Parson Russell

[WEDGEY 753]

That was foxbolter

[Cleanspade 3,322]

oops double post

 

 

 

Edited March 8, 2015 by Cleanspade

[Cleanspade 3,322]

it makes me giggle to myself when i see all the nonsense wrote about pedigree's / ancestry. good breeders of any animal will keep some form of tracability of there breeding be it cows cats or flowers ffs. same as anything else in the murky world of working dogs they can be falsified. so the usual pinch of salt is required unless you know the folk and thelines well. there is most definately decent parsons that work fox to ground. some registered and some not. the only difference is the registered ones have a closed genepool. they all have a mixed ancestry. so

 

jack russell. type. parson russell type. different in name but the same in the flesh. most parsons or russells at this time owe a lot of there type to lakeland or fell type terriers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

one of these dogs arnt kc. but they all have very similar breeding. if you are looking for a working parson source it from working parents . simples

Edited March 8, 2015 by Cleanspade

[Cleanspade 3,322]

fcuked up the post so here are pics lol

 

 

 

 

 

 

russell. or parsons.? reg or not.? same in the flesh

 

 

[foxbolter 447]

Some nice dogs there cleanspade are they yours my cup of tea

[Cleanspade 3,322]

some where mine. but they are all related to the old parson. barr one that is similarly bred. my point is they are basically the same animal with or without papers. if the breeders take them down the show rd they will be wasted. if they are bred for work they will keep the working qualities.

[Moorside 642]

Nice they are cleanspade, like the darker marked dogs in 2nd and 4th pics nice robust look to em.

[eastcoast 4,137]

This may be off the original thread but I think it has some relevance to the topic. A couple of years ago a working terrier show was held within walking distance of my house. Unfortunately in an urban area, unfortunately for me because that's where I live at present, but that's my problem. The venue was on the edge of a small industrial estate with entries taken in one of the units and the show ground being an adjoining bit of waste ground. All the usual classes and working types were catered for. However, as the show was in an urban area and had been well advertised, with all profits going to a very worthy charity ( all credit to the man who organised it ), lots of local people turned up. Some brought with them an assortment of small dogs that could loosely be described as terriers. All shapes and sizes and colours.

 

The Border classes had a decent entry of Borders. Lakelands likewise. Patterdale/Fell had some nice entries. Even " other types " boasted a few useful looking working types. Russell classes ? Some proper looking working types were also entered, along with the all of the mixed breed pet bred dogs that the none " dog people " had brought with them. All shapes, all colours. All Jack Russells. Credit to the judge as he examined every single of one them ( even the nervous biters ) and asked the owners about their pride and joys. None were placed however. But why did they enter them in the Russell classes ? Most bared no more resemblance to a Jack Russell as they did to a Border or Lakeland.

 

My point being that this is the reason that the word Parson began to be used again 40 or so years ago To differentiate between the popular pet small mongrel types and the proper white working terrier. That's what they said anyway. But it turned out that they did it just for money and not preserving the working terrier as they said. But they real ones still exist and always will until the politicians put and end to it. But even if that happens they are well established across the world in countries that respect freedom and know how to manage their flora and fauna.

[Nita McGuinness 3]

Today's Parson Russell Terrier is yesterday's Fox Terrier. Look at any pictures from Circa 1870 and if you see a terrier with hounds, invariably they call it a Fox Terrier but it is the same as today's Parsons and mainly bears little or no resemblance to the Show Fox Terrier, wire or Smooth. I know of one of our lines presently working as vermin control with a local gun club. Oversized dog but apparently very game. I personally do not know of any IKC registered Parsons working with Hound Packs. Albeit a particular Kennel in the South which is purely a Show Kennel has often claimed their terriers work with hound Packs in the UK , but couldn't name which Packs. To the best of my knowledge they have ferrets, lurchers as well as terriers but none work, he has been out with a terrier man once or twice but heard he couldn't keep up, so was a liability. Right breeding and properly introduced Parsons will work and work very well. They are not however a hard dog they were bred to bolt the fox not to kill the fox. The Hunts required a terrier that would bolt a fox that was still fit to be hunted.

[Ethan davies 86]

I've got a parson russel and being my first one I can't rate on every one of them becasue only mine I've seen work! And on him he works non stop and finds anything thats there brilliant marker couldn ask for a better terrier

[Ethan davies 86]

My parson Russel sorry about the foot only photo got of him good little dog

[mandog 37]

What a ugly foot, nice dog though.

[slip-em quick 74]

I had one years back a real honest grafter,as game as they come.He was of the leggier type,nice wire jacket with a strong box like head.Would have another in a breath if the right type came about again,he was cracking little dog.