Llewellin Setters Breeders Blog

I have written in the past expressing my views about Llewellin “blood lines” and their significance today. I feel that I must also say a word about the popular idea that if a breeder gets involved in breeding a certain breed of dog then his name gets to be in some way associated with the breed.

I refer to many writings I see on chat sites (which I never would participate in) and the like, as well as to the many people who e-mail and call me making reference to dogs which they attach the breeders name to.

Some examples would be “King Llewellins,” Humphrey Llewellins,” “Advie Llewellins,” even “Lynnhill Llewellins” and so on. This is of course total nonsense. There is no such thing. These dogs are Llewellin Setters. Period. (This same statement has also been attributed to Bernie Matthys of the Field Dog Stud Book in spite of his actions against Alfred King). You have no qualifications to add your name to the breed regardless of who you are. Of course you are free to register the dog with any name you please. However, just because you have registered or bred a hundred or even a thousand or more Llewellin Setters they remain Llewellin Setters going back to the work of the founders.

Unless you want to introduce totally other blood lines and mix the blood and then fix it to come up with another breed of dog you are not doing anything new, unique, or unusual. It has all been done before, most likely hundreds of times. There is fun, mystery and challenge for all of us in breeding specific examples of the breed we chose, to try and produce outstanding offspring where the sum of the parts is greater than the sum of the whole. That’s why we breed. We have some success and some failure. Attaching the breeders personal or kennel name to that dog is not useful to the future of the Llewellin Setter.

Let me finish by expressing the deep regret and anger I have for the treatment of Alfred King by everyone concerned in his being cut off from registration of his dogs. This has led to the use of the term, “King Dogs” as though they are inferior or undesirable. Many of those responsible for continuing the rumors and out and out lies attached to this, know nothing at all of the man, his principles or his devotion, expertise and contribution to the Llewellin Setter. There are very few modern Llewellins in the U.S.A. where the blood lines do not include dogs from his kennels. It is quite likely that no Llewellin Setter exists where the lineage as given in the pedigree is correct, especially if we go back ten generations. The chances of an unwitnessed breeding are very strong, even in the most orderly kennel environment, and doubtless were common in the days of the early breeders. This goes for every dog breed in the world. To turn around and throw out the baby with the bath water shows appalling lack of knowledge both on the part of the registration body as well as those who relentlessly attacked Alfred King and dragged his name into the dirt, and does untold harm to the blood pool. This resolution could easily have been applied to every major dog breeder, regardless of breed, and probably without any real doubt to the English Pointer and Field Trial English Setter fraternity without which the Field Dog Stud Book could not survive.

We can at least say that we now have DNA screening as a result of this matter, so that Alfred has once again made a major contribution to the bird dog breeds, even in his hour of sorrow….

Keith Smith

Related Article: What is the significance, if any, of “Blood Lines” in a Llewellin Setter?