Jump to content

Talk:Labrador Retriever: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Kumarrrr (talk | contribs)
mNo edit summary
Line 342: Line 342:


[[user:FT2|FT2]] <sup><span style="font-style:italic">([[User_talk:FT2|Talk]] | [[Special:Emailuser/FT2|email]])</span></sup> 13:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC).
[[user:FT2|FT2]] <sup><span style="font-style:italic">([[User_talk:FT2|Talk]] | [[Special:Emailuser/FT2|email]])</span></sup> 13:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC).

== Gallery ==

Added some new pictures of Labrador Retrievers ... please feel free to add more. [[User:Kumarrrr|Kumarrrr]] 12:53, 18 February 2007 (GMT)


== References ==
== References ==

Revision as of 04:54, 18 February 2007

WikiProject iconDogs B‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Dogs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Canidae and commonly referred to as "dogs" and of which the domestic dog is but one of its many members, on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Dogs To-do:

Here are some tasks you can do to help with WikiProject Dogs:

WikiProject iconCanada B‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Origin

If the breed was originally developed in the UK, why is it Labrador? --Menchi 05:35, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I've added in a sentance to explain this - the breed was developed in England from dogs brought back from Labrador and Newfoundland. -- sannse (talk) 08:26, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Perhaps describing the Labrador as being "further developed" and first recognized in the UK would be more accurate. -Steorling

Actually Labs had parallel development in the late 18th and early 19th centuries in both England (where dogs were imported from North America to develop fowl-hunting dogs) and in North America (where existing stock were used in fowl hunting, fishing, and ice breaking). Various lineages of dogs have been remerged with stock from the other side of the Atlantic at one time or another, so the development has been quite parallel on both sides of the Pond. It would be better if this perspective could be included in the main article, which is currently a bit misleading on this point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.19.25.239 (talkcontribs)

---

I put my Origin question in the wrong category. Sorry!! Are there two different types of "Lab"? American" and "English"? What are the differences if so? Kari KY.

The English/American terminology can be confusing because different people--even breeders--use these terms a bit differently. In general, Labs are bred in two different "styles": a shorter, stockier, blockier-headed style (sooner bred for swimming and showing), and a taller, thinner, longer-headed style (sooner bred for field work). You will see Labs of both types both in North America and in England. The stockier variety is often called "English" and the leaner variety is often called "American"--but, again, you will see both types in both America and England. English types tend to be a bit more mellow, and American types a bit higher-energy (cf. Marley in Marley and Me), but not necessarily (it depends on the dog). Regionally, you will see different Lab tendencies as well. In the American Midwest, for instance, American Labs predominate, to the point where an English Lab may not be readily recognzied as a Lab on an everyday basis. Many breeders try to breed Labs somewhere in the middle as well, so you will see Labs that look only a bit English or a bit American. These distinctions are not codified or offical at all, however (the AKC and other kennel clubs don't recognize these differences), so the terms can be used a bit loosely. This kind of clarification might be helpful in the main article as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.19.25.239 (talkcontribs)
You've put quite a bit of detail in the comments above. It's interesting. Can you dig around and see what you can find citations or support for, to make sure it's well founded and not original research? If so, then it would probably improve the article to have some of these points made clearer. FT2 (Talk | email) 11:34, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Obedience

"The Labrador Retriever, one of the most familiar breeds of dog, is noted for its friendliness, intelligence and obedience" ... so why is mine the exception? *grins* (FT2)

Are you saying you have a grouchy Lab?!?! It could not be possible! Elf | Talk 03:33, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Nope, just sometimes I am convinced whoever said labs are "obedient" just did it to make fun of me :) !!! FT2 09:08, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)
Try bribery - never knew a Lab that didn't work with ;) -- sannse (talk) 18:18, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

So how would you teach a 2-month old choco lab not to bite when he's being playful? He always does this when he wants to have fun and is being very hyperactive but unfortunately, since his fangs are so sharp, I always get scratches from him. Can anyone tell me how to handle him?

This isn't a training message board, but puppies bite one another as they play, and they learn how hard that they can bite. When they bite their playmates too hard, the playmate yelps and goes away. Puppies learn that "bad noise happens, and playmate goes away". This works naturally. Puppies who are taken from their litters early and sold to the publc don't often get this "natural training". So, what you do - is yell OW if you get bitten too hard then COMPLETELY IGNORE the the puppy, that may be hard to do, but you must. - Trysha (talk) 03:10, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I have a 1 year old Lab and I agree with both of the above, bribery always works (Labs eat anything, treats, vegtables, etc.) A slight variance on Trysha's point, if you say "Ouch!" sharply and with a high pitch, like a yip, pulling your hand or whatever away, I find it works well. Find a trainer that is a trained, behaviorist. You'll be very pleased with the results. Good Luck!


Labradors are notorious for "mouthiness", so here are just two little notes. Firstly, I know one woman who was on the verge of getting rid of a puppy she was convinced hated her particularly because it bit only her...and I mean hard. Turns out she uses special organic lotions and the pup REALLY loved the flavor. lol The thing I've always done with pups that want to put a hole in you is to grab their tongue or press it against their lower jaw. They will very quickly hit the "reject" button to get control of their tongue back....Works every time. I find it a really good technique because it saves you getting your hand torn by making your own exit and the "sounding like a wounded friend and going away" trick often backfires into its own game. Back to the Wiki, it might be helpful to mention puppy rearing briefly in the obedience section...at least a few things to AVOID particularly in labs...like giving them an old shoe as a chewy unless you want to say goodbye to buying Prada for life (You would not believe how many times I've seen this!)and not letting them up on the couch when they're a cute 8 week old if you don't want them there when they weigh 80 lbs. As I'm extremely new to wiki, perhaps this is going too far (I have to keep reading the guidelines)but I think it's essential for anyone thinking of getting a labrador to have their ground rules in mind beforehand....after all, you're going to have enough rules go out the window as they work on you with those lovely brown eyes! -Steorling


I am curious! I have heard there are two distinct types of "lab". The "American" or "English". Is this true? Kari KY

Yes. The English lab is shorter and stockier than the American lab. Additionally, the noses are also shorter. My English lab is often mistaken for a non-purebred lab due to the difference in look from the traditional lab. See one: Jeremy 20:24, 21 November 2006 (UTC)Jsbrown[reply]

Colour

Out of curiosity, what's with the yellow colour? The lab on the two pictures seems white to me, not yellow. ^^ (Admittedly, I am somewhat colourblind, but not with regard to these colours, so...) -- Schnee 18:55, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Both of the photos were a little washed out. I adjusted the lighting on the full-body shot, so it doesn't look quite so white, but the original lighting & contrast is such that it's hard to tell that it's not all white. This looks slightly better. I know what to expect, so I look at it and see the yellow. :-) This might be a lighter-colored coat, too; they do come in ranges. It's more like a wheaten color than a true yellow. It's usually more like this dog or this one; maybe we need a photo that better shows the coat color. :-) 00:49, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I changed the discussion of coat color genetics to discuss the B and E loci. This replaces text suggesting that there are two genes, one for coat color and one for nose color--I don't believe this is correct. The reference contains quite a good discussion of the matter. This is one of my first edits so I apologize if everything is not quite done to the letter. hagemani 22:29, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion of coat genetics is really so cursory it's misleading. There are far more than two loci involved in the various colors of chocolate lab...only black and yellow come close to the interaction described here, and most people don't know the difference between single genes and loci. Variation in coat type also has a huge affect on the color presented. What is essential, the fact that breeding yellows and/or chocolates for successive generations will cause a loss of pigment, is more useful to anyone not breeding the dogs exclusively for color. Incidently, the sudden appearance of silver labs should not be called a "dilution" of the chocolate gene...that is far from proven fact and under heavy suspicion when offspring of these "silver labs" are cropping up with the typical eye colors of the "silver ghost" Weimers! -Steorling

AHHHHH!!! i'm getting a labrador tommorow. It is 10 month female (black) hasn't been neutered and I rescued it. I dont know what to expect can I have some advice plz! About anything!

Someone has "edited" the section regarding silver labradors to make the color aberration appear to be anything other than a ~colorful~ marketing gimmick (pun intended). Silver lab enthusiasts, I would urge you to use sources that do not originate from "silver" lab breeders or from wishful thinking about a purchase that the AKC and the LRC refuses to recognize.

health?

What can cause a very healthy labrador retreiver to have a sudden seizure? she is young and well taken are of and has never had any health problems. she is 5 years old.

This isn't medical site and I'm no expert, but it could be a tumor, epilepsy, something she ate, too much heat, liver or kidney disease, blood sugar problems (e.g., diabetes), head injury, various infections, and so on and so on. According to the UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine Book of Dogs (Medical Reference), some dogs have a seizure only once in their life & then never again; others have them repeatedly. It also says that some breeds are known to exhibit inherited seizures with no apparent cause--and the Labrador is one of those breeds listed. If you haven't already been to your vet, you might consider taking the dog in, and you & vet can decide whether additional tests are needed. Elf | Talk 03:46, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This brings up another thought. I was rather disappointed in the health section...to mention Diabetes and not Epilepsy or "Sudden Death Syndrome" in labs seemed odd. I also believe the subluxating patella is not a problem in labs...not nearly so much as cruciate malformations or injuries. Subluxing is much more a poodle problem, at least in American studbooks. I also see no mention of screenings for labs (OFA, CERF, etc.) or PRA. There was also no mention of the elbow displasia that is quickly becoming a problem here in the US since the English imports became so popular with breeders. I didn't know to what extent the reader is expected to go to the various national/regional kennel clubs to find more information on health issues either; they are markedly different between American and UK bloodlines...just as an example. -Steorling

Details of Labs' Origin

This article mentions the origin of the breed in Labrador, but I have heard (from several sources) that Labs were initially bred to retrieve fishermen's nets. Is there any way we can confirm this and add it to the article?

Confirmed in both The Encyclopedia of Dog Breeds (Cunliffe, 1999, Parragon press) and The New Encyclopedia of Dog Breeds (Fogle, c 2000, DK press). Will add. Elf | Talk 01:25, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Speaking of confirming and quoting....why is it everything source/resource given here is about dogs in general? I find it very odd that books dedicated to Labradors don't seem to be cited, there are so many very good and important texts available from afficionados. If you love labs or are at all interested in their preservation as a breed against the scourge of their popularity, you should know Warwick, Howe, etc. Just another two cents in from the new kid.  ; ) -Steorling

Lifespan

Labs typically live into their teens? I was told that 10-12 was more accurate, or am I being pedantic? :D --PopUpPirate 22:35, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

My yellow lab died when he was 13. While many labs live up to that age, I think that it's relatively rare for them to live any longer than that. 10-13 years seems to be the typical lifespan.

The first reference I looked in (dated 2000) lists 12-13 years for Labs. One challenge in getting accurate info on dog longevity is that it has changed a lot, and rapidly, over the last decade or two, for a variety of reasons: Better food, availability of medical care, willingness of owners to provide medical care, fewer working/outdoor dogs wearing themselves out/living in nonideal conditions/being disposed of at the first signs of illness or lack of fitness. So what might have been accurate info a decade ago might be too low on the estimates now. (Based on a discussion with my vet and some reading.) Another challenge is in the absence of carefully tracked statistical info for dogs, compared to what's available for humans. Elf | Talk 23:40, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clearing that up - pity they don't live to 17 or 18 but never mind! As I speak, my 8 year old guide dog pup in training is wrecking a mattress and it's gonna get in serious trouble - lol --PopUpPirate 23:03, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
Pity they don't live til 40 or 50, once you finally go through all that work of teaching them not to eat furniture! Elf | Talk 01:39, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I added 12-13 number from reference doc. Elf | Talk 00:11, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

There are a lot of pictures and it is not helping the presentation of the article. Should something be done about it? Thelb4

Personally, I agree with you, whereas others may not. I also feel the same was about the Australian Cattle Dog article.
I dont think they should be removed, as every picture will contribute in some way! Perhaps, they should go into a gallery at the bottom of the page?
I would wait untill you get the blessings from people more involved in the dog project before making any changes though. Also, please sign your contributions to talk pages so others may know who you are, thanks. Tekana | Talk 16:30, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

kekemama sex::It's my feeling that most breeds have so much variation that it's helpful to have a variety of shots. I'd like to see every article have photos of the obvious variants of coat colors (e.g., black, chocolate, yellow) and even less-obvious ones (e.g., Golden Retrievers range from pale blonde to dark bronze red). And I think it's helpful to see dogs from the side (full body), also face on to get an idea of the personality and shape. I think it's useful to see puppies so that people can see how this lovely cute bundle of fur turns into this massive adult. AND I think it's helpful to see dogs doing activities, to give an idea of how the breed works. That said--once there are choices, I also think it's wise to start selecting for quality (e.g., do we need 12 photos of various people's chocolate labs standing up from a side view? Probably not, we could pick the best). And I also think that a gallery at the end of the article might be a good way to handle decent photos for which there isn't sufficient room in the body of the article; there are already maybe half a dozen breed articles with galleries at the end.

At this time, the only photos that I could see maybe being removed are the 2 yellow labs lounging--it's a nice photo but probably doesn't add anything--and the chocolate lab in the snow, which is really too dark to clearly see the coat or make out the details on the dog. I think that the others all add to the article, although the captions could be more useful. So--that's what I think, and that's what I've been striving for. Elf | Talk 17:51, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, I actually made a stab at altering the page & the photos. The layout still isn't perfect--if the page is really wide, the head shots start overlapping and shoving the text out to the right too far. I could put them both back into a table as they were before my change, which would fix that problem. What do you guys think? Elf | Talk 18:39, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bah! edit clash!

Anyhoo, whilst we are on the subject of doggie mug-shots. I think it would be good to have a photo or photo's to try and demonstrate the differences between the show and work strains. As a lab owner I have met meny of each kind and the differences between the two can be very dramatic! Especially since (where I am) it there has been a high demand of the "chunky lab" (basically, an over exagerated version of the show strain), and when you see it compared to an anorexic looking work bred dog, you can be confused as to whether they are even members of the same breed!

I would offer my dog as a model, but he is neither work or show strain, his father was a work, his mother a show.. hee hee, I get beauty AND brains, arent I lucky! Tekana (O.o) Talk 18:48, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Anyhoo, to answer you question... It looks all fine and dandy to me. The only pic that i have any fault with is the "yellow labs nose can be pink or black" picture, it has been pushed to the center of the page that that bugs the pants off me! Or is my comp just set to a dodgy resolution.
    • I'd agree with having show vs work lines. I tried to arrange a photo of a working-line yellow lab at an agility trial earlier this year because it was *very* different (and amazingly fast), but our schedules never coincided.

That image "pushed to the middle" is what I was talking about above--works differently depending on how wide your browser window is set. if you make the window really narrow, it should be over to the left under the other photo...but then everything's REALLY narrow. As I said, that would be fixed by putting the 2 photos back into a table. maybe I'll try that. Elf | Talk 19:05, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The images in the table are acceptable to me! My eyes no longer feel like they're being raped by offensive layout. God it feels good! Tekana (O.o) Talk 19:40, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, I stumbled upon this article. Somebody do something about it :). The photos on the left should be removed (or moved somewhere below). I don't have the time to read the article, but I believe it's fairly good. Robodesign 18:18, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I did do something about it and I don't know why the photos on the left have to be removed. If you have some other more specific suggestions about how to rearrange the photos, please make them. I already took out a couple that didn't really need to be there but I think the existing photos are useful. Elf | Talk 15:59, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Great overview, if anyone is interested in sharing photos of their labs go here: http://flickr.com/groups/blacklabradors/ The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.57.245.11 (talk • contribs) .

Yeah, but I think a lot of the dogs on the artivcle is just ugly and would like 'em to be changed with this --NorwegianMarcus 08:26, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What bothers me most right now is how many of the pictures in the article ATM have been ruined by too high jpeg compression. Acdx 13:50, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I'm going to come off sounding like a snob about something a moment...these photos really aren't great representations of labs,and I think it's not just about them not all being "show dogs". The picture at the top of the page is just a really bad showing of the dog in the first place...all turned around on itself like that. I also don't understand some of the "captions" with the photos. For example the photo of a yellow lab with the caption about poor nose pigment is actually pigmented very well. As an aside, I've never in my life heard bad pigment called a "snow nose". Every breeder or enthusiast I've ever met in any breed calls an all pink nose a "dudley". Maybe it's a US/UK difference, I don't pretend to know. -Steorling

There should be only one of each color for conformation,and a working Lab.--70.165.71.229 19:52, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

puppies with longer hair

my choc lab recently had puppies. three of them have longer hair than the rest. is this common


Define "longer". It is possible for there to be more than one father to a litter...if it's truly "long" hair and not simply a difference in the wave/texture of the coat (which can vary) you may have a mixed litter. I once knew a litter that at 3 weeks looked all the same but at 8 weeks it was really obvious that two of the pups were Cocker Spaniel crosses! {And yes, the breeder did register them as full-blooded labradors with the AKC. grrrrr} Usually it's easier to tell what a pups coat is going to be after the first "puppy" shed. -Steorling


Is there any chance that one of the parents was actually a Chesapeake Bay Retriever? They look like a chocolate lab with slightly longer hair... great dogs too. I think they look so much like a lab--and are such great hunting and family pets--that I'm debating using one to stud my chocolate lab.

Toilet brand?

I am somewhat perturbed by the fact that underneath 'famous labradors' a toilet tissue brand known as 'Cottonelle' is mentioned. If 'Cottonelle' is mentioned, then why is 'Andrex' not mentioned? That also has a labrador puppy as its mascot... Kyarorain 20:29, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't think that it was apropriate, so I removed the link. Was the dog even in more than one commercial? If the puppy was represented as an individual in the manner of Spuds MacKenzie, sure, but I don't think that this merits inclusion. - Trysha (talk) 20:39, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed both of these once again, as the dogs themselves are just nameless individuals in the commercials. - Trysha (talk) 18:46, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HTML Coding Doesn't Work in Firefox?

I'm using the Firefox browser. The photos in this article do not show up (they do with (ugh!) Explorer. What's with the coding problem? I haven't run into any problems before with Firefox. Askolnick 00:38, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just tried it with Firefox on my Mac and it loaded fine. If you continue to have problems, you might try investigating at Help:Contents/Technical_information. Elf | Talk 01:37, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am getting just fine on Firefox as well.--Counsel 05:18, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Im using it now and its fine. --70.165.71.229 22:44, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alcohol use

I have posted a question at Talk:Dog_health#Alcohol_as_treatment_for_antifreeze as to whether the anon's posting has any truth. If it does, it belongs in dog health possibly, not in a breed article. And I think it's a very bad idea anyway to post an idea of a dog appearing to drink alcohol recreationally. Elf | Talk 23:21, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Even if there is any validity to that claim, there is no reason that it should be on the Lab article.--Counsel 23:28, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I also agree with that. You can treat poisoning with a poison. People use that stuff to kill dogs, alcohol does the same thing. If the dog has ingested antifreeze he's best taken to vet where he'll probably get something like charcoal to bind the toxin then something else given to make him vomit. Also a B12 injection to help the body deal with any that may have gotten into the blood stream. LdyDragonfly 23:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Behavior

I currently have a Labrador, and its behavior seems very unusual when compared to other Dogs of various mixed breeds I've had. He seems to desire less attention, eventually tires of being petted, dislikes running long distances(10km+), enjoys being inside more than outside, does not make noise or posture to encourage me to do what he wants, immediately trusts anyone, and does not seem emotionally disturbed when neglected for a day. I've been told these are typical Labrador behaviors, but they seem so unusual that it seems they should have more emphasis in this article especially if these specific behaviors have made it the most desired suburban house dog in the UK and America.

Hi there. You don't state the age of your dog or if it's mixed breed? A very young Lab or a senior dog shouldn't be run long distances everyday. It's hard on the joints both ways and depending on the ground that you are running them the paws can become sore, tender and cracked. I've been breeding and training Labs, and the like, all my life. Some Labs don't always want attention but would sooner just sit at your feet. If your dog, of any breed, starts to exhibit behaviours outside of what he normally does (even for that breed) you might want to take him to your vet for a consultation. He could be ill and that visual lessening of interest could be a warning sign. Remember dogs hide pain and illness so well that's it's not until it's a serious problem that we notic it. LdyDragonfly 23:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very good points. Another is that while as a rule labradors have certain traits (They're very biddable, friendly, mouthy, water-loving, food-focused, etc...) each one has a unique character. My first lab was an absolute saint, miraculous as a retriever, and had a vocabulary bigger than most three year olds. (You couldn't even SPELL her favorite words!) My last lab I nearly gave away because even with two rounds of obedience school everytime I called her name she would look me in the eye with the "I KNOW you're not talking to ME" face and walk away. (I had never even heard of a lab like her for arrogance and voguing it for cameras. Truly a Diva, and labs aren't divas. Maybe she was a terrier or poddle re-incarnated?) Anyway, every lab I've had was a character one way or another...just never the same way twice.

Height ?

what about the height ?

How tall do black labs get?


How tall a lab CAN get is not the same as the standards set by the kennel clubs, but the standard will give you some idea. I once knew a lab named Bluto who was actually taller than the Great Dane he kenneled with...but that's extreme! -Steorling

"Flat-Footed Retreivers"

Has anyone heard of this variation? I havent, but someone posted about it on here. I removed that reference. If someone could prove to me that they exist, I would love to learn more about them.

I would assume the poster was confused by the Flat-coated Retriever, another breed of black retriever that is often called a "long-haired" lab. (I don't see how...they're heads and conformation aren't anything like a lab!) In terms of flat-footedness....it's an interesting discussion in and of itself. For many years breeders, and in fact the standard, described the foot of a lab as being a compact "cat foot". If you have seen labs with the extreme version of this, or if you've had one, you know how prone to "knocked up toes" (a soft tissue sprain involving tendons/ligaments) they are because there isn't enough length or flex in the digits. I think the preoccupation with the "cat-like" description was really about describing the labrador's strong and compact paw in oposition to regular hounds which are too loss and weak for the kind of swimming labs do ...water is a different stress on the design of a paw, after all. -Steorling

dog theft

I think the dog theft section should be reworded to avoid the word "theft". Dogs are not inanimate objects and I think a term such as abduction or kidnapping may be more appropriate. --Ted-m 23:52, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Another note on "theft" and labradors: The problem with the breed isn't so much that they're very desirable for the money that can be made on them. An unregistered adult labrador isn't going to make a thief a great deal of cash even if they sell it to a puppy mill or laboratory as suggested here. The problem is that labs love people and are extremely gregarious...they'll get into anyone's car or follow them home just for the company and attention. They're also notorious explorers (particularly on garbage collection days!) and can disappear with little fanfare to check out some scent they've picked up. Because of this it is essential that you "chip" your dog and that it have YOUR name/address on collar and tags but NOT the dog's. A dog's name is a very powerful thing, and to a lab it's almost the only thing necessary to acquire a bosom friend for life. -Steorling

Appearance Requirements

The table and much of the article discuss things such as colors that dogs' noses must be. It should be made clear that these requirements are only for the show ring.--Counsel 00:35, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Famous Labs

I just cleaned up the famous labs section pretty substantially, but wanted to note a few specific reasons for the edit. First, the Zanjeer entry is still way too long; Zanjeer doesn't warrant three whole paragraphs in a list. Second, I removed the following dogs:

  • Maggie -- No supporting details
  • Chloe, the yellow lab that is a great hunter and campanion -- Non-notable, probably dog vanity
  • Napo, from the TV series Chore & Napo -- Only 3 results on Google for "Chore & Napo" and 0 for "Chore and Napo"; Unsupported claim

Finally, I wikified the list. Just noticed that it could use some cleanup so I cleaned it up a bit. --MMX 23:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the reference to Old Yeller; in the book, he was a dog of unknown (but likely mixed breed) origins while in the movie he was played by a Black-mouth Cur, not a Lab, according to the article on the book. --H-ko 04:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Temperamant

It says that "they instinctively enjoy holding objects and even hands or arms in their mouths, which they can do with great aggressiveness." Isn't that supposed to be gentleness? I'd edit it, but I don't know enough to be sure. Dcteas17 02:55, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, "the steady temperament of Labs and their ability to learn quickly about attacking" seems an obvious vandalism. Anybody know what it should say? Dcteas17 02:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, and yes. Thanks :) FT2 (Talk | email) 03:18, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lab appearance

I started the section on the standard appearance of Labs. There is more to come later, including refreces so don't worry. Feel free to add or correct.

Be aware that some stuff is worth pointing off-site, such as to breed standards (in the info box). So pick and choose what you'll include, especially to illustrate variation or common themes, rather than trying to "put it all in". FT2 (Talk | email) 03:16, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Silver" Labradors

Some silver Labrador enthusiasts continue to vandalize the page and include un-cited and non-scientific statements as fact. There is currently no test to prove or disprove that a "silver" Labrador is a pure bred Labrador. There is no proof or evidence that the dilute "silver" gene in "silver" labs did or did not come from Wiemaraners. It is true, however, that the LRC does not condone, promote, or recognize silver as a legitimate color for the Labrador retriever. It is also true that to date no "silver" Labrador has ever appeared outside of the United States by breeding two native chocolates together. It is also a fact that the original kennel where "silver" Labradors first appeared also bread Weimaraners. It is also a fact that "silver" Labrador breeders charge upwards of 2-5 times as much for one of these dogs and that their motives behind their proof appear to be financially motivated. A true Labrador enthusiast doesn't care about money.

It is also true that of the three people I know who have "silver" Labradors, all of them claim the dogs act more like Weimaraners than labs. It is also true that one of them calls her dog a Weim, despite the $2000 she paid to register him as a "silver" Labrador.

So to the three or four people who keep vandalizing this page with their propaganda--please follow Wikipedia guidelines, cite your references, and if you love the breed... for God's sake, stop making false claims. This is a dictionary, not a fairytale where you can make your wishes about bogus “scientific evidence” come true.

Speaking of false "fairytales", I challenge the "fact" that to date no silvers have appeared outside the US; and I would like proof of that statement. I challenge the "fact" the original kennel in the US kept Weimaraners; if that is true, please state the name of the kennel. I know of dozens of silver lab owners, and NONE of them think their dogs act like Weimars.
The info about silver labs currently on your site(s) is dead wrong and certainly not neutral. I've corrected it numerous times over the last few months and it keeps getting redone, and redone with extreme bias. If the anti-silver experts who are responsible for these intentional distortions are so set on producing facts, I (as well as about a million other Lab owners) would like to read the name of this phantom "US-based kennel where "silver" Labradors initially were reported kept Weimaraners in the kennel"; or see one FACT which proves silver labs are NOT pure bred Labradors. By no stretch of the imagination would AKC have registered silver labs as "pure bred Labrador Retrievers" unless they were positive all the lineage (which they personally inspected all the way back to black) was "pure bred Labrador Retriever". All I read on this "fact sheet" is hearsay and jealousy. What you are posting is wrong and you are doing a disservice to legitimate Labrador owners and breeders of silver labs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.73.71.45 (talkcontribs) 05:44, February 16, 2007 (UTC)
The article does not state that so-called "silver" labs do not appear outside the US, it is noting that nobody outside the US has claimed one of their silver-coloureds has come from two pure-bred chocolate-coloureds, which is true. Nor does the article say that silvers act any differently (the person commenting above you did, but that is personal opinion). There is nothing wrong with accidental breedings that produces the color, but people who intentionally breed the colour, try to register them, and then charge extra money for them are doing a disservice to people and the breed in general. The color is not supported by any reputable breed organization, nor has any silver been "genetically proven" to be purebred, which some people have actually tried to claim. Sarrandúin [ Talk + Contribs ] 21:23, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Content review

The following edits have been made:

  • Removal of "Canis familiaris" in intro; relates to dogs generally, less so to labradors. Consider adding back somewhere more appropriate?
  • More neutral tone re water love. ("...fantastic companions..." etc edited)
  • Appearance material retrieved from history, placed alongside show standard crietria from present article, under the title "appearance". (Note that there are different show standards for labs in Europe and North America.)
  • Wording "to shore" instead of "in" -- more clarity.
  • Rvt obvious vandalism
  • "Mouthfeel" isnt a word.
  • Rmv what seems to be an excessive statement "Such dogs can become quite destructive if left too much on their own. " -- if this is notable in frequency or accurate specifically for labs, please source, cite and re-add.
  • Rmv duplicate reference to "rudder" tail
  • Rmv "Most Labs have a strong will to please." - seems to be adequately described already beforehand ("very trainable" etc).
  • Encyclopedify and cite the comment on "eat anything nailed down".

Work to do at a minimum:

  • The article's a bit of a mess in some ways - multiple lengthy "appearances", "color" and "variant" sections (at least one of which introduced by the above edits as a compact summary) - needs clearing up.
  • I haven't removed the skills section yet but this seems very specialized - for duck hunting or gun dogs generally, and for hunting dogs only, the commands they must be trained to understand. That should probably be moved to a suitable "dog training for hunting" type of article.
  • Cites and further review needed.

FT2 (Talk | email) 02:53, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mouthfeel may not be in the dictionary yet, but it is a technical term used by hunters and breeders in refrence to their dogs. I have heard the term hundreds of times and have seen it written in various magazines that specialize in the subjects of hunting and working dogs. Granted, the word does appear in quotation marks sometimes, but it is widely used and understood within a group. Basically, that is all that is needed for a word to be considered part of the English language anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.252.141.112 (talkcontribs)

Struck me theres no real need to use that term when "They are also known to have a very soft mouthfeel" can be equally well phrased as "They are also known to have a very soft 'feel' to the mouth". FT2 (Talk | email) 14:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup tag

The appearance and variations sections are quite lengthy and not well focussed. Hopefully tagging the article as "cleanup" will address these and gain review of the rest of the text in general. FT2 (Talk | email) 12:22, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The article is very appearance heavy. This is natural as the appearance of any particular breed is the characteristic that most people (and therefore most editors) are familar with. It should be edited to include an in depth explanation, but need not touch on every possible aspect of appearance. Additionally, I believe that more should be written about the working dog characteristics of the breed (see below)--Counsel 01:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Skills

I disagree that the skills section is highly specialized. This dog is a Labrador Retriever. These skills are the reason that the breed exists. To arrange the article such that the only distinguishing feature of Lab, with respect to other dogs, is appearance is to assume that Conformation Showing is the only legitimate purpose for dog ownership. This strikes me a POV. There are dogs which are products of the show ring which might well be covered by articles which do not address any sort of ability, but the Labrador Retriever is a gun dog. Saying that appearance alone is enough to explain what a lab is is akin to defining a New York Yankee as a man with a pin-stripped suit.--Counsel 01:29, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that presenting the article as only addressing "Labs as household pets" is missing an important aspect of the breed. In that sense while it's not really "biased", it is missing an equally important other side to the article, that of labs as working dogs. So there I have no disagreement.
My disagreement is that there is a difference between (1) discussing labs that are working dogs and which are taught hunting skills, and (2) adding a section discussing in depth the skills and commands which hunting and retreiving dogs are commonly taught. The appropriate level of detail for this article would be that working labs are often trained as gun dogs, and a brief overview what that means. We then put a link to a separate article for the full details of hunting/retrieving dog skills and their training, which would make more sense. We already have articles on gun dog and gun-dog training, the detail can readily go in there, or in a separate article "Working dog skills and training". FT2 (Talk | email) 15:04, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point, however emphasis placed on certain hunting skills is often breed specific. Placing all of that information on a hunting dog article would make it difficult to find and render the hunting dog article very long. By the same reasoning, we culd alter this article to say that labs are used as show dogs and entered in conformation shows. Then the actual details of the standard and the colors allwed etc. would be placed on the show dog page. This would required the reader to visit multiple articles in order to cover material specific to this breed. This is certainly do-able, but I am not convinced that it is the most efficient way of presenting the information. The working skills and characteristics now listed may seem general, but that is because it is still relatively short. There is a great deal more that could be placed here regarding tolerance of cold, pattern of work, biddability, hard vs. soft mouth, endurance, pointing labs vs. flushing lines, field trialing and hunt test organizations and those are just the things that come immediatly to mind. All of these considerations are taken into account when selecting a gun dog breed. Some of these things may be similar to other retriever breeds, but labrador and chessie conformation is very similar as well. Most of this information is very breed specific and should be part of a gun dog's breed page.--Counsel 16:20, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They aren't specific to Labs. They're specific to retrievers (of all kinds, as well as other breeds if any) which are to be trained for retrieval in hunting fowl etc. Not just labs. FT2 (Talk | email) 03:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that many of the skills are common to retrievers, however they are less similar than the information in the Temperament for example. The whole Temperament section could be pasted into a German Shepherd article and no one would know the difference. I do not see why we would take something as important to the history of working breed and deemphasize it because it is similar to that of another dog. These are the traits that truly distinguish the breeds and are the traits that have the greatest impact on an owner's choice of dogs. A GSP housepet and a Lab are not significantly different. A working lab and a working GSP are entirely different. This information is certainly more relavent to this breed than whether or not silver labs are permissible. I have really tried to think of a reason that it should be excluded and cannot think of a good one. The Field Trial and Hunt Test standards are even more breed specific than the conformation information. While one could be a conformation judge of multiple breeds, such is very rare in the working dog world. As there are differences between field lines and show lines is is conceivable that two articles could be created "Labrador Retriever(show dog)" and "Labrador Retreiver(working dog)" but this would surely create more acrimony. See the Talk:Irish Setter for an example of how this sort of split can go. I just recently merged those articles after months of heated debate.--Counsel 05:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose the skills information could go on the Retriever page, properly linked, with a smaller amount of infomation here related only to those skills which are truly different from general retriever skills. How does that sound?--Counsel 05:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My thought here is that a section "Working labs" that covers the skills, approaches, summarizes the core aspects of training needed, and other differences, would be good. Its the detail of what all the commands are and what the dog is supposed to do for each, that belongs in an article related to hunting/retrieving dog training, not to the article on the breed itself. FT2 (Talk | email) 02:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possible overlap in History section - to fix

In the history section it states:

  • "It is thought to have descended from the St. John's Water Dog (no longer in existence), a crossbreed of native water dogs and the Newfoundland to which the Labrador is closely related, by early settlers in the mid to late 15th century."

and also

  • "The original forebearers of the St. John's have variously been suggested to be crossbreeds of the black St. Hubert's hound from France, working water dogs from Portugal, old European pointer breeds and dogs belonging to the indiginous peoples of the area."

Would these sentences be better if combined somehow? Any volunteers? FT2 (Talk | email) 12:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Crossbreeds?

Objection - articles are expected to indicate (briefly) relevant related topics. notable crossbreeds are probably useful to some readers. FT2 (Talk | email) 03:09, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Variants need reworking?

We have 3 sections now (I just added one I'm afraid!) covering field v. show, English v. American, and "Physical lines and variants".

This is daft. We need to merge or handle this aspect better.

Any proposals anyone? FT2 (Talk | email) 13:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism block

An editor has been blocked using range blocks of a week at a time, due to persistent article and talk page vandalism.

See AN/I entries dates: 03:05, 4 February 2007 (FT2) and 03:13, 4 February 2007 (Pilotguy). FT2 (Talk | email) 03:23, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update

I received the following from user:Silverlabrador by email:

The info about silver labs currently on your site(s) is dead wrong and certainly not neutral. I've corrected it numerous times over the past few months and it keeps getting redone, and redone with extreme bias. If these anti-silver experts who are responsible for these intentional distortions (and flat out lies) are so set on producing facts, I (as well as about a million other Lab owners) would like to read the name of this phantom "US-based kennel where "silver" Labradors initially were reported kept Weimaraners in the kennel"; or see one FACT which proves silver labs are NOT pure bred Labradors. By no stretch of the imagination would AKC have registered silver labs as "pure bred Labrador Retrievers" unless AKC was dead positive all the lineage (which they personally inspected all the way back to black) was "pure bred Labrador Retriever" (AKC has stated this on the record). All I read on this "fact sheet" is hearsay and jealousy by breeders who can not sell their Labs. What you are posting is wrong and you are doing a disservice to legitimate Labrador owner and breeders of silver labs

Please refer to website silverlabradorinfo.com for more information about silver labs.

silverlabrador


My response so far is as follows:


Hi, and thanks for the email.

It would certainly have been helpful to discuss and make points on Wikipedia. Instead you edited others words to say things that they didn't say, both on the article and on the talk page. That is Vandalism, and for that your account has been blocked.

I am happy to discuss the isues of silver labradors with you by email, though. If there is legitimate information then that's important. But your history (as far as I have seen it) is someone who fabricates quotes and changes others quoted words to suit yourself. So it will be others words I trust, not just your own (unsupported) claims.

Let's take your points one at a time:

  1. The kennel reported -- yes, agreed. I would like to see some background on that too.
  2. I would like a reference to the AKC position. I've seen the statement on dogbreeedinfo.com, it seems strange to me that AKC would have a position specifically on silver labs and yet that position is not on their own website. Is there a more authoritative source for their view?

I have also read the werb site you linked to -- thank you. Again, some questions:

  1. "Until 1987, AKC issued registration papers which listed Silver as a Lab's registered color on both AKC registration certificates and AKC color charts" - is there an AKC or other verifiable authoritative source for this statement?
  2. "Literature on Labradors mentions the occasional gray puppy since people first began writing about Labs" - can I have a few sources to back this statement up? And without disrespect, as you have faked what sources have said before, I would like checkable sources not just claims.
  3. "DNA testing and mapping of CCK's Silver Labs was done during the close of the Twentieth Century" - what exactly was "checked"? Who checked it? Where is their report? These are questions I would like to check for myself, again from authoritative versions. As far as I'm aware, there is no DNA test that can tell if a dog is of this or that breed, or has a "crossbreed" in its ancestry.
  4. "Fortunately, kennel clubs around the world (who do not have the political pressure from mercenary American breeders of "normal" color Labs) already accept Silver Labs without all the political fuss and pressure being applied to AKC..." - Since AKC does not consider silver a different color from chocolate, it would help to know which major kennel clubs register silvers as silver.

Thanks for the help, these are my initial questions.

FT2 (Talk | email) 13:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Added some new pictures of Labrador Retrievers ... please feel free to add more. Kumarrrr 12:53, 18 February 2007 (GMT)

References

The references section for this article needs serious clean-up; mostly for consistency between how the entries look, and perhaps also for relevancy concerning what they support. Also, many of the sources appear several times.

Furthermore, I am a bit concerned by the number of links to sites for private breeders. Most breeders of any dog will, by default, know quite a bit about their breed, but the truth is their websites just might not make the greatest of sources here. In particular is one called "Endless Mountain" that is continuously added into the article, which among things, claims that opposite-sex pairings of labs work "100%" of the time, and that "show-bred" labs are more responsive in the field. Considering the "American" lines are indeed bred for working, and that the dogs are chosen out for their hunting and trial responsiveness, this latter claim almost borders on the bizarre. Sarrandúin [ Talk + Contribs ] 03:14, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Partly, that's why some cites are multiple-sourced; just one site saying something isn't really evidence of much. FT2 (Talk | email) 09:19, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Said source is the only one that claims that show-bred dogs are more responsive in the field. Reading through the site from "labbies.com," I think it makes a better argument for the two lines' temperaments, so I have put that one there too instead. Sarrandúin [ Talk + Contribs ] 15:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]