Assessing Sporting Ability

[Vickie]

Thanks Jed, your posts have always struck me as being rational & open in the past. I guess I can see why you got a little heated.

However, a lot of people who don't know much about dogs, working dogs, purebred dogs, standards etc. come and read these forums without posting.

So, if erroneous assertions by people who haven't the faintest idea what they are talking about are allowed to stand, those casual readers believe all purebred dogs are shit, or worse, and all registered breeders are shit, or worse.

Lots of registered breeders are not shit, or worse. They breed with dedication and ethics,

I guess your reasons for posting in this thread are similar to mine. I don't believe these types of statements:

Without the standard you have mongrels, and no breed type at all.

are fair as they relate to herding dogs and it bothers me to think that the casual reader thinks working breeders are all shit, or worse. As you & I know, they often breed with dedication & ethics too.

[jesomil]

A dog that works well doesn't always breed well.

How random.... Of course a dog that works well doesnt always breed well. A good worker with 10 generations of good workers behind it will generally breed well though.

Looks to me like the fundamental problem is the lack of a comprehensive testing system that incorporates both conformation and performance based testing. I've said it before but it really does seem like this divide is not good for purebred dogs and there needs to be some sort of reconciliation?

Within some breeds a reconciliation is not possible, the breeds are too far separated. Even with a comprehensive testing system, it still wouldnt work. Some trait would have to prioritise. Which would it be??

As long as people realise that there is a need for dogs who are bred for work, then things are all fine

[Kavik]

I understand that it takes a lot of time to train a dog in any discipline. But I also think breeders owe it to the breed to ensure that they can do what they were bred for (if they had a job), not just look like that breed. Obviously within reason - not dog fighting etc. But certainly breeds which are still used for work.

What exactly this should entail is where it becomes complicated.

For the controversial GSD Schutzhund, while ideal, is a very difficult discipline, and many would not be interested in the "C" part of the sport, and it is very time consuming. But there should be SOMETHING which can assess the dog's drives, nerves and temperament. Plus some people think that Schutzhund has become watered down to allow the show people to get the required titles on their dogs for breeding.

[Vickie]

I understand that it takes a lot of time to train a dog in any discipline. But I also think breeders owe it to the breed to ensure that they can do what they were bred for (if they had a job), not just look like that breed. Obviously within reason - not dog fighting etc. But certainly breeds which are still used for work.

What exactly this should entail is where it becomes complicated.

very complicated I think. I have had quite a few people ask if I would breed one of my bitches. A couple from agility, a few 3 sheep triallers, and a couple who work dogs for a living. I think it would require a lot more than my time & dedication in training. She obviously can do what she was bred for & has enough talent that people want her offspring.

For me to justify breeding her, I would have to have enough knowledge to understand in depth the traits I would want to reproduce, and know enough to pick a stud dog with traits to compliment hers. AND...(and this for me is a big and), someone else would not be breeding (and doing it better than I could), the exact same thing in a dog. I spayed her. Her sisters have both been bred & they produce great pups. Who am I to think I could do the same thing with a lot less experience under my belt, even if I do have the time?

[Jed]

Yep, I understand your point, Vickie. Turn it around and you have the usual show breeder's dilemma.

Occasionally I get the urge to do something with a dog, because it has talent. While I am finding the time, it grows too old!! I would have loved to do field trials with my cocker, but she grew middleaged while I was finding the phone number

And my good girl and I will probably do doggy dancing in the yard for years, and maybe show off to our friends, and the breeder.

On a list I am on, breeders are watching, with baited breath, the exploits of one of the breed (bred by a member of the list) who now has all tracking titles, most of the obedience titles, and is having a go at flyball with some success. Everyone is going "oogh, aargh, go you good thing" and every time she passes another level, the list is full of genuine congratulations

When that dog can't compete any more, I am sure about 20 breeders will offer the owner another dog...free.

All we can do is breed to the standard, being mindful of the purpose of the dog, not be swayed too much by current show trends, stick to our guns, and try to get one of ours into work. And know that if we stick to the standard for construction. movement and temperament, there is a good chance, given the right training and the correct drive (which we can probably pick in a pup) and dog will do the job.

Thank dog my breeds aren't real "workers" I'll leave that to breeders who know what they are doing.

And I don't have any particular problem with working dogs -- but some "show" dogs will do the job too. It's a matter of smarts and heart.

But with poor conformation, no matter how smart, or how good the heart, the dog wont have either the stamina or the speed required, or the turning ability, blah blah.

Friends of mine have a Shih Tzu. They have a little property of about 40,000 acres, and a couple of working dogs. They say the Shih Tzu is the best worker they have!! Self taught, he works in the paddock, and he will back sheep in the race. He's no good in the yards, the sheep run on him. He needs a REAL dog to save him. But if the sheep run on him, he goes for them. The only problem is the burrs when he hops into bed with his owners at night!!

[Tonymc]

This is posted for the newbies in here and not the regulars.

Some are wanting to twist,misinterpretate and of course run with their own agenda.Strange how some who never bother with this section normally are here trying to claim to be a great source of knowledge!!!Quite funny actually.

Lets sort out the mistruths and the twisted agenda.

Working dogs came first.

Working breeds were developed because of a need man had.

People saw a need such as dogs to work stock, this would of course make life easier for the Humans involved.

People crossed different dogs and blended prey drive to get the right dogs for the job.

People tried different combinations till they got the result they wanted.

What they were doing was blending and molding prey drive, so the resultant dogs had the drive to do that particular task.EG. a heeler having the drive to heel Cattle.

When the right result was achieved and the dogs were achieveing and fufilling the task then sometime down the track, a standard was drawn up.

NOTE. The standard was drawn up on dogs that were actually out working and fufilling the task at hand.

YES. The standard was drawn up on actual working Dogs.

So these dogs had it all.They had form and drive.They of course met the standard which helped keep the type set for that breed.

So here we have the dogs out working and meeting a standard.So we have the complete package.

So all is going well.The people working these dogs are breeding on and are basing their breeding selections on standard and drive.The way it should be.These people are ensuring the breed stays healthy and functional by testing for drive.How are they testing for drive?Easy by putting the dog to work.

By testing each dog, they ensure that only dogs with a good healthy level of drive are bred with.This see's the continuation of functional dogs.This see's that dogs are able to carry out their original task.

The advatage that these people have is that they are actually working the dogs in the field.Hence these people understand extremely well the whole situation.They understand what is involved and what it takes.They are the best placed individuals to judge on what dogs will be best for the particular working enviroment.

For example, who better to know and understand what makes a good Drover's dog than a drover!!!!

Please read Part 2 coming up. Tony

[ILK]

This is a really interesting article. It's worth getting a cuppa and a biscuit and reading the whole thing.

http://saluqi.home.netcom.com/belkin.htm

I think the questions he poses for Salukis could well be posed for many other breeds.

I finally got a chance to read it. Great article anita. This is a comprehensive article written by some-one who seems to know what he is talking about.

I'm certainly no expert, but I do find it sad that some dogs have their abilities depleted all for the sake of the show standard. I also read the Today's GSD thread and it is sad that dogs are bred to such a standard that they are not fully functional. It just doesn't seem fair to me.

Thanks!

[Jed]

You're right tony, function came first.

And drovers do breed good dogs.

So, are you saying no one except drovers should breed dogs?

[Tonymc]

Part 2.

Time passe's and as I said before, a standard is drawn up based on dogs that are actually working!!!!

The problem starts to happen from here in.

The people working these dogs understand the importance of type and drive and breed for both.Dogs are tested and worked before being bred.That way its not just a superficial decision based on looks alone.

Back to the breed.The breed starts to become known and is seen about working and so on.

Some of the original people may decide to show these dogs and thats fine.Why is it fine?Because the dogs at this stage are all capable of carrying out the said task, because all have been tested and worked.

Time moves on though and people who do not work or earn a living in the enviroment that these dogs work in,start to notice these dogs.Some of these people want one of these dogs.

No offence to anybody intended as its just the way it is.So People buy some of these dogs and have no intention of ever working the Dog at his original task.These People also quite often have little idea of the enviroment in which the dog would be working, if in a working home.

These people want to show the dog, so off they go.Down the track they decide to breed.They aquire another dog/s and breed.So this person has so many dogs they are breeding.These dogs in this situation are not working at their breed specific task, so the breeder who is showing these dogs is evaluating and making selections based only on appearance!!!!

The person is this example is not testing for drive at all, but only appearance.

He or she falls into the delusional belief, that because it meet's the breed standard it will automatically work!!!The Breeder though has failed to test for a vital component of the breed, which is drive!!!!

So now we in these situations have dogs being bred only for appearance.

Because in this situation no evaluation for drive is carried out, its becomes a crazy lucky dip!!!

Without even being aware of it,Breeders in situations like this end up breeding dogs of low drive to dogs of low drive.Keep that up and we end up with what we see in some lines today!!!Dogs that have very very low or no drive.

Yes lines of dogs that are not capable of the original task and dogs that have no desire to carry out the original task.Keep lowering drive and it keeps reducing a dogs ability and instinct to carry out the task.

Are all breeders like this?No thank god.The Breeders that work their dogs as well understand the importance and drive and thus breed for it.There are a number though that never test and sadly the proof is around us in lines of dogs that cannot carry out their task!!!!

I wonder how the original people who developed some breeds would react if we went back in time and said to them" In years to come, you will have some lines in this breed ineffective and unable to work!!!!

We have examples around us of the importance of testing before breeding.Horses,dogs,cattleand even dairy cattle are tested.Why? To ensure the ongoing health and functionality of the breed!!!

I am friends with many breeders who work their dogs and they are all aware of the dangers of not testing,hence they are breeding good sound,useable dogs.

Human nature can be a strange thing at times.Deflection is a major tool used by those not wanting to see or face the thruth about a matter.Anybody that raise's concerns or objections, alot of the time has the term Breeder bashing thrown at them.Pretty sad actually as its used to deflect atention away from the real issue/s rather than objectively examine the situation.

At least I got a laugh out of some of this thread.There have been a minority of posts here that have not contributed to the thread.

A minority of content in here,reminded me what a Mate said one day.

The Mate said, " You know some people are like a milk bucket" I said how do you work that out?He said" well if you gve the Milk Bucket a kick on the way to milk the cow,its make's alot of noise but its sure as hell empty!!!! " Tony

[WoofnHoof]

I wonder if some sort of points system could be set up where titles/championships or whatever gained by progeny can be credited to the sire/dam? So instead of breeders going out and trying their dogs at all sports, they can get any results from pet owners and credit them to their lines. I guess at the moment the breeder could do it manually but it would be good if there were a centralised system where people could upload their dogs' achievements and have them credited to whatever sire/dam? I think it's the hanovarians that have a sire of the year competition where the achievements of the progeny go towards an award for the sire which has the best performed progeny?

No doubt a logistical nightmare but it could potentially be a new avenue for people to promote their lines? You could have an awards night with best performed progeny for each breed in which achievements in both showing and sporting/working are collated and awarded?

Perhaps the sports could be weighted according to the origins of the breed?

Something like that could begin to reconcile the two worlds IMO.

Plus who doesn't love a good awards night

[Keshwar]

My opinion is that the best way to test for soundness relating to what the breed is supposed to be able to do is to actually do it with the dog and it's parents and it's parents before that etc. I believe that is a much better test of whether a dog will break down or not, but that is just my opinion, I may be missing the point.

Any suggestions on how I do this with my Afghan Hound?

It is not possible for all breeds to be able to demonstrate what they were originally bred to do. The best we can do is try to get as close to the written standard as possible. Perhaps you have a better suggestion?

Bear.

[Kavik]

My opinion is that the best way to test for soundness relating to what the breed is supposed to be able to do is to actually do it with the dog and it's parents and it's parents before that etc. I believe that is a much better test of whether a dog will break down or not, but that is just my opinion, I may be missing the point.

Any suggestions on how I do this with my Afghan Hound?

It is not possible for all breeds to be able to demonstrate what they were originally bred to do. The best we can do is try to get as close to the written standard as possible. Perhaps you have a better suggestion?

Bear.

What about Lure Coursing?

tkay, I like your suggestion

[Keshwar]

My opinion is that the best way to test for soundness relating to what the breed is supposed to be able to do is to actually do it with the dog and it's parents and it's parents before that etc. I believe that is a much better test of whether a dog will break down or not, but that is just my opinion, I may be missing the point.

Any suggestions on how I do this with my Afghan Hound?

It is not possible for all breeds to be able to demonstrate what they were originally bred to do. The best we can do is try to get as close to the written standard as possible. Perhaps you have a better suggestion?

Bear.

What about Lure Coursing?

tkay, I like your suggestion

They weren't bred to chase plastic bags around a static course. They were bred to hunt live prey, not something permitted in Aus.

[Kavik]

Yes, but it is the closest thing available and would still give an indication of whether the dog would chase.

I am for testing of ability, but also for REALISTIC testing given that some jobs are illegal. I have said that I also think there are things that even the fighting breeds could use to test gameness, that do not include fighting. Things like weight pull and springpole competitions. Surely some testing of ability is better than none?

[Keshwar]

Yes, but it is the closest thing available and would still give an indication of whether the dog would chase.

I am for testing of ability, but also for REALISTIC testing given that some jobs are illegal. I have said that I also think there are things that even the fighting breeds could use to test gameness, that do not include fighting. Things like weight pull and springpole competitions. Surely some testing of ability is better than none?

I agree I was just trying to make the point that it is not always practicable for a breed to do what it was originally bred for.

I think for sighthounds a combination of lure coursing and endurance testing would be a viable way to test soundness. Maybe there could be an Australian sighthound title for sighthounds that gain a title in all three disciplines (Conformation, lure and endurance). Although that would mean that ANKC would have to recognise lure coursing.

Bear.

[WoofnHoof]

If the ANKC is difficult about certain sports perhaps the breed clubs could kick it off for each breed and if it does grow then some pressure could be put on the ANKC to take over? There is a thoroughbred performance club here in qld that has an awards night with a point system for heaps of different sports, from memory they have an award for best performed TB in each sport/discipline and then an overall award for highest pointscore TB for the state.

If the breed clubs follow that principle it could also encourage more memberships for the club as it would attract people who might otherwise not get as much out of the club as showies or breeders might get?

I know the lure coursing has a point thing for the best performed of each breed so it would be good if that could go even further and count towards something recognised by the breed club

[Jed]

And, as FaxonandBear will verify, the Afghan was bred to course in rugged hills, unlike it's cousin, the Saluki, which was used on the plains.

So, to test the dogs, you will need to let them chase deer (or something) around rugged hills!!

I don't see that as an accredited sport any time soon.

Good luck

tonymc, don't forget to credit the author of the information you posted.

Kavic

Things like weight pull and springpole competitions. Surely some testing of ability is better than none?

APBT club runs regular days for pit bulls for weight pull, and other competitions to test the dogs. The comps were big deals, annual point scores etc. Or they used to a couple of years ago, what is happening now I don't know.

[WoofnHoof]

Couldn't find the TB group looks like they don't have a website but here is the link for the standardbreds: http://www.spphav.org/index.php?p=1_6

Looks like they have a performance card system with designated eligible shows/events, they have a points award and an award for eligible endurance rides as well. Shouldn't be too hard to set up I wouldn't think?

[OzPit]

Many people think that the APBT can be gametested thru weight-pull, springpole, etc; I have to disagree. The concept of "gameness" wrt the APBT is directly related to the dogs desire & willingness to keep doing the task it was developed for in the pit, even when critically injured, tired, etc; keeping in mind the dogs were perfectly able to escape the pit or refuse to fight(hence the curs). Weightpull/springpole can test determination, strength, tenacity, etc; but the only true way to test an APBTs "gameness" is in the pit, with another dog, otherwise you just have a determined, strong, tenacious dog, not a game one. Nobody would dream of doing it these days (except in USA). So - you could test other APBT traits in weightpull, springpole, etc, but they are traits common to many breeds. The defining trait of the pit bulldog can't be tested for. Heres a link to a debate on the topic : link

WRT "whether the dog would chase" - many dogs will "chase". I believe the ability to successfully "hunt" is different. Not having a go here, by the way, I realise testing breeds for their original uses is not always realistically possible. My pov is that when we can't "properly" test a dogs ability, we're going to lose the essence of the breed and end up with a watered down version, like we see today.

Yes, but it is the closest thing available and would still give an indication of whether the dog would chase.

I am for testing of ability, but also for REALISTIC testing given that some jobs are illegal. I have said that I also think there are things that even the fighting breeds could use to test gameness, that do not include fighting. Things like weight pull and springpole competitions. Surely some testing of ability is better than none?

[WoofnHoof]

OzPit I don't think anyone is denying the difficulty in testing for some breeds, however for me at least I think that some sort of integrated performance testing would help to stave off the soundness issues (real or otherwise) which can occur when the breed is only tested in the show ring and being bred for the show ring. I don't think anyone would suggest that a weightpull would prove the dog is able to be a fighting dog, or that a coursing dog is able to be a hunting dog, however these sports can at least go some of the way to proving that the animal is still well built and able to perform at least some of the functions of it's original task.