Why Not Judge On Function?

[eyeopener]

On the other side - look at beagles. In 35 years Ive never sold a beagle to a hunting home - every single one has gone out as a pet and while they muck around here scenting Ive never selected them for how well they scent .Thats why when I send them home they are easier to live with as pets and if I went back to driven dogs which scent and drive you nuts they would be more difficult to live with for those who want them as pets. I don't care if they don't pass scenting tests or go into the quarantine program.I breed pets not hunting dogs and if ever I get an enquiry for a hunting beagle Ill tell them to find someone who has been selecting for that. No doubt that people who have placed a higher importance on hunting think Ive buggered it up but the people who live with them like it lke that and so do I.

Very good point n I think if your pups are going to pet homes primarily then the temperament n work ability n drive sections of my criteria should be based on as a pet meaning ability to thrive in a pet situation n drive being drive to please n be apart of a family etc n having the temperament best suited to a pet placement.

Even when breeding working dogs you have to take into account not all we be placed in workings homes wether it be lack of work ability n drive or that that's just the placement they ended up with so you have to keep pet suitable temperaments that also have work ability n drive which can be hard. It's a balancing act really isn't it.

[murve]

very interesting subject

ok my greatuncles bred Bc"s for working on our properties, if they didn't meet the critirier, conformation & ability to work, they were sold off as pets (after being desexed)

all our dogs are trained to work in one way or another, mostly Obedience, ET, Agility.

Now who says a lapdog is just a lapdog, Lapdogs can work it is all up to the owner I know a couple of MIN Pins who have achieved their ET's. We have Pappies, our foundation Bitch now holds her ET tittle, 1st Pap in Aus to achieve this, she is also starting to compete in Rally-O & Obed trials :) her boys are not far behind her with their training.

Now our Whippets, One whippy has a ET & a couple of Obed tittles, ok yes this is unusal for this breed, our other whippy is learning Obed & we will start her training for ET early next year.

My stepfather had whippets when I was a Kid, he bred them for the what they originaly bred for, Racing & Rabbit hunting.

The way I was bought up was if a dog can't earn its keep, its then place it in a pet home, Basicly if a dog is bred for a pecific purpose then use those ability to its highest point with keeping in mind conformation & staminar of that breed

[Kavik]

It's a weird world.

Maybe if more farmers did try selective breeding from conformationally correct dogs the towns wouldn't be full of failed working dogs.

Those who have made a business of selective breeding are world famous in the working dog world & are paid astonomical amounts for their pups....weird eh?

Failed working dogs could also be the case of poor training. You still need to know how to train the dog to follow commands and to be able to direct the dog to move the sheep the way you want. I've only given it a go a few times with my dog, there is a lot to know, both about how to work dogs around sheep and about sheep behaviour as well.

[mixeduppup]

I've seen many a "failed" working dog almost shot or end up dumped by arrogant owners who think if they can't train it no one can. Quite a few of those are now very successful farm dogs, I own one of them, possibly one of the best yard dogs I've had. I've seen farmers shoot dogs that I saw a good lot of potential in because their style was too rough for that dog. You can offer to take the dog but if they decline you can't do anything, especially not on a station.

[steamboat]

The working dogs people marvel at at sheep dog trials aren't just pulled off the farm & plonked in a competition. They are specifically trained to do the exercises required at the trials.

Some have never even done a genuine days ''work'' in their lives.

They are, for all intents & purposes, show dogs.

But no serious sheep dog handler is going to waste time on "specifically" training dogs that don't have heaps of natural ability.

I can't speak for three sheep trialling as I'm not involved in that and it appears to have become more of an exhibition than real work, but I can assure that the majority of yard dogs earn their keep on farms during the week and then go trialling at weekends.

Yep, real work is competition practice. I don't know anyone who just keeps kelpies for trials without working them as well.

Does anyone here know anyone who competes in any organised, judged competition without practicing?

Conformation exhibits are not only products of their breeding but also of hours of training for a couple of minutes of exposure.

They need to do the best they can with the little time they have....... Weird eh.

As with everything, training is the key to success. Even sheep dog triallers do it....Weird eh

There certainly are an over abundance of cynics about.

[Steve]

Nothing is ever black and white and everything counts. Often its stuff you didn't notice at the time or never considered important.

[mixeduppup]

Actually there's a huge Utility Dog trial in my town today, Unfortunately I can't go as my dog isn't competition ready yet. I know everyone from this area that is going though and not one of them doesn't use their dogs daily on the farm. All those dogs are working dogs bred, raised and trained to work, the competition is simply a fun thing for the farmers to do, it also get good dogs noticed for future selling of litters and gets good dogs sold. To say that yard dogs and utility dogs don't work on the farm is a bit offensive as most if not all of them work hard most days.

I understand that showing is hard as well, if you have a passion you work towards it and it's never easy, be it working dogs, showing dogs or competing in agility etc. You don't just wake up, take an unprepared dog out and hope for the best, it's years and years of hard work, sacrifice, tears, failures and second guessing yourself to get a handful of truly wonderful animals.

[SkySoaringMagpie]

So I've been thinking. And excuse my naive thread, as I'm not as well versed in the nuiances of pure breeding as most of you here, but I've been wondering this: Why are purebreds judged on form rather than function?

Take the function of hunting rabbits. How many breeds were bred to do this? How many varieties of rabbit are there? More than one. So what is the function you would test for?

Among some loose groups (eg, some of the sighthounds) you see some overall similarities but if the dog is bred to go to ground instead of covering distances then the dogs may also look radically different. The smaller podengos for example. Overall their conformation is related not just to their function, but the terrain in which they hunt and the climate in which they hunt, the kind of rabbits they hunt as well as other factors.

If you plan to breed, then you also have to "judge" but you have the advantage of judging against a much wider set of criteria. The conformation judge can't see my dogs watch a hare through the paddocks and note which one can see it the longest as it runs away, but I can. That part is up to me.

And while I can't mimic what the Bedu did 300 years ago, I can do some things. I can put my dogs in Endurance Title trials for example, as can owners of Dalmatians and other long distance breeds. So I also get a bit irritated by people who say you can't test for function in modern society so forget it. That's a baby/bathwater thing.

We should all try to decide on criteria that inform function as set down in the standard, and apply those criteria. Even the toys. I stewarded in the toy ring once and someone put a Cavalier on the table that could not be touched at all by the judge because it was such a fruitcake. Is that dog fit for function? Not in my view.

[Diva]

There is no formal functional competition for my sighthound breed in Australia, although there are several different forms in overseas countries. There is some informal lure coursing here.

Lure coursing is not a 'real' test of original purpose, but if the course is set out appropriately for the breed it is a whole lot better than no functional test at all.

The original country of origin standard holds up pretty well when compared against a top coursing dog, not so much when compared to some - not all - top winning show dogs.

Coursing can show speed, agility, soundness, flexibility of the loin, and a whole lot of other stuff that is very useful and debunks a lot of myths and excuses.

Good photograghy and video makes it even more useful - you can really see how the dog is using its body, does it really flex that topline compared to the how others of its breed do, does it have the burst of acceleration called for by its original purpose.

Almost any coursing shot looks pretty, but if you learn how to interpet them they can contain lot of information. I don't care if they want to catch the prey or not, but if they can't run the way they are supposed to, they aren't built the way they are supposed to be built.

I wouldn't judge a dog solely on how it courses - as someone else said some dogs just won't chase plastic, and there are lot of fine breed points coursing just doesn't test - but I feel on much stronger ground looking at how they course than I do just looking at how they show. I don't need all the fingers on one hand to count how many in my breed in this country feel the same, and I can understand that as they see them only as show dogs, but plenty in the overseas breed community look for both.

Edited October 20, 2012 by Diva

[voloclydes]

for those that complain that farmers shoot no good working dogs... its better than what happens in a good deal of rural towns... which is they are just dumped.

not chipped, no rego.. this idea that chipping stops that is bollocks...

there is nothing more frustrating that a working dog that won't work or even worse is a huge hinderence on the job... often those sort get a bullet in frustration.

my 2 dals are epic fails... sophie who was the dol rescue is terrified to leave the house especially when the horses are around... in 2 years i have not even made a dent in her fear... she cannot even ride on the cart without shaking in fear.

leo will run untill he stands on something that hurts... then its all over... he has had cracked paws... on and off since i got him... now he has a chronic hot spot on his leg, which is very sore when you bandage it, just ask him.... so laying on the couch is top priority...he is also terrified of the horses in the paddock but will come out when i drive, but rabbits and that big green troll that pushes him into water against his will(is far more interesting than running)... i have yet to lay eyes on the troll but the dog swears he does not swim or wade on his own.

one will bark up a storm when confronted at the gate... and one will follow suit..but when on his own.... he would let you in, then follow you home. no protective instincts in that dal.

Edited October 20, 2012 by voloclydes

[Maddy]

The simple answer is that for many breeds, ffunction cannot be tested reliably - for a range of reasons. The other point to keep in mind is that form for many breeds is governed by function, right down to features like foot shape. That form is what's expressed in int breed standard.

Take whippets for example. The standard states that all colours are acceptable. Why? Because any colour of dog can be fast.

Not all sighthounds will lure course. The fastest, most prey driven dog in my house will not chase a plastic bag. Show him a rabbit and it's game on!

While I'd generally agree here, I've seen plenty of fast greyhounds that had no real prey drive. If a dog is bred for the purpose of chasing and it lacks the drive to chase, it's not fit for function, even if it looks the part and can physically move as required.

There's a couple of dual-registered greys down here that were the laughing stock of the racing people when their owner started entering them in races. They could run fast enough to qualify but last I saw, one had actually been stood down from all tracks in the state. They might have "looked" correct but a greyhound that meanders all over the show when chasing is not going to catch the hare (whether it's real or otherwise).

Compare this to our current pup- he has a kink in his tail, he has cocked ears that don't look like they'll correct and generally speaking, he looks coarse. He'd likely do terribly in conformation which seems wrong to me, given his appearance (right down to his coat pattern) is identical to his father (out of Brett Lee- and a very successful racer).

Personally, I think some breeds would be much better off if function was tested, at least to some degree.

[Greytmate]

This subject has come up a lot over the years.

I think it comes down to why people are involved with dogs. Showing, breeding, working, racing, trialling, hunting, whatever. Different people like to do different things and you can't take somebody who invests all their spare time into one of these things and expect them to be interested in doing any of the other activities as well.

Somebody made an important point about slight geographical differences in terrain, climate, vegetation, which means that different conformations will be more suitable for working in different places. So it would be impossible to set up a standardised test for function, when there is no pure function, it's all about function in context.

In the USA they run the greyhounds on shorter tighter tracks than we do here. This results in a beefier greyhound with stronger joints than the ones that have evolved here. So which is the true working conformation?

[mixeduppup]

for those that complain that farmers shoot no good working dogs... its better than what happens in a good deal of rural towns... which is they are just dumped.

not chipped, no rego.. this idea that chipping stops that is bollocks...

there is nothing more frustrating that a working dog that won't work or even worse is a huge hinderence on the job... often those sort get a bullet in frustration.

my 2 dals are epic fails... sophie who was the dol rescue is terrified to leave the house especially when the horses are around... in 2 years i have not even made a dent in her fear... she cannot even ride on the cart without shaking in fear.

leo will run untill he stands on something that hurts... then its all over... he has had cracked paws... on and off since i got him... now he has a chronic hot spot on his leg, which is very sore when you bandage it, just ask him.... so laying on the couch is top priority...he is also terrified of the horses in the paddock but will come out when i drive, but rabbits and that big green troll that pushes him into water against his will(is far more interesting than running)... i have yet to lay eyes on the troll but the dog swears he does not swim or wade on his own.

one will bark up a storm when confronted at the gate... and one will follow suit..but when on his own.... he would let you in, then follow you home. no protective instincts in that dal.

I didn't complain that farmers shoot crappy working dogs, i was complaining about arrogant guys that can't train worth their salt without beating the dog and wonder why it stops working for them and then shoots it instead of giving it to someone for a second chance.

[Maddy]

In the USA they run the greyhounds on shorter tighter tracks than we do here. This results in a beefier greyhound with stronger joints than the ones that have evolved here. So which is the true working conformation?

Funny you should say this because I've noticed the opposite to be true.

Take muzzles, for example. I've only ever seen one "needle nose" in Tasmania (Panterka's hound) and if I recall correctly, he was actually from US lines. Every greyhound I've had here has had a faily broad muzzle and short head when compared to what seems to be the average in the US.

Obviously breeding makes a difference there- if you're breeding for speed, your greyhounds are going to be broader but generally, in Tasmania at least, we don't really see those lean, light greyhounds much.

As for which shape is correct, for the purpose of live coursing, I'd think the heavier dogs would be the correct form. From what I've seen of live coursing (with muzzles on), the hare is usually caught within a matter of seconds, handlers run in and pull the dogs away to let the hare go again and rinse/repeat. The dog would be relying heavily on that initial acceleration ability that comes from thick muscles, rather than the ability to move fast over longer distances.

I think it's interesting that there's a real trend towards greyhounds with muscling that is almost dry when they were never intended to be a dog with great endurance. In other sighthound breeds, for their purpose, that ability to keep going was necessary but for chasing a hare in an enclosed paddock.. no.

[SkySoaringMagpie]

Much agreement with everything Diva wrote.

As a point of interest, this is a link to the standards for Salukis across the world:

http://www.thesalukiarchives.com/standard.php

The Australian standard is the 1923, the original Western standard. Note what it says about the prey and the terrain in general characteristics, and note that two other standards have since edited that out.

[Rebanne]

and of course, greyhound racing came along only a hundred years ago. And the greyhound has been around much, much longer then that. They are sighthounds, hunters of game and, in packs, it was large game like deer. My greyhound's wouldn't win a race but they have not been bred selectivly to run on smooth oval tracks after artifical lures. But they would hunt and chase, just like a greyhound should. Except for one, he would have flunked out, same as many of the race bred dogs fail at racing.

[Rebanne]

While I'd generally agree here, I've seen plenty of fast greyhounds that had no real prey drive. If a dog is bred for the purpose of chasing and it lacks the drive to chase, it's not fit for function, even if it looks the part and can physically move as required.

There's a couple of dual-registered greys down here that were the laughing stock of the racing people when their owner started entering them in races. They could run fast enough to qualify but last I saw, one had actually been stood down from all tracks in the state. They might have "looked" correct but a greyhound that meanders all over the show when chasing is not going to catch the hare (whether it's real or otherwise).

Compare this to our current pup- he has a kink in his tail, he has cocked ears that don't look like they'll correct and generally speaking, he looks coarse. He'd likely do terribly in conformation which seems wrong to me, given his appearance (right down to his coat pattern) is identical to his father (out of Brett Lee- and a very successful racer).

Personally, I think some breeds would be much better off if function was tested, at least to some degree.

Dual registered greyhounds are all racebred dogs who are also registered to show. Show bred dogs can't be registered to race, I tried cause I wanted to course one of mine. If the Tassie dogs were all over the shop it might have had a bit more to do with incorrect training, plain lack of ability etc then the fact they were also registered to show.

There are dual registered greyhounds that have shown and raced and won.

[Maddy]

While I'd generally agree here, I've seen plenty of fast greyhounds that had no real prey drive. If a dog is bred for the purpose of chasing and it lacks the drive to chase, it's not fit for function, even if it looks the part and can physically move as required.

There's a couple of dual-registered greys down here that were the laughing stock of the racing people when their owner started entering them in races. They could run fast enough to qualify but last I saw, one had actually been stood down from all tracks in the state. They might have "looked" correct but a greyhound that meanders all over the show when chasing is not going to catch the hare (whether it's real or otherwise).

Compare this to our current pup- he has a kink in his tail, he has cocked ears that don't look like they'll correct and generally speaking, he looks coarse. He'd likely do terribly in conformation which seems wrong to me, given his appearance (right down to his coat pattern) is identical to his father (out of Brett Lee- and a very successful racer).

Personally, I think some breeds would be much better off if function was tested, at least to some degree.

Dual registered greyhounds are all racebred dogs who are also registered to show. Show bred dogs can't be registered to race, I tried cause I wanted to course one of mine. If the Tassie dogs were all over the shop it might have had a bit more to do with incorrect training, plain lack of ability etc then the fact they were also registered to show.

There are dual registered greyhounds that have shown and raced and won.

I think you missed my point- it's not what they were bred for (that bit is really beside the point)- the dogs conformed to the physical standard but despite this, lacked the ability to function as intended. So even if they were physically "correct", they weren't actually good examples of the breed. Sort of like having a BC that is scared of sheep- it can look great but at the end of the day, if it can't do what it is bred for, continuing its lines isn't doing the breed any favours because you'd be losing your function (which dictates your form).

[Dogsfevr]

You have the other end of the scale to ,those that have breed solely for working ability to the point you can no longer recognize the breed .

As for racing Greys i remember the chiro we used for many years ,we took our Shows greys to her & it was always the talk .

She asked on many occasion whether we would like to show some of the dogs that didn.t make the grade as runners & they had bad mouths,prick ears & many faults where they wouldn't meet the breed standard .

Edited October 20, 2012 by showdog

[mixeduppup]

You have the other end of the scale to ,those that have breed solely for working ability to the point you can no longer recognize the breed .

As for racing Greys i remember the chiro we used for many years ,we took our Shows greys to her & it was always the talk .

She asked on many occasion whether we would like to show some of the dogs that didn.t make the grade as runners & they had bad mouths,prick ears & many faults where they wouldn't meet the breed standard .

This is so true, I met a working line BC the other day, a guy had bred the same lines for generations, I swear she looked more like a lab cross BC, she was tall floppy eared, short hair big square head with one black patch on her butt and the rest was white. He swears she's from his best lines and purebred...I was perplexed. I spoke to someone who's seen her work and he said she was amazing to watch.