# Do you think Field Trial lineage dogs are......



## Dave Combs (Feb 28, 2003)

Do you think dogs with heavy Field Trial lineage are too high strung for the average Joe hunter/ hunt tester?


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

NO........


----------



## Buzz (Apr 27, 2005)

I find it amusing to think of such generalizations.

I have one dog that has plenty of FT dogs on the sire's side, but the Dam's side are all hunting dogs that I am familiar with from my local area. He's high strung, hard headed, with very high desire. I have to be consistent in not ever giving him an inch, or he'll take a mile.

I have another dog with a high powered FT breeding. She is soft, and sensitive, extremely high desire, and smart - a very good balance. So she's very responsive, and she's very gentle.

So, I guess my answer would have to be, it depends...


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Buzz said:


> I have one dog that has plenty of FT dogs on the sire's side, but the Dam's side are all hunting dogs that I am familiar with from my local area. He's high strung, hard headed, with very high desire. I have to be consistent in not ever giving him an inch, or he'll take a mile.
> 
> I have another dog with a high powered FT breeding. She is soft, and sensitive, extremely high desire, and smart - a very good balance. So she's very responsive, and she's very gentle.
> 
> So, I guess my answer would have to be, it depends...


Basiclly a ditto from me. However, the poster ask about an avergae Joe/hunt tester. My opinion is that it takes a certain amount of experience both as a trainer and handler to work with a "hot" retriever. And, lets face it, many of those average Joes are turned off by high-energy dogs and are looking elsewhere for what they feel would be better suited retrievers.

I just helped a guy who is head of a local utilites company find his next hunting retriever. First thing he said to me was, "I don't want one of those hard to control FT knuckleheads".


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

if the "average" hunt tester has trained a couple dogs, no.

if it's their first attempt at training one, perhaps.

dog's personalities are all over the map. what suits my training style and needs may not suit you.-paul


----------



## Dave Combs (Feb 28, 2003)

Thanks for the replies so far.
Reason I ask is that over the past few years I have seen quite a few people both experienced and not, with dogs from heavy FT pedigrees that are just completely out of control due, mostly, to the handler not being able to deal with the needs of the dog. If that's your cup of tea I have nothing against it, but I find it counter-productive and frustrating for both dog and handler..... and it never ceases to amaze me these are usually the first people to announce their dog is out of FC/AFC yadda yadda yadda. Again, not trying to push buttons, but it seems to be more of a status symbol for them than what they truly can handle or need.


----------



## Bob Gutermuth (Aug 8, 2004)

NO assuming that the average Jo or Jane is in a position to give the dog(s) a modicum of exercise on a regular basis. I've been living with trial bred dogs for over 13 yrs, my own Chesapeakes and daughters Labs. They have all run hunt tests and been in control. They are also good calm family house dogs 99% of the time. This includes a Trumarcs Hot Pursuit son and a Pike daughter


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

In general I'd say NO. A lot of the time it depends what you put into them. I think a dogs environment has a whole bunch to do with the dogs temperment in the end. A pup raised by one person can be a totally different dog raised by another person. A pup that is a wild child in the beginning with the proper time and attention can be a good citizen in the end or a mellow easy going pup can turn into an idiot without or with the wrong kind of attention.


----------



## Polock (Jan 6, 2003)

Mr Booty said:


> Basiclly a ditto from me. However, the poster ask about an avergae Joe/hunt tester. My opinion is that it takes a certain amount of experience both as a trainer and handler to work with a "hot" retriever. And, lets face it, many of those average Joes are turned off by high-energy dogs and are looking elsewhere for what they feel would be better suited retrievers.
> 
> I just helped a guy who is head of a local utilites company find his next hunting retriever. First thing he said to me was, "I don't want one of those hard to control FT knuckleheads".


Ditto on the above statement, the average Joe just doen't have the experience to train that type of retriever..........and some of the more experienced folks will fit into the Phase II bracket...........and never work it out.......


----------



## greg magee (Oct 24, 2007)

According to James Lamb Free it cost as much to feed and care for a well bred dog as it does a blue light special. With the well-bred field trial dog you have the history of trainability, sound genetics, and not to mention a dog that is easy on the eye. With that in mind and having placed plenty of well bred dogs in both working homes and none working homes and only having one come back for being to much dog I don't think that it is an issue. But I do agree with Bob G. that there must be some outlet in place for the dog to expel some energy. So for some one to say that a good family should be denied the opportunity to have a great dog is just showing their ignorance. Greg


----------



## Patrick Johndrow (Jan 19, 2003)

Not generally but there are a few dogs out there I would NOT want to hunt with...but then again that can be said about a few hunt test dogs as well.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

IMHO almost all FT bred dogs can be good citizens if allowed to reside in the house with an owner that demands respect. I think OOC dogs have much to do with novice trainers, or those trying to run dogs too early, or too often in HT. If you are a novice and intend to run HT, don't be looking for a hot breeding or hot linebreeding because it's a disaster waiting to happen unless you are patient.


----------



## Buzz (Apr 27, 2005)

I think that anyone who has watched The Dog Whisperer would realize that there are many people that don't know how to handle any dog, let alone a high energy dog.


----------



## Miriam Wade (Apr 24, 2003)

Dave Combs said:


> Do you think dogs with heavy Field Trial lineage are too high strung for the average Joe hunter/ hunt tester?



I think it depends upon their over all life style. Like Bob and others have said-they need to be able to count on routine & exercise. 

There are hunters who kennel their dogs and give them very little time or attention except during hunting season. I can't see a high octane dog being happy in that environment. There are hunters whose dogs are part of the family and get quality time all year round. I think the "average" hunt tester sees training as part of the dogs daily life-for the most part & for many of them-the dog is a member of the family.

What I think a lot of people who have a misconception about FT pedigree dogs think is that they are all out of control 24/7 & handful in & out of the house. That's such an unfair & untrue generalization.

My personal experience is that if you channel the energy and give them a job to do-they are the most intelligent, loyal, affectionate and best house dog anyone could ask for.

M


----------



## ducksoup (Oct 3, 2005)

FOM said:


> NO........


I'm with Lainee -- you can't miss with a dog that just doesn't know "quit" in a duck blind -- and granted that might mean maintaining a very high standard in training -- but that shouldn't be bad either in any case


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Patrick Johndrow said:


> Not generally but there are a few dogs out there I would NOT want to hunt with...but then again that can be said about a few hunt test dogs as well.


it can also be said about quite a few people....;-)


----------



## Patrick Johndrow (Jan 19, 2003)

EdA said:


> it can also be said about quite a few people....;-)


AMEN ED AMEN


----------



## SloppyMouth (Mar 25, 2005)

Mr Booty said:


> However, the poster ask about an avergae Joe/hunt tester. My opinion is that it takes a certain amount of experience both as a trainer and handler to work with a "hot" retriever.


I'd completely agree, especially Average Joe Hunter. Depends for Average Joe Hunt Tester. And, sorry to bring up public enemy #1 but, isn't that what Robert Milner said in Back to Basics?

"There is an excellent breeding selction process in the field-trial segment of Labradors. Breeders have made great progress in reducing probablilities of severe hip dysplasia. They have made enormous progress in reducing the incidence of progresssive retinal atrophy. Breeders are also producing great field-trial prospects...A puppy with plenty of these titles in his ancestry will probably be a good field-trial prospect. However, he may not be a great hunting dog prospect...A puppy that is ideal as a field-trial prospect may be less suitable as a hunting dog prospect...That field-trial puppy will likely require a higher degree of dog-training skills than those possessed by the average hunter." 

"...the average hunter is usually quite low in dog-training skills...The average hunter should not have to get a Ph.D. in dog training in order to come up with a dog that is pleasant to hunt with and pleasant to live with."

(note: not trying to diverge the conversation into the same old argument, just noting that oft-hated PE #1 said basically what many on here say, albeit less tactifully...)



Dave Combs said:


> Thanks for the replies so far.
> Reason I ask is that over the past few years I have seen quite a few people both experienced and not, with dogs from heavy FT pedigrees that are just completely out of control due, mostly, to the handler not being able to deal with the needs of the dog. If that's your cup of tea I have nothing against it, but I find it counter-productive and frustrating for both dog and handler..... and it never ceases to amaze me these are usually the first people to announce their dog is out of FC/AFC yadda yadda yadda. Again, not trying to push buttons, but it seems to be more of a status symbol for them than what they truly can handle or need.


I've noticed the same thing...and they also seem to want to breed for the same reasons.


----------



## Lance-CO (Jan 10, 2003)

I have trained an HT dog (the amish way) but I was pulling my hair off and shakin my head from shock  when I got my FT pup. To my defense, there was a big lag of time when my first lab passed away and my FT pup now. I felt that I fell off the edge of the earth on how to train dogs. I guess that is why there are pros for somebody like me. 


Angelo


----------



## RailRoadRetrievers (Feb 4, 2004)

Since FT/HT bred labs are often touted as being easily trainable and smarter, wouldn't you say the novice/beginner trainer would have an easier time training one of them as oppose to a back yard bred dog that doesn't have a lick of sense but meets the color requirement for the purchaser. 

It just makes sense to me, that with a better bred dog, who has a pedigree with proven trainable dogs backing it, that it would be an easier dog to train to the hunting standard. All dogs need a certain degree of excercise and something to channel their energy into. So, wouldn't the novice trainer or hunter be better off getting a better bred dog, FT/HT?


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

I consider Robert Milner a pretty good friend, which won't come to most RTF'ers as a surprise.

I will write, as I've written before, that Robert's writings tend to go to extremes, to the point where it alienates a certain segment of the retriever world. 

Very rare is the person who keeps paying attention and trying to get the full meaning of the whole message, once a "hot button" has been pushed. Most of us, once our hot button is pushed, are angry enough that we're done listening (or reading) but rather we're waiting our turn (or flat-out interrupting) to give our response.

Robert's words and style tend to push the "hot button" of the FT folks. He knows this, and frankly, I believe he thinks it's funny. One of my favorite things is hearing him snicker when he knows someone's upset by his writings. 

Sloppymouth, I do not think that Franco (Booty) and Robert wrote identical things. I do think that there are some commonalities.

One thing that's sure to happen when we generalize about any group, be it a sub-segment of a sporting breed, or a particular human culture (skin color, nationality, etc.) is that we're bound to be wrong some of the time.

There is no one-size fits all. That's a good thing.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

ShotGunWillie said:


> Since FT/HT bred labs are often touted as being easily trainable and smarter, wouldn't you say the novice/beginner trainer would have an easier time training one of them as oppose to a back yard bred dog that doesn't have a lick of sense but meets the color requirement for the purchaser.
> 
> It just makes sense to me, that with a better bred dog, who has a pedigree with proven trainable dogs backing it, that it would be an easier dog to train to the hunting standard. All dogs need a certain degree of excercise and something to channel their energy into. So, wouldn't the novice trainer or hunter be better off getting a better bred dog, FT/HT?


Yes! Definitely!

selective breeding is real and it works!


----------



## Bob Gutermuth (Aug 8, 2004)

I bought my first Chessie as a hunting dog, I had no idea of the dog games that were available to us in 1987. Fortunately, that dog had an overwhelming desire to retireve and was birdy in extremis despite being back yard bred. I think that Joe or Jane Sixpack will, in the long run, be better served by getting a F/T H/T bred dog even if that dog is a bit much for a first timer as opposed to getting a palooka with little or no desire and no birdyness. I have said many times I would rather have a dog that I need to tie an anchor to than one I need to kick in the butt to get going. A hi roller can be toned down, but a dog with low desire is difficult to amp up.


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

FT lineage only buys you potential . What the owner/trainer decides to do with that " bag of DNA" depends on the person's interest.

Tim


----------



## labsforme (Oct 31, 2003)

No.My first lab was Trumarc Zip Code x Triven Thunderhead daughter.You couldn't ask for a more tractable loving dog.Now it's a different story when I bred her daughter to Cosmo and kept a pup.In the house,wonderful.Put her in a situation where retrieving or birds were involved and watch out.But who's to say the backyard bred dog is any less in control with no training.How many times have we seen birds sail a ways and said "laid back" dog is not capable of getting the bacon.
I'll take FT bred any time.
Jeff


----------



## Buzz (Apr 27, 2005)

Chris Atkinson said:


> One thing that's sure to happen when we generalize about any group, be it a sub-segment of a sporting breed, or a particular human culture (skin color, nationality, etc.) is that we're bound to be wrong some of the time.


That's pretty much what I was trying to say in my post.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

My simple answer was "NO" - I gave no reasoning behind it, but I'll try - My first dog was a BYB dog, to his credit he has some go-go juice, very stylish, smart, tractable, and has desire to retrieve.....not really a FT pedigree - he pointed out my short comings as a trainer more so than any other dog. I now have a true FT bred dog and I have found him easier to train than my first who was a BYB. Simple put it has come down to STANDARDS in training - I let my old man get away with murder and I never held him accountable for the lessons I knew that he knew.....with the FT bred dog I knew better what to do. I am glad that my first dog wasn't a puppy out of, let's say Cosmo because I probably would have the wrong impression about FT dogs, too. But simple put it comes down to the trainer and if average joe hunter wants a good dog then he needs to train the dog - the level of training and standards upheld will dictate a lot of how the dog turns out....

FOM


----------



## tpaschal30 (Oct 11, 2005)

I got one of those high rollers and am a beginner in the modern methods. The hardest part for me was apropriate amount of force to use. The one I have now takes and needs much more force than would have been necessary or able to apply to my prior lab with not near the FT lineage and trained by the Water Dog book. I had to redo FF and OB. He is now two, but feel he has just gotten mature enough to really focus and is really taking to training. I can't say it has not been frustrating at times, but I've learned alot, and all that frustration goes away when he tears out for a mark or makes a breakthrough in training. What a ride!!!


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

ShotGunWillie said:


> It just makes sense to me, that with a better bred dog, who has a pedigree with proven trainable dogs backing it, that it would be an easier dog to train to the hunting standard. All dogs need a certain degree of excercise and something to channel their energy into. So, wouldn't the novice trainer or hunter be better off getting a better bred dog, FT/HT?


Define better bred dog.

Would that be one from a hot FT litter? Where genetic faults are often overlooked in the hopes of producing SUPERDOG. Where the physical traits that define a Lab are overlooked in hopes of producting SUPERDOG? I've said before that the #1 consideration of top Field breeders is not about what kind of hunting dog they are producing but, can these pups be FT winners. I enjoy watching FT's and handling my dog on occasion. But, I'd never beleive that what is being bred to win FT's is the ebst suited for hunting.

There are some great FT dogs that are also great hunting dogs. There are also some FC AFC's that would be hard to control on a duck hunt. Dogs that are just wired in such a way that they are obnoxious to have in a duck blind. We had one at the camp this year that was sired by an NFC to a QAA bitch. Dog didn't know how to settle down and was constantly panting at the camp and in blind. I've heard FT trainers say they would never want to have such and such dog in a duck blind no matter how many titles. 

Personally, I like FT dogs as hunting dogs. My yellow female who is grandsired by NAFC Cropper and out of a FC AFC Gunstock Butch bitch is as calm as they come. I knew both her sire and dam and I thought they were ideal hunting dogs. She is eager to retrieve and eager to please. However, when I'm buying at pup from FT breedings, I have an idea of what I'm getting into. The average duck hunter does not. They just want a calm dog in the blind and in the house, a dog that will get their ducks. They don't care if the dog marks well at 300 yards because they are never going to send a dog on a 300 yard mark in the marsh. They don't care if the dog has a natural tendency to run a straight line because they just want the duck bagged and if the dog cheats the bank, so what. 

I wouldn't sell my three FT bred dogs for all the beer in Germany. However, for my next dog I am going to try something different. I am going for a dog that has it all; American bred, athletic, moderate boned from bench lines. One that represents the breed well in all aspects that define Labrador Retriever.

And, that is what I would recommend to average Joe hunter.


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

I would side with shotgun will

I would want a dog with alot of natural ability and drive that was excitable next to me in a blind ,,,,rather one that had little ability low drive and was exiteable.
Drive and excitabilty to me are not remotely related. Dogs of any breed can be highly exiteable. Field trial bred dogs tend to show focus much more readily than non trial bred dogs because that what usually do well at trials so it becomes a breeding trait which is good characteristic for hunting dogs.
High Drive dogs with focus steady up quickly.
High drive dogs which are exciteable dogs much less


_If you were to take the exciteability out of the high drive dog you would see a change for the better in performance. _
_ iF YOU ADD EXCITABILITY TO A LOW DRIVE DOG YOU WOULD SEE AN IMPROVEMENT. AND NOTHING IS MEANT BY THE CHANGE OF FONT I JUST DONT KNOW HOW TO CHANGE IT BACK:razz:_
_ EXCITEABILITY IS USUALLY FUELED BY THE OWNER_
_AN OWNER CAN EXCITE HIS LOW DRIVE HIGH EXCITEABILITY DOG JUST AS EASILY AS THEY COULD EXCITE THEIR HIGH DRIVE HIGH FOCUS DOG_

_ GIVE ME A FIELD BREEDING ANY DAY._


----------



## greg ye (Nov 28, 2007)

So, if I want a laid back hunting dog, I'll go the classifieds and buy a pup from "AKC, Both Parents Hunt, $150." GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!!!!!!!

Having trained several hundred of these a-- h----, I can tell you they are not a bargain. Give me a field trial dog anyday!! At least Joe Hunter can spoil it rotten and still end up with a great companion and hunter. Good Grief, so now we're saying the retriever breeding program is off key with the buying public?


----------



## Lance-CO (Jan 10, 2003)

I guess it defends on what is your goals and your capability to train a dog. Just be careful what you wished for, you might get what you want and more.........


----------



## SloppyMouth (Mar 25, 2005)

FOM said:


> My simple answer was "NO" - I gave no reasoning behind it, but I'll try - My first dog was a BYB dog, to his credit he has some go-go juice, very stylish, smart, tractable, and has desire to retrieve.....not really a FT pedigree - he pointed out my short comings as a trainer more so than any other dog. I now have a true FT bred dog and I have found him easier to train than my first who was a BYB. Simple put it has come down to STANDARDS in training - I let my old man get away with murder and I never held him accountable for the lessons I knew that he knew.....with the FT bred dog I knew better what to do. I am glad that my first dog wasn't a puppy out of, let's say Cosmo because I probably would have the wrong impression about FT dogs, too. But simple put it comes down to the trainer and if average joe hunter wants a good dog then he needs to train the dog - the level of training and standards upheld will dictate a lot of how the dog turns out....
> 
> FOM


Aye, it comes down to the trainer. Your ability to train your FT dog came down to your knowledge/experience base. So the other way to ask the question would be:

*"Does the Average Joe Hunter possess the dog training knowledge to train a "hot" FT-bred dog?"*

My opinion? By and large, not really. That's not to say any dog in their hands would be any better if they don't put in at least a modicum of effort and time, but one that isn't quite as "hot" or from those type of lines might be easier/more success for them.

One problem with these type of questions is that because so many folks on here are "dog people" we often forget the beginning stages of getting into the sport/game and/or don't often hunt with "Average Joe" guys any longer, but rather other "dog people" because that's who we hang with. 

I just went to a DU banquet and sat at table of hunters. Great guys that do a lot of hunting. They throw rocks to get the dog to a blind, and the last time they went hunting the dog stacked half the ducks on the _other_ side of the pond. These guys probably hunt as much, if not more than, the "average" guy, but they're not dog guys. Now if they decided to become dog guys, would they have an easier time with a non-FT bred dog, or at least one from lines that weren't "hot"? Maybe, maybe not.

Guess it boils down to how much time and effort you're going to put in...another way to ask the question, or at least another question: "Does it really take a higher degree of dog-training skills to train a "hot" dog?"

(took FT out of the equation, because when you get down to it, it's "hot" or "not as" that matters, as lines exist in all breedings (FT/HT, UK/et al, BYB) that could fit the classifications)


----------



## DuckManiac (May 10, 2004)

I like Lainee's first answer, a simple "NO" but I would like to add, No way, No how or Nope. I love a dog with style, you just need a better understanding and higher standard of training.


----------



## RailRoadRetrievers (Feb 4, 2004)

Mr Booty said:


> Define better bred dog.


In the given scenario, Average Joe Hunter isn't going to be purchasing the next superdog. Avergage Joe Hunter wouldn't be considered a possible purchaser of that dog. Those who are breeding for the next superdog are looking to place them in strictly FT homes. So that isn't going to work.

But I know from looking at classifieds here and other sites I can get a wondefully bred pup, out of FT/HT lines for some where in the range of $500.00 to $1,000.00. And that is like I said a wonderfully bred pup who has the pedigree that proves he is a better bred dog. 

Now are there dogs that are out of "hunting stock" who can just out hunt an FT bred dog, make a better hunting dog, I believe so, its possible. But in the game of odds, how do you know what you are getting. I think you stand a better chance of getting what you are looking for in an FT/HT breeding as average Joe Hunter, than you would to find a litter in the paper for $100.00. 

I think (speaking from experience) for the weekend hunter and novice trainer, the FT/HT lines are better suited.


----------



## Keith Stroyan (Sep 22, 2005)

Hav'n a little fun, Dave?

My worst dog was daughter of two National Open finalists. My best was a Tank daughter - so wild, I think the grave is still moving after almost 7 years. I still love her. My Harley and Abe daughters were as mild mannered as you like and talented.

The best dogs are well-chosen pairings between FC sires and MHR dams! - like 2X National Open finalist FC Diamond Ds Klondike and his sister GMHR Shohola Tess. (Flame away! .)


----------



## Matt McKenzie (Oct 9, 2004)

There is way too much variation among FT-bred dogs to try to classify them as a group as far as temperament or trainability. I have a young Patton pup that I think would make a great dog for the average Joe to train into a duck dog. I have a Dusty daughter that is the farthest thing from a "beginner dog" that you can get. I have a Cruise daughter that is somewhere in between. 
The right FT-bred dog from the right breeding is the best choice for the average Joe (when compared to any other catagory of retriever that I can think of), but a dog from a very hot FT breeding might just be the worst possible choice.
The other variable is the "average Joe". Some beginners have a tendency to be too soft on their dogs and need a very biddable, sensitive dog. Others tend to be overly heavy-handed and require a dog with a lot more bottom.
Trying to catagorize "FT-bred dog" and "average Joe" is much like "white person" or "motor vehicle". One man's opinion.


----------



## cgoeson (Jan 22, 2008)

Mr Booty said:


> Define better bred dog.
> 
> 
> Personally, I like FT dogs as hunting dogs. My yellow female who is grandsired by NAFC Cropper and out of a FC AFC Gunstock Butch bitch is as calm as they come. I knew both her sire and dam and I thought they were ideal hunting dogs. She is eager to retrieve and eager to please. However, when I'm buying at pup from FT breedings, I have an idea of what I'm getting into.


And I have a MH bitch x Gunstock Butch son that is 9 years old and his hair is still on fire. I just don't think you can generalizewhat kind of dog you're going to get from any breeding.

You could have an absolute dream of a dog from the same litter, but you get what you pick.


----------



## Buzz (Apr 27, 2005)

Hookset said:


> Trying to catagorize "FT-bred dog" and "average Joe" is much like "white person" or "motor vehicle".


That would make a good sig line.


----------



## twall (Jun 5, 2006)

Keith Stroyan said:


> The best dogs are well-chosen pairings between FC sires and MHR dams! - like 2X National Open finalist FC Diamond Ds Klondike and his sister GMHR Shohola Tess. (Flame away! .)


Keith,

You bred some nice dogs!

I think the bigger issue is not what the breeding is but how is the dog going to live on a day-to-day basis. Is these dog going to sit in a kennel 360 days a year? Is the dog going to be expected to live quietly in the house, on the couch all day long, every day until hunting season.

Regardless of breed these are Sporting Dogs! They are bred to hunt. They were not bred/developed to be companion animals only. These are living, breathing animals that do not have on/off switches. 

I think the average Joe hunter can get a well-bred lab and be very happy with it as long as the dog gets enough physical activity on a regular basis and he develops a bond with his dog. Does that mean it will live up to its FT "potential?" No. But, it does make for a happy dog and hunter.

If you don't have time for a dog on a regular/daily basis don't get one, regardless of the breeding!

Tom


----------



## Keith Stroyan (Sep 22, 2005)

Thanks Tom and the truth is the best dogs come from well-chosen pairings, whatever the breed, whatever the game. (Dave and I have to have some fun!)

Heck, some folks are even happy with Chessies! ;-)


----------



## IowaBayDog (May 17, 2006)

Keith Stroyan said:


> Heck, some folks are even happy with Chessies! ;-)


You don't have to worry about looking for the right deamor with CBRs, they're all hard to train! If I got an easy dog I wouldn't have to get so much advice from you and what fun would that be. :razz:


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

There are field trial lines and there are field trial lines. For the most part I have hunted ALL my dogs from FC/AFC to gun dog types. All with the exception of my first dog, were out of "close up" field trial lines, at least three or more of the parents and four grandparents were FC and/or AFC dogs. Some were more excitable in thier "early years" then others. One of my nicest bitches was very well bred , trialed until 10 years old, and seemed to know the difference between hunting and trials. Give me the odds every time in the pedigree,
%50 mom and Dad , %25 grandma and grandpa ,the rest who cares!! with solid trial lines.


----------



## Bob Gutermuth (Aug 8, 2004)

Happy with Chessies? I wouldn't own anything else....I share some traits with those critters, we are both thick of skull, have curly hair, and are loyal to a fault.


----------



## Keith Stroyan (Sep 22, 2005)

Do you stink, too? ;-)

Mean stinky brown dog regards,


----------



## Bob Gutermuth (Aug 8, 2004)

No though some would say my opinions do.

Never had a stinky Chessie, except when the wife fed my first one boiled cabbage. That was one mistake never repeated.


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

Keith Stroyan said:


> Heck, some folks are even happy with Chessies! ;-)


With all that lineage anybody can train a lab and the result is just another lab.
If you want to really train and have something special you have to have a CBR.

Another plus: judges tend to remember you better.

Tim


----------



## gsc (Oct 4, 2007)

The last hunt test I went to had 7 chessies and 4 labs. Chessies are becoming just to common!!

I have two labs and they are both from top FT pedigrees and both are great, calm, relaxed in the house and tear up the field otherwise. Really happy with them.


----------



## trog (Apr 25, 2004)

Tonight it will be 12 below and in my house will be 4 highly bred field trial dogs one of which is an FC 
An Honest abe dog bred to a Super Tanker bitch - produced one FC and national finalist
a Lean Mac x Lotti sister
a Lean Mac x Harley daughter
a Joe black pup x a rudy daughter (9 wks old)

the older dogs all hunt pheasants as guide dogs and have all their life
they all with be in the house tonight and are good house dogs
this stuff about hyper dogs lies with the people that raise them - give a lab an inch and they will take much more

I love inteligent highly bred field trial dogs. Sorry I have no love/sympathy for back yard breeders with their calm big blocky headed "hunting dogs"

My dogs will trial/hunt/live in the house with the best of them

Anyone care to dispute this
trog


----------



## Dave Combs (Feb 28, 2003)

Not really having fun Keith, just doing sorta....well...... 'research'.

I dont mean to generalize all ft dogs, but the answer I was trying to get was why some people feel that they need such 'hi strung' animals if they aren't playing the ft game. 

OH...and I don't in any way, shape or form mean that non FT dogs means BYB dogs. What I was refering to is dogs with more of a HT background. 

Everyone always talks about how the lab breed has seperated into 2 distinct vareties - show vs field, but I tend to believe that there are also different levels within each. Sure, you can buy a Cadillac to go off roading but its not reccomended - see my point?


----------



## Vickie Lamb (Jan 6, 2003)

Dave Combs said:


> I dont mean to generalize all ft dogs, but the answer I was trying to get was why some people feel that they need such 'hi strung' animals if they aren't playing the ft game.


FWIW, over the years and across this country I have seen, truly, far more dogs that fall into the "high strung" category that come from backyard breedings than FT dogs...with FT dogs there are a variety of traits in different lines. I would advise anyone that was an avid hunter that wanted a Lab to go with certain lines and why? because the years of breeding for intelligence, trainability, instincts, marking ability...it's all in there...hopefully. The odds are greatly increased. 

That's not to say one can't get lucky and find a dandy dog in the newspaper (I did once upon a long time ago) or down the street...it's a matter of what you want to do, how you want to increase your odds, so many things that come into consideration. 

But my main point is that FT dogs shouldn't be cast off or blindly overlooked because some of them may have been too hot to handle...that can apply to any dog from any cross, including the neighbor's backyard, and for a variety of reasons. 

Thanks for reading


----------



## FowlDawgs (Oct 22, 2007)

I think any dog is bad for anybody that doesn't put in the work to have a respectful dog. No matter what the lineage says.

Cory


----------



## DRAKEHAVEN (Jan 14, 2005)

Dave,

Let me answer a question with a question. Who is ( by your definition) the average Joe hunter/hunt tester ? Give the criteria which comprises "average joe" in your book.

I would not consider anyone who is here average. They users, posters, and even lurkers of this board are beyond the average (knowledge wise) that I have encountererd in the field.

John
________
digital vaporizer


----------



## Illinois Bob (Feb 3, 2007)

Dave Combs said:


> I dont mean to generalize all ft dogs, but the answer I was trying to get was why some people feel that they need such 'hi strung' animals if they aren't playing the ft game.


I've never heard of anyone saying they need a high strung dog.I don't think anybody goes out looking for one when they're looking for a pup.I know I wasn't.My last lab was very easy to train and had plenty of drive.That's what I wanted to find again.That's not what I got.I have one now that has more juice than I was looking for.I did my homework.I watched alot of dogs at trials and tests and read up on anything that I could when I saw a dog(s) I liked.None of the dogs that I saw or read about that steered me to the litter/breeding that I chose were as jacked up as my dog gets.None of the dogs were that way or gave me reason to believe mine would be that way.He just is and that's what I work with.I'm an average guy with probably average dog skills but I don't think this dog is beyond me or anybody else that is willing to put in the time to learn to work with it.I don't recall ever thinking "I need a dog that can yank my arms out of thier sockets at the sound of a gun".He's alot of dog for me but that also means that every gain we make is even more rewarding for me(us).A sidenote to add,alot of posts and threads here have helped us more than you'll ever know.I'm always lurking around for tips and ideas.Thank You All.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Bob Gutermuth said:


> NO assuming that the average Jo or Jane is in a position to give the dog(s) a modicum of exercise on a regular basis. I've been living with trial bred dogs for over 13 yrs, my own Chesapeakes and daughters Labs. They have all run hunt tests and been in control. They are also good calm family house dogs 99% of the time. This includes a Trumarcs Hot Pursuit son and a Pike daughter


Only 13 years??? I would never have guessed:razz:

john


----------



## Aussie (Jan 4, 2003)

What does high strung mean? Nervous? Kennel pacer? Barking all day for want of something to do? Working kelpies in the burbs comes to mind.


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

Aussie
That is what high strung often means and it manifests often in a kennel environment. I see more of that in back yard breedings , 

I think many people here misuse terms. If i'm guessing correctly when the term is used here it means that a dog is exciteable at the line ,, or can't sit still in a boat or duck blind or a couch ,,,,,or possibly they can relax except when a prey object is offered. 

But when hunting upland they think somehow that is needed. when in reality you need a focused dog when your hunting ducks or partridge.,,,not an excitable one.

I see more non hunting breeds and non trial breedings. that behave that way.

Winners are generally stable animals. And when you breed stable to stable you generally get stable. I say generally. I would always play the odds when it comes to genetics 

Pete


----------



## RailRoadRetrievers (Feb 4, 2004)

Sure, you can buy a Cadillac to go off roading but its not reccomended - see my point?


I bought a Jeep six years ago because it was capable of four wheel drive. I have probably put in four wheel drive maybe handful of times because I needed to. I don't "have to have it" but it sure is nice when you need it, its there.


----------



## Keith Stroyan (Sep 22, 2005)

Aussie said:


> Working kelpies in the burbs


What language is that? (What does it mean?)


----------



## crackerd (Feb 21, 2003)

Keith Stroyan said:


> What language is that? (What does it mean?)


Means the coroner's come for Heath Ledger. Or "The dingo's got Combsie's idea."

Either will work. As do kelpies.

MG


----------



## HiRollerlabs (Jun 11, 2004)

kelpies--breed of dog?
burbs--suburbs?


----------



## Illinois Bob (Feb 3, 2007)

Pete said:


> I think many people here misuse terms. If i'm guessing correctly when the term is used here it means that a dog is exciteable at the line ,, or can't sit still in a boat or duck blind or a couch ,,,,,or possibly they can relax except when a prey object is offered.
> Pete


 
I may be misusing the term but this description by Pete describes what I believe is high strung. Overly or easily excitable.


----------



## Boondux (Feb 10, 2006)

My FT bred pup is the calmest pup that I've ever had in the house. She's a different story outside though.


----------



## SloppyMouth (Mar 25, 2005)

DRAKEHAVEN said:


> Dave,
> I would not consider anyone who is here average. They users, posters, and even lurkers of this board are beyond the average (knowledge wise) that I have encountererd in the field.
> 
> John


Bingo! And I completely agree. And therein lies the problem. The "average guy" doesn't possess the knowledge to train any dog to decent standards, much less one that's "hot" ... but offer him the choice between BYB and a FT champion, champion, champion sired pup and I'd bet the vast majority of time they'll take the champion-bred pup...everyone likes a winner!

And to Dave's point, many of these folks are then saying "My pup is XX bred to XX and blah, blah, blah...wanna breed?" When they don't really need "that much dog" to accomplish the task at hand...and certainly don't need to be breeding...


----------



## Bob Gutermuth (Aug 8, 2004)

Yeah John, Flier just turned 13. Before her I had a BYB dog that was QAA and MH and a couple of mainly show bred dogs that were grandaughters of CFC CAFC Irownwoods Stone Cubs


----------



## greg magee (Oct 24, 2007)

SloppyMouth said:


> Bingo! And I completely agree. And therein lies the problem. The "average guy" doesn't possess the knowledge to train any dog to decent standards, much less one that's "hot" ... but offer him the choice between BYB and a FT champion, champion, champion sired pup and I'd bet the vast majority of time they'll take the champion-bred pup...everyone likes a winner!
> 
> And to Dave's point, many of these folks are then saying "My pup is XX bred to XX and blah, blah, blah...wanna breed?" When they don't really need "that much dog" to accomplish the task at hand...and certainly don't need to be breeding...


It never ceases to amaze me the amount of ignorance that is bantered about on this board. You guy's kill me.


----------



## SloppyMouth (Mar 25, 2005)

greg magee said:


> It never ceases to amaze me the amount of ignorance that is bantered about on this board. You guy's kill me.


You seem to like that word: ignorance. You're two for two on using it in posts in this thread. Sorry if my ignorance, e.g. my lack of knowledge, amazes you; but if I'm ignorant, think about some of the folks getting a dog only because it's FT champion bred...


----------



## Miriam Wade (Apr 24, 2003)

SloppyMouth said:


> think about some of the folks getting a dog only because it's FT champion bred...


With all due respect-& I'm not the first to mention this: Why wouldn't many folks want an FC bred dog? They don't exactly hand those titles out. Look at the individual dog in terms of characteristics you do or don't want, but overall, an FC says the dog can flat out mark, run blnds that the average dog can't, are intelligent-yada yada.

I met and watched the sire of my dog before getting my pup because titles were a big part of the picture, but I needed to like the dog in person. Would be the same for me whether it was an FC or an MH or backyard bred. If there is something I find appealing about the dog that makes me say, "I want a dog like that" then I'm going to pursue a pup. But that said-if all the qualities are there that I'm looking for in a dog-yup-give me the FC breeding.

M


----------



## Page (Jul 21, 2005)

Hi all. Here's what I think.

Each pup within a litter is different and there are some people out there I wouldn't trust to properly raise a Daschund. Labs need a lot of activity, period....so if "the average Joe" works 40 hours a week, has 3 children who play sports 5 nights a week, and doesn't truly love the time they spend with their dog then yes, I think any sporting dog will be too much for them. 

I have four dogs that require a great deal of stimulation and activity each day (and they are those lazy show dog types ) I have one boy who has so much drive, he is seriously obsessive/compulsive about needing to retrieve. Once I was just leisurely playing frisbee with him inside our yard when the frisbee landed on the hot wire. He grabbed the frisbee and the wire together in his mouth and tried to bring them both to me....pulling the hot wire away from the border post by post. I commanded him to stop and drop it which he did fairly quickly and then went to put the fence back up. When I grabbed the fence it was ON!! I didn't realize it becuase Dan had it in his mouth along with the frisbee for at least a few seconds. (and before you guys say it's becuase "show dogs" are dumb, he isn't. He just had a job to do and was focussed on doing it.) It's funny because he will literally hold his breath and holds a piercing stare until you send him. I have wondered before if I wait an extra 30 seconds, would he pass out or start to breathe. 

A show breeder I was familiar with contacted me about leasing him and I agreed, but I told them that he would require a great deal of activity each day or he would drive them crazy. The deal was that they would show him and use him as a stud on their bitches. His second weekend with them he won two major shows and then he mysteriously didn't get out much after that. I found out later that he became very hard for them to handle. Supposedly he did drive them crazy by barking 24/7 and becoming a total A$$. He became totally unmanageable, breaking out of crates/runs and fences, he refused to eat and lost a dangerous amount of weight, and his face actually went grey in 11 months. 

This picture was taken just before he left and the second was taken 11 months later. I know the profile shot doesn't show his face too well, but you can easily see how dark and even the color was. 

















He just turned 3 one month before the second picture was taken, but he looked like an 11 year old dog. 

He has been home since October and is doing very well again. He never barks (unless there is a specific reason) and he is the funniest guy I live with. 

This boy has a number of JH, SH, MH and CD in his pedigree, so the trainablity factor has been tested 100%. He is a pleasure FOR ME to live with, but I am telling you that I don't think the average pet owner or some "show dog" owners would find him as wonderful as I do. Why do I think he's wonderful? Because I spend time with him every day doing what he loves to do. Throwing bumpers, training, interacting with him. Although he loves his down time and will sleep on a couch or bed all day, he NEEDS his outlet or the energy builds until he goes crazy. He really does NEED a job to do in order to be happy. I truly believe if the owners of the other kennel threw a few bumpers for him a few times a week he would have been OK there, but he literally made himself sick from the stress. He came home gray and you could count every rib, see his shoulder blades and spine under his skin. 

I have never owned a FT dog but I do have Labs who each have multiple Hunt Test dogs in their pedigrees and although any of them would make great pets it would have to be under the right conditions. Plenty of running/swimming time would be a must or the dogs would tear a hole in the wall of the house.  None of my dogs are couch potatoes and I think only one would adapt well to that life if he had to. I'm sure it is the same way for puppies from FT lines. Some can more easily adapt, some wouldn't. 

Just wanted to throw my 2 cents in....ducking now in case it gets hurled back at me.


----------



## greg magee (Oct 24, 2007)

SloppyMouth said:


> You seem to like that word: ignorance. You're two for two on using it in posts in this thread. Sorry if my ignorance, e.g. my lack of knowledge, amazes you; but if I'm ignorant, think about some of the folks getting a dog only because it's FT champion bred...


If it walks like a duck, sounds like a duck, looks like a duck, it's usually a duck.
No offense meant, but if the shoe fits!;-)


----------



## SloppyMouth (Mar 25, 2005)

Miriam Wade said:


> With all due respect-& I'm not the first to mention this: Why wouldn't many folks want a FC bred dog? They don't exactly hand those titles out. Look at the individual dog in terms of characteristics you do or don't want, but overall an FC says the dog can flat out mark, run blnds that the average dog can't, are intelligent-yada yada.


I'm not disputing that they're great animals, they are! But, for the Average Joe Hunter that isn't into dogs, many/some/etc MAY be too much dog for 1. their needs 2. their training-skill level—and I'm not the first to mention that.



Miriam Wade said:


> I met and watched the sire of my dog before getting my pup because titles were a big part of the picture, but I needed to like the dog in person. Would be the same for me whether it was an FC or an MH or backyard bred. If there is something I find appealing about the dog that makes me say, "I want a dog like that" than I'm going to pursue a pup. But that said-if all the qualities are there that I'm looking for in a dog-yup-give me the FC breeding.
> 
> M


And has been pointed out, you, and probably the vast majority of people on this board, have deeper knowledge/experience base and grasp of training dogs than the Average Joe Hunter. Put a BYB dog and a FT dog with an impressive pedigree (after you explain what FC, et al means) in front of a AJH and guess which one he'll probably want...whether he knows what he needs or not.


----------



## Page (Jul 21, 2005)

SloppyMouth said:


> I'm not disputing that they're great animals, they are! But, for the Average Joe Hunter that isn't into dogs, many/some/etc MAY be too much dog for 1. their needs 2. their training-skill level—and I'm not the first to mention that.
> 
> 
> 
> And has been pointed out, you, and probably the vast majority of people on this board, have deeper knowledge/experience base and grasp of training dogs than the Average Joe Hunter. Put a BYB dog and a FT dog with an impressive pedigree (after you explain what FC, et al means) in front of a AJH and guess which one he'll probably want...whether he knows what he needs or not.


I have been considering "Average Joe Hunter" to be the guy who hasn't made it his priority or his life. A pet owner who wants to occassionally take a dog out to get a bird. If this is what is meant I would just call them pet owners and many pet owners shouldn't have certain types of Labs at all. 

Personally I don't think anyone should buy from BYB. They are unresponsible, ignorant, money-hungry idiots who aren't breeding for anything other than the almighty buck. 

I would absolutely buy a FC pedigreed dog before a BYB dog, and it is the breeder's responsibilty to screen the buyers and educate them on the breed and what type of training is recommended. 

Conformation breeders also worry about the idiots who buy a dog and do the whole "Let's breed my pretty dog to yours", but many try to counteract that by the Limited Registration. In my experience the real idiots out there are the ones who buy AKC Labs in the papers to breed to other AKC Labs (like it is a badge of honor or something). 

Real breeders, with real titled dogs can eliminate this by education, screening, and Limited Registration. 

JMO.


----------



## Steve Shaver (Jan 9, 2003)

SloppyMouth said:


> I'm not disputing that they're great animals, they are! But, for the Average Joe Hunter that isn't into dogs, many/some/etc MAY be too much dog for 1. their needs 2. their training-skill level—and I'm not the first to mention that.
> 
> 
> 
> And has been pointed out, you, and probably the vast majority of people on this board, have deeper knowledge/experience base and grasp of training dogs than the Average Joe Hunter. Put a BYB dog and a FT dog with an impressive pedigree (after you explain what FC, et al means) in front of a AJH and guess which one he'll probably want...whether he knows what he needs or not.


 


Well if average Joe hunter isnt into dogs he shouldnt have one. I see soooo many dogs stuck out in their kennels or staked out on a chain just wasting away and only taken out during hunting season. This type of person shouldn't own a dog period.
I think people should give serious thought to getting a dog no matter what pedigree looks like. Even if it's an adopted mutt from the pound. I think the decision should rank right behind the decision to have kids but people dont think about that either they just do it and a lot shouldn't. If Average Joe Hunter doesn't have the knowledge or experience to train a dog he should make an attempt to do so.


----------



## DRAKEHAVEN (Jan 14, 2005)

Greg,

What specifically am I ignorant about ? What about my ignorance is humorous to you ?


John
________
buy vapor genie


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

Ill.Bob

Thats good enough for me. 
The term High Strung can mean anything anybody wants it to mean. It is used in more ways from more people dog oriented or not that it doesn't have a real meaning. So we can assume high strung means a dog that likes to run around alot

Anxious, high drive, compulsive, exciteable, frustrated, all seem to be synonums for High Strung,.

Can you imagine writing a text book where the words can mean anything you want them to.:razz::razz:

No wonder why so many "average Joe hunters' believe so many myths.

I hunt with a bunch of awsome guys and some own 2 or 3 dogs each and you would be surprised what they consider doctrine.

And they could care less about what is myth or fact when it comes to dogs,,,their biggest concern is finding and shooting at birds. Little do they know that most of the birds that their dogs flush would be shootable or retrievable if they trained their dogs alittle.

As long as they enjoy the day with friends and their dogs and make good memories ,,l think that matters most in the long run.

We all can't be retriever training retards. Some just enjoy owning them:razz:


Pete


----------



## greg magee (Oct 24, 2007)

DRAKEHAVEN said:


> Greg,
> 
> What specifically am I ignorant about ? What about my ignorance is humorous to you ?
> 
> ...


John, no disrespect meant to you. You were collateral damage I’m afraid. I was more or less responding to all of the "average hunter" quotes. I have bred my All Age bitches to the following dogs in no particular order. Zip, Quick, Chavez, Pike, Dr Feel Good, Cosmo, Hilltops Hayseed and some that I've probably forgotten. I think pups from these litters would fall under the definition of "Hot Field Trial Prospect". As _sacrilegious _ as it might be, half of these pups went into none working homes. The point I'm trying to make is because of their history and linage these dog start out regardless of the owner’s future desires, making great pets. And this is with people that have very little knowledge of what formal dog training looks like. To have the arrogance to think that anyone and I mean anyone is ill-equipped to handle some of the best bred dogs in the world in my opinion is just ignorance(3rd time). I have a drawer full of testimonials from people that have one of my dogs that did nothing more than pick up the newspaper until if they were lucky, hunting season rolled around. Their just great dogs and everyone average or not should have the pleasure. Greg


----------



## DRAKEHAVEN (Jan 14, 2005)

Ok Greg I get ya. Pretty much same boat. Well bred bitches with hunt test or trial titles to The best in the game and 50% might get to hunt the pheasant opener.....they will be fine the rest of the year being "too much"

Don't condsider the folks that would buy my pups or yours average though. they are at least smart enuf to want a "better" dog for whatever they end up doing with it.

TOE MAY TOE....or TA MAAATA
________
RC145


----------



## Polock (Jan 6, 2003)

Page said:


> I have been considering "Average Joe Hunter" to be the guy who hasn't made it his priority or his life. A pet owner who wants to occassionally take a dog out to get a bird. If this is what is meant I would just call them pet owners and many pet owners shouldn't have certain types of Labs at all.
> 
> Personally I don't think anyone should buy from BYB. They are unresponsible, ignorant, money-hungry idiots who aren't breeding for anything other than the almighty buck.
> 
> JMO.


But this is exactly the type of dog AJH will buy from, the BYB, because he has a friend who's dog can pick up a bird, hunted with a buddy who's dog hunted on a collar, watched him get a few ribbons at a HT, yada, yada, yada............the BYBs are everywhere and AJH doesn't know any better, so he buys one........but the dog remains ignorant and never learns anything nor does AJH........and the BYB just keeps breedin' cause he has a web site and a few ribbons on the wall.........bad hips, known CNM carrier, no OFA, British background, did it all in 6 months, yada,yada,yada...........but AJH doesn't know any better, so he contributes to the cause...........and the circle continues........


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Polock said:


> ...........but AJH doesn't know any better


yep that guy Art J. Holly is a doofuss supreme.......

Old Folks Regards

THE WHITE KNIGHT


----------



## tpaschal30 (Oct 11, 2005)

About same percentage of people who should not have kids, should not own a dog.


----------



## Finn McCool (Dec 8, 2007)

Here is my 2 cents, 1 cent adjusted for inflation. I am/ was AJH. My first Lab who just retired was a friend's litter, no pedigree to speak of. Despite my best efforts, she became a superstar in the blind. Everyone remarked on her smarts, temperament, etc. When I started thinkning about my next pup, I did some research, and started lurking around this board after rejecting others. I used the info I found here to help me pick a breeder and a pup. This dog has a nice pedigree, some recognizable names in the ol' family tree, etc. I got him primarily as a duck dog, but I wanted to have him trained and trainable, on the level of a Trial dog. My reasoning was simple: I want the best dog I can afford, with a proven history of smarts and temperament. The only way to do that is to buy from a reputable FT breeder. There is no standard of measure for Duck dogs. I also felt that the skills needed for a FT/HT dog would easily translate to the Duck blind, since that is a lot of what the tests replicate anyway. Since then , I have made contact with a local club, mostly because I enjoy the company and picking up usable tips. The question is, is he more dog than I deserve? Maybe, but although he is only 12 weeks, we have bonded, he impresses me every day, and with a lot of work, he will be the best Duck dog around. I fail to see anything wrong with that. Thanks to all here for the valuable info, even if we don't get ribbons, our time together is precious. Rant Over, sorry


----------



## Polock (Jan 6, 2003)

Good things happen when ya walk towards the light........................


----------



## Bruce MacPherson (Mar 7, 2005)

They are all just a bunch of knotheads and will drive you to drink. Going to be getting me one of those gentleman's gundogs next time.


----------



## Rick Hall (Jan 21, 2003)

Dave Combs said:


> Do you think dogs with heavy Field Trial lineage are too high strung for the average Joe hunter/ hunt tester?


All of my retrievers (four Chessies) have been of "heavy Field Trial lineage" (titled or QAA parents and/or grandparents) and, despite my amateurish methods, which most here would think antiquated at best, have been easy to train and live with. And I can point to any number of similarly or better bred Labs one could say the same of.

But one need look no further than the nearest hunt test to see professional trainers and serious amateurs struggling to keep a lid on other trial-bred dogs that would surely run all over AJH in the field and at home. Doesn't mean all trial-bred stock is too hot for AJH, or that AJH won't love a wild dog that runs its own show afield and at home enough to think the sun rises and sets for it. Just means generalities are slippery suckers.


----------



## Dave Combs (Feb 28, 2003)

Polock said:


> But this is exactly the type of dog AJH will buy from, the BYB, because he has a friend who's dog can pick up a bird, hunted with a buddy who's dog hunted on a collar, watched him get a few ribbons at a HT, yada, yada, yada............the BYBs are everywhere and AJH doesn't know any better, so he buys one........but the dog remains ignorant and never learns anything nor does AJH........and the BYB just keeps breedin' cause he has a web site and a few ribbons on the wall.........bad hips, known CNM carrier, no OFA, British background, did it all in 6 months, yada,yada,yada...........but AJH doesn't know any better, so he contributes to the cause...........and the circle continues........


Good points - but what does this have to do with being British?



Saltmarsh said:


> They are all just a bunch of knotheads and will drive you to drink. Going to be getting me one of those gentleman's gundogs next time.


Nice subtlety - same question?




Rick Hall said:


> But one need look no further than the nearest hunt test to see professional trainers and serious amateurs struggling to keep a lid on other trial-bred dogs that would surely run all over AJH in the field and at home. Doesn't mean all trial-bred stock is too hot for AJH, or that AJH won't love a wild dog that runs its own show afield and at home enough to think the sun rises and sets for it. Just means generalities are slippery suckers.


Exactly what my original post was intended to get people to think about!!


----------



## gdluck (May 27, 2005)

Dave Combs said:


> Again, not trying to push buttons, but it seems to be more of a status symbol for them than what they truly can handle or need.



Or maybe its because they come to sights like this to get advice on buying their first pup from people in the know. Then the advice they get is to only buy the best they can afford from proven lines, FT/HT, with all the clearances.....................


----------



## Jason Gillette (Feb 9, 2007)

I started as a duck hunter. Got more dog than I needed but I was happy because he was not less than I needed. That dog got me to join a club, meet new friends and learn how to train. I found out this crazy sport could extend hunting season and I fell in love with it.

I'm still learning, still making friends and real happy I got a field trial bread dog 15 years ago.

Also, all our dogs live in the house and are part of the family. I have yet to have a hyper one that wasn't fun to have around at home. I think the high strung thing is over blown but maybe I've been blessed.


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Dave Combs said:


> Do you think dogs with heavy Field Trial lineage are too high strung for the average Joe hunter/ hunt tester?


Some...........


----------



## Aussie (Jan 4, 2003)

HiRollerlabs said:


> kelpies--breed of dog?
> burbs--suburbs?


Thankyou. Translation complete Keith? 

Nice hardy herding breed. 

I went to an Australian national herding competition one weekend. As with retriever breeds, the good ones were settled in their crates or tie ups, great manners while not working, but turned it right on when competing. 

Like when I observed US field dogs. I was so impressed with quads.


----------



## Bruce MacPherson (Mar 7, 2005)

Dave Combs said:


> Do you think dogs with heavy Field Trial lineage are too high strung for the average Joe hunter/ hunt tester?


I will contribute, with out subtly. Which FT lines would be considered or are you just going to lump them all together and take an average?
Some lines would be just fine for JAH, some would not.
Lacking any more specifics, that is probably all that can really be said about that subject Dave.

Mac


----------



## DRAKEHAVEN (Jan 14, 2005)

Bruce,board,

It is not so much as what lines, but what individual dogs. Selecting TRAITS. 
Personally know of 2 progeny by Ford, 1 could be run/trained by a total novice. 
She has all the tools in the world and is TITLED, FC 
Male sired by ford, FC titled, is the same and actually has a higher degree of quality in the tool box, ie; a more precise marker and better lining dog. His package also includes a DESIRE level that is off the scale, the AJH as we are now terming it would not have a prayer in H#LL of running/training the other guy simply because of the level of desire, which equates to the dog moving FASTER, thinking FASTE, and consequently getting in trouble FASTER. They are both wonderful dogs ANYONE, trialer or duck hunter would love to own.
It has nothing to do with the breeding, the pedigree, the LINE, it has everything to do with the TRAITS that dog has. There is an english dog who is/was a popular stud. 
When I questioned the owners as to level of desire and the whole calm easy to handle English thing. The response I recieved was....the good English ones are no diffrent than the good ones here. Same TRAITS.
________
vapir no2


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> Not really having fun Keith, just doing sorta....well...... 'research'.


My guess is _marketing_ research ....noting the recent stud ad that was put up.


----------



## Buzz (Apr 27, 2005)

DRAKEHAVEN said:


> When I questioned the owners as to level of desire and the whole calm easy to handle English thing. The response I recieved was....the good English ones are no diffrent than the good ones here. Same TRAITS.



Amen,

I know a guy that is a member of the Dakota HRC. He had a British dog from a well known kennel. I asked him about this, and he told me that the dog was the wildest and most vocal he'd ever had. You have to love genearlities. Good Lord, dogs from the same litter can be so different.


----------



## Dave Combs (Feb 28, 2003)

ErinsEdge said:


> My guess is _marketing_ research ....noting the recent stud ad that was put up.


ACTUALLY - NO, and I'm seriously insulted by this comment.

Who pissed in your cheerios this morning?

I guess because I'm not part of the US field trial cult that because I ask a simple question and eveyone gets defensive that I suddenly have vested interests. If that had been my intention don't you think that I would have mentioned my dogs in some part of the conversation? 
This has nothing to do with the US vs UK thing, but everyone just took it there because they got defensive over the pedigree of their dog. 

I've written several things and erased them all because unlike some people on this board I'm taking the high road.


----------



## Sue Kiefer (Mar 4, 2006)

Here's my 1 1/2 cets worth.
I agree somewhat with what allot of what everyone is saying.
Just a few comments to stir the pot.
Miriam........by watching the stud dog work you picked him to either sire your litter or purchase one of his puppies??(No offense please. I'm just pointed out something that I see in my business dealings with the public.)
Funny you should say that because that's the line I get from Johnny Q. Public when he buys from Joe Smoes dog "DuckBuster" and "Princess Tara". No pedigree "Just watched them dawgs work that ol field over their."And I knew that I wanta a pup outa that next breedin."Currently have 3 Labs in for training that fit that .
I have bred what I consider quality Fluffy's since 1991 and the public wants a well-bred Field Dog for the following reasons:
1. No health issues or a minimum of them.
2. Easy to train.
3. Not allot of Fluff.
As I see it...........It still sits with the breeders to educate the public when they call/e-mail you with regards to a puppy/started dog. It is their responsiblity.
My 1 1/2 cents worth > Carry on.................


----------



## Rick_C (Dec 12, 2007)

gdluck said:


> Or maybe its because they come to sights like this to get advice on buying their first pup from people in the know. Then the advice they get is to only buy the best they can afford from proven lines, FT/HT, with all the clearances.....................


Very good post.

I'm constantly chuckling at the snobbery of some on here that turn up their nose at any dog without 5 generations of dogs they recognize the names of in their pedigree and then turn around and turn up their noses at the thought of selling one of their pups to a non competitive/no name owner.

How many times do you see the phrase "competitive homes only" or "would "prefer" competitive home"??

You can't have it both ways. If you want the breed to improve by encouraging people to only buy from reputable breeders who obtain all the clearances, strongly consider each breeding they do etc... you have to be willing to sell your pups to anyone who will give them a safe, happy home regardless of whether or not they have the resources and/or inclinatin to campaign them.

Tell me again how it's not about the ribbons and/or money regards...


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

> ".............the snobbery of some on here that turn up their nose at any dog without 5 generations of dogs they recognize the names of in their pedigree ..........."


They have completely disregarded the genetic ramifications of the "popular sire" syndrome and the problems that goes along with it.

http://www.uskbtc.com/article.php/157

There is a reason that you shouldn't marry your half sister.

john


----------



## Gary Wayne Abbott I (Dec 21, 2003)

Dave Combs said:


> .....Reason I ask is that over the past few years I have seen quite a few people both experienced and not, with dogs from heavy FT pedigrees that are just completely out of control due, mostly, to the handler not being able to deal with the needs of the dog......



I too have seen the situation you describe but when I believe it to be a very minor problem in comparsion to the number of times I have seen a frustrated handler unable to get his "pointing or show or "white" yellow or dual purpose or english lab that are unable to get off heel in a upland situation, do a forty yard swim, or retrieve any bird at a higher rate of speed than a fast trot. 

I can likely blame the frustrated trial dog owner for inadequete training but not likely be able to blame the show dog owner save for his intial purchase decision for a dog that is clearly demonstrating a lack of basic drive. One is a training problem the latter is likely a genetic problem.


----------



## greg magee (Oct 24, 2007)

Gary Wayne Abbott I said:


> I too have seen the situation you describe but when I believe it to be a very minor problem in comparsion to the number of times I have seen a frustrated handler unable to get his "pointing or show or "white" yellow or dual purpose or english lab that are unable to get off heel in a upland situation, do a forty yard swim, or retrieve any bird at a higher rate of speed than a fast trot.
> 
> I can likely blame the frustrated trial dog owner for inadequete training but not likely be able to blame the show dog owner save for his intial purchase decision for a dog that is clearly demonstrating a lack of basic drive. One is a training problem the latter is likely a genetic problem.


Amen, I think that response sums up the whole thread.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

john fallon said:


> They have completely disregarded the genetic ramifications of the "popular sire" syndrome and the problems that goes along with it.
> 
> http://www.uskbtc.com/article.php/157
> 
> ...


Wow! Remind me not to get a Kerry Blue Terrier or a thoroughbred horse! ;-) I'm joking John!


----------



## Miriam Wade (Apr 24, 2003)

ginger69 said:


> Here's my 1 1/2 cets worth.
> I agree somewhat with what allot of what everyone is saying.
> Just a few comments to stir the pot.
> Miriam........by watching the stud dog work you picked him to either sire your litter or purchase one of his puppies??(No offense please. I'm just pointed out something that I see in my business dealings with the public.)
> ...


I guess I wasn't clear (seems to be a gift I have!). I was very much interested in the breeding for a long time. I corresponded w/ a lot of knowledgable Golden folks & did my homework. Clearances were a must. I don't feel I meet the criteria you posted above at all. However-after I had expressed an interest in the breeding-I was fortunate enough to see the dog run. To me-it is important to meet the dog & watch him run. Titles are all well & good, but if the dog has certain qualities that I either can't live with or conversely, are exactly what I'm looking for in a dog-how can it be a bad thing to partially base one's opinion on that?!?

Sure did like watcing that there dawg run tho-ayup!

M


----------



## DEDEYE (Oct 27, 2005)

HiRollerlabs said:


> kelpies--breed of dog?
> burbs--suburbs?


*Kelpies*:









*Working kelpie in the burbs*


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

Hey did you take that picture of my dog at the line the other day when that cock pheasant flew up?!?!?!?!


----------



## Aussie (Jan 4, 2003)

So, no one who has bred a field bred labrador returned to them, due to the dog being more than the original purchaser could handle? 

O, the shame of it all. I have. Returned nut case, has won the Australian national twice, so far.


----------



## greg magee (Oct 24, 2007)

Aussie said:


> So, no one who has bred a field bred labrador returned to them, due to the dog being more than the original purchaser could handle?
> 
> 
> I think if you go back and read post # 10, I was very honest about that. But it was only 1 dog and it was only a week after she went home. She then went to another first time dog owner and has been there for the past 11 years. I think that it's a lot like 1% of men admit to performing acts of self gratification and the other 99% lie. But even backyard breeders get dogs returned to them for the same reason.


----------



## Aussie (Jan 4, 2003)

Thanks Greg, went back and found your post. 

I cannot imagine a highly bred working breed dog being happy in a pet home, unless they were well exercised and mentally stimulated. How often do we hear of kennel pacing, star gazing, chewing themselves and objects, whining/barking, vocalising, ruining gardens and lawns by running the fence lines due to poor puppy placement. Mary including working farm kelpies. And some GSP's.


----------



## Joe Dutro (Nov 20, 2007)

Define a hunt test dog???? I have a female that should have been in FT's but due to my inexperience she is just a master hunter with more desire than most of the dogs you see at a hunt test. That is what the judges have told me not just my opion. She is a chocolate by the way.


----------



## Rick_C (Dec 12, 2007)

Desire Dogs said:


> Define a hunt test dog???? I have a female that should have been in FT's but due to my inexperience she is just a master hunter with more desire than most of the dogs you see at a hunt test. That is what the judges have told me not just my opion. *She is a chocolate by the way*.


Now you've done it! :razz:


----------



## DRAKEHAVEN (Jan 14, 2005)

Desire Dogs......If she's that good I'll buy her !!! Name your price!!!!!!!!


----------



## DRAKEHAVEN (Jan 14, 2005)

Desire Dogs......If she's that good I'll buy her !!! Name your price!!!!!!!!


----------



## DRAKEHAVEN (Jan 14, 2005)

OOOOOOPPPPPSSSS................
I'll still buy her since there have only been a handful of Chocolate Bitches worth their salt.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Dave Combs said:


> I guess because I'm not part of the US field trial cult that because I ask a simple question and eveyone gets defensive that I suddenly have vested interests. If that had been my intention don't you think that I would have mentioned my dogs in some part of the conversation?
> This has nothing to do with the US vs UK thing, but everyone just took it there because they got defensive over the pedigree of their dog.


I don't know about others, but I am dubious about your professed intentions given your previous criticisms of FT and FT dogs in previous posts


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Rick_C said:


> I'm constantly chuckling at the snobbery of some on here that turn up their nose at any dog without 5 generations of dogs they recognize the names of in their pedigree and then turn around and turn up their noses at the thought of selling one of their pups to a non competitive/no name owner.
> 
> How many times do you see the phrase "competitive homes only" or "would "prefer" competitive home"??


So, your position is that people who are trying to breed the best dogs for competition are supposed to sell them to people who don't want to compete?


----------



## Tim Thomas (Jan 31, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> So, your position is that people who are trying to breed the best dogs for competition are supposed to sell them to people who don't want to compete?


Good point Ted. One very important purpose and reward in breeding for these pups is that they go on to be competitive, otherwise all the costs in training the sire and dams to competitive levels, the semen costs, all the puppy expenses, not to mention the vet cost for insemenation and possible c-sections would be for nothing....most certainly bad business. I completely understand this smart business approach.


----------



## J. Torrey (Nov 11, 2007)

Aussie said:


> What does high strung mean? Nervous? Kennel pacer? Barking all day for want of something to do? Working kelpies in the burbs comes to mind.


LOL!! I own a Kelpie. I had him shipped out to work my cattle. Mine happens to be great. He loves going to Starbucks on Sundays and has no problem going head to head with a heifer and her calf. 

I read some of the the previous posts, but not all. Bottom line. If you don't care about retrieving or being active at all...... buy a show dog. If your lucky they will retrieve a squeaky toy in the yard.

If you have an active life style or hunt, then a trial dog will be a wonderful companion for you. 

Now there is a small % of FC Lines and newspaper dogs for that matter that won't match there homes. To much dog maybe? Have them evaluated for search and rescue or scent detection training. They love those dogs. Better to find a good home for the dog then keep it and be misserable. If you have one that pin point marks and is willing to learn....and you just can't handle it....Call me. I'll relieve you of that awful dog. I'll even pick it up. 

If you've tried more them one Labrador and they are still to much for you...Maybe try a gold fish. 

Good luck.


----------



## DRAKEHAVEN (Jan 14, 2005)

Jeff,

Your sense of humor is a mirror I look into daily ! LMAO. Hope to meet you some day.

JK


----------



## Jerry (Jan 3, 2003)

A dog, whether it's breeding is FT, HT or pound Mutt, is a lump of clay. The "Potter" is the key to the final sculpture!!!

Jerry


----------



## DRAKEHAVEN (Jan 14, 2005)

Amen, UNca Jer


----------



## Polock (Jan 6, 2003)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Combs 

I guess because I'm not part of the US field trial cult that because I ask a simple question and eveyone gets defensive that I suddenly have vested interests. If that had been my intention don't you think that I would have mentioned my dogs in some part of the conversation? 
This has nothing to do with the US vs UK thing, but everyone just took it there because they got defensive over the pedigree of their dog. 




Ted Shih said:


> I don't know about others, but I am dubious about your professed intentions given your previous criticisms of FT and FT dogs in previous posts


Dubious is an understatement..........Ted, I learned long ago that these kinda posts are nothing more than ignorant rubbish.......


----------



## Rick_C (Dec 12, 2007)

Ted Shih said:


> So, your position is that people who are trying to breed the best dogs for competition are supposed to sell them to people who don't want to compete?


Not exactly. 

If someone were to want the best dog they could afford and just wanted to have a superior hunting companion because they hunt much more than the average hunter and/or a dog for their guide service and they have no intention of competing the dog, would you sell them one of yours?

If someone was a weekend hunter, maybe ran a couple of hunt tests a year with their local club, but otherwise the dog would be a valued member of the family and a great hunting companion, would you sell them one of your dogs?

What I've been trying to say in this and another thread (and, obviously, not very well) is that it just seems a little hypocritical to me that SOME breeders tell everyone that asks about choosing a pup to buy the best they can afford from reputable breeders that do all the tests on their dogs, reasearch the potential pedigree's for their breeding, take care of the pups with great socialization, vaccinations etc... but then when someone in one of the situations described above knocks on their door about buying one of THEIR pups, they are turned away, or at least discouraged, because the breeder wants the pups to go to "competitive" homes. 

It seems to me that these are the folks that end up going to a "back yard breeder" type because they don't give a damn where the puppy goes as long as the check clears. 

So, by refusing to sell a pup to a non-competitive home, isn't that helping to create a market for these BYB's and puppy mills?

The bottom line is, and I totally agree, that the breeders have every right and responsibility to place their pups in the homes of their choice. I also understand the arguement you and other breeders of competitive dogs make, and I don't disagree with either of you. I'm simply asking the question by playing devils advocate.


----------



## Joe Dutro (Nov 20, 2007)

I understand where you are going with that,but I personally would hate to think that one of the pups in my liter was going to a non working home. When you try to breed to create a liter that will be full of DESIRE I would rather give the pups away to a working home than sell them for a premium price to a back yard breeder. I am finding out though how important it seems to be to have a FC in the sires or dam name as opposed to a MH in both names.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Rick_C said:


> If someone were to want the best dog they could afford and just wanted to have a superior hunting companion because they hunt much more than the average hunter and/or a dog for their guide service and they have no intention of competing the dog, would you sell them one of yours?
> 
> If someone was a weekend hunter, maybe ran a couple of hunt tests a year with their local club, but otherwise the dog would be a valued member of the family and a great hunting companion, would you sell them one of your dogs?
> 
> ...


 
Rick

I think you are simply stirring the pot.

You have now posted this proposition on several threads.

However, there is no proof that your scenario exists in the real world.

Who are the people that you claim are being turned down for "good" litters and being forced to buy puppies from "backyard breeders"? And how many of them are there?

It has been my experience that FC to FC litters all go to "competitive homes" and are typically sold before the pups ever hit the ground.

It has been my experience that FC sire to QAA/MH dams go to a variety of homes ... some competitive, some hunt test, some hunting, some pet

In short, I have not seen what you claim happens

Ted


----------



## Rick_C (Dec 12, 2007)

Desire Dogs said:


> I understand where you are going with that,but I personally would hate to think that one of the pups in my liter was going to a non working home. When you try to breed to create a liter that will be full of DESIRE I would rather give the pups away to a working home than sell them for a premium price to a back yard breeder. I am finding out though how important it seems to be to have a FC in the sires or dam name as opposed to a MH in both names.


Understood, but I wasn't referring to the dogs going to non working homes but non competitive (meaning hunt tests and/or field trial) homes.

I completely agree that someone just wanting a pet to lay on the couch and bring back the occasional tennis ball the grandkids threw for it should probably look more towards a show lines type of breeder as that dog would be more suited to their needs, as someone else recommended earlier in the thread.


----------



## Buzz (Apr 27, 2005)

Rick_C said:


> What I've been trying to say in this and another thread (and, obviously, not very well) is that it just seems a little hypocritical to me that SOME breeders tell everyone that asks about choosing a pup to buy the best they can afford from reputable breeders ... but then when someone in one of the situations described above knocks on their door about buying one of THEIR pups, they are turned away, or at least discouraged, because the breeder wants the pups to go to "competitive" homes.


Watching the classified ads, and knowing a few people who breed, I would conclude that there is an ample supply of extremely well bred dogs available to the hunter. There are so many in fact, the hunter can pick up one heck of a dog at a very reasonable price.


----------



## Rick_C (Dec 12, 2007)

Ted Shih said:


> Rick
> 
> I think you are simply stirring the pot.
> 
> ...


Actually Ted, that is an excellent distinction between two levels of "well bred" dogs and your point is well taken.

I personally have not seen this happen in practice either. What got me thinking about this is that, while trying to learn all I can about different dogs and breeders, I spend a lot of time on their web sites and looking at available litters on RTF and elsewhere and have seen many, many disclaimers or "competitive homes only" or "would prefer competitive homes". 

I appologize if I ruffelled any feathers. I really wasn't trying to pass judgement on anyone I was just trying to justify, in my own mind, the seemingly opposing statements.

I am a self proclaimed newbie to this and, admittedly, don't even know what I don't know but I learned a long time ago that the best way to learn is to ask questions and occasionally challenge view points.

You've actually given me a "light bulb" moment with your comments and I thank you for that.


----------



## Dave Combs (Feb 28, 2003)

Polock said:


> Quote:
> Dubious is an understatement..........Ted, I learned long ago that these kinda posts are nothing more than ignorant rubbish.......


...and I learned long ago that you are just plain ignorant!


----------



## Polock (Jan 6, 2003)

The statement was made in general terms....................personal attacks like yours aren't exceptable on RTF..................time too grow up Dave...........and go play in another sandbox.............maybe the wearing of dog vests and e-collars during tests is more yer cup of tea......


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

When you sling mud back, you both get dirty and nobody can tell who started it.

Lighten up fellas! 

If we all liked the same thing, every guy on the planet would be chasing Patrick's grandmother.

Chris


----------



## DH (Oct 3, 2006)

I'm new to retrievers and don't have a huge amount of experience but I've looked around at lots of dogs and formulated the start of an opinion. Most of the trial dogs I see are good dogs with lots of go. I do think that some average hunters with limited training experience could have some trouble dealing with breaking issues and handling a fast hard driving dog. It is just a matter of experience as a trainer and handler. 

To me how a dog acts around the house is irrelevant, if you can't control your dog in the house (any breed) you have no chance in the field so when people say "he's great around the house but hard charging in the field" that just tells me you are a good at training the dog to behave in the house. It doesn't tell me if an inexperienced trainer will be able to harness the dog's energy in the field. 

I think that most first time hunters would do well to get a dog from hunt test lines. It would give them a good well bred dog that is PROBABLY less likely to really challenge them in training. I think one of the issues some first timers have is that they don't feel comfortable using the necessary force that a hard charging dog can require. I know most of my friends gasp when they see me use a heeling stick to enforce sit and they would be very uncomfortable using an e-collar especially if more than level one or two was required. 

That being said, I've never seen a lab of any type that I don't think could live in my house. In fact I think it is funny when I read some of the comments about labs being high energy dogs. I grew up with Germand Shorthair Pointers and most recently had a Brittany, to me that's high energy. My Brittany needed a 5 mile run every morning or he would literally go bonkers and I usually ran him another 3 when I got home for work. Kind of miss it I was in great shape back then. Conversely, my 1 year old BLM is real fired up when he gets out of the crate but a brisk walk around the block settles him right down. 

In case anyone thinks mine is a couch potato, Rigby picked up 15 species of birds before his first birthday and will sit in the duck blind all day. He went hard in the uplands for pheasant, quail and grouse but rode quietly in the car for trips from VA to SD and TX. 

One of his full sisters is evidently tearing up the hunt tests down in Texas and if I was a better trainer we'd be father along on that route. We're going to try some tests this spring and see what happens.

DH


----------



## crackerd (Feb 21, 2003)

DH said:


> In case anyone thinks mine is a couch potato, Rigby picked up 15 species of birds before his first birthday and will sit in the duck blind all day. He went hard in the uplands for pheasant, quail and grouse but rode quietly in the car for trips from VA to SD and TX.


Show off. And who's your breeder, by the way...;>) Don't worry, I've lined up a good Cornell shrink (or two) to deprogram him from that cult thinking business.

MG


----------



## Captain Mike D (Jan 1, 2006)

Ted Shih;250734}
[FONT=Garamond said:


> It has been my experience that FC sire to QAA/MH dams go to a variety of homes ... some competitive, some hunt test, some hunting, some pet[/FONT]
> 
> 
> Ted


Bet the owners of Ford, Patton, Cruise and Jamie were happy their picks did not go to pet homes


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

That horse has been beaten to death! ANY field trial bred dog with training would make ANYONE with an ounce of training sense a good to great hunting dog, upland with minimal training and waterfowl with moderate training. By the way who is "Joe gundoghuntester" don't think I know him. It's kinda like the street answer if your a cop of who thier acomplice is " Joe somedude" .Lots of guys named somedude out there.


----------



## DH (Oct 3, 2006)

Ok crackerd Dave is the breeder of my dog but this isn't about me defending his position. I intentionally left that fact out because he's been accused of starting this to market his dogs already. 

The fact is folks on this board need to remember that the very fact they are here makes them far more dedicated than the average hunter and most of their friends probably are as well. 

Little story, this year one of my hunting buddies was considering getting a dog. He asked how I had trained Rigby (meaning sit, heal and here). My response was it was pretty easy to do the obedience if you get up early and do 15-20 minutes a day from the day you get the dog. His response was "Every day?" like that was a huge burden. Now this guy wound up getting a dog from a breeding of two nice hunting dogs nearby, the dam has some HT titled dogs in her pedigree. Now do you think this guy is going to do well with a dog from FT lines?

I've only been to a couple of trials and part of the Master National and a few hunt tests. But when I see a pro coming to the line with a dog that is really amped up and not healing well and in a couple cases vocalizing then my guess is that if a pro has control issues the average hunter is going to have some real problems. 

I detest backyard breeders and think that the vast majority of FT and HT dogs would make great hunting dogs. But I do think that someone new to the sport should probably not start with the highest rolling dog out there. It won't be any fun for the dog or trainer.

Crackerd we need to get together again soon, you won't believe how big Rigby has gotten.

DH


----------



## Buzz (Apr 27, 2005)

DH said:


> Now do you think this guy is going to do well with a dog from FT lines?


About the same as he'd do with any dog...


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

DH ---have you ever heard the term "trial wise or test wise" this doesn't have much to do with where the genetics comes from. Having said that some dogs genes are such that one needs to keep the standard up and have the experience to work within those parmeters.
Some dogs that a Pro might have ,inherited the antics from a amateur and/or a Pro with lower standards.


----------



## Judy Chute (May 9, 2005)

"Some dogs that a Pro might have ,inherited the antics from a amateur and/or a Pro with lower standards"...

Since Earl said it first ...I was going to post just that. The retriever might have come to the pro with bad habits.. Hopefully, the dog will improve as it goes...  

There are some retrievers, though, with great field pedigree that really will not do well in a home without structure, training..and exercise. A balance...plus lots of patience and time to mature. ...from actual experience, here!! Fun though..isn't it?? Gotta love'em! 

Judy


----------



## wheelhorse (Nov 13, 2005)

Judy Chute said:


> There are some retrievers, though, with great field pedigree that really will not do well in a home without structure, training..and exercise. A balance...plus lots of patience and time to mature. ...from actual experience, here!! Fun though..isn't it?? Gotta love'em!
> 
> Judy


Case in point is the Golden the Amy Dahl is keeping us updated on. Was turning into a problem dog, but with the structure and knowledge that Amy has, is now well on his way to being a good hunting dog.

Kathleen


----------



## Aussie (Jan 4, 2003)

J. Torrey said:


> LOL!! I own a Kelpie. I had him shipped out to work my cattle. Mine happens to be great. He loves going to Starbucks on Sundays and has no problem going head to head with a heifer and her calf.
> 
> I read some of the the previous posts, but not all. Bottom line. If you don't care about retrieving or being active at all...... buy a show dog. If your lucky they will retrieve a squeaky toy in the yard.
> 
> ...


Jeff, 

Was speaking to a fellow trialer just the other day regarding sound nerves and comparing working kelpies and field bred labradors. As far I am aware Australia and New Zealand are the countries who use kelpies and to a smaller extent Australian Cattle Dogs (my word the PRA carrier rate in that breed!!!), routinely for stock work. Anyway......most farm kelpies never leave the farm, so nerves might be harder to judge.


----------

