Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 10:26 am Post subject: working dog versas show dog
I am carrying on the thread from Ch show week end.
The way I look at it. Gundogs were designed to do a job and it is not fair to take away their instincts by not selecting for the nose quality, strong pointing ability and of course, sometimes a weakness in the retrieving side.
I would never select a male dog which I had never seen in the field to see what it is made of. But nor would I choose an ugly dog just because he worked really well. If I have to live with a dog, he/ she has to be pleasing to the eye
I intensly dislike bow legged Springers with long back, but also don't agree with all the coat of the show Springer.
So, in my view, a show dog should have a minimum test to check his instincts remain, and it should be something higher than a TAN.( which is very basic!) I know many do but is it enough for Stud dog selection and the improvement of the breed?
I would like to know as John states, if some Brittanys really are getting that poor in the field??
I'll probably get shot down in flames now!!!
We know how it works in France, how about Germany...as I never had time to finish asking Andrea....
At this moment in time we need both , one for confirmation type etc and the other to maintain the working ability that i for one was drawn to.
We are still fortunate to have breeders who show and work and long may this continue, i only work my dogs ( at this point ) but in the litters my youngest 2 came from you will find sh Ch's as well as dogs ( like mine ) who only work and some that do both , The problems start to arise, in my view, when breeders go along only one of the paths and ignore the other, you then end up with the odd mixtures that make up other more popular Gundog breeds which barely resemble each other let alone breed standard.
this is just my opinion and probably to simplistic for some, but if i have another Britt i will be looking at the dams working/show background as well as the sire ( who i would prefer to have a good dollop of french tr blood ) as i require more than a pretty face
Dave A _________________ Dave A, Fern, Gill and Molly
Last edited by Dave A on Thu Oct 15, 2009 6:25 pm; edited 1 time in total
If you want a dual purpose breed you need to select for ability, if you want a dog of a specific breed you need to select for conformation which has surely been deliberately bred for over a good number of years to enable the dog to do a job.
For me, I want a dog that can work and can be seen to be a good specimen (showing as an additional pastime is nice too but not if the dog really dislikes it as the dog cares nothing for rosettes, titles etc to be happy and fulfilled). However, like Patricia I like a dog to look appealing - it doesn't have to be stunning but it does have to have something and ugly would be difficult to live with. Mind you, beauty being in the eye of the beholder we as individuals all find different things appealing even some breeds I think are truly awful visually. _________________ Sue, Chase and the non-Brittany boys - Brice & Piper. Pets first and foremost.
I think it is unfortunate that the only criteria that really counts is FT CH and CH in the ring. If we continue to mate Ch or Sh Ch to Ch or Sh Ch or even FT CH to FT Ch (if we had them) we will be on a hiding to nothing.
We must not loose sight of the fact that the Brittany was developed as a GUNDOG nothing else. The fact it can lend itself to other disciplines is fantastic but at the end of the day it is a gundog.
We must also not loose sight of the fact that not everyone wants to use a Brittany as a gundog. This does not detract from either the owner or the dog, all it does is take the dog out of the pool of proven gundogs. At the moment the only way to 'prove' a gundog is at FT. This is unfortunate as to achieve a win requires not only dedication to the task but also great ability as a trainer - some way of grading a dogs ability against a standard would be a much better IMHO . We need some way of measuring and publishings a dog's ability other than by FT so that sensible judgements can be made over breeding decisions.
I think it odd that those who only use the 'ring' to assess a dog feel they have custody of the breed standard. One does not need to be a sheep to tell good mutton! _________________ Guy, Ellie, Topaz, Catja and in memory Barley
Beauty from Structure
www.epagneulbreton.org.uk
I think it is unfortunate that the only criteria that really counts is FT CH and CH in the ring. If we continue to mate Ch or Sh Ch to Ch or Sh Ch or even FT CH to FT Ch (if we had them) we will be on a hiding to nothing.
We must not loose sight of the fact that the Brittany was developed as a GUNDOG nothing else. The fact it can lend itself to other disciplines is fantastic but at the end of the day it is a gundog.
We must also not loose sight of the fact that not everyone wants to use a Brittany as a gundog. This does not detract from either the owner or the dog, all it does is take the dog out of the pool of proven gundogs. At the moment the only way to 'prove' a gundog is at FT. This is unfortunate as to achieve a win requires not only dedication to the task but also great ability as a trainer - some way of grading a dogs ability against a standard would be a much better IMHO . We need some way of measuring and publishings a dog's ability other than by FT so that sensible judgements can be made over breeding decisions.
I think it odd that those who only use the 'ring' to assess a dog feel they have custody of the breed standard. One does not need to be a sheep to tell good mutton!
A lot of sense in this - but stats come into this too -3500 Brits in the UK at any one time (seems to remain fairly static over the years) about 100/150 max shown, a handful trialled - where are the other 3400? For sure they ain't in purely pet homes or we'd have a lot more coming on rescue. They are WORKED ! That's what! _________________ Annie
Handle every situation like a dog, if you can't eat it or play with it, just pee on it and walk away
if you want a dog of a specific breed you need to select for conformation which has surely been deliberately bred for over a good number of years to enable the dog to do a job.
You'd certainly hope this to be the case but I fear that we will return to the arguements that followed Crufts when the American Cocker won. Sure it was a good example of the breed but a gundog????????????????? _________________ My goal in life is to be as good a person as my dog already thinks I am.
So how about Stud selection?
I can see where Guy is coming from with the field trials. Indeed, I feel there may be better results should we put our dogs in the hands of Professionals!!!
Spring pointing tests are a good way of seeing a dog and measuring the quality of its nose on wild game? As for working tests, a willingness to retrieve dummys is more than useful. BUT...Some Brittanys hate dummys even though they are meant to do as they are told and retrieve any article. I would personally rather select on Spring test or field trial.
Not that I mean the dog should be necessarily a field trial Ch, but for me to choose a Stud, I would prefer to see it quarter, point and retrieve keenly. But importantly too, have a pliable and biddable nature.
I would not go on " hear say" that it works because the owner says so...
I really liked the " working " book for field dogs in France. This can be seen in the livre d'elevage. There can be many " results" but if you look, it will say if not classed, eliminated, no occasion etc..as well as the CACT etc...In that case, you can take the results as true...and not promotion of a mediocre dog.
You'd certainly hope this to be the case but I fear that we will return to the arguements that followed Crufts when the American Cocker won. Sure it was a good example of the breed but a gundog?????????????????[/quote]
That one may not have been a gundog John but when the breed was first brought into the UK there were two that made FT Ch and they were also shown with success. _________________ Jan
Merlin, hips 9/9=18 and Ghillie, hips 8/9=17
Pull [n or v] An equal and opposite force perpetrated on both ends of a lead that results in the inevitable tripping and falling of the human involved!!
when the breed was first brought into the UK there were two that made FT Ch and they were also shown with success
Exactly and now the working ability has been bred out of them in favour of over exagerating a breed standard to the ponit where it looks more like a mop than a dog.
_________________ My goal in life is to be as good a person as my dog already thinks I am.
All times are GMT Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Next
Page 1 of 10
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Join! (free) 
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
