Question for the masses

[ACC/Boykin]

A hunt test is not the only way of evaluating and proving if a dog can do it. A duck hunt can prove it just as well. If you can go and watch the parents work at a hunt or their place of residence/training grounds and if they can do the job and do it well and if they have all the proper health clearances then what is problem in breeding them. I've been around HT dogs and dogs that hunt and have never run a HT and I've seen good from both sides. The key is to observe the parents and their quality's and get the proper health certs: Any good breeder will gladly accomodate this.

And even though there are people out there who don't run HT's or FT's they do train their dogs to those standards. Maybe not many but they are out there.

And RCH, a whistle is not only valuable in a hunting situation but from a safety standpoint as well.

[quackaddict]

would someone please inform me on this e-collar thing?

[HuntinCosta]

2th thats a different breed you were hanging with. Thats how field trial people are. it makes sense, they are all competing against each other and they do think their shit doesnt stink. thats not what hunt tests are about. there is no competition.

[Palmetto Bug]

You may have a great dog, maybe the best ever, but the best way to PROVE (to others)it is to run them in competition or against a standard with impartial judges. Everybody thinks they have a great dog. If you want to breed (or brag), you should have to PROVE your dog is up to the standard. If you're not planning on breeding, tests and trials have little value other than setting training goals, like browndog said.

[ACC/Boykin]

quack they do have a shock effect on a dog and in the wrong hands can really hurt and ruin a good dog. But, with someone who knows how to use them and on the proper settings they are a lot more humane and beneficial than the old methods such as sling shots and marbles and bird shot. I use mine sparingly in training now and only to re-inforce a command my dog already knows never to teach a new command.

They as a whistle are as good for the safety aspect as they are for training. I know a guy that stopped his just in time with a collar right before he ran in front of a speeding car. Not the trainers fault car was in the wrong place and going way to fast.

[HuntinCosta]

i had to learn that a collar is useless without properly training yourself to use it first. all you have to do is teach a dog the three basic commands with a collar to use it succesfully and not burning your dog out. i learned the three biggest things to train with a collar are sit, back, and here. if you can use a collar correctly and teach those commands easily you have a great collar foundation.

[2thDoc]

well....what about that dog that is perfect in every way but has had the collar used inappropriately. is he worth breeding?

please prove my point for me....

[Fish]

Sure quack. E-collars are valuable training tools to owners or trainers who want the ability to train to a higher level. There is a ton of information out there on this subject. But since you asked, I'll give you my take on it. Some dogs need the collar and some can probably do without a collar, but all would benefit from them.

Some dogs cannot deal with much pressure and some can walk right through the highest stimulation settings on a collar. Therefore, it is important to know where your dogs tolerances lie. My dog, for instance, requires the Wrath of God when correction is required. And so, once you know what level of stimulation your dog can endure, you operate in that range to make timely and appropriate corrections.

What are corrections? Well, lets look to my mutt for an example. Hes a pretty hard driving dog and when he brings back a bumper he comes to heel but he will often shirk my sit command. Enter the collar. Most times, I offer him the tone, which is a warning of things to come if he chooses not to go ahead and put his ass on the ground. If he chooses to be a good little man we move along. If he chooses to be a peckerlilly, the tone is followed by electrical stimulation. Once the electrical stimulation is metted out he will usually comply without hesitation for the rest of the session, not only in sitting on que, but in all areas of our training. When he is reminded its around his neck, hes a fine boy.

Training a dog with a collar makes, on average, the learning faster because you can make corrections immediately. Also, there comes a time in some dogs lives when they step out of line and instead of John Q Heavyhand laying an asswhoppin on said fleabag, he can simply push a button and the pooch gets his commupance without associating the pain with the raised hand of his beloved owner.

There are so many benefits I can't even begin to outline them all but my wife came to understand them and you can too. Some people think they don't need them and some folks think they are inhumane. This is typical of people who have no experience with a collar or have seen or heard of an idiot using a collar inappropriately. For more information on the subject, read the book Finisheddog for a thorough understanding of one complete and humane e-collar training program.

[RCH]

Fish did u check your PM

[Fish]

Oops, did I take that question out of context? [img]graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[ACC/Boykin]

2th, guess that depends on how much damage has been done to the dog(physical and physcological sp?) and if it can be corrected.
There are definitely people out there who have no buisness with a e-collar in their hands.

Some should do like I did try it on themselves before ever putting it on their dog.

[ACC/Boykin]

Palmetto, I agree HT's are a great standard to prove/evaluate a dog but couldn't that be done just as well on a hunt or a HT style Training session?

And please don't take this personally Im not trying to be a smart butt but why should I, you or anyone else have to prove to anyone how good their dog is based on someone else's set of standards?

BTW: This is one of the best threads ever on this forum.

[BrownDog]

2th – Perfect in every way is very subjective. If the dog has never had a collar on you will never truly know how they are going to react to pressure. That is one of the many things I look at when selecting a breeding. That might not be an issue for others. So if the health checked out it might be a good choice to breed. There are just too many variables to say a blanket yes or no.

ACC – HT are simply one way to “prove” your dog. As you suggest there are many others. Evan Graham is running a dog in the WRC that has never competed in any FT or HT before. She is hands down the best dog I have ever seen! She is my pick to win!

E-collars are like any other tool. They are only as good as the operator. I will say this there are only a handful of dogs that have made it to an FC level Amish training (no e-collar). On the other hand there are thousands of meet dogs that do a very respectable job without ever wearing a collar.

It is all about your goals for that dog and how you are going to achieve them.

[Palmetto Bug]

Boykin,

If you want to compare things, you need to set a standard to compare against. Hunt tests represent one standard.

If you just want to go out into a field and watch the dog work, how do you quantify how good he is? To say,"He's a really good dog" isn't very meaningful. To say "He's a Master Hunter" or "He's SC Regional Champion" has a lot more meaning.

I occasionlally get to judge pointing dog Hunt Tests. All the dogs entered are good dogs in their owners' eyes, yet even some of the really good dogs may fail to meet the standard that day. Some do great that day yet aren't able to be great for the five or six other Hunt Tests that are required for the title. The title doesn't make the dog, it only documents the dog's ability in a standard, quantifiable way. If a dog has a title, he has been judged by several knowledgeable, unbiased judges who all agreed that he gotten the job done.

A dog with a title isn't necessarily better than a dog without one. He simply can show proof he is a good dog.

Would you go to a dentist who had all the classes but never got around to getting his diploma? How about if he told you he was really good? How about if he took you to his office and showed you how good he was? Wouldn't you still rather get a dentist who has his degree?

[ACC/Boykin]

Palmetto, I agree HT's may be the best way of evaluating a dog and it may be rare but there are other way's. I got to watch a dog over a three day hunt this dog never missed a mark(long or short), he honored, worked blind retrieves, never once broke,steady as a rock, whistle trained had awesome drive and desire(wasn't anything he wouldn't do to get his bird) and he had some of the best blind manners of any dog I have ever been around. I would take a pup out of that dog any day of the week and he's never ran in a FT and he's not a HT competitor. He just has an owner who has a high standard of training. I will most defintely say this may be rare for someone who dosen't compete their dog but they are out there and every once in a while you can evaluate their dogs qualities in a setting other than a HT or FT.

And yes on the dentist question.

[HuntinCosta]

I want to bring up another subject in this topic. It ties in well with breeding. Bloodlines are a very shaky thing now a days. obviously health issues have become a huge concern. what does everyone think should be the exact requirments for someone to be able to breed a dog. What would you do before you breed your dog?? Should a dog have heart, eyes, hips, elbows certified? Should a dog be DNA tested to prove its purity as a breed. The worst thing in breeding is the lack of truth behind it and i can give you an exact example of it. When registering a dog in AKC or UKC all that is required is a registration number of the dam and sire. Would requiring all of the above i mentioned improve the breed if all were required for breeding. Breeding should be done for the improvement of the breed not just because you want a dog.

I work at a Vet clinic and i see alot of interesting stuff coming in the door. Several months back a woman came in with her brand new black lab puppy. She was very excited and didnt want to have it neutered because she wanted to breed it one day since she paid 350 dollars for it and his nuts were worth something. Well i took a look at the dog and it had an interesting look. The doctor came in and looked at the dog and made a shocking discovery. This purebred black lab had Basset Hound legs!! He wasnt a lab at all. The owner in fact didnt know for sure which dog had bred there female but they used there 2 labs registration numbers to register the litter. Now if that doesnt beat all i dont know what does. True Story. AKC registered Labrador Basset Hound Dog.

[big dog momma]

I guess I was right the first time. Go buy a puppy from someone who knows something about breeding and get with a pro that can help you train it properly.
2TH You asked if only dogs with titles should be bred. Yes because you have a better idea of what you have. I have hunted with plenty of so called MEAT DOGS that couldn't mark a lick. They stumble on birds. The comment from the owner is "they got a good nose." Well every dog has a good nose that is why you breed for good eyes. And the comment about the whistles, If you have to handle a dog to a blind then you just need to do it when there are no birds flying. Lots of other factors flair ducks besides someone picking up a blind.

[ACC/Boykin]

And big dog momma I have hunted with some so called meat dogs that could hold their own or better with some FT and HT dogs. It's about the dog not their affiliation. And yes Ma'am before you ask I have been around quite a few HT and FT dogs.

And BTW you may have been right the first time but the tone/attitude of your message over shadowed any benefit the original poster may have got out of it.

[RCH]

well bdm i totall disagree, because i have hunted with dogs who have excelled with FT and are the most spastic dogs who have no clue what they are doing on a real hunt. It is because they can't think for themselves because they have been manipulated. If that is what you want so be it, but i am not sure that is always the case!

[Creston]

I am with you RCH. I am planning on breeding my two labs in the future. neither one are trial dogs. they both have HT and FT chanpions in there bloodline but I choose to train myself. Both were examined throughly by a vet when I got them. I believe that they will produce a great litter of pups. my male is one of the smartest dogs that I have ever seen. but he is my wife's baby. She spoils him worst than a child. my female stays outside she is a natural.

Of course all of this is my opinion. I am sure some people will disagree with me based on the posts above. BUT too bad there opinions don't count.