# CGC - now that I've done it, let's talk :D



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

Since I've been told that I can't say anything negative about the CGC because I've never done it with my own dogs and don't know how hard it is to train for it. Let's talk about it. 

First off, let me say that I do not want to diminish any and all efforts of anyone they put into their dogs. There are certainly dogs out there that need more work than others. Dog Reactivity, Separation Anxiety, etc. 

However, I do not believe that the CGC is a suitability test to test a dog if they are breedworthy and there have been numerous discussions about breeders that only put the CGC on their dog and then think they have a breedworthy dog. It's NOT a title!

Since yesterday, Yukon has his CGC. I've never even trained for it. He's retired, knows very basic obedience, nothing special, hasn't trained in about half a year, is very very velcro with me and most of you know his history. 
My SAR Tester also is a CGC Tester. So throughout the day she saw him in many different, real-life situations. How he acts when he goes through a crowd of people, how he acts towards other dogs, how his re-call is, sit, down, how she can take him out of my hand, he can be petted by total strangers, brushing not a problem. Overall, he is just a super well behaved dog and I barely put any Obedience on him at all. It's just the way he is. He has an outstanding temperament and even with loud noises, he doesn't jump, he recovered himself from his bad experiences all by himself. 
She took a shovel and literally hit on the concrete right in front of him. Loud Thunder above us... ATV's (four wheelers and all the other busy going of the Team training, teenagers etc.) not an issue at all and between all that, he absolved his CGC. 

What I did not know is that you are allowed to talk to your dog at all times and give hand-signals on top of that. So if you have a medi-ocre stay you can still walk back, with your hand up, talking to the dog "Stay, Stay, Stay." and hoping he stays. If he does, you've got it. 

That would be an absolute NO-GO in the BH. 

So overall, the BH is a much harder test just because of the routine. You do the whole routine on leash, than you have to do it off leash. It takes a heck of a lot of concentration for the dog and handler whereas for the CGC the dog doesn't require that level of concentration plus you are allowed to talk and give hand signals on top of that. So you can actually influence your dog a lot more than with the BH. You don't have the long downstay that is required for the BH. 

Both tests have parts that are not easy to pass. A dog reactive dog might have a hard time with the CGC and the BH but overall, I strongly believe that if you pass the CGC you won't pass the BH, however 98% of the dogs who pass the BH WILL pass the CGC.


----------



## wildo (Jul 27, 2006)

I didn't know anyone was using the CGC as a breed worthiness test. That's a real stretch, as you stated. However, I don't dismiss the CGC as a worthless test. The CGC is literally the very thing that got me into working my dog in the first place. Prior to "training" for the CGC, I'd never trained my dog for anything. It was a fantastic jumping off point for other training.


----------



## Wolfgeist (Dec 4, 2010)

I think the CGC / CGN is a respectable basic temperament test. Of course it is not a test to determine breeding suitability - it is very basic - but I think it is a great little accomplishment to see on a dog. In Canada, the CGN is indeed considered a title and appears on a pedigree.

I also think it is a great title for people new to dogs / training to achieve - it was the first title I ever put on a dog myself, so I am quite proud.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

wildo said:


> I didn't know anyone was using the CGC as a breed worthiness test. That's a real stretch, as you stated. However, I don't dismiss the CGC as a worthless test. The CGC is literally the very thing that got me into working my dog in the first place. Prior to "training" for the CGC, I'd never trained my dog for anything. It was a fantastic jumping off point for other training.


It's not a worthless test at all. That is not what I wanted to say. 




> I think the CGC / CGN is a respectable basic temperament test. Of course it is not a test to determine breeding suitability - it is very basic - but I think it is a great little accomplishment to see on a dog. In Canada, the CGN is indeed considered a title and appears on a pedigree.


I think the CGC can be linked to the AKC number too, can't it? 

Anyhow, I think for beginners who never really done anything the CGC is a great jump off into the world of sport. But it's just not something I would consider as advanced or really anything that is hard to train for, for established people. 

And since there has been the discussion of what is harder, the CGC or the BH. From what I've seen yesterday, there is absolutely no question that the CGC is nowhere near on the same level as the BH. Any BH dog should pass the CGC but you just won't pass the BH if all you've done is trained for the CGC.


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

I don't think anything you wrote is up for debate.


----------



## RocketDog (Sep 25, 2011)

I also think it is not even close to a breedworthy test, but I think it is a basic title dogs should be able to acquire. It is mostly just basic manners in the human world--some dogs will be able to pass it with no training, really, those are the ones with excellent temperament. Others need training, but if that's the case, they definitely need the title to be well-behaved members of society.


----------



## Freestep (May 1, 2011)

My 7 month old puppy passed her CGC with NO training for it.

I do think it's a good basic temperament test, and every dog SHOULD be able to pass it, but as a breedworthiness test? I would like to see breeders put a bit more pressure on their dogs, truly test their mettle. The Doberman people seem to make good use of the TT, which I think is a better test. I don't think the CGC is enough to base good breeding decsions from.


----------



## Lilie (Feb 3, 2010)

Mrs.K said:


> I think the CGC can be linked to the AKC number too, can't it?


STAR puppy can be as well.


----------



## Courtney (Feb 12, 2010)

Never in a million years would I connect the CGC to being a breed worthy test. It's a fun goal for pet owners to work towards with their dogs...any dog breed.

I have seen some dogs have it as young as 5 months old which is cool but try it again at a year old and see how they do when they are more mature.

Having said that...I would hate this thread to turn into the CGC is worthless because it's a good starting point for basics.


----------



## Freestep (May 1, 2011)

Courtney said:


> Having said that...I would hate this thread to turn into the CGC is worthless because it's a good starting point for basics.


I don't think anyone is saying it's "worthless". The CGC is definitely a good thing, but it's not the only thing, and I'd like to see GSDs acheive more than that if they are to be bred. If we were talking about a toy breed or a strictly "companion" breed, things might be different--I wouldn't expect a Maltese to excel in SchH.


----------



## sitstay (Jan 20, 2003)

I don't think the CGC is anything more than a certificate saying that on that particular day, your dog had the minimum manners needed to function in the community outside of your own home. It doesn't really speak to how much training a dog has had (indeed, the OP talks about her dog passing with minimal training), or how lenient the evaluator is, or how familiar the evaluator is to the dog. And it certainly doesn't address how breed worthy a dog is (or isn't).

I see and hear some people talk about it as if it is "title", which makes me grind my teeth a little. 
Sheilah


----------



## Wolfgeist (Dec 4, 2010)

sit said:


> I see and hear some people talk about it as if it is "title", which makes me grind my teeth a little.
> Sheilah


It is a title. Just because it isn't of the same caliber as the RN or IPO2 doesn't mean it is not a title. In Canada, the CKC considers it a title. Therefore, the CGN is a title. Whether you think it worthless or not makes no difference.


----------



## Shade (Feb 20, 2012)

Wild Wolf said:


> It is a title. Just because it isn't of the same caliber as the RN or IPO2 doesn't mean it is not a title. In Canada, the CKC considers it a title. Therefore, the CGN is a title. Whether you think it worthless or not makes no difference.


I agree

Needless to say it's something you and your dog do work for, the OP did do basic obedience with Yukon and it paid off. For those people that want to do it why should we look down at them, I'd pat anyone on the back that even tries it. I think we should be encouraging all dog owners to train and bond with their dogs, not look down at them because it's a easier test then some for some dogs and people to pass

Who knows, maybe the thrill of getting a CGC might encourage someone to try something else, push for more titles! I hope it does


----------



## wildo (Jul 27, 2006)

Wild Wolf said:


> It is a title. Just because it isn't of the same caliber as the RN or IPO2 doesn't mean it is not a title. In Canada, the CKC considers it a title. Therefore, the CGN is a title. Whether you think it worthless or not makes no difference.
> 
> 
> sit said:
> ...


The CGC is not a title- it is a certificate. Check the AKC website for this information. AKC's Canine Good Citizen (CGC) Program - Certificates

A title grants use of certain acronyms in a dog's name. Notice this title states that the title may be applied:









A lot of people, myself included, do still display the CGC acronym in their dog's name though. That still doesn't make it a title...


----------



## robk (Jun 16, 2011)

There are a lot of dogs being bred that probably could not even pass a CGC. (unstable temperaments). Sure it is not a breeding title, but then again, neither is the BH. Having said that, it is better than nothing. I would encourage all dog owners, especially anyone with plans on breeding their pets (byb types) to do _at least_ a CGC.


----------



## Elaine (Sep 10, 2006)

sit said:


> I don't think the CGC is anything more than a certificate saying that on that particular day, your dog had the minimum manners needed to function in the community outside of your own home. It doesn't really speak to how much training a dog has had (indeed, the OP talks about her dog passing with minimal training), or how lenient the evaluator is, or how familiar the evaluator is to the dog. And it certainly doesn't address how breed worthy a dog is (or isn't).
> 
> I see and hear some people talk about it as if it is "title", which makes me grind my teeth a little.
> Sheilah


I completely agree with you and it amazes me when people 
have to train with the CGC as a goal and then they say their dog is "trained." This is such a nothing test, I hate to see what the dogs are like to live with that can't pass this test.


----------



## sitstay (Jan 20, 2003)

Wild Wolf said:


> It is a title. Just because it isn't of the same caliber as the RN or IPO2 doesn't mean it is not a title. In Canada, the CKC considers it a title. Therefore, the CGN is a title. Whether you think it worthless or not makes no difference.


No, it isn't a title. I can't speak to the CKC, but here the AKC calls it a "certificate", not a title. Here is a link:
AKC's Canine Good Citizen (CGC) Program

I don't think it is worthless, but at the same time I don't see it as anything other than a fun certificate. It would be nice if people who became involved in obtaining it were to continue on in their training. That would be an added benefit.
Sheilah


----------



## sitstay (Jan 20, 2003)

Shade said:


> For those people that want to do it why should we look down at them, I'd pat anyone on the back that even tries it. I think we should be encouraging all dog owners to train and bond with their dogs, not look down at them because it's a easier test then some for some dogs and people to pass
> 
> Who knows, maybe the thrill of getting a CGC might encourage someone to try something else, push for more titles! I hope it does


I don't look down on anyone who has tried it or completed the evaluation. I think it is a worthwhile program that pet owners can get excited about. And if they become excited enough to continue training, all the better. That is a worthy goal in and of itself. 

But that still doesn't make it a "title", any more than getting a certificate of completion from an obedience class is a title. 
Sheilah


----------



## sitstay (Jan 20, 2003)

robk said:


> There are a lot of dogs being bred that probably could not even pass a CGC. (unstable temperaments). Sure it is not a breeding title, but then again, neither is the BH. Having said that, it is better than nothing. I would encourage all dog owners, especially anyone with plans on breeding their pets (byb types) to do _at least_ a CGC.


I can't imagine using a CGC as a minimum standard for breeding. That is so far from the intended purpose of the certification. 

I totally agree with dogs being bred that shouldn't be, and there are heavily titled dogs that couldn't pass a CGC examination, that is for sure. 
Sheilah


----------



## JakodaCD OA (May 14, 2000)

I have never 'trained' for a CGC, tho I see some places offer classes on it.

I have never heard of breeders using it as a 'title' for breed worthiness either.

Personally, I think dog owners that wish to do the CGC, should go in "cold", no training, no cgc classes, (tho I do think being aware of what is expected is fine). 

I have also never done a CGC test where you mention handler going back to 'fix', keep repeating the 'stay' exercise. It was , tell the dog to stay, walk so far away, turn around stand, wait until the tester tells you to return. Release when told.

I'm sure all cgc testers can do their own "thing", but whenever I've done my dogs, it wasn't about 'fixing' things, yes you could speak to the dog, but keep it to a minimum, maybe the 'test' has lightened up some? couldn't say


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

CGC and TTs are valuable to me because I use to rent. Having those certificates are what allowed me to live in rental housing with GSDs and keep my landlords (and insurance) happy. All my dogs but Pan have been tested twice. The CGCs I've done were free or $10 which is a lot cheaper for me than finding a new house to live in that will allow GSDs. It's easy enough to keep the landlord happy.

As far as breedworthiness testing, absolutely not because they *aren't* breed tests, they are for all breeds and mixed breeds. A breed test to me is something that is, well, designed to test a specific breed.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

A CGC is not a title in the US. It is certificate. In Canada, defined differently. Being a "title" or not carries no magic. The nature of the test is minimal control and decent stability. Very very far from a breeding suitability test especially in a breed that is supposed to have a rather competent and impressive array of traits and abilities.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

CGC will not be added to your dog's AKC name even if you send the papers in and get the pretty little certificate that looks exactly like a title certificate. I could paper my bathroom with my CGCs. But they are not titles. 

I certainly do not think they are a test to determine breed-worthiness. 

I have taken the classes, and I have taken the tests without any training, and in both incidents I have passed. But I see merit in the classes as well. I believe it is the journey, not the goal that teaches us what we need to know about our dogs. Someone with lots of family and friends, or leaves their dogs regularly with a family member or friend, or groomer, or boarding facility might not quake at the thought of supervised separation, as an old single lady living alone in the quiet country might. But somehow I usually manage that test ok. And I always hope the class will provide instant dog-people to practice separation with, and in the course of six weeks, we might hold another dog's leash briefly while the owner is in the area one time, and maybe hold the dog briefly while the owner goes out of sight one time, and certainly not for three minutes. So, normally what I want from the class, I don't get anyhow, but in the end it doesn't really matter.

For some dogs it would be much harder for them to pass at eight or ten months, than it would be for them to pass as an adult dog. I suppose the same could be said the other way around. 

As for being able to give multiple commands, I think if anything that works against the people training their dog. Dogs tend to tune it out when you tell them over and over again to do something without them following through. So, a dog who is trained to sit when the owner says "SIT", will do a lot better than the dog who requires, "Sit. SIT. Siiiiiiit? C'mon look at this fake treat I don't have in my hand, Siiiiit? Arrrrgh!!!!!! SIT DARN YOU!" 

What we have to remember is the CGC is really the window into AKC dog-related events (other than conformation showing). Green handlers take green dogs on a 6-8 week journey of socialization, and in the end they have both accomplished something and have a piece of paper to show for it. And, good for them! They should get a piece of paper, a certificate. They _have _accomplished way more than the average dog owner ever accomplishes with their dog. While that dog was young, it was exposed to people at least for 6-8 weeks, and dogs, and has had to learn and obey certain commands.

In fact, many of the tests are to train the owners as much as the dogs. How many people with small to medium sized, friendly dogs, do not seem to get it that everyone in the universe does not want to have their dog's feet on them? How many people do not realize that if they tell their dog to sit and not run into the the oncoming dogs until they have a chance to find out whether a meeting is welcomed, their dog might get injured? 

I am not familiar with the BH, but from what I have read, it is kind of like a CGC and CD in one, and yes people train for it. Now the TT is not really something the dog should be trained for. The dog should go in cold for that. But I think that the CGC, and the reasons behind it make no sense to go into that cold. 

The point of a BH is to test the dog before moving up to SchH1. 
The point of the TT is to test basic temperament, generally for conformation dogs.
The point of the CGC is to test and dog and handler's ability to manage basic obstacles an ordinary pet owner is likely to encounter. It is a test of basic socialization and limited training. It tells the owner what areas his dog might need more work on, whether the dog passes or not.

If your dog passes supervised socialization and you are hiding in the other room praying to your higher power and promising to continue to work on it. then you know your dog still needs work in that area. Personally, I do not see much point in that test. I would never let a perfect stranger hold on to my dog while I go out of site, unless it is a vet tech or groomer, and they usually know how to manage a dog. But whatever. 

I generally get them on my dogs because it is one of the few things available close, and I think it is a good goal for any dog and owner, during the course you can decide whether you might want to do agility or obedience or rally or whatever with this dog.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

selzer said:


> The point of the TT is to test basic temperament, generally for conformation dogs.


Maybe you mean the TC? The one that the GSDCA does? I haven't seen many conformation dogs at the ATTS tests I've attended, they've mostly been obedience dogs, pets, or working type dogs (the first TT I did was at a DVG club).

I think by go in cold people mean not taking a CGC class. I don't know how a dog could pass a CGC with *no* training whatsoever. The dog must be able to heel, heel around people, and heel around other dogs among other things. But say you train a dog for Rally, then you can easily go in and do a CGC without taking a CGC class or practice tests.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I think I worked the hardest on my first CGC, and I think that was Jenna. I thought there was no way I was going to pass it because there is a statement in the book that the evaluator should look at the dog and ask themselves if this is a dog they would like to won. FAIL. I was toast. The trainer had said she would be a fear biter when she was ten weeks old, and was afraid of her. I had to teach the trainer not to back up when the dog pulled back. The trainer just didn't like GSDs, did not trust them. So I figured she would flunk us. 

I told her I wasn't going to come for the test. She asked why, and I told her flat out that she did not like my dog and my dog would therefore flunk. She told me to come. I did. Jenna did awesome. 

I can say that now, because I have seen a LOT of passing CGC performances. I have had some of my own dogs pass when I would have flunked them. I have seen some scary dogs pass the CGC test, and I think that the evaluators felt that a fail would discourage them from trying to continue to work with their dogs. But I have seen a lot of progress in a lot of dogs that have gone through classes, and I have seen a lot of new owners learning a lot of dog-stuff along the way. I think the program in all does a lot in the area of responsible dog ownership. 

The dog I did the least for was Arwen. My club was putting on a show, and I needed to enter something, and Arwen was available. So I signed her up for the CGC. She never did supervised separation before, but I put her on a down stay and walked out of sight for three minutes and she never moved a muscle I am told. Everything else was a no-brainer with Arwen. She was not dog reactive, and could sit, down, stay, heel on leash or off leash without any problems. As for letting people pet her, look at her ears and paws, I have had her to vets so it just wasn't an issue. I think she would have passed your BH with no trouble too. I entered her in three shows for her CD and she took first at each of them. But, it will always be a should've, would've, could've now. I still think about her, probably every day.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Liesje said:


> Maybe you mean the TC? The one that the GSDCA does? I haven't seen many conformation dogs at the ATTS tests I've attended, they've mostly been obedience dogs, pets, or working type dogs (the first TT I did was at a DVG club).


Maybe they have changed the name over the years. The certificates I have seen say TT. But the people that have done this were mostly obedience people, with a toe in conformation, instead of the other way around.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

> The point of a BH is to test the dog before moving up to SchH1.


It is MUCH more than just that, Selzer. The BH is called Begleithunde Pruefung. The translation for that is "Companion Dog Test/Certification". 

It doesn't matter WHAT kind of sport you do, even if it is Search&Rescue, you WILL need the BH as prerequisite to guarantee a certain level of Obedience and Temperament. 

So the BH is not only for the Schutzhund Pruefung, it's pretty much for anything you want to do. FIRST comes Obedience and then you move on. The same goes pretty much for over here in the US. Either you have to have a basic Obedience course or the CGC to do SAR.




> If your dog passes supervised socialization and you are hiding in the other room praying to your higher power and promising to continue to work on it. then you know your dog still needs work in that area. Personally, I do not see much point in that test. I would never let a perfect stranger hold on to my dog while I go out of site, unless it is a vet tech or groomer, and they usually know how to manage a dog. But whatever.


Actually, I have it happen quite a lot during training that somebody holds the dogs while I go and get something or go to the loo.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

You also need a BH to do any phase, any combination of phases, or FH tracking. So you can't even SchH1 track (TR1) without a BH. Same is true for SDA, you must have an FO. The difference is that you *can* track and then do an FO the same day but if you fail your FO then your earlier track is void. If you want to do a P1 or PD1 then you have to do two long obedience performances since you have to pass that FO.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Mrs.K said:


> It is MUCH more than just that, Selzer. The BH is called Begleithunde Pruefung. The translation for that is "Companion Dog Test/Certification".
> 
> It doesn't matter WHAT kind of sport you do, even if it is Search&Rescue, you WILL need the BH as prerequisite to guarantee a certain level of Obedience and Temperament.
> 
> ...


And here, the window into other dog sports, though not schutzhund or protection, is the CGC. Many dog training facilities will require the CGC before letting you go into other sports. 

If the BH was required for anything it this area, people with dogs would do nothing with them, because we really have no schutzhund/BH close, I have looked. It just isn't big around here. 

I haven't come across anyone fixing their stay, or even giving reminders to keep the dog there. Well, why should they, they say STAY, walk 20 feet away, turn and come right back. It is not a 1 minute or a 3 minute, you really do not even have to wait for the judge to tell you to return. 

It is pass/fail. If the dog fails the stay, but passes everything else, the evaluator can, at his discretion, repeat that one test, and if the dog passes, the evaluator can pass the dog.

And, as for a team member, or someone in your training class holding on to your dog for a few minutes, that is not generally a total stranger, it should at least be someone who knows dogs, and is not afraid of your dog. I never have to go to the loo. I have an aversion to public toilets, and never use them. So that really isn't an issue. I would let people from my training classes hold my dog, but they are not total strangers. I am thinking of a total stranger as being someone outside of Drug Mart, you need to go in and get a pack of smokes and an escape and want some yayhoo walking out to hold your dog for a couple of minutes until you can complete your purchase and come home. I guess, if I ever did that, I would hand my dog off to the Jeffrey Dahmer of dogs. So no way, am I handing my dog to a total stranger and going out of sight for three minutes -- unless it is the CGC test, and enough of my buddies are around watching.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

Just for the record, it wasn't my team member. I've seen her twice in the last year and it was the first time Yukon met her. So to him she was not only a stranger but she does know dogs. 

As for the stay. You do realize that before you do the routine your dog has to stay in a down-stay while another handler does the routine, right?


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Mrs.K said:


> Just for the record, it wasn't my team member. I've seen her twice in the last year and it was the first time Yukon met her. So to him she was not only a stranger but she does know dogs.
> 
> As for the stay. You do realize that before you do the routine your dog has to stay in a down-stay while another handler does the routine, right?


For a CGC? Never. 

That was the honor exercise in Rally Excellent, and yes, my dogs have done that a number of times. But for a CGC, unless the rules have changed in the last year, the dog does not have to down stay at all. The dog owner has to show the evaluator that his dog can sit and down, and then the owner decides whether he wants the dog to stay in a sit or a down, while he goes to the end of a 20' long line, and comes right back. 

In the CD you have a 1 minute sit and a 3 minute down stay. All the dogs do that in a line at the same time.

ETA:
For the record supervised separation should be a stranger, it isn't always, but hopefully it is a stranger to the dog. I would feel a whole lot more comfortable letting someone I have seen around while training, even once or twice hold my dog for a couple of minutes, then someone out in the public place that I never met before. The point of the CGC test is to demonstrate a certain amount of training and socialization, so that you could feel comfortable in real life with the dogs in public, in crowds, at a cafe, etc. But the point of supervised separation I just don't get. For temperament, I like it in there, but for a real life scenario, sorry, I just am not handing my dogs off to any Joe Shmoe that looks like he doesn't think she will eat him.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

That's for the BH, not the CGC. Sorry, tired. Must have misunderstood.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I'm glad. I am hoping to do the test with Gretta and Dolly shortly and was worried they changed the rules.


----------



## chelle (Feb 1, 2009)

I have a mutt. A sometimes nervy mutt at that.

He's my lovable mutt and I've had to work quite hard with him. I'm proud of how far he (and I) have come. (In fact, I made a post when he was around 16 weeks, talking about some nervy issues. I received some harsh, but pointed responses on the trouble I may have, along with very strong recommendations for training and socialization. THAT post made me decide, I *will* get a CGC for this dog.)

I was very proud he got his CGC at about 13 months. We (I) had accomplished a goal.

I don't give a fig if it is a certificate. I am happy to put it behind his name. Where this silly idea came from that it proves breed-worthiness, I don't know. Does anyone actually think that? 

To downplay this basic accomplishment, I believe, is rude and condescending and well, shame on you.

What about the folks who take in a rescue with issues? Such dogs would not be able to walk in "cold turkey" to get a CGC. I would think it quite commendable that someone worked with their rescue, taking whatever class helps prepare them.

At least they're spending time and effort on the dog! I simply cannot understand any negativity towards attempting/getting the CGC on any dog.

Those of you at the high levels, you should especially be the ones encouraging us down here below you to train. To work. To learn. To get more interested in our dogs and their training.

This is not pointed specifically at any one person.


----------



## sitstay (Jan 20, 2003)

chelle said:


> To downplay this basic accomplishment, I believe, is rude and condescending and well, shame on you.


I think the accomplishment is huge! Even more so for some dogs. Tanner can't pass the strange dog item. So it is not like any dog that shows up is supposed to get a certificate. 

Regardless of where the training came from, someone has put some effort into putting some good basics on the dog. And that effort is something to be proud of. Setting a goal and seeing it through is also something to be proud of. 

But...there is nothing condescending or rude in pointing out that the GCG is not a title. Saying that doesn't take away anything from everything that it represents for the owner and dog, though. 

I honestly believe that it has made a lot of owners more aware of how their dogs move through their communities. That is a good thing. It has given owners a goal to work towards that is more concrete than just saying "I have a well behaved dog". That is also a good thing. It has made some dogs more "acceptable" in rentals, which is also a good thing. Through training, some owners might become involved in competitive dog sports of some type, and that is a good thing.

But I do thing that there is some degree of mis-use or misunderstanding of what a CGC is. Think of how often it is referred to as a title here, on this forum. And forum-goers tend to be more involved than the average pet owner, simply because they're interested enough to seek out and participate in a forum.

I don't think anyone who has taken the time to do the CGC evaluation with their dog should be put out or talked down to. 
Sheilah


----------



## chelle (Feb 1, 2009)

sit said:


> ....But...there is nothing condescending or rude in pointing out that the *GCG is not a title*. Saying that doesn't take away anything from everything that it represents for the owner and dog, though.....


The GCG is definitely not a title I've heard of. :rofl: (Just kidding! lol)

I never thought of it as a title, so that certainly doesn't offend in the slightest. I've thought of it only as a test that a dog passes or does not and his proof of passing is a certificate.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

chelle said:


> I have a mutt. A sometimes nervy mutt at that.
> 
> He's my lovable mutt and I've had to work quite hard with him. I'm proud of how far he (and I) have come. (In fact, I made a post when he was around 16 weeks, talking about some nervy issues. I received some harsh, but pointed responses on the trouble I may have, along with very strong recommendations for training and socialization. THAT post made me decide, I *will* get a CGC for this dog.)
> 
> ...


Well shame on me then or maybe shame on you p) for not reading my first post completely because I clearly said: *First off, let me say that I do not want to diminish any and all efforts of anyone they put into their dogs. There are certainly dogs out there that need more work than others. Dog Reactivity, Separation Anxiety, etc. *


----------



## chelle (Feb 1, 2009)

Mrs.K said:


> Well shame on me then or maybe shame on you p) for not reading my first post completely because I clearly said: *First off, let me say that I do not want to diminish any and all efforts of anyone they put into their dogs. There are certainly dogs out there that need more work than others. Dog Reactivity, Separation Anxiety, etc. *


Not directed at you.  

This came across offensively:



> This is such a nothing test, I hate to see what the dogs are like to live with that can't pass this test....


Bottom line for me, is to not discourage people from going for the CGC. If they're attempting it, they're working with their dog. That's only good. 

Tucker could never pass a CGC. At least not right now. He's a work in progress. Doesn't mean he's hard to live with. It means he has baggage and issues and a mostly uninformed person trying to train him.


----------



## llombardo (Dec 11, 2011)

Liesje said:


> CGC and TTs are valuable to me because I use to rent. Having those certificates are what allowed me to live in rental housing with GSDs and keep my landlords (and insurance) happy.


This is 100% true and lots of landlords use this or accept this because the CGC is defined as:

The Canine Good Citizen Program is a two-part program that *stresses responsible pet ownership for owners and basic good manners for dogs*. All dogs who pass the 10-step CGC test may receive a certificate from the American Kennel Club.


*Many dog owners choose Canine Good Citizen training as the first step in training their dogs*. *The Canine Good Citizen Program lays the foundation for other AKC activities such as obedience, agility, tracking, and performance events.* As you work with your dog to teach the CGC skills, you'll discover the many benefits and joys of training your dog. Training will enhance the bond between you and your dog. Dogs who have a solid obedience education are a joy to live with-they respond well to household routines, have good manners in the presence of people and other dogs, and they fully enjoy the company of the owner who took the time to provide training, intellectual stimulation, and a high quality life. *We sincerely hope that CGC will be only a beginning for you and your dog and that after passing the CGC test, you'll continue training in obedience, agility, tracking, or performance events.
*

This test is for the owners just as much as the dogs. Its a foundation to build on and a good test that all breeds, mixed and pure can take.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Elaine said:


> I completely agree with you and it amazes me when people
> have to train with the CGC as a goal and then they say their dog is "trained." This is such a nothing test, I hate to see what the dogs are like to live with that can't pass this test.


I kind of took offense at this statement as well. But glass half empty, or half full? It was the first really negative post in 2 pages of posts. 

There is no way to please all the people. 

A dog with a CGC, should be able to function in public, go to the vet, and not be a total nut. His owners definitely have a better idea of what is expected to be a responsible owner than people who do nothing with their dogs. 

The CGC is a great goal for people to have. No these dogs are NOT ready to get a BH or go into SchH1, or get their CD. Those are different tests, and they have their own preparations. But for your average pet owner, functioning in public, basic socialization, being able to demonstrate basic control is perfectly fine. And those dogs ARE trained well enough to make them excellent companions. 

The CGC is not the point where a dog is finished. It is a beginning, it is the first hurdle. It is great because without spending a small fortune, and making multiple trips into the ring, people can get a certificate from the AKC for accomplishing ten basic tests. It _is_ enough to keep people coming back. I think it is a great thing. 

On the bottom of my training page, in my puppy book is this statement:
It is a pleasure to be around a well-mannered dog. It is not an accident and it is not genetic. Make a commitment to train your puppy and make it a way of life. In too many cases, the difference between a life-long companion and a one way ticket to the dog pound is training.


----------



## Freestep (May 1, 2011)

chelle said:


> To downplay this basic accomplishment, I believe, is rude and condescending and well, shame on you.


Who here is "downplaying" the CGC? The only thing we're saying is that it shouldn't be a breedworthiness test in and of itself.


----------



## sitstay (Jan 20, 2003)

I wouldn't even call it "the first hurdle", Sue. To say that is to imply that you have to get over that first hurdle in order to go on to something else and that is not the case. There is no AKC competitive endeavor that requires the CGC certificate in order to participate. So it really can't be considered a "first hurdle" to anything.

The window analogy is a good one, however. The training that many people go through in order to get the CGC certificate is a first exposure to a whole new world. It is a "gateway experience" that could lead to training for competition of some sort...competition that could lead to actual titles!
Sheilah
P.S. I don't agree with your statement that included: _It is a pleasure to be around a well-mannered dog. It is not an accident and it is not genetic. _It is an absolute pleasure to be around a well-mannered dog. And for most people it isn't an accident. But genetics play a huge part in it, too. There is just so much that training can do with a genetically weak nerved dog. I am living that life, as are many others.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

sit said:


> I wouldn't even call it "the first hurdle", Sue. To say that is to imply that you have to get over that first hurdle in order to go on to something else and that is not the case. There is no AKC competitive endeavor that requires the CGC certificate in order to participate. So it really can't be considered a "first hurdle" to anything.
> 
> The window analogy is a good one, however. The training that many people go through in order to get the CGC certificate is a first exposure to a whole new world. It is a "gateway experience" that could lead to training for competition of some sort...competition that could lead to actual titles!
> Sheilah
> P.S.* I don't agree with your statement that included: It is a pleasure to be around a well-mannered dog. It is not an accident and it is not genetic. It is an absolute pleasure to be around a well-mannered dog. And for most people it isn't an accident. But genetics play a huge part in it, too. There is just so much that training can do with a genetically weak nerved dog. I am living that life, as are many others*.


I am not saying that genetics have no part in temperament, but manners is training. Whatever the temperament of your dog, if you persist with training, you will learn to manage your dog and maximize what training can do, and what will present is a dog/owner team with manners. It might mean keeping distance or reducing stress, or moving out of a situation before there is a problem, but manners comes from training, not genetic. A dog with good nerve and no training, will have no manners and is certainly not a pleasure to be around (training does not have to be formal obedience training).

ETA: My point in the first hurdle is for people who have not ever done anything with any dog. It is a great place to start, and a LOT of obedience clubs/facilities use the CGC as a requirement to sign up for more advanced classes. In those places to sign up for Novice Obedience, or Rally classes, or Agility classes, the CGC is the first hurdle. This is because the instructors expect that all the dogs are starting with at least some level of control.


----------



## chelle (Feb 1, 2009)

Freestep said:


> Who here is "downplaying" the CGC? The only thing we're saying is that it shouldn't be a breedworthiness test in and of itself.


These comments stood out:



> ....I don't think it is worthless, but at the same time I don't see it as anything other than a *fun certificate*.





> I completely agree with you and it amazes me when people have to train with the CGC as a goal and then they say their dog is "trained." This is *such a nothing test*, I hate to see what the dogs are like to live with that can't pass this test.





> I don't think the CGC is anything more than a certificate saying that on that particular day, your dog had the minimum manners needed to function in the community outside of your own home...


No one has disagreed that this testing has nothing to do with breedworthiness.


----------



## Freestep (May 1, 2011)

Sometimes I think you guys look for ways to be offended.  Okay, so a few people described the CGC as "fun" and "nothing" and "minimum". Doesn't make it any less of an accomplishment, IMO.


----------



## chelle (Feb 1, 2009)

Freestep said:


> Sometimes I think you guys look for ways to be offended.  Okay, so a few people described the CGC as "fun" and "nothing" and "minimum". Doesn't make it any less of an accomplishment, IMO.


You asked me, I answered!  I don't look for ways to be offended, but I do call a spade a spade!


----------



## sitstay (Jan 20, 2003)

chelle said:


> These comments stood out:


One of the quoted comments was mine. The last one. I should have been clear, and stated in connection to the statement that my point wasn't meant to detract from what the CGC was and was more aimed at pointing out what it wasn't.

If you found it offensive, I apologize. That wasn't my intent at all. I stand by what I said, but I didn't mean for it to be offensive.
Sheilah
ETA: Sorry! The second quoted comment was mine, too. A two-fer, if you will. Maybe the term "non-competitive certification" would have been more appropriate than the word "fun".


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

robk said:


> There are a lot of dogs being bred that probably could not even pass a CGC. (unstable temperaments).


Not all dogs that can't pass a CGC have unstable temperaments. I never even attempted one with Keefer because he can be barky on leash, so the meeting a strange dog would definitely have been a challenge. And yet, he's off leash around strange dogs all the time and has been since he was 4-1/2 months old. He's a social butterfly - he wants to sniff all the other dogs and lick their muzzle. :wub: 

I did take the test with Halo when she was around 9 months old and she failed due to jumping up to greet the evaluator (bad puppy! :nono, and lunging forward to sniff the cones they'd set up for the walking on a loose leash part. The sit, down, stay, recall, 3 minute separation, distractions, she aced all that stuff. And now she races in flyball and is doing fabulously!


----------



## chelle (Feb 1, 2009)

sit said:


> One of the quoted comments was mine. The last one. I should have been clear, and stated in connection to the statement that my point wasn't meant to detract from what the CGC was and was more aimed at pointing out what it wasn't.
> 
> If you found it offensive, I apologize. That wasn't my intent at all. I stand by what I said, but I didn't mean for it to be offensive.
> Sheilah


I do know that and no need to apologize -- but thank you. I saw your later comments that were very positive.  I was just answering Freestep.

Again, I don't want anyone to be dissuaded from trying for the CGC. It isn't a huge accomplishment, no -- but it does (at least me,) give you a boost that all your hard work paid off in at least a _little_ something.

We don't all have strong nerved dogs out here, and to get a dog with some questionable nerve issues, purebred or mix, thru the testing, feels pretty dang good.  I don't believe for a second it is the end-all, be-all -- only that it is a great start.


----------



## sitstay (Jan 20, 2003)

Maybe it is a regional thing? I just don't see a CGC being required before becoming involved in any training around here. Of course, this whole region isn't known for being a hot bed of doggie activity, either.

There is (or was) a trainer about 35 miles east of here that refused certain breeds (GSD among them) in any class. And this was supposed to be a full service training facility, with herding and agility among the offerings. A CGC wouldn't have made any difference in that case. Those selected breeds were not welcome.
Sheilah


----------



## sitstay (Jan 20, 2003)

Don't feel bad, Debbie! Ask me how I know that explosive diarrhea is ALSO grounds for not passing an item.
Sheilah


----------



## Cassidy's Mom (Mar 30, 2003)

sit said:


> Don't feel bad, Debbie! Ask me how I know that explosive diarrhea is ALSO grounds for not passing an item.
> Sheilah


:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: 

I actually don't feel bad, I was disappointed at the time but only because Halo had done SO well in the prep class (yes, we took a prep class, because polite leash walking and polite greetings were an issue) the two weeks before the test that I thought she might actually pass. She was the youngest dog by far and that was the class where she was dubbed the "stay star" because her stay was so rock solid. 

If I had taken the test cold I would have expected her to ace and fail the exact portions of the test that she did, but I had gotten my hopes up. Alas, although she was politely greeting all the other people in the class and the instructor and helper, she still jumped during the test. And while she walks nicely on leash out in public she's always been really bad about scarfing the floor for dropped treats whenever we're in a class. Hey, the girl knows where she might find food and where she probably won't, lol!


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

It almost sounds like we need a thread, "Why we didn't pass our CGC, let's all share." I flunked a couple of times, the best was the one where the evaluator's dog WOULD NOT LISTEN TO HER. LOL. They parked it right behind where my dog had to stay for her recall, and when I said come, it came too. For some reason, my girl just did not want to stay with the Giant Schnauzer breathing down her back. 

In the meet and greet with another dog, she walks up with the Schnauzer:
Her: SIT SIT! SIT SIT!!! Uhg! SIT! 

Milla was sitting nicely at my side and looked up at me, "is this lady for real?" 

She apologized for having to fail me. 

I told her not to worry, Milla had already passed the test a few weeks ago. 

She said, Really? 

And I was like, Lady, you can't even control your dog, and you're out flunking people, and then acting like you can't believe their dog could pass??? Whatever. But I chose not to say anything. It did not matter. Really. And she was a friend of the instructor's. 

And no, Milla is NOT difficult to live with at all.


----------



## NewbieShepherdGirl (Jan 7, 2011)

Sasha doesn't have hers, but it is something I'm planning on doing with her. Actually, it was something I was planning on doing with her this summer until this summer turned out to be kind of a disaster lol Regardless, I saw it as something fun for us to do together, a goal of sorts to work toward. I'm fairly certain she could pass it right now, though I'm not 100% confident on the separation part. I know she couldn't have passed it when I first got her. That bundle of nerves would have freaked out, so I think for some people it really is a huge accomplishment; it very well be as far as some people are ever able to go with their dogs (recognized accomplishment wise). For most of us, maybe not, but for some, sure.


----------



## FlyAway (Jul 17, 2012)

LOL! I got to page 4 and skipped ahead. 

The way I see it, the CGC is designed to get the average joe a little more interested in training his dog. Even on the AKC web page it hints about possibly moving on to obedience and other training. 

Either way, it's better than nothing, and does promote awareness. My obedience instructors like to give the test on the last day of the OB1 classes. More than half of the dogs pass. It's not automatic. 

I like the TT. I am taking my youngest in September to give it a try. He should do fine, and yes, he has his CGC  (an RN, also).


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

And the CGC becomes an AKC title....

http://images.akc.org/cgc/new_title.pdf


----------



## msvette2u (Mar 20, 2006)

> I didn't know anyone was using the CGC as a breed worthiness test.


OH yeah...some folks actually think that since they have it they can call their dog "titled" and ready to breed


----------



## chelle (Feb 1, 2009)

Samba said:


> And the CGC becomes an AKC title....
> 
> http://images.akc.org/cgc/new_title.pdf


Well goodness, all that arguement about whether it is a title... and now it is! Gee whiz, super duper, my boy has a title.

I don't feel any different than before.  Certificate, title, sherticate, ****le, all the same to me.

Wonder why this change, though?


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I don't know. But, the fee is $20.00


----------



## iloveshepherds (Jul 10, 2012)

I didnt read all the posts...but just wanted to add...
Navajo got his CGC and Good Puppy start when he was 5mnths. To me, its something to brag about, cause I know a lot of dogs cant do it.
and..
its only the beginning...Im planning on getting him into everything. LOL...except schutzhund. I wanted too...but I also want him to be a therapy dog...so I had to pick one or the other. 
I still have doubts....cause since his grandfather was the grand sieger champion..and his grandmother won a different title......and his whole family tree is of titled dogs (except his dad and mom)...I wanted him to carry on that "tradition" sorta speak. if that makes sense. LOL


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

Samba said:


> And the CGC becomes an AKC title....
> 
> http://images.akc.org/cgc/new_title.pdf




There it is. Got to get Yukon registered with the AKC. Now that he's got a title (in January) I MUST breed him! :wild:


----------



## NancyJ (Jun 15, 2003)

The CGC becomes a TITLE?. What a crock of nonsense.


----------

