New gun dog

[Rick]

I'd suggest taking a look at DuckDog's post. He plainly does know "squat" about it.

Had you, yourself, looked at his post more carefully, you might have noticed that DuckDog is talking about a very, very different test (of accomplishment, and not at all necessarily inherent ability) than NAVHDA's NA testing: the VJP, which is required of Draghts if their offspring is to be registered as such, rather than German Wirehairs. Of course, most "versatiles" aren't even tested on the very elementary NA level, let alone VJP.

And while it's easy to say the NA tests do nothing, I also asked if you could show me where labs (since we're talking about them, I guess) even pretend to evaluate any sort of inherent ability for breeding purposes.

Is there a lab NA testing process that I'm unaware of?

Again, NA is that in name only. And had you read my post more closely, you might have noticed that I did, in fact, point out that the JH and Started levels of retriever hunt testing are essentially the same as NA for retrievers. They all, NA, JH and Started, test very basic abilities that can be as much or more developed through training as inherent.

And, again, a knowledgeable person may draw fairly sound conclusions about inherent aptitudes by actually watching the dogs tested at those levels, but no one can do so from the certifications they produce. All pointing and retriever testing programs "pretend to evaluate...inherent ability for breeding purposes". But in practice, you simply cannot separate the nature from nurture by way of their resulting certifications.

"I would argue" that for any gun dog breed one has to get to the level of trialing, where the best dogs are pitted against the best dogs, rather than a test standard, for the resulting certifications (titles) to be credible indicators of superior inherent ability.

[assateague]

What is the age limit on these JH hunt tests?

[assateague]

And when during the test do they evaluate temperament, teeth, physical attributes, that sort of thing?

[DixieDawg]

This is why I posted this a lot of knowledge to be learned on here y'all have given me a lot to research and sort out to find my next hunting partner and gentleman I thank you for it

[RonE]

Here is a web site that will give you a lot of information about choosing a Labrador Retriever or any dog for that matter.

I built the first kennel building years ago and have used John to train all of my dogs. Keep in mind that no matter how good the pedigree is, there is a chance that the pup you choose will not preform up to your expectations. It is just as true that buying a $35.00 "Lab" puppy out of a cardboard box in front of a WalMart can turn out to be the most fabulous hunter you have ever seen. Depends on what risks you want to take. Many of the hunting breeds have over the years had traits bred into the breed and bred out of the breed. Hip dysplasia is one of those traits so when choosing a breed, look for dogs out of parents where bad traits are tested for but don't show and the parents have certificates stating the health conditions.

John Folsom trained my first Lab in 1974 and we have been the best of friends ever since. His web site is pretty comprehensive and his puppies are expensive but guaranteed. After looking at his web site, if you have any questions, give John a call. Even if you don't buy a dog from California, John will talk to you and help you in any way he can.

http://hightest.com/

[DixieDawg]

Thanks my Dixie came from Jim Sawyer down at five oaks retreat in Goodlettsville he has good dogs but he's breeding more for field trials from what I hear and I'm more just looking for a versatile hunter and good natured family pet I'll be out in California on business in October think I'm going to look up high test then while I'm out there

[Rick]

What is the age limit on these JH hunt tests?

Have to wait until they're at least six months old for JH testing, and there's no upper age limit. (I'm unaware of any age limit, upper or lower, for NA.)

[jarbo03]

16 months maximum for NA, no minimum. I wish I had of known people prepared their dogs for it, the prize 1 was all the dog.

[Rick]

And when during the test do they evaluate temperament, teeth, physical attributes, that sort of thing?

Far as I know, NAVHDA judges may comment on those things, but the dogs are actually judged on performance, just like retrievers. So those things play the same practical role in AKC, HRC and NAHRA retriever testing as in NAVHDA versatile dog testing: none, providing the dog can physically do the work and has the cooperative and non violent temperament to do it without getting kicked out for unruly behavior.

[Duckdog]

I really don't want to wade into the middle of this, for fear my waders will leak and I'll end up all wet.
But since my name was brought up, here goes...

I think maybe you're both right? (How's that for ducking fire?)
But I will clear up a few things...

Had you, yourself, looked at his post more carefully, you might have noticed that DuckDog is talking about a very, very different test (of accomplishment, and not at all necessarily inherent ability) than NAVHDA's NA testing: the VJP, which is required of Draghts if their offspring is to be registered as such, rather than German Wirehairs. Of course, most "versatiles" aren't even tested on the very elementary NA level, let alone VJP.

The VJP IS a natural ability test. Dogs are judged on: pointing, search, use of nose, cooperation, and tracking. So naturally, any of those categories that the dog "trained" on or even just exposed the dog to, he's going to score higher than the dog that wasn't worked with at all. Yet, some of those categories, you just can't train.
You can't "train" fire into a pup. If they already have it, and you give them plenty of exposure, you will surely nurture and foster it, but you can't "make" a dog hit the field on fire.
Use of nose is another one...sure, you can give your pup enough opportunities to develop it, but it has to be there to begin with.

The age the dog runs the VJP plays a big part too. They can be anywhere between 6 and 18 months old, depending on when the litter is whelped. Obviously, there's a big difference between a 6 month old pup and an 18 month old pup.
The 18 month old pup should have OB down pat, so naturally he should test higher in cooperation.
But,...again, if the other natural inherited abilities aren't there, you're not going to train them in.

While the natural ability tests surely do not tell a whole story, they are an important piece of the puzzle when you're doing your research if or when you know what you're looking at.

"I would argue" that for any gun dog breed one has to get to the level of trialing, where the best dogs are pitted against the best dogs, rather than a test standard, for the resulting certifications (titles) to be credible indicators of superior inherent ability.

I won't argue that competitive retriever trial titals are important in discerning traits. The training and "pressure" it takes to get a dog to those levels tells you that THAT dog was trainable to that level and had enough natural inherited abilities and desire to make it to that level. And, it might even be more intense than the higher levels of hunt test training. Definitely so in the retriever hunt tests.
But, the finished dog level of JGHV, (and maybe NAVHDA too, but I don't know NAVHDA well enough to say for certain) is real close, or just as intense in terms of ability and training. And, you have to train for a bunch more categories. So, you just can't dismiss VGP scores as "just another hunt test", but you have to know what you're looking at too.
If you're looking at a dog that scored 300+ points with a prize at it's VGP, that is one hell of an accomishment.
If you're looking at a potential breeding match of dogs that have done that, the odds that a pup produced from that litter will have "what it takes" start to improve dramatically. Or, if their parents scored high, or if past litters scored high, or even siblings...It's all just pieces of a puzzle to help you make an informed conclusion.
But,...yea. The VGP is hardcore...

And, just for the record,...I love labs!! If all I did was waterfowl hunt with a pheasant hunt thrown in here and there, I'd probably have another lab. For that particular scenario, it's pretty darn tough to beat a lab.

There isn't a day that goes by that I don't think about ole Rowdy...

[jarbo03]

And when during the test do they evaluate temperament, teeth, physical attributes, that sort of thing?

Far as I know, NAVHDA judges may comment on those things, but the dogs are actually judged on performance, just like retrievers. So those things play the same practical role in AKC, HRC and NAHRA retriever testing as in NAVHDA versatile dog testing: none, providing the dog can physically do the work and has the cooperative and non violent temperament to do it without getting kicked out for unruly behavior.

Those things are on file with NAVHDA, teeth, coat rating, temperment.

[Rick]

16 months maximum for NA, no minimum. I wish I had of known people prepared their dogs for it, the prize 1 was all the dog.

I find it hard to imagine a dog putting on a prize I, or any, duck search without preparation. I'd think one that's not experienced success at it might take to the water on command but soon decide there's nothing there and pack it in.

[jarbo03]

16 months maximum for NA, no minimum. I wish I had of known people prepared their dogs for it, the prize 1 was all the dog.

I find it hard to imagine a dog putting on a prize I, or any, duck search without preparation. I'd think one that's not experienced success at it might take to the water on command but soon decide there's nothing there and pack it in.

Duck search is not part of NA in NAVHDA. Most well bred pups would search, even at a young age, if they knew what they were to do. Taking Taz for walks and telling him to find it while he was sniffing around, created plenty of search without training for it.

[assateague]

Two dogs from Dutch's litter were docked on the teeth. One for missing eye teeth, and one for having an undershot jaw. While it may be a small thing, the breeder has asked those two to be neutered/spayed. That's all I'm saying. To feel that "there are more of X available, so it's easier to get an excellent X dog", while not admitting that the opposite is equally true is silly. And a JH tests 100% trainable ability, and can be done after the dog is 4 years old, if you want.

While I understand what you're saying Rick, that dogs can be trained, I think it's absurd to believe that if you and I were each given a lab from the same litter, and then tested them 1 year later, that the training results would be a good indicator of breedability. (Unless you've learned absolutely nothing in 30+ years training dogs, and I've learned everything in <1) And while it may also be true to an extent with a breed which performs a more rigorous "inherent" ability test, I firmly believe that overall the trainer will play less of an impact, thus indicating more as to whether or not the dog has "got it".

[assateague]

In short, "trainability" speaks more to the trainer than to the DNA.

[jarbo03]

As the level of tests increase, trainability becomes a bigger issue.

[jarbo03]

I really don't want to wade into the middle of this, for fear my waders will leak and I'll end up all wet.
But since my name was brought up, here goes...

I think maybe you're both right? (How's that for ducking fire?)
But I will clear up a few things...

Had you, yourself, looked at his post more carefully, you might have noticed that DuckDog is talking about a very, very different test (of accomplishment, and not at all necessarily inherent ability) than NAVHDA's NA testing: the VJP, which is required of Draghts if their offspring is to be registered as such, rather than German Wirehairs. Of course, most "versatiles" aren't even tested on the very elementary NA level, let alone VJP.

The VJP IS a natural ability test. Dogs are judged on: pointing, search, use of nose, cooperation, and tracking. So naturally, any of those categories that the dog "trained" on or even just exposed the dog to, he's going to score higher than the dog that wasn't worked with at all. Yet, some of those categories, you just can't train.
You can't "train" fire into a pup. If they already have it, and you give them plenty of exposure, you will surely nurture and foster it, but you can't "make" a dog hit the field on fire.
Use of nose is another one...sure, you can give your pup enough opportunities to develop it, but it has to be there to begin with.

The age the dog runs the VJP plays a big part too. They can be anywhere between 6 and 18 months old, depending on when the litter is whelped. Obviously, there's a big difference between a 6 month old pup and an 18 month old pup.
The 18 month old pup should have OB down pat, so naturally he should test higher in cooperation.
But,...again, if the other natural inherited abilities aren't there, you're not going to train them in.

While the natural ability tests surely do not tell a whole story, they are an important piece of the puzzle when you're doing your research if or when you know what you're looking at.

"I would argue" that for any gun dog breed one has to get to the level of trialing, where the best dogs are pitted against the best dogs, rather than a test standard, for the resulting certifications (titles) to be credible indicators of superior inherent ability.

I won't argue that competitive retriever trial titals are important in discerning traits. The training and "pressure" it takes to get a dog to those levels tells you that THAT dog was trainable to that level and had enough natural inherited abilities and desire to make it to that level. And, it might even be more intense than the higher levels of hunt test training. Definitely so in the retriever hunt tests.
But, the finished dog level of JGHV, (and maybe NAVHDA too, but I don't know NAVHDA well enough to say for certain) is real close, or just as intense in terms of ability and training. And, you have to train for a bunch more categories. So, you just can't dismiss VGP scores as "just another hunt test", but you have to know what you're looking at too.
If you're looking at a dog that scored 300+ points with a prize at it's VGP, that is one hell of an accomishment.
If you're looking at a potential breeding match of dogs that have done that, the odds that a pup produced from that litter will have "what it takes" start to improve dramatically. Or, if their parents scored high, or if past litters scored high, or even siblings...It's all just pieces of a puzzle to help you make an informed conclusion.
But,...yea. The VGP is hardcore...

And, just for the record,...I love labs!! If all I did was waterfowl hunt with a pheasant hunt thrown in here and there, I'd probably have another lab. For that particular scenario, it's pretty darn tough to beat a lab.

There isn't a day that goes by that I don't think about ole Rowdy...

Good looking dog, I still miss my lab Moose. We had a good 12 year run, along with my britt, of bagging ducks, geese, and pheasant.

[Rick]

The VJP IS a natural ability test. Dogs are judged on: pointing, search, use of nose, cooperation, and tracking. So naturally, any of those categories that the dog "trained" on or even just exposed the dog to, he's going to score higher than the dog that wasn't worked with at all. Yet, some of those categories, you just can't train.
You can't "train" fire into a pup. If they already have it, and you give them plenty of exposure, you will surely nurture and foster it, but you can't "make" a dog hit the field on fire.
Use of nose is another one...sure, you can give your pup enough opportunities to develop it, but it has to be there to begin with.

Essentially those same arguments can be made for retriever testing. And a dog with mediocre aptitudes but superior training may very well outperform one with stellar aptitudes and poor training in either. Unless you're talking about the extreme ends of the "fire" scale, it can be taken out of a pup by ham handed training or lit with astute training. Nose? I'd think it a very rare dog lacking the physical nose to be a fine gun dog, but how that nose has developed can be huge. Know my ex- was into AKC type tracking and had all four of our then dogs, including her Westie working tracks that met their TD specks. On Sunday mornings, I'd don rubber knee boots, and we'd head to a large recreation area with adjoining woods, where I'd walk various quarter mile plus tracks with several turns over mowed soccer fields, dirt ball diamonds, across access roads and sometime through the woods and leave bumpers at their ends. Then we'd go to Popeyes for biscuits and jelly before returning to work the tracks. Billy, the terrier, loved the game and was as readily successful at it as our beagle, Chessie and English setter. Biggest difference between the lot was that the setter worked with a higher head and further downwind of the actual track. The tracking part of nose ain't rocket surgery. (The pointing part can seem so, but that's another topic.)

[Rick]

16 months maximum for NA, no minimum. I wish I had of known people prepared their dogs for it, the prize 1 was all the dog.

I find it hard to imagine a dog putting on a prize I, or any, duck search without preparation. I'd think one that's not experienced success at it might take to the water on command but soon decide there's nothing there and pack it in.

Duck search is not part of NA in NAVHDA. Most well bred pups would search, even at a young age, if they knew what they were to do. Taking Taz for walks and telling him to find it while he was sniffing around, created plenty of search without training for it.

My bad, thanks for setting me straight. Been 17 years since I joined NAVHDA only to learn the nearest test was a day's drive away. "Misremembered" the requirements and blame drugs and alcohol.

[jarbo03]

16 months maximum for NA, no minimum. I wish I had of known people prepared their dogs for it, the prize 1 was all the dog.

I find it hard to imagine a dog putting on a prize I, or any, duck search without preparation. I'd think one that's not experienced success at it might take to the water on command but soon decide there's nothing there and pack it in.

Duck search is not part of NA in NAVHDA. Most well bred pups would search, even at a young age, if they knew what they were to do. Taking Taz for walks and telling him to find it while he was sniffing around, created plenty of search without training for it.

My bad, thanks for setting me straight. Been 17 years since I joined NAVHDA only to learn the nearest test was a day's drive away. "Misremembered" the requirements and blame drugs and alcohol.

Ha. Unfortunately there is not a chapter in KS, my closest is a 3 hr drive.

[Duckdog]

Essentially those same arguments can be made for retriever testing. And a dog with mediocre aptitudes but superior training may very well outperform one with stellar aptitudes and poor training in either.

Since this is all hypothetical, since there is no way to prove one way or the other, we'll just have to agree to disagree here.
While the above may very well be true in the retriever hunt tests, having personal experience in JGHV testing, there is NO way a pup with less inherited abilities is going to score higher than a pup with more inherited ability while being ran in the same brace.
It ain't happenin'...

[Rick]

Two dogs from Dutch's litter were docked on the teeth. One for missing eye teeth, and one for having an undershot jaw. While it may be a small thing, the breeder has asked those two to be neutered/spayed.

It's good of NAVDHA to note such things, but my point was that the test titles don't factor into the part of the records most folks will look at, the test titles. Just as an FYI, I think that it if you read the OFA's recommendations to breeders re: genetic defects, you'll find their recommendation to study "vertical pedigree," of potential parents' and their parents' siblings, as they can show propensities more telling than the parents' and grandparents' records. Better, if my memory hasn't completely jelled, for instance, to breed a dog with poor hips and a clean vertical pedigree than a dog with good hips and a vertical pedigree showing a lot of poor hips.

To feel that "there are more of X available, so it's easier to get an excellent X dog", while not admitting that the opposite is equally true is silly. And a JH tests 100% trainable ability, and can be done after the dog is 4 years old, if you want.

That's the first I've seen of that quote or anything like it. And JH may or may not be mostly trained, thought I'd been quite clear on that, but so may NA. The Britt I buried last week was rock solid steady when his first brace of wild quail was shot over him at a few days under six months, and he retrieved them both to heel and hand. Also handled to voice, whistle or hand and worked waterfowl commercially long before he would have aged out of NA.

While I understand what you're saying Rick, that dogs can be trained, I think it's absurd to believe that if you and I were each given a lab from the same litter, and then tested them 1 year later, that the training results would be a good indicator of breedability. (Unless you've learned absolutely nothing in 30+ years training dogs, and I've learned everything in <1) And while it may also be true to an extent with a breed which performs a more rigorous "inherent" ability test, I firmly believe that overall the trainer will play less of an impact, thus indicating more as to whether or not the dog has "got it".

If you wish to believe NA certified dogs have shown more practical inherent ability than hunting retriever tested dogs, you're welcome to your bliss.

[Rick]

Essentially those same arguments can be made for retriever testing. And a dog with mediocre aptitudes but superior training may very well outperform one with stellar aptitudes and poor training in either.

Since this is all hypothetical, since there is no way to prove one way or the other, we'll just have to agree to disagree here.
While the above may very well be true in the retriever hunt tests, having personal experience in JGHV testing, there is NO way a pup with less inherited abilities is going to score higher than a pup with more inherited ability while being ran in the same brace.
It ain't happenin'...

Maybe not, but I've sure had pointing dogs, retrievers and a hound that clearly out-shown others I thought carried better tool kits than they but lacked their opportunities.

In any event, I've never been one to require consensus to find contentment. Though it does kind of tickle me to consider the old saw that the only thing two out of three dog men can agree on is that the third doesn't know shit, and I've hit the gundog trifecta with "pointing," "retrieving" and "versatile" dog guys all thinking I'm nuts.

[Flightstopper]

Two dogs from Dutch's litter were docked on the teeth. One for missing eye teeth, and one for having an undershot jaw. While it may be a small thing, the breeder has asked those two to be neutered/spayed.

It's good of NAVDHA to note such things, but my point was that the test titles don't factor into the part of the records most folks will look at, the test titles. Just as an FYI, I think that it if you read the OFA's recommendations to breeders re: genetic defects, you'll find their recommendation to study "vertical pedigree," of potential parents' and their parents' siblings, as they can show propensities more telling than the parents' and grandparents' records. Better, if my memory hasn't completely jelled, for instance, to breed a dog with poor hips and a clean vertical pedigree than a dog with good hips and a vertical pedigree showing a lot of poor hips.

To feel that "there are more of X available, so it's easier to get an excellent X dog", while not admitting that the opposite is equally true is silly. And a JH tests 100% trainable ability, and can be done after the dog is 4 years old, if you want.

That's the first I've seen of that quote or anything like it. And JH may or may not be mostly trained, thought I'd been quite clear on that, but so may NA. The Britt I buried last week was rock solid steady when his first brace of wild quail was shot over him at a few days under six months, and he retrieved them both to heel and hand. Also handled to voice, whistle or hand and worked waterfowl commercially long before he would have aged out of NA.

While I understand what you're saying Rick, that dogs can be trained, I think it's absurd to believe that if you and I were each given a lab from the same litter, and then tested them 1 year later, that the training results would be a good indicator of breedability. (Unless you've learned absolutely nothing in 30+ years training dogs, and I've learned everything in <1) And while it may also be true to an extent with a breed which performs a more rigorous "inherent" ability test, I firmly believe that overall the trainer will play less of an impact, thus indicating more as to whether or not the dog has "got it".

If you wish to believe NA certified dogs have shown more practical inherent ability than hunting retriever tested dogs, you're welcome to your bliss.

Sorry to here about Kie, Rick. At least there is no shortage of good memories as I'd expect from any of your dogs.

[Rick]

Sorry to here about Kie, Rick. At least there is no shortage of good memories as I'd expect from any of your dogs.

Appreciate it. But we were blessed with seventeen grand years and precious few regrets. He couldn't have had a much finer run.

[Rick]

Probably just pissed off some of my fellow Chessie owners over on DHC, so I'm on a roll today.

Really need to get back in the marsh.

[assateague]

Rick, I'm not upset in the least. If someone doesn't feel strongly enough about their dog to argue a bit, they probably chose poorly

[Flightstopper]

Probably just pissed off some of my fellow Chessie owners over on DHC, so I'm on a roll today.

Really need to get back in the marsh.

Ol Dwight is quite the chessie expert.

[AKPirate]

Probably just pissed off some of my fellow Chessie owners over on DHC, so I'm on a roll today.

Really need to get back in the marsh.

Ol Dwight is quite the chessie expert.

He has a hate for nuts

[Bootlipkiller]

Rick, I'm not upset in the least. If someone doesn't feel strongly enough about their dog to argue a bit, they probably chose poorly

Or they just don't care about you duck dicks opinions.