Testing For Breed Function

[dotdashdot]

I would love my dally to do an endurance test, I am always enthralled watching her run on the beach (which we usually have all to ourselves). The only time she walks is when she's on lead, she gets so much joy out of running from the waves to the dunes, to the waves and back again. She just has SO much stamina, she is a true testament to the breed, and a very loving companion at home.

[Sandra777]

I would love my dally to do an endurance test,

Any reason why you don't then?

[Sandra777]

Staffords - weightpull has no relevance to their original function but some of them certainly enjoy it. Hanging off a piece of material on a frame has even less relevance to their original function but some of them enjoy that too. Most of mine love lure racing (straight line or proper lure coursing) and this doesn't have much to do with their original function either. The ET test would have some bearing on their function, to be able to be physically active for a long period of time and be sound enough to achieve that level of fitness.

Breeds with no easily replicated test (or those with no testable function at all such as the companion breeds) can be tested for basic good temperament, trainability and soundness by a mixture of other things which probably has nothing to do with the original function of the dog but handily proves it's ability to be active and fit and live in the 21st century.

[espinay2]

Livestock Guardian Dogs - what they do is not easy to quantify in a static 'test'. Researchers have looked into this and have found it very difficult to formulate any kind of suscinct 'behaviour test' for what a LGD does. While the French pyr club does use a standard 'temperament test' which all Pyrs in France have to pass before they are shown (at least at the RACP Nationale) this is not a test of working ability but rather temperamental 'stability' (and is equally applicable to many if not most breeds). As a LGD's role is very specific to its environment and as when they are 'off territory' they generally don't consider themself 'on duty' any test performed off their own territory is not going to effectively test their ability. A lot of what an effective LGD does too, is not something that can be tested in a matter of minutes, or even hours. So having a 'working test' for LGD really isn't something that is very feasible.

One thing I would note about 'working tests' in general as well. A working test by its nature is not necessarily testing traditional working ability, but rather how the dog can perform that particular test. How the test is formulated can also affect how a breed develops. Mary Roslin Williams in her book 'Reaching for the Stars: Formerly Advanced Labrador Breeding' discusses how the development of field tests has changed the Labrador bred to compete in these tests. With the advent of the long-distance retrieve in these tests for instance speed and agility came to be more important and field triallers bred for 'long lean greyhound types'. She discusses at some length the changes that the particular requirements of field trialling tests brought to the Labrador. Thus it is not only the show ring that changes dogs. Competitive working tests also change dogs. I would hazard to say too that this is not the only type of competitive 'working test' that has changed dogs. Perhaps the Border Collie/Working Collie and Agility etc may be another possible example??

[Kavik]

What of hunting dogs that are bred for not only tracking but to bail up? Akitas and Elkhounds are ones that spring to my mind, Yes they might be able to track it down but one of the most important things hunters looked for in those breeds is the ability for the dog to stop the quarry in it's tracks long enough (which often means getting up close and personal) for the animal to be shot. Having them pass a tracking test doesn't mean they can do what they were bred for.

--Lhok

That is a good point. I don't know much about those breeds. Any suggestions?

[Kavik]

Livestock Guardian Dogs - what they do is not easy to quantify in a static 'test'. Researchers have looked into this and have found it very difficult to formulate any kind of suscinct 'behaviour test' for what a LGD does. While the French pyr club does use a standard 'temperament test' which all Pyrs in France have to pass before they are shown (at least at the RACP Nationale) this is not a test of working ability but rather temperamental 'stability' (and is equally applicable to many if not most breeds). As a LGD's role is very specific to its environment and as when they are 'off territory' they generally don't consider themself 'on duty' any test performed off their own territory is not going to effectively test their ability. A lot of what an effective LGD does too, is not something that can be tested in a matter of minutes, or even hours. So having a 'working test' for LGD really isn't something that is very feasible.

One thing I would note about 'working tests' in general as well. A working test by its nature is not necessarily testing traditional working ability, but rather how the dog can perform that particular test. How the test is formulated can also affect how a breed develops. Mary Roslin Williams in her book 'Reaching for the Stars: Formerly Advanced Labrador Breeding' discusses how the development of field tests has changed the Labrador bred to compete in these tests. With the advent of the long-distance retrieve in these tests for instance speed and agility came to be more important and field triallers bred for 'long lean greyhound types'. She discusses at some length the changes that the particular requirements of field trialling tests brought to the Labrador. Thus it is not only the show ring that changes dogs. Competitive working tests also change dogs. I would hazard to say too that this is not the only type of competitive 'working test' that has changed dogs. Perhaps the Border Collie/Working Collie and Agility etc may be another possible example??

Yes LGD do present a challenge when thinking of testing for function - good point about it being specific to the environment, otherwise I would have suggested the same test as the GSDs but noting that they wouldn't expect to do the play drive aspect (tugging).

Working tests are obviously not the same as actually working the dog, but in cases where working the dog is not actually possible any more it is the only thing I can think of to try to prove that the dog has at least some ability to do its original function. Your example with Border Collies and agility though is not quite accurate, although some people may be breeding Border Collies specifically for agility and this may change those lines of Border Collies, agility is not a test of the dog's original function, herding trials would be (there are several different types of herding/sheepdog trials, a topic in itself!), so those breeders are not breeding for function. Don't know as much about Labs and field trials, will leave that one to someone with those breeds.

[cassie]

Excuse my ignorance, but what were Dallies originally bred for? Thanks :)

[The Spotted Devil]

Excuse my ignorance, but what were Dallies originally bred for? Thanks :)

From what we understand, they were "carriage dogs". They would trot for many miles either next to or between the horse/s and carriage, guarding the carriage and sleeping in the stables with the horses at night. Thus they aren't known for their biddability as they didn't associate with people a lot. In the USA (and possibly UK?) they have carriage trials - the Dalmatian should be calm around horses and they also test their ability to retrieve a "dropped" whip amongst other things. All Dalmatians should be able to do an Endurance Test in their sleep - it's something I will do with Ziggy now that I (finally) have a bike. I also need to fit it around training/competing in obedience and agility with him plus 3 sports with my Springer. I imagine some would expect a Dalmatian to be struck off the ANKC for passing an obedience test :laugh:

With the ESS, the horse rabbit has already bolted. The breed split many years ago. It wasn't unusual for an ESS to spend one day in the field and the next in the show ring but the showies didn't like what it did to the coat (I don't blame them :laugh:) and the breed diverged. The show and working Springers of today are very, very different. Working ESS are slightly longer than tall, have shorter ears and much less feathering. They tend to work like they are possessed by the devil - I have to be very quick on my feet to keep up with her mental and physical speed. The difficulty with gun dogs is that training and competing in field and retrieving trials takes a huge commitment - long drives even to train, camping rough is common, you need a gun license (not in WA), access to game, training partners etc. Instinct is really important but so is being a good trainer - it's complicated by distance and "factors" - water, cover, terrain etc. Whilst I think the retrieving ability tests are a wonderful start for someone interested in retrieving they don't go close to measuring breed function. PLUS I can't imagine an average pet owner wanting a little buzz box like mine that is so incredibly birdy - whilst she is a beautiful house dog, channelling all that instinct into something constructive is not a task for the faint hearted.

I have no problem with the working/show split. Dogs have evolved alongside humans for the past 100,000 years. 100-200 years of controlled breeding by humans should not restrict our ideas of breed purpose. More importantly I want to see sound dogs that are physically and temperamentally suited to their environment, no matter what the purpose. No dog is perfect in all situations - even within Em's relatives are dogs better suited to hunting, field trials, retrieving, scent work or active pets. I spend hours talking pedigrees, working style/ability and structure with my Em's breeder. Wonderful stuff :)

ETA: This is Em training at 7 months old. Her energy and enthusiasm has gone through the roof since then but she has learnt a little more self control ;)

Edited March 15, 2012 by The Spotted Devil

[voloclydes]

Excuse my ignorance, but what were Dallies originally bred for? Thanks :)

From what we understand, they were "carriage dogs". They would trot for many miles either next to or between the horse/s and carriage, guarding the carriage and sleeping in the stables with the horses at night. Thus they aren't known for their biddability as they didn't associate with people a lot. In the USA (and possibly UK?) they have carriage trials - the Dalmatian should be calm around horses and they also test their ability to retrieve a "dropped" whip amongst other things. All Dalmatians should be able to do an Endurance Test in their sleep - it's something I will do with Ziggy now that I (finally) have a bike. I also need to fit it around training/competing in obedience and agility with him plus 3 sports with my Springer. I imagine some would expect a Dalmatian to be struck off the ANKC for passing an obedience test :laugh:

With the ESS, the horse rabbit has already bolted. The breed split many years ago. It wasn't unusual for an ESS to spend one day in the field and the next in the show ring but the showies didn't like what it did to the coat (I don't blame them :laugh:) and the breed diverged. The show and working Springers of today are very, very different. Working ESS are slightly longer than tall, have shorter ears and much less feathering. They tend to work like they are possessed by the devil - I have to be very quick on my feet to keep up with her mental and physical speed. The difficulty with gun dogs is that training and competing in field and retrieving trials takes a huge commitment - long drives even to train, camping rough is common, you need a gun license (not in WA), access to game, training partners etc. Instinct is really important but so is being a good trainer - it's complicated by distance and "factors" - water, cover, terrain etc. Whilst I think the retrieving ability tests are a wonderful start for someone interested in retrieving they don't go close to measuring breed function. PLUS I can't imagine an average pet owner wanting a little buzz box like mine that is so incredibly birdy - whilst she is a beautiful house dog, channelling all that instinct into something constructive is not a task for the faint hearted.

I have no problem with the working/show split. Dogs have evolved alongside humans for the past 100,000 years. 100-200 years of controlled breeding by humans should not restrict our ideas of breed purpose. More importantly I want to see sound dogs that are physically and temperamentally suited to their environment, no matter what the purpose. No dog is perfect in all situations - even within Em's relatives are dogs better suited to hunting, field trials, retrieving, scent work or active pets. I spend hours talking pedigrees, working style/ability and structure with my Em's breeder. Wonderful stuff :)

ETA: This is Em training at 7 months old. Her energy and enthusiasm has gone through the roof since then but she has learnt a little more self control ;)

i would love my dallies to do an endurance test.... but they think they are enduring every day.... endurance of the couch is not what they mean....

leo will run all round the cart and barks with exciotment when i tell the horse "get up" for the first time of the drive... but when we get going he's out hunting smells... not chasing the cart...

although he does tend to find food easily and passed his weigh in at the vet with flying colours.

sophie.... however is a home body... apart from pacing.. she will not follow the cart.... both are more attached to me than the horses.

[~Anne~]

The Pug certainly lives up to being a companion dog. In fact, I would wager it would score a perfect result if such a test was done (re: earlier comments regarding the nature of a companion dog).

[Kavik]

TSD

Do you think then that field trials are too difficult to use as a test for breed function considering the dedication needed to trial a dog?

[Pattycake]

Excuse my ignorance, but what were Dallies originally bred for? Thanks :)

From what we understand, they were "carriage dogs". They would trot for many miles either next to or between the horse/s and carriage, guarding the carriage and sleeping in the stables with the horses at night. Thus they aren't known for their biddability as they didn't associate with people a lot. In the USA (and possibly UK?) they have carriage trials - the Dalmatian should be calm around horses and they also test their ability to retrieve a "dropped" whip amongst other things. All Dalmatians should be able to do an Endurance Test in their sleep - it's something I will do with Ziggy now that I (finally) have a bike. I also need to fit it around training/competing in obedience and agility with him plus 3 sports with my Springer. I imagine some would expect a Dalmatian to be struck off the ANKC for passing an obedience test :laugh:

With the ESS, the horse rabbit has already bolted. The breed split many years ago. It wasn't unusual for an ESS to spend one day in the field and the next in the show ring but the showies didn't like what it did to the coat (I don't blame them :laugh:) and the breed diverged. The show and working Springers of today are very, very different. Working ESS are slightly longer than tall, have shorter ears and much less feathering. They tend to work like they are possessed by the devil - I have to be very quick on my feet to keep up with her mental and physical speed. The difficulty with gun dogs is that training and competing in field and retrieving trials takes a huge commitment - long drives even to train, camping rough is common, you need a gun license (not in WA), access to game, training partners etc. Instinct is really important but so is being a good trainer - it's complicated by distance and "factors" - water, cover, terrain etc. Whilst I think the retrieving ability tests are a wonderful start for someone interested in retrieving they don't go close to measuring breed function. PLUS I can't imagine an average pet owner wanting a little buzz box like mine that is so incredibly birdy - whilst she is a beautiful house dog, channelling all that instinct into something constructive is not a task for the faint hearted.

I have no problem with the working/show split. Dogs have evolved alongside humans for the past 100,000 years. 100-200 years of controlled breeding by humans should not restrict our ideas of breed purpose. More importantly I want to see sound dogs that are physically and temperamentally suited to their environment, no matter what the purpose. No dog is perfect in all situations - even within Em's relatives are dogs better suited to hunting, field trials, retrieving, scent work or active pets. I spend hours talking pedigrees, working style/ability and structure with my Em's breeder. Wonderful stuff :)

ETA: This is Em training at 7 months old. Her energy and enthusiasm has gone through the roof since then but she has learnt a little more self control ;)

I just want to say I love watching Em ................we have a little buzz box also...Bella is almost 3 now.

[Saffioraire]

My friend just bought a Dally pup (she's a horse girl) and was awestruck with the fact that while he had never seen a horse in his 1st 4 months of life she can take him riding with her every day and he trots out alongside the horse without fear and as if it is his 'duty'. Interesting point re. instinct being closer to the surface that one sometime imagines.

I actually have a question for the GSD people. When I was contemplating breeding GSD's I had explored the possibilities of donating a pup from each litter, or every second litter, to the Prison dog system so the bloodlines could be tested for it's natural stamina in a work field I could not test for myself. Is this something anyone else does or has done and if so I'm interested in hearing the outcome.

(NB. I no longer have an interest in GSD's so this is no longer something I look into)

[The Spotted Devil]

TSD

Do you think then that field trials are too difficult to use as a test for breed function considering the dedication needed to trial a dog?

I suspect so, Kavik. Some real diehards think that only hunting is a test for breed function because retrieving/field trials are too stylised.

I'm not sure that we need to test for breed function. We all have our different passions, be it pet owner, breeder, hunter, competitor or any combination of those. We will choose the dogs we wish to breed and to own and to train. Personally I love the variety and have no problem seeing someone with a show line dog (when there is a strong split) compete in any sport as long as they are physically able. I probably have more of an issue with the training methods some people employ! I don't expect everyone to go weak at the knees when Em tackles cover and water, taking a perfectly straight line and using her eyes and nose to pick up the game - last time she did that at a trial I had tears of joy in my eyes as she swam all the way back to me to deliver the game. The tears were streaming down my face by the time we made it back to the start peg The judge didn't let me live that one down for the rest of the day but he really did understand how much it meant to me.

How do you ensure breeds are at least fit? I'm not sure any of us have the solution but I have no doubt it lies in education - our understanding of dog behaviour and training is constantly evolving and I suspect our evaluation of breeding, breed standards and function will continue to evolve. Sometimes it will be for the better, sometimes for the worse. I do believe the standards need to evolve. I have been reading the extension to the Clumber standard - whoever wrote it is incredibly knowledgable about the breed but there are a few points that I think are simply folk lore. Of course, I am a scientist so I will critique everything with that training in the back of my mind. And don't think for one minute I do not value what such people have brought to the various breeds. Just like the published science on behaviour and welfare that has gone before me, I damn well hope someone smarter than me questions and improves upon whatever I achieve. As a side note, Encyclopaedia Britanica has just gone to print for the last time. A gentleman with a copy from around 100 years ago commented on how much he loves to read it as so much of it is just plain wrong - it shows just how far we have come, particularly in terms of medical knowledge. Oh, and the entry on Adolf Hitler talked about what a great guy he was. Incredible to contemplate.

One important point to note is that controlled breeding is a relatively recent phenomenon. A number of breeds that we assume are 'ancient' (e.g. Pharaoh hound) certainly reflect an ancient form but are actually quite modern genetically. This has only come to light in the last 10 years with the mapping of the dog genome. Quite possibly this applies to other so-called 'ancient' breeds. Dogs that are similar don't necessarily share a genetic history either (e.g. Xolo & Chinese crested) - even groups designated by the ANKC have plenty of genetic crossovers.

Whilst there is no perfect dog at least they come a hell of a lot closer than us silly, interfering humans ;) Sorry for the ramble - complex question that I'm not sure I've answered to my own satisfaction. Long week however, so I will leave it there for now :)

[The Spotted Devil]

Ah Pattycake - is Bella your first field ESS? Em is my first and I am addicted to the little rascals!

Saff - I haven't seen enough Dal responses to horses to comment but the first time my Springer saw a gun she nearly fainted with excitement. It was the most incredible thing I have ever seen - I had just got my gun license, was out training with a friend (on dummies), picked up the gun (with blanks) and all her self control just vanished. I don't get to train with a gun much but by our second retrieving trial she was following the line of the gun like an old pro - and I certainly didn't train that as my gun handling skills (according to my last judge) are "crap" :laugh:

Edited March 15, 2012 by The Spotted Devil

[WreckitWhippet]

Those who suggest basic obedience as a test for function/temperament, what does "basic obedience " mean to you.

My idea of an obedient dog is one that does as it's taught then told. None of my dogs sit, but they all have commands for coming and going from the house, get to their crates, go in their kennel, get up, get down, stand, heal, steady, watch, fetch, leave it and the list goes on. They aren't going to pass a "basic obedience " test and once again, I have no interest in teaching them to sit to appease the masses.

[Kavik]

TSD

Yes there is always the issue of sport being stylised vs actual work.

I guess I see two main reasons why testing for function is important. One is the reason this is being debated on my other forum. With GSDs there is a show/working split in type. In other countries, working ability can be tested in various sports that include bitework (and in some countries this is compulsary for them to be bred), but in Australia this is very difficult to do due to politics and now law as well in some states. So it is difficult even for people with working line dogs or choosing working line dogs to know if they have or are getting a dog that can work. If there was recognised testing than people would have a better idea of the working ability of their dogs, and for people who say their show dogs can still work, they could demonstrate this.

The other is to help with the problems of breeding for extreme features, as extreme features will not allow a dog to do its job properly. And I think people who breed dogs are responsible for keeping them true to temperament/ability type as well as physical type.

[BJean]

If we keep accepting alternatives our quality will slip, which it has in a lot of cases.

That Korning test on paper looks to have a lot of merit, but from that video ... I wouldn't touch that dog to work with a 10 foot pole

I think 'testing' would be disastrous for LGDs. Mainly because there exists so much variance and required behaviours under 'working LGD'.

Notwithstanding, you cannot test a dog's willingness to carry out defence under no instruction or a dog's interactions with other dogs in this context. Plus I'm wary of the notion: 'my dog tested for it so my dog can do it'.

In the real world the only test is actual performance, and I would not like to see stock guardian dogs' abilities caricatured into a 'test' conducted by and awards earned for dogs and people very far removed from the actuality of stock guard work.

Some dogs are wonderful in all aspects and will micromanage hundreds of free range fowl, some are PITA to manage, yet they will shoot the breeze removing the local wild dog population ... I cannot think of a test that would incorporate all types of working dogs and their personalities, and I dont think a 'general temp test' will help much either.

Tests are effective when the realm being tested is specific.

It would be nice to have short cuts to guage in 20 minutes what takes 12 months - 2 years to determine out in the field, but I don't think it exists.

ETA:

The other is to help with the problems of breeding for extreme features, as extreme features will not allow a dog to do its job properly. And I think people who breed dogs are responsible for keeping them true to temperament/ability type as well as physical type.

This is not a helpful premise from which to conduct a performance test for a breed.

Fortunately (for now) Anatolian and Central Asian are somewhat removed from this current politic.

Edited March 15, 2012 by lilli

[Kavik]

Hi lilli

Seeing that it is so difficult to test for function in LGDs, how do you suggest we keep the working ability/integrity of LGDs? Should we require that the only people breeding them actually use them for their original purpose? Or that a certain amount of their dogs go to working homes so we can be sure they can still work? How do you suggest we stop them from just becoming big teddy bears and losing their working ability if they are only bred by people who have them for the show ring?

[Sheridan]

I also think that testing for breed function assumes that many breeds just naturally do a job. Working dogs are trained to do their job.

It's also mistaken to think that earthdog is the testing function for terriers. Many terrier breeds were multi-function dogs. They didn't just go to ground, they did herding, were guard dogs, and were spit dogs at night. I've always maintained that my breeds should be shown running around a farmyard covered in mud instead of in a ring but how many of the fancy would be willing to train their dogs to do the job for which they were bred before they got in a show ring? I suspect very few.