Do You Consider Obedience "work"?

[ILK]

I have done (we got our CCD title) obedience with my Afghan Hound. We will do obedience in the future to at least CD level. If I can be bothered to teach him to retrieve we may go further.

Is he a working dog? No.

Can he do what he is bred for? Yes, but not legally in Australia.

Is doing obedience 'work' for us? Hell yeah! Obedience exercises do not come naturally to a sight hound. We had to work at it. But no he is not a working dog.

Bear.

This is an interesting point FaxonandBear..... Obedience has not come easy with my dog either.

Is he a working dog? Yes. Is he doing what he was bred to do? No

Is doing obedience work for us? Yes , but I would still call it a sport. Lets look at humans e.g. One high jumper may have to work harder than another to achieve the same result, but it is still a sport.

[Just Midol]

For me the dog is working if it is using their natural instinctive abilities to perform a task which the dog was specifically bred for.

If I wanted to say that it was limited to the task the dog was originally designed for then I would have.

I didn't.

[poodlefan]

For me the dog is working if it is using their natural instinctive abilities to perform a task which the dog was specifically bred for.

If I wanted to say that it was limited to the task the dog was originally designed for then I would have.

I didn't.

So Quarantine Beagles are not "working dogs"? Explosives and drug detection dogs are not "working dogs"? Assistance dogs are not "working dogs"?

[Gayle.]

By your definition Midol, your dog will never be a "working dog".

Does Midol have a dog?

[Just Midol]

For me the dog is working if it is using their natural instinctive abilities to perform a task which the dog was specifically bred for.

If I wanted to say that it was limited to the task the dog was originally designed for then I would have.

I didn't.

So Quarantine Beagles are not "working dogs"? Explosives and drug detection dogs are not "working dogs"? Assistance dogs are not "working dogs"?

Huh?

A better way to put what I said (because you don't seem to be getting it) would be the dog is using his instincts to perform a job.

Edited March 20, 2009 by Just Midol

[ILK]

For me the dog is working if it is using their natural instinctive abilities to perform a task which the dog was specifically bred for.

If I wanted to say that it was limited to the task the dog was originally designed for then I would have.

I didn't.

It can't be limited to what the dog is bred for anyway, because a Kelpie can be used as a guide dog and it certainly wasn't bred for that, but being a guide dog is work. I would like to point out though Just Midol, you say in your original post that you wouldn't call obedience work or a sport, but a test on the handler.

Someone who takes on a rescue for example will have to do a lot of hard work and work the dog hard to achieve something as low key as a pre CCD. It is a sport as there is a winner. It is not just a test on the handler it is a test on the dogs ability to follow instructions.

[poodlefan]

For me the dog is working if it is using their natural instinctive abilities to perform a task which the dog was specifically bred for.

If I wanted to say that it was limited to the task the dog was originally designed for then I would have.

I didn't.

So Quarantine Beagles are not "working dogs"? Explosives and drug detection dogs are not "working dogs"? Assistance dogs are not "working dogs"?

Huh?

A better way to put what I said (because you don't seem to be getting it) would be the dog is using his instincts to perform a job.

If its regardless of breed Midol, then how can you define "working" by saying that its when the dog was specifically bred for the task.

Some of the best "working" drug and explosives detection dogs in the UK are working line English Springer Spaniels. They certainly aren't bred for that job.

Would you consider a sled team that's successfully completed the Iditarod as a "working" team regardless of breed?

Edited March 20, 2009 by poodlefan

[jesomil]

It can't be limited to what the dog is bred for anyway, because a Kelpie can be used as a guide dog and it certainly wasn't bred for that, but being a guide dog is work. I would like to point out though Just Midol, you say in your original post that you wouldn't call obedience work or a sport, but a test on the handler.

Someone who takes on a rescue for example will have to do a lot of hard work and work the dog hard to achieve something as low key as a pre CCD. It is a sport as there is a winner. It is not just a test on the handler it is a test on the dogs ability to follow instructions.

I cant imagine a Kelpie being used as the norm, more of an exception and would it pass the testing in Australia? It would have to have certain traits not the norm for the breed.

How is a rescue any harder than any other dog? It is a test on the handler as the dogs ability to follow instructions are as good as it has been trained to. Some dogs are harder than others but it depends on the handler as to whether it will win or not.

[Just Midol]

For me the dog is working if it is using their natural instinctive abilities to perform a task which the dog was specifically bred for.

If I wanted to say that it was limited to the task the dog was originally designed for then I would have.

I didn't.

It can't be limited to what the dog is bred for anyway, because a Kelpie can be used as a guide dog and it certainly wasn't bred for that, but being a guide dog is work. I would like to point out though Just Midol, you say in your original post that you wouldn't call obedience work or a sport, but a test on the handler.

Someone who takes on a rescue for example will have to do a lot of hard work and work the dog hard to achieve something as low key as a pre CCD. It is a sport as there is a winner. It is not just a test on the handler it is a test on the dogs ability to follow instructions.

I don't think a rescue dog is any harder than a dog you've had as a puppy.

Any dog can follow instructions.

For me the dog is working if it is using their natural instinctive abilities to perform a task which the dog was specifically bred for.

If I wanted to say that it was limited to the task the dog was originally designed for then I would have.

I didn't.

So Quarantine Beagles are not "working dogs"? Explosives and drug detection dogs are not "working dogs"? Assistance dogs are not "working dogs"?

Huh?

A better way to put what I said (because you don't seem to be getting it) would be the dog is using his instincts to perform a job.

If its regardless of breed Midol, then how can you define "working" by saying that its when the dog was specifically bred for the task.

Some of the best "working" drug and explosives detection dogs in the UK are working line English Springer Spaniels. They certainly aren't bred for that job.

Would you consider a sled team that's successfully completed the Iditarod as a "working" team regardless of breed?

Not sure about the Iditarod. It very closely resembles work. It is a very accurate test of a dogs working ability but even then it isn't technically work.

This is a discussion on obedience though. You're not doing a very good job of making a point because I can't even figure out what you are trying to prove. You're not even reading what I am saying, I have no idea why I am trying to discuss this with you.

Edited March 20, 2009 by Just Midol

[ILK]

It can't be limited to what the dog is bred for anyway, because a Kelpie can be used as a guide dog and it certainly wasn't bred for that, but being a guide dog is work. I would like to point out though Just Midol, you say in your original post that you wouldn't call obedience work or a sport, but a test on the handler.

Someone who takes on a rescue for example will have to do a lot of hard work and work the dog hard to achieve something as low key as a pre CCD. It is a sport as there is a winner. It is not just a test on the handler it is a test on the dogs ability to follow instructions.

I cant imagine a Kelpie being used as the norm, more of an exception and would it pass the testing in Australia? It would have to have certain traits not the norm for the breed.

How is a rescue any harder than any other dog? It is a test on the handler as the dogs ability to follow instructions are as good as it has been trained to. Some dogs are harder than others but it depends on the handler as to whether it will win or not.

I don't understand what you are trying to say in your first paragragh. You say "I can't imagine a Kelpie being used as the norm"? and who mentioned anything about Australian standards.

A rescue can be far more difficult because one is dealing with issues created by previous handlers.

Edited March 20, 2009 by ILUVKELPIES

[poodlefan]

Not sure about the Iditarod. It very closely resembles work. It is a very accurate test of a dogs working ability but even then it isn't technically work.

This is a discussion on obedience though. You're not doing a very good job of making a point because I can't even figure out what you are trying to prove.

You seem to consider that a "working" dog is not a dog competing in any sort of sport. Is that correct?

Unless the task is related to the instincts specifically developed in the breed, the task cannot be "work"?

So a team of dogs trained and conditioned to successfully complete the Iditarod three times could not be 'working dogs' because the Iditarod is a race or because they weren't a sledding breed? I'd argue that they were more 'working dogs' than anything else.

Here is the team. How this breed ever ended up in the "Non-sporting" Group defies logic IMO

Edited March 20, 2009 by poodlefan

[Just Midol]

Not sure about the Iditarod. It very closely resembles work. It is a very accurate test of a dogs working ability but even then it isn't technically work.

This is a discussion on obedience though. You're not doing a very good job of making a point because I can't even figure out what you are trying to prove.

You seem to consider that a "working" dog is not a dog competing in any sort of sport. Is that correct?

Unless the task is related to the instincts specifically developed in the breed, the task cannot be "work"?

Yes & No. I don't think I've explained myself properly.

I don't consider it a working dog if it is competing in sport. However, quite a few of the Iditarod teams work. If they only compete in the Iditarod then the dog is a sport dog. A very, very good sport dog but a sport dog. If they compete in the Iditarod AND work then they are a working dog which dabbles in sports

The second. Not really. This is what I am having trouble defining. I was more thinking of herding when I said that, but it doesn't really apply to all breeds so it isn't really relevant. The real issue is whether or not the dog is doing a job. Not whether the dog thinks they are doing a job but whether they are actually doing a job, being paid for it does not matter.

There are quite a few definitions of work and working. I noticed most people in this thread chose one which fits their argument so I'll do the same.

Working:

11. doing some form of work or labor, esp. manual, mechanical, or industrial work, as for a living: a working person.

Work:

17. to be employed, esp. as a means of earning one's livelihood: He hasn't worked for six weeks.

ETA: I'd argue that they are competing in a sport, rather than working.

Edited March 20, 2009 by Just Midol

[ILK]

For me the dog is working if it is using their natural instinctive abilities to perform a task which the dog was specifically bred for.

If I wanted to say that it was limited to the task the dog was originally designed for then I would have.

I didn't.

It can't be limited to what the dog is bred for anyway, because a Kelpie can be used as a guide dog and it certainly wasn't bred for that, but being a guide dog is work. I would like to point out though Just Midol, you say in your original post that you wouldn't call obedience work or a sport, but a test on the handler.

Someone who takes on a rescue for example will have to do a lot of hard work and work the dog hard to achieve something as low key as a pre CCD. It is a sport as there is a winner. It is not just a test on the handler it is a test on the dogs ability to follow instructions.

I don't think a rescue dog is any harder than a dog you've had as a puppy.

Any dog can follow instructions.

Of course a rescue dog can be harder than a dog you've had as a puppy, because one is dealing with issues created by previous handlers.

You haven't addressed my other comment though in relation to obedience being a sport which is what this thread is about.

[jesomil]

I don't understand what you are trying to say in your first paragragh. You say "I can't imagine a Kelpie being used as the norm"? and who mentioned anything about Australian standards.

A rescue can be far more difficult because one is dealing with issues created by previous handlers.

You were saying that a Kelpie can be used as a guide dog. I was saying that I doubt many would be capable if any at all. The guide dogs I have seen have been selectively bred or have traits that have been selected to make them good working dogs. I mentioned Aust standards because someone might say they have a kelpie guide dog but but does it match up to the standards.

Alot of dogs have issues created by their current handlers so I wouldnt agree with you about rescue dogs.

[ILK]

Oh you have answered it above. We were typing at the same time

[poodlefan]

Midolt:

However, quite a few of the Iditarod teams work.

Actually, nowadays, very few Iditarod teams do anything but race. If they are bred, selected, trained and kept as race dogs, not pets, how is this not a "living" from the dog's perspective.

Edited March 20, 2009 by poodlefan

[Just Midol]

I've said 3 times now that I'm not talking about the dogs perspective.

Well, 4 now.

ETA: Rescues can be harder, but they can be easier. Isn't fair to generalise. My rescue is far easier than the first dog I had from a puppy.

Edited March 20, 2009 by Just Midol

[poodlefan]

I've said 3 times now that I'm not talking about the dogs perspective.

Well, 4 now.

ETA: Rescues can be harder, but they can be easier. Isn't fair to generalise. My rescue is far easier than the first dog I had from a puppy.

Well what about the professional mushers perspective. If they make their living sled racing, are their dogs working dogs?

[ILK]

I don't understand what you are trying to say in your first paragragh. You say "I can't imagine a Kelpie being used as the norm"? and who mentioned anything about Australian standards.

A rescue can be far more difficult because one is dealing with issues created by previous handlers.

You were saying that a Kelpie can be used as a guide dog. I was saying that I doubt many would be capable if any at all. The guide dogs I have seen have been selectively bred or have traits that have been selected to make them good working dogs. I mentioned Aust standards because someone might say they have a kelpie guide dog but but does it match up to the standards.

Alot of dogs have issues created by their current handlers so I wouldnt agree with you about rescue dogs.

It was an example for Midol's thread in relation to a dog working at a task it wasn't bred for.

Alot of dogs do have issues created by their current handlers. Some issues are worse than others. If you take on one of those dogs you have to deal with those issues so naturally that would be more difficult than having a dog as a pup.

[Just Midol]

I've said 3 times now that I'm not talking about the dogs perspective.

Well, 4 now.

ETA: Rescues can be harder, but they can be easier. Isn't fair to generalise. My rescue is far easier than the first dog I had from a puppy.

Well what about the professional mushers perspective. If they make their living sled racing, are their dogs working dogs?

Tough one.

And I'm not sure.

It's not black and white. The only black and white part of this discussion is that an obedience dog is not a working dog.