Ames Study For Trial Dogs and Bird Finds

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:16 pm

DETECTABILITY OF RADIO COLLARED COVEYS BY FIELD TRIAL COMPETITORS ON AMES PLANTATION,
DECEMBER 1998, JANUARY 1999, AND FEBRUARY 1999

Rachel Chambers, Research Associate, Ames Plantation
(As published in the November-December 1999 issue of Quail Unlimited Magazine, pages 60-61)
Introduction

'Field trial enthusiasts who follow their dogs afield can be compared with fishermen who cast their lines into the depths. Sedge-covered fields conceal the quail as effectively as water, and neither sportsman can rely on human senses alone to determine where the game is located.
Rather, they both must rely on outside agents to produce results: for one it is a baited hook, for the other, natural game bird scents and a dog’s powerful sensory capabilities.

How effective can all-age bird dogs be under the grueling standards of field trial competition? To examine this question, coveys of quail containing radio collared wild birds were monitored during the National Amateur Invitational Championship, the Ames Amateur All-Age, Hobart Ames Memorial Open All-Age, and the National Championship field trials, all run on the Ames Plantation northwest of Grand Junction, Tennessee, to determine if they were detected (i.e., pointed) by the dogs during the competition.

The variable used to assess the effectiveness of the dogs in pointing the radio collared coveys was "detectability," expressed as a percentage and defined as:

Average number of productive radio collared finds (the birds were pointed) per day divided by the total number of radio collared coveys available to the dogs (i.e., within 400 meters of the centerline of the course) multiplied by 100.

Detectability was determined separately for the morning and afternoon courses.

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:18 pm

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Getting to the Point: Efficiency of Pointing Dogs in Locating Bobwhite Quail Coveys Studied

H. Lee Stribling and D. Clay Sisson

“That dog'll hunt” is music to any bird dog owner’s ears, but even the best dogs can miss a covey on occasion. Research conducted through the AAES at Auburn University's Albany Area Quail Management Project in Albany, Georgia, has identified ways in which quail elude hunters.

Researchers began monitoring the efficiency of pointing dogs in locating bobwhite coveys at the Albany center starting in 1992.

Prior to each hunting season radio transmitters were attached to several birds in coveys on the study areas. These transmitters allowed researchers to determine the location of coveys, to monitor each covey's behavior as the hunting parties approached, and to determine other information relative to pointing dogs and quail on the study area.

Over the course of five hunting seasons, 169 hunts involving 254 separate radio-tagged coveys were monitored. “Encounters” between radio-tagged coveys and hunters were monitored by field staff on 838 occasions. The objectives of this work were to determine: (1) the percentage of bobwhite coveys located by pointing dogs, (2) reasons for coveys going undetected, and (3) what causes "false" or unproductive pointing.

The monitored hunts were conducted in South Georgia plantation style. For these hunts, a fresh brace of dogs is kept on the ground by a dog handler and a scout on horseback while the owners and guests follow along on horseback or the hunting wagon drawn by a matching pair of mules.

Normally, several hundred acres of open pine woods and fields are covered in a morning or afternoon hunt with most of the shooting ocurring at covey rises. On the study hunts, one or two technicians followed the hunting party with radio-telemetry receivers and monitored the behavior and/or reaction of radio-tagged coveys to the approaching hunting party.

Each time a radio-tagged covey was “encountered” during the hunt, a record was made of whether the covey was “seen” or “unseen” by the hunters. Coveys that were seen were then categorized as to whether they were pointed and shot, pointed but wild flushed (flushed out of shooting range), or wild flushed without being pointed. Coveys “not seen” were broken down into the following categories: wild flushes; dogs missed birds because quail ran on the ground; dogs missed birds and quail didn't flush; dogs pointed birds, but quail ran on the ground; or dogs pointed, but birds did not flush. Table 1 provides a breakdown of the 838 encounters with radio-tagged coveys during the 1992-93 through 1996-97 hunting seasons.

Table 1. Encounters With Radio-tagged Coveys,
1992 Through 1997 Hunting Seasons Coveys seen Coveys not seen
Hunting season No. seen/
no. available Pointed/
shot Wild flushes Wild flushes
(pointed/ not pointed) Passed by
(ran/held ) Pointed (ran/held)
1992-93 45/112 24 11/10 4 25/27 9/2
1993-94 142/286 96 20/26 17 18/76 25/8
1994-95 112/194 67 17/28 14 4/49 11/4
1995-96 90/143 49 17/24 11 9/26 6/1
1996-97 57/103 31 12/14 9 5/12 11/0
Total 446/838 267 77/102 55 61/ 99 62/115
Percent 53% 32% 9%/12% 7% 7%/ 24% 7%/2%

The hunting parties averaged “seeing” just over half (53%) of the radio-tagged coveys available to them on any given hunt. “Seeing” (often referred to as “coveys moved”) is defined as coveys that were “pointed and shot into” or “seen getting up wild.” This could vary quite a bit from day to day depending most probably on interactions between scenting conditions for the dogs and feeding behavior of the birds. The reasons why some hunts are better than others covering the same ground is still something of a mystery, and still very much part of the appeal of hunting.

Thirty-two percent of the radio-tagged coveys were “pointed and shot into” on an average hunt. The other 17% of the coveys “seen” were wild flushes and included 12% that flushed ahead of the hunting party before they were pointed and 9% that were pointed and flushed before the hunters arrived.

Forty-seven percent of all encounters resulted in coveys that were never “seen.” Most of these (24%) were simply passed by or missed by the dogs and the hunters. It was quite common for a covey to hold tight and let the party pass, often literally within feet of where the quail were hiding.

These were usually coveys that were not actively feeding. When quail are not moving, little scent is left and the birds are more difficult for dogs to detect. Another common occurrence was for the coveys to run out of the way as the hunting party approached, especially after they had been shot at earlier in the hunting season.
This happened in 7% of all covey encounters and became more prevalent as the season progressed. “Unseen wild flushes” accounted for another 7% of all encounters and also increased in prevalence later in the season. Several coveys were notorious for this and would simply pick up and fly off, unseen, as soon as they heard the hunting party approaching. The dogs would often get “birdy” (act as though they are about to point a bird) and sometimes point the spot were the birds were located before the covey flew off.

Coveys also were missed when birds were pointed but refused to get up. Even a good attempt at flushing was not successful in some cases. These coveys would flush only when they were about to be stepped on. This occurred in 2% of all covey encounters.

The percentage of coveys “seen” was highly variable from day to day (averaged 53%, ranged 0-100%) but fairly consistent among years (averaged 53%, ranged 40-63%).
Many variables affect the efficiency of pointing dogs in locating bobwhite coveys. Weather can affect feeding patterns and scenting conditions. The condition of the ground cover and hunting pressure affect covey behavior and, in turn, dog performance. There is also a great deal of variability between an individual dog’s ability and/or desire to hunt. All these variables apparently average out over the course of a hunting season as evidenced by the fairly consistent detection rate among years.

Table 2 provides some insights into the causes of “false” points. In 107 of the 392 encounters with radio-tagged birds no covey was seen after a dog pointed. Most (16%) of these were a result of birds running away from a pointed dog and by the time a flushing attempt was made the birds were no longer there.

This table actually underestimates the frequency of this occurrence since many coveys were recorded as having been “seen” after two or three unproductive points of running birds. A covey running 100 yards or more was common, and in at least one incidence a entire covey ran 500 yards before eventually flushing wild.

Eight percent of unproductive points were a result of wild flushes not seen by any of the hunting party. The remaining 4% were coveys that were pointed but the birds present would not flush. In all, almost 13% of all encounters with radio-tagged coveys involved what dog handlers classified as a “false” point.

Table 2. Encounters With Radio-tagged Coveys Classified as “Unseen,”
1992 Through 1997 Hunting Seasons Dog passed by/ birds held Dog passed by/ birds ran Dog pointed/ birds ran Birds flushed wild /pointed Birds flushed wild/not pointed Dog pointed/
birds would not flush
199 61 62* 30* 25 15*
(51 %) (15 %) (16 %) (8%) (6%) (4%)
* Indicates incidences of perceived "false pointing."

Occurrences of “unseen wild flushes,” birds running away from pointing dogs before they are spotted by the hunting party or dog, and quail refusing to flush often are responsible for many an innocent bird dog being chastised for false pointing when the dog was responding to what his nose told him. This study shows that it is very likely that there are birds present or strong bird scent lingering when a good bird dog points. Based on this, “false points” are more accurately defined as “unproductive points.”

Overall, bobwhite coveys showed a remarkable ability to evade hunting parties and some coveys seemed to be better at it than others. Individual coveys appear to develop their own personalities over the course of a season and results of the AAES study suggest that quail hunters who pay close attention to these behaviors usually put more birds in the bag.
Something as simple as changing normal hunting patterns or directions of approach may be enough to interfere with a covey's escape plan. The study also indicated that some coveys run a great deal, suggesting that if dogs get “birdy,” hunters may benefit from staying close behind the dogs and arriving at all points as quickly as possible.

Finally and most importantly, the study suggests that hunters should trust their dogs! When good bird dogs point there is usually legitimate cause for their actions. Hunters should make an earnest attempt at flushing; some coveys are simply difficult to rouse. When birds don't flush, hunters should relocate their dogs. In this study, many coveys eventually were overtaken by the hunting party and flushed at the second, third, or fourth locations.

Successful hunters think like a quail. If previous experience with a particular covey has not shown where and how they prefer to escape, take an inventory of the surrounding habitat. If they are suspected of running or flying off, they will probably be in nearby heavy cover.
The study also showed that single birds can be even more elusive than a covey. In many cases after the covey scatters single birds “hit the ground running.” When hunters arrive at the location where the birds went down, often they are already gone. Another common behavior single birds use to avoid hunters is to “sit tight” or “screw in.” These birds can be incredibly hard to find and to flush. Undoubtedly, a single bird is harder for a dog to smell than a dozen birds, and many hunters believe that the flush and flight of a bird has a “wing washing” effect that leaves little scent for the dogs to detect. Many times only the threat of actually being stepped on will cause single birds to take flight.

Survival instincts are strong in all animals and behaviors are constantly being modified to ensure perpetuation of the species. Wild bobwhites’ survival instincts are extremely sharp, undoubtedly due to the intense year-round pressure put on them by all types of predators. Studies such as this one give hunters and dog trainers a better understanding of quail behavior, the efficiency of pointing dogs, and what causes unproductive points.

Stribling is Associate Professor and Sisson is Wildlife Program Research Associate of Zoology and Wildlife Science.

Chukar12 · Post by **Chukar12** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:25 pm

Mountaineer · Post by **Mountaineer** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:30 pm

For some reason, I'm reminded of the fella that looks at a raisen pie and sees raisens.

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:32 pm

This study is no longer available online.

It was removed as a result of strong pressure from the trial officials.

You will have to request it from the biologists at the Ames plantation.

As for the hunting dog studies at tall timbers - you can see the multi year study here.

< http://allthingsquail.tripod.com/falsepointstudy.htm# >

Chukar12 · Post by **Chukar12** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:40 pm

BillThomas wrote:This study is no longer available online.

It was removed as a result of strong pressure from the trial officials.

...hmmm, you think they could help this Snooki person get her pictures off-line? I just read on Fox News that she is mad as a sitting hen about some pictures and the web has gobbled them up anyway...she needs folks with some stronger influence like these.

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:45 pm

The Ames study has been the subject of some copyright dustups, not a conspiracy theory.

Regardless, if it's not your game, please take your ball and go elsewhere.

ElhewPointer · Post by **ElhewPointer** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:47 pm

Education level still in question for me. Can't spell Ames right in the title of the thread.

Georgia Boy · Post by **Georgia Boy** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 4:14 pm

Say it isnt so. You mean field trials are not about finding birds but how far a dog runs away or how holds its head or tail

brad27 · Post by **brad27** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 4:20 pm

Georgia Boy wrote:Say it isnt so. You mean field trials are not about finding birds but how far a dog runs away or how holds its head or tail

You know what is even more funny, all the info in this thread is on hunting dogs.

ckirsch · Post by **ckirsch** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 4:34 pm

Interesting study, but the results are about what I would have expected. Shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that dogs miss birds in trials. They zig when they should have zagged, pass by upwind of the birds, run above or beneath a current of scent, might happen to be exhaling when they run through a narrow scent cone, or any number of things, just as with hunting dogs. I've seen dogs run right over the top of birds without detecting them, in tests, trials, and hunts. Bird scent is a funny thing, and I don't think any of us understand it as well as we'd like. No dog is perfect.

Post by **slistoe** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:05 pm

I didn't see any study here about trials or trial dogs, only some results from a study of fellows hunting with dogs that showed that the birds keep pretty even score with the "hunters" even when dogs are used - the use of dogs is not a "gimmee".

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:10 pm

ElhewPointer wrote:Education level still in question for me. Can't spell Ames right in the title of the thread.

I spilled beer on my keyboard last night, laughing while reading some of your posts, and it causes a few keys to stickkkkkkk.

True story.

Sorry for the misspelling.

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:11 pm

slistoe wrote:I didn't see any study here about trials or trial dogs, only some results from a study of fellows hunting with dogs that showed that the birds keep pretty even score with the "hunters" even when dogs are used - the use of dogs is not a "gimmee".

The omitted part of this study (Ames & Timbers) is that more moderate paced 'Meat' dogs were brought in, and they found 3x-4xs the number of birds on the same grounds as the all age trial dogs..

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:14 pm

ckirsch wrote:Interesting study, but the results are about what I would have expected. Shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that dogs miss birds in trials. They zig when they should have zagged, pass by upwind of the birds, run above or beneath a current of scent, might happen to be exhaling when they run through a narrow scent cone, or any number of things, just as with hunting dogs. I've seen dogs run right over the top of birds without detecting them, in tests, trials, and hunts. Bird scent is a funny thing, and I don't think any of us understand it as well as we'd like. No dog is perfect.

Overly Animated and athletic, Excited, GALLOPING dogs ranging out from 500-1200meters + (even outrunning horses), Often Outrun their noses and blew by Lots and lots of birds.

And that is what this study documented.

AMES = 18,000 acres, Thousands of resident birds PLUS 2000 released quail prior to the event over 8 days, and barely 90 points from the trial dogs.
Thats little over 1.5 birds per hour, per dog. Its abysmal in other words with regard to the birds located.
Not to mention the 30% Unproductives. Im not sure how to reconcile that either..

Stoneface · Post by **Stoneface** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:28 pm

That table came out jumbled. I found this through Google if anyone wants to see the table better. http://www.aaes.auburn.edu/comm/pubs/hi ... /dogs.html

Vonzeppelinkennels · Post by **Vonzeppelinkennels** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:29 pm

Bill this is not the first time we have all heard about these meaningless studies & I'm sure it won't be the last.There has been several before you with the same broken record & you have already repeated the same thing on several different threads.It seems the only way to stop it is to totally ignore it & you will get tired of reading your own jibberish.

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:36 pm

Vonzeppelinkennels wrote:Bill this is not the first time we have all heard about these meaningless studies & I'm sure it won't be the last.There has been several before you with the same broken record & you have already repeated the same thing on several different threads.It seems the only way to stop it is to totally ignore it & you will get tired of reading your own jibberish.

Interesting that you call this meaningless, though I can probably see why....
This is The Quintessential sporting dog event in America (Ames) and this is a typical year..
Id just like a meaningful, honest dialogue with what is considered Premier and the pinnacle for dog work, judging from these results. (Not atypical) doesnt seem to pinnacle (Unproductive false points, Trash Points, RunOffs dogs lost).

CedarOak Delta Dawn backed Whippoorwill Radiance at :35 (a rabbit); was later Gone, and Tracking device was Requested at 1:49.

'Coldwater Warrior was Lost; Tracking device Requested at 1:05.

Phantom's Last Dime was Lost; Tracking device requested at the hour mark.

L J Confidential had a find at :51; sustained an absence; handler came for Tracking device at 1:40.

Mega Touch was Gone at :18 and handler requested Tracking device at :60.

Spectre Pete had 2 Unproductives; picked up at 2:23.

Barshoe Busy suffered 2 Unproductives. Up at :57.

Patriote had two game contacts, a rabbit, and 1 Unproductive. Completed the three hours.

Prairieland Pride had two finds, a back and 1 Unproductive and finished the three hours.

Elhew Sinbad had three finds, two backs, a Rabbit, and was picked up at 2:05.

Poison tallied five finds and a divided find, had 2 backs and an unproductive. Finished the three hours.

Strut notched three finds, shared a find with Poison, had two backs, 1 unproductive, and finished the three hours.

Lester's Knockout and White's Solid Reward had virtually simultaneous Unproductives. Reward taken up at 1:50 and Knockout at 1:54.

Survivor's Real Deal had four finds, two backs, a Rabbit, and finished the three hours.

Survivor's Little Bill had five pieces of bird work, a back, 2 unproductives, and finished the three hours.

Patriote had a find, 2 unproductives, and was taken up at 1:24.

Idaho Clean Sweep had two finds, a back, a rabbit, and 3 unproductives. Picked up at 1:20.
Phantom’s Last Dime had four finds. Picked up at 1:50

Lester's Snowatch had five finds, a rabbit and 2 unproductives. Picked up at 2:41.

Barshoe Busy suffered 2 unproductives and was up at 1:05.

brad27 · Post by **brad27** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 5:44 pm

BillThomas wrote:
slistoe wrote:I didn't see any study here about trials or trial dogs, only some results from a study of fellows hunting with dogs that showed that the birds keep pretty even score with the "hunters" even when dogs are used - the use of dogs is not a "gimmee".

The omitted part of this study (Ames & Timbers) is that more moderate paced 'Meat' dogs were brought in, and they found 3x-4xs the number of birds on the same grounds as the all age trial dogs..

So let me get this straight, you reply on a thread stating meat dogs find more birds then trial dogs, start a thread with "studies" that support your view, yet omit the parts of the "studies" that prove your views?

Elkhunter · Post by **Elkhunter** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:57 pm

Bill FT's are about finding the best FT dog, not the best hunting dog.... This topic goes round and round.

asc · Post by **asc** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 8:13 pm

Broken freaking record....

Troll

14269.jpg

ckirsch · Post by **ckirsch** » Mon Jun 11, 2012 9:25 pm

BillThomas wrote:Overly Animated and athletic, Excited, GALLOPING dogs ranging out from 500-1200meters + (even outrunning horses), Often Outrun their noses and blew by Lots and lots of birds.

VerY BiZarrE

AHGSP · Post by **AHGSP** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 11:00 am

By your use of Meters, I'm going to make a guess that you are not located in the U.S.? Have you ever seen a Trial and do you understand what it is a Trial seeks in the bigger picture?

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 11:39 am

ckirsch wrote:
BillThomas wrote:Overly Animated and athletic, Excited, GALLOPING dogs ranging out from 500-1200meters + (even outrunning horses), Often Outrun their noses and blew by Lots and lots of birds.
VerY BiZarrE

I know of NO canines, anywhere in the dog world, that track game at a full gallop running 30_+ mph.

Not wolves, not Search and rescue dogs, not tracking dogs, not beagles, and not hounds.

Some will run at a lope on a hot scent, others a methodical canter, until the scent is very hot and a real chase commences.

This should be somewhat elementary.

Any dog that hunts at a full run is not hunting, it is running. And this is what is seen at alot of trials, least the ones Ive attended as a spectator. Alot of running.

ElhewPointer · Post by **ElhewPointer** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 2:07 pm

BillThomas wrote:
ckirsch wrote:
BillThomas wrote:Overly Animated and athletic, Excited, GALLOPING dogs ranging out from 500-1200meters + (even outrunning horses), Often Outrun their noses and blew by Lots and lots of birds.
VerY BiZarrE

I know of NO canines, anywhere in the dog world, that track game at a full gallop running 30_+ mph.

Not wolves, not Search and rescue dogs, not tracking dogs, not beagles, and not hounds.

Some will run at a lope on a hot scent, others a methodical canter, until the scent is very hot and a real chase commences.

This should be somewhat elementary.

Any dog that hunts at a full run is not hunting, it is running. And this is what is seen at alot of trials, least the ones Ive attended as a spectator. Alot of running.

Well we all know english isn't your strong suit. But obviously math is far behind. Some elementary math for you there Billy. 30 mph(thats miles per hour) x (thats times) 3 hrs. (thats hours) =(thats equals). I don't think they run 90 miles in the National Championship.

RayGubernat · Post by **RayGubernat** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 2:24 pm

Elhew Pointer -

Please correct me if I am wrong.

It was always my understanding that the typical field trial course was one which cold be traversed at a flat walk. So, if a horse were to walk at ... say 5-6 miles per hour, a one hour course would be five to six miles long. If a dog were to be going THREE times faster than the horse, in order to cover the available terrain in a comprehensive fashion, then the dog would be running, on average, at 15 to 18 miles per hour. For a dog, in condition, 15 mph is not running all that hard I'm thinking.

For the walking competitor, I believe the pace would be much closer to 3 MPH and length of the course would be about 3 miles. If the dog were going at 15 miles per hour and still staying in reasonable touch with its walking handler, that dog would be covering the available terrain with extreme thoroughness.

RayG

Grange · Post by **Grange** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 3:21 pm

RayGubernat wrote:Elhew Pointer -

Please correct me if I am wrong.

It was always my understanding that the typical field trial course was one which cold be traversed at a flat walk. So, if a horse were to walk at ... say 5-6 miles per hour, a one hour course would be five to six miles long. If a dog were to be going THREE times faster than the horse, in order to cover the available terrain in a comprehensive fashion, then the dog would be running, on average, at 15 to 18 miles per hour. For a dog, in condition, 15 mph is not running all that hard I'm thinking.

For the walking competitor, I believe the pace would be much closer to 3 MPH and length of the course would be about 3 miles. If the dog were going at 15 miles per hour and still staying in reasonable touch with its walking handler, that dog would be covering the available terrain with extreme thoroughness.

RayG

15 mph seems a little fast to me, but if that's true those dog are moving. To move that fast for three hour is really impressive.

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:00 pm

ElhewPointer wrote:
Well we all know english isn't your strong suit. But obviously math is far behind. Some elementary math for you there Billy. 30 mph(thats miles per hour) x (thats times) 3 hrs. (thats hours) =(thats equals). I don't think they run 90 miles in the National Championship.

ONLY 4 of 41 Dogs finished the entire 3 hour Trial at Ames, remember?

Youre probably not aware that Tom Blodgets Walker Coonhounds were clocked at 32 miles an hour, sled racing, the fastest time over any distance for any type of racing dog, ever tied to a sled.

So I dont see 25-30mph for these canine athletes as being too far fatched. I know many Pointers can flat GO.

Of course, math and logic isnt your strong suit either, the dogs are quartering, false pointing, and pointing trash game on occasion, waiting for the gallery or handler, so its not like the 4 finalists are traveling the full 90 miles.

And the others drop off long before then-something about trial etiquette or conditioning I think.

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:02 pm

Grange wrote:
RayGubernat wrote:Elhew Pointer -

Please correct me if I am wrong.

It was always my understanding that the typical field trial course was one which cold be traversed at a flat walk. So, if a horse were to walk at ... say 5-6 miles per hour, a one hour course would be five to six miles long. If a dog were to be going THREE times faster than the horse, in order to cover the available terrain in a comprehensive fashion, then the dog would be running, on average, at 15 to 18 miles per hour. For a dog, in condition, 15 mph is not running all that hard I'm thinking.

For the walking competitor, I believe the pace would be much closer to 3 MPH and length of the course would be about 3 miles. If the dog were going at 15 miles per hour and still staying in reasonable touch with its walking handler, that dog would be covering the available terrain with extreme thoroughness.

RayG
15 mph seems a little fast to me, but if that's true those dog are moving. To move that fast for three hour is really impressive.

It IS Grange and I would argue that the top dogs are traveling better than that.
Easily.

ElhewPointer · Post by **ElhewPointer** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 6:58 pm

12 dogs finished the 3 hours this year. Also, people that know and care about the dogs they run, know if they are winning the trial. If they are not they pick up as to not injure the dog. You wouldn't understand that. It shows in your posts that you have zero common sense.

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 7:04 pm

ElhewPointer wrote:12 dogs finished the 3 hours this year.

So only About 20% of the dogs, higher than normal compared to past years.??

Also, people that know and care about the dogs they run, know if they are winning the trial. If they are not they pick up as to not injure the dog. You wouldn't understand that. It shows in your posts that you have zero common sense.

Common sense isnt very common today, it seems.
And so much for come from behind victories. I was taught for years in playing football at high levels never to quit, give up or give in.

I dont think Id be a good trialer.
I dont mean to denigrate your sport as it relates TO sport.
But i dont think it is the best option for selecting hunt stock in most cases. Thats been my only point here.
Sorry if it offends any, thats not my intention.

ElhewPointer · Post by **ElhewPointer** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 7:08 pm

BillThomas wrote:
ElhewPointer wrote:12 dogs finished the 3 hours this year.
So only About 20% of the dogs, higher than normal compared to past years.??

Also, people that know and care about the dogs they run, know if they are winning the trial. If they are not they pick up as to not injure the dog. You wouldn't understand that. It shows in your posts that you have zero common sense.
Common sense isnt very common today, it seems.
And so much for come from behind victories. I was taught for years in playing football at high levels never to quit, give up or give in.

I dont think Id be a good trialer.
I dont mean to denigrate your sport as it relates TO sport.
But i dont think it is the best option for selecting hunt stock in most cases. Thats been my only point here.
Sorry if it offends any, thats not my intention.

Again, not so great at math. What fine University did you "play" D1 football at. Yikes. Its about 35%. The comments you make are intentionally trying to offend people, its quite obvious. As do mine.

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 7:14 pm

ElhewPointer wrote:
Again, not so great at math. What fine University did you "play" D1 football at. Yikes. Its about 35%. The comments you make are intentionally trying to offend people, its quite obvious. As do mine.

I counted about 42 dogs, of which 12 finished.
Thats 28%.

I didnt count with precision but with guesswork. So Give or take a few.
I looked back at last year (2011) at only 4 of 41 dogs finished. (9%)

And in 2010, Only 1 dog finished the 3 hour course.

2009, 13 of 60 dogs finished for 21%.

Average this over 3-4 years, and its below 20%, My original number.
So I was actually being generous.

Im sorry youre offended by the truth.

ElhewPointer · Post by **ElhewPointer** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 7:26 pm

BillThomas wrote:
ElhewPointer wrote:
Again, not so great at math. What fine University did you "play" D1 football at. Yikes. Its about 35%. The comments you make are intentionally trying to offend people, its quite obvious. As do mine.
I counted about 42 dogs, of which 12 finished.
Thats 28%.

I didnt count with precision but with guesswork. So Give or take a few.
I looked back at last year (2011) at only 4 of 41 dogs finished. (9%)

And in 2010, Only 1 dog finished the 3 hour course.

2009, 13 of 60 dogs finished for 21%.

Average this over 3-4 years, and its below 20%, My original number.
So I was actually being generous.

Im sorry youre offended by the truth.

And now you don't know how to read. For crying out loud man. 7 dogs finished in 2010. Get your freaking facts straight before you come on here a toot your little horn. And in 2011 8 of the 39 dogs did. And in 2009 there were only 41 dogs. Math, reading, spelling. WOW!!!

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 7:38 pm

ElhewPointer wrote:
And now you don't know how to read. For crying out loud man.
7 dogs finished in 2010. Get your freaking facts straight before you come on here a toot your little horn.
And in 2011 8 of the 39 dogs did.
And in 2009 there were only 41 dogs.
Math, reading, spelling. WOW!!!

And Yet the numbers STILL work out closer to My math than yours.

20% vs 35% if one averages the 3-4 years.

Aint it a B*tch?!

Grange · Post by **Grange** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 7:41 pm

BillThomas wrote:
Grange wrote:
RayGubernat wrote:Elhew Pointer -

Please correct me if I am wrong.

It was always my understanding that the typical field trial course was one which cold be traversed at a flat walk. So, if a horse were to walk at ... say 5-6 miles per hour, a one hour course would be five to six miles long. If a dog were to be going THREE times faster than the horse, in order to cover the available terrain in a comprehensive fashion, then the dog would be running, on average, at 15 to 18 miles per hour. For a dog, in condition, 15 mph is not running all that hard I'm thinking.

For the walking competitor, I believe the pace would be much closer to 3 MPH and length of the course would be about 3 miles. If the dog were going at 15 miles per hour and still staying in reasonable touch with its walking handler, that dog would be covering the available terrain with extreme thoroughness.

RayG
15 mph seems a little fast to me, but if that's true those dog are moving. To move that fast for three hour is really impressive.
It IS Grange and I would argue that the top dogs are traveling better than that.
Easily.

You have no basis to argue so why do you bother commenting?

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 7:46 pm

Grange wrote: You have no basis to argue so why do you bother commenting?

I can darn sure argue the merits of breeding as it relates to trial vs hunting dogs.

I owned a trial bred dog, remember?
Ive been to 3 trials personally.
Ive spoken to trialers, seen their dogs, and spoken of their dogs and testing.

Should I not take firsthand comments from trialers like:
'He doesnt have the range to be a trial top dog, he only gets out to 800 yards max, or
' we dont hunt our trial dogs, its bad For trial dogs' .... seriously?

Maybe this is no basis to argue, but Im not arguing the validity of trialing. Its a sport and if you enjoy it, Im fine with it.

But to argue that it (trialing) produces the best hunting dogs, For hunters, (wild game), is silly to me or anyone with enough smarts to see through hype of horseback trialing which require spotters, trackers, planted birds and subjective judging in the pagaent.

SetterNut · Post by **SetterNut** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:36 pm

BillThomas wrote:
slistoe wrote:I didn't see any study here about trials or trial dogs, only some results from a study of fellows hunting with dogs that showed that the birds keep pretty even score with the "hunters" even when dogs are used - the use of dogs is not a "gimmee".

The omitted part of this study (Ames & Timbers) is that more moderate paced 'Meat' dogs were brought in, and they found 3x-4xs the number of birds on the same grounds as the all age trial dogs..

Sorry, at best a moderate pace dog will find as many as these high end dogs.

Lets set you documentation on the "Omitted" part.

brad27 · Post by **brad27** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:45 pm

SetterNut wrote:
BillThomas wrote:
slistoe wrote:I didn't see any study here about trials or trial dogs, only some results from a study of fellows hunting with dogs that showed that the birds keep pretty even score with the "hunters" even when dogs are used - the use of dogs is not a "gimmee".

The omitted part of this study (Ames & Timbers) is that more moderate paced 'Meat' dogs were brought in, and they found 3x-4xs the number of birds on the same grounds as the all age trial dogs..

Sorry, at best a moderate pace dog will find as many as these high end dogs.

Lets set you documentation on the "Omitted" part.

Talking with Bill is like running on a treadmill, it's alot of work and in the end you've gone nowhere.

Grange · Post by **Grange** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:15 pm

BillThomas wrote:
Grange wrote: You have no basis to argue so why do you bother commenting?

I can darn sure argue the merits of breeding as it relates to trial vs hunting dogs.

I owned a trial bred dog, remember?
Ive been to 3 trials personally.
Ive spoken to trialers, seen their dogs, and spoken of their dogs and testing.

Should I not take firsthand comments from trialers like:
'He doesnt have the range to be a trial top dog, he only gets out to 800 yards max, or
' we dont hunt our trial dogs, its bad For trial dogs' .... seriously?

Maybe this is no basis to argue, but Im not arguing the validity of trialing. Its a sport and if you enjoy it, Im fine with it.

But to argue that it (trialing) produces the best hunting dogs, For hunters, (wild game), is silly to me or anyone with enough smarts to see through hype of horseback trialing which require spotters, trackers, planted birds and subjective judging in the pagaent.

You owned a trial bred dog, went to three whole trials, AND talked to a few trialers? Wow now that's some experience. But that wealth of experience aside how does that give you any knowledge of how fast the dogs trialing at Ames are running? I'll answer the question for you. It doesn't.

Post by **ezzy333** » Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:24 pm

BillThomas wrote:
ElhewPointer wrote:12 dogs finished the 3 hours this year.
So only About 20% of the dogs, higher than normal compared to past years.??

Also, people that know and care about the dogs they run, know if they are winning the trial. If they are not they pick up as to not injure the dog. You wouldn't understand that. It shows in your posts that you have zero common sense.
Common sense isnt very common today, it seems.
And so much for come from behind victories. I was taught for years in playing football at high levels never to quit, give up or give in.

I dont think Id be a good trialer.
I dont mean to denigrate your sport as it relates TO sport.
But i dont think it is the best option for selecting hunt stock in most cases. Thats been my only point here.
Sorry if it offends any, thats not my intention.

OK, Bill, you say you are not interested in the sport of trialing so I am telling you NOW to stop posting on these threads you are not interested in.

Enough is enough, and you have proven you have nointerest in learning, and unless you learn you will never discover the facts about the subject. You are welcome to your opinion as is everyone else, so this is it for you.

Just stop or i will take care of it for you. That means all of these threads where you are posting the same material.

Ezzy

Yahoo · Post by **Yahoo** » Wed Jun 13, 2012 5:55 am

BillThomas wrote:
ckirsch wrote:
BillThomas wrote:Overly Animated and athletic, Excited, GALLOPING dogs ranging out from 500-1200meters + (even outrunning horses), Often Outrun their noses and blew by Lots and lots of birds.
VerY BiZarrE

I know of NO canines, anywhere in the dog world, that track game at a full gallop running 30_+ mph.

Not wolves, not Search and rescue dogs, not tracking dogs, not beagles, and not hounds.

Some will run at a lope on a hot scent, others a methodical canter, until the scent is very hot and a real chase commences.

This should be somewhat elementary.

Any dog that hunts at a full run is not hunting, it is running. And this is what is seen at alot of trials, least the ones Ive attended as a spectator. Alot of running.

A good bird dog doesn't track as you suggest above.

Yahoo · Post by **Yahoo** » Wed Jun 13, 2012 6:06 am

BillThomas wrote:
Grange wrote: You have no basis to argue so why do you bother commenting?

I can darn sure argue the merits of breeding as it relates to trial vs hunting dogs.

I owned a trial bred dog, remember?
Ive been to 3 trials personally.
Ive spoken to trialers, seen their dogs, and spoken of their dogs and testing.

Should I not take firsthand comments from trialers like:
'He doesnt have the range to be a trial top dog, he only gets out to 800 yards max, or
' we dont hunt our trial dogs, its bad For trial dogs' .... seriously?

Maybe this is no basis to argue, but Im not arguing the validity of trialing. Its a sport and if you enjoy it, Im fine with it.

But to argue that it (trialing) produces the best hunting dogs, For hunters, (wild game), is silly to me or anyone with enough smarts to see through hype of horseback trialing which require spotters, trackers, planted birds and subjective judging in the pagaent.

Bill
I think what you don't understand is that trial bred dogs can be developed to hunt. Actual trial dogs are developed differently. I could take the same pup and train it to be a trial dog or a hunting dog. I could not do this with a slow methodical dog. Also, the more ground a dog covers the more birds it will find. Simply a fact. I know I could take my trial dogs and out bird you in any venue you wish. If you are up to the task.

Ruffshooter · Post by **Ruffshooter** » Wed Jun 13, 2012 6:50 am

A wild bird dog is developed by experience with wild birds. By a person that understands wild bird hunting. That simple.
Trials of all types; Cover dog, wild grouse trials, NSTRA, AKC, AF, all give you a handle on the type of dog( That has produced that pup you want) and weather or not it has a very good chance of having the tools to develop for the type of Hunting( Prairie or Grouse woods )or trialing (AA or cover dogs stuff) you want to do.

It is that simple just like the NAVHDA, MH VHDD (German testing (always get abbv wrong on that) or what ever.

P.S. I read on this or the other thread, good bird dogs do not track. That is just dumb. :roll:

Yahoo · Post by **Yahoo** » Wed Jun 13, 2012 7:36 am

Ruffshooter wrote:A wild bird dog is developed by experience with wild birds. By a person that understands wild bird hunting. That simple.
Trials of all types; Cover dog, wild grouse trials, NSTRA, AKC, AF, all give you a handle on the type of dog( That has produced that pup you want) and weather or not it has a very good chance of having the tools to develop for the type of Hunting( Prairie or Grouse woods )or trialing (AA or cover dogs stuff) you want to do.

It is that simple just like the NAVHDA, MH VHDD (German testing (always get abbv wrong on that) or what ever.

P.S. I read on this or the other thread, good bird dogs do not track. That is just dumb. :roll:

If you have worked many dogs you would realize what I meant by that comment. A good bird dog smells the birds while running along an objective with their head up. Sure they may track scent to get a good location if the bird has run. If they drop their nose to track ground scent they generally get too close and put the birds up. A good bird dog uses the birds body scent to stay off the birds. Why do you think a high headed do is desired?

Ruffshooter · Post by **Ruffshooter** » Wed Jun 13, 2012 8:24 am

Yahoo:
I do not disagree with any of that, however, I am not a mind reader nor do I know who you are.
You know that Dogs do not need to track with low head.

dan v · Post by **dan v** » Wed Jun 13, 2012 8:26 am

Grange wrote: 15 mph seems a little fast to me, but if that's true those dog are moving. To move that fast for three hour is really impressive.

I can believe 15mph. I road every other day. I have a male that won't break over into a lope until 12mph...so at 15 he's just jogging along.

Grange · Post by **Grange** » Wed Jun 13, 2012 9:46 am

Wyndancer wrote:
Grange wrote: 15 mph seems a little fast to me, but if that's true those dog are moving. To move that fast for three hour is really impressive.
I can believe 15mph. I road every other day. I have a male that won't break over into a lope until 12mph...so at 15 he's just jogging along.

It's not just the 15 mph for average speed. I know dogs that can average that speed, but I don't think they could keep that pace for 3 hours. The dogs that can do that are amazing athletes.

Post by **slistoe** » Wed Jun 13, 2012 10:30 am

When I was conditioning to be competitive my best dogs would average 16 mph for 1/2 hour dragging 12 lbs of chain. The worst would average 13 mph for 1/2 hour with the chain. If they couldn't do that they were not good enough to be competitive in 1/2 hour stakes. If you wanted to win an AF CH you needed a dog that could average that pace for the full hour and then some. My Brittanys couldn't do it - they had trouble keeping pace with the Pointers for 1/2 hour.

BillThomas · Post by **BillThomas** » Wed Jun 13, 2012 2:17 pm

Yahoo wrote:
Bill
I think what you don't understand is that trial bred dogs can be developed to hunt. Actual trial dogs are developed differently. .

So now youre admitting that trial dogs worked differently than many good hunting dogs?

I could take the same pup and train it to be a trial dog or a hunting dog.

Guess so.

I could not do this with a slow methodical dog.

Why is methodical bad?
2 Studies, 1 from Ames and 1 from Tall Timbers Found that slower, more methodical dogs Found More birds than the best Trial dogs. Thats what all this arguing has been about.
A dog on a gallop is going to miss a crap ton of birds compared to a more methodical dog.

Also, the more ground a dog covers the more birds it will find. Simply a fact. I know I could take my trial dogs and out bird you in any venue you wish. If you are up to the task.

This blanket statement needs alot of qualification.
I blieve that The better use of a dogs nose will find More birds. Smarts helps, and legs to keep them going and get them out there.
If you wish to come to OH, you are welcome anytime.
Ive got 600 acres to work with. Liberated and WIld Birds, No peppered birds. Ive no home field advantage, Ive hunted it twice in 10 years.

Point it like this:

1. 3 pt For Retrieve to Hand.
2. 2 pts for every Find
3. 1 Pt for any back.
4 -1 Unproductive
5. DQ Forfeit any lost cripple, or Failure to rerieve to hand.

Bring your best bitch and come on out.
Ill buy the lunch and beer afterwards. And we can hunt ducks coming in to roost later that day with the same dogs.
Video is welcome.
Im not claiming I will best you, but I will give you a good run for your money and my dog will still be one helluva lot more versatile than yours.