otters, badgers and other vermin. Some of that original "prey" can be fairly large. I guess what the question boils down to is is the U.S. bred Cairn somewhat smaller than the original Scottish Cairn? Would a Cairn bred to European or UK "standards" be different in some ways from a Cairn bred in the U.S. to AKC "standards"?

Is this topic too wacky and far out, or is there something to it?

[Jessica H]

Actually my breeder has imported several dogs from Sweden and they are larger than the US bred. Is is very typical for dogs bred in Europe are different from the dogs bred in US. You're example was perfect, a Euro German Shepard is extremely different than a US German Shepard.

This is from my breeder's website to show how the larger saize is accepted and wins alot of titles... he is a BEAUTIFUL dog...

"Wasco has nice bone, a level top line, a beautiful head, very nice bite with a strong muzzle and a nice eye with good color. He is a little on the larger size which is typical of Swedish lines. He comes from a fantastic award winning show kennel in Sweden with every dog in his pedigree being a multiple champion with most carrying top show awards such as: world winners, top stud or bitch and Cairn of the year. "

[bradl]

Dynamite topic, Hagar - I went with your initial instinct and moved this to Best of Breed since it's about the standard.

Some say the current American standard (alone in the world at this point) is in fact closer to the original UK standard as regards size than is the current UK standard. Others say that since there have always been "big 'uns and little 'uns" that either or both standards are arbitrary and capricious.

A convincing case can be made that Cairns on the larger side of even the American standard are already too big to enter after fox; on the other hand, as utility dogs Cairns had many roles to play. Maybe a fox might be left to the smaller dogs while otters might be better suited to being aggravated by the larger ones? I certainly don't know, not being a crofter. I'd have to say our two best 'aggravators' (loud, sustained, metronomic barking) are our largest and smallest dog, so for sheer ability to 'work' where 'work' equals quarry harassment and where den size isn't an issue, I can't say size seems to matter.

I agree that as Cairns get too large they lose Cairn 'type' and become coarse - there is something to be said for a small, portable dog that can easily be tucked onto a hip or under an arm and carried about by an elderly person, such as I hope one day to be

On the other hand, I've seen dogs that meet the letter of the standard in height and weight, yet they look like caterpillars, all out of balance. I'd rather have a larger but more balanced dog, even if it drifts to the high end of the standard or beyond. I love our big boy beyond words; an English judge gave him his championship, but I don't quibble that some find him too large.

Your mention of GSD is both apt and frightening. I've seen some striking and beautiful Scandinavian dogs. I keep a photo of one with a gorgeous head next to my grooming table to help me visualize what a beautifully presented head looks like. I've also seen pictures of some - in win pictures - that had what seemed to be exaggerated rear angulation and unusually long necks. I'm more worried about that than an inch or two of height, or a couple of pounds here or there.

As it happens, the parent club for the breed in the US - our hosts here, the CTCA - has a committee on the topic that is currently asking its membership to speak up and be heard on the topic of the Cairn standard. I expect most do that privately, as there is little activity on the intra-club forum topic on the same subject.

[mattoleriver]

there is something to be said for a small, portable dog that can easily be tucked onto a hip or under an arm and carried about by an elderly person, such as I hope one day to be

I take that as a challenge and while wishing to continue my macho street creds a bit further into my dotage, I accept. At the next Earthdog Trials prepare yourself to be hoisted up onto this elderly person's hip and carried around under my arm! Please have a photographer at the ready because I will only do this once and certainly not for a very extended time.

Brad, I know it is not in the breed standard, but is there any concern/desire that Cairns be spannable? That, in itself, would somewhat limit the size of a working Cairn. Is this a concept that one even need/should consider in a standard that states: "...active body with well-sprung, deep ribs,..."?

George

[bradl]

Interesting question George. I have several years of archives of the standards discussion email list and 'spannable' returned a single hit in 2002 from an American breeder judge that mentioned that it helps keep the size down on Border Terriers. She actually mentioned it in context of putting them (BTs) on and off the table herself, something we see English breeder-judges doing with Cairns. No spanning, though. I suspect only the very smallest bitches, and few of them, would be spannable, even with the US standard. I can barely get my fingertips to touch on little Barley, and she's a waif these days.

[Greg P]

The old adage, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" has never been so true as in the world of dog exhibition.

For all breeds, there is an intoxicating desire to create the "specimen" -- the Best In Show and big group winner. As breeders get caught up in creating a "specimen", the vision of the breeds function dims.

Every breed has a word picture called a "standard". These standards include the ideal size and weight for the ideal dog. While some people are committed "rule followers", many others are "rule pushers".

Today, it may be possible for a nicely balanced 10 inch male cairn to finish an AKC championship (perhaps after a long campaign), howver, this dog will never win on the big stage of a national specialty or prestige show. Over the years, the size of winning cairns have been "pushed".

I've studied family lines, and without getting too technical, it has been recognized that there is a "type" difference within the breed. Loosely, the two types from the past were the "UK type" and the "US type". I think it's fair to say that cairns now have a third type -- "the Scandinavian type".

In Canada, I saw a + 14inch cairn win an AOM in a specialty. Several Canadian breeders have gravitated toward Swedish lines, which to my eye have significantly changed the silhouette and body shape of the cairn terrier. This year the Swedish are holding a "world cairn terrier conference". Hmmmmm

Perhpas it's time to update the US cairn standard to reality. Dogs will not go back to 10 inches. But at the same time, if we were to adapt the UK 11-12 inch model, a disqualification by wicketing should be put in place to keep the exhibitor from pushing the cairn's size further. We also need to keep a keen interest in preventing the cairn from becoming overly angulated and keep the hocks from growing out of proportion.

Perhaps another solution is to create two standards like the Beagle. We could have a 12" breed and a 15" breed.

Think about this, as the cairn approaches 15", it only puts us 8 inches from the Airdale standard -- the largest terrier.

[Greg P]

Again, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder".

Four different examples of Swedish Cairn Terriers (one dog and three bitches). All appear to be "stacked" in a similair fashion to German Shepard Dog

Do we want this for our vision of the perfect cairn terrier? Or the balanced, more square US type?

And finally, where does "function" fit into the picture?

[Hagar]

Wow! I started out trying to determine if there were essentially two different Cairns, and apparently the differences can be quite varied. there has been a lot of interesting information in the replies.

As far as I can tell, Renny looks like what a Cairn should look like according to the AKC standards. But, he is on the big side at 20+ pounds. As far as I can tell, he is about 11" at the shoulder ( He doesn't exactly stand still when he see's the ruler ). I would imagine that a Cairn expert would decide that his tail is too long, or his ears are too hairy, or his feet are too big or something, but he is not a show dog, and I love him just the way he is. He is my Buddy, and that's what counts the most.

[nancy rink]

My vote is absolutely for the nice, square balanced conformation. I'm also not liking the long necks on those Swedish dogs. Rocky is just over 12" at the shoulder but weighs 18 pounds & not an ounce of fat. He's far from a show dog in his conformation but there's no mistaking what he is, and his nice square build makes him quick, balanced & agile. That tendency towards 'stacking' looks like it could eventually cause hip & leg problems in the dogs with those sprung-out hocks.

[Tracy A.]

Wow the Swedish examples have really long necks! Tail tip and ear tip aren't even close to be level..... Gee I wonder if they'll start breeding in an ultra long tail to compensate!

[eastofeden]

Always interesting food for thought.....I think that we have a lot to learn from watching the GSD's. Certainly most of the GSD's I see today look nothing like the ones I knew as a child. And I know devoted GSD folks who have moved away from the breed because of the stucture changes (And temperment changes too...I see far to many GSD's that come into our obedience class that jump at their own shadow, or are fear agressive). The ones I do see that look like the old type of GSD usually always come from Europe or from U.S. breeder's whose lines focus is on working dogs for police work and not for AKC championships.

Greg your pictorial had me take a look in the History Gallery on this site. Now the US dogs look more like those old photo's than a the Swedish dogs you picture. Also of interst is the groom in those historic photos...much more scruffy and not as streamlined as today. Heads were intersting too not a single puffball westie type groomed head.

Form should follow function. We will always have dogs that are to the right or left of any size standard that are true to the breed. But overall the dog should be of a size that allows it to go to ground and handle the vermin it was intended to hunt. Too large and can't fit into a den...too small and unable to deal with the vermin. God forbid that we ever have Airdale sized Cairns or "teacup" sized Cairns (shudder) for that matter too.

[shergry]

Greg you certainly put some great pics to size up how the cairn should look. Now came the tough decision - "How do I feel about my own standards on the cairn." And I have to agree with eastofeden...have a good point on too big for the hole and too petite to fight the vermin. The unfortunate thing about breeding dogs is everyone thinks it is soooo simple. So we get those "cairnpoos", etc. Too see how it was in the almost beginning of the breed and to see where we are today...interesting.

I guess that even though my boy is on the large side, he always had the tight coat of the swedes and did well in the ring. I have a girl is on the smaller side and she had a little longer coat and also did well in the ring. They both are able to go to ground...just have not been in an area to see how well they would do against time. But anyway, I guess I am tossed up as to which...healthy, happy, good structure, good coarse fur, good teeth, and most of all comes to me when asked....well I have to work on that one every so often. Good thread..really made me think, thanks.

[dunraeven]

Hello, all! I would love for folks to read the following and give me your feedback -- thanks!

Kathy Cannon

sigean@hotmail.com

Height_to_Length_Ratio.pdf

[Greg P]

Kathy,

I read your paper carefully with great interest.

It's interesting, one aspect of proportion that's been rattling in my mind is the tendency for short backs. In your paper you wrote, "We tend to accept a proportionally "short" Cairn in the show ring more readily than we do a "long" one. Breeders and judges often find it more visually appealing."

I think it's fascinating how readily my eye picked up on the differences within your drawings.

The next paragraph says," It has been popular in the U.S. for many years to import Cairns from Canada or Europe and breed into those lines for the purpose of improving our bloodstock, with wonderful results. The problem is that our dogs are beginning to resemble every international standard except our own, hence the drive to modify CTCA breeding practices to match."

Again, I go back to what I wrote above, "For all breeds, there is an intoxicating desire to create the "specimen" -- the Best In Show and big group winner. As breeders get caught up in creating a "specimen", the vision of the breeds function dims."

From a standpoint of functionality, how important is back length? What is the function of the super long neck (are we the new sight hound?). Would a long neck help or hinder digging action in a sette (tunnel)? Or is the function of the long neck to have that fetching outline for a conformation judge?

I owned and showed GSD's over 30 years ago. Show breeding has morphed the GSD into a very different animal.

We often have discussions about poor puppy mill breeding practices and the effect on the cairn.

But what about show breeders and exhibitors? What will the Cairn morph to in 20 years by exhibitors developing their "specimin" dogs?

Will it resemble the sturdy little earthdog of the cairn standard? Or morph to the profile of a Kerry Blue Terrier, or a Wheaten (with wire hair)? Will a cairn be just another mid sized dog with "balance"?

[bradl]

Greg and/or Val - doesn't the group ring have more to do with the phenomena you describe than the standard?

As to the neck, it could be used to peek around corners But seriously, a certain length of back and decoupling at the loin is probably necessary for a dog to turn back on itself in a tight space. Agree that a short-backed dog would be at a disadvantage there.

[Greg P]

"Greg and/or Val - doesn't the group ring have more to do with the phenomena you describe than the standard? "

Brad, absolutely! No doubt in my mind. The group ring AND the big National Specialties, Terrier Specialties and premier shows like Westminster.

The winners of these events are the dogs that breeders advertise and run the ads for. They become the paradigm and the vision for other breeders to aspire to. The breeders aren't looking at function as much as what they need to breed to win. As judges start to place the dogs in group, other judges feel "safe" to do the same. The "dog of the day" starts affecting the look for others who want to repeat the success.

As for the standard, how can an AKC judge actually correctly make his/her judgement? They read the ideal, yet rarely, if ever see the ideal in the show ring. This makes their job IMHO completely subjective on what they like on any given day, and generally the "ideal" dog gets dumped if any competition at all is entered at shows.

So then as exhibitor /breeders we sit around and justify why we've blown by the height standard by romanticizing about the different sized dogs the crofters used and always point back to balance. (Yes, he's a big boy, but he's balanced!)

Cairns haven't been huge group and BIS winners in the past. If they start winning more at these levels with import bloodstock, the changes may accelerate.

I don't think it would be so alarming to me, but I've seen examples of huge Cairns winning in Canada (Swedish stock), and the breeding creep form Denmark and Sweden is quickly starting to change the mechanics and the vision of the ideal Cairn (US type standard).

Now, all that said, my paradigm and perfect cairn image comes from imagining an AKC Champion doing it's work under ground. Do I know how a crofter in reality worked the dogs? I've never seen it and have only read about it. So admittedly I romanticize what the dog should be doing as they persistently work vermin.....digging and crawling through tunnels and dens. I just think it's harder for a 15 inch dog to get there than a 10 inch dog. Everyone now (exhibitor and judge) looks down on the little guy who may be the one to get the job done!

I would love to see the standard upheld (and never change), but at this point feel it's more practical to attempt to cap future height infractions with a disqualification.

(It's me...Greg )

[dunraeven]

Greg and Brad -- thanks for your comments! I agree that producing a big winner is often the goal rather than maintaining breed type. Because of exactly that, hardly anyone remembers what a truly proportional American Cairn Terrier is supposed to look like anymore.

Another problem is that we don't have many terrier judges, much less Cairn Terrier breeder judges, in the conformation ring. Other national breed club sites (e.g., http://www.shihtzu.org/) post Judge's Education articles on their websites, is there any reason the CTCA can't as well? We've all seen conformation judges who pick the largest, fluffiest head in the ring and ignore horrible movement, or choose the popular winner (since it MUST be a good dog to win so much, right?). They're not prejudiced or stupid or evil -- I'm convinced they just don't know any better. It's OUR job to train them. The membership has to first decide on a standard, then work to defend it.

[bradl]

Other national breed club sites (e.g., http://www.shihtzu.org/) post Judge's Education articles on their websites, is there any reason the CTCA can't as well?

No technical reasons.

[PeppersMom]

Do those swedish dogs really have necks that long or is it an illusion caused by the grooming on the neck?

[hallswel]

I would hate to see the smaller Cairns disappear. I have both large and small. Sugar just meets the standard while Harley is larger. Both are sound Cairns. I was told by several people that the winning goes in cycles. For 4 or 5 years the larger ones win then the next couple of years you see the smaller ones become popular with judges.

[Greg P]

The length of neck is not an illusion.

[Maggie15]

cant say that i like the look of the swedish dogs, there are none like that, that i've seen, in the province i'm from. i like my short little cairn!

a

[Cairnmania]

Well, the Swedish Cairns are gorgeous - but to my eye the neck and body are too long. Grooming also seems to be done to exaggerate those points, especially no "skirt" whatsoever.

English Cairns tend to be a bit bigger and a bit higher on the leg than American Cairns - but they are still much more similar than different. Probably why so many UK Cairns are imported to the US for breeding.

My understanding is that in the UK the standard was changed to recognize the fact that Cairns are larger than they were 50'ish years ago - and the U.S. has declined to follow suit - not because there isn't awareness that Cairns are larger - but because of the human tendency to keep pushing the limits. The fact is, a Cairn that exactly meets the breed standard in the US is likely to be seen as small and overshadowed by larger dogs.

In terms of function, I have two English Cairns - 'cause I live in England :-) One was let go by her breeder because she was too small by English standards to show - she would, however, be absolutely fine in the US to show in terms of size. When I showed two English breeders a photo of the U.S.-bred Cairn I finished to Champion - there comment was "so and so" always breeds dogs too short on the leg. (Although a US-bred dog, her sire was an English import and and her pedigree contained quite a few UK dogs.) She definitely was not consider short in the US - in fact - she was just about middle of the road in everything (except her sparkling show personality!)

So my two English Cairns - one is shorter on the leg than most English dogs, Abby. Rudi, my other Cairn is an x-show dog; by English standards he is an absolute stunner. In fact, by any standard he is a stunner. His problem is he is a wimp and so the show world was not the best place for him. Rudi can outrun and outjump Abby - I am amazed at how athletic and powerful he is and how well he moves. What he cannot do as well as Abby is corner - Abby can change direction on a dime - Rudi needs a bit more room to get going in the other direction. Cairns were not bred to run with the horses, for example, like Border Terriers. They were bred to scurry among rocks and in tight spaces to bolt vermin - so I guess I'd have to opt for the shorter leg and medium length back (Cairns should not be cobby after all, not like Westies).

Greg - my first show dog was a GSD. When I wanted a second show dog they are why I chose Cairns - I wanted a breed with stable, good temperaments, not exaggerated, one recognizable type (or only slight variations), less political, more owner-handlers, etc., etc. etc. Plus, I thought Cairns had a very high cuteness and cheerfulness factor. I'd hate to think Cairns are headed in the same direction as GSDs.

[Greg P]

Well, the Swedish Cairns are gorgeous - but to my eye the neck and body are too long. Grooming also seems to be done to exaggerate those points, especially no "skirt" whatsoever.

Actually I agree. They are beautiful dogs. I just wish I was looking at a different breed.......not a cairn terrier.

English Cairns tend to be a bit bigger and a bit higher on the leg than American Cairns - but they are still much more similar than different. Probably why so many UK Cairns are imported to the US for breeding.

I think this is good insight. I agree that they are more similar than different. US lines came from the UK. It seems in the cairn development that the DG and DR family lines proved to be the most popular. The modern US breeder gravitated toward DGS lines(influenced by Splinters of Twobees). It seems both UK and US breeders would occasionally throw in an "I" line dog, which gave them some leg. Perhaps the UK gravitated more toward the "I" line which caused the dogs to get bigger?

Greg - my first show dog was a GSD. When I wanted a second show dog they are why I chose Cairns - I wanted a breed with stable, good temperaments, not exaggerated, one recognizable type (or only slight variations), less political, more owner-handlers, etc., etc. etc. Plus, I thought Cairns had a very high cuteness and cheerfulness factor. I'd hate to think Cairns are headed in the same direction as GSDs.

Which is exactly why a "standard" was created. What's wrong with honoring the standard? Honoring the past breeders who created the standard who bred and exhibited toward an ideal?

The CTCA sent out a cairn terrier "movement" video (remastered in digital format) with the spring newsletter. The piece was done in 1968. I thought it was remarkable how the cairn terrier by large has retained it's integrity as a breed. In fact, as I look in compendiums and catalogs from the '40's, we still look like cairn terriers.

Yes, we have become more refined in our show grooming, but away from the show ring most cairns continue to look like cairns.

I am alarmed, however, as to how quickly the cairn terrier profile is changing. There appears to be a movement by breeders throughout the world to exaggerate and stylize the scruffy tykes. The biggest physical changes seem to be engineered by Scandinavian breeders, who even appear like they are adopting a new "show pose". I saw an example of that show pose in the newly issued 2007 CTCA yearbook used on a US champion (Swedish lines). As we see and get used to greater angulation and poses to show off that angulation, what's next? Like you, I do not want to see the cairn go the way of the GSD.

In my opionion, cairn breeders and cairn breed clubs need to become proactive and be intentional about either preserving our current cairn profile, adopting a new cairn profile or pushing for the creation of a new wire haired terrier breed. Breeders must somehow get control of size, or the cairn will continue to grow to become a mid sized terrier --with an entirely different profile. Without intentionality, cairns will morph by default. The internet and electronic communicaiton will speed up this process.

Some people say we have to "change". I talked to a breeder who feared if our standard doesn't change, we won't be "competitive" in the "world".

I ask why change? Why not honor the vision and the standard our pioneering breeders adopted so that 40 years into the future, the cairn still resembles the cairn on the 1968 video and photos of the 1948 Champions from the Compendium of Champions ?

[Aimfor]

Hello from Australia!

this is a topic that is of HUGE conflict here at present...there seems to be a great amount of difference here in size too in the ring...we have the US lines which produce the smaller side of the scale dogs, the english and now we are getting alot of the great big Swedish dogs....

Yes they are very large and I do myself believe to be a tad over angulated at the turn of stifle, in fact some moving long, low and fast like a sheherd, I believe mixed with the two other 'types' could down the track mingle quite nicely. We tend to see alot of really straight fronts and reads here, so i believe this swedish stock could help that.

Its kind of like everyone here goes "what height in the standard??" Its a total mix of animals either being tiny or built like horses! lol