Shouldn't it be BIRDS first

[kninebirddog]

ok I made this post as a reply but it does bring to light some thoughts as to how the field can pressure what a total breed should maybe look or be more like

Birds first

a dog that can hunt all day and is a joy to watch..is a dog that is in good form for the most part


saddly a dog that is great in the field is not the base to what is an expressor of the breed when it comes to the ring as a lot of what does have show titles can't last 5 minutes in the field so yes there are some that accuse some pro show handler for cheapening the DC title by showing certain dogs under certain judges when they make a hugh show circuit ....but is it all bad when it is a field dog that is squeaking in for the DC and not the show champion sqeaking in as many strong show bred dogs will not fair well at all in a field trial

I am not speaking of the true dual planned dogs ...So lets keep that thought in context

I think by the field dogs squeaking in it has put more pressure on the total show breedings to change a bit and step up to a more field looking dog that has field movement not some hackney gait out in the field


Just some food for thought

Sure brittanys don't need to run like a pointer BUT everyone that gets in to trials that is all the profess is that big running dog

So shouldn't a dog be about birds first....Sure we have idea and parameters of what our dogs should be like but lets face it I don't want a long coated fluff puff in the field i like the shorter coat get in the field look for birds points are pretty get there and get r done dogs

there are some here that think if a dog is out of the standard it shouldn't be bred and of course to a dog that makes up for the lack in the other dog but both dogs showing what is desired in the field...but what if the judges are placing that dog at some top hour stake trials ...aren't those the dog that are showing they are functional in the field with the stamina to run ....shouldn't they be what people look to as we are breeding BIRDDOGS aren't we
then show being secondary

are you willing to breed a lessor dog just because of a standard regardless if the dog has what it takes to even be a bird dog

Would you toss out a extremely good potential for a lessor dog


Think dual is being cheapen by some pro handlers getting out of standard dogs finished even if it requires strategic planning on how to get them done....traveling ..what judges etc
it is a field dog
try and squeak a pure show bred dog to winning a field trial to attain a DC

and I am not speaking of dogs that are being bred for both ...i am talking of the extremes but how does one get that happy medium ...sometimes it takes those extremes to keep the over all UP there


Food for thought

I can see why the setter and pointer people gave up....many were not willing to give up the meat of a birddog for the fluff of the ring and I still say it shouldn't be like that a dog should be able to step out of the field and hit a ring in true physical shape...thats a dog

[Ruffshooter]

This is one post I agree with whole heartedly. Birds first, hope they are pretty close to the standard. All ways a bird dog.

Well said Knine.
Rick

[TrueBlu Shorthairs]

I think you are making the argument that field trial judges need to judge to the standard and not put up the best of the stake. A gun dog should have all of the attributes needed, gait, speed, style, manners, search intelligence, and yes, even range, that is needed in that part of the country to find wild birds. Just because a dog is clean, he may very well have not fit the standard. I've withheld AA placements because the best broke dogs were not really even high quality gun dogs. Dogs shouldn't scrape to anything, whether show titles or field. They should be excellent specimens of their breed or should show the qualities of the proverbial "high class hunting companion". I do tend to believe there are more so-called trial bred dogs that fit the standard more often than pure show bred dogs that can legitimitely win in most trial formats. I believe many duals become due more to overall lax judging, in both show and field. Particuarly not judging with a standard as the base for performance, but using the "best clean dog" mentality.

Yes, birds should be first. The dog was meant to be a birddog, so if he can't cut it in the field, he isn't worth much imho. Trials do focus so much on run, however, that a real birddog often loses to the bigger runner with far fewer finds. "yeah, your dog was on point the whole time so we didn't get to see her run, as much as the other dog". I see both sides of that argument.

[kninebirddog]

I am honestly not trying to argue anything just an over all food for thought

I mean lets face it wouldn't you say about 90 percent of dogs sold are for Hunters

and how do we keep the dog athletic and driven for birds...we look to trials AKC is the dual concept here in the states and then the American field who is all about a dog not a show there is NAVDHA and NSTRA alsosoon to be UBH also as ways to help a dog be judged on birds in the field

If someone wanted to get nit picky about what should be a true dual then they should be measured before entering the field and point a bird before being allowed in the ring

But I don't want to let a breed dwindle to mediocrity in both areas because we have lost sight of a total pictures they are BIRD DOGS first or at least they should be

if we don't push a bit on the extreme to keep our breed on its toes we might as well turn them all in to non sporting breeed like what happened to the poodle

and FYI Yes I do care ..having a dog that performs and show well is a great idea...but do have to wonder what people are willing to give up

[Ruffshooter]

As I read the first post, I took it that a bird dog is about the birds first, and to be a good bird dog it needed to be have all the attribute of a true bird dog. Stamina, bird ability, nose, trainable range etc. These are the primary sets. The standards should be considered to keep the proper type dog, but maybe your breeders wont be perfect to the standard but should lean toward it heavily. A truely excellent specimen would have all the attributes of both the standard of breed and the excellence of performance. There are many breeds in the competion classes where there are some truly non standard dogs that perform incredibley, but could not get a placement in a one dog show. THe same is true for most show dogs.

I guess this is what I think and seems to be in line with both of what has been written.

[AHGSP]

Definitions of:
Conformation:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Conformation

and as an adjective, or descriptive, Standard:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Standard

Reading these definitions tells me that Conformation is: formation of something by appropriate arrangement of parts or elements : an assembling into a whole and that a Standard is: something established by authority, custom, or general consent as a model or example

Taking these definitions into account and the fact that our Sporting Breeds were developed for use in the field, having "the attributes needed, gait, speed, style, manners, search intelligence, and yes, even range, that is needed in that part of the country to find wild birds."
It would seem relatively simple to me to see who it is that knows more about Conformation and the necessary Standard to do the job required...... I mean really...... Who knows more about the job necessary and the Conformation required to do that job? The person that runs the dog in the field for hours under the toughest of conditions, or the person that watches the dog go around a ring for 2 minutes?

I rest my case!

[ezzy333]

Bruce,

Since some think it is impossible to achieve field ability while conforming to the standard that was set by field people who were developing the breed, would that in itself mean we have changed the purpose of the breed? For instance, no where while establishing the breeds was how far a dog could run considered since both of our breeds were designed to be close working bird dogs. Maybve we need to get back to judging our breeds against the standard that was established and leave the big running dogs to the breeds that have been bred to do that.

No one has convinced me that a Brit or a GSP should compete with a pointer. I have no problem if they do as long as they stay in the conformation standard of the breed. But rather I would like to see the bird finding abilities worked on and not how big or how fast a dog runs. For years I have watched two dogs put down on the same ground with the exact same opportunities and have seen the biggest running dog that finds a bird or two win over the other dog that found 6 or 7. To answer Knines question about it being about birds, I don't think so. At least that hasn't been the concern of the trialers who profess that they are the ones bettering the breed.

I will swear to my dying day that dogs need to be bred to the conformation standard for their breed and also bred to have the best nose and bird finding ability that is possible. And if your breed can't run big enough or pretty enough because of that standard then we need to switch breeds to the one that suits us. But if we are going to breed dogs to fill the publics needs and desires we need to have some breeds that hunt close and some that hunt wide, some that hunt slow and some that hunt fast, and some that show a lot of independence and some that do not, and some that flush and some that point. And not a single thing that I mentioned makes one breed better bird dogs than the others but rather just makes them different. In a country as big and diverse as ours there is a place for every breed and there are people who will like each and swear they are the best. But hopefully we all know better and are smart enough to see where each has a place in our lives.

Ezzy

[snips]

I think the problem therein Ezzy is there are judges out there that do not have the first clue about what structure will hold up in the field. It was funny, but when Fritz was doing his show gig, the judge that put him up for a 5 pt major was a FT Brittney person.

[Don]

I agree it should be about birds. I also thing that the trial world is as guilty as the conformation world of taking dogs to riduculus extremes. The standards in the ring are all to often not followed, same in the trial world. I pay much more attention to the trial world because it's the field dog that turns me on. Everyone should read the "Amesian standard". Those who do not trial but read it will not recognise it is being followed in trials. Same goes for the Standards of Performance in AKC, the hunter that does not trial but reads them will not recognise them being adhered to.

Years ago I was told by a big name Wirehair breeder, trialer and AKC and AF judge that I was lucky because my shorthairs run and he had to train his Wirehairs to run. Well I think each breed has done that in effort to chase down the pointer. Why is that? Why should any breed run to some imaginary standard that no one seems to be able to define? Why is it in AKC there are gun dogs, all age dogs and gray area dogs? what is a gray area dog? If a dog is running to much to qualify as a gun dog then why isn't it given consideration as an all age dog based on it's performance. If a dog should lack something in range, shouldn't it be ably to make up for it in general sustained display of manners and use of the course? Why is it that a Britt must run out of the country to compete with dogs that do? Why is it that GSP's, or any breed, can be out of view for over half a brace and still win?

And the point is to create better bird dogs for bird hunters? I keep hearing that in some areas dogs must run like that to find birds yet people are hunting the same areas with lab's and springer's and doing fine, how can that be?

Yes I think it should be about birds first.

[kninebirddog]

ezzy for your info i do have a dog from my breeding program that has a show title whoopie

I also for your information have a pup from one of my breedings that was sold to a non hunter that does agility again requires speed and trainablity

But most my dog go to HUNTERS requires a solid dog that will hunt for how ever long the owner wants to hunt

so sorry I am selling BIRD DOGS and that is what this forum is about GUNDOGS

So if they don't hunt they are usless if they are weak in drive and desire they are not useful to the majority of my clientele
and if a dog is strong out in the field and can handle hunting all day long how can that dog not have proper PHYSICAL form

A dog with perfect conformation that doesn't hunt is useless in my book just like a dog with super bird desire but can't make it 10 minutes in the field is also useless in my book for being a BIRDDOG

I am not willing to cut the bird out of the dog...

So bruce nailed it big time...what is the truth watching a dog in the field for 30 plus minutes hunting or trialing or 5 minutes prancing around in a circle ...and if it can do both even better

[ezzy333]

So if they don't hunt they are usless if they are weak in drive and desire they are not useful to the majority of my clientele
and if a dog is strong out in the field and can handle hunting all day long how can that dog not have proper PHYSICAL form

Knine,

I will see if I can find pictures of a couple of three legged dogs that we hunted over all day along with the other dogs. Don't think they were perfect specimens. A GSP with a front shoulder removed hunted for several years right along with the other dogs and a Brit with a rear leg missing at the hock from getting hung up in a fence he tried to jump.I can also take you out with my soon to be 5 yr old that has a steel plate, 13 screws, a foot of wire, and a tube of super glue in his left hip and he will hunt as big and wide as you want and do it all day. Or I could go back in time and recall a dog named Ripsnorter who was possibly the best young dog running years ago till he had his back broken. He still run trials but wasn't quite as good as he often fell when he turned left. But you won't ever find a dog any better in the field for the whole day. I also trained a bitch that had a terrible bite for a fellow but she hunted well all day though it was hard to keep weight on her. I also know as well as you do I think,that there have been several FC that were dysplastic and had problems but they could run for hours till they got older or had surgery to help them.

I have commented before that I have found one Brit that had no desire to find birds and haven't encountered a single GSP that wouldn't hunt. We continue to hear the field people run down the show dogs that won't hunt and there have been a breed or two that over many many years have had most of the desire bred out of them, but in most cases its still there waiting to be used. They won't run as fast or as wide, they won't win most trials, but they are still good looking examples of their breed and most will hunt.

I too, get concerned about what show breeding can produce over many generations, but I am just as concerned about people breeding bird dawgs that we have no idea what breed they are or what defects were overlooked because the dog could run and find a bird. If we don't care about the full package then we are part of the problem and not a solution for any breed. A dog with correct conformation is just as capable of performing in the field as one that doesn't. In no way is it an either or situation. There are way to many examples out there and quite a few right here on this forum that proves it works if the breeders will just do iut and not always look for an excuse why it isn't important.

Yep, birds are important, but so is the complete package, conformation, hunting instinct, and trainability. Try and put one above the others and you have lost the ability to improve a breed but rather you just change it. Breeding to a dog that is way oversized because he won a trial when there are many dogs in the standard who have won many trials, or breeding to a dog that is an unrecognized color because he hunts well when there are hundreds of dog withthe right color that hunt just as well are examples and there are many more. It happened to several breeds and can happen again. and will if we as breeders don't breed to produce the best speciman of the breed. Bird dogs are good but Brits and GSPs are better and they all hunt as well as the others.

Ezzy

Ezzy

[kninebirddog]

your grasping at straws on medical issues which a dog is over coming and has the drive to go on remember I live and work on a pheasant preserve brittanys setter pointers GWp GSP gordons griffon weims pudel pointers Poodles munsterlander both large and small springers labs we get all flavors of dogs out here ...
we also have dogs that hunt out here and their owners take wild bird hunting that have had accidents and lost limbs or even 2 that hunt with one eye from getting in to bushes and damaged the eye to bad to save....

So let's get back in track

A dog that has the conformation and Ok maybe small or maybe tall ...doesn't make that dog trash do you breed a tall dog to a tall dog No nor do you breed a small dog to a smaller one but if both dogs display and over all package then you breed the smaller one to the taller one to produce the desired size then take that dog and breed it to a normal size dog that also displays the desired traits

all dogs have some fault so you breed to help over come the faults

but I am also going to say hat some judges will put a placement on are field conformation wrecks. and if those judges are allowed to continue judges our breed they will be the ones to further an atheltic dog turning into a long coated pile of fluff. and I refuse to allo my dogs to go down that path just to get a CH as an AKC Ch is pure fluff pretty but means nothing about what kinda bird dog that dog may be

So yes if I have a field dog that i can go on the show circuit for a little while Sure it is a cute title here and there...but it will not make the substance of my program i do not ahve the money nor the time nor the desire to prance around in the show ring

[WildRose]

I will see if I can find pictures of a couple of three legged dogs that we hunted over all day along with the other dogs. Don't think they were perfect specimens. A GSP with a front shoulder removed hunted for several years right along with the other dogs and a Brit with a rear leg missing at the hock from getting hung up in a fence he tried to jump.I can also take you out with my soon to be 5 yr old that has a steel plate, 13 screws, a foot of wire, and a tube of super glue in his left hip and he will hunt as big and wide as you want and do it all day. Or I could go back in time and recall a dog named Ripsnorter who was possibly the best young dog running years ago till he had his back broken. He still run trials but wasn't quite as good as he often fell when he turned left. But you won't ever find a dog any better in the field for the whole day.

I hate to point out the obvious but if those dog had not had incredible drive and desire they would not have been able to perform with their handicaps. That drive and desire is a product of their genetics which overshadowed their physical problems.

If conformation doesn't matter why are we even discussing it ???

If breed type and conformation mean nothing to a "breeder" then they might as well breed hybrids. However in some breeds meeting a conformation standard has little to do with what show judges will put up; it's more a function of what's in fad at the time or what their own personal preference is.

I watched some of the recent Westminster Dog show footage. The GSP's were a HUGE class and about 1/3 of the dogs in the class were primarily white with liver patches and little or no ticking. My wife laughed when I shook my head and said all or most of those dogs would be out in the first cut or two. I was absolutely right and it was pretty obvious that it was far more about the color and marking pattern than anything else because of how quickly they were dismissed.

We need to do a better job within our breed clubs (who set the standards) making sure that what's going on in the show ring produces dogs that can still perform to a very high level in the field. Of course as long as there have been pure breeds (working and sporting) there have always been "difficulties" on keeping the show and performance folks on the same page.

Whether you like the breed or not, or how they do it the ABC by far has set up the best system of any of the breeds to keep the show and field folks at least closer to being on the same page. One can't begin to aruge it either since they have more than double the number of DC's of any other breed. That doesn't make them "better dogs" than other breeds, but it does show that indeed they have a better system. CR

[fuzznut]

To achieve a Dual Championship, the dog has to be a bird dog first! The FC title is by far more difficult to achieve.

Conformation wise, I can overlook small problems and if these things don't impact the dogs performance abilities, it's not a big deal. Too big is more of a problem for me, then too small. But I may feel differently if I had Britts. My breed doesn't have a size DQ.

I've kept, trialed and bred dogs that wouldn't finish in the show ring, because they were good field dogs. I've kept and bred dogs that couldn't finish their FC, but they were still bird dogs. They all brought something to the table, all had something to contribute. So when you see someone walk up to the line with an ugly dog, don't assume it can't offer something. And when you see that beautiful show dog, don't assume it don't hunt. There are many reasons a dog may never finish it's FC title,but it may still be a wonderful animal.

Trying to breed that DC is sometimes a real compromise and there are many out there who won't compromise in any way, shape or form. And I don't think that is necassarily a bad thing either. There are lots of really nice dogs out there that could be DC's if their owners wanted to pursue that path. You have to look for them.

Snips, bet it was the same Britt person that put that last point on one of my DC boys!
Dual