Apologists for over large terriers will sometimes argue that their animals have flexible chests and a great deal of desire, and can "eventually get there".
Perhaps, but some skepticism is in order.
Yes a flexible chest is important, but only at the margins of correct size. If a dog has a 17 inch chest, it is not going to find 3 inches of flex in its rib cage. Nothing is more plastic than water, but you cannot put a gallon of water in a pint bottle, no matter how hard you pound!
Desire and gameness is important, of course, but if a dog is too large for the earth, it is not going to be able to excavate a 20 foot length of pipe to get to its groundhog, fox or raccoon.
Dogs at the very margin of correct size in youth, are likely to be less useful as old age (and perhaps pregnancy and added weight) result in the chest springing out a little more and getting stiffer as well.
Start with a dog that has a chest under 14 inches, and you will never regret it.
.
5 comments:
When people speak of a flexible chest, do they mean laterally, so they can squeeze around corners, or do they mean longitudinally, so they can squish closer to the ground when the ground squishes closer to them, or both? It gets repeated so often, sometimes I wonder if anyone thinks about it.
Seahorse
It's the chest circumference at the widest point while the dog is being held. Your longest fingers should meet underbeath, and (for my hands), the thumbs should overlap by at least one joint on top.
P.
I understand the measurement and why it's important, I just am never sure where the "flexibility" comes in. Longitudinal, lateral, both? Maybe "both" is the correct answer?
Seahorse
Ribs float a bit and will flex in to make a smaller cross section. An older dog (past 4 or 5) tends to have less flex. As a general rule, I think flex is over-rated and cannot be counted on. Smaller chests on smaller dogs is the way to guarantee the dog can get there, even in older ages!
P
Thanks for the explanation. To me it begins to just sound like a ill-defined, probably exaggerated catch-phrase. I mean, these aren't cats or worms we're talking about.
At least size is something measurable, whereas "flex", I dunno. Seems pretty subjective to me.
Seahorse
Post a Comment