# Will FF damage breeding for natural retrievers



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

Just thinking - I see lots of threads and advocation for FF on retrievers - and I am thinking that if we continue to FF every dog for the type of response necessary for hunting/tests/trials could the natural ability and selection for natural retrieving suffer - IE if you are gonna force fetch every puppy or have to for the type of response necessary perhaps this will cover up big holes in natural selection - instead of selecting for natural retrieve and biddability perhaps selection criteria will morph to mental toughness and the ability to take pressure - to the deterrement of the breeds natural strengths?


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

will whoa training have an effect on the natural point? The answer is NO


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Retrievers have been trained with force fetch since at least the 1940s so if what you speculate might happen would have already happened. Quite the opposite has happened as today's Labradors are generally easier to train and require less collar pressure than they did 25-30 years ago, indeed my dogs could not tolerate the E collars that we used in the 70s and early 80s.


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

Well, if you are selecting for a really staunch point - the "whoa" just enhances the control - with FF you can cover up lots of things - I have FF lots of pointers and they do fine - but they had little retrieve to begin with but they did have the mental toughness to take the pressure to do that - biddability in pointers is different - they are encouraged to run just on the edge of control - with retrievers it seems to me it is all about control?


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

ShadowMagic said:


> Just thinking -
> to the deterrement of the breeds natural strengths?


Do you mean Retrieving?


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

You cannot force a dog to mark, to have style, to be trainable in the first place. Force fetch is MUCH more than making a dog retrieve in the retriever world. It is the start of polishing a retrieve, much like whoa would be in your world, but then as you continue there are many more layers than just making a dog retrieve. ( pressure conditioning , handling skills, taking away options like popping , no goes etc)


----------



## truthseeker (Feb 2, 2012)

I hear this all the time " It not natural if you use the collar" Trust me you can tell if the dog is out there because they want to be. The collar just makes the behavior more predictable and easier on the handler. A good dog will preform better With or with out the collar. The only difference is that with the collar, it takes a lot less time to finish the training.

Keith


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

Somewhat - more about biddability natural bonding and want to - many have that - my little puppy Gunny has that - but he does not come from field trial breeding in fact, only one MH in 5 generations - but at 10 wks he is chasing ducks and swimming and doing lots of stuff - I understand the purpose of field trials but when you breed for the extreme you sometimes lose other things - IE - in pointers we breed for extreme range 1/4 or 1/2 mile for All age dogs as well as mental, physical toughness and staunchness - because sometimes it takes 10 minutes or more to ride at a short lope on horses to get to the dogs - what we lose in that sometimes is wanting to hunt with you - because we have bred such extreme independence we sometimes get them too independent - if a certain breed - (name that breed) is bred for extreme - labs have changed in the 40 something years I have been around them - from very nice - blocky dogs around 60 lbs to extremely thin (but very athletic) light coated dogs - almost like they are more built to run than swim sometimes - I have pics of our first labs back in the 70s and if you were to compare them side by side - there has been a big physical change - 

Back to FF - we had two nice labs (neither was force fetched and 99.5% of the time delivered to hand - and even hunting huge water (Snake, Columbia and Yakima river) we had no reason to send dogs 300 yds on water retrieves - but they were built different - heavy coat, pretty blocky build and - by selecting for the extreme - have you left the ordinary hunter behind? Does FF cover that up? Or enhance it - just some thoughts - I like my field trial pointers and setters but they are not for every one


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

EdA said:


> Retrievers have been trained with force fetch since at least the 1940s so if what you speculate might happen would have already happened. Quite the opposite has happened as today's Labradors are generally easier to train and require less collar pressure than they did 25-30 years ago, indeed my dogs could not tolerate the E collars that we used in the 70s and early 80s.


I have a TT Judge collar that is at least 20+ years old and if it still charges it works. Had the plug you had to put on the collar and the levels were changed by changing the contact points. I wouldn't use that on a dog I hated today. It was nasty.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

There was a lot of talk back in the day ('70's) that the really high point FT dogs (there were no HT's back then) were really, really tough animals. To reach that high level of performance they tolerated/survived some brutal "conventional" training methods (*) or the coarse, intense burn of the early collars. 

Today's methods, honest-to-gosh, I swear to you, are way more sophisticated and can be highly adapted to the nature of the dog. If you read on this site long enough you'll see people describing dogs of all sorts of temperaments and how they can be managed and how their performance can be enhanced. If anything, the opposite of what you fear is taking place.

About the FF itself... it's really like grade school for a retriever. Assuming you want to go to "college" (a dog that goes enthusiastically on a blind retrieve, lines well, stops on a whistle and handles well... a dog that can be taught to fight factors and so forth) then you have to put them through grammar school. It's like teaching a kid to read. We know that reading in and of itself is a big deal. But more so... if you can't read, it limits what you can learn going forward. Just so, the FF lays the ground work so that the dog can learn to learn the advanced skills.

(*) I don't know if anyone who is old enough will have ever heard about what was called "the Itch drill"... the means by which they made Itching-to-Go (relatively) steady. Pretty tough stuff.


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

1tulip said:


> There was a lot of talk back in the day ('70's) that the really high point FT dogs (there were no HT's back then) were really, really tough animals. To reach that high level of performance they tolerated/survived some brutal "conventional" training methods (*) or the coarse, intense burn of the early collars.
> 
> Today's methods, honest-to-gosh, I swear to you, are way more sophisticated and can be highly adapted to the nature of the dog. If you read on this site long enough you'll see people describing dogs of all sorts of temperaments and how they can be managed and how their performance can be enhanced. If anything, the opposite of what you fear is taking place.
> 
> ...


Part myth...the trainers were tough ..and some that trained them were even tougher,which may have lead many to wrongly assume they were stubborn animals
Now with that said there were many instances where the heavy handed trainer might have accelerated the premature end to a dog's career by their heavy handed methods
Today's trainer is much more compassionate than their predecessors


----------



## Bruce MacPherson (Mar 7, 2005)

If FF was done solely for the purpose of "teaching" the dog to retrieve you might have a point but it's not.


----------



## Sharon Potter (Feb 29, 2004)

FF isn't about retrieving as much as it is about teaching a dog to handle training pressure in a very controlled environment.


----------



## Evan (Jan 5, 2003)

No it will not damage the breeds. If anything it will ultimately improve them as more stable, trainable dogs. When we perform training that improves performance we do not necessarily "cover up" any deficits in our dogs. What we do with training is to improve how they do things relative to how we want it done. Remember, most of what they do in their work is man made. It's only driven by certain natural desires and abilities. The skills are tasks we made up for them and assembled into a functional form. FF stabilizes all that, and forms impetus on demand. A trained dog lives and acts in a structured manner that makes them more efficient and useful. How much talent the dog is born with is enhanced. But nothing is covered up.

Evan


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

I might buy that except - I have trained pointers to retrieve - after all the steadiness is done - as far as a shot quail or pheasant is likely to fall - if the pointer marked it well he retrieved it - when we started training he had little natural retrieve (in gun fire conditioning we would throw a bird he would chase and then point until we picked up the bird - then he wanted it dead bird would sniff it then go on to find more birds or try too) - so we go out to demonstrate him on some pen raised quail - was steady to wing and shot and we sent him and he went out and picked it up and returned with the bird and delivered to hand. "I've never seen a pointer retrieve like that" bought the dog and went on his way.

I understand training concept of a conditioned response - with our pointers/setters we train somewhat differently - we let the wild birds teach our young dogs how much pressure they can take before flying away - after a ton of contacts some of our best ones will point and hold until the flush - the 'whoa' only comes into play in our presence (steady to wing and shot) works great except we are expecting those dogs to hold while we short lope up there over ravines, down hills and so forth, where the natural instincts of the dog keep them steady - only then can we even communicate the "whoa" to the dog - hopefully all the yard work will keep them there - but not always - have come back from the prairies and had dogs come unglued on throw down birds running all around them in plain sight - 

Not sure I can yet see the relationship of FF to training response yet - course I haven't run drill after drill either on crazy set ups that few dogs will ever encounter in a hunting environment but I look forward to the challenge - all my experience comes from NAVHDA dogs, NSTRA, AKC Hunt Tests (pointing breeds) AKC field trials (pointing breeds) and American Field horseback and walking shooting dogs - I did have one AKC Hunt Test dog (just a Junior Hunter) that I guided duck and goose hunts with in the Pacific Northwest that was pretty good - but never saw a triple retrieve with a bull dog or a blind through the triple either - The only thing I really did to him was teach him to \"Hold" he did handle to multiple blinds on shot chukar that sailed to bottom of canyon and a few ducks that sailed across the Yakima but not nearly as nicely done as the few MH I did watch when I was gunning at the local retriever Hunt tests in the mid-late 90s, but he did handle to them and deliver to hand - at that time he was trained to Senior Hunter Standards - but was too busy training everyone else's dogs to train him much

Trying to understand how "fetch or force fetching" enhances a dogs natural ability - I understand that "whoa" does because everything revolves around that one command ' in the most simple terms "whoa" means stop plant your feet and don't move until released" but takes a whole lot less time than FF - most dogs will be "whoa" broke quickly perhaps 2-3 weeks and FF takes much longer and more reps - so the question comes are you actually enhancing a natural retrieve or making FF become the basis for the retrieving instinct? - Not sure I phrased that right


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

Bruce MacPherson said:


> If FF was done solely for the purpose of "teaching" the dog to retrieve you might have a point but it's not.


This would be my take as well. FF has nothing to do with retrieving really. A dog that wont retrieve before FF wont do it after FF either. Not sure how this would change anything as far as natural abilities go.


----------



## cakaiser (Jul 12, 2007)

badbullgator said:


> This would be my take as well. FF has nothing to do with retrieving really. A dog that wont retrieve before FF wont do it after FF either. Not sure how this would change anything as far as natural abilities go.


Agree.
And in fact, the dog that we are least likely to put through a force program, is the dog with little retrieve.


----------



## crackerd (Feb 21, 2003)

Bruce MacPherson said:


> If FF was done solely for the purpose of "teaching" the dog to retrieve you might have a point but it's not.


He _*has *_a point from a pointing dog trainer's perspective, it's just N/A to performance retrievers. As most learn when they come over to serious retriever training, especially if they come over to it from NAVHDA. Over there, they may still ask, in all seriousness, if training with the e-collar also might mask a gundog's deficiencies for the sake of future breeding. 

MG


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

badbullgator said:


> I have a TT Judge collar that is at least 20+ years old and if it still charges it works. Had the plug you had to put on the collar and the levels were changed by changing the contact points. I wouldn't use that on a dog I hated today. It was nasty.


I still have my first "Judge", it was nasty. It could well be the reason my first dog soured on training after he got his MH, and I stepped up training when I got my first FT dog.


----------



## Bubba (Jan 3, 2003)

Interesting. Doesn't seem to matter how many times this turd floats by- someone is sure to jump on it and feed the trolls.

Expired Equine regards

Bubba


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

ShadowMagic;1266012)
[I said:


> [/I]*Trying to understand how "fetch or force fetching" enhances a dogs natural ability - I understand that "whoa" does because everything revolves around that one command ' in the most simple terms "whoa" means stop plant your feet and don't move until released" but takes a whole lot less time than FF - most dogs will be "whoa" broke quickly perhaps 2-3 weeks and FF takes much longer and more reps - so the question comes are you actually enhancing a natural retrieve or making FF become the basis for the retrieving instinct? - Not sure I phrased that right*




I don't mean to take this out of context, I just wanted to highlight this part of your post. I don't believe FF enhances the dogs "natural ability", like other's have posted it's just one step in the process of teaching our dogs how to learn. Most any retriever out of field trial lines is going to have an excess of retrieve desire (natural ability) built in, so the fetch and return is not an issue. The big issue for those of us that want to compete at a high level, is that there will be times in training that are not fun for the dog. We will ask and insist that our dogs do things that go against their wishes, like angling into a thin slice of water rather than taking the more natural, much faster running down the shore rout to a mark. This is especially true with a fast dog that has a lot of drive to retrieve. We will have to apply pressure in one form or another to make this a fool proof response, FF is the first step toward that, basically one of the first tools we put in our tool box of advanced training.

John


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

The nature comes into it when you have a litter of 6week old retriever puppies, incessant about carrying things around. FF is only a process to formalize it, and build a working relationship around natural drives. As long a I still have to chase pups around the yard to find things they have moved, while "helping", or take interesting things out of their mouths that they decide to bring to me; I don't think I'll worry about a lack of retriever instinct. 

You can train a lab to point, some might even have a bit of that instinct bred in, however they will never point like a pointing breed gundog. But still all dogs used to point even the natural pointing breeds get whoa-ed. Why? Same reason natural retrievers get FF. We all get trained on the proper way to do our job, then we can be held responsible for do it correctly.


----------



## Dave Flint (Jan 13, 2009)

crackerd said:


> He _*has *_a point from a pointing dog trainer's perspective, it's just N/A to performance retrievers. As most learn when they come over to serious retriever training, especially if they come over to it from NAVHDA. Over there, they may still ask, in all seriousness, if training with the e-collar also might mask a gundog's deficiencies for the sake of future breeding.
> 
> MG


This is an important point. I believe the concept of FF began in the pointing dog world where it's purpose was to make a dog w/ little or no desire to retrieve do so.

It's use in the retriever world is for a completely different reason-to teach the dog to respond correctly to applied pressure in an environment where he can't escape or avoid. It's a building block for future training.

As to the danger of it masking a dog w/ little or no retrieving instinct, it hasn't happened to this point & I don't think it's a concern simply because even a FF'd dog w/out the natural desire will not achieve the level of performance that makes him desirable breeding stock.


----------



## RMC$$$ (Oct 1, 2012)

I think retrieving is the natural prey drive in the dog to pursue the bird. Most puppies will pick things up and carry them around. We enhance those natural instincts with correct training.


I used to have several pointers and I force fetched them all. From my perspective it was more about building the relationship between me and the dog. Going through the force fetch process correctly with the dogs finalizes the pecking order in their mind. Most pointers will at least pickup the dead bird naturally, they just don't want to deliver cleanly to hand. They would rather go and find the next bird (either shot or live). This is the same with retrievers. They would rather go get the next bird than come to heel and patiently wait for the handler to take the bird from them. An example is diversion birds in hunt tests. They want to run to the falling bird. We teach them to deliver to our standard not theirs. 

Point is a natural hesitation when the dog scents the bird. We enhance that with training. Many old time trainers would let young dogs bump and chase birds until they realized the could not catch them. That is a long and tedious process unless you have lots of land and lots of birds that are flight conditioned enough not to be caught. I believe that whoa should be taught completely away from pointing birds. If you use too much pressure around birds with either pointers or retrievers you can cause them to associate the pressure with finding birds. That is why you should start retrieving with dummies and progress to birds. The gold standard in pointing dog training is Hunt Smith. They are like the Lardy Program for retrievers. 

I was around Rick and Ronnie Smith briefly years ago and they think like dogs. I used to wonder if they turned in circles before they laid down.


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

ShadowMagic, go ahead and test your own theory.

Buy a dozen Lab pups from assorted pet stores.
Buy a dozen Lab pups from breedings of FT titled parents, with 90% or more of the ancestry since the 60's also being titled.

Then see what percentage from each pool you have running 50 yard marks and delivering to hand at 9-10 weeks of age.

You do realize that most Retrievers don't start FF until they are about 6 months old right?

Don't you think that the ones that ultimately succeed in training were picking up and delivering marks long before they were 6 months old?


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

copterdoc said:


> ShadowMagic, go ahead and test your own theory.
> 
> Buy a dozen Lab pups from assorted pet stores.
> Buy a dozen Lab pups from breedings of FT titled parents, with 90% or more of the ancestry since the 60's also being titled.
> ...


I suppose the best test/theory would be to have a dozen pro lab trainers have a dozen labs each that were not from FT parentage?
Bet that would sort out the men from the boys 
Certainly test the programs too!!

Them in the game select from the pool that is in the game. So statistics and percentages will always be biased .


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

Copter Doc - I have never bought into the theory that only good dogs come from field trial lines - if I did I would not have been successful with llewellin setters dogs that have not been trialled in 60 yrs - I have seen alot of really good dogs come from just plain old meat dogs and I have seen duds too - but I can say the same thing for field trial lines - - I have never FF'd any dog before they were over a year old - just like I don't teach steady to wing and shot until they are on average between one and two years old - because they are still puppies - and for the most part not ready to take the pressure associated with being broke - I assume that FF is similar - nor have I ever subscribed to the theory that you should push a dog faster than it is ready to be pushed - I am not interested in having bragging rights "I had the youngest MH in breed history" - to me that is just dumb.

But, I have taught dogs with little/no retrieve to retrieve through the FF process - but again - birds seldom fall more than 50 yds from the point in south and west Texas quail country - they may run like the devil but generally speaking the dog will either track it and re-point it or retrieve it depending on the dog - and I am generally not gonna tell the dog to "fetch" unless I am 100 percent sure it is the bird - since experience has taught me - that it may be another covey of quail.

When you select for extreme traits - be it endurance, mental toughness or marking or whatever - you can only push the envelope so far - if you are teaching dogs to run 300 yds to a blind other traits will suffer - somewhere - it could be build, endurance, marking ability any number of things - in the pointer world we may breed for extreme independence - we get dogs that run on the edge of control sometimes up to a mile from us (yep, I have had them on a Garmin at that range) and turning them at that distance from my horse (cueing on it) and I have had them on point for up to 15 minutes while I made my way over ravines and terrain to flush for them - we have done this by breeding extreme staunchness in them - and yes I do teach dogs by lots and lots of contacts on birds every summer in South Dakota at summer camp - but in doing so we have lost retrieve and dogs that are sometimes not the biddable a single minded pursuit of one thing and that can be a problem sometimes - 

So, if you are breeding a dog that needs to be able to run a straight line for 300 yds and you must FF them to do that - are you possibly losing something there - and if you are breeding for that and the mental toughness to take the type of pressure necessary to do that - is this detrimental to the breed as a whole? Back in 1999 when I was training for Bert Carlson - there were two other trainers that were doing retrievers then - made comments that Master Tests had become mini qualifying test/trials (yes I know they are different) - and if you breed a type of dog that can take that kind of pressure - will it work for your normal hunter? 

I guess my question thought is that if you test to the extreme, you have to breed to the extreme and pretty soon you will hit a wall and at some point you come to a point of diminishing returns -


----------



## copterdoc (Mar 26, 2006)

A Retriever is 100% genetics and 100% training.
One doesn't replace the other.

We don't force fetch these dogs to compensate for a lack of natural ability. 
The dog with the greatest natural abilities, will always be the best dog that we could have possibly trained.

We also do not force fetch to make a Retriever out of a non-retriever.

We force fetch so that we can train the Retriever to handle.
We force fetch so that we can make corrections during retrieves.
We force fetch so that we can maintain momentum in the face of counter momentum influences.

We force fetch so that we can ultimately train a finished Retriever.

A dog that picks up a simple mark and delivers it to hand, is far from being a finished Retriever.
We can easily get our young puppies to do that, without doing much if any training. And certainly without force fetching them.


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

Should be a doddle with a Flatcoat !


----------



## Criquetpas (Sep 14, 2004)

ShadowMagic said:


> Just thinking - I see lots of threads and advocation for FF on retrievers - and I am thinking that if we continue to FF every dog for the type of response necessary for hunting/tests/trials could the natural ability and selection for natural retrieving suffer - IE if you are gonna force fetch every puppy or have to for the type of response necessary perhaps this will cover up big holes in natural selection - instead of selecting for natural retrieve and biddability perhaps selection criteria will morph to mental toughness and the ability to take pressure - to the deterrement of the breeds natural strengths?


Naw! Been force fetching retrievers since 1964. I can't remember one of those "natural retrievers" and there were dozens and dozens of them that met their demise by force fetching. I started with Golden Retrievers and many of the current pedigrees today will show the "old guys" that were force fetched back then. Even put a couple of CDX's on force fetched dogs. In fact force fetch is the foundation of any modern e-collar program. I grew up in the era of shoot, boot and electrocute and don't want to go there in even talking about it. FF is the best thing that ever happened to our modern retrievers along with the e-collar!


----------



## Fire N Ice (Nov 12, 2007)

Copterdoc: You can't fix stupid. Convince the ignorant. Help the unaccomplished. Good try though.


----------



## David Lo Buono (Apr 6, 2005)

Fire N Ice said:


> Copterdoc: You can't fix stupid. Convince the ignorant. Help the unaccomplished. Good try though.


 You're not kidding


you read this thread and then find out he/she ran their first ever HT a JH of course....A microcosm of this site


----------



## Im_with_Brandy (Apr 22, 2010)

ShadowMagic said:


> When you select for extreme traits - be it endurance, mental toughness or marking or whatever - you can only push the envelope so far - if you are teaching dogs to run 300 yds to a blind other traits will suffer - somewhere - it could be build, endurance, marking ability any number of things - in the pointer world we may breed for extreme independence - we get dogs that run on the edge of control sometimes up to a mile from us (yep, I have had them on a Garmin at that range) and turning them at that distance from my horse (cueing on it) and I have had them on point for up to 15 minutes while I made my way over ravines and terrain to flush for them - we have done this by breeding extreme staunchness in them - and yes I do teach dogs by lots and lots of contacts on birds every summer in South Dakota at summer camp - but in doing so we have lost retrieve and dogs that are sometimes not the biddable a single minded pursuit of one thing and that can be a problem sometimes -
> 
> So, if you are breeding a dog that needs to be able to run a straight line for 300 yds and you must FF them to do that - are you possibly losing something there - and if you are breeding for that and the mental toughness to take the type of pressure necessary to do that - is this detrimental to the breed as a whole? Back in 1999 when I was training for Bert Carlson - there were two other trainers that were doing retrievers then - made comments that Master Tests had become mini qualifying test/trials (yes I know they are different) - and if you breed a type of dog that can take that kind of pressure - will it work for your normal hunter?
> 
> I guess my question thought is that if you test to the extreme, you have to breed to the extreme and pretty soon you will hit a wall and at some point you come to a point of diminishing returns -


Going to step it but what the heck. Yes, I do believe if you breed with a narrow focus on behavioral traits at the expense of others you may diminish those other traits. FF in and of itself is not the problem, but the willingness of a breeder to breed retrievers that have no desire to pick up items. Not saying the dog doesn't have chase desire but that it has no possession desire. If indeed it is a genetic trait for a line of dogs then I can see that being an issue that would have to be corrected with FF. And as you elude to FF in that case is being used to mask genetic trait in that line of dogs.

Trainers start out pups retrieving first and don't do FF or pressure associated with the retrieve (IE marbles and slingshots) until after the dog has already proven that it will retrieve. Often pups that show no desire to retrieve are not utilized past this age. But how would a breeder know this if they sell the pup before training begins. They would have a pretty good idea based on the parents. That not to say that a good breeding can't have a dud in the litter.

The unwillingness to posses can be problematic for an amateur trainer that does not FF their dog.

Keep in mind that an overly possessive dog may need more FF training than one with a less possessive trait. Having a dog turn its head to avoid giving up a bird can be just about as frustrating as one that drops it 3 feet in front of you. 

I did have a breeder tell me "I don't care about natural ability I want a dog that can handle the pressure I can force it to do the rest". Won't ever purchase a dog from that breeder.

Since I don't use e-collars in my training natural ability and bid-ability are very important to me. I have to have a dog that has desire to chase and posses other wise I have nothing to bargain with during training.

One big note for you to keep in mind, the measurement used to measure success in breeding is often field trials and to the lesser hunt test. Regardless if you agree with the methods asking breeders and trainers in these forums who use proven methods for achieving success in these events to second guess what works for them is fruitless at the least.


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

_







Originally Posted by *Fire N Ice* 
Copterdoc: You can't fix stupid. Convince the ignorant. Help the unaccomplished. Good try though.

_

You're not kidding

you read this thread and then find out he/she ran their first ever HT a JH of course....A microcosm of this site



If you had read the WHOLE post on 1st hunt test you would have found out that under my name Denise Caskey it says (The GF). Oh at that GF stands for Girlfriend, in case you didn't know...:razz:

Keith didn't run his 1st hunt test this weekend, I did. And yes I ran in JH but you have to start somewhere, right? 

My views are MY views and do not imply or represent the views of Keith or anyone else....and yes I say whats on my mind. So before you go off and state things you need to read the whole post(s).....name and all.

As to the fact that you need lots of champions in the bloodlines, I will give you my thougths....but from something other than dogs. I have trained and run lots of barrel racing horses in my time. That piece of paper with all those bloodlines on it doesn't make a horse any better than one without papers...(of unknown lineage). If the horse (or dog) has it he/she has it....it takes lots of talent (natural ability), a big heart, tremendous drive, and a love of what you want to "train" them to do....plain and simple. You can have a high bred horse with lots of know champions in the bloodlines of whatever (racing, working cow horse, cutting, roping or barrel racing) and still have an idiot. And the same goes with a horse without papers or one with no champions in the bloodlines. Either they have or they don't.....

The reason someone looks at the bloodline and says "Oh I have to have a horse (or dog) out of this bloodline" is because everyone else does. Its the going thing (the fad at the time). No one looks at ALL the others out of that lineage that didn't make it...do they? I call it trying to keep up with the Jones'....if the Jones' have one then I have to get one....lol

Someone... somewhere...says this is the best of the best...

Well the "best" should never rest cause the rest is knocking on your door to take your spot....

There's always a next big thing whether its a horse, dog.....or man...thats just the way it is.....lol

Denise Caskey
(The GF)​

you read the last line right?


----------



## Colonel Blimp (Jun 1, 2004)

A very wise old engineering inspector once said to me "It'll all pass if you don't test it."

To test if FF alone, as opposed to breeding practices, has brought about any changes for better or worse in competition dogs within the US would be impossible, and given the level of satisfaction within the FT / HT community pretty pointless anyway. 

When we breed retrievers (and other aminiles) for high performance we stick to and try to improve existing lines and then take the resultant youngsters for what they are and proceed to train them. We don't however have a measure of "natural ability" that can be relied on; sure we can make subjective assessments as the training proceeds, but we're not in a position to say "Natural ability consists of the following nine characteristics, and this dog obtained the following scores. That dog over there scored rather more and is a better prospect." The best we can do is say that this dog's got it and that one hasn't, based on our own experience and observation.

So it's just as valid to say "IMO FF has degraded the dogs" as to say "No it hasn't" because there is no scale of measurement available; judgement yes, measurement, no.

To go back to my old mentor Joe Bayley's statement it has always seemed to me that competition doesn't test some of the things we value in the hunting field, and if we aren't checking it all the dogs will all pass no matter what. Stamina for one, game sense for another, and under some test formulas, nose. 

Denise posted


> The reason someone looks at the bloodline and says "Oh I have to have a horse (or dog) out of this bloodline" is because everyone else does.


I await the non thoroughbred horse that wins the Arc or The Derby or the Breeders Cup with some anticipation. If you see one coming along let me know, the odds should be well worth a punt. About a million to one! 

I did make a nice little tickle on Treve in The Arc a couple of weeks back; sired by a Derby winner who was sired by an Arc winner, she's got Northern Dancer on both sides in her fourth generation and judgement (not measurement ;-)) says it's not a coincidence. 






Eug


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

polmaise said:


> I suppose the best test/theory would be to have a dozen pro lab trainers have a dozen labs each that were not from FT parentage?
> Bet that would sort out the men from the boys
> Certainly test the programs too!!
> 
> Them in the game select from the pool that is in the game. So statistics and percentages will always be biased .


Yes, we do. I am a field trialer (pointing breeds) trained with some of the best in the game too - amateurs and pros alike - competed against them. However, none of my FC's (or those I trained) or American Field champions - have ANY ancestors closer than 60 yrs ago with any field trial titles - because I run and ran llewellin setters. We as a breed have 3 FC's 2 AFC's in the AKC game perhaps more - and probably 20 dogs total got field trialled and perhaps 10 past derby ( more now though) and that has come a long ways in the few years since trialling started in llewellin breeds - so yes percentages are in your favor - but not always.


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

Fire N Ice said:


> Copterdoc: You can't fix stupid. Convince the ignorant. Help the unaccomplished. Good try though.


Unaccomplished? I have over 200 field trial wins both American Field and AKC - I have had a walking shooting dog ABHA National Open Invitational Shooting Dog Champion and Runner Up champion in 2012 - NSTRA CH, AND AKC FC's/AFC's that I have trialed. No, I am not in the same league as Sean Kinklaar, or Ferrel Miller or Ike Todd but I have spent hours in the saddle training with some of the best amateurs and pro's in the pointing dog game - my best friend Jim Michaletz had a dog name Jetsetter Grand Junction not to many years ago - and you grouse triallers might know the name Scott Chaffee too. Coming off a horse and breaking your neck and laying out on the prairie for over 24 hours before you summoned the strength to walk/crawl 7 miles to get help has a way of making you reconsider getting on a horse to continue to play. I have never had more than a handful of trial dogs - because I train for the most part just plain old hunting dogs for west and south Texas quail hunters. 

Although I do agree that certain types of venues cater to a certain type of dog - they are apples and oranges here - probably why there are no GSP's at the National Bird Dog Championship in Grand Junction - it is dominated by pointers and a few setters. 

But, we all have opinions and there is more than one way to skin a cat

Keith Hickam


----------



## crackerd (Feb 21, 2003)

Colonel Blimp said:


> When we breed retrievers (and other aminiles) for high performance we stick to and try to improve existing lines and then take the resultant youngsters for what they are and proceed to train them. We don't however have a measure of "natural ability" that can be relied on; sure we can make subjective assessments as the training proceeds, but we're not in a position to say "Natural ability consists of the following nine characteristics, and this dog obtained the following scores. That dog over there scored rather more and is a better prospect." The best we can do is say that this dog's got it and that one hasn't, based on our own experience and observation.


Bingo, Eug, and oh by the way



> got Northern Dancer on both sides in her fourth generation









​ X​ 
Continues to be the spanielers (yourself, Dave Flint and moi the pseud excluded) and pointing dog people (trialers) who can't, don't or won't grasp that force fetch entails an altogether different purpose for retrievers. (Then again, the pointing dog wizards also "sing" - aer kid you not - to their dogs in trials as their way of maintaining control at distance.)

And NAVHDA has the greatest misnomered dodge of all afoot - their "Natural Ability test." Which gets aced by the dogs that have, er, had the most training up to that point - that point being up to the age of 16 months.

Like I say, the aforementioned don't, won't or cannae "get" it - until if and when they come over to serious retriever training. And that's not those serious trainers who liken retriever training to dolphin behaviour of retrieving a fish _*from*_ a trainer's hand...

MG


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

ShadowMagic said:


> Yes, we do. I am a field trialer (pointing breeds) trained with some of the best in the game too - amateurs and pros alike - competed against them. However, none of my FC's (or those I trained) or American Field champions - have ANY ancestors closer than 60 yrs ago with any field trial titles - *because I run and ran llewellin setters.* We as a breed have 3 FC's 2 AFC's in the AKC game perhaps more - and probably 20 dogs total got field trialled and perhaps 10 past derby ( more now though) and that has come a long ways in the few years since trialling started in *llewellin breeds* - so yes percentages are in your favor - but not always.


There should be no -'Because' ?
...............
Just need another 11 and that dozen will be proof?


----------



## David Lo Buono (Apr 6, 2005)

ShadowMagic said:


> _
> 
> 
> 
> ...


cool story bro...


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

Another thread not worth reading the multitude of responses
However I have one question; Is the title of the thread a joke?


----------



## mathewrodriguez (May 11, 2011)

South Texas is hot, real hot with short trees and brush. It's where the saying, _"So hot you could fry an egg on rock"_ came from. Get up on a horse and you're out of the shade.


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

Criquetpas said:


> Naw! Been force fetching retrievers since 1964. I can't remember one of those "natural retrievers" and there were dozens and dozens of them that met their demise by force fetching. I started with Golden Retrievers and many of the current pedigrees today will show the "old guys" that were force fetched back then. Even put a couple of CDX's on force fetched dogs. In fact force fetch is the foundation of any modern e-collar program. I grew up in the era of shoot, boot and electrocute and don't want to go there in even talking about it. FF is the best thing that ever happened to our modern retrievers along with the e-collar!


Yep and hot shots were too - and maybe still are - IF you have to FF a dog with an e-collar in a building foundation (I have seen some posts that this is happening at 6 months) perhaps there is something wrong with either the testing process or the breeding process. I understand how e-collars are a blessing to pro trainers and amateurs alike and would never want the tool taken away from any one - and I understand that whether it is "whoa" breaking or FF you teach that in a yard before you ever go out and try to reinforce it in training - 

As I said I come from a totally different venue - perhaps summing it up like this - pointer guys value independence and perhaps retriever guys value control - sometimes to the extreme - We don't expect our dogs to be broke before they are two years old (some are not even ready by then) and to that end there is a whole lot of red shirting going on (but that is another discussion for a different board) field trials and hunt tests evolve - and I know that but at some point you are gonna run into a wall on where and how far you can go with your breeding - but if you have to use FF to get a finished retriever because in the end it seems FF is less about retrieving and more about control - then has the game evolved to a point beyond what the average hunter needs and breeding dogs for FT's and the ability to take that kind of pressure - results in dogs that can take that kind of pressure, and at least in the pointer/setter world results in dogs that are too hot to handle for the average hunter. Perhaps by breeding dogs that can be FF and teaching FF you are doing a service to all the hundred of lab owners out there that just duck hunt or shoot pheasants over their dogs - I don't know - but I do know with any FT breedings in the pointer AA world out of a 100 dogs you may get 5 dogs that are true AA dogs and perhaps another handful of shooting dogs and a whole lot that are neither and unsuitable for the average bird dog guy.

I have duck hunted ALOT in the past and I have never shot a duck at 300 yds much less three or 4 of them, I have also bird hunted ALOT and except for hunting chukar - there is no need to have a dog that consistently runs 1/2 mile in front of a handler or more - except perhaps south and west TX quail hunters on gun trucks or plantation hunts on horseback

In the pointer world - you get people training dogs, and judging and setting up tests that have never bird hunted in their lives all they know is testing/trialling and I am sure this probably happens in the retriever world too - so if the end goal is to breed better dogs for your consumer (the average Joe duck hunter or bird hunter) and FT/HT's is the way you evaluate your breeding stock on an artificial set up in an artificial game are you then breeding better duck dogs or bird dogs or just better HT/FT dogs? And if FF is part of this process - you may be losing something in the translation - things like calmness in the blind - ability to use their nose to find the bird, rather than just relying on you - Have you guys never seen a hard hit bird sail off a mountain and drop like a stone - I have and although I had an idea of where the bird was - I did not know exactly where the bird fell - in fact it was 100 yds further than where I thought it had went down - yes, I was able to handle Shadow (my lab - that I guided with) to the area I thought the bird had fallen into and I gave him my hunt it up whistle from the top of a ridge in broken chukar country and Shadow came up with the bird way further than I had thought - Shadow was not FF in his life but delivered to hand all the time (because he had from the time he was an 8 wk old puppy) but I digress - in this scenario in even a JH test Shadow would have been dropped because "if you handle, you must handle to the bird" again a real world scenario (chukar hunting in Washington) vs an artificial test or set up - 









Yep, that is a setter and a lab hunting together - Dancer was a great retriever for a setter - Shadow was a great flushing dog and retriever - Shadow through some training would honor Dancer - when I started hunting them together and Dancer was pointing - I would blow a sit whistle and flush the birds and shoot them and Dancer and Shadow would pick up the birds - pretty soon when Shadow saw Dancer pointing he would sit on his own - Shadow's specialty in that scenario was chukar (you might hit a chukar and they would set their wings and sail) to the bottom of a hill or draw or due to the terrain you might hit a bird like a tower shot and that bird's momentum might carry it anywhere from 50 to 300 yds - I would mark it best I could - send Shadow and using whistles and hand signals - sometimes they were dead where they landed and sometimes they ran like little track stars and Shadow had to track them down and most of the time he came up with the bird - or you and a buddy are hunting on big water - in this case the Snake River and you drop 3 birds - they hit dead in the water but another bird comes in late and gets hit but only has a broken wing - and is making a wake to the opposite shore - multiple shots with steel shot on the water to kill the bird while your dog (in my case Shadow) is bringing the first of 3 dead birds floating in a small cove while the wing bird is making tracks to catch the current of river - do you want your dog to switch to go get the wounded bird that may be lost or stick with the ones you know ain't going anywhere - the duck hunter is likely to say - I want the dog to switch and get the wounded bird - a FT/HT guy (if they have never hunted ducks in the real world) is gonna light the dog up because he is switching - So, again ask yourselves are you breeding for the average Joe duck hunter or are you breeding dogs to win field trials and are the breedings you are producing suitable for the duck hunter. How many times have you read in an ad on these boards "Such and Such breeding $ TO FIELD TRIAL HOMES ONLY" and then ask yourself why that is?

When I trained Shadow (as a duck hunter) I had never heard of FF to retrieve - always expected delivery to hand (and got it) and the only thing I knew about training a retriever is what I learned from my dad (plain old meat hunter) and what I read in James Lamb Free's book - yet there was a dog (only a JR Hunter) that had literally hundreds and many more than that - ducks, geese, chukar and pheasant shot for him - and never had an ecollar on him - although I can remember two instances hunting the Columbia (Lake Umatilla) where I wished I had for bringing him back when a wounded duck caught the current and Shadow chased it out of sight on a cold winter morning where the mist coming off the river obscured him - both times after lots of minutes where I thought he was gone for good here he comes one over the rocks along the shore line and the other where the morning was clear and we could see all the way across the Columbia at the tugs and barges going up the main channel - my friend Steve Evans (was a Police sniper and former Ranger) estimated the distance to the duck at 1/4 to a 1/2 mile before Shadow got the duck and came back - granted this was over 20 yrs ago now (and now I would never dream of training a dog without an ecollar and I never turn my setters/pointers loose without a Garmin on them) but in those days the E-collars had one setting and it was either a plug you put in it or a prong you screwed in it that was color coded and pray you didn't forget which prong was in it when you switched dogs to train - variable intensity e-collars are great now - but the uninitiated and uniformed or the imprudent use of one can crush a dog hard - but then again back in the day so could a check cord a flushing whip or bird shot, but if you are breeding for an extreme you will get it - and how many first time owners out there can FF a dog without crushing it? I guess the answer is as diverse as the individuals doing it.


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

I would suggest you train a few retrievers to the higher levels ("only" MH or QAA level) at a *high standard* and then come back and tell us your thoughts in about 3-5 years....


----------



## mathewrodriguez (May 11, 2011)

The egg's already been fried.


----------



## Sharon Potter (Feb 29, 2004)

ShadowMagic said:


> As I said I come from a totally different venue - perhaps summing it up like this - pointer guys value independence and perhaps retriever guys value control - sometimes to the extreme - We don't expect our dogs to be broke before they are two years old (some are not even ready by then) and to that end there is a whole lot of red shirting going on (but that is another discussion for a different board) field trials and hunt tests evolve - and I know that but at some point you are gonna run into a wall on where and how far you can go with your breeding - but if you have to use FF to get a finished retriever because in the end it seems FF is less about retrieving and more about control - then has the game evolved to a point beyond what the average hunter needs and breeding dogs for FT's and the ability to take that kind of pressure - results in dogs that can take that kind of pressure, and at least in the pointer/setter world results in dogs that are too hot to handle for the average hunter. Perhaps by breeding dogs that can be FF and teaching FF you are doing a service to all the hundred of lab owners out there that just duck hunt or shoot pheasants over their dogs - I don't know - but I do know with any FT breedings in the pointer AA world out of a 100 dogs you may get 5 dogs that are true AA dogs and perhaps another handful of shooting dogs and a whole lot that are neither and unsuitable for the average bird dog guy.


FF has very little to do with retrieving. 

A pointing dog person like yourself has to recognize the name Clyde Morton, right? Field Trial Hall Of Fame? Won the National Championship at Grand Junction 11 times, a record that will stand forever? As you know, there are no birds killed and no retrieving required, yet Clyde FF'd every one of his dogs. When asked why, he said "Because it makes them MINE." It obviously took nothing away from their natural ability as top class pointing dogs. 

It's pretty much the same for retrievers.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Don't you love people who have hot opinions about venues they have never trained a dog for or participated in.


----------



## Mark Sehon (Feb 10, 2003)

Well said Ed.


----------



## Brandoned (Aug 20, 2004)

EdA said:


> Don't you love people who have hot opinions about venues they have never trained a dog for or participated in.


Dr Ed you are right there! I just hate I wasted my time reading the whole 5 pages. I honestly thought it was a joke when I noticed the title of the thread, sadly it isn't...


----------



## Sharon Potter (Feb 29, 2004)

Another way to look at the original question would be to ask a question that parallels it, only pertaining to what the OP is most familiar with. So here goes:

Will whoa training damage the breeding of pointers to naturally point?


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

Sharon - The answer to that question is that it doesn't - but how many pointers, setters, brittanies are getting "whoa" broke at 6 months old? 

We are gang running them on wild birds so that the birds are teaching them not us - there is selection at every age puppies, derbies etc not every great puppy or derby is gonna make a great field trial dog. What I do find interesting is that this weekend at the Hunt Test - there were twice as many MH's running as there were JH and SH - this is the opposite in the pointing dog hunt test world - generally you have twice as many Junior's running as Master and perhaps- a third again SH as MH in hunt tests. Plus I suspect their are few FC in pointing breeds that was younger than a couple years old and most are much older in fact I do not remember judging at AKC Gun Dog or AKC All Age dog that was less than two years old. And damn few derby aged dogs are running in American Field Shooting Dog or All age stake.

It also seems that if the testing format is getting so complex that only certain breeds can compete in or dominate the venue that the format is very skewed - IE - Labs dominate retriever trials and even Master hunter tests/Nationals where they are the predominate breed - just like pointers dominate American Field All Age and Shooting dog stakes.

Keith (Not the GF)


----------



## labsforme (Oct 31, 2003)

I ran GSP in FT and that's actually how I got into Labs. I started GSP in NAVHDA in the early 70's and continued using FF for my trial dogs. Heavy German import lines. Shadowland would know. I had an Esser's Chick grandson who had his major win beating GSP ,Brittanies, and Pointers in AKC Open Gun Dog Brittany trial in Madras. Wide shooting dog. Another was a Blick grandson on both sides and was a true AA dog. FF didn't slow them down even though they were natural retrievers. It just re-enforced training. Yes we broke dogs much later than Labs however.
I believe FF enhances natural ability not over shadows it.
Jeff G


----------



## Mary Lynn Metras (Jul 6, 2010)

Bubba said:


> Interesting. Doesn't seem to matter how many times this turd floats by- someone is sure to jump on it and feed the trolls.
> 
> Expired Equine regards
> 
> Bubba


This is as far as I got in the thread so far. Bubba you made me laugh. 

My dog of the 1960s looks like the ones I have now. The one in the 60s was purely for duck hunting but from field lines. The owner of this thread must be referring to conformation lines of Labs. You have to be careful what you purchase.


----------



## James Seibel (Aug 20, 2008)

labsforme said:


> I ran GSP in FT and that's actually how I got into Labs. I started GSP in NAVHDA in the early 70's and continued using FF for my trial dogs. Heavy German import lines. Shadowland would know. I had an Esser's Chick grandson who had his major win beating GSP ,Brittanies, and Pointers in AKC Open Gun Dog Brittany trial in Madras. Wide shooting dog. Another was a Blick grandson on both sides and was a true AA dog. FF didn't slow them down even though they were natural retrievers. It just re-enforced training. Yes we broke dogs much later than Labs however.
> I believe FF enhances natural ability not over shadows it.
> Jeff G


Wow - That is a name I have not heard in a while - Esser's Chick ! Hum , Richard S Johns and I ran "the" Esser's Chick a few times on John's training grounds. 

Field Trial Champion Rich's Cap & Ball won the Derby and Open All Age at Finger Lakes GSP trial the same weekend. Majority of the dogs that Johns broke to Steady to Wing and Kill were YOUNGER than 2 years old. 

I did all the force fetch at John's for 7 years. Natural retrievers included . Johns believed 100% in force fetch. 

I have gotten few EP Steady to Wing and shot at 6 months old. Let me think now FC Little John , gsp also broke steady to wing and kill under 2- and can not remember all their names were all broke steady to flush and shot under 2. It was John's Secret now reviled 40 years after the fact. He believed these dogs should basically never chase a bird, once you can place your hands on the dog when they pointed they were brought to being Steady to flush and shot in a easy way. Actually as I remember they were pretty steady at under a year. By the way - RSJ is in the GSP hall of fame.He also ran pointers setters ect... 

Region 2 Am Champion Scandia Sam ESP- Steady under year old. 

Every lab I have owned that was direct daughter of National Field Champion or National Amateur Champion have been great hunting dogs. there is a BIG difference between all age pointers and age labs as I see it. 
Unlike the knot headed Pointers I have worked that want to run in the next county while I am over here. Dogs that want to run on the edge and have NO BRAINS do not fit in here any longer. There is NO room to run such dogs safely in PA as I see it. 

Every and ALL Labs I have trained or hunted behind that were down from field champion lines have been nothing but outstanding gun dogs and a joy to be around.


----------



## Sharon Potter (Feb 29, 2004)

ShadowMagic said:


> Sharon - The answer to that question is that it doesn't - but how many pointers, setters, brittanies are getting "whoa" broke at 6 months old?
> Keith (Not the GF)


Answer: The ones that are ready for it. It depends on the dog, just like with retrievers. When I get a six month old retriever in here to train, I don't automatically go to FF. There's a foundation that needs building first. Same for a pointing breed that comes here...lay the foundation, then add the necessary training when the dog is ready for it. 

And just like FF isn't about retrieving, whoa isn't about pointing. It's all pressure conditioning.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

How is FF any different than any other aspect of training? Does teaching a dog to sit, heel,come detract from natural abilities? 

/paul


----------



## Sharon Potter (Feb 29, 2004)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> How is FF any different than any other aspect of training? Does teaching a dog to sit, heel,come detract from natural abilities?
> 
> /paul


Shadow Magic is incorrectly looking at FF as a replacement for natural desire to retrieve....not as training like other skills.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Sharon Potter said:


> Shadow Magic is incorrectly looking at FF as a replacement for natural desire to retrieve....not as training like other skills.


FF will not fix a lack of desire. Flawed theory

/Paul


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

I will bow to ya 'll's collective wisdom


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

Sharon Potter said:


> Another way to look at the original question would be to ask a question that parallels it, only pertaining to what the OP is most familiar with. So here goes:
> 
> Will whoa training damage the breeding of pointers to naturally point?


 That was the #2 comment , it did not register


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

Sharon - This I agree with 

"The ones that are ready for it. It depends on the dog, just like with retrievers. When I get a six month old retriever in here to train, I don't automatically go to FF. There's a foundation that needs building first. Same for a pointing breed that comes here...lay the foundation, then add the necessary training when the dog is ready for it." 

This is why after we are legal to train on wild birds in South Dakota - I divide my puppies into two groups just like my broke dogs - certain days while I am roading my big dogs in the harness off my quad - the puppies are running free - pointing knocking and chasing birds - the best ones are pointing and backing each other on wild birds and many times I can get off the quad walk in front of them and flush - even the poorer ones after a few months of this are way better pointing dogs than they were when they started - but, I am still not likely to try to "whoa" break a 6 month old (maybe a particularly great puppy - but even then I am gonna err on the side of caution and let them be puppies) my puppies that I am evaluating for field trials are gang run off horseback in particularly big and birdy country to see if they have the drive - independence and physical conformation to make it as a trial dog - I am sure there are similarities in the retriever world but not sure what the criteria of selection might be. 

There were lots of dogs passing in hunting tests (both retriever and pointer tests) that I personally would not own - but they are passing the tests and they are getting bred too - this is particularly evident amongst show people in certain breeds I call them slopey dogs - slow and lopey their angles are all wrong for speed and endurance their gait is more akin to a rocking horse and that has got to be pounding the crap out of their front shoulders - their pointing desire is at best mediocre - but I can and have seen those dogs to trained to "whoa" stand in the presence of bird scent and they get passes and they are marketed as "dual" quality dogs. I have seen some dogs in field trials - they are pointing with little intensity - flagging and what not - and hardly get out of the horse path but they are placing in field trials too, so I am sure that passes can be achieved with FF dogs that have not much retrieve in them - perhaps not at master level but certainly at JH level and possibly SH level - I know it is happening at JH, SH and MH in pointing breeds that did not have alot of point or at least it was 10 yrs ago. 

But, I also agree that for every level of trial/test advance the selection criteria gets harder (but you can mitigate that by entering lots of tests/trials)


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

"(*) I don't know if anyone who is old enough will have ever heard about what was called "the Itch drill"... the means by which they made Itching-to-Go (relatively) steady. Pretty tough stuff."

I think I know what this entails.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

ShadowMagic said:


> "(*) I don't know if anyone who is old enough will have ever heard about what was called "the Itch drill"... the means by which they made Itching-to-Go (relatively) steady. Pretty tough stuff."
> 
> Is a training technique where the dog is sitting and a mark is thrown and an assistant is standing behind the dog/handler and upon the release command the assistant hits the dog in the butt with a Hot Shot? The conditioned response is that dog launches itself forward like the Devil hisself was after him. I saw a trainer do that a few times.


I did that with my first dog, but only on force to pile where "back" was coupled with a whack on the but with my whip stick. This helped launch my low momentum dog on blinds. As for marks, most dogs, all good dogs, are released on marks, as they are raring to go. Actually breaking is the bigger issue on marks.

With all due respect, though we should all remain open to new ideas, most posters on this forum have had years if not decades of good success mostly using one or another Carr based program, and we look at people who come on here questioning these proven techniques when they themselves have relatively little experience at the highest level of retriever training, with a pretty high degree of skepticism . It seems like every four months or so somebody new tries to suggest we are doing things wrong, or their way is better. If someone who has been running and winning trials post some technique they discovered, we would be all over it, but I think you kind of need to earn your stripes or come up with a much more compelling argument in trying to describe a problem that doesn't seem to exist.

John


----------



## Colonel Blimp (Jun 1, 2004)

John,

I don't think the OP or anyone else is querying the efficiency of the Carr based approach. 

The question was does it's universal application within FT / HT breed lines cover up any defects in "natural ability" and is any such a decline in "natural ability" observable. The most obvious thing it seems to me is that we have no definition of what natural retrieving actually is, nor is there a measure for it. If a team of hunters set out to define it I think their work would resemble that of a team of Triallers but have significant differences too. 

Eug


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Colonel Blimp said:


> John,
> 
> I don't think the OP or anyone else is querying the efficiency of the Carr based approach.
> 
> ...


That's the way the tread started, by asking a question regarding a potential problem that doesn't seem to exist, but as usual the thread went downhill from there.


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

Colonel Blimp said:


> John,
> 
> I don't think the OP or anyone else is querying the efficiency of the Carr based approach.
> 
> ...


You said it better than it seems I am saying it -


----------



## Mike Kelly (Aug 5, 2014)

Well considering the fact that a lot of training is being done well before you should even think about force fetch training then I would think the answer is NO! But I am new to training dogs for the field so this of course is JMHO!
Mike


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Colonel Blimp said:


> John,
> 
> I don't think the OP or anyone else is querying the efficiency of the Carr based approach.
> 
> ...


There is no question that one can take a dog with little or no natural retrieving ability or desire and put HT titles on them--I have even seen MH titled dogs that fit this bill. You can do the same in ob, dock diving and probably even canine freestyle. However, I don't think 1) that many of the breeders that would breed dogs that most of us would want would use one of these anyway and 2) that this is equally as possible in FTs (or even at the highest level of canine freestyle). So, no, I don't think it is a valid concern. In fact, it is one of the weaker arguments against FF, Carr, multiple quadrant or whatever techniques most folks use that I have heard by the detractors.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Colonel Blimp said:


> John,
> 
> I don't think the OP or anyone else is querying the efficiency of the Carr based approach.
> 
> ...


This is what I read into the discussion. I'm of the opinion NO training doesn't detract from natural ability, I base it on, the hunting with several labs for many generations, from all walks of life, ran by hunters that do not test and do not train, yet still have a natural retriever that goes out and gets their birds, hunts and flushes, still manages to become the talk of the duck club and pretty much does everything asked of it not because they've ever been trained but because someone just took it out in the field and the dog picked it up. Then there's those hunt testers (perhaps a majority in the lower stakes)that never FF and never use a collar, just take a dog out to a test with no real program, sort've piece things together on their own to teach their dog how to do it. Usually get well through the Senior-mid level, perhaps to Masters, before the wheels fall off, and a more formal training program is needed. Now could such dogs be better and more efficiently trained. Absolutely, but most of these dogs pick these things up, with any teaching method; and very poor lackadaisical instructors-training partners  They couldn't do it without natural drive, an inbred instinct to please and a desire to do the job. If they couldn't pick it up relatively easily most owners would lose interest. It's very rare to find a retriever that just can't - won't do it; when one of those comes along they usually go on the couch, couch dogs become pets and usually don't get bred. After getting spoiled and finding that first dog that naturally does the job, a buyer will focus on buying pups from dogs-breeder that also do the job, pretty much ensures that the natural instinct is kept strong. However I believe the strongest safe-guard for instinct is simply the fact that people are inherently lazy, the vast majority don't care about dog training, thus if the family retriever couldn't just go out and do it, the dog would stay home, and the owner would find other interests .


----------



## Russ (Jan 3, 2003)

ShadowMagic said:


> Just thinking - I see lots of threads and advocation for FF on retrievers - and I am thinking that if we continue to FF every dog for the type of response necessary for hunting/tests/trials could the natural ability and selection for natural retrieving suffer - IE if you are gonna force fetch every puppy or have to for the type of response necessary perhaps this will cover up big holes in natural selection - instead of selecting for natural retrieve and biddability perhaps selection criteria will morph to mental toughness and the ability to take pressure - to the deterrement of the breeds natural strengths?


Getting back to the original post. I have been able to observe dozens of young dogs preparing for field trials. Almost all of their ancestors have been ff'ed for many generations. These dogs have a tremendous amount of natural talent, tremendous prey drive and learn very quickly. 

I recommend that the original poster go watch a young dog field trial trainer work with the 6 month to 14 month pups. It would put an end to the idle speculation.


----------



## polmaise (Jan 6, 2009)

Russ said:


> I recommend that the original poster go watch a young dog field trial trainer work with the 6 month to 14 month pups. It would put an end to the idle speculation.


That would take about 8 months .
Most want it in a 45 minute dvd.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Russ said:


> I recommend that the original poster go watch a young dog field trial trainer work with the 6 month to 14 month pups. It would put an end to the idle speculation.


I think the OP trains pointing dogs and might like to give retrievers a try but has a serious impediment of too many preconceived ideas this being one of them. If a person from Central Texas had a real desire to learn retriever training he/she would call Danny Farmer and ask to come throw birds and watch him train for a week, a month, or a year rather than stirring the internet pot.


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

Russ said:


> Getting back to the original post. I have been able to observe dozens of young dogs preparing for field trials. Almost all of their ancestors have been ff'ed for many generations. These dogs have a tremendous amount of natural talent, tremendous prey drive and learn very quickly.
> 
> I recommend that the original poster go watch a young dog field trial trainer work with the 6 month to 14 month pups. It would put an end to the idle speculation.


Russ - I actually have - been 15 yrs or so getting closer to 20 yrs ago now I guess - I trained with (shot birds, threw birds etc) RJ Retriever Kennels in Toppenish, I watched Pat Murphy and Todd Manuel work dogs (helped when asked) when we were all trainers at Carlsons Canine Country Club up in Fall City, by that time Bert was retired - even then I specialized in training pointing breeds, versatile dogs and labs when Todd and Pat were covered up. Fact is I have made my living the past 15 yrs training dogs - most of them meat dogs and most people are not gonna want to spend lots of money - most dogs here average 1-4 months training and few stay all year. The operant reason I have had to force fetch dogs is because they didn't or had little natural desire - and when you train for the public you train what comes through the door. My experience is that I learn more about training dogs from the ones that are not natural dogs than I did from the ones that were natural dogs.


----------



## Russ (Jan 3, 2003)

The ones that just come through the door are not the ones that have had generations of force fetching. The ones from top pedigrees have lots of generations of force fetching and certainly do not lack desire to pick up a bird. Most retrievers field trial retrievers are forced around six months of age and have been enthusiastically retrieving for several months before that.

I do not see any correlation between forcing and retriever evolution.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Shadow,

Welcome to RTF.

Have you accomplished your goal with this thread? It seemed your goal was to learn if the site users felt that the practice of force breaking our competitive, hunt test, and field retrievers was having a detrimental impact on the breed.

I'd say that's been answered several times over.

Is there more you want to accomplish with this thread?

Thanks, Chris


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

Chris - Thanks for the welcome - I think part of the reason there was controversy was people thought I was criticizing a method as FF - and I really wasn't as much as I was asking about breeding traits.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

ShadowMagic said:


> Chris - Thanks for the welcome - I think part of the reason there was controversy was people thought I was criticizing a method as FF - and I really wasn't as much as I was asking about breeding traits.


You are welcome Shadow!

Have you accomplished your goal with this thread?

Is there more that you seek to accomplish with this thread?


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

LOL - I suppose so at least partly


----------



## BBnumber1 (Apr 5, 2006)

ShadowMagic said:


> Russ - I actually have - been 15 yrs or so getting closer to 20 yrs ago now I guess - I trained with (shot birds, threw birds etc) RJ Retriever Kennels in Toppenish, I watched Pat Murphy and Todd Manuel work dogs (helped when asked) when we were all trainers at Carlsons Canine Country Club up in Fall City, by that time Bert was retired - even then I specialized in training pointing breeds, versatile dogs and labs when Todd and Pat were covered up. Fact is I have made my living the past 15 yrs training dogs - most of them meat dogs and most people are not gonna want to spend lots of money - most dogs here average 1-4 months training and few stay all year. *The operant reason I have had to force fetch dogs is because they didn't or had little natural desire *- and when you train for the public you train what comes through the door. My experience is that I learn more about training dogs from the ones that are not natural dogs than I did from the ones that were natural dogs.



ShadowMagic,

I believe that this is the biggest disconnect right here. The reason that most retriever trainers FF the dogs has very little to do with retrieving desire. The process is meant to teach the dogs how to deal with pressure, what pressure means, how to turn off the pressure, and how to continue to work through the pressure. Among other things it is a foundation for teaching the dogs about how to respond to corrections that will be applied throughout the dogs lifetime of traning. 

As I understand it, this is much different than how FF is used by the pointer people. I have no first hand knowledge of pointer training


----------



## Paco (Feb 14, 2007)

I've enjoyed it, very telling, but the boss is saying enuffs enuff, the wagons circled right away, so guess the discussion is over, happy trials to you.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Paco said:


> I've enjoyed it, very telling, but the boss is saying enuffs enuff, the wagons circled right away, so guess the discussion is over, happy trials to you.


If you are referencing me, I asked two closed probes. (yes or no questions)

I also welcomed him to RTF.

Maybe you're not referencing me.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Paco said:


> I've enjoyed it, very telling, but the boss is saying enuffs enuff, the wagons circled right away, so guess the discussion is over, happy trials to you.


If you're referencing me, my primary intent was to get 2 closed probes answered. (yes or no questions)

If you all want to discuss it more, have at it! 

Then again, maybe you were not referring to my posts.


----------



## Paco (Feb 14, 2007)

Nope Chris , just my take on the thread and my warped sense of humor, I gleaned alot from both sides, my labs point and hunt upland so hope it keeps going, but probably has run out of gas anyways.


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

Bridget Bodine said:


> You cannot force a dog to mark, to have style, to be trainable in the first place. Force fetch is MUCH more than making a dog retrieve in the retriever world. It is the start of polishing a retrieve, much like whoa would be in your world, but then as you continue there are many more layers than just making a dog retrieve. ( pressure conditioning , handling skills, taking away options like popping , no goes etc)


I am not sure about marking but if you can't train a dog to "mark" why do you come to the line and through training with the word "mark" and the position of dog's spine and also your leg position to focus the dog in a certain direction? Unless it is way different in the retriever world - dogs learn by pictures the more pictures you can show them (different situations) the better and more confident they are. Throwing a "in" mark versus and "out" mark or why a dog that has only had marks at a certain distance - goes to that approximate distance and hunts around (whether that be long or short). Why do you have blinds and stick men out there - is the dog actually marking the fall of the bird/bumper or is the dog marking where the blind/stick man is and working the area of the fall? In the pointer world if you want a dog to run to objectives you plant birds at the objective (clump of trees, bushes what have you) do that enough and pretty quick you got dogs running to the objectives almost to the exclusion of other cover. Or in NSTRA where the birds are planted in each quadrant or they learn to follow the quad tracks (when the quad plants birds). Why do pattern blinds work? I know that my most experienced pointing dogs go to where they have found birds in the past (the grounds I trained on in SD were 19 square miles). Sharptails and quail are creatures of habit - I could tell you on my training grounds within 100 yds of where the birds were likely to be (sometimes they were sometimes they weren't) but my dogs knew where they had found birds before and made a bee line to that area if I cast them in that direction.

And I am not sure about the retriever world but I know that you can train style in pointing dogs - a well known field trialler on the east coast does this and I judged his dogs - he does this by barrel training on "whoa" the conditioned response was that his dogs actually bowed up (really cranked the head and tail AFTER the birds have left, and happened not only on finds but stop to flushes too) which for the most part is contrary to what I have seen in bird dogs that let down when the birds have left. I have always relied on the body language of my dogs to tell me where the birds might be and if they have already left. Another example in the pointing dog world a certain pointer and many of his prodegy have an extreme "head crank" I had never judged that particular dog but that style became popular and people started to train/breed for that (birds in cages suspended from a tree, while the dog was on a "whoa" barrel. The head crank in itself is not bad - I have a llewellin that does that when the birds are way away and the scent is on the wind










But this type of "style" can be trained too. 

I strongly suspect this works in retriever training too - Have seen Hot Shots in pro retriever arsenal in their trucks and witnessed some of it - As alluded to earlier - dog does not have the dynamic or enthusiastic water entry on a blind or mark - pro has assistant stand behind the dog with a Hot Shot and on the command "back" and the assistant hits him with Hot Shot - the response is the dog explodes off the line like the devil hisself is chasing him and do that enough times and the conditioned response will be on the command "Back" that dog is gonna leap off the line - However, the trial spectators or judges really have no idea if the dynamic water entry is a natural or trained response do they?

This is akin to what is referred to whip running in pointing dog world or - if you have a dog that yo-yo's - you want dogs to hang out there - many do it naturally and some do yo-yo (which if done to the excess will take you out of the running for placements in many cases) cutting off your dog and parking your walking horse at a gallop on that dogs butt while blowing a "go" whistle - nowadays this is accomplished with e-collars - you are teaching the pointing dog "out there is good" back here (by the horse or handler) is bad" - I suspect the operant conditioning happening here is very similar to breaking a retriever from bank cheating "water is good - bank is bad" 



I guess it all goes back to the whole "nature vs nurture" argument -


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

wow.......... my statement of train up a couple of higher level dogs and then come back and tells us your thoughts stand.....I HIGHLY recommend you mentor with someone other than the ones you observed with the hotshot....


----------



## Colonel Blimp (Jun 1, 2004)

*This is an ex parrot*






Eug


----------



## Russ (Jan 3, 2003)

ShadowMagic said:


> I am not sure about marking ......And I am not sure about the retriever world....I strongly suspect this works in retriever training too -


You make a lot of conclusions based on things you are not sure of or suspect. Credentials in the pointer world do not make one an expert in the retriever world. 

Retrievers are bred for retrieving. To the retriever folks, your speculations are akin to someone coming to you theorizing that Pomeranians would make decent pointers if they were trained enough. Successful all age dogs train from 4 to 6 days per week and have to a have a high work ethic. If they do not enjoy it, they will not excel. Style comes from enthusiasm for the work.

A retriever's pedigree is judged by the ancestors' titles. There is no such thing as an FC without great natural marking ability & desire to retrieve. If the dog does not have it, it is usually washed out early. The all age competition is intense and the good trainers do not want to waste their time with a dog does not "have it". Dogs without the talent and/or desire are washed out. 

I have had hunting retrievers for many decades and have been the HT/Ft for 20 years. I have never heard of anyone using a Hotshot to build desire or style in a retriever.

-Russ


----------



## KwickLabs (Jan 3, 2003)

Dear ShadowMagic, 

I've read this entire thread with a great deal of patience. In addition, I have a great deal of tolerance for _different_ views. While I don't have nearly as much experience as many that post on RTF and won't question your vast, proclaimed talents in other areas......you're pretty much clueless or just plain enjoy fishing. *My gut feeling it's a great deal of both.* 

I wrote this in reply to your #84 post and let it simmer in a file for awhile. After Eug's “parrot ploy”, I could not resist any longer.









When that rare situation arises that I am at a loss for the best way to express an opinion, a picture is often better than a thousand words. Find another field.


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

Again - this was 20 yrs ago almost at least 15 and e-collars have come a long ways - with the advent of the variable intensity collar has made it much less painful for the dog but the operant principle is the same - pressure is pressure - some high and some low whether that is delivered with a check cord and prong collar - an ear or toe pinch or a variable intensity collar or what have you - pressure on - pressure off based on compliance

And out of that whole dissertation on observed dog behavior you come away with the one example of a hot shot? 

Higher level dogs - I guess that is as variable as the game you play - MH? QAA? FC? NFC/AFC?

Higher level what? Higher than 2 out of 4 defacto National Champions in my breed? Higher than the Champion and Runner Up Champion American Bird Hunters Association National Open Invitational Championship in 2012? Higher than a NSTRA CH? Higher than a NAVHDA UT Prize 2 dog? Higher than 2 AKC FCs' and owner handled AFC? Higher than the #4 rated Bill Conlin Shooting Dog (Setter Awards) derby in 2008 (this a national award and to my knowledge Jackie is the only Llewellin Setter to ever make the standings) Higher than an AKC SH with MH passes (pointing dogs) Does one have to run Major circuit shooting dogs or All Age dogs to have a valid opinion on training to that level - how about judging them, how many championships do I have to judge or major AKC stakes to have a valid opinion in your eyes as to whether I know what I am talking about in training and dog behavior that I have personally witnessed?


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

ShadowMagic said:


> Again - this was 20 yrs ago almost at least 15 and e-collars have come a long ways - with the advent of the variable intensity collar has made it much less painful for the dog but the operant principle is the same - pressure is pressure - some high and some low whether that is delivered with a check cord and prong collar - an ear or toe pinch or a variable intensity collar or what have you - pressure on - pressure off based on compliance
> 
> And out of that whole dissertation on observed dog behavior you come away with the one example of a hot shot?
> 
> ...


OK here's the deal.



Your opinion is valid. OK?

That's settled.

Lots of regular RTF users disagree with your opinion.

And that's OK.

That's why RTF is here.

Have a great Sunday Magic.

Chris


----------



## Russ (Jan 3, 2003)

ShadowMagic said:


> Again - this was 20 yrs ago almost at least 15 and e-collars have come a long ways - with the advent of the variable intensity collar has made it much less painful for the dog but the operant principle is the same - pressure is pressure - some high and some low whether that is delivered with a check cord and prong collar - an ear or toe pinch or a variable intensity collar or what have you - pressure on - pressure off based on compliance
> 
> And out of that whole dissertation on observed dog behavior you come away with the one example of a hot shot?
> 
> ...


What do any of the above qualifications have to with retrievers???? Next an earth dog trainer will chime in? We already went through the pet obedience trainer giving us retriever training advice while he posted videos of his Lab trying to get past SH.

Ps. Even 20 years ago we used variable collars. I purchased my first collar in 1994. It came with 5 intensity plugs for the receiver and there were three levels that could be activated on the transmitter.


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

Russ - Okay maybe you have a valid point - I can buy some of that - but you are missing the operative fundamental that dog behavior is dog behavior

IE - You have a dog that you are running a lining drill on you are showing him something - force to a pile what have you or running a pattern - you put bumpers way out there and through a step by step training program have the dog running in a straight line at whatever distance - on the command "back" you may do with with lining drills and progressively putting bumpers at a certain distance and when they are running that distance to the blind/bumpers increasing the distance. Then you incorporate handling at some point

I take a pointer/setter that I want to blast off the line on my "go" whistle. I plant birds on an objective (hill, clump of trees, bunch of brush) and I let the dog watch me - take him back to whatever distance (he knows the birds are there) and I mount my walking horse - and give the dog the "go" whistle and he runs hard to that objective and finds birds - now I add another objective I want the dog to run too so now I put no birds on the first objective but I put them on the 2nd objective - so dog is hunting that first objective and I give him a attention getting ' I use Y-yo and turn my horse give him the "go" whistle and he blasts to the 2nd objective and finds birds - pretty soon when he hears my attention getter (akin to a whistle sit in retriever world) and I turn my horse he cues off that and runs in the direction my horse is going - when working a retriever I use whistle sits and hand signals - when working a pointer/setter I use a yo-yo shout and turn my horse - dog takes the cue and all is right in the world - keep in mind you are dealing with perhaps hundreds of yards in retriever world and we are dealing with fractions of miles in pointers and setters - but we are both giving cues or signals to which way we want the dog to go nevertheless - now couple my "yo-yo" with the visual clue of my horse - dog turns the way I want him - nothing happens - dog ignores my attention getter or continues on the first line (I nick them give them the Yo- yo" and continue the direction I want them to go) dog comes with me - how is this different (in principle) to you giving a dog a "sit" whistle and then giving them a right/left over or back - dog takes the cue - no problem - dog goes to the left but was sent right 'No - nick with the collar - whistle "sit" and re cast -- I am sure there is subleties to the process that I will re-learn as I go but the operative conditioning for the desired behavior is similar. 

Whoa vs sit - Whoa and sit are the same in the most basic essence of the command - sit in the most simple terms means stop plant your butt and don't move until released - "whoa" means stop plant your four feet and don't move until released - the major difference in the initial training is the position of the dogs butt (0ne standing one sitting) off of this simple command all advanced commands will come in the pointing dog world steady to wing and shot - honoring and is at its essence a control command similar to sit I suspect - because lots of things come off that sit command right - you expect a dog to sit when you are heeling and stop - when you give them a whistle so they are focused on you to give them a cast etc


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

Russ said:


> What do any of the above qualifications have to with retrievers???? Next an earth dog trainer will chime in? We already went through the pet obedience trainer giving us retriever training advice while he posted videos of his Lab trying to get past SH.
> 
> Ps. Even 20 years ago we used variable collars. I purchased my first collar in 1994. It came with 5 intensity plugs for the receiver and there were three levels that could be activated on the transmitter.


Yep, they did have plugs - generally a nick, continuous and high continuous - but if you had a "1" plug it was still a "1" plug and if it was a "5" plug it was still a 5 plug - to my knowledge Dogtra was the first collar to come out with a variable intensity dial right at the transmitter and that was about 1999.


----------



## Russ (Jan 3, 2003)

ShadowMagic said:


> Russ - Okay maybe you have a valid point - I can buy some of that - but you are missing the operative fundamental that dog behavior is dog behavior
> 
> IE - You have a dog that you are running a lining drill on you are showing him something - force to a pile what have you or running a pattern - you put bumpers way out there and through a step by step training program have the dog running in a straight line at whatever distance - on the command "back" you may do with with lining drills and progressively putting bumpers at a certain distance and when they are running that distance to the blind/bumpers increasing the distance. Then you incorporate handling at some point
> 
> ...


 I guess pointer training and retriever training are almost identical. What planet are you on??


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

Russ said:


> I guess pointer training and retriever training are almost identical. What planet are you on??


Well, last I looked I didn't live on Mars - I have never said identical - I have said similar - that the operative conditioning (training techniques) are very similar - in their most basic form.


----------



## Dave Flint (Jan 13, 2009)

Did I miss the part where there's a rash of Labs that don't love to retrieve ?


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Training a dog to bite a bad guy, follow a track or trail, take a cast, stop on a whistle and all sorts of conditioned responses has lots of parallels. It really doesn't matter the venue. 


The the notion that it somehow degrades our breeding stock is flawed in my opinion. Selective breeding of performers in any venue should tend to create future generations of performers. 

To me, the balance is how to avoid the hereditary health baggage that may come with tighter breeding.

ps. My 7th grader seems to want me to believe that algebra training may somehow damage the future of humanity. I don't buy that either!


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Training a dog to bite a bad guy, follow a track or trail, take a cast, stop on a whistle and all sorts of conditioned responses has lots of parallels. It really doesn't matter the venue.
> 
> 
> The the notion that it somehow degrades our breeding stock is flawed in my opinion. Selective breeding of performers in any venue should tend to create future generations of performers.
> ...


True - but I can not for the life of me figure out the new core curriculum math exercises - LOL

And I agree with linebreeding - in order for it to work well you must cull ruthlessly - 20 yrs ago - I never heard of EIC - and as much as I was around retriever enthusiasts and a breeding kennel in WA if it was a problem - I am sure I would have, so back 20 yrs ago you were testing mostly for CHD, and CERF - then you started testing for elbow dysplasia, and PRA and now EIC- seems interesting too and makes a curious study.

And performers have a Tendency to throw performers (but not always) at one point Whiterock Kennels was breeding 6-10 litters a year - we might keep an entire litter of what we thought might be the best dogs and at every step of the process - evaluate and eliminate those from the program (wash them out) that would not make the standard we were striving for (it becomes a numbers game after a while) because it takes as much to feed a poor one as a good one - however, there were several instances that we had left over puppies from the "non-performance" litters that were better than the ones from the performance litters -


----------



## goldensrule (Feb 20, 2010)

I dont post a lot here because theres lots of people that know better than me.

But I have worked with retrievers for almost 30 years. Did a little trialing and testing early on but mostly trained hunting dogs (though I dont see any difference in required skillsets.). I have Goldens but have trained and help train labs, GSP"s, a weim and a brit or two. Specifically, Basic FF for the pointing breeds. 

I have also spent a considerable amount of time chukar hunting with a variety of breeds . Good and bad within each breed. I have done a lot of observation and thinking about the differences between the pointing world and the retrieving world. Some of my conclusions may not be accepted by my retriever colleagues. 

But here goes. Some of what I say my have already been said, sorry for repetition.

If we are to test for "natural retrieving " ability, scientifically we would have to eliminate any variables that would muddy the waters. So it seems to me, in order evaluate a dogs "natural retrieving" ability, we would have to do no training that would influence the outcome until the dog was an adult, say 18 months to two years. No teaching a dog to come because thats a component of retrieving or playing fetch in a hallway with pup. The dog would almost have to be in isolation. Well who is going to do that? Without a hands off approach you have really no idea of what you have naturally.

So nobody is evaluating "natural retrieving", retriever folks or pointer folks. 

The retriever people need to understand there is a great deal of emphasis put on the "natural Retrieve" by people in the pointing/verstatile world.
And they believe they do better job of testing for it than the ret folks, which may be true because i dont believe we are trying to test for NR.

As I said, I have spent quite a bit of time evaluating ret and pointers in the field. And there is a difference between the styles and breeds that shadowmagic and perhaps others dont recognize. A retriever has what I call the "desire to acquire". what rocks a retrievers world is getting that something in his mouth. It may be a tennis ball, a bumper , bird, or in my case even multiple porcupines! That desire is what is natural in a retriever.


That desire also includes the drive to hunt. Thats what makes them plow through blackberries or cattails to track down a pheasant, or dive to hase crippled duck They want the bird in their mouth. So the hunt or running to get the bird is what gets them jazzed up and it culminates with getting that thing in their mouth.

With the pointing breeds its a bit different. What gets them jazzed up is the find. Now some do get a reward for getting the bird in their mouth, but its not as monumental as it is with a retriever. Think about it, the two actions conflict with each other. The pointer world is more likely to negatively impact the natural point by breeding for a natural retrieve than the ret world is going to adversely effect NR by FF. Some pointers will go sniff the downed bird and go look for another, because its the hunt and the find that gets them their reward.

This desire to "find" and then stop is what the pointer world is relying on. And it is what they are breeding for. 

I dont believe we are breeding retrievers to retrieve. Retrieving is something we train. What we are breeding for and what the trials and tests are doing is finding the dogs with the best natural attributes that lead to a great retriever. Dogs that have the natural drive to go get something and dogs that can be trained to do the complex tasks that we ask of them. 
The retriever world has also developed better training methods to make training easier for the trainer and the dog.

In simple terms, retriever trainers have to do a lot more training than pointer trainers.

Shadowmagic talked about a dog getting dinged for switching off dead ducks for a cripple. What he fails to realize is that when hunting if I have the dog trained, I can select any of the birds I want. I can call the dog off the dead bird and send it for the cripple. So through trials and hunt tests we get dogs that can be trained to high levels and become more effective tools for us and in my mind we have a much better working relationship in the field.

So yes we need to have control to have an effective retriever. The pointer world sees the world control as a very negative term, they are afraid of the dog losing his independence. I look at it as a very positive thing. If I have control, I can efficiently send the dog 300 yards down the canyon to get the chukar and not walk there myself. (Or climb actually). If I have multiple chukars down I can select which ones to pick up first if I need.
Our dogs still hunt, track and flush like crazy, but when I need to put their nose someplace to get a cripple, control is a great thing! The dogs are never robots, a term often tossed around by the pointer crowd.

Probably enough for now.


----------



## Sharon Potter (Feb 29, 2004)

A natural retriever is evident pretty early on, long before any formal training starts. There is no question in my mind that we are breeding for natural retrievers. All it takes to show up is opportunity.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Sharon Potter said:


> A natural retriever is evident pretty early on, long before any formal training starts. There is no question in my mind that we are breeding for natural retrievers. All it takes to show up is opportunity.


I agree, I can see over the top drive to retrieve throwing rolled up socks down the hall for an eight week old pup. By the time they are four months old, that kind of drive is obvious. Now I have had one dog that I was worried about as a young pup turn into a retrieverholic, but I have never had a high drive pup loose that drive later on.


----------



## ShadowMagic (Sep 16, 2014)

goldensrule said:


> I dont post a lot here because theres lots of people that know better than me.
> 
> But I have worked with retrievers for almost 30 years. Did a little trialing and testing early on but mostly trained hunting dogs (though I dont see any difference in required skillsets.). I have Goldens but have trained and help train labs, GSP"s, a weim and a brit or two. Specifically, Basic FF for the pointing breeds.
> 
> ...


I agree with almost everything you said - pretty awesome actually. Wish my ex-wife hadn't taken or thrown away all my pics - I have one that I am especially proud of - that is of me as a 16 yr old with my dog Tescha (LabXWPG) and a limit of 6 wood ducks and 3 pheasants on opening day of bird season in WA in 1981. See, I grew up 100 yds from the Sunnyside WRA in WA - everyday I would go through the potholes, irrigation ditches and river that made up Sunnyside WRA with Tescha and train - and when bird season came I would run off the bus - change very quickly into hunting close grab Tescha and my 20 ga shot gun and go hunting - probably by the time I left home to join the military she had 1000s of contacts with pheasants, chukar, ducks and geese - retrieving what I shot - never had a pair of waders - didn't need them Tescha picked up my decoys with the command ' Get the decoys" she knew the difference


----------



## Sharon Potter (Feb 29, 2004)

I think it's also important to differentiate between breeding for natural retrieve and bringing out whatever level of innate retrieve desire a puppy has. Most breeds have some level of retrieving ability...maybe not as strong as the breeds selectively bred for it, but it's usually there, at some basic level. A lot of pointing dogs never get those few, simple puppy play retrieves and it's not encouraged...and as bird work starts, that window of natural retrieving opportunity closes. Simple, fun puppy retrieves will not hurt pointing ability one bit....and if done well as a little pup, it can develop a stronger, more intense point in the adult dog.


----------



## Gerry Clinchy (Aug 7, 2007)

I got hung up on the marking comments. Bridget said, "You can't force a dog to mark." I think what you can't do is give the dog a gift of good eyesight. While I believe that selective breeding has given most of our dogs today that gift ... you still occasionally might find one that doesn't have it. You might be able to force a dog to mark, but only as far as he/she can actually see. Within this limitation, you may be able to train a mediocre marker to be a "good" marker, but still not a spectacular marker, no matter how many pictures you show them. If (please note I said *IF*) many show-bred dogs are not good markers, the selective breeding may not have included good eyesight as part of the breeding criteria.

As for style, dogs may look "different" in their style based on their difference in structure. I can recall watching two Goldens do the same mark in training. One "looked" faster than the other, but if you timed them, they were not much different ... but their structure was different. They used their bodies differently. For both dogs it was evident that there was nothing on their mind but getting the bird in their mouth ... both could mark & had focus and drive ... but their body structure determined what that looked like in the process of retrieving. This was not a comparison between a "show-dog" type v. a field type, but rather two athletically built dogs with differences in structure.


----------

