Natural History

Chinese crested dog

December 21, 2010 by retrieverman

The show type of these dogs has also changed.

This is a Chinese crested dog named “Hairy King,” who is depicted in W.D. Drury’s British Dogs: Their Points, Selection And Show Preparation (1903):

Hairy King

Posted in dog breeds | Tagged Chinese crested dog | 16 Comments

16 Responses

1. on December 21, 2010 at 9:59 pm Jess

   Anyone besides me find “Hairy King” extremely ironic, in regards to what is actually considered ‘hairless’ today?

   
   
   • on December 21, 2010 at 10:05 pm Jess

     Grooming a hairy ‘hairless:’

     http://www.crestars.com/chinese_crested_grooming_hairy_hairless.html

     
     
     • on December 21, 2010 at 10:17 pm retrieverman

       LOL.

       Aveno!

       
       
2. on December 22, 2010 at 3:11 am Pai

   Hairless is defined now by most show folks as the dogs lacking an undercoat. That’s how bad it’s gotten in the past 20 years. The change from a hairless breed to a fake hairdresser dog was incredibly quick once the breed got into the AKC and the show bandwagoners jumped in and started ‘improving’ things: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v485/Pietoro/webjunk2/pippatwosides.jpg

   For dogs considered ‘typical’ in the 1990s, this AKC Judge education video even more firmly illustrates how the standard has been warped (I mean, ‘improved’): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKuOabwsgEM

   Now to be fair, true hairless dogs CAN have very nice furnishings. But never as long/thick as a hairy’s. And it’s much easier to breed the single-coated dogs and Nair off the excess than to breed for real hairlessness with adequate furnishings, especially now since most lines have had so much hair bred in that they default to that type unless a real effort is made. Some breeders never see a real hairless (or even an H-patterned) pup in their litters. Even the powderpuff coats have changed — extremely long and often wavy now to the point where they have to be straight-ironed to appear correct for the ring.

   There are still show kennels that aim for true hairless dogs… or at least dogs that are recognizable as hairless without cosmetic altering. But they are firmly in the minority and probably always will be at this point.

   
   
3. on December 22, 2010 at 3:25 am Pai

   That modern show dog photo above is probably an H-pattern (hair down the back and somewhat up the legs with the rest of the body bare) though it’s hard to judge from a show-groomed photo. I generally go by how thick the socks are and how long the crest is, and that dog looks rather moderate in those regards. Still better than the extreme hairy dogs now in fashion.

   My opinion is that the modern fashion’s goal is to make the dogs look like miniature Gypsy Vanner horses.

   
   
4. on December 22, 2010 at 10:11 am Peggy Richter

   In this case, I think some of you are being a bit unfair. The hairless gene is, like merle, a semi-lethal. two hairless genes kill the dog. (see http://www.sciencemag.org/content/321/5895/1462.abstract)
   So dogs are Hh. As with a lot of such genes, the gene in question isn’t an absolute dominant and sometimes “half and half” dogs occur. Moreover, “hairless” dogs ALSO have a much higher incidence of sunburn, toothlessness and other disorders associated with the hairless gene. One of the reasons the “powderpuff” was accepted into the show standard was that it is necessary to have such dogs if the breed is to be continued at all. I’ll bet that the dogs that are not quite “hairless” enough are also the ones with better teeth, etc since it’s a function of the gene’s penetrance. I’d much rather see the dogs that are not “hairy” enough to be powderpuffs but too “hairy” to be “show conformation” hairless “helped” in that direction by GROOMING. After all GROOMING doesn’t have a genetic impact and doesn’t reduce the gene pool. It might be silly to have “hairy hairless dogs”, but the conformation ring IS after all a beauty contest. It’s like making fun of the “beehive” hairdo and how long it may take to create it.
   I think in this instance, one must give the crested’s fanciers a pass. They aren’t trying to “fix’ the issue by progressing with a dangerous gene.

   Peggy Richter.

   
   
   • on December 22, 2010 at 1:09 pm Jess

     Pai can speak to this better than I can, but there are certainly Crested breeders that have developed lines of true hairless dogs with better teeth. I ran across more than a few of them when I was looking at breeders a few years ago.

     And if you think ‘grooming’ doesn’t have an impact on the gene pool, you are deluding yourself. Breeding for coat is just as abused at breeding for fad conformation, and it can have just as big an impact on welfare for the dog. And it does reduce the gene pool, as breeders pass over perfectly acceptable true hairless dogs for hairy hairless that will produce flashy dogs. The more of these over-groomed dogs that enter the ring, the fewer correct true hairless the judges will see. If the breed club is not doing it’s job in regards to judge education, a true hairless in the ring be just as rare as heavily patterned Afghan.

     Why breed for a dog with a historically correct coat when you can just make one with the clippers?

     
     
   • on December 22, 2010 at 5:49 pm Pai

     See, I don’t mind the fact that the gene has variance. That is a part of the breed (and is seen in Xolos and PIOs as well), and not the issue here. The issue is, that originally, you NEVER got the amount of body hair in even the hairiest hairless puppy 20+ years ago as you see today in most lines. People who breed for furnishings get 90% coated hairless pups, and a dog with any sort of bald patch is rare if ever seen. This is the reverse of how it once was, and it is purely because of selection of pups who would’ve originally been petted out back in the day, or used only sparingly to breed with dogs with less hair. Unless the effort is made to maintain minimal body hair + good furnishings, the hair amounts will increase and increase, as we’ve seen today.

     Some Xolo people have even expressed concern that this could happen to their own breed once they enter the AKC. Once you start resorting to fakery to achieve correctness, it’s much easier to make compromises and even ignore the issue entirely since it’s so much simpler to just hide the fault than breed it out, especially a fault that’s considered by many to be aesthetically pleasing, like huge furnishings.

     
     
     • on December 22, 2010 at 6:18 pm Jess

       Yes, exactly. It skews things from a normal curve where you have true hairless on one end and hairy hairless on the other end and gradations in between. You see it in Afghans, too. Historically, you have some very hairy dogs (although not nearly as hairy as today’s dogs, and the coat didn’t get as long), and some not-any-hairier-than-a-Saluki dogs, and everything in between. The dogs are like this in the countries of origin. Look at the ring, now, though.

       I went looking today and found some very nice-looking true hairless with nice furnishings on the head. One was even shown with a natural fuzzy face, I don’t know how common that is. But you can kind of look at the feet and tell. The hair on the feet of true hairless and, I guess they call them moderate hairless now, is much thinner and has a more natural gradation into the hairless skin on the leg.

       
       
       • on December 22, 2010 at 7:09 pm Pai

         There is one old kennel, Gingery, that shows many of their dogs (Puffs and Hairless) naturally. They are one of the few U.S. kennels still around from before the AKC days, and have some nice true hairlesses. There are me nice kennels in mainland Europe, too, where it seems many breeds are kept less exaggerated in general.

         I have heard many stories of people with true hairlesses being approached by other breeders (and even judges!) and being discouraged from continuing to show their dogs because they are a true hairless, and for no other reason. The breeder of my own THL female got grief for showing her THL male, friends telling her not to bother. Because they are seen as ‘less than’ because of smaller furnishings, and I guess they think they’re doing a person a favor by advising them not to spend the time and money to finish the dog. Even though THLs CAN (still) be finished nowadays, it’s just much harder. Many people don’t want to go through the effort, which means you see less of them in the ring, which continues the cycle.

         Many don’t even know how the genetics works in their own breed — or even realize that Cresteds share the same history as the Xolo. They have only seen the hairy, cobby English-style dogs that are favored now and perceive anything that deviates from that style as ‘incorrect’, forget what the standard says or what history clearly shows. And this is only in a 20 year period where this level of ignorance has been achieved!

         
         
5. on December 22, 2010 at 12:10 pm M.R.S.

   Taking off hair to give a “hairless” pattern is not so much different in essence from stripping a terrier, clipping coat “pattern” onto a poodle, or some of the other grooming practices routinely used.

   And it isn’t confined to “show dogs”, either…witness the large number of pet dogs that are routinely clipped/cut/sculpted for various reasons.

   
   
   • on December 22, 2010 at 1:00 pm Jess

     I disagree. It’s dishonest. From the grooming page I posted:

     “I was asked to participate on a few Judges’ seminars as a few years back, and sometimes to this day, many people (including) judges, didn’t know what a Hairy Chinese Cresteds really looked like before entering the ring. The goal of these pictures is to make potential buyers aware of what is involved in order to have this “flashy look” and as I mentioned above Judges’ education. This is also the reason why I am still using Danzee’s pictures, as I never let the body hair grow for such a long period of time.

     chinese crested groomingDanzee is typically your average as far as body hair goes for a Hairy Chinese Crested sporting such furnishings (Crest, Socks, and Plume). Some Chinese Crested Dogs come with a very decent furnishing with minimal body hair. The degree of thickness may also vary from thinner to thicker. Unfortunately they remain in the minority. Unless there is a good reason to let the hair grow, most breeders will keep the Hairy Chinese Cresteds shaved most of the time. I am sure for most part; some breeders don’t even know just how hairy their dogs are because of the frequent routine grooming.”

     The AKC standard for the Crested states: “Grooming is minimal-consisting of presenting a clean and neat appearance.” It does not state: “Shave a bunch of body hair off, then use hair remover.”

     In Afghans, puppies do not typically develop a short-haired saddle until sexual maturity. Exhibitors often clip or strip a saddle on the back in an immature dog. This is continued into adulthood, and the exhibitor never knows if the dog would have developed a natural saddle or not. In fact, a natural saddle is an advertising point and often included in ads. Some Afghan people consider any dog with a natural saddle to be patterned, which is not what ‘patterned’ is at all. The AKC standard for the Afghan hound states: “The Afghan Hound should be shown in its natural state; the coat is not clipped or trimmed” and “Fault–Lack of shorthaired saddle in mature dogs.”

     Of all the Afghans I have owned, which is not just a few, only one has had a short-haired saddle all the time: a heavily patterned bitch with a rather coarse coat. Besides the patterned bitch, only my bitches have had a ‘natural’ saddle, and only after their post-heat coat blow. Of my current males, one would require a little stripping, the other two would have to be clipped. So sad, all those faulty dogs.

     People expect a Poodle to be groomed to the nines, in fact, the standard gives directions. Excessive grooming to MEET the standard in breeds where the standard requires MINIMAL grooming is DISHONEST.

     
     
     • on December 22, 2010 at 1:34 pm M.R.S.

       Well, I didn’t indicate if those grooming practices were (or were not) desirable, honest, according to the Standard, etc — only that they are fairly common.

       As to poodles — it isn’t just clipping. Tons and tons of hairspray and often added coloring agents as well. Not to mention the added hair in switches sometimes used.

       Actually, I agree with your last line, Jess.

       
       
   • on December 22, 2010 at 4:52 pm Miki

     Except no one has ever claimed the pattern on a poodle is the result of anything other than clipping/shaving.

     But that’s just me quibbling – at bottom it’s all just as bad, and far too much about a hair/beauty show to the detriment of the health of a breed. If a “true” hairless crested can’t be bred without health issues then for chrissakes – who needs ’em?

     
     
     • on December 22, 2010 at 5:30 pm Pai

       They CAN be. They have the same gene as the Xolo (also commonly bred HL to HL), and can be bred safely. They gene is like the Corgi bobtail gene, in that it’s lethality is pre-natal — i.e., the 1 in 4 zygotes affected with it are reabsorbed early in gestation. There are no ‘dead dogs’.

       You cannot breed for ‘better teeth’ using the hairy dogs — premolars will always be gone in a HL dog. The other tooth issues are the type common to toy dogs in general, and are improved in the same way. The reason the hairies became popular is because they are glamorous and flashy — they originated in the UK in the late 1980s and were snapped up by many U.S. show kennels in the 1990s after AKC recognition because they ‘showed’ much better.

       
       
   • on December 22, 2010 at 5:25 pm Pai

     The Cresteds standards all describe a true hairless, and states ‘grooming minimal’. They are supposed to be a naturally presented breed, unlike a Terrier or Poodle. There is no comparison.

     
     

Comments are closed.