I am going out on a limb here as I am not anonymous and I ride the fence on this working/hunting ability and conformation type thing, I want both. This thread is in response to a comment by someone in the Romeo thread about JHs being enough to show working ability and someone else’s question about judges wanting you to go nice and slow around the ring.

I started with my first Lab in 1996 in obedience. I started training for Hunt Tests in 2006, started competing in conformation in 2003. I have no champions, but one is close. I have 3 Senior Hunters, all show bred. One of those dogs, earned his first Master leg at 9, the other two will start competing in Master this spring. I do my own training and I send my dogs off to a good friend who is a field trainer. I teach obedience for pet owners and competition level classes also. My definition of what makes a good dog, conformationally, type wise and working ability wise, has changed significantly since I started.

A Master Hunter test, in recent years, does not accurately reflect a typical hunting situation. That all changed when people became competitive and Master National was born. Will I continue to do master work? I really don’t know….it’s becoming unrealistic to find the time/money and grounds to do it on your own.

A Junior Hunter title or test, only indicates that the dog has instinct. Until you start doing Senior work, which the average person can do on their own, do you really learn anything about a dogs biddibility, trainability, desire, perseverance and heart. Until you are running that dog, at a test or at a shoot with multiple guns firing, do you realize the difference between instinct and perserverance. I didn’t learn this difference until I started doing advanced work regularly.

Sending your dog out with a trainer to make them a MH? If the dog doesn’t have it, it doesn’t have it. I’ve seen lots of show dog and field dog wash outs that can’t make it through pattern work because they don’t want to work with the owner/trainer. It’s not as easy as sending a dog to a trainer. I’m glad that people are doing more JH/WC stuff with their dogs, it gives us a bigger pool to choose from. To use the JH title to say that the dog would make a good hunter is unrealistic. It’s an indicator.

EVERY spring, since the Lab-L days, we’ve been doing the field vs show thing. BOTH sides have issues. Structure and type is important. I’ve seen and had enough dogs with sports injuries and had friends whose dogs have had them to know how important structure is. Type - is what makes a lab a lab. But there is too much divergence in both directions. Dogs are too big and too small. Field bred dogs may not be in the show ring, but CC’s are become more common. And these are given out by knowledgeable judges at trials. Greyhound or houndy looking dogs are not correct, nor are those dogs with tons of bone and dripping in coat. Have you ever tried to dry those things? -Harsh outer coat or not. On the flip side, no undercoat or slick coats is wrong also.

My young girl is 55 pounds. She will be a master hunter. But guess what? She’d be more efficient in the field, if she was a little taller and a little more substantial. Conversely, the 90 - 100 pound dogs out there are not very efficient either. They may be able to do the work, but not EFFIECIENTLY. Efficient doesn’t mean fast. But they should move with purpose. The video of Romeo and whoever the bitch is, during I guess it was BOB judging, is a good one. Take a good look at the difference in movement between the two. Which dog is covering ground efficiently and effortlessly?

What is the point of all this? This whole Lab thing is more than just field people making comments about the show people and vice versa. It's more than a lab that is head, coat and tail or has a MH or a FT. NEITHER side understands the other. The field people don’t understand WHY the standard is there. The show people don’t understand that running out and picking up a couple of birds is not enough to show that a Lab is still a retriever, a gentleman’s gun dog- it’s not even about the Field Trial thing. We need to do a better job understanding the big picture. Nothing is as easy as a title or a picture or a video. Experience is necessary. Both sides are going off the deep end. We need to preserve the breed. Both in type, structure and working ability.

I’ve gone on too long….too much time in airports….As we used to say in the old days…..flame away….

Hope to see you at tests this spring at the higher levels, watching or playing. I will see you at the show ring looking for that perfect dog!

Sue Puff

No Flame from me, Sue. You said it beautifully - I really enjoyed reading it. I went back and read the Romeo posts ... not 1 person used their name. What's with that? If you have something nice to say about another person's dog, why not use your name? Heck, I use my name (even) when I don't have anything nice to say.

I was going to comment on this post with my name but some of the people on here are ruthless. I am scared!

This was a great post and I agree with you 100%. I looked at your website and you have beautiful dogs. Too many people breed these heavy dogs just to sell puppies or for what they like and people have moved away from the standard on both American types.

I watched a show recently and there were two dogs that just floated around the ring. Both were on the thin side and it was like music to watch them. They both won their classes. I heard the Judge say to a different handler for one that "that dog can really move". I hope that's a good this because it was pure beauty to watch.

Thank you Sue. Nicely said. I am only a small time Hobby Breeder, with one home bred Champion, who has dabbled in both obedience and field work, but I too have concerns about "those dogs with tons of bone and dripping in coat." When I'm at a show, especially Potomac, those dogs can take my eye and make the smaller ones look puny. I have been guilty of trying to breed to bigger dogs to produce more bone. I have a lovely girl here, that i wouldn't dare show at a specialty due to her lack of "Bone". I do wonder, "how much bone is enough?" How big do we really want these dogs to be? No easy answers unfortunately.

I got into Labs because I loved the temperament and work ethic. Specifically, my Labs specialize in Human Remains Detection, skilled enough at this point to do historical grave work.

When I look at the Labs in the specialty ring now a days, I am astonished at the massiveness of them. They might be able to make one pass around a graveyard to do their business, but to be able to differentiate between the individual graves over the hours that it would take, I think not.

I really don't understand this drive for "more". More bone, more coat, more head. How does that contribute to the ability of the dog to compete or work? Some give the excuse "it's typey". No, it's not. It is some breeders idea of the ideal Lab, breeders that don't compete in any way, shape or form.

Try to dry a dog that is "dripping in coat". Try to spend a day in the field with a "substantial" dog. Those massive fronts that everyone exclaims over, would trap a that same dog behind a fence because it would be too massive to jump over or wiggle through. And then so out of balance, that there is no hind end to give the power for jumping.

The reason that foreign judges pick our youngsters to win at the big specialties is because, by the time they are mature, they are so over done as to be caricatures of the breed standard.

I know that I, as minuscule breeder of few litters, have a snowballs chance in hell of changing anyone's mind, but I am a part of John Q Public. A public that sees those rotund out of shape Labs in the ring and wonder what they are.

The breed standard says it all, and everyone should read it and keep it mind when judging and breeding:

General Appearance

The Labrador Retriever is a strongly built, medium-sized, short-coupled, dog possessing a sound, athletic, well-balanced conformation that enables it to function as a retrieving gun dog; the substance and soundness to hunt waterfowl or upland game for long hours under difficult conditions; the character and quality to win in the show ring; and the temperament to be a family companion.

Physical features and mental characteristics should denote a dog bred to perform as an efficient Retriever of game with a stable temperament suitable for a variety of pursuits beyond the hunting environment. The most distinguishing characteristics of the Labrador Retriever are its short, dense, weather resistant coat; an "otter" tail; a clean-cut head with broad back skull and moderate stop; powerful jaws; and its "kind" friendly eyes, expressing character, intelligence and good temperament.

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

"The show people don’t understand that running out and picking up a couple of birds is not enough to show that a Lab is still a retriever, a gentleman’s gun dog"

I am really confused by this statement, isn't this exactly what a gentleman's gun dog does? Runs out and pick up birds for his master? That shows willingness to please and biddability to me, maybe I misunderstood you. I love my gentleman's gun dogs, they are always up for anything I ask of them.

Sorry I just couldn't use my real name.

I apologize, let me rephrase that. What I was meant to reference here was perserverence. Yes, a gun dog should just pick up birds. But what about with multiples that have been shot at a time, cripples and divers? Does the dog persist until he brings it home? That's what I want to see. On birds down, when handled, does the dog want to work with you or does he/she constantly resist your direction, is it a fight to get to the bird? It's an absolutely beautiful partnership when it's there. There is a huge difference and maybe you don't have that with your dogs. That's great. But it happens. You see it every weekend at tests - with all types/styles of labs. We're talking about the general population here.

You know, I compare it to obedience also. A CD is great, but a CDX really starts to show teamwork. Do I discount dogs with a JH or CD? Nope, but to me, to say that those are an indication that it's a great hunting or working dog? No. I want to see those titles and I understand money constraints and not being to go farther and do everything. I'm in the same boat and I choose hunt tests right now.

I'll repeat it, so I'm not misunderstood - as can happen on the internet.

TO ME, to say that a JH or a CD are in indication that a dog is a great hunting or working dog is false. I think there IS more to the picture. The field people have that right. Just as the show people have pieces of the type/structure thing right. I want to see dogs with these titles, BUT...

Constant battle here on the anonymous thing. It's probably suicide in the Lab world that I did use my name. Oh well. I'm sure since I don't have 20 plus years experience my thoughts will be discounted.

They are just another view and no more wrong than anyone elses. Another perspective. My dogs love me and I enjoy what I'm doing. And I think I'm doing no harm, except to my checkbook. Isn't that what it's all about?

I'm a purist and wasn't as involved as some as you in the Standard argument. I don't disagree with the height/weight specifics. But, as Kathleen said, here is the description of our Labs that I try to stay true to, I really think about this:

General Appearance

The Labrador Retriever is a strongly built, medium-sized, short-coupled, dog possessing a sound, athletic, well-balanced conformation that enables it to function as a retrieving gun dog; the substance and soundness to hunt waterfowl or upland game for long hours under difficult conditions; the character and quality to win in the show ring; and the temperament to be a family companion.

Physical features and mental characteristics should denote a dog bred to perform as an efficient Retriever of game with a stable temperament suitable for a variety of pursuits beyond the hunting environment. The most distinguishing characteristics of the Labrador Retriever are its short, dense, weather resistant coat; an "otter" tail; a clean-cut head with broad back skull and moderate stop; powerful jaws; and its "kind" friendly eyes, expressing character, intelligence and good temperament.

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

Sue Puff

I don't need to train a dog to MH level to go out and enjoy a day here or there of upland or waterfowl hunting. The only time it matters if my dog can take a cast the first time, pick up multiple marks, and not cheat the shoreline, is in a competition.

Doesn't matter one whit if I am out enjoying the day with my buddy; we have nothing to prove to anybody.

Well said, Sue Puff ....

You are right and I stated that in my first set of comments. After these dogs I'm running now, I think that I'm sticking to Senior because training to that level, with handling, makes a good hunting dog. You don't need a master hunter to prove anything. It's a game.

But, you do need a dog that will keep working to find the bird right? And that you can handle, fairly easily, to retrieve those multiple marks that they didn't see go down? Isnt' that more pleasing to work? Cheating is only taken into consideration in tests. Cheating is smart and efficient.

This is not a comment against a particular breeder or field vs show. This is meant to make us think about the big picture and the breed as a WHOLE. We need to look outside our own little world at home.

Sue Puff

Sue, I found your post beautiful and your clarity of thought an inspiration. I only quibble a little with the word "perserverence."

I certainly think steadfastness and tenacity are important qualities in a performance dog. But to me they do not convey the enthusiasm and joy in the work that encourage a dog to go the extra mile. Joy and enthusiasm are qualities easily squelched in a poor relationship with the trainer/handler especially if the trainer/handler uses poor training strategies.

True that joy and enthusiasm for the work are not qualities mentioned in the Standard. But in my experience training they are the qualities that make the difference between an adequate performer and a star. They are qualities that must be nurtured in a relationship with the animal, not to prove something to anyone else but because they are why you have a dog in the first place. Creating a dog with joy and enthusiasm for the work is the reward. They are best nourished in a supportive environment of sport friends.

I often wonder how people who feel so unsafe in the Labrador world that they cannot post their real names can en-joy the world of dog sports or dog training. This fear is such a sad, sad comment on the Lab community. Thank you for your post because it is honest and open and heart-felt and fear-less.

We hunt with our dogs and they love it. I have gone and watched a couple of JH tests pretty sure I could get that title with somone coaching me along the way. I am just too lazy and BROKE most of the time! LOL!

But back to hunting. A lab shouldn't have to "go" all day, regardless of the "type" he or she is. When we hunt we usually take two or three dogs and let them share the fun and work. 90% of the hunting we do is Canadian geese. Big birds! And the hunting party is 4 to as many as 10. We are usually out set up in the field by 6:00a.m. and back at the house by 10:00 - 10:30.

I have bred several champions and even a Grand Ch. They all had great retrieving instinct.

Now I say this partly in jest - but has truth in it as well - if you go "hunting" not "trialing" and your dog has to "go all day"... you suck at shooting or you went over limit.

Breed the type you like and use them for what you enjoy.

Valerie Jones
(A Gentlewoman's Grandma Hunter)

Great posts Sue. I do disagree a bit on the JH thing though, but maybe it's a matter of semantics. I have trained (on my own, w/ no help of pros)a dog to SH a few years ago, that along w/ CDX, open agility titles and tracking certification all by age 4. She was bred twice after that as well. I was pretty exhausted to say the least as we were training 7 days a week most weeks.

Now w/ more numbers here, I have come to feel very comfortable after training for JH, CDX (on 5 generations), tracking etc, in my assessment of individual working ability/trainability. I have one fire breather who I'll likely do a SH on but holy cow, she may need to be 9 by that time to just mellow out a bit! She earned her CDX handily at age 2, like several others here, and is also working on utility concepts as time allows. The thing is not necessarily do these dogs get the titles, but what the breeder/owner/handler LEARNS about the dog in the meantime. Do *I* really WANT another just like the fire-breather though? Not really... I'm personally hoping that by breeding her to a more grounded, but highly capable/trainable stud, I will approach my goal though. I'd not know any of that if I didn't at least do the JH, maybe do some SH handling at least (not necessarily title but see how they "learn") and do the CDX (which I know CAN be done very reasonably w/ a smart and biddable dog). OTOH, I've watched some MH titled dogs that were painfully pokey, so just saying that titles don't tell the whole story. I'd much rather breed to the untitled son of a fantastic dog from proven lines. But sometimes that takes really knowing the breeder well and being able to trust what they tell me about their dogs too.

The reason for all my posts about Romeo is one word... Balance.

Balance allows beautiful movement.

I do think Mary Roslin - Williams would love Romeo.

I really like how Crufts works. One judge for the girls, another for the boys. If they can't decide between them, a senior judge is called in to cast the deciding vote. I am sure glad that is the case. Three sets of eyes are better then one.

One has to remember that real life hunting is not a competition . It is a time to enjoy the outdoors with your Labrador. If you have a balanced one it will have no trouble in a field, on a mountain hike, or a swim in the ocean.

Most often it is our lack of training ability that makes for a poor hunter. As another poster said, most Labradors have the instinct. Will every Labrador excel, no way. Life does not work that way.

No, it doesn't. However, it probably DOES matter if your dog goes out and chews up the bird, if your dog is unsteady to the gun and is therefore a liability on a hunt, if your dog is so noisy there is no way birds will ever get close enough to shoot, etc. I am assuming it would matter if your dog has no desire to enter water or use its nose, has poor marking ability etc.

Everyone has different standards and things they can live with. I train with a lot of old school waterfowlers who belong to the local gun clubs and Ducks Unlimited. They are active hunters who run tests to keep their dogs conditioned and tuned up for hunting. They all say hunting with a nice, trained dog with good instincts is much better than hunting with an untrained, out of control dog or one who goes off to smell the roses when they are supposed to be picking up birds or dogs that need to be cajoled to get into the water. But these types of dogs are encountered quite regularly, so there must be a varied range in what is considered acceptable, depending on the person and the relationship with their dog.

My personal belief is that breeding dogs should be held to a higher standard than the standard an average pet owner has for their dog. I believe this to be true for both physical and mental conformation (work ethic, biddability, etc.). Breeders should KNOW what they are breeding rather than make assumptions. We don’t assume that because we have bred several generations of good hips that we no longer have to xray our current breeding stock; it is as erroneous to assume that because I had an obedience dog or two or because my dogs like to chase balls in the back yard that they will produce great work ethic or make good hunting companions. The only way to KNOW what is being passed down is to prove each generation of our breeding stock and keep track of the pups we place in pet homes. If a dog has never retrieved a bird, how is one to know whether that dog has hard mouth, which is one of the worst faults a retriever could possess? This is a personal pet peeve of mine because I am seeing it a lot more frequently at field events.

I think the one thing that is difficult for many is, what should the standard be for work ethic? If you ask hard core field enthusiasts, it should be an AFC/NFC. The minimum standard set by the LRC is a WC, and for Labradors (as opposed to Flat Coats or Goldens), the WC requirements are extremely minimal. It is a measure of basic instinct; it does not measure trainability, marking, etc. There are some people who could care less about whether these dogs can retrieve, but for most I think the standard is somewhere in between a WC and a Field Trial Champion. Personally, I think field trials are an extreme sport and do not resemble real hunting situations. They may mimic some pieces of a hunt that could possibly occur once in a blue moon, but on average regular hunting does not involve multiple 400+ yard retrieves. For me, a WC is a great way to get puppies started but certainly does not tell me what I want to know about work ethic, marking, hunting a fall, etc. My minimum standard is the equivalent of what is measured in a SH or Seasoned (HRC) test although I do take my dogs to MH and Finished because I enjoy it. I want a dog that can work off lead and is steady to the gun. If I am shooting I do not want my dog running out in front of me until I send it. If I am shooting having to restrain it by a collar is next to impossible. I expect my dog to be responsible for marking multiple falls, and I will be responsible for handling to the ones he doesn’t see. But that requires a dog that will handle. I want a dog that goes when I send it (resending within reason – I should not have to beg my dog to go out and retrieve or get in the water). For a great marking dog, I could care less if they run the bank or not. For a marginal marking dog, I would care. I do expect my dog to use its nose and put in a decent hunt. And when they have the bird I expect it to come back without a lot of encouragement. I want a dog that will sit quietly in a blind, and when I am with others I do expect them to honor another dog’s work without interference or restraint. If one does not get out there and work their dogs, how does one really know whether their dogs can meet this standard?

I expect others have lower or higher standards, but I also expect these standards to be based on working knowledge and not what they think it might be. When I ask a breeder about their stud dog’s work ethic, I expect them to be able to articulate what their standard is and how the dog measures up. Whether this is done through hunting over one’s dogs or through titles that represent achieving a standard, I really don’t care, but I do expect the dog to have been evaluated in some way if it is being held up as breeding stock. If someone uses a trainer to achieve a title, it really does not matter either, because the dog is ultimately the one earning the title. I would probably want to talk to the trainer as well.

I also think breeding dogs should hold up in strong competition in the breed ring; dogs that are given CH's for merely showing up(IABCA shows, for example) would not meet my criteria any more than a WC. I don't think they need to be specialty winners, but they should be evaluated by people approved to judge this breed (who have been mentored by breeders)and should be evaluated against other strong representatives of the breed.

And then there is the evaluation of the overall health of the dog and meeting standards for that.

I agree wholeheartedly that we should be evaluating and breeding the WHOLE dog, because when we breed to WIN at one specific event (field trials, agility, specialty shows) and ignore the rest, we get extremes. A lot of this is due to events that are meant to produce a “winner” and what winning means to people. People lament the demise of the dual champion, but let’s face it, neither shows nor field trials are what they were when we had dual champions. I would not say either have improved, but they certainly have changed. Back in the day, shows and field trials were often judged by the same people, who had working knowledge of conformation and work ethic. The same dogs were entered in both arenas. That is a bygone era.

Whole Dog,

Excellent post. I too think we will not have another Dual. The games have changed too much in the extreme. Though I do think there are one or two kennels today that might be able to do it.

Sue Puff

I'm just curious now....we're having a civilized discussion...

No one else has any comments about any of this? Either way?

Sue Puff

Just checked out your web site, and I am very surprised that your Labradors have none of the look of the Field Trial Labradors. They actually look typical of what is being bred in the USA today by Show breeders.

I like them, but what would the Field Trial dog breeders say about them? Much of your issue or thoughts goes right to individuals preference. It would seem you are trying to breed a versatile Labrador. I commend you for that. It is what all breeders should strive to do.

You may have sold off pups to buyers that could have been great hunters but never took them hunting. If your motivation for breeding is selling good hunting dogs you will make those buyers happy.

I have this one friend who bought a Field Trial type pup. He can't stand him too years into ownership. Will he one day I do not not know. He just wants to run all day or whines, he is too hyped up all day long. I wonder how many of these high octane pups that get produced actually get put down or put up for adoption because would be buyers can't handle or have the time for such a dog.

Balance is the key. You have to produce a dog that is quiet in the home, but willing and built right to spend a day in the field.

******************************************************

I'm late getting into the discussion but I did want to say I agree with you to a point.

I have only put a WC on one dog (note: I'm in Canada so a WC is 2 land, 2 water)but I have trained enough to know I am not interested in standing in wet grass, in the rain, five or so days a week. I have trained to UD in the obedience ring and, although it doesn't necessarily show marking ability, I feel that obedience does show the trainability and willingness to work as a team.

I think the Labrador Retrievers original intent WAS to go out for a days hunt. The number of birds is irrelevant. The focus should be on the willingness and ability to do the job. I chuckled at Valerie Jones comments that if you're hunting all day you're either a bad shot or have gone over limit.

I have put the three relevant standards below. You will notice that the FCI and CKC standards call for a dog that is biddable (def: willing to do what is asked; obedient) and only the AKC standard hints to the intensity of the work required.

As an aside, I find it sad that people have to post under an assumed name because they are afraid of repercussion. Obviously many Labrador owners don't have the same, kind nature that their dogs have.

"The Labrador Retriever is a strongly built, medium-sized, short-coupled, dog possessing a sound, athletic, well-balanced conformation that enables it to function as a retrieving gun dog; the substance and soundness to hunt waterfowl or upland game for long hours under difficult conditions; the character and quality to win in the show ring; and the temperament to be a family companion." (AKC Standard)

"Good-tempered, very agile. Excellent nose, soft mouth; keen lover of water. Adaptable, devoted companion. Intelligent, keen and biddable, with a strong will to please. Kindly nature, with no trace of aggression or undue shyness." (FCI Standard)

"The breed is noted for its love of retrieving and water, for its excellent nose, soft mouth, intelligence and biddable temperament." Extraordinary versatility allows Labradors to excel as hunting, service, and therapy dogs; in search and rescues; in drug and bomb detection; as family companions, and in performance and field events." (CKC Standard)

Thanks for talking about the "go all day" mentality.... I've long questioned that, and I've also questioned the value of 300 yard blind retrieves - damned fine shot if that really happens. All it proves is that the dog can be trained to do it, not that he will ever see it in the real hunting world.

I am a conformation person who ran out of available time to do both conformation and field work, but I have done both, and I have recently gone to trials to observe. I believe structure is critical to being able to do what these dogs were bred to do. What I can honestly say is there seems to be a far higher percentage of dogs in the show ring that can honestly hunt (not "trial"... "hunt") than the percentage of dogs at a trial that can honestly show (not "win" necessarily, but honestly compete for a ribbon). I don't intend that comment to incite a show vs. field war - just to point out that there are A LOT of people on the extreme edges in both of those communities to put the breed at risk. Good thread....

The Labrador is a gentleman's gun dog. What does that mean? After attending a few trials for WC JH SH and MH I have come to the conclusion that a gentleman's gun dog is one that can obtain a WC and/or a JH. I think there is a misconception in the breed about what a gentleman's gun dog is. After what I saw I just can't imagine an average hunter a gentleman's hunter putting their dogs threw anything I saw at the senior or master level.

I don't know what tests you have been watching, but most of the dogs I see desperately want to work, I don't think their handlers are "putting their dogs threw" anything, unless they are poor trainers/handlers. How will a "gentleman" cope when his WC/JH can't bring back an unseen bird because it was never taught how to do a blind retrieve? That is not to say that WC/JH titles are meaningless, but these dogs can do and want to do so much more, if they are correctly bred and correctly trained. Gun dogs need to be able to do a blind retrieve, mark multiples, be steady, etc. It may not need to be as pretty a performance as what is required for a title, but they still have got to be able to get the job done.

Laurel put it perfectly. 'my understanding', I think you are right about people not knowing what a gentlemans gun dog is, you proved a point with your comment. It is more than running out and picking up a bird. You'll understand this if you re read through the posts. Retrievers conserve game. They do this by picking up everything that is down. To do this, they may not see all shot, but they have to have the desire to remember those they did see drop and to persistently look for those they didn't and to be willing to work with the handler to get to birds that the handler knows the location of.

I am NOT saying every dog needs a SH or criticizing those that don't go beyond a JH. Hunt Tests are just that, TESTS. A test of ability. I don't hunt but have been hunting. There are only so many hours in a day and so much money. But tests at the senior level help to show that dogs have the ability to do what is required by a retriever. They do not accurately reflect a days hunt. They are testing for the traits needed. This is one of the weaknesses of the show side of things. It is more than running out and picking up a single bird. Now, the field side of things is the extreme opposite.

Like conformation shows should be a way to evaluate structure and type of breeding stock, this venue is a way to help evaluate ability. Why do you thing the Dual champion was such a coveted thing?

Go to a hunt test and find someone involved in multiple aspects of the breed and have them walk you through concepts. Heck, call me. I'm usually marshaling somewhere. I'll help anyone evaluate why traits are important.

Sue Puff