YES!!! Randy, I knew you could do it....hee hee


Here was my first post:

I am not sure there really is a difference, IMHO.
If you are doing something with your dogs that requires training a behavior, then the dog works.

Even cute circus dogs work even though they are doing tricks.

Hobby to me=backyard breeder or hoarder kind of.

I mean, SAR, firefighting, EMS and LE are basically my hobbies as I have a 40 hour per week job with our company. They are jobs, yes, but I research, study and have a great time doing all of it.

My dogs are trained SAR, so maybe the hobby part would be the clicker training I do to get them to do a certain behavior unrelated to SAR......

Tough question Jennifer, and a good one. Why don't you want to start a thread on it, I would love to see what others outlooks are to broaden my thought process on it. ;\)
______________________________________________________________
MY 2nd post:

But obedience is work in a sense.....maybe more work for the handler?

You guys have great points and I agree with them, but I still am having trouble seeing the "hobby" part. Unless you want to start bringing in the SAR handlers I have seen with low drive, pet quality dogs that they are desperately wanting to call a "working dog".
Then I would agree that they need to be classed as "hobby" and not "working" because the dog relies on cues from the handler and the handler has to have a general idea of where their "victim" will be BEFORE they even start.

Hope that makes sense.
________________________________________________________________


It is kind of hard to copy and paste all this since the threads by others are in between.

Jennifer,
When I get to work I will copy you all your replies.

Working dog/companion dog - definition in the mind of the dog or in the mind of humans? Cause I think a dog would have a completely different view of whether or not he was a working dog.

 Quote: Sandy Moore

Working dog/companion dog - definition in the mind of the dog or in the mind of humans? Cause I think a dog would have a completely different view of whether or not he was a working dog.

Your mind....

Yeah ob is work for the handler Carol, just look at all people writing in with 6 month old pups that won't stop pulling them through the under brush eeeeeeeeeeenice doggie...whoa...now heel.....heel....heeeeeeeeel. Ask them if ob is work.


Yeah yeah Carol, your right, really when you come down to it anything we ask the dog to concentrate on is work for the dog..... So presuming Ember learns not to bite on command and concentrates on sitting, being a sweet little thing, she's working hard. But does that make her a working dog?
Ok ok I know it works for you LOL. But does it make her a working dog or a dog who's working.

Randy

Post #3:
Holy Cow Jennifer, you should have started a thread....this is wonderful.

Do you want me to start one and put this all in quotes as a start?

I would consider what I do as a "serious hobby" really. My dogs work when I need them to and they are reliable (this being one of the most important words in my line of work as well as other work in different disciplines...ie LE, Arson ect).

But then, think about LE K-9's...they go to "work" with their partner, but probably are only deployed less than half of that time. Whether it be a track, narc search or a neutralization of a threat. LE trains regularly and the dogs get to do all of that once or twice a week.
So, would they be classed as a working dog just because they "go to work"?
Sometimes I come to work and do nothing.....hee hee

It is hard work that we all do to train our dogs to be reliable resources. I average about a call a month and that is because I live in a rural area where not a lot goes on.

(I had entered an example here, but it is not something I post publicly about so I took it out.....)

Basically, lots of our "working" dogs get called to scened and while we are enroute or upon arrival the "threat" has already been neutralized or the subject was found...so basically I think there is sometimes more "hurry up and wait" than actual deployment.
Does not make the dogs any less of a working dog though.

 Quote: Sandy Moore

Working dog/companion dog - definition in the mind of the dog or in the mind of humans? Cause I think a dog would have a completely different view of whether or not he was a working dog.

I know I said this in my post, but it is a little confusing with all of the reposts out of order and such, but I thought the question was more for how we as humans classify working vs. sport vs. companion dogs.

To the dogs, yes...they are working and the handlers of sport dogs deserve credit too, because some of them are so well-trained and can perform so well it's a gorgeous thing to watch. So to me, it's not a judgement thing...it's just a classification thing.

And of course, working dogs and sport dogs can be (and usually are) companions as well. No arguement there.

 Quote: Carol Boche

 Quote: Sandy Moore

Working dog/companion dog - definition in the mind of the dog or in the mind of humans? Cause I think a dog would have a completely different view of whether or not he was a working dog.

Your mind....

You crack me up - I almost spit my coffee on my keyboard . I knew what you meant but was being facetious

Edited to add: just read Amber's post and ditto to Amber what I said to Carol

Great distinction Amber made, between classifying and judging. Good point.

Carol, just because the working dogs in your neighborhood live in the lap of luxury doesn't alter one bit what they actually are, working dogs. No body, at least me, is suggesting that working dogs can't be pets too.
What your dogs do is not sport, as you so aptly pointed out. When I take my dog for a track if in the end she loses the track, well theres always another day. Maybe not so for your dogs seach object (insert in trouble person here), their tracks are life and death.

Randy

I've been reading this thread...intermittantly this morning.

In full agreement with the apples and oranges (working dogs versus pets with hobbies, which, in my mind includes workingline sport dogs)

If and when the term deployment and its true definition can be applied involving the dogs, in my mind, the dog is a working dog.

I was reading some clips from the Von Stephanitz book, and it seemed clear to me (though Id like to place a disclaimer, I havent read all of it so this opinion isnt seeled in stone yet)
And everything he was sayong seemed to be pointing to the fact that as the "ultimate working dog" the Shepherd must be able and willing to do ANY task needed by the person. the dog was essentially a service dog, whether it was a "pet" (hey, not every dog can be a good pet, it takes a well rounded stable dog do the job right :winkor a herding dog or a police dog.

So in a way I agree that there is a distinction between a working dog and a non-working couch potato. on the other hand, a dog that is a pet but really does the job, guarding the family and home; engaging in an attack IF neccesary, ridding the yard of vermin (seriously, that isnt confined to the terriers) escorting aroung the helpless humans etc) is really a job. BUT there is still a distinction, in my mind, between this dog and the dog who is not particularly helpful at all except as an accessory or accepted family member, because of its instability or drive or sense of responsibity. Those are the things that distinguish between a dog that can be a working dog or not.