Eye shapes

see and that to me is kinda silly... Like why would expression be that important? I would think health, temperament, soundness and working ability would be far more important.

I like the the FCI picks smaller height ranges (as in many breeds the north american versions are much larger than the original) but limiting an already limited gene pool seems like a bad move.

Just to add to Spiritwind's post (BTW, HI!)

UKC standard:

EYES

The bright eyes show great expression. They are medium sized, almond shaped and are set obliquely. They are brown in color, except in merles, where one or both may be blue, although brown is preferred. Serious fault: Large, round eye.

FCI Standard

Eyes

Very important feature giving sweet expression. Medium size (never very small) set somewhat obliquely, of almond shape and dark brown colour, except in the case of blue merles when eves are frequently (one or both, or part of one or both) blue or blue-flecked. Expression full of intelligence, with quick, alert look when listening.

----------------------------

In the Collie, basically it's the set of the eye, not the size, that serves a purpose. The oblique set was supposedly to give them better peripheral vision in the field while watching the flocks. The size part is purely aesthetics. I've heard people say that the lighter eyed dogs are more sensitive to the sun, but I've never had one to test the theory.

It is interesting that the US standard (AKC and UKC) fault the large eye, while the FCI standard speaks against the small eyes ...

Why do I feel that larger breeds have kinder eyes ? Do any large breeds have round eyes ??

That's just your opinion. I can think of a lot of small breeds that have a beautiful soft expression.



Anyways... Papillons eyes are confusing. FCI states almond shaped and AKC says round. They are generally smaller and not as round as say a chihuahua or pomeranian's eye. They are alert and inquisitive in expression as well as oozing intelligence. Their eyes are very expressive, especially Summer's. Her eyes are bigger than most papillons.

AKC:
FCI:

Aww Laur she looks so sweet.

Grammy..

I, also, am an "eyes" person

Thank you. She really is a sweet sweet dog. She is the most people loving dog I've ever owned.

Dekka is just gorgeous.

Trey was also a small breed and I thought he had the greatest expression of any dog I've seen in real life. So sweet and soft.

Those eyes are all lovely ! I'd consider them almond shaped . I was just wondering if any large dogs had round eyes .

The japanese akita have very unique eyes they are very beautiful; they almost look like they have eyeliner lol, the american akitas have very diferent eyes they have more a mastiff type eye, they remind me of the saint bernard ones

Obviously the standard talks about more than just eyes and expression, but eyes and expression are important parts too. The expression is actually the last thing talked about in the standard. But the expression isn't just the eyes.. it's everything. Its the way the eyes are set in the head, shaped, color, size... plus how how well filled the muzzle is, and ear set and carriage. The head and expression on a Collie, is what distinguishes a Collie from another breed. It's where breed type is shown the most.

As far as the FCI standard, it is far from the original. The Collies from the late 1800's that were imported into the US (from mainly Great Brittan) resembled more of what the American Collies look like today, rather than the current European Collies. Especially the European Roughs. I talk to several European breeders, on a few different Collie forums. The Rough Collies have changed so much, its almost a different breed. Not only are the heads and expressions totally different (many European Roughs have a Chow Chow like expression) they lack underjaw, have to much stop, no muzzle, low, wide set ears, POOR POOR structure, and obviously horrible movement, gay tails, HUGE HUGE over grown, soft, fluffy coats, that serve no purpose... I have also been told temperaments are pretty poor, not to mention they have absolutely no working ability left in them.

Smooths are a little bit different. The breeders have done a better job with them.

I agree about limiting an already small gene pool, by banning breeding of roughs x smooth, but for some reason they now consider them two separate breeds. It really does not make a lot of sense. From what I understand, the rare chance of a rough puppy being produced in a smooth x smooth breeding, even though genetically it is a rough (carries 2 recessive rough genes.. no smooth genes) it has to be registered as a smooth, and cannot be bred. It really doesn't make any sense at all!

A few months ago, on one of the other forums I go to, a Smooth Breeder from Germany said the VDH (German kennel club???) was banning any breedings that would produce puppies with the MDR1 gene. However, very recently they have overturned this decision, probably after realizing how very small the Collie gene pool would be after such a decision, since a large percentage of Collies carry at least one gene for the MDR1 drug sensitivity.



I agree with this. It's not so much the size of the eye, but rather the set of the eye, and also the shape of the eye.

Here is one of my girls.. Paris



While I think she has a beautiful shape and size to her eyes, she does have a little to much width between her eyes -- they need to be just a tiny bit closer together. However she has beautiful body, structure and movement, a beautiful outline and finished easily.

Then you have Amy here..



With her singleton puppy. While she has sort of a happy, proud mother look to her, I just love her expression. Not to much width between her eyes.. pretty set and shape, IMO. Real soft and sweet.

As far as lighter eyed dogs. I couldn't tell you. My dogs usually have very dark eyes, but whether lighter eyed dogs are more sensitive to the sun, I couldn't tell you, but a lighter eye does change the expression.

The funny thing is.. have you seen any of the European Roughs? So many of them have such tiny little, oddly placed, squinty eyes! I think many of the smooths over there have to round of eyes. Size doesn't bother me, but their shape is very round.

The sensitivity of lighter eyed dogs to the sun may have to do with lack of pigment on the back of the eye.

I have blue eyes, and I was very blonde as a child. Apparently, this lack of darker pigment causes the backs of my eyes to have less pigment. Its called a "blonde" eye and it has causes me to be more sensitive to bright lights. I have to have prescription tinting lenses. In especially bright sun its very painful and even with the special lenses, very hard for me to drive and function normally.


Anyway, something to consider. Also, my hair and eyes have darkened as I aged, but apparently the pigment in my eyes (or the backs) hasn't.

OK, this will be a quick hijack to the 'eye' thread ... sorry!!

I was told that this had to do with how their show system works. They offer a certain number of Challenge Certificates (equivalent to our CH?) each year, and when the smooths and roughs were one, that meant fewer dogs could obtain a CC. So they split them up, thus allowing them to have twice as many. Of course, with that, you are now a separate breed and therefore cannot interbreed. I just recently saw that the smooths are considered a 'Vulnerable Breed', meaning that the breed is dwindling in numbers.

The Smooth Collie - a vulnerable breed

That's what I was wondering. I too have blue eyes and they are sun sensitive, but my brown-eyed friends don't seem to be. Could be a coincidence, but who knows??

This is rather interesting... I've talked to several breeders in Europe and so far I have not heard about this. I will have to ask some of them..

If this is the case, I its a rather stupid reason to separate the varieties into different breeds. Cut the already limited gene pool down even more.

Though, from what I understand, even when they could do rough x smooth breedings, very few smooth people bred to roughs, because of the lack of quality, poor structure and movement, along with poor temperaments. Breeding a smooth to a rough really had no benefits to the smooth breeder, because the roughs are a less quality animal than the smooth.

However, as far as the European bred smooths go, many of them lack the correct amount of undercoat needed for a working dog. They have a real flat, slick, thin coat.. I've had several breeders I've talked to say they think American smooths have to much coat... however they also say their dogs get cold in the winter months so are not real good for working in the winter. Funny thing is, my smooths who apparently have to much coat (to them) I've never once seen them get cold, or even shiver. They love the cold weather and to roll around and sleep in the snow.

A breeder I know in Canada sold a smooth champion to Finland several years ago. After the dog finished his champion and was out for a bit, he is now retired and I believe just a stud dog, but since he is no longer showing, the owners in Finland SHAVES down the smooth every summer because they think he has to much coat and gets hot in the summer..... stupidest thing I've ever heard of!! Poor dog!

I really don't understand the system over there. They can't do rough x smooth. Any roughs that MIGHT be produced from a smooth x smooth breeding cannot be registered as a rough, even though that is what it is, genetically. They also are not supposed to do sable x blue merle breedings.. and if they do, any sables from the litter cannot be registered. I guess the kennel club over there thinks the breeders can't tell the difference between a sable and a sable merle. Really NOT that hard to do at all! They also seem to think Color Headed Whites are defective, just like double dilutes.

It doesn't surprise me about the smooth being vulnerable in Europe. I know some countries only have a hand full of breeders.

I

I absolutely believe that's the reason for wanting darker eyed dogs for work. If the dog is squiting and uncomfortable, then he's not going to be quite so willing to work on bright days. Maybe .

I can't find any large breeds who specifically state round eyes, but many of them only mention eyes qualities (set, etc.) in their standard but don't mention shape at all. To me, these breeds appear (to me) to have round eyes. Try looking at the large/giant breeds, especially of the mastiff type.


I had a really long post typed out about this and my computer froze up. I'm too lazy to re-type it, but basically, I found my resource for the CC comment.

It came from a book written by noted Collie historian, Iris Combe, called 'The Smooth Collie - a family dog. (The Collie Centre, Cambridgeshire, 1992). There is also information regarding the feelings on both sides regarding the interbreeding of the two breeds (varieties). Basically, many of the Rough breeders saw it as introducing a 'common' element into the breed, while many Smooth breeders felt it was ruining the special qualities of their pure Smooth (shepherd's or drover's) Collies. This was a big issue in the 1970s, with arguments and lulls here and there all the way up until the KC officially separated the breeds in 1994. It's a very informative book and I highly recommend it.