|
Post by hicntry on Mar 15, 2006 20:20:04 GMT -5
OK, I am back....had dogs to attend to. I am just having fun in the last couple of posts. I will never test my dogs against any others but I am doing my best to get someone else that does birds to the H/W test. I thought I had a friend bring two this time but he ifound out he is going to be in Dublin that weekend so it won't happen. He promised that they would be there next year.
"Oh yes, I agree with Sidney, I think Don should hunt a dog of his that left home by 8 weeks of age. Under that situation I bet we could find a competitor!"
Suzanne, you make it sound as though you may have to pick carefully. I was just trying to think of anyone that had a pup that would like to do this. How about 8 week old pups(or young).... that will definitely eliminate training or environmental issues. That is when you see the dog and nothing else.
I would like to see more opinion one some of the questions also. When is a dog not an airedale anymore? Where do you draw the line?
|
|
|
Post by Maverick on Mar 15, 2006 20:47:25 GMT -5
Personally, I think this has been talked to death a few times over. Appears some people still think that more talk is necessary. Don has made a few suggestions about organizing something to DO about it, but I see very little enthusiasm to actually DO anything, especially if it might be dangerous -- the forte of Airedales in their hunting heyday. I know what a champion hunting a field trialing versatile bird dog should look like. What is more important is what they DO and how they DO it. I have hunted den terriers against game that maim and kill dogs up to 5 times their size. I know what it takes to create a den terrier to DO this work. The original Airedale (aka Waterside Terrier) was used to hunt otter. Otter may be small by bear standards, but at 60 lbs and in their element, water, they are a very formidable opponent for any dog. I suspect a decent Pit Bull would likely not survive a fight in 3 ft or deeper water. Can't really try it here anyway due to game laws and such. We do have a much less formidable animal here called a nutria, and is a rodent about 1/2 the size of an otter. They are a pretty fair test of the best of the working den terriers, and most of the local guys have taken to using cut collars when hunting them, even though they don't bother with the cut collars when hunting things like coon and badger. Now if anyone is interested in testing their Airedale in the most traditional manner that is legally available, I'll arrange a hunt. The Airedales will get a chance to trail nutria (mostly in the water), bring them to bay in a burrow or fight them in blackberries or out in the water. The ones that go to ground will be bayed by den terriers, and the Airedales will get a chance to draw and kill their own nutria. This is about as close as you can legally get to traditional Airedale work. Or for the non-traditionalist, how about finding, drawing, and dispatching an American badger (different species than the English badger: about 1/2 as big, a bit tougher, and 2 to 3 times meaner and aggressive)? I could arrange a hunt, if there is interest. Anyone interested in DOing? I'm getting tired of talking ...
|
|
|
Post by Maverick on Mar 15, 2006 21:25:56 GMT -5
OK, maybe I am not quite done talking! I hate to keep harping on this, but it is either getting ignored (at least not argued against), or the contrary is being argued for without reference to my statement (suggestion ). That is the first thing that needs to be decided is: What is the job of an Airedale? Until you answer that question, how can you design test performance in the absence of criteria, standards of performance, and style of performance? What is minimally acceptable? How many different areas does an Airedale have to perform well in to be considered versatile? What is important about the Airedale to you? Personality? Ability? OR Proper trim? Tail set? What is more important to you in buying a car? Color and style, or dependability and performance? I believe, based on everything I know, and years of experience with dogs, that creating a dog that all Airedale people would be proud to own (and have no problem as recognizing as an Airedale), is this: it is many times easier to polish the looks of a top performing breed of dog, than it is to make a top performer out of a standard bred dog whose standard is designed by committee!!!!Anyone disagree?
|
|
|
Post by Wolfer on Mar 15, 2006 21:54:47 GMT -5
Hey DON can you say ROAD TRIP............. you bring Either Odie Or Titan Ill Bring Chopper and we should have a Nutria EATING tream Providing they dont eat each other ;D....
Another thing This Kinda sounds like somethign we was talking about for septemberish doesnt it.LOL
|
|
|
Post by ScottE on Mar 15, 2006 22:46:24 GMT -5
I read this board all the time I don't think I've made a post since the new board was started. I really hope for the AD's sake something good comes from this their is a wealth of knowledge on this board. IMHO more truth has never been spoken.
Pedigree - What your dog is supposed to be Conformation - What your dog appears to be Performance and temperament - What your dog IS"
|
|
|
Post by Wolfer on Mar 15, 2006 23:08:29 GMT -5
Pedigree - What your dog is supposed to be Conformation - What your dog appears to be Performance and temperament - What your dog IS" AMEN!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Maverick on Mar 15, 2006 23:19:26 GMT -5
I read this board all the time I don't think I've made a post since the new board was started. I really hope for the AD's sake something good comes from this their is a wealth of knowledge on this board. IMHO more truth has never been spoken. Pedigree - What your dog is supposed to be Conformation - What your dog appears to be Performance and temperament - What your dog IS" Couldn't have said it better myself, but I would have taken a lot more words to do it! ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by Doggitter on Mar 15, 2006 23:22:04 GMT -5
Eggers, you around my neck of the woods? The nutria segment sounds like here with blackberries and all. Western Oregon here. Loren
|
|
|
Post by Maverick on Mar 16, 2006 1:20:26 GMT -5
Eggers, you around my neck of the woods? The nutria segment sounds like here with blackberries and all. Western Oregon here. Loren Yes, sent you and email and updated my profile to show location. - Pete
|
|
|
Post by Suzanne on Mar 16, 2006 1:51:40 GMT -5
This is the question I have posed however I guess since I don't hunt you figured my criteria weren't important!
I really would like to hear lots of ideas. I'm not afraid to take my dogs out tracking or trailing - I don't want to hunt personally and I don't like the sport of hunting unless the meat is eaten by someone or dog. I would be happy to do a fur test which I know doesn't cut it with most of you but my main reason is me - I just don't like hunting. Some breeds have instinct tests, perhaps we could have something like that for those of us on the end that doesn't want to hunt. I'm sure many of you don't want to train for obedience but I think that obedience training shows a lot about an Airedale, especially their ability to focus on things that aren't inherently interesting to them. Unlike a golden that is glued to his owner (the Velcro dog) Airedales perform with one eye on you and the other on the world, it is an unbelievable bond with an Airedale when they commit to work with you. I think that is an important characteristic. All you hunters what do you think? Are your dogs biddable when hunting on are they on their own?
What is the job of an Airedale? Until you answer that question, how can you design test performance in the absence of criteria, standards of performance, and style of performance? What is minimally acceptable? How many different areas does an Airedale have to perform well in to be considered versatile? What is important about the Airedale to you? Personality? Ability? OR Proper trim? Tail set?
Personality, terrier fire and drive Confidence and trainability Physically sound head/Tailset/outline
"it is many times easier to polish the looks of a top performing breed of dog, than it is to make a top performer out of a standard bred dog whose standard is designed by committee!!!!"
On what criteria do you base this statement? How many breed champions have you bred? What dogs did you start with? How many different physical criteria did you evaluate when breeding for (show) conformation? How long did it take.
Don't you think the value of a standard might depend on the committee?
|
|
|
Post by Maverick on Mar 16, 2006 9:00:42 GMT -5
I really would like to hear lots of ideas. I'm not afraid to take my dogs out tracking or trailing - I don't want to hunt personally and I don't like the sport of hunting unless the meat is eaten by someone or dog. I would be happy to do a fur test which I know doesn't cut it with most of you but my main reason is me - I just don't like hunting. Some breeds have instinct tests, perhaps we could have something like that for those of us on the end that doesn't want to hunt. I'm sure many of you don't want to train for obedience but I think that obedience training shows a lot about an Airedale, especially their ability to focus on things that aren't inherently interesting to them. Unlike a golden that is glued to his owner (the Velcro dog) Airedales perform with one eye on you and the other on the world, it is an unbelievable bond with an Airedale when they commit to work with you. I think that is an important characteristic. All you hunters what do you think? Are your dogs biddable when hunting on are they on their own? Goldens lack confidence, intelligence, grit, fighting ability, and initiative. What you are alluding to with biddability is not a black & white issue, and a comparison with a dog like a Golden is like comparing apples to oranges. For most fur hunting, very little obedience is needed, but recall and loading-up on command is always appreciated. For comparison purposes, I can't think of an AKC dog that both hunts and works. If they hunted, I suppose a Giant or Standard Schnauzer, or maybe a Bouvier de Flanders might make a good comparison. A better comparison could be made with Blackmouth Curs or Catahoula Curs as they are very versatile breeds, very gritty, hunted on all manner of game, natural guard dogs of family and property, and will roundup the rankest of feral cows. I don't hear of them getting used much in police work, and I think Michael explained it one time, but I don't remember the details. I guess I should have asked for prioritization of the list! I base the statement on all 30 years of witnessing the failed designs of numerous committees trying to design all manner of things, and the beauty of the genius of individuals. But mainly, I base it also on all of the AKC Sporting and Working breeds that have been designed down to the last detail to be the greatest hunting or working dogs of all time, to be a significant improvement on those that came before. But with all of the attention to detail, all of the time and money spent on those AKC working and hunting breeds, you would think that they would display the epitome of PERFORMANCE! Right? Wrong! And not just a little wrong, but very very wrong to the point that it would be laughable, if it were not so sad. Many have split into 2 breeds, i.e. Springer Spaniel, Labrador Retriever, (English) Pointer, Greyhound, Black and Tan Coon Hound, etc. Some never split and have faded away from being serious competitors in their original job. Look at what has happened to the German Shepard: weak and plagued with genetic problems and healthy ones can barely compete; Afghan Hound: the vast majority cannot even muster a double suspension gallop, the trademark of a sighthound and absolutely essential for great speed; almost all terriers are completely worthless as working terriers: they have become physically, mentally, and temperamentally incapable of performing terrier work. My 13 year old graying Patterdale with missing teeth and going blind from cataracts would make 99% of the AKC terriers look pathetic and beat the other 1% in any true working terrier contest (and he was never a star performer!). I'll put money on it. "How many [AKC show] breed champions have I bred?" First off, for the last 20 or so years, I would have been too embarrassed to admit publicly that I would enter an AKC showring! What if my dog friends found out? How embarrassing! ;D LOL! Secondly, I suspect the number is exactly equal to the number of top hunting dogs you have bred. The only pup that I bred and sold that was field trialed, a German Wirehaired Pointer, was either 2 or 3 points away from an AKC field championship when she was hit and killed by a car before her third birthday. But I suppose that field championships are only for those dogs that can't make it in the showring, right? lol!! But, I have been much more successful with working and small hunting terriers! I could talk about a few different breeds that fall into categories of bayers, battlers, and draw types. But, since AKC breeds are very rarely (with the exception of the newly recognized Jack Russel Terrier breed) of any use, we don't have a common reference point. I did have a Patterdale that was the most capable swimming and diving terrier I have ever owned or seen, and was pure devastation on nutria. I had another Patterdale that could kill any coon her size or smaller in less than a minute of making contact. And I sold a hybrid (Patterdale x Jagd) that even before he matured was out performing both of his parents in everyway. He went on to keep the little orchard the owner had raccoon free. Almost all of the coons would run up a tree, if they weren't already in one, thinking they were safe. But that little guy (actually large for a working terrier at 20 to 25 lbs) would leap into the tree, rapidly climb up through the branches and yank the coon out of the tree, and then dispatch them quickly single handed. Oh, and by the way, he spent most of his time as the granddaughter's dress up doll and playmate! "How many different physical criteria did you evaluate when breeding for (show) conformation?" I'm not sure whether you are trying to be funny or insulting here. What are the skills that you find essential in evaluating a truly versatile Airedale? What is your minimum acceptable performance level for each skill? That is what I think is important! For the sake of argument, let's say I was presented with a group of top performing Airedales that had a few generations of top performers (top meaning top 10% or maybe top 5%). First off, they would all look similar due to the intensive breeding for the best performers would shrink their genetic pool. So as the judge, I would pick the one most pleasing to my eye as the winner! And then, we would all buy him/her drinks after dinner while discussing how we could make the performance tests harder and better at testing useful skills. Once that was settled, we would get to the important stuff of deciding when we could get together to do some serious hunting or working with our Airedales while trying to ignore the envious stares of people that didn't own one of our Airedales!
|
|
|
Post by Maverick on Mar 16, 2006 9:13:57 GMT -5
Curt - Great feature!!! See if you can get Wolfer to put a link to that map from the home page of the board. I forgot you had posted the link, and even if I had remembered, my aging brain cells probably wouldn't have remembered where it was! And my patience for digging around is about 2 minutes, so it is unlikely I would have found it even if I looked! ;D Thanks for the link, I added myself. - Pete
|
|
|
Post by hicntry on Mar 16, 2006 12:25:49 GMT -5
Suzanne, an airedale should look like an,airedale. We all agree on that. As far as the standard, it is only good in the ring. One standard will never be conducive to "outstanding working abilities" because of the environmental differences. That has been explained and stated. Through selective breeding for performance, the structure of the dog will rapidly change from what conformation people believe to be ideal. It is not ideal for any working dog. Yes, it does look good and is pleasing to the eye, that is where it ceases to be good. A dog bred to go the distance in this country where it is hot, will tend to developer similar to mine. Deep narrow chest, longer legs, longer in the body. A dog that is used for extreme cold water retrieving. Selective breeding will, over a few generations turn that dog into a much broader chested dog because he is predominately a swimmer, and the extra mass gives him better heat retention instead of narrow for heat dissipation. Is the conformation standard good for anything besides appearance and a stroll in the ring. Yes, it is, my guess is it is better than having my standard in an agility test, the size is much better for keeping in apts or living in the house. Yes, it is probably even much better suited for all when sleeping on the bed. It is easier for the elderly to handle. It is neither a plus or a minus in obedience. You see, it isma good standard for many things....just not for a serious working dog. The airedale is supposed to be a working dog.
Now, that being explained again. I will take one more stab at this. Please ....don't just read this, think about it, understand it. The people with real working dogs "do not care" whether your standard is changed, updated, or discarded. A set standard is necessary and works in the ring only. I don't think any hunter cares if you and the others like to do conformation. Hey more power to those that like it. If you are going to do it do it as best you can. The rub comes in when the conformation people say that the breeders of working quality Airedales are ruining their breed. By the way, you said the Airedale was showing in England since the 1860's. The English kennel Club did not even recognize it as a distinct and separate breed until 1886.
What it boils down to is, the working ability has to be maintained by people that "know" what a working dog is. In recent years, thanks to the energy some have put into it, the ACTA, has a H/W organization and that is a good thing. They have tests so you can all see what training can do to make the conformation dog look like true working dogs. That is also good up to a point. But, you have to realize, a trained dog does not have to have natural instincts. It is the lack of these "natural instincts that result in 40 out of 40 dogs failing a 100yd, tracking event. For the survival of the airedale, conformation people are going to have to realize that the lack of good breeding is something even training is not going to redeem in the long run. These dogs do not need trumped up tests to make them look good, they need to have people get in the field during bird season and hunt the dogs. The dogs need exposer or they will loose it forever. You said you don't like to hunt, I could say, why don't you show poodles then because they are a prime example of what the conformation people have done with that noble breed. How can so many people be so oblivious to what show breeding has done to so many great working breeds and then look people in the eye and say, "I am doing it for the good of the breed!" The first thing that was pointed out a few posts back is that it would be grossly unfair to compete my dogs against the conformation dogs of the ATCA. On the showbnreeders board, Margo said her dogs could out do my dogs in flat out race. It has to make one wonder how much is understood about dogs by conformation folks at times. Pay attention to this. The conformation dog is not and never was bred to be a versatile anything. It is the result of selective breeding to excel in the conformation ring, just as mine are selectively bred to hunt. I have a much better chance of having a versatile working dog because the breeding is based on ability and not appearance. Look at the my website, 8 mo old pups doing bite work, dogs doing water retrieving, upland game, big game. A number of them also have obedience titles. That is what I consider versatility.
|
|
|
Post by melanie on Mar 16, 2006 17:22:23 GMT -5
Curt - Great feature!!! See if you can get Wolfer to put a link to that map from the home page of the board. I forgot you had posted the link, and even if I had remembered, my aging brain cells probably wouldn't have remembered where it was! And my patience for digging around is about 2 minutes, so it is unlikely I would have found it even if I looked! ;D Thanks for the link, I added myself. - Pete Me too! [glow=red,2,300]Mel[/glow]
|
|
|
Post by Maverick on Mar 16, 2006 17:26:33 GMT -5
A dog bred to go the distance in this country where it is hot, will tend to developer similar to mine. Deep narrow chest, longer legs, longer in the body. A dog that is used for extreme cold water retrieving. Easier to make a cold or warm water retriever out of a running dog by putting a good flotation vest on it, than it is to make a fast moving runner out of a powerfully built, but squatty dog, especially over rough terrain! You don't want to go to the extreme here, but a dog with a well balanced athletic body will physically be capable of doing many more jobs or tasks that one that is bred to the extreme for one of either power, speed, quickness, endurance, or any one particular job. But, just like the all around star athlete, they will be in the top 85% or maybe even 90% in all categories, as I believe the Airedale should be in the canine world. - Pete
|
|