01/09/2026
WOW! The response to this post has been absolutely incredible. In just the first 24 hours, it has reached over 20,000 views!
Thank you so much for all the messages, shares, and especially for the important discussions that have come from raising the issues highlighted in this post.
This is an important subject, and I truly appreciate every single share. These are questions we need to stop, think about, discuss, and ultimately take a stand on.
And to everyone who has reached out from outside Sweden asking for an English version – here it is!
Thank you for reading, sharing, and keeping the discussion going. 🙏
ARE WE BREEDING WRONG – OR ARE WE TRAINING WRONG?
It is no secret that we have a problem with retrieving within the breed. And in my opinion, the problem is getting worse.
When you look at the results from water work over the past few seasons, and at how much game is being recorded as “lost” or unable to be retrieved, we have to be willing to ask the question:
Are we breeding wrong? Perhaps, to some extent.
Genetic ability matters. Trainability – how receptive the dog is to training – matters. Willingness to cooperate matters. And yes, I believe there are breeders who have gradually made parts of the breed too “soft”.
But I don’t believe that is the whole explanation.
Over the past 10 years, we have seen a gradual change where several of the qualities that define a strong, functional hunting dog are at risk of being weakened.
Drive. Hunting instinct. Independence. Intensity. Sharpness.
And this is where I believe today’s approach to dog training plays a bigger role than many people are willing to admit.
A few months ago, a trainer who advocates exclusively positive/reward-based training had quite a lot to say about the work of a balanced trainer. I became curious and therefore took a look at the trainer’s own page.
There was a long account of injuries that their own dog had suffered.
My first thought was simple:
How many of those situations could have been avoided with better obedience and greater control of the dog?
If you work professionally as a dog trainer, the results of your own training should also be allowed to form part of your CV.
Because dog training is not only about making sure the dog feels comfortable every second of every day.
It is also about responsibility.
Responsibility for the dog.
Responsibility for other dogs.
Responsibility for people.
Responsibility for game and other animals.
And to me, that requires one thing:
BALANCE.
Balanced training does not mean violence.
It does not mean hitting dogs, frightening them, or breaking down their personality.
It does not mean constant pressure or correction.
Balance is far more sophisticated than that.
It is about being able to read the individual dog in front of you and understanding what that particular dog needs at that particular moment.
Reward when it is appropriate – and expectations when they are needed.
Clarity. Consistency. Timing.
And above all: responsibility.
In discussions about positive-only training, there is often a great deal of focus on discomfort, stress and potential pain that other training methods may cause. That is a relevant discussion.
But then we must also be willing to discuss the consequences of inadequate control.
What happens when the dog runs in front of a car?
When it chases a horse and gets kicked?
When it pursues game it should not be pursuing?
When the handler can no longer interrupt a behaviour because the dog’s motivation in that situation is greater than the value of the reward?
How much stress, pain and suffering can that cause?
Not only to the dog, but also to the horse, the rider, the driver, the game, or other people and animals caught in the situation.
That must also be taken into account when we discuss dog welfare.
And this brings us to the part that I believe is even more important for the future of the breed.
When our training methods can no longer handle the natural characteristics of our dogs, there is a risk that instead of changing our training, we start changing the dogs.
A little less drive.
A little less hunting instinct.
A little less independence.
A little less sharpness.
A little less intensity.
Eventually, we risk breeding dogs to suit the training method – instead of developing training methods capable of handling the dog the breed was intended to be.
That is a dangerous development.
For those who genuinely need a strong, independent and functional hunting dog, it then becomes increasingly difficult to find what they are looking for.
Talk to people who genuinely hunt a lot with their dogs. People who use them practically, season after season, and who place high demands on functionality.
Ask them whether they believe truly strong working dogs are becoming more common – or less common.
At the same time, breed organisations are discussing why participation in trials is declining and why results in certain disciplines – particularly water work – look the way they do.
Perhaps the trials are not too difficult.
Perhaps the dogs are not the problem.
Perhaps the training simply isn’t good enough.
If the training no longer prepares the dogs for what is actually required of them, the results will reflect that.
And people will not continue year after year to invest time, money and enormous commitment into trials and competitions if they repeatedly fail and see no progress.
At the end of the day, we can debate training philosophies for as long as we like.
But out in the field, there is no comment section.
There is only the dog, the handler, the game – and the result.
And as the saying goes:
“When the tailgate drops, the bu****it stops.”
There are no worthless dogs – but there are training methods that simply do not measure up.
Have a fantastic day! :)
