Westksbowhunter, there are many on this forum who are avid field trialers. They take time to post with helpful information and opinion. It is a dis-service to use a broad brush and label those who run field trials as snobs.
"Marcus, they got us good, man. You stay alive, Marcus. And tell Cindy I love her." - Axe
4.0xGMPR HRCH Hunters Marsh Jack Daniels Bubba Jazz MH
I can tell you "have a dog in the fight" based on your signature line and the fact that you've replied to folks on this thread three at a time! So with that said, be assured I'm not picking on you. I could easily have replied to a dozen different posters since my early post on this thread.
For those who are keeping score, I have a bitch out of a GMPR who I'm planning to breed to another GMPR. However, let me go on to say that I didn't select these dogs based on their "pointing Lab" status. Yes, I'm an upland hunter. No, I don't run APLA tests. Yes, it's OK if my dogs point. No, I don't train them to point and it doesn't bother me if they don't. My bitch's sire is also a MH and the dog I'd like to breed her to is a MH, HRCH, and QAA. They have proven themselves capable in traditional retriever testing.
So, besides the fact that they are titled and have their health clearances, why did I select them to be in my breeding program if not for their pointing ability? Because they meet my standards for conformation!
Why the heck would you suggest that you won't consider conformation in field bred Labs until the show breeders get the field work right!?!? Do you think "proper conformation" means a Lab should look like many of the show Labs? Not the way I interpret the standard! Just because the show breeders have lost their way doesn't mean we shouldn't try to produce a Lab that meets the standard as we understand it! Actually, the fact that they may have it wrong makes it even more imperative that we get it right!!! You claim you want to insure that the pointing Lab has all of the traditional working talents that "standard" retrievers do. Why not go all out and try to breed them to look like the standard describes a Labrador should look as well?
I was with you up until you made the statement I emboldened in your quote above. I think you might want to rethink that comment!
P.S. Socks, If I were a betting man, I'd bet the dog in your avatar is a son or grandson of Lean Mac. I had a grandson of Mac who loves to lay on his back like that and get a belly rub!
Last edited by Swack; 03-11-2013 at 11:40 PM.
Many bench labs don't fit within the written standard either. Most are too heavy, many are too short.
Empire's Honey Ryder-CBR-F-3-18-2013
Crossfire's Empire Builder SHCBR-M- 2-15-2009
GCH Breakwater Salutes USS MADDOX SH-CBR-F-10-27-2006
RIP Rainyvalis Callin' Hawaii 5-0-CBR-F- 2-19-2002 - 09-27-2006
A statement from Pupaloo in a previous post: "To me, it is a simple matter of preference-do you want a pointer or a flusher?"
Will I start another heated discussion if I answered with, "Can't we have both without people getting mad about it?"
I'm a firm believer that it's OK to have whatever breed of dog you prefer. And, it's OK to train them to what ever level you want. It's not OK to tell others their choice sucks. Even if that's what you really think - unless that person is a really good friend - or maybe not even then.
We have two labs, two red (Irish) setters, and one brittany. The labs flush and the setters and brit point. We have a ton of fun hunting with these guys. I hated it when the season ended and used to get really bitchy about it - many years ago. So, I started training them for hunt tests and field trials in the off season. Even though there are lots of people more successful than I am in both hunting and competitions. That's OK. I'm having a good time year-round.
It would be great if we could hear the different opinions and experiences without the nasty stuff.
CH Rosewood Little Giant UDX VER RA SH MXP MJP OFP VCX WCX CCA CGC FFX-OG
also UCH HR UUD UJJ URO1 UHIT
(golden retriever) born 3-10-07
a.k.a. "Tito", "The Tito Monster"