Just Midol

If I wanted to say that it was limited to the task the dog was originally designed for then I would have. I didn't. It can't be limited to what the dog is bred for anyway, because a Kelpie can be used as a guide dog and it certainly wasn't bred for that, but being a guide dog is work. I would like to point out though Just Midol, you say in your original post that you wouldn't call obedience work or a sport, but a test on the handler. Someone who takes on a rescue for example will have to do a lot of hard work and work the dog hard to achieve something as low key as a pre CCD. It is a sport as there is a winner. It is not just a test on the handler it is a test on the dogs ability to follow instructions. I don't think a rescue dog is any harder than a dog you've had as a puppy. Any dog can follow instructions. If I wanted to say that it was limited to the task the dog was originally designed for then I would have. I didn't. So Quarantine Beagles are not "working dogs"? Explosives and drug detection dogs are not "working dogs"? Assistance dogs are not "working dogs"? Huh? A better way to put what I said (because you don't seem to be getting it) would be the dog is using his instincts to perform a job. If its regardless of breed Midol, then how can you define "working" by saying that its when the dog was specifically bred for the task. Some of the best "working" drug and explosives detection dogs in the UK are working line English Springer Spaniels. They certainly aren't bred for that job. Would you consider a sled team that's successfully completed the Iditarod as a "working" team regardless of breed? Not sure about the Iditarod. It very closely resembles work. It is a very accurate test of a dogs working ability but even then it isn't technically work. This is a discussion on obedience though. You're not doing a very good job of making a point because I can't even figure out what you are trying to prove. You're not even reading what I am saying, I have no idea why I am trying to discuss this with you.

If I wanted to say that it was limited to the task the dog was originally designed for then I would have. I didn't. So Quarantine Beagles are not "working dogs"? Explosives and drug detection dogs are not "working dogs"? Assistance dogs are not "working dogs"? Huh? A better way to put what I said (because you don't seem to be getting it) would be the dog is using his instincts to perform a job.

If I wanted to say that it was limited to the task the dog was originally designed for then I would have. I didn't.

For me the dog is working if it is using their natural instinctive abilities to perform a task which the dog was specifically bred for. There isn't a single breed that I know of that has instincts specifically tuned for obedience trials and bred for obedience trials. It's even worse when people claim their dog has a working title and you find out it's an obedience title.

I think a good trainer is a good trainer. Definitely. I was just pointing out that someone being acomplished in a dog sport does not necessarily make them a good trainer. I am talking from a perspective of training other peoples dogs and having a great deal of knowledge about dogs. The obedience instructors at the club I visited can train their dogs for obedience, sure, but when I questioned why they do certain things they had no answer and it was just the way they do it. I think that's what seperates an average trainer from a good trainer or a good trainer from a great trainer. It just happened to be obedience that I was discussing at the time

Most security trainers are probably worse than most obedience instructors

$50 says I could escape from a lion

Yeah, but not working ability. I guess when I hear someone say I "work" my dogs I assume they are either actually working in the field OR testing their dogs working ability in a dog sport. I don't consider obedience to be a test of working ability. I guess this is because I probably spend more time reading working related materials and my interest lies in actual work. But like I said, I do have respect for those who can get to high levels in obedience. I don't necessarily think that makes them a great trainer though.

Ok, I has a better way to phrase my question. Do you think obedience shows a dogs working ability? This is assuming there are no breeds that are bred for obedience.

It doesn't matter what the dog considers work. If I asked "Do you think your DOG considers obedience to be work?" I'd expect the majority to say yes. But I didn't ask that.

This is just semantics isn't it. I sort of see where you guys are coming from now but I still agree with tollersowned. Lewis, competing in a sport... I don't care if the dog doesn't know it's a sport. We're people. We're using people words. We even use pretty awesome sentence structure.

Okay. If someone asks do you own a working dog and you compete in obedience (and only obedience) what would you say? btw, you're suppose to be pretending you own a dog and only compete in obedience... I actually find it quite insulting to those who do work their dogs to consider obedience work...

So any mental stimulation is considered work?

In the GSD thread going in in general people are claiming obedience is considered work. When someone competes in obedience, do you think they are working their dogs? To me obedience is not work, I don't even know if I'd consider obedience trials to be a sport. It is testing your skills as a handler to teach the dog - but you're not working the dog. Views? ETA: To clarify, I don't consider any sport dog to be "working" with the exception of maybe herding & potentially tracking. If someone told me IRL that they worked their dogs and I asked doing what and I was told obedience I'd feel like slapping them.

Yeah, it's a great start to even more draconian laws. They are WORSE not BETTER than the laws they replaced. For some reason APBT owners only see the "APBT is no longer banned" part of it without realising the wider implications of the legislation. ETA: I need to proof read.

*looks to the left* Okay, I will TRY tonight

The problem is this isn't a plus, or a move forward. It's worse than specifying individual breeds.

That is insanely cheap. $1.60 roo tail. I pay $4.60.... Thats if you order over 100kg I buy over 100kg at a time anyway

Ahhh, vets are terrible. My boy is developing a problem with the vet, it didn't help that the vet hit him over the head but I am working like crazy to fix it. Good luck.

That is insanely cheap. $1.60 roo tail. I pay $4.60....

If you want 1 on 1 then you're after a trainer, not a course. I doubt you'll find a course/workshop that does 1 on 1.

I give heaps at once. I also end when I jackpot so don't really care about focus.

Toowoomba isn't too far from me (2-3hrs) so it might be worth me travelling to them for it if they are the best in SEQ. Montu is a GSD as well

Do any vets do it or are only certain vets equipped with the gear? If only certain vets do it, does anyone know of a vet on the Sunshine Coast who does? Looking at getting Montu scored in a few months.

I see many problems with that, I could even consider that worse than banning breeds. Many dogs HATE vets. Giving vets the power to declare dogs dangerous is a stupid move. Schuhtzhund is now illegal in Italy. Everyone has to carry a muzzle. Would be interested in the "surgery that is not for health purposes" and what it encompasses as well.