A pointing lab is just a lab/cross

[clink83]

I see doc e is still using the bill Clinton argument. Pointing is a trait, not a "strain". The apla does not set the breed standard, so its opinion is irrevelant.http://www.thelabradorclub.com/subpages ... +Labradors

POINTING LABRADORS

The clear and unarguable fact is that the Labrador is a retriever, not a pointing dog. There may be a residual instinct to point in certain Labradors. That does not make the Labrador a pointing breed. It was bred for use as a retriever of game and in this country particularly, as a waterfowl retriever. There are any number of sporting breeds that excel at pointing upland game as well as flushing such game. The Labrador is not one of those breeds and should not be bred or sold to the public as a pointing breed.

The regulatory club for akc labs has stated that the pointing trait should not be encouraged.

Argue all you want, but in the eyes of the akc pls are the same as outcrosses or invalid coat colors. They are not a "strain" and its an undesirable trait.

[Hunt1Fish2]

Just my 2cents but my Lab who happens to be a pointing lab has never yet flushed a bird,he has always pointed them and held a point till we get to him. His longest point was on a rooster and it was for about 30secs, so for being a close working dog like I want that is dang good and never will he actually need to hold his point that long. He has had around 40 birds shot over him as well as pointing and holding point on over 60+ birds. He is just barely over 10months old and has worked harder to find birds than any of the "real pointing" breeds that I've seen work in real life. And to Nike gun dogs original post of them being a mutt? My lab is a purebred Labrador retriever. Doc- I agree with everything you have said. Not tryng to anger anybody, just my 2 cents

[ezzy333]

I see doc e is still using the bill Clinton argument. Pointing is a trait, not a "strain". The apla does not set the breed standard, so its opinion is irrevelant.http://www.thelabradorclub.com/subpages ... +Labradors

POINTING LABRADORS

The clear and unarguable fact is that the Labrador is a retriever, not a pointing dog. There may be a residual instinct to point in certain Labradors. That does not make the Labrador a pointing breed. It was bred for use as a retriever of game and in this country particularly, as a waterfowl retriever. There are any number of sporting breeds that excel at pointing upland game as well as flushing such game. The Labrador is not one of those breeds and should not be bred or sold to the public as a pointing breed.

The regulatory club for akc labs has stated that the pointing trait should not be encouraged.

Argue all you want, but in the eyes of the akc pls are the same as outcrosses or invalid coat colors. They are not a "strain" and its an undesirable trait.

The whole premise of your argument is flawed as the AKC doesn't make standards and there is no standard that regulates what a dog might do in the field. There are pointers that flush and if someone wants to breed for that characteristic there would be a lot more. A lab is a lab and some point and some flush. The breed will remain a breed till someone starts breeding for just one trait and then we will see them grow apart just like the dogs bred strictly for show and those bred strictly for trialing with no regard for the complete package.

[clink83]

That's a matter of semantics. The parent club says no pointing, and has the lab competing in retriever trials. That's and open and close case. If you're breeding akc "pointing labs" they are no more legit than blue weims.
Akc standards are set by the parent club. You should know that as a Britt breeder...when's the last time a black Britt won a bench title?

[nikegundog]

The whole premise of your argument is flawed as the AKC doesn't make standards and there is no standard that regulates what a dog might do in the field. There are pointers that flush and if someone wants to breed for that characteristic there would be a lot more. A lab is a lab and some point and some flush. The breed will remain a breed till someone starts breeding for just one trait and then we will see them grow apart just like the dogs bred strictly for show and those bred strictly for trialing with no regard for the complete package.

The breed club sets the standard and the breed club says that labs shouldn't be bred to point. Should the breed club be ignored by breeders? Should Brittney's be bred to run like pointers?

[clink83]

Or, just not register your dogs with the AKC, and find someone who doesn't expressly ban it.

[ezzy333]

That's a matter of semantics. The parent club says no pointing, and has the lab competing in retriever trials. That's and open and close case. If you're breeding akc "pointing labs" they are no more legit than blue weims.
Akc standards are set by the parent club. You should know that as a Britt breeder...when's the last time a black Britt won a bench title?

Brit standard says no black, not AKC standard. But they register dogs that won't retrieve so and there is nothing saying that they won't register a retriever that points. All they are trying to prevent is people thinking a lab that points is a different breed. And even that is kind of a stretch since pointing or flushing has nothing to do with retrieving.

Ezzy

[nikegundog]

That's a matter of semantics. The parent club says no pointing, and has the lab competing in retriever trials. That's and open and close case. If you're breeding akc "pointing labs" they are no more legit than blue weims.
Akc standards are set by the parent club. You should know that as a Britt breeder...when's the last time a black Britt won a bench title?

Brit standard says no black, not AKC standard. But they register dogs that won't retrieve so and there is nothing saying that they won't register a retriever that points. All they are trying to prevent is people thinking a lab that points is a different breed. And even that is kind of a stretch since pointing or flushing has nothing to do with retrieving.

Ezzy

Just retrieving? What about upland hunting?

[slistoe]

That's a matter of semantics. The parent club says no pointing, and has the lab competing in retriever trials. That's and open and close case. If you're breeding akc "pointing labs" they are no more legit than blue weims.
Akc standards are set by the parent club. You should know that as a Britt breeder...when's the last time a black Britt won a bench title?

Brit standard says no black, not AKC standard. But they register dogs that won't retrieve so and there is nothing saying that they won't register a retriever that points. All they are trying to prevent is people thinking a lab that points is a different breed. And even that is kind of a stretch since pointing or flushing has nothing to do with retrieving.

Ezzy

Just retrieving? What about upland hunting?

Come on, you are going to argue that the Labrador Retriever is to be bred as an upland hunter? It is a RETRIEVER - used to retrieve game. Any other use is ancillary to the intended purpose and should not be the focus of breeding decisions.

[Doc E]

All they are trying to prevent is people thinking a lab that points is a different breed.

Ezzy

Exactly correct................ Some people just don't get it ---- and probably never will.



.

[AlbertaChessie]

AlbertaChessie wrote:
Its a WELL known fact that labs are not the best sight markers when compared to other retreiver breeds.


That's got to be the best joke of the day. ... ... .... LMAO


.

But they arent Doc. They are pretty darn good, but THE best sight markers absolutely not. Labs are phenominal if you want a multi purpose, multi environment, multi game retriever. sight marking, they simply arent the absolute when it comes down to that specific trait. Not downplaying labs at all, as thats what I ran and do run for the last 15 years. BUT, from my experience, and based on the experiences of most guys up this way (where waterfowling is MUCH MUCCCHHH more prevalant than down those ways) labs dont mark quit as well as the bigger, tougher brown boys/gals.

Shouldnt have stated 'well known fact', more like based on experience amongst the community up here.

[clink83]

That's a matter of semantics. The parent club says no pointing, and has the lab competing in retriever trials. That's and open and close case. If you're breeding akc "pointing labs" they are no more legit than blue weims.
Akc standards are set by the parent club. You should know that as a Britt breeder...when's the last time a black Britt won a bench title?

Brit standard says no black, not AKC standard. But they register dogs that won't retrieve so and there is nothing saying that they won't register a retriever that points. All they are trying to prevent is people thinking a lab that points is a different breed. And even that is kind of a stretch since pointing or flushing has nothing to do with retrieving.

Ezzy

Except that it does. Do flat coated, noviscotia duck tolling, golden, or any other retrievers point? NO, because if they did, they would not be retrievers. By definition, if its a retriever, it's not a pointing dog. The proof of it is clear if you look at what kind of trials the parent club allows. Its the Bill Clinton agrument all over again, if you know what I mean.
If they were ok with pointing labs, don't you think it would be part of their trials, or at least don't you think they would allow them in pointing dog trials?
There is no ambiguity in their statement, saying "its ok to breed labs to point, just don't call them pointing labs"

The clear and unarguable fact is that the Labrador is a retriever, not a pointing dog. There may be a residual instinct to point in certain Labradors. That does not make the Labrador a pointing breed. It was bred for use as a retriever of game and in this country particularly, as a waterfowl retriever. There are any number of sporting breeds that excel at pointing upland game as well as flushing such game. The Labrador is not one of those breeds and should not be bred or sold to the public as a pointing breed.

As far as the black comment goes, UKC and other people that recognize "French brittanys" vs "american brittanys" allow black, where AKC does not. Either way, the AKC/parent club decides what a breed can or cant do.If you breed a pointing dog only to point and not retrieve is a whole other subject.
If you breed a pointing dog only to point and not retrieve is a whole other subject. I think we can all agree that noone that really cares about "bettering the breed" really allows that.

[ezzy333]

Those of you that love to argue semantics have at it. But I would guess there are many more Labs used to hunt pheasants with than any other breed. Those dogs either point or flush. But they are still Labs and their full name is Labrador Retriever. Believe it or not retrieving is a different function of the lab as well as every other hunting dog that either points or flushes. All hunting dogs have in their past been bred to retrieve and it shows in the fact that they all still carry the instinct to do just that even though several have ignored the importance of retrieving in recent times.

Ezzy

[clink83]

By that logic it would be OK to breed Brittanys with poor pointing abilities with each other to make flushers since they do not say they have to point in the standard? Are you ok with that, because that is you and docs argument applied to pointers.
A+b=c entails that c-b=a.
No one has answered with an explanation why no other retriever group dogs point either.

[AlbertaChessie]

I agree ezzy. all breeds are developed with genetics from multiple breeds per say. to be ignorant enough to think that some hound trait, spaniel, pointer etc etc WONT show up somewhere in the gene pool is a silly stance. Furthermore, those that say 'having a pointer in the shed' would leave lasting pointer qualities in a whole line of dogs is absurd to say the least. Breeding selected labs that have exhibited a profinciency in pointing for many years does make sense however. Saying those dogs are any lesser of a lab is ridiculous.

I would expect those using the 'pointing labs arent labs' are firm on the beleif that trialing dogs make the best field dogs too. Case in point, not correct

[Jagerdawg]

By that logic it would be OK to breed Brittanys with poor pointing abilities with each other to make flushers since they do not say they have to point in the standard? Are you ok with that, because that is you and docs argument applied to pointers.
A+b=c entails that c-b=a.

So what you are saying is a Lab is only a Lab if it retrieves only. If it has any instinct to flush game or point game it isn't a true lab. That makes as much sense as your Bill Clinton analogy

[clink83]

By that logic it would be OK to breed Brittanys with poor pointing abilities with each other to make flushers since they do not say they have to point in the standard? Are you ok with that, because that is you and docs argument applied to pointers.
A+b=c entails that c-b=a.

So what you are saying is a Lab is only a Lab if it retrieves only. If it has any instinct to flush game or point game it isn't a true lab. That makes as much sense as your Bill Clinton analogy

A lab is a lab when its parents are labs. Its no more acceptable to breed pointing Labs when the parent club forbids it than breeding nonstandard coat colors. Blue weims are still weims, but have that coat color as a result of outcrossing and should not be bred.
Sex is sex, and breeding for a trait not allowed is still unacceptable.

[AlbertaChessie]

And that statement right there clink is why the AKC, CKC, and so forth should have no bearing on field dogs. Some of the best dogs (labs) ive ever shot over were 20 lbs heavier than the breed standard and had the odd white marking on the toe. Any less of a lab? not a bloody chance. A mixed mutt by pencil pusher standard...you bet!

So if a breeder has two titled dogs that have excelled in the retrieving side that have shown the ability to point, he shouldnt breed the two because the AKC says that in turn would make them lesser labs? makes perfect sense :roll:

[Jagerdawg]

By that logic it would be OK to breed Brittanys with poor pointing abilities with each other to make flushers since they do not say they have to point in the standard? Are you ok with that, because that is you and docs argument applied to pointers.
A+b=c entails that c-b=a.

So what you are saying is a Lab is only a Lab if it retrieves only. If it has any instinct to flush game or point game it isn't a true lab. That makes as much sense as your Bill Clinton analogy

A lab is a lab when its parents are labs. Its no more acceptable to breed pointing Labs when the parent club forbids it than breeding nonstandard coat colors. Blue weims are still weims, but have that coat color as a result of outcrossing and should not be bred.
Sex is sex, and breeding for a trait not allowed is still unacceptable.

Breed standard says nothing about flushing, pointing or retrieving game for that matter. So we must be going on your opinion that a lab that points or flushes game its not a lab and shouldn't be breed.

[clink83]

Breed standard says nothing about flushing, pointing or retrieving game for that matter. So we must be going on your opinion that a lab that points or flushes game its not a lab and shouldn't be breed.

The parent club lists pointing labs under "designer dogs" and says their official position is that it is not allowed. Not my opinion, theirs.
hhttp://www.thelabradorclub.com/subpages/show_c ... +Labradors <--you can't ignore that

And that statement right there clink is why the AKC, CKC, and so forth should have no bearing on field dogs. Some of the best dogs (labs) ive ever shot over were 20 lbs heavier than the breed standard and had the odd white marking on the toe. Any less of a lab? not a bloody chance. A mixed mutt by pencil pusher standard...you bet!

So if a breeder has two titled dogs that have excelled in the retrieving side that have shown the ability to point, he shouldnt breed the two because the AKC says that in turn would make them lesser labs? makes perfect sense :roll:

If you sell your dogs as AKC, CKC, ect registered, then you should conform to the breed standards, period. Breeding dogs out of standard to win trials is just as bad as the show breeders breeding to win shows with no regard to the standard. If you breed two MH or FC labs because of their titles and health, go for it. If you breed them because you want a better point, thats against the standard.

If you want to sell out of standard dogs, dont register them. It's pretty simple really. I see people doing it all the time.

[Jagerdawg]

Breed standard does say " Above all, a Labrador Retriever must be well balanced, enabling it to move in the show ring or work in the field with little or no effort. The typical Labrador possesses style and quality without over refinement, and substance without lumber or cloddiness. The Labrador is bred primarily as a working gun dog; structure and soundness are of great importance. "
"is bred primarily as working gun dog" they are either going to have to flush game or point game to accomplish that.

[Jagerdawg]

It says that no where that is just your interpretation of an opinion given not a BREED STANDARD. I'm done arguing you wheel only be here long enough to get this profile blocked then it will be on to the next one. Happy hunting

[AlbertaChessie]

Breed standard says nothing about flushing, pointing or retrieving game for that matter. So we must be going on your opinion that a lab that points or flushes game its not a lab and shouldn't be breed.

The parent club lists pointing labs under "designer dogs" and says their official position is that it is not allowed. Not my opinion, theirs.

And that statement right there clink is why the AKC, CKC, and so forth should have no bearing on field dogs. Some of the best dogs (labs) ive ever shot over were 20 lbs heavier than the breed standard and had the odd white marking on the toe. Any less of a lab? not a bloody chance. A mixed mutt by pencil pusher standard...you bet!

So if a breeder has two titled dogs that have excelled in the retrieving side that have shown the ability to point, he shouldnt breed the two because the AKC says that in turn would make them lesser labs? makes perfect sense :roll:

If you sell your dogs as AKC, CKC, ect registered, then you should conform to the breed standards, period. Breeding dogs out of standard to win trials is just as bad as the show breeders breeding to win shows with no regard to the standard. If you breed two MH or FC labs because of their titles and health, go for it. If you breed them because you want a better point, thats against the standard.

If you want to sell out of standard dogs, dont register them. It's pretty simple really. I see people doing it all the time.

So youre saying that my previous 105lb chocolate lab shouldnt of been bred? Even though he was a titled CKC registered dog solely because he didnt fit within the 'breed standard' as put forth by 'fanciers' at the kennel clubs? Youre saying his great coat, phenomial muscle tone and ridiculous ability in the field should not have been passed down to a litter....because he was by CKC standards 'overweight'.....your sense is superbly lacking.

Statements like that are exactly why good gun dog lines (Not trialing lines) get flat ourt ruined. The AKC, CKC and every trialing group should be the last resort for setting standards for actual field dogs.

[clink83]

Well, what is the point of registering your dogs as pure breeds then? If you breed out of standard field dogs how do you justify complaining about sporting group show dogs that can't hunt?

[LabGuy]

I think this thread carries more BS than a thread on politics would... :roll:

[AlbertaChessie]

Well, what is the point of registering your dogs as pure breeds then? If you breed out of standard field dogs how do you justify complaining about sporting group show dogs that can't hunt?

i have a feeling we are kind of derailing ehre, but how is breeding an above standard sized dog have anything to do with non huntable show lines? you do realize groups like the AKC are solely responsible for such things as show vs field right?

[ACooper]

He is just barely over 10months old and has worked harder to find birds than any of the "real pointing" breeds that I've seen work in real life.

How many have you seen?

[ACooper]

you do realize groups like the AKC are solely responsible for such things as show vs field right?

How exactly is the AKC responsible for show vs field?

[Hunt1Fish2]

I have watched 3 or 4 field trials at Pleasant Creek State park and I have hunted over a handful of GSP's. As well as waching other pointing breeds at the UGA hunt test in parnell last fall. So if that isn't an adequate amount to be judging my opinion on, I don't know what is. Sure my pup isn't the best or better than all the other dogs I've seen but he has been better than a large amount of what I have seen. I'm not trying say that labs who point are superior, I just don't like people bashing on the labs who do point and are good at it.

[clink83]

Well, what is the point of registering your dogs as pure breeds then? If you breed out of standard field dogs how do you justify complaining about sporting group show dogs that can't hunt?

i have a feeling we are kind of derailing ehre, but how is breeding an above standard sized dog have anything to do with non huntable show lines? you do realize groups like the AKC are solely responsible for such things as show vs field right?

Well, the parent club is at fault. Both field and show have to be held to the same standards. The Britt world has done an excellent job that should be an example for other breeds. You can't really complain about foot long hair on show setters if you're breeding lemon colored gaps or pointing labs.

The standard not saying labs shouldn't point is the argument made. It doesn't, but the parent club says pointing isnt legit, and has that statement under the heading "designer dogs", much to the apla's dismay.

[Jagerdawg]

Well, what is the point of registering your dogs as pure breeds then? If you breed out of standard field dogs how do you justify complaining about sporting group show dogs that can't hunt?

i have a feeling we are kind of derailing ehre, but how is breeding an above standard sized dog have anything to do with non huntable show lines? you do realize groups like the AKC are solely responsible for such things as show vs field right?

Well, the parent club is at fault. Both field and show have to be held to the same standards. The Britt world has done an excellent job that should be an example for other breeds. You can't really complain about foot long hair on show setters if you're breeding lemon colored gaps or pointing labs.

The standard not saying labs shouldn't point is the argument made. It doesn't, but the parent club says pointing isnt legit, and has that statement under the heading "designer dogs", much to the apla's dismay.

Ok I will take the bait. Where in the BREED STANDARD that you keep quoting does it say that labs shouldn't point? It doesn't.

[Chukar12]

To believe that a pointing lab does not have a recent cross outside its breed is every bit as naive as those of us with continentals who would blindly proclaim a purity of strain. The everyday look of Britts and GSP's has changed over time, some will say for better and others will argue not. Have a gander at the feet of some of the top pointing lab lines in the country.

I could not care less what they do with the dogs as long as they breed for health and make a reasonable effort to insure that a responsible market exists for the product. I myself am for more concerned about figuring out how to stop the unwashed masses from breeding fighting dogs and spurring quantities of dog legislation.

Breed clubs set a standard and they focus on what they deem measurable like dimension, color and weight. There are arguably more important factors such as temperament and performance that most AKC members cannot and will not ever understand, it ain't their thing. I for one am not inclined to tell those people what they should like or want, but I also would not breed to their mediocre bird dogs. By the same token, there is a dog or two running in the Brittany world right now that would probably help improve the field characteristics and I would use them, if I did not suspect that somewhere in the not so distant past someone was cheating I do not care to perpetuate that.

Maybe the pointing lab folks will take their strain, breed, what have you and break free from the AKC or CKC guidelines. Maybe they will continue to selectively breed labs or use whatever means necessary to improve the pointing ability of the dogs. However, one has got to be realistic about their capabilities and purpose some of these comments have gotten carried away...No matter how much whatever has been added to the mix in a large scale you still have dogs with much greater inclination to ground scent, limited range, heavy coats that create major heat related heath risks in many upland scenarios. I know many people some very good friends included who love this type of dog, they are easy to control, they work close; and for many hunters control and close cures a lot of their dog ills.

I put this in the silly argument category...arguing that a lab is a sufficient pointing dog by the standards of other pointing dogs should probably be avoided and that should start with those of you with the pointing labs. Standing game is not the end all be all of a pointing dog; anymore than trotting/swimming out and bringing back a bird carcass is the end of retrieverdom.

[Doc E]

. Where in the BREED STANDARD that you keep quoting does it say that labs shouldn't point? It doesn't.

It DOESN'T.........It says they "should not be sold as a pointing breed".

He just can't fathom it and wants it to say what HE wants it to say.

[nikegundog]

Just retrieving? What about upland hunting?

Come on, you are going to argue that the Labrador Retriever is to be bred as an upland hunter? It is a RETRIEVER - used to retrieve game. Any other use is ancillary to the intended purpose and should not be the focus of breeding decisions.

Yes, I will because upland hunting is part of the breed standard.

[clink83]

Ok I will take the bait. Where in the BREED STANDARD that you keep quoting does it say that labs shouldn't point? It doesn't.

That's the issue. Breed standards tell you what the dog should look like, not how it hunts. Doc E and others are claiming because it is not in the breed standard, its ok to breed and sell pointing labs.
This is the last time I'm going to post this, because I'm tired of reposting it and people saying "it doesn't say that in the breed standard!"
If you naviagate to the lovely heading of "designer dogs":

you end up at http://www.thelabradorclub.com/subpages ... +Labradors
which says

POINTING LABRADORS

The clear and unarguable fact is that the Labrador is a retriever, not a pointing dog. There may be a residual instinct to point in certain Labradors. That does not make the Labrador a pointing breed. It was bred for use as a retriever of game and in this country particularly, as a waterfowl retriever. There are any number of sporting breeds that excel at pointing upland game as well as flushing such game. The Labrador is not one of those breeds and should not be bred or sold to the public as a pointing breed.

Now, thats as clear as clear can be. The statement is under the same heading as labradoodles, mini labs, and silver labs, which are also deemed by the lab parent club as illegitimate dogs. It may not be in the breed standard, but it's the offical position of the AKC lab parent club. The language about "as well as flushing such game" is rather odd, I must say.

The only reason I have a dog in this fight is because of this:

My argument is this: A lab is and was always a great dog, why did people have to make a pointer out of a flusher? Isnt this just confusing people who might buy a lab and expect a flusher and get one that wants to point? Involving more training? Just get a pointer is my say
Isaac and Banks

Shame - Shame Isaac ! !

The actual name of the Lab is a Labrador RETRIEVER ----
NOTHING in the breed description says anything about Flushing or Pointing. It says they are Retrievers.
Some Labs Flush (naturally) and some Labs Point (naturally)....... One of the original foundation dogs in the Labrador was a POINTER......... Sometimes this trait shows up. Some 7% to 10% of Labs from NON-Pointing pedigrees will point. From good PL breeders, 100% will point.
Some people don't want both a Pointer and a Flusher --- they want one dog that can do it all. Do you want two dogs ?
Some folks want a Lab that flushes --- some want a Lab that points.

you have a Lab --- you need to study up on labs some more before you state incorrect "facts".

Ignorance can be cured, stupid is forever ----- I hope i'm helping with your cure.



.

Honestly, I have a britt, and have no problem with people ruining the lab breed. However, when a grown man attacks a 15 year old kid with wrong "facts", then it's a little absurd.

There, I'm done.

[Trekmoor]

What gets me about this entire thread is that I thought the labrador breed standard said labs were retrievers. To me this means their proper purpose is to walk to heel during walk- up hunts or sit at heel during drives or sit in hides while waiting for game to be shot that they can be sent to retrieve.
If that is the case then both the people that work labs as pointers and the people that work labs as spaniels are "wrong." The dog can do those things but neither were what the breed was originally bred for.

Bill T.

[nikegundog]

What gets me about this entire thread is that I thought the labrador breed standard said labs were retrievers. To me this means their proper purpose is to walk to heel during walk- up hunts or sit at heel during drives or sit in hides while waiting for game to be shot that they can be sent to retrieve.
If that is the case then both the people that work labs as pointers and the people that work labs as spaniels are "wrong." The dog can do those things but neither were what the breed was originally bred for.

Bill T.

They are a waterfowl and upland game dog, that's the position of breed club.

[ACooper]

Honestly, I have a britt, and have no problem with people ruining the lab breed. However, when a grown man attacks a 15 year old kid with wrong "facts", then it's a little absurd.

There, I'm done.

I wondered if I was the only one who noticed that.

[Winchey]

What gets me about this entire thread is that I thought the labrador breed standard said labs were retrievers. To me this means their proper purpose is to walk to heel during walk- up hunts or sit at heel during drives or sit in hides while waiting for game to be shot that they can be sent to retrieve.
If that is the case then both the people that work labs as pointers and the people that work labs as spaniels are "wrong." The dog can do those things but neither were what the breed was originally bred for.

Bill T.

They are a waterfowl and upland game dog, that's the position of breed club.

A retriever of waterfowl and upland game or a retriever of waterfowl and hunter of upland game?

[Trekmoor]

That's what I was trying to get at. They are just as much not spaniels as they are not pointers . The breed is the labrador retriever and it is good at it's job and can do a few other jobs besides.

Bill T.

[slistoe]

Thanks for explaining it more clearly Bill T.

Show folks are not the nemesis of working dogs, field folks are the nemesis of breeds. Why not just breed anything to anything and call them "Hunting Dogs"?

[clink83]

What gets me about this entire thread is that I thought the labrador breed standard said labs were retrievers. To me this means their proper purpose is to walk to heel during walk- up hunts or sit at heel during drives or sit in hides while waiting for game to be shot that they can be sent to retrieve.
If that is the case then both the people that work labs as pointers and the people that work labs as spaniels are "wrong." The dog can do those things but neither were what the breed was originally bred for.

Bill T.

Funny you mention that. I have a friend who's husband had a FT bred lab that they claimed wouldn't hunt upland birds, but was a retrieving/handling machine. I always thought it was a training problem..but many its not.

[Trekmoor]

I would be very surprised to encounter a F.T. winning lab that would not hunt as a spaniel ....if it was given sufficient chance to with game around. An old gamekeeper was given a F.T.Ch. lab when it was 6 years old by a trialer. After about a fortnight with the dog the gamekeeper commented that the dog would not run in and it would not hunt for unshot game . He then added, "But I'll soon change aw that !" and he did ! By the end of the shooting season that dog was as wild as the keepers other dogs. :roll:

Bill T.

[nikegundog]

What gets me about this entire thread is that I thought the labrador breed standard said labs were retrievers. To me this means their proper purpose is to walk to heel during walk- up hunts or sit at heel during drives or sit in hides while waiting for game to be shot that they can be sent to retrieve.
If that is the case then both the people that work labs as pointers and the people that work labs as spaniels are "wrong." The dog can do those things but neither were what the breed was originally bred for.

Bill T.

They are a waterfowl and upland game dog, that's the position of breed club.

A retriever of waterfowl and upland game or a retriever of waterfowl and hunter of upland game?

Being that the standard calls for "substance and soundness to hunt upland game for long hours under difficult conditions" I would imagine the word Hunting refers to more than riding in a wagon or walking at heel, but then again Bill Clinton argued what the word "is" meant.

[Double Shot Banks]

Is the arguing all about a lab being a "pointing breed" or a "breed that can be trained to point"?
If a lab can be trained to flush or point so good..then its just another plus for the breed.
Although i do not agree with it
Isaac and Banks

[Doc E]

Is the arguing all about a lab being a "pointing breed" or a "breed that can be trained to point"?
If a lab can be trained to flush or point so good..then its just another plus for the breed.
Although i do not agree with it
Isaac and Banks

PLs are not trained to point anymore than any other dog that points.
Pointing is genetic.



.

[clink83]

banks: The argument is that the akc parent club has issued a stance on pointing labs that they consider pls to be designer dogs, and should not be bred or sold as pointing dogs. People just are trying to argue it doesn't say that so they can justify their dogs.
In reality you could breed silver pointing labradoodles, and it doesn't matter one bit as long as you don't sell them under a label that they conflict with (like akc). It devalues the name of the akc when people say " akc pointing labs" or "akc blue weims" despite them being not in line with akc standards. If you pay a price premium for a registered pure breed you have a realistic right to get a dog that is in standard and doesn't have another illicit breed in its background(blue weims).

[Doc E]

Hey Clink Click here and read post #2 viewtopic.php?f=69&t=41935


.

[JKP]

The breed club sets the standard and the breed club says that labs shouldn't be bred to point.

So which club is that?? or which registry?? we have a half dozen registries in North America. Americans don't give a hoot about tradition...that's why you see VW Beetles with a 454 big block in the back seat...why we have 35 lb GSPs and all white GWPs running in front of horses. Its about what "I want" or "look what I did" with the breed. Tradition don't mean %$@p!!

To me the whole point of having a pointing dog that works under the gun is moot....it will never attract real pointing dog enthusiasts. IMO...PLs will remain the darling of the Soccer Mom and Dad crowd. But..so what....I don't see myself calling up the guy down the street with his PL to go training or hunting anyway. Ain't hurtin nothin'!!!

That aside...I've only seen a dozen or so of these dogs and have yet to see one point...most just dance for a moment before the flush. Have NEVER seen one stand 2-30 yds off birds and really smoke a point. Not sayin there aren't dogs that can't but your average Vdog is way better...not to mention the best longtails. Sorry...but that's what I've seen...and these folks have paid some serious $$$$.

When Alma (Alba???...whatever) started this years ago, you paid more money depending on how many generations of proven PL were in the pedigree (their proof, of course)...was suspicious from the start.

[clink83]

The breed club sets the standard and the breed club says that labs shouldn't be bred to point.

So which club is that?? or which registry?? we have a half dozen registries in North America. Americans don't give a hoot about tradition...that's why you see VW Beetles with a 454 big block in the back seat...why we have 35 lb GSPs and all white GWPs running in front of horses. Its about what "I want" or "look what I did" with the breed. Tradition don't mean %$@p!!

To me the whole point of having a pointing dog that works under the gun is moot....it will never attract real pointing dog enthusiasts. IMO...PLs will remain the darling of the Soccer Mom and Dad crowd. But..so what....I don't see myself calling up the guy down the street with his PL to go training or hunting anyway. Ain't hurtin nothin'!!!

That aside...I've only seen a dozen or so of these dogs and have yet to see one point...most just dance for a moment before the flush. Have NEVER seen one stand 2-30 yds off birds and really smoke a point. Not sayin there aren't dogs that can't but your average Vdog is way better...not to mention the best longtails. Sorry...but that's what I've seen...and these folks have paid some serious $$$$.

When Alma (Alba???...whatever) started this years ago, you paid more money depending on how many generations of proven PL were in the pedigree (their proof, of course)...was suspicious from the start.

Thats my point, it doesn't matter what you breed or hunt, you're free to do it. In American, the AKC is the main registry for 95% of the buying public. If your dog is UKC registered or FDSB or something, you probably know enough to make informed descisions on your own.

There are tons of people selling nonAKC purebreds that are fine hunters. Around here an AKC pup is usually 650-1800, where a nonregistered purebred usually sells for 300-350. If you want to command that higher price, you should be breeding to standard, and not trying to sell/breed something that the parent club says is unacceptable. Is that really such a hard ethic to understand?

I bought by Britt from a good breeder, from good bloodlines. I should be able to trust my dog is a britt, and doesn't have any setter or pointer in him. If I enter my dog in an AKC trial, I should be able to compete against britts, not outcrosses that look like britts. Is that really that hard to understand?

My personal opinion is that breeding PLs is bad for the breed. Assuming mendelian genetics, breeding a true breeding PL lowers the probability of breeding a dog with correct working conformation and temperment and no genetic disease by 1/4, if its two genes, 1/16, three 1/64 ect.