Waarheid, your prejudices are emerging, again....fortunately...I have to agree with the majority of what you have stated in your last post.
Like I said before. When it comes to functional dogs I am prejudiced, and proud of it
.
With respect to Bonnie Sykes-Norris, I disagree. As I think we can have both conformation and working. We just have to find organizations willing to offer our dogs the tests...and owners willing to try it.
You preaching, me choir.
I disagree with Bonnie on this one as well. She essentially argues that you cannot have your cake and eat it too because in every real working performance venue that she has studied, the dogs that perform the best, never have 'show' type conformation. I would agree with her observation itself, but disagree with her conclusion. I think it is POSSIBLE, but it would be an unfathomably difficult road-to-hoe... we can have both, but the conformation RR folks will have to decide they are willing to let their little 'snookums' break a nail on the hunt, and the RR hunting folks are going to have to come out of the closet... well, I can dream can't I?
.
Remember, coursing?/Herding?/Obedience?/Tracking?/Even weight pulls?
Discussing the real-world value and viability (or lack thereof) of any of those events as substantive evaluations of our dogs ability to do what they were developed for, is a road we probably shouldn't go down... perhaps in the debate area, even then, it's probably better left alone.
I find it hard to believe that Matt is the only person hunting with their dog. I have heard that Germany has many hunt tests and RRs have competed.
You only heard half of the story. Ridgebacks have been overtly
rejected and shunned by the hunting orgs in Germany. That's part of what club ELSA (
http://www.club-elsa.de/english/index.php) is trying to do now... prove to the German hunting community that our dogs are for real. I had the honor of working with several club ELSA dogs while I was in Germany visiting with Club Elsa's President for several days. Their dogs excel as wounded game trackers, a fact I was able to document on video while there. But they have a very uphill battle on their hands.
Matt says: Technically, Ridgebacks are eligible to run in UKC Cur & Feist Squirrel events, but the UKC has not really provided small-game or big-game venues for Ridgebacks.
So what's stopping you Matt? 
An EXCELLENT question. I personally don't enter the UKC Cur/Feist Squirrel events because the dogs are rewarded for a particular hunting style... in the squirrel events that is... hunting like a Feist. Ridgebacks have a
completely different hunting style. They have as much chance as titling in a UKC squirrel event as a Dachshund does in an upland Field-trial. Even if you had a Dachshund that hunted birds, he would do it in a very different way from a Brittany Spaniel, and the trial is specifically designed to reward that particular style. We need breed-specific hunting trials.
What's stopping RR owners, in general???
Another excellent question. I wish I had more/better answers. I hope I'm wrong, but I think where individual owners are concerned (as opposed to breeders), most RR owners are just not interested. They're simply not going to do it if they're not interested.
We just have to find organizations willing to offer our dogs the tests...and owners willing to try it. / What's stopping RR owners, in general??? / If I could work the field again, I would certainly try the squirrel tests..... 
Heck, mine are so good at squirrel and rabbit that I don't even need a gun... 
Sandra
The truth is that there is another facet of this that very few want to talk about, but I suspect it's the real "elephant in the middle of the room".
Two main smoke-screen arguments seem to prevail amoung the breeders (as opposed to individual owners).
1. I know this not what you're saying at all Sandra, so please know that I'm not referring to you here, but for many breeders it's easier to say "My dogs 'hunt' all the time on their own... trialling/testing would just be redundant." The simple and obvious answer to that, is that there is a profound difference between
prey-drive, and a dog's abilities as a
hunting companion. This is self-evident, but like I said, it's a smoke screen meant to distract, not address the issue.
2. The other is the "risk of injury" argument, which again is non-sensical in a breed culture that promotes lure coursing - a venue in which injuries happen with regularity. Like I said, it doesn't have to make sense, it's a smoke-screen, it just needs to distract from the real issue.
I suspect the truth is that many breeders are worried that if their "lion hunting dogs" were actually trialled, they might find out they won't hunt. Think about the damage that could do to a program.
What happens to your top 10 stud dog when he's tested, and everyone finds out he won't hunt? I think many in the breed will give any excuse they can think of to distract from the real issue, but what it really comes down to is fear that their dogs would not make muster.
I sincerely hope that I am dead-wrong about this one, but as much resistance as there is to the idea of a breed specific hunting trial system, it makes me wonder.
