This is a serious question that has grown out of an argument on another thread. I know that retrievers like labs and chessies are bred to retrieve, and retrieve in that context means bringing back ducks, maybe in a field trial.
Then there's the bring it back game that lots of dogs, not necessarily retrievers, enjoy. With Cubbe, this means a ball in a sock. With my brother's flop eared mustard colored mutt, it meant frisbees. Is that called fetching?
I ask because I can see where some things that are important to one are irrelevent to the other. I don't really care if Cubbe shakes and pounces on the ball-in-sock before bringing it to me. I can see where that might be a problem with a duck. Same for concepts of hard mouth, soft mouth, forced retrieve and tug. Vital to get it right in some circumstances, irrelevent in others. What's the right terminology?
Lia
1 2 3
Julia Altshuler (Email Removed) spoke these words of wisdom in
This is a serious question that has grown out of an argument on another thread. I know that retrievers like ... forced retrieve and tug. Vital to get it right in some circumstances, irrelevent in others. What's the right terminology? Lia

A retrieve comes in many forms, but a retrieve by any other name is still a retrieve.
Some venues penalize style points.
This is a serious question that has grown out of an argument on another thread. I know that retrievers like ... mouth, forced retrieve and tug. Vital to get it right in some circumstances, irrelevent in others. What's the right terminology?

It's all retrieving, Julia.
But the degree of difficulty changes, depending on the venue.

The field-trial venue, for example, is for expert retrievers only. Field-trial dogs will compete in a number of series on a typical trial weekend. Each series may include 4-5 different retrieves, and at varying distances, up to 400 yards away from the handler.

Plus, each series is set up to fool the dog. Using prevailing the grounds' structure, wind direction, "poison" birds, gunshots, etc. The idea is to eliminate as many dogs as possible, and as quickly as possible.Some of the retrieves will be what are called "marks." That's where both the dog and the handler get to see where the bird falls to the ground out in the field. The dog is expected to remember where each bird (the bird can be a duck, goose, pheasant, pigeon, etc.) has fallen, and when sent to retrieve each bird, do it in the fastest, most expedient manner possible, which is always in a straight line, and at full speed. That means if there are two ponds, each 50-100 yards in circumference, between the dog and the bird, the dog must swim across each pond (no, he can't run around it), perhaps up and down a hill or two, plus cross several roads, a culvert, etc., remember exactly where the bird fell, and then pick it up and return with it to the handler.

If the dog veers off course, he's stopped by the whistle of the handler, and then sent off in a new direction.

He can't drop the bird (otherwise it might escape), he can't play with the bird (takes up valuable time, because there are more birds to be retrieved), and he can't munch on it (who wants to eat a munched up bird?), either.
There are also retrieves called "blinds." A blind retrieve is where only the handler knows where the bird has been planted in the field, not the dog. Many blind retrieves are conducted out to 300 yards or so. The dog is sent off in the direction of the fall, in a straight line, of course, and if he remains on that straight line, he'll eventually either see or scent the fallen bird, and then he'll pick it up and return to the line with it. The "line" is where the handler must stay during the entire series. He can use verbal commands, whistle commands, and hand signals, to direct the dog to each bird.

A good field-trial retriever will need very little or no handling when sent on a mark, but is expected to be handled somewhat for a blind retrieve. But each "handle" costs the dog points. He's also graded on style, speed, memory, nose, determination, training, etc.

In real hunting situations, a retriever may be called upon to wrangle a crippled and very *** off 20 pound goose, flapping around out in the middle of a lake, and in frigid weather, and return it to his handler unharmed.
It's takes a very special dog to be able to do things like that, and special training, too.
But it's his JOB at this point, and he thrives on doing it.

Anyway, a fun retrieve is always better than no retrieve, but they should never be confused with what happens out in the field.

Handsome Jack Morrison
Getting Vietnam right.
http://www.spectator.org/dsp article.asp?art id=11946

Some "consensus," eh?
"Less Than Half of all Published Scientists Endorse Global Warming Theory" http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord id=b35c36a3-802a-23ad-46ec-6880767e7966

"They're very excitable, these Democrats."
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22161
In typical "reality-based" fashion, John Edwards wants you to give up your* SUV, but wants to keep *his 30,000 sq. ft. home, multiple SUVs, ride in private jets, etc. http://www.wlos.com/template/inews wire/wires.regional.nc/22b7034c-www.wlos.com.shtml http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u128/sapguy us/EdwardsHome.jpg

This* is the *real reason why the "reality-based" community pushes global-warming hysteria. To push you around and take your money. Senator Dingell now wants a cap on the Mortgage Interest Deduction! http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/08/dingell wants c.php

Freakin' Democrats.
The "reality-based" community: Hopelessly Devoted to Failure. http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Mjc2NGM4NTBmYmUwYzRkYzNmMGVkMWZhYjU5ZjEzNDE =

Why "liberal" doesn't quite fit:
"In the short term, this reflects the failure of the Republican Party to secure its hard-won victories. In the longer term, this may provide a new opportunity for the heirs to authentic liberalism - today's conservatives - as they often thrive when lovers of big government, by whatever name they go by, overreach." http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/08/why-liberal-doe.html

"The main proponents of 'universal coverage' want to throw more money at the current health care system, which strikes me as unwise. I believe that the 'universal coverage' mantra is dysfunctional for the same reason that 'more money for public schools' is a dysfunctional mantra for education. When your current approach is digging you into a hole, the sensible thing to do is not to dig faster. It is to stop digging." http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=080607B
It's all retrieving, Julia. But the degree of difficulty changes, depending on the venue.

That's a good essay. Thanks.
Then it would be accurate to say that I've clicker trained Cubbe to retrieve? Even though she retrieves a ball-in-sock from down the stairs as a way to relieve boredom and get exercise on rainy days? It seems like there should be a different word for what the curly tailed do.
Lia
It's all retrieving, Julia. But the degree of difficulty changes, depending on the venue.

That's a good essay. Thanks.

You're welcome.
Then it would be accurate to say that I've clicker trained Cubbe to retrieve?

If you've clicker-trained her to retrieve, and she retrieves for you to your satisfaction, then you've clicker-trained Cubbe to retrieve.

You bet.
Even though she retrieves a ball-in-sock from down the stairs as a way to relieve boredom and get exercise on rainy days?

It sounds like she has a nice "play" retrieve, and enjoys it.

Just don't invite any field-trial Labs over to the house, cuz they might retrieve the ball-in-sock and Cubbe, and drop them both in your lap, before circling back to look for your husband.
It seems like there should be a different word for what the curly tailed do.

The curly tailed retrieve?

Handsome Jack Morrison
Getting Vietnam right.
http://www.spectator.org/dsp article.asp?art id=11946

Some "consensus," eh?
"Less Than Half of all Published Scientists Endorse Global Warming Theory" http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord id=b35c36a3-802a-23ad-46ec-6880767e7966

"They're very excitable, these Democrats."
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22161
In typical "reality-based" fashion, John Edwards wants you to give up your* SUV, but wants to keep *his 30,000 sq. ft. home, multiple SUVs, ride in private jets, etc. http://www.wlos.com/template/inews wire/wires.regional.nc/22b7034c-www.wlos.com.shtml http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u128/sapguy us/EdwardsHome.jpg

This* is the *real reason why the "reality-based" community pushes global-warming hysteria. To push you around and take your money. Senator Dingell now wants a cap on the Mortgage Interest Deduction! http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/08/dingell wants c.php

Freakin' Democrats.
The "reality-based" community: Hopelessly Devoted to Failure. http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Mjc2NGM4NTBmYmUwYzRkYzNmMGVkMWZhYjU5ZjEzNDE =

Why "liberal" doesn't quite fit:
"In the short term, this reflects the failure of the Republican Party to secure its hard-won victories. In the longer term, this may provide a new opportunity for the heirs to authentic liberalism - today's conservatives - as they often thrive when lovers of big government, by whatever name they go by, overreach." http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/08/why-liberal-doe.html

"The main proponents of 'universal coverage' want to throw more money at the current health care system, which strikes me as unwise. I believe that the 'universal coverage' mantra is dysfunctional for the same reason that 'more money for public schools' is a dysfunctional mantra for education. When your current approach is digging you into a hole, the sensible thing to do is not to dig faster. It is to stop digging." http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=080607B
Just don't invite any field-trial Labs over to the house, cuz they might retrieve the ball-in-sock and Cubbe, and drop them both in your lap, before circling back to look for your husband.

It would be cool if they found him. I'm not married and have always wanted to meet the guy.
Lia
Just don't invite any field-trial Labs over to the house, ... your lap, before circling back to look for your husband.

It would be cool if they found him. I'm not married and have always wanted to meet the guy.

Aah. Just shacking up, EH?
Heh.

Handsome Jack Morrison
Getting Vietnam right.
http://www.spectator.org/dsp article.asp?art id=11946

Some "consensus," eh?
"Less Than Half of all Published Scientists Endorse Global Warming Theory" http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord id=b35c36a3-802a-23ad-46ec-6880767e7966

"They're very excitable, these Democrats."
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22161
In typical "reality-based" fashion, John Edwards wants you to give up your* SUV, but wants to keep *his 30,000 sq. ft. home, multiple SUVs, ride in private jets, etc. http://www.wlos.com/template/inews wire/wires.regional.nc/22b7034c-www.wlos.com.shtml http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u128/sapguy us/EdwardsHome.jpg

This* is the *real reason why the "reality-based" community pushes global-warming hysteria. To push you around and take your money. Senator Dingell now wants a cap on the Mortgage Interest Deduction! http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/08/dingell wants c.php

Freakin' Democrats.
The "reality-based" community: Hopelessly Devoted to Failure. http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Mjc2NGM4NTBmYmUwYzRkYzNmMGVkMWZhYjU5ZjEzNDE =

Why "liberal" doesn't quite fit:
"In the short term, this reflects the failure of the Republican Party to secure its hard-won victories. In the longer term, this may provide a new opportunity for the heirs to authentic liberalism - today's conservatives - as they often thrive when lovers of big government, by whatever name they go by, overreach." http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/08/why-liberal-doe.html

"The main proponents of 'universal coverage' want to throw more money at the current health care system, which strikes me as unwise. I believe that the 'universal coverage' mantra is dysfunctional for the same reason that 'more money for public schools' is a dysfunctional mantra for education. When your current approach is digging you into a hole, the sensible thing to do is not to dig faster. It is to stop digging." http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=080607B
Aah. Just shacking up, EH?

For 20 years. The last 10 at the same address.
Lia
Aah. Just shacking up, EH?

For 20 years. The last 10 at the same address.

Well, if you must shack up, I guess it says something about both of you, that at least you hate to change your addresses.

Heh.

Handsome Jack Morrison
Getting Vietnam right.
http://www.spectator.org/dsp article.asp?art id=11946

Some "consensus," eh?
"Less Than Half of all Published Scientists Endorse Global Warming Theory" http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord id=b35c36a3-802a-23ad-46ec-6880767e7966

"They're very excitable, these Democrats."
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=22161
In typical "reality-based" fashion, John Edwards wants you to give up your* SUV, but wants to keep *his 30,000 sq. ft. home, multiple SUVs, ride in private jets, etc. http://www.wlos.com/template/inews wire/wires.regional.nc/22b7034c-www.wlos.com.shtml http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u128/sapguy us/EdwardsHome.jpg

This* is the *real reason why the "reality-based" community pushes global-warming hysteria. To push you around and take your money. Senator Dingell now wants a cap on the Mortgage Interest Deduction! http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/08/dingell wants c.php

Freakin' Democrats.
The "reality-based" community: Hopelessly Devoted to Failure. http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Mjc2NGM4NTBmYmUwYzRkYzNmMGVkMWZhYjU5ZjEzNDE =

Why "liberal" doesn't quite fit:
"In the short term, this reflects the failure of the Republican Party to secure its hard-won victories. In the longer term, this may provide a new opportunity for the heirs to authentic liberalism - today's conservatives - as they often thrive when lovers of big government, by whatever name they go by, overreach." http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/08/why-liberal-doe.html

"The main proponents of 'universal coverage' want to throw more money at the current health care system, which strikes me as unwise. I believe that the 'universal coverage' mantra is dysfunctional for the same reason that 'more money for public schools' is a dysfunctional mantra for education. When your current approach is digging you into a hole, the sensible thing to do is not to dig faster. It is to stop digging." http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=080607B
Show more