Desexing Females

[Greytmate]

Statistically, in our breed we more likely to get good workers from parents with proven working performance although it's no guarentee.

More likely than what alternative? Breeding with dogs that don't work well? Nobody here is advocating that at all.

In performance breeding, you are more likely to breed good workers from proven (prepotent) producers that are also good worker themselves, than you are from breeding an equally good worker than has not yet been proven as a producer herself.

Not all good working bitches are prepotent. Good breeding bitches are. They may even regularly throw ability beyond their own if the breeder is working to a long-term plan.

The trend of using a super male over an unproven bitch is where I see many of the problems when trying to improve the breed's performance. The majority in our sport work males, but personally I would like to see more females working and titled to get an idea of the strength of the bitch lines and where they are going. Too many breeders IMHO rely upon a good male to produce offspring from a female who's working performance has never been evaluated.

That is beside the point of this thread. Yes it is important to choose the right male, but that has no relevance as to whether people should keep all their bitches entire.

[SmoothieGirl]

Personally, I don't understand why anyone would use a desexed female for performance/sport in the first place. A sporting female IMHO should be trained in work/sport as a proofing foundation that the line is work/sport capable and then used for the breeding of a proven and titled bitch. To concentrate on the training of a desexed performance/sporting/working dog is a real shame in the sense that if the dog turns out well, it cannot be reproduced or contribute to improved gene pools.

Nope, I haven't read beyond your first post BB, so forgive me if I'm on a tangent, but...

By your reckoning I should pack up all my dog related activities and take up knitting? Btw, yes my dog is a herding titled 'desexed' female. But I don't have any intentions of ever being a breeder - best left to those with the time, resources and know how - rather than a dog enthusiast like me. Oh and on that, just because a dog has a title, doesn't mean it should necessarily pass on its lines. I love my girl to bits, she's sharp as a tack, highly trainable, but her skin issues are just too overwhelming to ever consider using her as breeding stock.

I think I know where you are coming from though, its a great shame that more of the really good breeding dogs don't have titles in working/sport disciplines, particularly those that show off the original 'job' of the breed. But realistically that isn't always possible, nor does everyone have the same interests.

Edited because I was having an illiterate moment.

Edited May 29, 2010 by SmoothieGirl

[jesomil]

I think BB is talking about a different type of sport/performance.

From what I have seen, most dogs who compete in working dog trials eg schutzhund and sheepdog trials are entire. Only certain breeds are capable of doing these sports and it is a test of their genetics.

Yes, of course people do it for fun but it is a test to see whether the dogs are breed worthy. What a shame to have a super bitch who is winning everything and showing amazing skill and not be able to breed that on.

Working dog breeding is always striving to breed better workers and competition against other working dogs is a good way to test that.

Obedience, agility, herding etc has been designed for everyone and all breeds to be able to participate in. Its for the enjoyment for dog and handler.

Other working dog trials are based alot on genetics so breeding and breedability is a bigger issue as the dogs are being tested and bred to improve their abilities.

I would not desex a performance dog of mine. From 3 separate breeders in 3 breeds, I have been advised not to. Not ever really thought why but I assumed its because it changed the way they worked.

[jesomil]

By your reckoning I should pack up all my dog related activities and take up knitting? Btw, yes my dog is a herding titled 'desexed' female. But I don't have any intentions of ever being a breeder - best left to those with the time, resources and know how - rather than a dog enthusiast like me. Oh and on that, just because a dog has a title, doesn't mean it should necessarily pass on its lines. I love my girl to bits, she's sharp as a tack, highly trainable, but her skin issues are just too overwhelming to ever consider using her as breeding stock.

No, it means you should keep having fun with your dog, not pack up and start knitting.

If you were a working line enthusiast and had bought your dog from working lines to compete with and it turned out to be a big winner with amazing talent, it would be a shame not to be able to put that dogs skills into bettering the breed.

Just the same with show people when they sell a puppy to a pet home (where it is desexed) and it turns out a magnificent example of the breed, they will wish it hadnt necessarily been desexed.

I agree that a title doesnt mean breedworthy but it also depends on the title and what it represents and its purpose.

[mjk05]

I think BB is talking about a different type of sport/performance.

From what I have seen, most dogs who compete in working dog trials eg schutzhund and sheepdog trials are entire. Only certain breeds are capable of doing these sports and it is a test of their genetics.

Well, I'm talking about working sheepdogs, and we desex anything we aren't going to breed from. 4 of my current 5 trialling dogs are desexed, and the other one is probably going to be soon. We've also sold a number of pups to working homes where they will be desexed, because their owners want dogs to work, not to breed from, and would rather buy a pup when they need a new dog (from parents proven to produce good workers) than have to deal with entire animals themselves. This applies mostly to people buying bitch pups, but my brother-in-law does a lot of contract stockwork for other people, and he keeps only desexed males. Never has any problems if he's working somewhere with entire bitches on the property.

I would not desex a performance dog of mine. From 3 separate breeders in 3 breeds, I have been advised not to. Not ever really thought why but I assumed its because it changed the way they worked.

My experience is that many people think desexing will make dogs fat and lazy- which isn't true unless they are overfed. My desexed dogs all need less food, I think that's actually a bonus, they're a cheaper workforce! No change in the way they work.

Sure, if we're selling pups to people who want to trial or otherwise will be testing their dogs to a high standard and may want to breed, then absolutely they should keep them entire. But if someone wants to desex their working dog or even trial with a desexed dog, I'd say go for it. On the odd occasion that we've sold pups to pet homes or non-working (eg agility) homes, we usually ask them to bring the dog down to do some basic training so we can see what it's like and get a better idea of what we're producing.

Yes, of course people do it for fun but it is a test to see whether the dogs are breed worthy. What a shame to have a super bitch who is winning everything and showing amazing skill and not be able to breed that on.

Working dog breeding is always striving to breed better workers and competition against other working dogs is a good way to test that.

It's not only to see if the trialling dogs themselves are worth breeding from, but to show which dogs are producing the best working animals. Yeah, it would be a shame for us if we sold a pup that was desexed and then went on to be brilliant, but on the other hand, we then know that her parents are producing fabulous dogs. And even in trialling circles here, the accepted wisdom is that the best way to get a pup like that fabulous dog is to go back to the parents. As Greytmate says, you're most likely to get a great dog from parents who produce lots of great dogs, not from breeding that great dog itself.

The main reason people breed working sheepdogs should be to supply dogs to farms and stockmen/women, not to trial. So the vast majority of pups will go to non-trialling homes. If those homes want to breed and have the capability to do it well, then they should. But if they don't want to, should we tell them, as BB did, that it just isn't worth working or trialling a desexed dog?!

[jesomil]

It's not only to see if the trialling dogs themselves are worth breeding from, but to show which dogs are producing the best working animals. Yeah, it would be a shame for us if we sold a pup that was desexed and then went on to be brilliant, but on the other hand, we then know that her parents are producing fabulous dogs. And even in trialling circles here, the accepted wisdom is that the best way to get a pup like that fabulous dog is to go back to the parents. As Greytmate says, you're most likely to get a great dog from parents who produce lots of great dogs, not from breeding that great dog itself.

But we should be breeding to better the breeds abilities, so if the parents produced an even better pup, then the pup should be bred from. Onwards and upwards.

Plus parents get old and pass on, you cant always keep going back to the parents.

Obviously you wouldnt just breed a great dog because it was great, you would breed a great dog because it was great and was from a line of great dogs. You wouldnt get a dog from the pound, have it win everything then breed. Most working enthusiasts would buy a puppy from the best lines they could afford.

The main reason people breed working sheepdogs should be to supply dogs to farms and stockmen/women, not to trial. So the vast majority of pups will go to non-trialling homes. If those homes want to breed and have the capability to do it well, then they should. But if they don't want to, should we tell them, as BB did, that it just isn't worth working or trialling a desexed dog?!

I think what BB said was referring to the sport he/she is involved as maybe that opinion is the norm.

4 of my current 5 trialling dogs are desexed, and the other one is probably going to be soon.

I dont really understand this. I thought your trialling dogs would be your best dogs.

Edited May 29, 2010 by jesomil

[mjk05]

But we should be breeding to better the breeds abilities, so if the parents produced an even better pup, then the pup should be bred from. Onwards and upwards.

Plus parents get old and pass on, you cant always keep going back to the parents.

Doesn't always (or even often) work that way, unfortunately.

There are very few top trial dogs whose parents were both top trial dogs, and so on. And there are so many other considerations apart from trial results. If we're looking at a very good dog on the trial ground, we aren't necessarily saying, "Ooh, he's good, we'll use him!", we might be thinking, "his sire's line has produced some very good dogs from that line of bitches", or "that litter by that bitch were all much better than his previous litter from a different sort of bitch", and perhaps making breeding decisions accordingly. So rather than just putting top dog to top bitch, we'd try to make decisions that would have the best chance of producing the sort of dogs we want.

You can't keep going back to the parents, but you can try to emulate or even exceed the breeding of great dogs using similar lines.

4 of my current 5 trialling dogs are desexed, and the other one is probably going to be soon.

I dont really understand this. I thought your trialling dogs would be your best dogs.

No, I trial the dogs that I enjoy trialling and that are trained for trials. One of my trial dogs has an entire full brother who is a better dog and has produced well, and is free from the genetic disease that my dog carries. My dog isn't a world-beater, but he makes a few finals and gets the odd place. Another is a rescue that I enjoy working at home and he enjoys occasional trials- he has mild HD too. So should I keep them entire or should I just stop trialling them? I go to trials because I enjoy it. It also helps me with training my current group of young dogs, who are so far entire. Eventually some of them will probably be sterilised- we have 4 from one litter, and the plan is just to choose the best of them to breed on (not necessarily the best at trialling, but the best in terms of the traits we want to produce). Maybe we'll sell some of the others as trained dogs, maybe we'll keep them for farmwork, maybe I'll continue to trial them. Depends on how many trial dogs I have then.

Of course, I'm not a competitive trialler, I do it because I enjoy it and I'm not going to pass on a dog that is useful at home because it isn't winning trials. My partner trials all entire dogs, but he has the same attitude- some of his better trial dogs won't be bred from. But it's much more useful to their breeders being able to see them work than if we'd just pet homed or disposed of anything we didn't want to breed from. Each dog working represents not just the genetic potential it could produce itself, but an indication of the genetic potential of its parents, siblings and lines in general.

[Red Fox]

Most working enthusiasts would buy a puppy from the best lines they could afford.

Agreed. But what of those who want a serious working dog but have no interest or desire to breed? Would you still keep the dog entire? Or would a dog of that quality only go out on breeders terms -ie, if the dog does turn out to be highly succesful then the breeder would expect a litter from her?

[mjk05]

I'm not a horse person, but I'm wondering what the difference is between dogs and horses in this regard... It seems as though quite a lot of serious performance competitors (racing included) are happy and perhaps even prefer to compete with geldings- but horse breeders manage to continue producing high quality animals, despite a significant proportion of the foals they produce being sterilised... I realise that a stallion is a much bigger management issue than a dog, but don't the same breeding principles apply to some extent?

[Wazzat Xolo]

I'm not a horse person, but I'm wondering what the difference is between dogs and horses in this regard... It seems as though quite a lot of serious performance competitors (racing included) are happy and perhaps even prefer to compete with geldings- but horse breeders manage to continue producing high quality animals, despite a significant proportion of the foals they produce being sterilised... I realise that a stallion is a much bigger management issue than a dog, but don't the same breeding principles apply to some extent?

Well I can tell you we desexed all our Narcotic Detector dogs as they searched much better when desexed and it was better also for the males who worked with the bitches.

[Black Bronson]

The majority in our sport work males, but personally I would like to see more females working and titled to get an idea of the strength of the bitch lines and where they are going. Too many breeders IMHO rely upon a good male to produce offspring from a female who's working performance has never been evaluated.

Sure, that's an argument for training/working all entire bitches (and dogs), I think anyone involved in breeding dogs for work would agree with that- but how does that explain your belief that it's not worth working desexed animals???

Wouldn't you get a much better idea of the bitch lines if all her desexed relatives were trained and worked, as well as the entire ones?

We have enough trouble finding good handlers working females at all

[Black Bronson]

Statistically, in our breed we more likely to get good workers from parents with proven working performance although it's no guarentee.

More likely than what alternative? Breeding with dogs that don't work well? Nobody here is advocating that at all.

In performance breeding, you are more likely to breed good workers from proven (prepotent) producers that are also good worker themselves, than you are from breeding an equally good worker than has not yet been proven as a producer herself.

Not all good working bitches are prepotent. Good breeding bitches are. They may even regularly throw ability beyond their own if the breeder is working to a long-term plan.

The trend of using a super male over an unproven bitch is where I see many of the problems when trying to improve the breed's performance. The majority in our sport work males, but personally I would like to see more females working and titled to get an idea of the strength of the bitch lines and where they are going. Too many breeders IMHO rely upon a good male to produce offspring from a female who's working performance has never been evaluated.

That is beside the point of this thread. Yes it is important to choose the right male, but that has no relevance as to whether people should keep all their bitches entire.

That's a given Greytmate to use a good producer , but the good producer has to have her first litter to determine her production quality in the first place. There is more sense testing the producing ablity of bitch that can work than a bitch that cannot or hasn't been evaluated.

It's very relevent to keep a working bitch entire if the owner has any interests in the improvement of their breed

[jesomil]

Agreed. But what of those who want a serious working dog but have no interest or desire to breed? Would you still keep the dog entire? Or would a dog of that quality only go out on breeders terms -ie, if the dog does turn out to be highly succesful then the breeder would expect a litter from her?

A dog of that quality would only go to someone who would not desex. Whats the point of breeding top dogs if they arent going to be tested and bred from to improve the breed if suitable.

[Black Bronson]

I think BB is talking about a different type of sport/performance.

From what I have seen, most dogs who compete in working dog trials eg schutzhund and sheepdog trials are entire. Only certain breeds are capable of doing these sports and it is a test of their genetics.

Yes, of course people do it for fun but it is a test to see whether the dogs are breed worthy. What a shame to have a super bitch who is winning everything and showing amazing skill and not be able to breed that on.

Working dog breeding is always striving to breed better workers and competition against other working dogs is a good way to test that.

Obedience, agility, herding etc has been designed for everyone and all breeds to be able to participate in. Its for the enjoyment for dog and handler.

Other working dog trials are based alot on genetics so breeding and breedability is a bigger issue as the dogs are being tested and bred to improve their abilities.

I would not desex a performance dog of mine. From 3 separate breeders in 3 breeds, I have been advised not to. Not ever really thought why but I assumed its because it changed the way they worked.

Correct Jesomil, that's exactly my thoughts

In the performance dog world, there are a lot of very capable and enthusiastic handlers I have seen that a really working the wrong dogs. Their (handlers) abilities could be put to a far greater use in the general scheem of proofing and titling dogs for the performance improvement of specific breeds. Some of these handlers/trainers could make a real impact in the Australian working breed improvements if they trialled the right dogs.

Many start out with their faithful mutt they adore and train for pleasure which is great, but some of these handler/trainer teams have a real talent with dogs and have a lot of potential to take the right dogs in the right sporting/working discliplines to greater heights.

[Black Bronson]

I think BB is talking about a different type of sport/performance.

From what I have seen, most dogs who compete in working dog trials eg schutzhund and sheepdog trials are entire. Only certain breeds are capable of doing these sports and it is a test of their genetics.

Well, I'm talking about working sheepdogs, and we desex anything we aren't going to breed from. 4 of my current 5 trialling dogs are desexed, and the other one is probably going to be soon. We've also sold a number of pups to working homes where they will be desexed, because their owners want dogs to work, not to breed from, and would rather buy a pup when they need a new dog (from parents proven to produce good workers) than have to deal with entire animals themselves. This applies mostly to people buying bitch pups, but my brother-in-law does a lot of contract stockwork for other people, and he keeps only desexed males. Never has any problems if he's working somewhere with entire bitches on the property.

I would not desex a performance dog of mine. From 3 separate breeders in 3 breeds, I have been advised not to. Not ever really thought why but I assumed its because it changed the way they worked.

My experience is that many people think desexing will make dogs fat and lazy- which isn't true unless they are overfed. My desexed dogs all need less food, I think that's actually a bonus, they're a cheaper workforce! No change in the way they work.

Sure, if we're selling pups to people who want to trial or otherwise will be testing their dogs to a high standard and may want to breed, then absolutely they should keep them entire. But if someone wants to desex their working dog or even trial with a desexed dog, I'd say go for it. On the odd occasion that we've sold pups to pet homes or non-working (eg agility) homes, we usually ask them to bring the dog down to do some basic training so we can see what it's like and get a better idea of what we're producing.

Yes, of course people do it for fun but it is a test to see whether the dogs are breed worthy. What a shame to have a super bitch who is winning everything and showing amazing skill and not be able to breed that on.

Working dog breeding is always striving to breed better workers and competition against other working dogs is a good way to test that.

It's not only to see if the trialling dogs themselves are worth breeding from, but to show which dogs are producing the best working animals. Yeah, it would be a shame for us if we sold a pup that was desexed and then went on to be brilliant, but on the other hand, we then know that her parents are producing fabulous dogs. And even in trialling circles here, the accepted wisdom is that the best way to get a pup like that fabulous dog is to go back to the parents. As Greytmate says, you're most likely to get a great dog from parents who produce lots of great dogs, not from breeding that great dog itself.

The main reason people breed working sheepdogs should be to supply dogs to farms and stockmen/women, not to trial. So the vast majority of pups will go to non-trialling homes. If those homes want to breed and have the capability to do it well, then they should. But if they don't want to, should we tell them, as BB did, that it just isn't worth working or trialling a desexed dog?!

I would NEVER advocate to anyone interested in trialling a dog to desex it at all. If breeding was not their interests, I would recommend an entire male. In our sport which I know that all disciplines are not the same, but trialling a desexed female is a complete waste of time and effort.

[Black Bronson]

Agreed. But what of those who want a serious working dog but have no interest or desire to breed? Would you still keep the dog entire? Or would a dog of that quality only go out on breeders terms -ie, if the dog does turn out to be highly succesful then the breeder would expect a litter from her?

A dog of that quality would only go to someone who would not desex. Whats the point of breeding top dogs if they arent going to be tested and bred from to improve the breed if suitable.

Correct

[Red Fox]

Agreed. But what of those who want a serious working dog but have no interest or desire to breed? Would you still keep the dog entire? Or would a dog of that quality only go out on breeders terms -ie, if the dog does turn out to be highly succesful then the breeder would expect a litter from her?

A dog of that quality would only go to someone who would not desex. Whats the point of breeding top dogs if they arent going to be tested and bred from to improve the breed if suitable.

Correct

Okay, thank you.

BB- Going slightly OT here but can you elaborate on your sport a little and why you say that it is hard to find good working females? Are males just more suitable or does it come down to the inconvenience of having an entire female (seasons, time out for breeding, etc) Appologies if that's a silly question but I am genuinely curious.

[Wazzat Xolo]

Agreed. But what of those who want a serious working dog but have no interest or desire to breed? Would you still keep the dog entire? Or would a dog of that quality only go out on breeders terms -ie, if the dog does turn out to be highly succesful then the breeder would expect a litter from her?

A dog of that quality would only go to someone who would not desex. Whats the point of breeding top dogs if they arent going to be tested and bred from to improve the breed if suitable.

Correct

Okay, thank you.

BB- Going slightly OT here but can you elaborate on your sport a little and why you say that it is hard to find good working females? Are males just more suitable or does it come down to the inconvenience of having an entire female (seasons, time out for breeding, etc) Appologies if that's a silly question but I am genuinely curious.

I would also like to know a bit more ( having no knowledge of any dog sports) and what your involvement with the sport is ( capacity, time, levels etc)

I cant understand some of your posts and the reasoning behind some statements.

[Greytmate]

I'm not a horse person, but I'm wondering what the difference is between dogs and horses in this regard... It seems as though quite a lot of serious performance competitors (racing included) are happy and perhaps even prefer to compete with geldings- but horse breeders manage to continue producing high quality animals, despite a significant proportion of the foals they produce being sterilised... I realise that a stallion is a much bigger management issue than a dog, but don't the same breeding principles apply to some extent?

The same principles apply to horse breeding, and a lot of our knowledge on performance breeding principles has been based on thoroughbreds. That is where the big money is. Breeding efficiently is even more important in horses, as so much is invested in each animal.

Statistically, in our breed we more likely to get good workers from parents with proven working performance although it's no guarentee.

More likely than what alternative? Breeding with dogs that don't work well? Nobody here is advocating that at all.

In performance breeding, you are more likely to breed good workers from proven (prepotent) producers that are also good worker themselves, than you are from breeding an equally good worker than has not yet been proven as a producer herself.

Not all good working bitches are prepotent. Good breeding bitches are. They may even regularly throw ability beyond their own if the breeder is working to a long-term plan.

The trend of using a super male over an unproven bitch is where I see many of the problems when trying to improve the breed's performance. The majority in our sport work males, but personally I would like to see more females working and titled to get an idea of the strength of the bitch lines and where they are going. Too many breeders IMHO rely upon a good male to produce offspring from a female who's working performance has never been evaluated.

That is beside the point of this thread. Yes it is important to choose the right male, but that has no relevance as to whether people should keep all their bitches entire.

That's a given Greytmate to use a good producer , but the good producer has to have her first litter to determine her production quality in the first place. There is more sense testing the producing ablity of bitch that can work than a bitch that cannot or hasn't been evaluated.

It's very relevent to keep a working bitch entire if the owner has any interests in the improvement of their breed

Not all well-performed bitches necessarily should be bred from or need to be bred from for the breed to benefit and improve and for the bloodlines to remain strong. Unless you have a rare breed, but then you are breeding for survival not for performance.

Yes, you could test out a bitches ability to throw pups with potential for good performance by breeding her. But there is much more to ethical breeding than just the bitch's performance to take into account. Breeding from a bitch just because she is a good performer will give you a higher failure rate than if you breed taking other things into account as well. Is it right to be breeding litters just to test every bitch's prepotency? That might be an awful lot of puppies and a high proportion that might not have inherited much ability. How easy is it to find homes for not-quite-working quality pups in your breed?

I think BB is talking about a different type of sport/performance.

From what I have seen, most dogs who compete in working dog trials eg schutzhund and sheepdog trials are entire. Only certain breeds are capable of doing these sports and it is a test of their genetics.

Yes, of course people do it for fun but it is a test to see whether the dogs are breed worthy. What a shame to have a super bitch who is winning everything and showing amazing skill and not be able to breed that on.

Working dog breeding is always striving to breed better workers and competition against other working dogs is a good way to test that.

Obedience, agility, herding etc has been designed for everyone and all breeds to be able to participate in. Its for the enjoyment for dog and handler.

Other working dog trials are based alot on genetics so breeding and breedability is a bigger issue as the dogs are being tested and bred to improve their abilities.

I would not desex a performance dog of mine. From 3 separate breeders in 3 breeds, I have been advised not to. Not ever really thought why but I assumed its because it changed the way they worked.

Correct Jesomil, that's exactly my thoughts

In the performance dog world, there are a lot of very capable and enthusiastic handlers I have seen that a really working the wrong dogs. Their (handlers) abilities could be put to a far greater use in the general scheem of proofing and titling dogs for the performance improvement of specific breeds. Some of these handlers/trainers could make a real impact in the Australian working breed improvements if they trialled the right dogs.

Many start out with their faithful mutt they adore and train for pleasure which is great, but some of these handler/trainer teams have a real talent with dogs and have a lot of potential to take the right dogs in the right sporting/working discliplines to greater heights.

How about the people that just want to own pets or work their dogs and may not necessarily want to be 'put to use' as breeders?

Breeding dogs just isn't attractive to everyone, nor should everyone breed dogs or even keep entire dogs. If you are a breeder of performance dogs that wants to run on all your bitch pups entire, you will have to make your breeder's terms very attractive to potential owners.

[Black Bronson]

Agreed. But what of those who want a serious working dog but have no interest or desire to breed? Would you still keep the dog entire? Or would a dog of that quality only go out on breeders terms -ie, if the dog does turn out to be highly succesful then the breeder would expect a litter from her?

A dog of that quality would only go to someone who would not desex. Whats the point of breeding top dogs if they arent going to be tested and bred from to improve the breed if suitable.

Correct

Okay, thank you.

BB- Going slightly OT here but can you elaborate on your sport a little and why you say that it is hard to find good working females? Are males just more suitable or does it come down to the inconvenience of having an entire female (seasons, time out for breeding, etc) Appologies if that's a silly question but I am genuinely curious.

We trial in Schutzhund and do some work in K9 security with GSD's. Male's in Schutzhund will generally score higher than females purely on size and power and don't suffer of course from seasonal issues and the majority of dedicated sports people will train and trial males. There are some females trialling but not nearly enough titled and proven workers for breeding improvements compared with amount of good stud dogs available. I would have to check the rule book, but I don't think you can officially compete with a desexed dog at all, but you can train at club level with a desexed dog for pleasure. Personally, I would really like to see more females trialling as a nice bitch line complementing the stud lines is the way to moving forward with the breed.