Retrieving Stakes in Pointing Dog Trials

[slistoe]

OK..... how?

We've got to show the anti-hunting crowd and other responsible sportsmen that trials promote a good sportsman ethic and good bird dogs. The only one way to prove a trial dog can retrieve and is truly steady to wing and shot and fall is
kill the bird in the trial. If we do this the anti-hunting crowd and other responsible sportsmen will be OK with trials killing wild birds whether it's hunting season or not and killing birds for competition.

So the need for a retrieve is a PR exercise now?
I will vehemently disagree with your last premise. The anti-hunting crowd will NEVER be OK with killing anything, regardless of the reason, and they will make all the mileage they can over killing wild birds for competition. We have already seen on this forum recently how "responsible sportsmen" react to the killing of wild birds for competition.

[Chukar12]

What a stupid argument. If you want to see field trial bred dogs retrieve get your magnanimous gluteus Maximus off the couch and go hunting....BECAUSE that is where the bulk of the dogs are that are born and bred trial dogs. As far as excuses JKP call whatever serves your purpose, but live ammunition and killing birds in many formats is not a good idea. I am a volunteer and I do not care to manage the process.

I know bird dogs well enough to say that the recovery of game by most any hunting dog is a reflection of the hunter and his or her attitude toward that recovery. The dogs with very few exceptions have the skill and desire to find dead or wounded game, just like every other predator. Training and exposure is the issue and field trials horseback field trials in particular are not the model of influence in hunting dog training. To suggest otherwise is simply argumentative. It's actually why the other kids didn't like many of you.

[Neil]

I am not saying the retrieve is unimportant, I am saying I have never seen set up to properly to fairly test it.

To join the other side, when the US Fish and Wildlife was closing state field trial grounds we used the conservation of game as a successful argument. So I am very glad others are still testing for the retrieve.

In 30 days a semi-competent trainer can get a dog of any breed to pass the current test, including a peek a poo.

[ACooper]

If we do this the anti-hunting crowd and other responsible sportsmen will be OK with trials killing wild birds whether it's hunting season or not and killing birds for competition.

No way, the anti-hunting crowd will never be okay with killing anything, wild, tame, in season or out.


Who really thinks that if a dog retrieves or doesn't retrieve in a call back really matters in the "grand scheme" of game recovery?

If I never run my dog in a retrieving stake again or had never run him in a retrieving stake does that make him a poor retriever?

[slistoe]

Who really thinks that if a dog retrieves or doesn't retrieve in a call back really matters in the "grand scheme" of game recovery?

You used the word "thinks"

[slistoe]

To join the other side, when the US Fish and Wildlife was closing state field trial grounds we used the conservation of game as a successful argument. So I am very glad others are still testing for the retrieve.

If the placing of the game in the hunters hand was requisite to the argument, then trying to argue for the use of dogs to aid in the recovery of shot/wounded big game animals would be rather futile, wouldn't it.

[RayGubernat]

The AF field trial tradition is that of a stylized southern hunt. In that hunt, the job of the coursing dogs is to find, point and hold game for the mounted gunners. After the gunners have dismounted, flushed and shot, the dogs are gathered up, brought back to the front and released to find more birds. On the wagon with the driver is a Lab whose job it is to go and retrieve the shot birds after the pointing dogs have been released to hunt forward.

So you all hunt with Labs at the ready?? horses pulling the cart?? finger sandwiches at noon on the veranda??? Gun bearer with the matching double standing at the ready behind you??? What century are we in?? Haven't seen anything like that during the hunting season from AZ to Saskatchewan

And I haven't seen any DD's or DK's taking down stags or bringing back foxes, or coyotes or wolves, or even the neighbor's tabbycat, either before or right after retrieving a wounded swan during the hunting season here in Delaware either. Not even ONE!!! I guess wasn't looking hard enough. :roll:


I thought them jam up German bred versatiles were supposed to be aces at all that fur stuff??? Or is that only when they ain't gnawing off someone's leg because the poor SOB tried to deliver a box of Florida grapefuit. What was that you say?? They don't ask them to do that stuff here on this side of the pond?? Do tell why not. They ARE supposed to be versatile are they not?? Doesn't versatile mean they are simply the BEST at EVERYTHING??
:roll:

Have a great day.

RayG


PS - The gunbearer thing is British, not Southern...at least that is what Bwana said.

[JKP]

Good word!!! Poke a little fun and folks go ballistic!!

Owning a gun is a RIGHT....hunting is a privilege...taking home everything you shoot is the responsibility that goes with it, IMO. I think its safe to say we all pretty much agree with that. So let the games we play demonstrate it. If we were having this discussion where the term FIELD TRIAL did not appear, everyone would agree. When we point out that the pinnacle of "field dogdom" does not incorporate any meaningful retrieve into its titles and priorities, folks get all worked up. We don't need dogs to retrieve 95% of the birds shot...we do for the other 5%...and in some cases you better have a good one with you...or hope that the mules and the cart are too far away We've heard time and again that these dogs are the definition of cooperation and desire...shouldn't be a problem.

I've been hearing the "Lederhosen" jibes for years...doesn't bother me.

Nough said.

[RayGubernat]

Good word!!! Poke a little fun and folks go ballistic!!

Owning a gun is a RIGHT....hunting is a privilege...taking home everything you shoot is the responsibility that goes with it, IMO. I think its safe to say we all pretty much agree with that. So let the games we play demonstrate it. If we were having this discussion where the term FIELD TRIAL did not appear, everyone would agree. When we point out that the pinnacle of "field dogdom" does not incorporate any meaningful retrieve into its titles and priorities, folks get all worked up. We don't need dogs to retrieve 95% of the birds shot...we do for the other 5%...and in some cases you better have a good one with you...or hope that the mules and the cart are too far away We've heard time and again that these dogs are the definition of cooperation and desire...shouldn't be a problem.

I've been hearing the "Lederhosen" jibes for years...doesn't bother me.

Nough said.

Now JKP, you didn't think you were gonna get by with the last cheap shot...diddja?? Not a chance bubby.

ike you said... Poke a little fun and some folks go ballistic. Seems to me the one that went off into the intergalacitic void first was you my dear sir.


I got one for you too... If you can't handle the heat, stay outta the kitchen.


But First ...I have a question??? Just WHO is "we"? YOU said that when "WE" point out something or other... I only see your ruminations, aso i would like to know who is "WE"??

Now...for the rest of the story( DANG - Always wanted to write that!!)


You stated:

"If we were having this discussion where the term FIELD TRIAL did not appear, everyone would agree."


I sincerely doubt that. Heck, the folks on this board can't all agree on just about ANY subject from which dog to use, to which style shotgun, to which gauge to which shot size for a particular species of bird...and I think that is AWESOME. back a little ways you would have saddled me wityh a gunbearer and two side by side British doubles. Not me Bud. I'd send the gunbearer back to his country of origin and sell BOTH of those fancy double guns. Probably have enough money to buy an F-450, a honkin' big LQ trailer and another couple of pointers.

Maybe I'd even have enough money left over so's I could send my best FDSB pointing dog off to Force Fetch school. I am glad that you had the good taste to admit that AF trials are the pinnacle of field dogdom. Or were you just being sarcastic?? Naaaah. You wouldn't do that.

It is cold and nasty here and the wind is whistling through the trees at about 25 mph, so I have no burning desire to go out and train dogs...or much of anything else. Maybe you could tell???

BTW, I would not look good in lederhosen. Especially not with a "versatile" dog gnawing on a lower extremity. Darn things gotta be drafty too.

Have a great day.

RayG

[slistoe]

If we were having this discussion where the term FIELD TRIAL did not appear, everyone would agree.

You obviously haven't been reading what was written have you. My disagreement with you has nothing whatsoever to do with field trials. When hunting it should be expected that we will make every effort possible to recover any game shot. I would most certainly hate to see hunting in this country come to the point that it has in many European countries where you will not be allowed to hunt if you do not have access to a certified tracking dog within minutes of shooting. Not having a dog of any kind along does not mean you have not expended every reasonable effort to recover shot game.
Now, if you are hunting with a dog then the dog can certainly be an asset in the location of shot game - thereby increasing the possibility of recovery of difficult birds in those 5% (IME you overstate the number - 2% may be more realistic for pointed birds) of cases where you cannot simply walk 25 yards and pick up the bird. However, having the dog actually bring that bird to you is totally irrelevant to the conservation aspect in all but the most obscure of cases. In strict upland hunting scenarios over pointing dogs the # of instances where the bird would be irrecoverable if the dog refused to pick it up and bring it to you would likely be similar to the number of cases where the most experienced and skilled bird finder/trackers are unable to locate a downed bird in a couple of hours of trying.
So, when you say that the RETRIEVE is an absolutely essential component of a hunting dog, I will always disagree. The only essential component of a useful hunting dog is its ability to find birds and not eat them.

[Allin13]

Before I got my field trial dog I thought it would be crazy to have a dog like that. Big run, cant keep up with them, half the time you dont even see them BUT I really enjoy the game!! Its competitive, you get the chance to win stuff and it gives me something to do. would I want to hunt with my pointer every weekend like that, no. and I know some of you will say well I do. and thats great if you do But I dont want to use the e-collar all the time to keep him in or take that edge off his run.

Now as for my gsps I hunt with and do hunt tests with I love hunting with them! they stay within 50 to 80 yards they dont run 60mph i dont have to call all the time and they really dont miss many birds but they dont have the drive my pointer does and not as stylish. but if I want to hunt they are the dogs Ill take.

So Its all about the game you want to play. play what you like and dont knock others for what game they play. remember we're all in this for the dogs and habitat!

[JKP]

Seems to me the one that went off into the intergalacitic void first was you my dear sir.

What void...simply stated a very tenable position. Its clear that folks here shoot the birds that fall in the open...good deal I prefer not to go wading in the cattail muck or try to keep from being perforated in the thorn apple.

Anyone that has read this can pretty much see that retrieving is not thought to be all that important...and that with the talent to win comes all the retrieve you need..since in 98% of cases you can just go pick the bird up yourself...done deal...I'm convinced.

[Gordon Guy]

I think this needs to be restated.

No one has said that putting the birds in your vest is not important.

Retrieving and finding the birds/game conservation are two similiar but different things.

Retrieving = a dog finding, picking up, and bringing the bird to the handler. The convenience part of this is "Bringing it back."

Finding the birds = A dog pointing and finding a shot bird, standing over it until the handler picks it up.

Other than semantics, ethically I don't see a difference. Both birds are in possession. "Bringing the bird to hand" is a matter of personal preference

[Gordon Guy]

If trials are to meant to determine the best breeding stock for future trial/hunting dogs it doesn't make sense that we're measuring something (retrieving) in which the retrieve can be and most often completely manipulated/manmade.

[UpNorthHuntin]

I think this needs to be restated.

No one has said that putting the birds in your vest is not important.

Retrieving and finding the birds/game conservation are two similiar but different things.

Retrieving = a dog finding, picking up, and bringing the bird to the handler. The convenience part of this is "Bringing it back."

Finding the birds = A dog pointing and finding a shot bird, standing over it until the handler picks it up.

Other than semantics, ethically I don't see a difference. Both birds are in possession. "Bringing the bird to hand" is a matter of personal preference

What happens when the bird falls in a body of water? In October... And its cold.... Really Cold???

[UpNorthHuntin]

I think this needs to be restated.

No one has said that putting the birds in your vest is not important.

Retrieving and finding the birds/game conservation are two similiar but different things.

Retrieving = a dog finding, picking up, and bringing the bird to the handler. The convenience part of this is "Bringing it back."

Finding the birds = A dog pointing and finding a shot bird, standing over it until the handler picks it up.

Other than semantics, ethically I don't see a difference. Both birds are in possession. "Bringing the bird to hand" is a matter of personal preference

What happens when the bird falls in a body of water? In October... And its cold.... Really Cold???

One last post and I will be done... I know... It's about time, right? But when I saw this post I had to reply with another definition. It happens to be the one that drives every aspect of training in any hunting dog and the ability to coerce a dog to do what we want it to do.

Prey Kill: "Prey drive is the instinctive inclination of a carnivore to pursue and capture prey, chiefly used to describe habits in dog training. In dog training, prey drive can be used as an advantage because dogs with strong prey drive are also willing to pursue moving objects. In nearly all aspects of canine training, when using prey kill as the main motivator for training (dogs hunt, point, and chase birds because of this prey drive) when the reward (witholding the game, or not allowing the dog to catch the game) is introduced, well, that is what we refer to as reward deprivation.... Normally utilized to correct unwanted behavior. I just cannot understand witholding the dogs prey from them and keeping them from satisfying that prey kill drive, which id the basis and main reason they hunt in the first place.

[Winchey]

What happens when they fall in a tree, what happens if a hawk grabs it before you get there, how much wood can a woodchuck chuck?

[UpNorthHuntin]

What happens when they fall in a tree, what happens if a hawk grabs it before you get there, how much wood can a woodchuck chuck?

Well, if it falls in a tree then I will have to get the chain saw out of the truck, but if a hawk grabs it, then I guess he will be a happy hawk on that day....

[ACooper]

For myself and a lot of the people I know running dogs, trials are as much or more about fun with dogs than proving breeding stock.

[slistoe]

I think this needs to be restated.

No one has said that putting the birds in your vest is not important.

Retrieving and finding the birds/game conservation are two similiar but different things.

Retrieving = a dog finding, picking up, and bringing the bird to the handler. The convenience part of this is "Bringing it back."

Finding the birds = A dog pointing and finding a shot bird, standing over it until the handler picks it up.

Other than semantics, ethically I don't see a difference. Both birds are in possession. "Bringing the bird to hand" is a matter of personal preference

What happens when the bird falls in a body of water? In October... And its cold.... Really Cold???

There was quite a period of time when I did not own dogs to hunt with. I understand very well how nice it can be to have the convenience of a dog to get your birds for you. I always went home with my birds though

[Winchey]

Saddle, I am going to go out on a limb, but wouldn't you say that pretty well all those dogs in Grand Junction right now have littermates who are someones jam up brag hunting dog, and have probably near the potential of their brothers running in the national.

Absolutely not. 1 in a 1000 dogs has what it takes to compete on that level.

Crazy they go through 40,000 dogs every year to get 40 to Ames and that they are entirely different animals than their brothers and sisters.

I take it Gary Lester raises a couple thousand puppies a year.

[Saddle]

Good word!!! Poke a little fun and folks go ballistic!!

Owning a gun is a RIGHT....hunting is a privilege...

Owning a gun is also a privilege and one that can be taken away if you commit a felony offense.

Freedom of speech is a right. You have the right to remain silent. Owning a gun is a privilege.

[Saddle]

Saddle, I am going to go out on a limb, but wouldn't you say that pretty well all those dogs in Grand Junction right now have littermates who are someones jam up brag hunting dog, and have probably near the potential of their brothers running in the national.

Absolutely not. 1 in a 1000 dogs has what it takes to compete on that level.

Crazy they go through 40,000 dogs every year to get 40 to Ames and that they are entirely different animals than their brothers and sisters.

I take it Gary Lester raises a couple thousand puppies a year.

It makes no sense to argue with someone who knows nothing about all age dogs.

[Stoneface]

Johng, I am breaking her out for broke stake because that's what's required. But, if they had AF or AKC-like trials that didn't require a dog to stand steady, I'd be all over it. UBH had it right, in my opinion, and the AF Gun Dog stakes (Am. Derby) is the right idea. But, I'm not a rule-maker, I'm just a player so I have to play by the rules established. If those rules say my dog has to be broke, then so be it. I also just finished my bachelor's degree and about half way through realized the majority of a college degree - at least mine - was BS... and I don't mean "bachelor's of science." But, I still had to do all the crap I didn't like in order to get that paper.

[Winchey]

Considering in 2004 there were only 6300 pointers whelped and registered in the fdsb and akc, including pets and show dogs, you make no sense. Ya I agree there aren't a lot og dogs that can do it but the odds of finding one if you know what you are doing and know how to do it is drasticly lower.

Then their are also dogs that fall through the cracks, don't have the opportunity, don't have an owner with the inclination, resources, ability.

Anyway's you didn't even answer my question. Unless you are implying that none of the competitors have littermates that are any good at all.

[RayGubernat]

Saddle, I am going to go out on a limb, but wouldn't you say that pretty well all those dogs in Grand Junction right now have littermates who are someones jam up brag hunting dog, and have probably near the potential of their brothers running in the national.

Absolutely not. 1 in a 1000 dogs has what it takes to compete on that level.

Crazy they go through 40,000 dogs every year to get 40 to Ames and that they are entirely different animals than their brothers and sisters.

I take it Gary Lester raises a couple thousand puppies a year.

No, but I would bet real money that he does have a couple hundred on the ground each year that he will look at and pick from. The one in a thousand is , I am fairly sure, meant to cover all of the breeding of pointers and setters done for both trialing of all types and and hunting of all types. From that perspective, the percentages are most certainly in the right ballpark.

A Cooper made a very interesting and valid point when he said:

"For myself and a lot of the people I know running dogs, trials are as much or more about fun with dogs than proving breeding stock."

I'm on board with that too. I'm in this mostly for fun.

And since we are talking about retrieving, ifi drop a bird in the water in October(not so bad) or November(not so good) and one of my sissy pointers won't go in after it... time to put down the gun, empty my pockets and get wet. After all ...I'm the dumb SOB that pulled the trigger.

All I will say is that the last time I went into the water in the field was about six years ago...and it was after a dog, not a bird. The dog(a young, stupid one) went out onto some rubber ice on a pond before I could stop her and broke through a rotten patch, then could not get back up.

That sucked, especially the walk back to the truck... but the dog was fine...like nothing happened. GRRRR.

RayG

[Saddle]

Considering in 2004 there were only 6300 pointers whelped and registered in the fdsb and akc, including pets and show dogs, you make no sense. Ya I agree there aren't a lot og dogs that can do it but the odds of finding one if you know what you are doing and know how to do it is drasticly lower.

Then their are also dogs that fall through the cracks, don't have the opportunity, don't have an owner with the inclination, resources, ability.

Anyway's you didn't even answer my question. Unless you are implying that none of the competitors have littermates that are any good at all.

You really are a clown aren't you. Do you know how many pups each year aren't even registered because they cant even make it to derby age before they were culled. I only answer questions that come from people with knowledge winchey. How many all age competitors that make it to that level do you think are the only living puppy remaining in the litter. Get a clue fella.

I'm gonna bow out of this conversation with this thought. We all know that supply and demand affect the price of something. If these he-man all age dogs are a dime a dozen like you would have us to believe then why did CH Miller's Happy Jack sell for north of $30000 last year? Why is a legit all age derby prospect from a big time pro fetching north of $10000. Why is a proven bitch that can produce a true all age dog going for $5000 to $10000? If these animals can be produce from Backyard Bob being bred to Backyard Tess then why the prices winchey? Here's a secret it's because these dogs are so rare that when one is discovered they command top dollar. Here's another secret. They aren't available to guys like you and me even if we have the money. Those dogs are kept in circle so tight its incredible. Unless a guy like you or me just wanted to be an owner then maybe they'd talk to us but if we tried to buy one to run for ourselves we'd get laughed at. You're right winch these animals are as common as the day is long. I bet you have 8 or 10 just sitting around that could go win the national next week. What a joke.

[Winchey]

34,000 if you are right.

I am not saying there are lots, just saying it is probably a lot closer to 1 in 100 if you are Gary Lester or the like.

[JKP]

Top dogs attract top hands...and the money to follow through. Not saying that these dogs aren't among the best. But, the rest don't get the attention for the most part. Its self perpetuating...in any venue.

[Allin13]

Has there ever been a john smith to win it all? A true amateur.

[Grange]

OK..... how?

We've got to show the anti-hunting crowd and other responsible sportsmen that trials promote a good sportsman ethic and good bird dogs. The only one way to prove a trial dog can retrieve and is truly steady to wing and shot and fall is
kill the bird in the trial. If we do this the anti-hunting crowd and other responsible sportsmen will be OK with trials killing wild birds whether it's hunting season or not and killing birds for competition.

So the need for a retrieve is a PR exercise now?
I will vehemently disagree with your last premise. The anti-hunting crowd will NEVER be OK with killing anything, regardless of the reason, and they will make all the mileage they can over killing wild birds for competition. We have already seen on this forum recently how "responsible sportsmen" react to the killing of wild birds for competition.

Of course that premise is wrong. Heck it's down right laughable. I made that comment because there was a post earlier that tried making the ridiculous point that retrieving in a trial is good PR for the anti-hunting group. Hold a trial that would kill wild birds for retrieving purposes and, as you noted, it will upset more than just the anti-hunting crowd too.

[Neil]

Has there ever been a john smith to win it all? A true amateur.

Quinlin, Billy Blackwell come to mind as decidedly middle class, hard working types. Ferrel Miller was a state employee, Gary Lester a farmer. Many of the owner handlers are from humble, if not poor beginnings, but all are highly driven, so they exceed in most aspects of life. 2 time winning owner David O'Conner was far from rich when I first met him. Of the very rich, few inherieted it, nearly all worked for it.

[RayGubernat]

Which of the "pointing" breeds is not also a "versatile" breed.?

I would say that those breed clubs who do not require their dogs to have retrieve points or a water test would define their breed NOT to be defined as "versatile" in terms of the dog breed classification, but would instead, consider them more of an upland bird specialist breed.

The pointing breeds that come to mind are Pointer, E. Setter, Irish Setter, and Brittany. I am not so sure about some of the others, such as Gordon setter, but I am sure the requirements are in the appropriate AKC rulebook.

In the AF/AFTCA competitive world, there is no "versatile" breed, there is no "versatile" dog test. The trials are designed only for upland bird specialists. Many trials are super specialized, being conducted and the dogs being evaluated on their ability to locate, point and hold a single speices of upland gamebird. in fact, work on "off game" (such as pointing, chasing or catching rabbits) is considered detrimental to the performance and is considered a negative.

As to the more general dictionary type meaning of the term versatile... of being able to perform many diferent tasks due to a wide range of skills... I firmly believe most of the pointing breeds can do most of the things one might need a dog for. Some will do certain things better than others, but they are all dogs after all. They all love to chase and kill stuff.

RayG

[jasonw99]

IMO the retreiving stakes using callbacks are a joke. You can teach any dog to retreive so what does it really accomplish? The callbacks are quite embarrasing to watch. Retreive on course arent bad.

THe only thing the call backs really prove is how steady your dog is when he sees a bird fall in front of him.

Like i said you can teach any dog to retreive even a toy poodle.

[dan v]

Ok,

So let's kick this dead horse one more time, for the last time.

It's hard to recall what Gordon Guy's question was, but I think the thread has migrated into something else. The question now it seems is this. Should AKC/AF test retrieving skills? I would answer that if the continental breeds (currently those in AKC that require ret points for a FC/AFC) want to then fine. I myself would propose a modification to that and institute a retrieving test, similar to the water test. Make it one or two passes under some agreed standard and be done with this silly callback method.

It's my opinion that whatever method that is currently employed, and to a degree a future retrieving test, neither of those have or can assess the strength of a retrieving dog. Can it test dogs that have no natural inclination to retrieve but have been FF'd? Certainly. But what has that accomplished? Not much in terms of revealing the genetic disposition of a dog in terms of natural retrieving. It hasn't tested the desire for a dog to stick with a truly hard or extended retrieve. I'd even say that this is true even in AKC HT's. It will test the dogs ability to be trained but not the natural "I ain't stoppin' until I have the bird." because that situation is not presented. That is something that YOU have to discover in your dog or line of dogs. Don't ask AKC or AF to try to render an opinion on something that is not and can not be assessed at a FT or HT.

The dogs that are the true natural retrieving dogs, are they discovered in the training sessions and wild bird hunts? I'd say that the ONLY place.

[JKP]

Ok,

So let's kick this dead horse one more time, for the last time.

It's hard to recall what Gordon Guy's question was, but I think the thread has migrated into something else. The question now it seems is this. Should AKC/AF test retrieving skills? I would answer that if the continental breeds (currently those in AKC that require ret points for a FC/AFC) want to then fine. I myself would propose a modification to that and institute a retrieving test, similar to the water test. Make it one or two passes under some agreed standard and be done with this silly callback method.

It's my opinion that whatever method that is currently employed, and to a degree a future retrieving test, neither of those have or can assess the strength of a retrieving dog. Can it test dogs that have no natural inclination to retrieve but have been FF'd? Certainly. But what has that accomplished? Not much in terms of revealing the genetic disposition of a dog in terms of natural retrieving. It hasn't tested the desire for a dog to stick with a truly hard or extended retrieve. I'd even say that this is true even in AKC HT's. It will test the dogs ability to be trained but not the natural "I ain't stoppin' until I have the bird." because that situation is not presented. That is something that YOU have to discover in your dog or line of dogs. Don't ask AKC or AF to try to render an opinion on something that is not and can not be assessed at a FT or HT.

The dogs that are the true natural retrieving dogs, are they discovered in the training sessions and wild bird hunts? I'd say that the ONLY place.

By the same reasoning, why have field trials on liberated birds...in hedgerows? or put out 1000's of birds at Ames for dogs to find? Why have retriever tests where birds are launched for the dogs? Why drag phez 200 yards and send a dog to get it? We can argue that all of that is meaningless when compared to hunting, finding and holding wild game.

The point for me was to prioritize what we all know to be good sportsmanship...bringing home everything you shoot. You might be surprised how many dogs don't bring back birds...or bite them and flip them and go on hunting....or just run by them to the next bird....how many dogs break down when put under FF pressure...or just resist. I can understand that folks are only interested in finding game and the glory of the game...I can see that. What I have trouble with is why folks wouldn't want MORE capable dogs....many are...why not aspire to it for all.

The dogs that are the true natural retrieving dogs, are they discovered in the training sessions and wild bird hunts? I'd say that the ONLY place

So how many discussions are had among the FT royalty about the retrieving, how long a dog will search dead, etc when breeding decisions are made?? I'll wager seldom.

[dan v]

JKP,

Well it's good that you have a soapbox to stand on here. But you are even anywhere near the original question, nor where the discussion has led us.

In any organization that I've managed, it was common for people to identify a problem. Plenty of people can do that. What separates doers from complainers is this... doers will identify a problem...and propose a solution. You're great at the first........Keep on keepin' on.

[RayGubernat]

[

So how many discussions are had among the (American Field) FT royalty about the retrieving, how long a dog will search dead, etc when breeding decisions are made?? I'll wager seldom.

I added the descriptor in parentheses above for clarity.

Actually I'll wager almost none at all... because they - the American Field FT royalty - or rther their dogs i should say... have been proved over the last hundred years or that those discussion discussions are totally unnecessary .

Bird dogs have never lost their "natural ability" to retrieve, despite a hundred years of not having it "tested". That is a certifiable, undeniable FACT.

Those that claim to value the concept of "natural ability" should appreciate that a dog from parentage that has not been trained or encouraged or even evaluated for the retrieve, FOR GENERATIONS... can, almost all the time, be expected to retrieve a shot bird just fine, if given the opportunity.

If the AKC folks in certain breed clubs want to have a retrieve requirement as part of their qualification for champion status...that is wonderful and it is their right ot do so. Those who feel it makes a difference should support those types of stakes with whatever dog they choose to compete with.

The weight of history has conclusively demonstrated that the lack of retrieve requirements in field trial type evaluations is essentially irrelevant to maintining the innate ability of a dog to be able to retrieve shot birds.

Can we stop this silliness now? Or do we want to start a topic about why is it necessary(or even allowed) for so many to intensively train their dogs for what is called a "Natural Ability " test or its German equivalent??? Hmmmm.

RayG

[bhulisa]

I can't really comment on callbacks and retrieving in the AKC/AF/USA Pointing/Continental field trials, but regarding many of the postings on the current topic, I would pose a question to the statement below (and others like it):

RayG =

Bird dogs have never lost their "natural ability" to retrieve, despite a hundred years of not having it "tested". That is a certifiable, undeniable FACT.

If this is true, why then, are there an inordinately high number of posts in the Training section having to do with Retrieving (specifically the lack thereof)??

[ACooper]

I guess with all the effort pointing out the flaws of FT and FT dogs I assume all DDV testing is done on wild game and has no flaws.

[slistoe]

I think I mentioned it before. I had been indoctrinated into the cult as a young boy. But somewhere along the way reality slapped me in the face and I actually used my brain to look at how things were rather than the religious emotion I was using. I would challenge JKP to drop his religious guard for a moment and answer to the facts that have been laid out here by Ray and myself. 150 years of breeding with absolutely no testing for retrieve - 150 years of breeding by owners/handlers actively discouraging the behavior in their dogs and yet anyone one with an inkling to have their dog pick up the bird and return with it in upland hunting scenarios can have that with their Pointer.

If the argument for a retrieve in a Pointing Dog Field Trial is that it is necessary to retain the instinct in the dogs used as breeding stock the premise has been proven to be absolutely false by the AF breeding system.

If the argument is that the dogs are capable and we should showcase that behavior then the argument is also without merit because picking up a dead bird at 25 yards and returning with it showcases nothing - that is what serious retriever prospects are doing at 3 months of age.

[slistoe]

I can't really comment on callbacks and retrieving in the AKC/AF/USA Pointing/Continental field trials, but regarding many of the postings on the current topic, I would pose a question to the statement below (and others like it):

RayG =

Bird dogs have never lost their "natural ability" to retrieve, despite a hundred years of not having it "tested". That is a certifiable, undeniable FACT.

If this is true, why then, are there an inordinately high number of posts in the Training section having to do with Retrieving (specifically the lack thereof)??

Are there really more postings on lack of retrieving than there are lack of pointing or lack of control?

[slistoe]

I guess with all the effort pointing out the flaws of FT and FT dogs I assume all DDV testing is done on wild game and has no flaws.

Hey, the DD/DK "system" has created such a natural, strong retrieve that those folks have no idea what FF is or why it is necessary - heck, their training manuals don't even mention retrieving other than to say it is something the dogs do.

[UpNorthHuntin]

If the argument is that the dogs are capable and we should showcase that behavior then the argument is also without merit because picking up a dead bird at 25 yards and returning with it showcases nothing - that is what serious retriever prospects are doing at 3 months of age.

But doesn't a dog retrieving a bird to hand for the handler (which is the only part of retrieving that is not an inherent element of a dog's prey kill drive in the first place) show the most in hunting cooperation from a dog. Everythging else the dog does is natural. The hunt, Point, and chase are all elements of prey kill drive. The actual return of the game "fit for consumption" is one of the biggest indicators of cooperation IMHO. Isn't cooperation ranked pretty high on the list for Field Trial Judges.

And if not, what venue in the miriad of dog games resembles hunting the most?

[JKP]

And there we have it.....

We all are wasting our time. All we need to do is get a horse...breed dogs to run 300+ yards ahead of us and point til we can collar them off. Identifyng the best dogs at game recovery???....unnecessary!!

Looking for a nice TW...I'm tall...16H +...please.

[Chukar12]

It's like a room full of business school graduates or consultants without tactical or practical application experience jumping into strategic decision making...it looks easy and they are sure they have ideas nobody has thought of...
Now kinda hurry some of you peons implement these ideas

[Grange]

If the argument is that the dogs are capable and we should showcase that behavior then the argument is also without merit because picking up a dead bird at 25 yards and returning with it showcases nothing - that is what serious retriever prospects are doing at 3 months of age.

But doesn't a dog retrieving a bird to hand for the handler (which is the only part of retrieving that is not an inherent element of a dog's prey kill drive in the first place) show the most in hunting cooperation from a dog. Everythging else the dog does is natural. The hunt, Point, and chase are all elements of prey kill drive. The actual return of the game "fit for consumption" is one of the biggest indicators of cooperation IMHO. Isn't cooperation ranked pretty high on the list for Field Trial Judges.

And if not, what venue in the miriad of dog games resembles hunting the most?

I would disagree with that opinion. Handling a dog takes more cooperation than retrieving. During a trial the course isn't a straight line and in some cases the turns are quite dramatic. If the dog is 200 yards out front in heavy cover and the course takes a 90 degree turn you'll need plenty of cooperation to get that dog to move with you so it can continue to hunt toward the front. When hunting I'm not a big fan of having my dogs hunting behind me so I need my dogs to be able to follow my voice and work forward rather than come from behind.

The trial venue that resembles hunting the most to me is a coverdog trial. It's not exactly like hunting, but closer than anyother type of of dog game I've seen.

[UpNorthHuntin]

I would disagree with that opinion. Handling a dog takes more cooperation than retrieving. During a trial the course isn't a straight line and in some cases the turns are quite dramatic. If the dog is 200 yards out front in heavy cover and the course takes a 90 degree turn you'll need plenty of cooperation to get that dog to move with you so it can continue to hunt toward the front. When hunting I'm not a big fan of having my dogs hunting behind me so I need my dogs to be able to follow my voice and work forward rather than come from behind.

The trial venue that resembles hunting the most to me is a coverdog trial. It's not exactly like hunting, but closer than anyother type of of dog game I've seen.

I understand that.... I don't mean to be so opinionated either, just trying to understand all of the aspects of as many venues as I can to find the one that fits me best. I am pretty sure I will run in the upcoming trials and who knows, I will probably be hooked too. Hopefully not too much because my pocketbook isn't very deep. Full of lint more like, but we will see how he does. I will hunt him a lot this year and see how he pans out in the competition arena, and if nothing else I will have a super hunting companion for the next 10-12 years. Thanks...Who usually sponsors the cover dog trials? I haven't seen any advertised at all in my area?

[ezzy333]

Good word!!! Poke a little fun and folks go ballistic!!

Owning a gun is a RIGHT....hunting is a privilege...

Owning a gun is also a privilege and one that can be taken away if you commit a felony offense.

Freedom of speech is a right. You have the right to remain silent. Owning a gun is a privilege.

How did you determine that when the right to both come from the exact same place, the US Costitution?

[Grange]

American Field has coverdog field trials listed under the calendar tab. Check out The Michigan Amatuer Field Trial Club's website for a list of the trials in MI:

http://coverdog.blogspot.com/

I've never been to Iona or Highland, but have been to Gladwin and will hopefully be there at least once this spring for a trial.

I don't know the cover dog clubs in Michigan, but in WI and Minnesota the clubs that hold cover dog trials are Chippeway Valley Grouse Dog Association, Moose River Grouse Dog Club and Minnesota Grouse Dog Association.