retriever/lab

[kingfisher 0]

alright i was just wandering what the difference between a lab and retriever is? besides them being different breeds as they look the same to me

[smarty 0]

im not sure mate but i think they are the same help anyone ????

because i think the full name is labrador retriever

someone correct me if i'm wrong

[pointer28 1]

Retriever is basically a group of Gundogs made of different breeds namely:

 

Labrador retriever

Golden Retriever

Flat Coated retriever

Curly coated retriever

Chesapeake Bay retriever

 

and believe it or not

 

Irish Water Spaniel, which although called a spaniel actually runs in retriever field trials.

 

There might be some I'm forgetting, probably is, but you get the idea.

[kingfisher 0]

Retriever is basically a group of Gundogs made of different breeds namely:

 

Labrador retriever

Golden Retriever

Flat Coated retriever

Curly coated retriever

Chesapeake Bay retriever

 

and believe it or not

 

Irish Water Spaniel, which although called a spaniel actually runs in retriever field trials.

 

There might be some I'm forgetting, probably is, but you get the idea.

yeah thats cleared things up abit thanks

[lewismac1 1]

I have both a lab and a retreiver,

 

The lab is more intellegent than the retreiver and is much faster- but lacks a good nose, Labs are very easily trained and very obedient if trained in the right hands they also have a very impressive pedigree and breed history if bred properly.

 

The retreiver is white, from show stock and is rather stupid But i give her, her due she is turning out to be a good worker with an excelent nose, She is very pig headed and does what she wants when she wants but it add's to her character, also retreivers are fairly slow on land and very muscular, love the water she has a show breed and is nothing compared to the lab.

 

But my advice would be getting a lab if it is your first dog.

 

If you go down the road of the retreiver- study the lines and pedigree and get a Golden ( and not from show stock)

 

Cheers

[Guest ESS]

I have both a lab and a retreiver,

 

The lab is more intellegent than the retreiver and is much faster- but lacks a good nose, Labs are very easily trained and very obedient if trained in the right hands they also have a very impressive pedigree and breed history if bred properly.

 

The retreiver is white, from show stock and is rather stupid But i give her, her due she is turning out to be a good worker with an excelent nose, She is very pig headed and does what she wants when she wants but it add's to her character, also retreivers are fairly slow on land and very muscular, love the water she has a show breed and is nothing compared to the lab.

 

But my advice would be getting a lab if it is your first dog.

 

If you go down the road of the retreiver- study the lines and pedigree and get a Golden ( and not from show stock)

 

Cheers

 

Ill show my ignorance Labrador is classed as a retriever.wether its show or working its just a classification of breed type... just as flatcoats goldies or chessies

[Guest ESS]

and just a footnote labs more common on the field than the other breeds mentioned and you will have more chance of securing a viable working dog than the other breeds mentioned..jmo

 

Regards Steve

[pointer28 1]

I support that comment wholeheartedly, there is a reason why Labradors are the most common retrievers in the shooting field !!

 

While it's lovely to own a minority breed and it's even better to get out there and work them, from an entirely practical point of view, it's a lot safer option to go with the proven, tried and tested breeds.

 

Go to a retriever field trial sometime and most days the entry will be 99% made up of Labradors.

 

It depends on your interest. My own interest level is mainly in training the dog, shooting is only a way of working with the dog and furthering his education and my enjoyment of the sport. That's why I'm quite happy to own a minority breed dog like a Brittany.

 

If you are mainly interested in shooting, and the dog is your secondary interest, then certainly go for the safer breeds like Labradors and ESS every single time.

 

I used to live on the coast and mainly shoot wildfowl at the weekends, at that time I owned a FTW (Field Trial Winner) Labrador, and for that job you will not get a better dog. He once set off after a strong swimming duck into the Irish Sea in rough conditions and although he eventually had to give it best, I'd hate to see another dog try it, and if it happened again in the same circumstances I wouldn't send a dog for the same bird. Youthful enthusiasm (or stupidity) got the better of me and I'm damn lucky I didn't lose my dog as well as my duck. I also did some picking up on a driven shoot and he was an absolute master on a strong runner. I thought I'd lost him once in a dense wooded area, but he eventually came back 20 minutes later with his bird.

 

Labradors live and breathe just to retrieve, and if they hunt up it's a bonus but it's not their main thing. Spaniels live and breathe to hunt cover, and while most retrieve quite well, they are not as fanatical about it as Labradors and with dummies especially, can get bored very easily.

 

If this is your first dog, then I would 100% suggest that you get a Labrador for a number of reasons;

 

1. Larger gene pool of proven working and trialling dogs available

2. Every dog trainer in the country knows them well, as has worked with hundreds of them

3. There is loads of books / DVD's available specifically about training Labs.

4. If you get really into it, you can enter Field Trials and have a better chance of winning than with a minority breed

5. You will find loads of helpful people who can advise you because they know the breed

[Guest ESS]

I support that comment wholeheartedly, there is a reason why Labradors are the most common retrievers in the shooting field !!

 

While it's lovely to own a minority breed and it's even better to get out there and work them, from an entirely practical point of view, it's a lot safer option to go with the proven, tried and tested breeds.

 

Go to a retriever field trial sometime and most days the entry will be 99% made up of Labradors.

 

It depends on your interest. My own interest level is mainly in training the dog, shooting is only a way of working with the dog and furthering his education and my enjoyment of the sport. That's why I'm quite happy to own a minority breed dog like a Brittany.

 

If you are mainly interested in shooting, and the dog is your secondary interest, then certainly go for the safer breeds like Labradors and ESS every single time.

 

I used to live on the coast and mainly shoot wildfowl at the weekends, at that time I owned a FTW (Field Trial Winner) Labrador, and for that job you will not get a better dog. He once set off after a strong swimming duck into the Irish Sea in rough conditions and although he eventually had to give it best, I'd hate to see another dog try it, and if it happened again in the same circumstances I wouldn't send a dog for the same bird. Youthful enthusiasm (or stupidity) got the better of me and I'm damn lucky I didn't lose my dog as well as my duck. I also did some picking up on a driven shoot and he was an absolute master on a strong runner. I thought I'd lost him once in a dense wooded area, but he eventually came back 20 minutes later with his bird.

 

Labradors live and breathe just to retrieve, and if they hunt up it's a bonus but it's not their main thing. Spaniels live and breathe to hunt cover, and while most retrieve quite well, they are not as fanatical about it as Labradors and with dummies especially, can get bored very easily.

 

If this is your first dog, then I would 100% suggest that you get a Labrador for a number of reasons;

 

1. Larger gene pool of proven working and trialling dogs available

2. Every dog trainer in the country knows them well, as has worked with hundreds of them

3. There is loads of books / DVD's available specifically about training Labs.

4. If you get really into it, you can enter Field Trials and have a better chance of winning than with a minority breed

5. You will find loads of helpful people who can advise you because they know the breed

 

 

You summed it up ..I am and always be Spaniel biased they get under your skin,put if you wish to pickup of fowl there is no better dog than a Lab.I have a Lab on shoot day I will also have 5 spaniels out .The Lab is there for the simple fact she will push out that little bit furthur her marking of birds especially runners, and on a very cold day she doesnt feel the cold on the foreshore ,or on a cold pond river .like my Springers Cockers do.

[kingfisher 0]

thanks guys for all that info, most people have said to get a lab as my 1st working dog so id be daft to ignore you all and to be honest its always been between a lab and a springer but this will be a few months yet til ive saved up for it and got the room

[pointer28 1]

I'll just make one more small point here.

 

Over the years and with the benefit of lessons learned the hard way, I very much live by the mantra "value versus cost".

 

In 1996 I paid £500 Irish pounds for a trained Labrador, which was about a months wages at the time. Everyone thought I was mad. However, I bought myself a fully trained Labrador that had won a Field Trial and as well as that, I bought him off a really nice guy who brought me picking-up a number of times and really put a lot of effort into making sure that I knew how to handle the dog properly and how to keep him to that standard.

 

Consequently I had a super dog for many years who was a joy to own and work with. It's a great feeling to go shooting with friends when their dogs fail on a bird, and you can direct your dog with hand signals onto an unseen bird and end with a successful retrieve. A lot of guys think that all this handling is a load of nonsense and that a retriever should be gone the second that you pull the trigger and should never be handled.

 

I consider this to be absolute b*llshit and usually comes as an excuse from people who just haven't the ability to train their dog properly. I hate dogs that run in on shots. Take this for an example.

 

You're shooting, a bird flies over, you shoot it and it lands 50 yards away, stone dead, in the middle of a stubble field.

 

Two seconds later, you shoot another bird, it lands on the other side of a river and is running strongly.

 

Where's your dog??? 50 yards away collecting a bird that doesn't need to be collected.

 

Now, if you had a well trained dog he would be sitting at your side and you could immediately send him after the runner and direct him with hand signals to where you marked the bird falling, hopefully he will then pick up the scent of the bird and track it, all ending with a bird in the bag.

 

That's why we have retrievers! If every bird we shot landed stone dead in the middle of a stubble field, why would we bother spending money buying and feeding retrievers when we could just pick them up ourselves.

 

Anyway, I'm eventually coming to a point here. You could easily pay £300 - £500 for a nice pup, spend a year feeding him, training him to whatever standard you can manage, and they may well still be a failure. How much money have you spent over that time? Feed, vaccinations, DVD's, books, etc. etc.

 

Or, field triallers regularly have lots of dogs that are very good dogs but just haven't the flair or style neede to win a field trial. You could buy one of these for maybe £1500, you can see exactly what he can do before you buy it, and if you take your time getting to know the dog and learn how to handle him properly, you can have a cracking gundog in a couple of months.

 

While this may be more expensive at the beginning, it certainly worked for me and I learned exactly how a well trained labrador should work and how they should be handled. This time, I now have the knowledge and the ability to take on and train a pup from scratch.

[kingfisher 0]

I'll just make one more small point here.

 

Over the years and with the benefit of lessons learned the hard way, I very much live by the mantra "value versus cost".

 

In 1996 I paid £500 Irish pounds for a trained Labrador, which was about a months wages at the time. Everyone thought I was mad. However, I bought myself a fully trained Labrador that had won a Field Trial and as well as that, I bought him off a really nice guy who brought me picking-up a number of times and really put a lot of effort into making sure that I knew how to handle the dog properly and how to keep him to that standard.

 

Consequently I had a super dog for many years who was a joy to own and work with. It's a great feeling to go shooting with friends when their dogs fail on a bird, and you can direct your dog with hand signals onto an unseen bird and end with a successful retrieve. A lot of guys think that all this handling is a load of nonsense and that a retriever should be gone the second that you pull the trigger and should never be handled.

 

I consider this to be absolute b*llshit and usually comes as an excuse from people who just haven't the ability to train their dog properly. I hate dogs that run in on shots. Take this for an example.

 

You're shooting, a bird flies over, you shoot it and it lands 50 yards away, stone dead, in the middle of a stubble field.

 

Two seconds later, you shoot another bird, it lands on the other side of a river and is running strongly.

 

Where's your dog??? 50 yards away collecting a bird that doesn't need to be collected.

 

Now, if you had a well trained dog he would be sitting at your side and you could immediately send him after the runner and direct him with hand signals to where you marked the bird falling, hopefully he will then pick up the scent of the bird and track it, all ending with a bird in the bag.

 

That's why we have retrievers! If every bird we shot landed stone dead in the middle of a stubble field, why would we bother spending money buying and feeding retrievers when we could just pick them up ourselves.

 

Anyway, I'm eventually coming to a point here. You could easily pay £300 - £500 for a nice pup, spend a year feeding him, training him to whatever standard you can manage, and they may well still be a failure. How much money have you spent over that time? Feed, vaccinations, DVD's, books, etc. etc.

 

Or, field triallers regularly have lots of dogs that are very good dogs but just haven't the flair or style neede to win a field trial. You could buy one of these for maybe £1500, you can see exactly what he can do before you buy it, and if you take your time getting to know the dog and learn how to handle him properly, you can have a cracking gundog in a couple of months.

 

While this may be more expensive at the beginning, it certainly worked for me and I learned exactly how a well trained labrador should work and how they should be handled. This time, I now have the knowledge and the ability to take on and train a pup from scratch.

that sounds like a good plan but theres no way i could afford 1500 quid on anything so ill just have to save up for a more reasonably priced pup and although it would be nice to get one pre-trained dog im quite looking forward to watching the dog progress

[jakeuk1 0]

that sounds like a good plan but theres no way i could afford 1500 quid on anything so ill just have to save up for a more reasonably priced pup and although it would be nice to get one pre-trained dog im quite looking forward to watching the dog progress

 

I would advise you to train your own dog, It wont be perfect, but i get my satisfaction from working dogs that i have trained myself, you will have to learn (just as much as the dog!) it will be a challenge! you will bond with the dog better and get to fine tune your dog to your requirements.

So what if the dogs not perfect? he will be yours