Testing For Breed Function

[RallyValley]

I look at the breed I have chosen and I am involved in and can see some ways in the USA they have helped to preserve a Brittany as a dual dog;

- Less coat is preferred, profuse coat is a fault. This has stopped the breed getting an exaggerated show coat.

-The breed celebrates their dual dogs, they publish all Duals on a website http://www.brittanybreed.info/DualChampions/ , they have dual champion classes at speciality shows, they have a futurity with show and field trials and award the highest dual dog (the dog that places highest in both)

- Judges education there REALLY emphasizes working ability, they explain how field collars leave a mark, they show images of dogs with incorrect coat full of burrs and discuss this, they explain how trialling dogs are thin and muscular (well most Britts that show are, they condition their dogs really well), they talk about features I.e nostrils, neck and angulation THEN discuss how this effects working ability.

[Alyosha]

- Judges education there REALLY emphasizes working ability, they explain how field collars leave a mark, they show images of dogs with incorrect coat full of burrs and discuss this, they explain how trialling dogs are thin and muscular (well most Britts that show are, they condition their dogs really well), they talk about features I.e nostrils, neck and angulation THEN discuss how this effects working ability.

This sounds really good.

[Kavik]

I didn't see the working Springer video - off to watch it now!

[The Spotted Devil]

RV - I do like that idea. However, I see much the much heavier boned Brittany competing in Vic retrieving trials - very tough, good workers, are proven hunting dogs but are different to what I am used to.

[The Spotted Devil]

I didn't see the working Springer video - off to watch it now!

It will make you either swear off them for life or want a dozen of them :laugh:

[RallyValley]

RV - I do like that idea. However, I see much the much heavier boned Brittany competing in Vic retrieving trials - very tough, good workers, are proven hunting dogs but are different to what I am used to.

I don't know much about working Brittany's outside of WA. :) I think quite a lot are more French lines the US...

Edited March 16, 2012 by RallyValley

[Nekhbet]

I agree that a test with bitework would be ideal, but how to get that accepted? The idea being thrown around is start with Korning test and then proceed to Korung which has bitework.

The problem is we care too much about what everyone thinks. And in doing that we keep narrowing and narrowing what is acceptable. Eventually we're going to care ourselves out of existence. If I want to train my dog to do Schutzhund, ringsport, PP whatever I dont see why it's Joe Blows business if the dog is not causing a problem. The dogs out there mauling people and animals are ill bred untrained mongrels NOT properly bitework trained animals which have self control and know right from wrong. Once people start seeing that, and the benefits these sports will actually bring to the canine population the world will be more sane. Instead the stupid people are talking for the rest of the population and some breeders/clubs out there are following the same stupid sentiment.

The korning test is not that the dog IS capable of doing the work, but that is shows the capacity to proceed on and TRY training. Whether is completes or not is a whole different thing and the completion and proving of the skill is what people look for in these types of breeds in particular. There is nothing in the Korning that shows the dog is something spectacular to breed from. We can do BH test here in Australia, but it's just the beginning to go onto other things, not the be all and end all.

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.

A test for breed function should prove in at least some way the dog is physically and mentally capable of doing the job it was bred for. They don't have to be titled. We forget a lot of the original breeding of working dogs WAS there because training was going to be minimal. People didnt have all the time we luxuriously have now to train their dogs, the animal had to show a lot of aptitude from an early age which in turn made the whole process easier.

[Crisovar]

Don't forget we are also being restricted by legislation, that is having an effect on the types of activities we can do with our dogs.

[Kavik]

I didn't see the working Springer video - off to watch it now!

It will make you either swear off them for life or want a dozen of them :laugh:

Just watched it - it was awesome! They were so enthusiastic :laugh: Their carriage and body language looks very different to the show line dogs I've seen

[FHRP]

RV - I do like that idea. However, I see much the much heavier boned Brittany competing in Vic retrieving trials - very tough, good workers, are proven hunting dogs but are different to what I am used to.

I suspect they are the same Brits I saw at the field trials in Vic I went to last year and as RV suspected, they are more the french style Brittany than the USA type.

[The Spotted Devil]

Thanks for the info FHRP and RV - much appreciated.

Hey Kavik, glad you enjoyed it :D They are very, very funny little things and, as you say, move quite differently to the show line dogs. Em is back in season and silly hyper so I've just booted her into the chook yard (sans chooks ;) ). She is flying up and down the hill, quartering and hunting - just doing what comes naturally. But you also need to be able to harness the natural behaviour and that also seems to vary amongst the different lines.

[dotdashdot]

I would love my dally to do an endurance test,

Any reason why you don't then?

Honestly didn't know about it until this thread. My girl is still too young to get her endurance test title, but definately something I can aim for and hopefully do. I think she'd be fine, I'm the one who would struggle with 20kms!

[mita]

What Telida posted:

People focus would be an obvious test for companion dogs.

Plus what Nekhbet posted:

Actually companion dogs should be tested for handleability, a good nature, good nerve and high tolerance of human contact. Too many small dogs with temperaments totally opposite to what makes a good companion dog.

Both comments are spot on re assessing for companion dog suitability. And jolly good reasons why puppy-farming type breeding/raising is unsuitable for producing companion dogs. Yet a lot of the small breed puppies sold commercially, come from a background like that...

Dogs & puppies intended to be companions for humans should be part of the human 'family' and lifestyle...from birth & always.

I can't resist posting tibbies, in their original setting, showing people focus. Click, enlarge:

'We're with her!

'

'I'm with him!'

Edited March 16, 2012 by mita

[Erny]

You could change the lure to be a fake fur tug or similar. Is there a way you could rig the lure to move like prey?

What I don't like about this idea is that (A) you've structured a lure to represent a prey animal in movement, looks (to a degree) and texture (ie fur) and (B) you've made that lure something that is remote from the owner/trainer - not something that is in the control of the owner/trainer where the dog's respect for owner has anything to do with gaining the lure.

If this is to be an idea for all people who own and/or breed that specific dog 'style', some specialised training needs to be added (IMO) to ensure that this training does not create a dog who thinks anything that is furry and runs like prey is prey to be had.

ETA: Reference to "you've" doesn't mean "you" personally, Kavik. I mean it to mean "in the context in which this has been written".

Edited March 16, 2012 by Erny

[dasha]

I haven't read all the replies but sometimes I think it would be good to have to test a breed with a function for the function for what they are intended.

However in a practical sense, there probably already is way that certain breeds are bred to maintain their original function.

It just falls apart when kennel clubs want to get involved and do things arse about and design a test that would suit kennel club dogs rather than test the dogs against a real thing. Then they want to introduce titles etc to make it more appealing for people that otherwise would not have bothered.

That is why in many of the sporting and working breeds, there is a show strain and working strain of dog and dogs that do a job but have no real consistency in looks, colour, build..... These are the dogs that have passed the function test and are still used to do the job.

Field labs are totally different to show labs, Spaniels, Most of the herding breeds fall into the same category. Sled dogs are a different looking type to show huskies.......... The list goes on.

[Crisovar]

You could change the lure to be a fake fur tug or similar. Is there a way you could rig the lure to move like prey?

What I don't like about this idea is that (A) you've structured a lure to represent a prey animal in movement, looks (to a degree) and texture (ie fur) and (B) you've made that lure something that is remote from the owner/trainer - not something that is in the control of the owner/trainer where the dog's respect for owner has anything to do with gaining the lure.

If this is to be an idea for all people who own and/or breed that specific dog 'style', some specialised training needs to be added (IMO) to ensure that this training does not create a dog who thinks anything that is furry and runs like prey is prey to be had.

ETA: Reference to "you've" doesn't mean "you" personally, Kavik. I mean it to mean "in the context in which this has been written".

My hounds have always hunted, they can distinguish between prey animals and household pets.

Part of owning Sighthounds for instance has always been managing this as far as I am concerned.

I think I get where you are coming from Erny, but I guess I don't see the need.

[Alyosha]

If this is to be an idea for all people who own and/or breed that specific dog 'style', some specialised training needs to be added (IMO) to ensure that this training does not create a dog who thinks anything that is furry and runs like prey is prey to be had.

The vast majority of sighthounds won't differ if doing this or not. They don't need training, most small furry running things spark much deeper instincts than training will ever effect.

[Crisovar]

I haven't read all the replies but sometimes I think it would be good to have to test a breed with a function for the function for what they are intended.

However in a practical sense, there probably already is way that certain breeds are bred to maintain their original function.

It just falls apart when kennel clubs want to get involved and do things arse about and design a test that would suit kennel club dogs rather than test the dogs against a real thing. Then they want to introduce titles etc to make it more appealing for people that otherwise would not have bothered.

That is why in many of the sporting and working breeds, there is a show strain and working strain of dog and dogs that do a job but have no real consistency in looks, colour, build..... These are the dogs that have passed the function test and are still used to do the job.

Field labs are totally different to show labs, Spaniels, Most of the herding breeds fall into the same category. Sled dogs are a different looking type to show huskies.......... The list goes on.

Having the pleasure of living with dual purpose dogs all my life I have to say there is no need for them to be worlds apart. It may be marked in some Breeds but most certainly not all. To me having a dog that can prove its versatility by being a very successful show dog that also works equally as well is just the way they should be. Many people simply cannot be bothered to do both.

[espinay2]

I haven't read all the replies but sometimes I think it would be good to have to test a breed with a function for the function for what they are intended.

However in a practical sense, there probably already is way that certain breeds are bred to maintain their original function.

It just falls apart when kennel clubs want to get involved and do things arse about and design a test that would suit kennel club dogs rather than test the dogs against a real thing. Then they want to introduce titles etc to make it more appealing for people that otherwise would not have bothered.

That is why in many of the sporting and working breeds, there is a show strain and working strain of dog and dogs that do a job but have no real consistency in looks, colour, build..... These are the dogs that have passed the function test and are still used to do the job.

Field labs are totally different to show labs, Spaniels, Most of the herding breeds fall into the same category. Sled dogs are a different looking type to show huskies.......... The list goes on.

Having the pleasure of living with dual purpose dogs all my life I have to say there is no need for them to be worlds apart. It may be marked in some Breeds but most certainly not all. To me having a dog that can prove its versatility by being a very successful show dog that also works equally as well is just the way they should be. Many people simply cannot be bothered to do both.

Agree with you totally on this one Crisovar. As I have said in discussions before. There is no need for separation. It is the way people think (and what they do with that) that creates the separation.

Noting your reference to Labs, Dasha, see my posts above regarding how working tests change dogs too.

[Crisovar]

I must admit there was a great deal of mirth in our household reading a post in one of these many threads that was talking about the inability of show Labs to swim. Not only can they swim in deep water but they can carry a large bird while they are doing it, and deliver the bird to hand and rinse and repeat, then after a quick hose off if needed do a few laps of the showring and/or compete in an Obedience trial that night. The human may need a longer nap but the dogs cope admirably.

eta One of the biggest problems with Labs is actually getting them out of the dam to get them to a show.

Edited March 16, 2012 by Crisovar