This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Krazy Bout K9s on 24 April 2010 - 02:04
I was in a different area of the other hunters, I just let her follow her nose and said "find em" and she flagged her tail like any bird dog would do, when she got on the scent, I knew there was a pheasant in those spiny brambles and sure enough out flies a hen, then a rooster, too bad I couldn't shoot worth a darn...<G>
we sure had alot of fun though!!!!
Steph
by darylehret on 24 April 2010 - 02:04
Are you assuming it wasn't genetics in the GSD?
by darylehret on 24 April 2010 - 03:04
by LAVK-9 on 24 April 2010 - 03:04
by BoldogKennel on 24 April 2010 - 04:04
A "well bred" lab must have both. "Hunt" and "retrieve" are two very seperate parts of the prey sequence. In locating scent detection dogs I run across plenty of dogs with really high retrieve drive that lack hunt drive - it seems to be common.
Then I get purebred very well bred GSD and Malinois dogs in that are in trouble, biters, aggression, etc. because they are NOT trained....great genetics, but left to their own devises.....so, then one would say, training....so I agree that this is a very interesting topic....one that is full of loopholes!!!!
I would suggest that genetics aren't involved in "a dog gone bad". MANAGEMENT of a dog makes the difference between a good dog and a bad dog. The "worse" dog in the world, managed well, is not a problem to anyone. Both genetics and training/environment take a backseat to simple, plain management practices...
I, again, disagree. I do believe you may be correct that a Pit Bull has a better chance of being a better pulling dog than a Collie.
According to your thinking, though, a Collie could never beat a Pit Bull. Well, what about a Collie that is trained to be a pulling dog versus a Pit Bull that has never even had a harness attached to it prior to the contest. The Collie is going to win because it has learned how to perform this task and the Pit Bull has not.
Sorry, I did not make myself clear: I was talking about taking the "average" collie and the "average" pit bull (good representative of their breeds) and training them both for the same task.
I would also really like to know what you mean by Pit Bulls beating Huskies at what they were bred to do?
So far, I have yet to see a team of Pit Bulls win a race like the Iditarod.
A Pit Bull is a strong dog in a weight pulling contest which is a relatively short period of time, but, it has virtually no stamina when compared to a Huskie, or the Huskie/Hound mix that you now see in most high level sled dog races, and, Pit Bulls are not a dog that can withstand the cold temps like a Huskie. I'm trying to figure out what you mean by this statement?
Here is what I said: There is no apples and oranges in this arguement because a much smaller pit bull can and does beat dogs BRED to pull.
We were talking about genetics, and pulling contests (not the Iditarod) and the differences between sled dogs and pit bulls. A sled dog, like a pit bull, is a specialized animal. I suspect the reason the pit bull out pulls the sled dog is that sled dogs that pulled to the point they injured themselves would not live to breed and pass on their traits. There are cases (rare) of sled dogs dying in harness, but anyone who has been to a modern weight pull will notice that the sled breeds seem to have a very well defined sense of "shut off" when the going gets too tough. This is probably a good thing genetically, as a sled dog that pulls itself to death is not only not useful, but would not live to breed and pass on genetic material. Pit bulls, however, are also specialized, in that many WILL self destruct when encouraged to do so by their owners. This gives them an advantage over the more "normal" sled dogs. When you have watched a 29 pound pit bull bitch pull several thousand pounds, and many more hundreds of pounds than the largest huskies at the pull, you understand that the grit bred into the bulldog breed surpasses that of "normal" breeds.
by darylehret on 24 April 2010 - 11:04
"a GSD that learned to hunt like the Springer they had.It wasn't anything geneticly inhareted it was a learned behavior."That, I just have to disagree with, if you are saying the dog "learned" to develop the drive for hunt and it was not already in the dog to do so. This is why I added the excerpt about phenotypic plasticity. As a similar example, mice that are bred for several generations within a laboratory that have never seen a cat will suddenly "freeze" in prey mode.
A propensity to exhibit a behavior that appears to be newly learned, still relies upon it's founding genetics. It just takes a proper environmental context to allow the expression to exhibit itself. In the case of a behavior "not" being expressed, you can assume that the genetics are not fully present in the combination of genes required, or are being suppressed or overridden by other genetic attributes (i.e., fear of taking stick hits), or possibly in part response to conflicting training methods, or lack of a fitting and facilitating environmental scenario. "Learning" itself, is also genetic.
I wouldn't be too eager to generalize characteristics as breed specific or not, though. The narrower your focus, say with bloodlines, the easier to predict certain certain generalizations. But the genetic potential present to work with still comes down to the individual dog and what you wish to develop, and the actual training environment and methods you employ to allow it's talents to flourish all add up in the result. It's important to emphasize here, that it's impossible to even measure genetics without corresponding environmental influence.
by OGBS on 24 April 2010 - 12:04
Glad to see that we agree on training being a part of the equation in how a dog turns out.
You wrote, "Sorry, I did not make myself clear: I was talking about taking the "average" collie and the "average" pit bull (good representative of their breeds) and training them both for the same task."
For some reason, though, you want to make the argument that the Pit Bull's genetics are superior to the Husky's for what it was bred to do. Those are your words. ("In fact, it is common for the much smaller pit bulls to beat much larger huskies BRED TO PULL") What is your version of what a Husky was "bred" to do? Again, please clarify this because you are either now side stepping the issue or you weren't forming a very good argument in the first place. You switch back and forth between weight pulling and sled dogs. Two very different sports wouldn't you say???
Huskies were bred to be sled dogs which is why I bring in The Iditarod. The main factors that go in to this are endurance and speed, and the ability to withstand harsh environments. Please tell me how a Pit Bull is superior to a Husky in this areana?
If you want to make the statement that Pit Bulls are better at weight pulling contests go ahead and make that statement, but, leave out the part about Pit Bulls being better at what Huskies were bred to do.
Because I am curious and maybe you know, how are the Pit Bulls faring against Greater Swiss Mountain Dogs in pulling contests? Swissies are a dog that was bred to pull and I believe that the curent record for a Swissy stands at over 4000lbs.
To clarify that question, I am not talking about "rail" pulls. I believe that "cart" pulls are the official standard.
Maybe we should even start a new topic for this?
(Oh, Boldog, I keep forgetting to mention, Don't touch any of my stuff!!!)
by Vixen on 24 April 2010 - 15:04
I see it like a Tool Box. You hopefully consider purchasing a good well equipped and good quality Tool Box. Now some will have general good quality tools and some will have additional extras (perhaps), some might even have a chain-saw thrown in!!! lol.
The next part is how well you know or learn HOW to USE those tools????? You may use the wrong item for the wrong reason! You might leave other tools unused! You may go mad with the chain-saw!!!!
However, if you know or learn how best to use the best tools you can, then you can ADD to the Tool Box, with more advanced type tools that you are capable and ready to use.
Regards,
Vixen
by LAVK-9 on 24 April 2010 - 18:04
No that isn't want I was saying.Of course the dog has the drive to hunt.I am talking about the dog pointing and flushing things that GSDs don't naturaly do.They might freeze when they see prey but then usually they go in and try to kill it.At least my dogs do.They would have to be taught to flush or just hold a point and not kill it. For instance...I was training a Weimeraner and she would naturaly stalk birds and point. I asked the owners if they used her to hunt and they said no but ever since she was a pup she would stalk birds and hold a point. That was never taught to her....it was inharetied behavior. There for genetics played a part in it. Her parents were Ch bird dogs.Wish I would have known from what lines cause I have a friend that wants one.
by Ibrahim on 24 April 2010 - 18:04
Ibrahim
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top
