Questionable titles - Page 3

So, I ask, isn't the simplest solution, at this point, for the community to start basing purchases on dogs that are titled in "other" SV recognized, breed survey level events?  Events such as the HGH (Herdensgebrauchshunde) and RH (Rettungshunde) are the closest thing we have to true working titles because from what I have seen, judges in those events typically have had a working background in the real life activity being simulated (i.e. Herding and Rescue Operations).  I'd argue that these are better much titles to judge dogs by today because they are not as vulnerable to fraud as IPO is.  It would be pretty difficult to rig an HGH trial, most are filmed and must occur in the daytime.  If a dog gets an HGH you can be assured they earned it and I have no doubt that pups produced by a KKL/HGH dog can do IPO.  Same goes for the RH, which can only be done in broad daylight, due to safety issues and all SV/RH judges outside the USA must go through IRO oversight to get certified.  Also, as I said before, most RH judges are working disaster response personnel on top of being a SV/IRO/FCI judge. 

IPO pretty much offers none of these above noted safeguards and I am stupefied why people are not putting more value in HGH or RH titled dogs for their breeding programs, especially when most are choosing females that only have a BH. How could a breeding program be hurt by pairing one of the usual IPO studs with a female that has an RH or HGH title?

Here are the SV rules clarifying the RH and HGH as equivalent to the IPO  title:

HOWEVER, for herding dogs apply utility theory Special Regulations Körvoraussetzungen:

•HGH testing under an SV judge HGH title Obtained under an SV judge

•No AD-AD test No test required

http://www.schaeferhunde.de/index.php?eID=tx_nawsecuredl&u=0&g=0&t=1437088141&hash=08bd41dc5ee8b75bd8ae5681fd298237658ac4cf&file=fileadmin/download/informationen/info_zba_941_regelungenHGH.pdf

3. Requirements for Participation at Breed Surveys
3.1 For the Dogs:

- The Körung is appropriate only for German Shepherd Dogs registered in the breed book of the SV, and which have coats classified as “Stockhaar” or “Langstockhaar mit Unterwolle” (translation: “straight topcoat hair” or “long straight topcoat” — both requiring wooly undercoat). In the year of the Körung they must be at least two years old;

- Proof of at least 80 points in section C of an IP-1 Prüfung(trial performance) under an SV Leistungsrichter(performance judge), or earned in a herding trial under an SV HGH judge, or in an RH-2 [advanced Rettungshundsearch-and-rescue dog] test. All of these will include a courage and protection phase;

- Proof of an AD examination under an SV judge;

- ‘a’-stamp for hips, shown in the Ahnentafel [certified SV pedigree. Translator’s note: an equivalent issued in another country where the dog resides is satisfactory];

- ED stamp for elbows also in the Ahnentafel (if born after 01.01.2004, was required, starting with the 2008 show season);

- Proof of a minimum quality evaluation of “Good” under an SV judge.

http://www.schaeferhunde-mv.de/attachments/article/22/K%C3%B6rordnung%20Fassung%202014.pdf

So, can someone please explain why the community needs to rely solely on the IPO title to identify good dogs, with an establish history of trial success, when we have the fraud resistant HGH and RH titles available?

Momosgarage, good point but to my knowledge there are only one or two people in the US who take dogs in for an HGH title.  Even if I wanted to do it myself there is only one possibility in the Midwest and they mostly do AKC herding.  Finding a good helper for IPO is getting harder and harder but the scarcity of HGH trainers is problematic.  You do make some good points though.  

Judy

      Gustav, I would like to know if dogs are currently given titles that they don't deserve. This thread started with the accusation that the corruption goes all the way to the top and since there has been leadership change and changes in the rules of the SV organization, I was wondering if the OP had recent or specific knowledge of cheating. 

Markobytes, has SV removed or changed all of the judges that have allegedly done this in the past? Anyway, there are folks that think all titles acquired under SV judges are legitimate.....so what's the point. If you really do not know answer to question you posed you are not in position to discuss this issue. ( and I don't mean that meanly or condescendingly.....just factually.

@judyk, you are correct, holding an HGH trial is a logistical nightmare and  will not likely become a commonly offered test offered in the United States.  However, the United States has the best conditions in the world to offer the HGH on a regular basis (available livestock, land, etc.).  The number one problem is that there is a TOTAL lack of understanding of why the HGH is an important title among those in the Schutzhund community.  The second problem is that although people doing AKC herding and AHBA herding fully understand why the HGH test is important, they don't have any strong desire to put a trial together because not everyone doing AKC and AHBA herding have German Shepherds going after a KKL.  This is an area where USCA, the GSDCA, WDA and AHBA need to form a special joint committee to expand HGH offerings and increase participation.  Its truly a missed opportunity, marred by the typical issue of polarized Americans not wanting to cooperate with other polarized Americans.  None of them can see that cooperating and offering something like th HGH is mutually beneficial to all parties involved (the national clubs, the local clubs, the volunteers, the individual participants, the owners of the livestock and land and even local businesses closest to the trial). 

But, putting aside the HGH for a moment, there is also VERY little reason why the RH is not a standard offering at clubs across the country (the FH Fährtenprüfung too, for that matter).  Outside of the skills needed to train a dog for the protection phase, all other schutzhund phases and training methods are completely applicable to the RH and would require very little modification to an individuals training methods.

The BH is not required to attempt the RH-F under an IRO/FCI judge (under the IRO/FCI the RH-F "suitability test" is the same as the RH1 offered at SV trials), BUT, if trialing under an SV/IRO judge, earning a BH is required first.

So what is involved in earning an RH-F/RH1 for example?

Tracking - 400 pace track, aged 20 minutes, with 2 right angles and 3 articles

Obedience and Agility - Heeling (nearly the same pattern as the BH), Walking through a group of people, Off leash heeling (nearly the same pattern as the BH with 2 gunshots), crawl through 3 meter Tunnel, Traversing 3x3 meters of unpleasant surfaces, Handler Carrying the dog for 10 meters and handing over the dog, Lying down while distracted, Traversing an elevated rigid 4 meter wooden board, Traversing of 3 different obstacles each up to 0.8 meters in height.

http://www.iro-dogs.org/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/Regelwerke/IPO-R_2012_E.pdf

I am not going to post all the rules, but the above illustrates that the RH1 is equivalent to the IPO1 and requires no more space or volunteer effort to hold a trial.  Most importantly, you DO NOT need a helper to train for the RH1/2.  There aren't really any good excuses why few clubs are offering and training for the RH titles.  It can be done by the same dogs, with the same training styles and using same club fields.  The difference however, as I pointed out, is the pool of judges available that clubs can choose from is VASTLY different from the IPO judge pool (same goes for the HGH).  That different pool of judges is an advantage, IF, someone is TRULY interested in evaluating good working dogs and not just going over a checklist of IPO3 "cut scores".  Why?  Because a dog that fraudulently passed an IPO3 doesn't stand a chance in hell at passing even the RH1 under an SV judge that was also certified by the IRO. 

Note, most USCA judges are only allowed to judge the RH1 because they are not dual certified by the IRO, that means, RH1 titles earned under USCA judges are not valid outside the United States, eliminating the possibility of a team ever being sent by the USA to the IRO World Championships.  Its also means that USCA as an organization, for the most part, cannot award an RH2 with its domestically cetified judges. 

In fact, I'd alter my above statement slightly and say dogs with both an IPO3 and RH2 are likely FAR superior candidates to base breeding programs on, or to purchase as a fully-trained imported-dog, because the chances of a dog having both a falsely awarded IPO3 AND a falsely awarded RH2 is HIGHLY unlikely.

I might be oldfashioned, but in my book a RH1 is NOT equivalent to an IPO1 trial - there is no part 3, called bitework, involved.
That said, I am accepting reluctantly the RH2 COMBINED with a breed survey, but never less.

Why? A lot of breeds are able to do the RH, but only a few breeds ( there are always examples to the norm ) are able to manage an IPO trial.
Even a lot of so called German Shepherd dogs are not able to title within IPO - I don´t want to see these dogs in a breeding program...

Forget about the " honesty " of HGH - it´s a trial, and the people taking part in these trials with their dogs know exactly how to train and title them -
it´s just not that common.

Only for the record: For several years now SV sends out "official observers" every weekend to the club trials, no club knows where these people go. No club is allowed to forbid entrance to spectators, every club has to announce date and place weeks prior to the event. As a result the judges and the competitors became a lot more careful.

Is it possible to cheat? It´s still possible, but IT IS NOT THE NORM - most of us are proud of their dogs, and are proud of the earned results.

I was a member of a club with a lot of "International" dogs, mostly from the United States, for years. We always tried our best, the dogs were well cared for, and we spent a lot of hours with these dogs on the trainig field.

You know what? Most often the "proud owners" of these dogs didn´t even know the rules of IPO, they didn´t know that there is a difference between helpers, club grounds, and handlers. They didn´t know that they need to TRAIN their own dogs, and they didn´t know the difference between a club trial and a Regional or even National, but all of them knew about the Dollar/Euro span, and almost all of them tried to pay as little as possible, and almost all of them tried to get back the dog as soon as possible...no matter how, only the "title" was important.

Right now the Americans tend to send their dogs to Eastern Europe for titling - it´s cheaper, it´s faster, and there is no supervision...

I lost my respect for all breeders who never trained their own breeding stock....

I might be oldfashioned, but in my book a RH1 is NOT equivalent to an IPO1 trial - there is no part 3, called bitework, involved.
That said, I am accepting reluctantly the RH2 COMBINED with a breed survey, but never less

Why? A lot of breeds are able to do the RH, but only a few breeds ( there are always examples to the norm ) are able to manage an IPO trial.
Even a lot of so called German Shepherd dogs are not able to title within IPO - I don´t want to see these dogs in a breeding program...

-susie

I can make the same argument about IPO trained dogs that can't do a proficient area search nor follow a trail filled with cross tracks.  So, which is more important in a working dog, bitework or the ability to independently solve scentwork problems?  The reality is that neither is more important than the other because it depends on the needs of the handler, breeder or buyer.

The tracking and agility portions are more difficult in the RH1 than is for the IPO1 and that's what makes them equivalent from a training perspective.  Also the RH track laying is more akin to natural walking, than the roboticly laid IPO tracks, therefore RH tracking, at any level, is much more difficult to pass.  But as you said, it all doesn't really count until they get the RH2 and pass a breed survey with the mini-bitework session anyway.

Note, I did say an IPO3 dog that also has an RH2 is likely a better vetted dog, than those that just have the IPO3.  I'd also give more credence to the credibility of a dual certified SV/IRO judge over a judge solely certified by the WUSV.

Momo, we could argue about it for years. It´not about any "training perspective" - it´s about character, temperament, and drive.
A lot of Golden Retrievers are very good at RH, but I don´t like their temperament. From the standpoint of a German Shepherd dog lover they are not breedworthy in case they call themselves German Shepherd dog, as long as they don´t proof their willingness to protect and engage.

You want to involve as much dogs and dog owners as possible in any kinds of sports - I want to preserve the initial working skills of the German Shepherd dog.
I really don´t care about pet owners, there are pet breeds enough on this planet.

" Note, I did say an IPO3 dog that also has an RH2 is likely a better vetted dog, than those that just have the IPO3.  I'd also give more credence to the credibility of a dual certified SV/IRO judge over a judge solely certified by the WUSV."

Nothing to say against this statement.

You want to involve as much dogs and dog owners as possible in any kinds of sports - I want to preserve the initial working skills of the German Shepherd dog.
I really don´t care about pet owners, there are pet breeds enough on this planet.\

-susie

And this has always been our disconnect... 

As I have said to you before, I have relatives that live in europe and what you said above ABSOLUTELY works there and will continue to work for decades to come.  That is not the case in the USA and if pet owners are not brought into the fold SOON, FCI working dogs sports are going to be in for big declines in the near future (this is especially true due to bitework averse Millennial trainers).  Millenials are pro-shelter/rescue, against breeders, etc and if you take a look at pet product advertising and SPCA outreach campaigns, the data is showing that dog owners like ourselves in in GREAT decline.  The millennials I see regularly, love nosework and AKC tracking, but run away crying when visiting a schutzhund club for the first time.  As much as I hate the SPCA and other organization like them, they have a much more clear understanding of what kinds of people owned dogs today in the United States. The choice is really black & white for American Dog Clubs, people like us either must start inviting those "new kinds of dog owners" into the fold OR become irrelevant when they overtake us and make legislation policies that make certain kinds of dog sports or training methods illegal. 

The RH and FH are the stopgaps that can save the USA sport dog world from becoming TOTALLY irrelevant in the world of FCI working dog sports, when the next generation totally takes over.  The USA based schutzhund community can ignore my observations, posted here, at its own peril.