FT dogs not such good hunters

rinker
Rank: 4X Champion
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2011 9:01 am

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by rinker » Mon Feb 09, 2015 10:06 am

I saw an ad recently for a litter of pointer puppies. The first few sentences of the ad talked about the fact that these puppies would make hunting dogs, not 'crazy, run-off, good for nothing field trial dogs'. The last few sentences of the ad talked about the puppies pedigree, and how many champion, horse back all-age dogs were close up in that pedigree. I had to laugh.

cjhills
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2529
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 7:37 am
Location: aitkin,mn

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by cjhills » Mon Feb 09, 2015 10:15 am

I do not really have a dog in this fight, because I do not really care one way or the other. If we are happy with our dogs, great. The question I have is this. If I walk two miles and hour and my dog runs twelve miles an hour and my dog is always to the front and going hard at the end of a hour, Even taking short cuts how far behind will I be? Unless he stops to let me catch up. I run some big going trial bred dogs but none go hard all the time and none are to the front all the time. Just wondering how that works.....................Cj

Neil
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3187
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:46 pm
Location: Central Arkansas

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Neil » Mon Feb 09, 2015 10:31 am

cjhills wrote:I do not really have a dog in this fight, because I do not really care one way or the other. If we are happy with our dogs, great. The question I have is this. If I walk two miles and hour and my dog runs twelve miles an hour and my dog is always to the front and going hard at the end of a hour, Even taking short cuts how far behind will I be? Unless he stops to let me catch up. I run some big going trial bred dogs but none go hard all the time and none are to the front all the time. Just wondering how that works.....................Cj
Even on the prairies there are objectives, neither the handler nor the dog go in a straight line. You go from objective to objective.

twistedoak
Rank: Junior Hunter
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 9:13 am
Location: phila penn

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by twistedoak » Mon Feb 09, 2015 10:50 am

RayGubernat wrote:
Actually...Yes they will. Most of the time anyway.

A good dog will run just as far and as fast as it can. That means(to me)...if the dog is running in front of a horse it is a quarter to a half mile out in front...going hard. Because a mounted hunter/handler can operate very effectively with a dog at those distances.

It ALSO means(to me) that if the dog is in front of a walking hunter with a gun, it is out there going hard at a distance where the hunter and dog can work together, which, depending on the terrain and the comfotrt level of the hunter... could be under 100yards and out to 400 yds.

If someone is convinced that they MUST have an eyeball on their dog AT ALL TIMES, they will never be comfortable with a dog that is operating at the edge of their vision. If someone is convinced that, for them to get a shot, the dog must always be within gun range, they will never be comfortable with a dog that ranges beyond fifty yards or so.

I have no problem with any of that...hunt the way you want, have the kind of dog you want. Be happy with what you choose to hunt over. But if that is how you choose to hunt, please be aware that your dog, if it is a good dog, is very likely capable of so much more than you are allowing it to do. We, the human part of the hunting team, are almost always the limiting factor in the equation.

I certainly am.

I routinely foot hunt, on relatively small preserves, with dogs that are capable of running for an hour in front of a horse...and occasionally coming home with a ribbon. My dogs pull it in as much as I need them to when we are foot hunting. I may not pull my dogs in as close as some and I may not allow my dogs to run bigger than others would...but I do what works for us, as a team. That is what is important. I'm 66 years old and not as quick on my feet as I used to be, so my dogs have to hunt a little more attentively and hold point a little longer than they used to when I could double time it through a plowed field. Now I walk...and they gotta hang in there.

A good dog will dial it up, down or even sideways...whatever it takes to hunt effectively...that day... with its master. It will pull itself in and hunt close when its master is legging it through a hunk of woods and stretch it out when the woods breaks into an open field...because it CAN and SHOULD. The dog that hunts an open field the same way as it hunts in the woods is not hunting as effectively as it could be. You gotta know that.

RayG
I don't disagree with anything you say.
I just feel at some point a dog can out run its nose. Just as a dog can move too slow.
be it a trial dog or a meat dog ,it really doesn't matter...
just as it doesn't matter how far they are ranging while searching

User avatar
whatsnext
Rank: Champion
Posts: 306
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2011 8:43 pm
Location: bourbonnais il

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by whatsnext » Mon Feb 09, 2015 11:00 am

Chukar12 wrote:The credibility of people is terribly fragile when you see beyond their internet persona and bravado. I cannot speak as intelligibly for those East of the Rockies and certainly not for those across the Atlantic. However, some of these "experts" west of the rockies that would espouse their expertise are pretending to have more wild bird knowledge and experience than they have. It isn't enough for them to sell experience as behavioralists and I have seen them do good things with pot lickers, enough to make their Subaru driving clients happy with their dog park bird club dogs. Noble purpose for sure. However their knowledge of trial dogs is nil...I can't remember seeing our proclaimed experts at one ever. Further, I know for sure that the wild bird exposure is limited and recent. Ask to see the 4X4 chained up in the snow, expansive landscape shots, and don't believe in the panoramic valley quail pictures... Forty pointers surrenderd at a time indeed... Post the breeder/trainers name I will ask he or she... Believe the videos and pictures you see of dogs on flat ground, and of planted birds on little rocky lumps... They tell the story and for those who know the difference it would be amusing if it hadn't gotten so ridiculous.
This is what common sense really sounds like just in case someone doesn't know.

User avatar
ACooper
GDF Premier Member!
Posts: 3397
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 1:37 pm
Location: Sometimes I'm in Oklahoma

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by ACooper » Mon Feb 09, 2015 12:37 pm

Ms. Cage wrote: Could it be that long ago Americans were BS'd into thinking that the best meat dogs came from horse back FT blood. For years we've had a game that gauged the best bird dogs yet had nothing to do with hunting. It's been stated how many times on this thread that trials ain't hunting and hunting dogs are not trial dog.
The majority of trial dogs are hunting dogs first.

User avatar
ACooper
GDF Premier Member!
Posts: 3397
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 1:37 pm
Location: Sometimes I'm in Oklahoma

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by ACooper » Mon Feb 09, 2015 12:42 pm

Chukar12 wrote:The credibility of people is terribly fragile when you see beyond their internet persona and bravado. I cannot speak as intelligibly for those East of the Rockies and certainly not for those across the Atlantic. However, some of these "experts" west of the rockies that would espouse their expertise are pretending to have more wild bird knowledge and experience than they have. It isn't enough for them to sell experience as behavioralists and I have seen them do good things with pot lickers, enough to make their Subaru driving clients happy with their dog park bird club dogs. Noble purpose for sure. However their knowledge of trial dogs is nil...I can't remember seeing our proclaimed experts at one ever. Further, I know for sure that the wild bird exposure is limited and recent. Ask to see the 4X4 chained up in the snow, expansive landscape shots, and don't believe in the panoramic valley quail pictures... Forty pointers surrenderd at a time indeed... Post the breeder/trainers name I will ask he or she... Believe the videos and pictures you see of dogs on flat ground, and of planted birds on little rocky lumps... They tell the story and for those who know the difference it would be amusing if it hadn't gotten so ridiculous.
All you're going to hear are crickets....

User avatar
Elkhunter
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1058
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 12:42 pm
Location: Idaho

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Elkhunter » Mon Feb 09, 2015 1:48 pm

ACooper wrote:
Chukar12 wrote:The credibility of people is terribly fragile when you see beyond their internet persona and bravado. I cannot speak as intelligibly for those East of the Rockies and certainly not for those across the Atlantic. However, some of these "experts" west of the rockies that would espouse their expertise are pretending to have more wild bird knowledge and experience than they have. It isn't enough for them to sell experience as behavioralists and I have seen them do good things with pot lickers, enough to make their Subaru driving clients happy with their dog park bird club dogs. Noble purpose for sure. However their knowledge of trial dogs is nil...I can't remember seeing our proclaimed experts at one ever. Further, I know for sure that the wild bird exposure is limited and recent. Ask to see the 4X4 chained up in the snow, expansive landscape shots, and don't believe in the panoramic valley quail pictures... Forty pointers surrenderd at a time indeed... Post the breeder/trainers name I will ask he or she... Believe the videos and pictures you see of dogs on flat ground, and of planted birds on little rocky lumps... They tell the story and for those who know the difference it would be amusing if it hadn't gotten so ridiculous.
All you're going to hear are crickets....

Cause they are all experts! :)

Mountaineer
GDF Junkie
Posts: 1630
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 7:23 pm
Location: State?...The one where ruffed grouse were.

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Mountaineer » Mon Feb 09, 2015 2:57 pm

Hmmmm.... the trolling worked better here than it did when the same was posted on other message boards.
Selecting the right bait for each feesh is indeed important.
:roll:

Ms. Cage
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 705
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 5:01 pm
Location: Hibbing, Mn. 55746

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Ms. Cage » Mon Feb 09, 2015 4:35 pm

ACooper wrote:The majority of trial dogs are hunting dogs first.

That's very debatably. In the beginning all breeds were hunting dogs. Many horse back FT's today are lucky to see a full hunting season . Some about all they see is pen raised birds. Yet the question remains, Why are FT dogs the gauge of hunting bred dogs when field trials ain't the same as hunting. What makes the horse back FT dogs so important to the breeding of quality hunting dogs? Why do some feel that FC,AFC in the pedigree are merits way above others such as MH, NAVHDA titles?
Ms. Cage wrote:Could it be that long ago Americans were BS'd into thinking that the best meat dogs came from horse back FT blood. For years we've had a game that gauged the best bird dogs yet had nothing to do with hunting. It's been stated how many times on this thread that trials ain't hunting and hunting dogs are not trial dog.
The majority of trial dogs are hunting dogs first.

RyanDoolittle
Rank: Champion
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 11:39 pm

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by RyanDoolittle » Mon Feb 09, 2015 7:17 pm

Tammy,

What do you consider a full season of hunting? I have said it before and I will say it again successful trial dogs spend 3 months on the prairie every summer and fall chasing wild grouse an huns. They see more wild birds than most peoples "hunting" dogs do. The average hunter is lucky to see 6-10 days of hunting, sure there are the few of us that get out 20 or 30 times a year. Heck I recon over my 8 year old the birds shot over him go into 4 digits and those are wild birds. But not many can say that anymore. Between life, family, cost of fuel, and low bird numbers people just arent traveling farther than local release sites to hunt.

FT are the gauge because its competition. Pro athletes arent good because they go out and shoot hoops with the guys next door in the drive way. They are good because they have proven this in competition. This is exactly what a FC or AFC is, it is a dog that has beaten a certain amount of dogs to attain this title. He is not put against a standard but against the competition, so even if he has the best run of his life if 3 other dogs have done a better job they will be placed above yours.

People are going to argue this but there is a difference between a field trial dog and a Test dog. The FT dog is balls to the walls hunting his arse off at all time. He is always pushing himself and his limits. People have bred higher pain tolerances so these dogs can push. I go watch a test and I see a couple dogs that can keep my attention, those are usually the dogs that trial or are from trial stock.. Most are plodders, most spend alot of time inside gun range, and most are always looking to the handler for direction. They just are not exciting to watch.

Tammy have you ever gone and watched a field trial? If so what format and stakes?

RyanDoolittle
Rank: Champion
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 11:39 pm

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by RyanDoolittle » Mon Feb 09, 2015 7:23 pm

Tammy I will also add I have both here. My forst Irish was a show line crossed into some oooold hunting stock, my current Irish is of trial stock. Same with my 8 year old GSP, he is mostly all show stock (malhaven) with a single DK far back on the bottom Navigator side. My young dog is trial bred (Walnut Hill).

All 4 can/could get it done but the trial dogs are much funner to watch.

User avatar
Mr. Crappie
Rank: Senior Hunter
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 5:06 pm
Location: Missouri

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Mr. Crappie » Mon Feb 09, 2015 8:14 pm

Mr. Pike,
No doubt you have done some research, but you are very much mistaken on many of your thoughts. I am not a trialer but currently own a Snow watch female and a Millers Dialing In female. Make no mistake about it, both Snow watch and Dialing In were/are exceptional field trial dogs. My dogs are wild bird hunted only. They are excellent "bird dogs". I like their "field trial" fire. Bird hunting and trialing are two different games. I am surprised with all of you birddog experience you weren't aware of that. I hunt in northeast Missouri and you need a dog that can cover some country. I suspect Mr. Ferrell Miller would have a different perspective than you do. I'm not sure if there is anyone more knowledgeable about bird dogs than him.
Last edited by Mr. Crappie on Mon Feb 09, 2015 8:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
ACooper
GDF Premier Member!
Posts: 3397
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 1:37 pm
Location: Sometimes I'm in Oklahoma

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by ACooper » Mon Feb 09, 2015 8:33 pm

Ms. Cage wrote:
ACooper wrote:The majority of trial dogs are hunting dogs first.

That's very debatably. In the beginning all breeds were hunting dogs. Many horse back FT's today are lucky to see a full hunting season . Some about all they see is pen raised birds. Yet the question remains, Why are FT dogs the gauge of hunting bred dogs when field trials ain't the same as hunting. What makes the horse back FT dogs so important to the breeding of quality hunting dogs? Why do some feel that FC,AFC in the pedigree are merits way above others such as MH, NAVHDA titles?
Ms. Cage wrote:Could it be that long ago Americans were BS'd into thinking that the best meat dogs came from horse back FT blood. For years we've had a game that gauged the best bird dogs yet had nothing to do with hunting. It's been stated how many times on this thread that trials ain't hunting and hunting dogs are not trial dog.
The majority of trial dogs are hunting dogs first.
Most dogs competing the major circuit be it pointer/setter, brit, or gsp spend july-sept (or close) being run on wild birds on the prairies. I would agree that some of these major circuit dogs are not being hunted, but per capita they are such a small percentage of "field trial" dogs, the overwhelming majority are being hunted. For example my club will not hold tests or trials during hunting season, because it would interrupt our hunting. The BS people continue to spread is that field trial dogs and hunting dogs are not one in the same. And for the record I like FC/AFC and UT titles.

cjhills
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2529
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 7:37 am
Location: aitkin,mn

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by cjhills » Mon Feb 09, 2015 9:40 pm

RyanDoolittle wrote:Tammy,

What do you consider a full season of hunting? I have said it before and I will say it again successful trial dogs spend 3 months on the prairie every summer and fall chasing wild grouse an huns. They see more wild birds than most peoples "hunting" dogs do. The average hunter is lucky to see 6-10 days of hunting, sure there are the few of us that get out 20 or 30 times a year. Heck I recon over my 8 year old the birds shot over him go into 4 digits and those are wild birds. But not many can say that anymore. Between life, family, cost of fuel, and low bird numbers people just arent traveling farther than local release sites to hunt.

FT are the gauge because its competition. Pro athletes arent good because they go out and shoot hoops with the guys next door in the drive way. They are good because they have proven this in competition. This is exactly what a FC or AFC is, it is a dog that has beaten a certain amount of dogs to attain this title. He is not put against a standard but against the competition, so even if he has the best run of his life if 3 other dogs have done a better job they will be placed above yours.

People are going to argue this but there is a difference between a field trial dog and a Test dog. The FT dog is balls to the walls hunting his arse off at all time. He is always pushing himself and his limits. People have bred higher pain tolerances so these dogs can push. I go watch a test and I see a couple dogs that can keep my attention, those are usually the dogs that trial or are from trial stock.. Most are plodders, most spend alot of time inside gun range, and most are always looking to the handler for direction. They just are not exciting to watch.

Tammy have you ever gone and watched a field trial? If so what format and stakes?
Field trials are the gauge for field trial dogs, not all bird dogs. because they are competition between field trial dogs. Obviously trial dogs are bird dogs and will hunt. I have master titled many trial bred dogs.
My biggest issue is that trial dogs mostly do not need a retrieve, they do not need to honor and the are not allowed to move or turn to mark the bird. Except for the point itself these three things are the my most important requirements in a bird dog. I also do not want my dogs to run to objectives. We hunt Huns in huge wheat fields the dogs need to use the wind, their nose and legs to locate covies. They need to point the covies well off and throttle back to find the singles. They need to be cautious on the singles, they need to honor, they need to be steady to wing, shot and fall, they need to mark the fall and they need to retrieve.
I like trial bred dogs they just are not the end all and be all of the dog world.
Do not like trials much, too much yelling and whistling and what not. We would scare every bird out of the country.
While a not very exciting dog can pass a test a pretty boring dog can win a walking field trial also. The last Gsp one I went to Had one dog pass a simple retrieve out of the top four in the retrieving stake......................Cj

User avatar
Grange
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1003
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:24 pm
Location: Green Bay, WI

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Grange » Mon Feb 09, 2015 10:18 pm

cjhills wrote: Field trials are the gauge for field trial dogs, not all bird dogs. because they are competition between field trial dogs. Obviously trial dogs are bird dogs and will hunt. I have master titled many trial bred dogs.
My biggest issue is that trial dogs mostly do not need a retrieve, they do not need to honor and the are not allowed to move or turn to mark the bird. Except for the point itself these three things are the my most important requirements in a bird dog. I also do not want my dogs to run to objectives. We hunt Huns in huge wheat fields the dogs need to use the wind, their nose and legs to locate covies. They need to point the covies well off and throttle back to find the singles. They need to be cautious on the singles, they need to honor, they need to be steady to wing, shot and fall, they need to mark the fall and they need to retrieve.
I like trial bred dogs they just are not the end all and be all of the dog world.
Do not like trials much, too much yelling and whistling and what not. We would scare every bird out of the country.
While a not very exciting dog can pass a test a pretty boring dog can win a walking field trial also. The last Gsp one I went to Had one dog pass a simple retrieve out of the top four in the retrieving stake......................Cj
Where on earth did you get the idea that trial dogs do not need to honor and are not allowed to turn and mark the bird? If a dog blows a back the judge will order the dog up and a dog can mark the bird, but it cannot chase.

RyanDoolittle
Rank: Champion
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 11:39 pm

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by RyanDoolittle » Mon Feb 09, 2015 10:41 pm

cjhills wrote:
RyanDoolittle wrote:Tammy,

What do you consider a full season of hunting? I have said it before and I will say it again successful trial dogs spend 3 months on the prairie every summer and fall chasing wild grouse an huns. They see more wild birds than most peoples "hunting" dogs do. The average hunter is lucky to see 6-10 days of hunting, sure there are the few of us that get out 20 or 30 times a year. Heck I recon over my 8 year old the birds shot over him go into 4 digits and those are wild birds. But not many can say that anymore. Between life, family, cost of fuel, and low bird numbers people just arent traveling farther than local release sites to hunt.

FT are the gauge because its competition. Pro athletes arent good because they go out and shoot hoops with the guys next door in the drive way. They are good because they have proven this in competition. This is exactly what a FC or AFC is, it is a dog that has beaten a certain amount of dogs to attain this title. He is not put against a standard but against the competition, so even if he has the best run of his life if 3 other dogs have done a better job they will be placed above yours.

People are going to argue this but there is a difference between a field trial dog and a Test dog. The FT dog is balls to the walls hunting his arse off at all time. He is always pushing himself and his limits. People have bred higher pain tolerances so these dogs can push. I go watch a test and I see a couple dogs that can keep my attention, those are usually the dogs that trial or are from trial stock.. Most are plodders, most spend alot of time inside gun range, and most are always looking to the handler for direction. They just are not exciting to watch.

Tammy have you ever gone and watched a field trial? If so what format and stakes?
Field trials are the gauge for field trial dogs, not all bird dogs. because they are competition between field trial dogs. Obviously trial dogs are bird dogs and will hunt. I have master titled many trial bred dogs.
My biggest issue is that trial dogs mostly do not need a retrieve, they do not need to honor and the are not allowed to move or turn to mark the bird. Except for the point itself these three things are the my most important requirements in a bird dog. I also do not want my dogs to run to objectives. We hunt Huns in huge wheat fields the dogs need to use the wind, their nose and legs to locate covies. They need to point the covies well off and throttle back to find the singles. They need to be cautious on the singles, they need to honor, they need to be steady to wing, shot and fall, they need to mark the fall and they need to retrieve.
I like trial bred dogs they just are not the end all and be all of the dog world.
Do not like trials much, too much yelling and whistling and what not. We would scare every bird out of the country.
While a not very exciting dog can pass a test a pretty boring dog can win a walking field trial also. The last Gsp one I went to Had one dog pass a simple retrieve out of the top four in the retrieving stake......................Cj

I would suggest you attend more trials. All of those things you listed above are required of any trial dog. BTW although not the most popular there are retrieving stakes if one desires.

Like you I hunt huns on the crop but we generally find our on the edges of prairie and the crop or on the pivot corners. Dogs learn to work down wind to scent all the 1/4 section and work to the corners.


As for the being broke thing that is up to the owner. I do alot pf yourh mentored hunting and have my dogs broke anyway to keep them out of the line of fire. However the top level of trials (Gun Dog, shooting dog, or All Age) requires a dog to be broke to W&S, so do Master level HT dogs as well as Utility level NAVHDA dogs so I dont see what your trying to get at here.

User avatar
SCT
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 858
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:43 pm
Location: Utah

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by SCT » Mon Feb 09, 2015 11:57 pm

It is amusing to me that people need to pick "sides" on this topic. Amusing because anyone with any decent amount of hunting experience knows that solid bird dogs come from FT bloodlines. Many horseback field trial Champions have littermates, sons, daughters, nieces, nephews, etc. that are never ran in front of a horse. Where do the "experts" think they end up???? Most are placed in hunters' homes. And as for the Pros "washouts", they are typically real nice bird dogs. And, because of their early and often exposure to wild birds are usually ahead of the "game" at a young age. Silly field trial haters!!!

Field trial bred pup honoring:

Image

User avatar
Elkhunter
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1058
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 12:42 pm
Location: Idaho

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Elkhunter » Tue Feb 10, 2015 2:45 pm

I am appreciative of the FT experts that have shown up on this thread to educate us ignorant bird dog folks!

Neil
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3187
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:46 pm
Location: Central Arkansas

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Neil » Tue Feb 10, 2015 3:24 pm

Elkhunter wrote:I am appreciative of the FT experts that have shown up on this thread to educate us ignorant bird dog folks!
You are welcome. And I thought I was wasting my time, good to know it is worthwhile. There is no shame in being uneducated if you do not reject offered knowledge.

Ms. Cage
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 705
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 5:01 pm
Location: Hibbing, Mn. 55746

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Ms. Cage » Tue Feb 10, 2015 3:58 pm

cjhills wrote:I like trial bred dogs they just are not the end all and be all of the dog world.
I agree with Jerry. Seems there has been a bit of a trend where hunters are looking more to MH and NAVHDA bred dogs to fill their needs as hunting companions.

Neil
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3187
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:46 pm
Location: Central Arkansas

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Neil » Tue Feb 10, 2015 4:06 pm

Ms. Cage wrote:
cjhills wrote:I like trial bred dogs they just are not the end all and be all of the dog world.
I agree with Jerry. Seems there has been a bit of a trend where hunters are looking more to MH and NAVHDA bred dogs to fill their needs as hunting companions.
Were I limited to only hunting small tracts and shooting preserves I would join in the trend.

Ms. Cage
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 705
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 5:01 pm
Location: Hibbing, Mn. 55746

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Ms. Cage » Tue Feb 10, 2015 4:13 pm

Neil wrote:Were I limited to only hunting small tracts and shooting preserves I would join in the trend.
fortunately many are prairie hunters, big woods grouse hunters, etc.

Neil
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3187
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:46 pm
Location: Central Arkansas

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Neil » Tue Feb 10, 2015 5:50 pm

Particularly for inexperienced dog trainers.

Ms. Cage
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 705
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 5:01 pm
Location: Hibbing, Mn. 55746

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Ms. Cage » Tue Feb 10, 2015 6:10 pm

Neil wrote:Particularly for inexperienced dog trainers.
:?

Are you saying FT bred dogs don't handle kindly for the inexperienced ??? Is this why those tend to lean toward MH NAVHDA bred.

Neil
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3187
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:46 pm
Location: Central Arkansas

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Neil » Tue Feb 10, 2015 7:01 pm

Ms. Cage wrote:
Neil wrote:Particularly for inexperienced dog trainers.
:?

Are you saying FT bred dogs don't handle kindly for the inexperienced ??? Is this why those tend to lean toward MH NAVHDA bred.
Absolutely, not only do big running, independent dogs require more experience to train, they demand more tools, facilities, and much more skill.

I often decline to sell a pup to those that are not prepared. It takes much less skill to train a dog that has a natural inclination to remain within sight 90% of the time.

ckirsch
Rank: 2X Champion
Posts: 435
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 8:46 pm
Location: Rapid City, SD

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by ckirsch » Tue Feb 10, 2015 7:11 pm

I don't really have a dog in this fight (pun intended) but I've not found trial-bred dogs to be difficult to handle. My first AA-bred pointer turned out to be a better bird finder, hunt test dog, and even retriever than any of the continentals I ran previously. Far and away the easiest to train, and the best citizen around the kennel and house. On top of that, my twelve-year-old daughter had success with her similarly-bred pointer in NAVHDA tests, which would seem to indicate their having a pretty good handle.

I've only had six bird dogs in my relatively short career, so I admittedly lack the experience many on this board have, but I suspect that in many ways, a good dog is a good dog, regardless of origin.

User avatar
Grange
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1003
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:24 pm
Location: Green Bay, WI

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Grange » Tue Feb 10, 2015 7:18 pm

Ms. Cage wrote:
Neil wrote:Were I limited to only hunting small tracts and shooting preserves I would join in the trend.
fortunately many are prairie hunters, big woods grouse hunters, etc.
I would say when it comes to grouse hunting there are a lot of hunters that look for trial dog breeding especially cover dog breedings. Dogs that prove themselves on the very same game that people are hunting are often looked at favorably by. Just one example of this would be how much the interest increased in puppies from one of my parent's brittanies. One of their britts got her Championship in the grouse woods and because of her trial history they likely already have enough deposits on her next litter. They also have interests or pups from this Champion britt's littermate and her dam because in part of the blood relationship, but also because of their own trial abilities. Many of the people that are interested are not trialers, but hunters.

Ms. Cage
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 705
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 5:01 pm
Location: Hibbing, Mn. 55746

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Ms. Cage » Tue Feb 10, 2015 7:28 pm

Grange wrote:I would say when it comes to grouse hunting there are a lot of hunters that look for trial dog breeding especially cover dog breedings
Only if they are looking at EP's and ES's.
Grange wrote:. Dogs that prove themselves on the very same game that people are hunting are often looked at favorably
I find this true , even more so with grouse hunters.

User avatar
ACooper
GDF Premier Member!
Posts: 3397
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 1:37 pm
Location: Sometimes I'm in Oklahoma

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by ACooper » Tue Feb 10, 2015 7:33 pm

What's a trial dog? NSTRA? AA? SHOOTING DOG? GSPCA? NGSPA? COVER DOG, NBHA? There are plenty more we could list, so what trial dog don't make good hunting dogs? This whole blanket statement stuff is total horse manure. I can't even believe people continue this crap about trial bred dogs not being "bird dogs" get a grip.

Ms. Cage
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 705
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 5:01 pm
Location: Hibbing, Mn. 55746

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Ms. Cage » Tue Feb 10, 2015 7:50 pm

Cooper , I have yet to say a bad word about trial dogs . raised some questions, yes. I will say this, WHAT MAKE$ TRIALERS THINK THE'RE DOGS ARE THE ROOSTER OF THE WALK ? What make s trailer think there the gods to the dog world but are the vast minority of the hunting crowd. IMO some are realizing FT kool aid has gotten very stale .

Vernal Pike
Rank: Junior Hunter
Posts: 34
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2015 7:36 pm
Location: Near the lake

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Vernal Pike » Tue Feb 10, 2015 7:52 pm

ACooper wrote:. I can't even believe people continue this crap about trial bred dogs not being "bird dogs" get a grip.
You might want to reread the opening post written by Brad Harter.
FT pointing dogs are bird dogs but maybe not as good "hunting bird dogs" according to the research in the op.
That's not my opinion, but rather the data presented in this study.
FT pointing dogs at Ames were missing birds.

User avatar
ezzy333
GDF Junkie
Posts: 16625
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 3:14 pm
Location: Dixon IL

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by ezzy333 » Tue Feb 10, 2015 8:28 pm

Vernal Pike wrote:
ACooper wrote:. I can't even believe people continue this crap about trial bred dogs not being "bird dogs" get a grip.
You might want to reread the opening post written by Brad Harter.
FT pointing dogs are bird dogs but maybe not as good "hunting bird dogs" according to the research in the op.
That's not my opinion, but rather the data presented in this study.
FT pointing dogs at Ames were missing birds.
All dogs miss birds. There was a study done that says the best dogs find some where near 70 % but as we all know there are way too many variables from one day to the next to come up with a definitive number.

I also think that we all know that no two dogs are alike and have different ways of hunting and running. What this means is they are different but not necessarily better at any single method of getting the job done. Those that don't just like to argue more than learn.
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=144
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=207

It's not how many breaths you have taken but how many times it has been taken away!

Has anyone noticed common sense isn't very common anymore.

ckirsch
Rank: 2X Champion
Posts: 435
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 8:46 pm
Location: Rapid City, SD

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by ckirsch » Tue Feb 10, 2015 8:30 pm

News flash, Vern; every dog runs by birds, probably far more frequently than their owners would care to admit.

This argument pops up often. While there are indeed a few trialers around who display impressive superiority complexes, for every haughty trailer, there's an insecure troll like Mr. Pike (who is probably on his third of fourth moniker on this forum) who denigrates trial dogs at every opportunity.

I hunt first, run NAVHDA second, and I've also really enjoyed the handful of NSTRA trials I've been fortunate enough to get to. I"ll never run AF as the horse thing is out of the question, but I'm not going to dismiss the contributions trial dogs have made to the bird dog world, just as NAVHDA / MH dogs have.

Run what you want, and let others do the same.

Neil
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3187
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:46 pm
Location: Central Arkansas

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Neil » Tue Feb 10, 2015 8:30 pm

Ms. Cage wrote:
rinker wrote:If you took a dog that was entered in the National Championship, and bird hunted him from foot in West Tennessee for a few weeks, he would begin to dig in to the woods and thickets and find every bird available also. I know nothing about the two 'meat dogs' that they used for their experiment, but I would be willing to bet that if you took a look at a pedigree for those two dogs, that within a generation or two back you would begin to find big running field trial dogs
Could it be that long ago Americans were BS'd into thinking that the best meat dogs came from horse back FT blood. For years we've had a game that gauged the best bird dogs yet had nothing to do with hunting. It's been stated how many times on this thread that trials ain't hunting and hunting dogs are not trial dog.
Tammy,

You may not think that is saying something bad about trial dogs, but it is as offensive as saying all Hunting Test dogs are boot lickers and wouldn't know a wild bird from cow poop.

Your attitude is why these debates are so boring. You and others, including the OP, insult and poison the discussion with hatefullness. Such as stating the prowess of trial dogs is BS, or the misscharacterization of a serious article.

This really is not worth my time. I do not care what you think.

Neil
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3187
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 12:46 pm
Location: Central Arkansas

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Neil » Tue Feb 10, 2015 8:35 pm

Vernal Pike wrote:
ACooper wrote:. I can't even believe people continue this crap about trial bred dogs not being "bird dogs" get a grip.
You might want to reread the opening post written by Brad Harter.
FT pointing dogs are bird dogs but maybe not as good "hunting bird dogs" according to the research in the op.
That's not my opinion, but rather the data presented in this study.
FT pointing dogs at Ames were missing birds.
That is a lie, no such data concerning the ability of trial dogs was given, nor suggested.

Mountaineer
GDF Junkie
Posts: 1630
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 7:23 pm
Location: State?...The one where ruffed grouse were.

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Mountaineer » Tue Feb 10, 2015 8:53 pm

Labeling the information quoted in the opening post a "Study" would be a bit of an overreach. :D

From a non-FTer, FT dogs are fine birddogs, shotrtgrass to alder runs, as can be the dogs that would never have the fine points that it often takes to win a FT where competitiveness renders the fine points IT on many days.
I prefer washed-out of FTing dogs...there are many and they often need homes.
The dogs do take an understanding of what they are doing when they are running and a faith that they will be honest with their birds when one is found.
Beyond that, it takes an honest look at oneself to discover if the gift that any dog gives is a fit.

I think many folks do not speak well of FT dogs as "hunter's dogs" or dam them with faint praise because they feel out of control when such a dog is down and that can lead them to feeling embarrassed if others are around.
Never understimate the importance some folks place on being seen by others as being....in control.
That said, a growing reduction of room for even a moderate running dog can find benefits to those that stay within double flusher range or so....just the reality for many folks today.

The need tho to put down FT dogs is a common one, especially when the National is being run and soon thereafter, rather than simply hunting with what one prefers.
My guess is that if a Wiggle Wart is not the reason then insecurity or jealousy may be.
I suspect that the dogs, FT related or not, would be the ones most embarrassed...if they could read.

RyanDoolittle
Rank: Champion
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 11:39 pm

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by RyanDoolittle » Tue Feb 10, 2015 9:05 pm

Ms. Cage wrote:Cooper , I have yet to say a bad word about trial dogs . raised some questions, yes. I will say this, WHAT MAKE$ TRIALERS THINK THE'RE DOGS ARE THE ROOSTER OF THE WALK ? What make s trailer think there the gods to the dog world but are the vast minority of the hunting crowd. IMO some are realizing FT kool aid has gotten very stale .

Because FT'er go out an prove their dogs time and time again in competition. So when people are looking at buying a puppy they can see these dogs are proven.

Ya a Mh is a great title, it shows a dog CAN BE TRAINED, but a championship proves the dog is better.

I think what most people who are unfamiliar with trials fail to realize there is a hige dofference between an AF AA dog vs a cover dog vs an AKC Gun dog yet all are trial dogs.

I have asked you a few questions in previos posts if you care to answer them.

User avatar
Grange
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 1003
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:24 pm
Location: Green Bay, WI

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Grange » Tue Feb 10, 2015 9:09 pm

Ms. Cage wrote:
Grange wrote:I would say when it comes to grouse hunting there are a lot of hunters that look for trial dog breeding especially cover dog breedings
Only if they are looking at EP's and ES's.
Grange wrote:. Dogs that prove themselves on the very same game that people are hunting are often looked at favorably
I find this true , even more so with grouse hunters.
Brittanies are another breed that people look for trial lines.

User avatar
Sharon
GDF Junkie
Posts: 9113
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 4:46 pm
Location: Ontario,Canada

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Sharon » Tue Feb 10, 2015 9:56 pm

I don't understand all this banter. Must be cabin fever. My setters have done well in trials and they hunt just f i ne . I think this thread is more about egos than dogs. :wink:


ACooper wrote:
. I can't even believe people continue this crap about trial bred dogs not being "bird dogs" - get a grip.

Exactly. Sh
..............

ALL dogs miss birds . When you're being watched by hundreds at Ames and being videoed , it will be much more obvious that birds are missed than Joe Blows dog in the back forty.
" We are more than our gender, skin color, class, sexuality or age; we are unlimited potential, and can not be defined by one label." quote A. Bartlett

cjhills
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2529
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 7:37 am
Location: aitkin,mn

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by cjhills » Tue Feb 10, 2015 10:09 pm

Neil wrote:
Ms. Cage wrote:
Neil wrote:Particularly for inexperienced dog trainers.
:?

Are you saying FT bred dogs don't handle kindly for the inexperienced ??? Is this why those tend to lean toward MH NAVHDA bred.
Absolutely, not only do big running, independent dogs require more experience to train, they demand more tools, facilities, and much more skill.

I often decline to sell a pup to those that are not prepared. It takes much less skill to train a dog that has a natural inclination to remain within sight 90% of the time.
This Is Just BS, if you can train a 100 yd. dog you can train a 1/2 mile dog. The second dog I owned was a Wildfire Shorthair on the bottom and Snip's Ticked Off on the top. Every dog in his sire's pedigree was a HOF dog all were National caliber trial Dogs. With absolutely no pointing dog experience and no equipment but a check cord, a e-collar, birds, both pen raised and wild, and a lot of determination I trained and titled him in the JH,SH and MH and also hunted him in Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota and Montana September to January. This dogs range was a 1/2 mile or more in the Montana Wheat Fields and he had a couple thousand birds shot over his points. I never once lost this dog he was always with me when I got to the truck. I am not friends with any big name trainers or know any body in high places in the dog world but I know some people who are pretty good dog people and I am pretty proud to hunt my dogs with theirs.
Be aware that trialers are not The only ones who have access to the prairies of the northern Plains. And we also have access to millions of acres of forest land right out our back door.
I just can not quite understand why people who trial need to try so hard to convince every body else their way is the only way. Most of us do not want to spend several years wages to convince our selves we have a good dog. Again My question is If the dogs handle so good why do you need scouts and lose so many dogs.
I am very happy with my dogs and I do not most of them have trial dogs in their pedigrees all find birds'point,honor ,retrieve and come home with me.........................Cj

Dirty Dawger
Rank: Junior Hunter
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 9:48 am

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Dirty Dawger » Tue Feb 10, 2015 10:10 pm

As was already mentioned, there is something out there for us all. It's no wonder the antis have left us to our own demise. We do a super job of cannibalising ourselves.
From someone that has trialed and judged - AF (horseback and cover), AKC, CKC, NSTRA, tested and hunts predominantly wild birds (on the prairies and dense woodlands), I see good dogs and crap in all manor of size and color. It was also stated more than once - a good dog is a good dog. A respected trialer and deceased friend of mine once said, "It's hard to make chicken soup from chicken sh_t."
Last edited by Dirty Dawger on Tue Feb 10, 2015 10:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Sharon
GDF Junkie
Posts: 9113
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 4:46 pm
Location: Ontario,Canada

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Sharon » Tue Feb 10, 2015 10:11 pm

"...........not only do big running, independent dogs require more experience to train, they demand more tools, facilities, and much more skill.

I often decline to sell a pup to those that are not prepared. It takes much less skill to train a dog that has a natural inclination to remain within sight 90% of the time." Neil
...........


This is absolutely true Mr Hills. Sh
" We are more than our gender, skin color, class, sexuality or age; we are unlimited potential, and can not be defined by one label." quote A. Bartlett

User avatar
Sharon
GDF Junkie
Posts: 9113
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 4:46 pm
Location: Ontario,Canada

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Sharon » Tue Feb 10, 2015 10:13 pm

Dirty Dawger wrote:As was already mentioned, there is something out there for us all. It's no wonder the antis have left us to our own demise. We do a super job of cannibalising ourselves.
From someone that has trialed and judged - AF (horseback and cover), AKC, CKC, NSTRA, tested and hunts predominantly wild birds (on the prairies and dense woodlands), I see good dogs and crap in all manor of size and color. It was also stated more than once - a good dog is a good dog. A respected trialer and deceased friend of mine once said, "It's hard to make chicken soup from chicken sh_t."
Did his last name start with W ? Miss that guy.
" We are more than our gender, skin color, class, sexuality or age; we are unlimited potential, and can not be defined by one label." quote A. Bartlett

Dirty Dawger
Rank: Junior Hunter
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 9:48 am

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Dirty Dawger » Tue Feb 10, 2015 10:33 pm

"It takes much less skill to train a dog that has a natural inclination to remain within sight 90% of the time." Neil
This might be why recreationally, new folk looking for a dedicated companion in the home for the most part as well as a foot handled gun dog would be drawn to such dogs. This might also explain why AA FT dogs bred for a great deal of independence would not be the dog of choice for this recreational hunter. Can the pups from the AA FT dogs make a good gun dog? Of course, but it would typically require the services of a more experienced trainer.
In closing, not matter the cover/habitat, a pointing breed of any origin that works within sight 90% of the time is likely not an effective bird finder unless it's worked on dumb pen-raised birds.
I believe a competent effective pointing dog (regardless of breed) should hunt the objectives and take me to the birds, which is why I want a bird dog in the first place - which means it's not within sight 90% of the time. Given the opportunity, smart dogs will adjust to the habitat anyway.
Very independent dogs as in those needed for trialing typically NEED a more experienced handler.

Dirty Dawger
Rank: Junior Hunter
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 9:48 am

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Dirty Dawger » Tue Feb 10, 2015 10:37 pm

That's right Sharon, J.W.

cjhills
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2529
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 7:37 am
Location: aitkin,mn

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by cjhills » Wed Feb 11, 2015 6:21 am

One last Question. How do you judge a dog that is out of sight 90% of the time? I guess two questions. Why does being out of sight have anything to do with finding birds?
Ms. Sharon the trainability of the dog is not based on range.............................Cj

Ms. Cage
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 705
Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 5:01 pm
Location: Hibbing, Mn. 55746

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Ms. Cage » Wed Feb 11, 2015 7:38 am

RyanDoolittle wrote:I have asked you a few questions in previos posts if you care to answer them.
Yes I've been to several trials. I'd rather watch a good UT test or a hot brace at the VC level . It's pleasing to my eyes to watch a dog have 5,6, 8+ finds and keep it together , find after find , retrieve after retrieve . True the hunt test dogs don't run as big as your FT's . We run on allot tighter courses . Walking trials, I enjoyed the one I was at. You could see most of the field . The horse backs, I walked the gallery and maybe saw the dogs 30% of the time. Might have been more enjoyable had I been on a horse and was up higher. I have yet to go to a hunt test and see a handler come out of the field with out his dog.

RayGubernat
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3308
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 11:47 am
Location: Central DE

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by RayGubernat » Wed Feb 11, 2015 8:15 am

cjhills wrote:One last Question. How do you judge a dog that is out of sight 90% of the time? I guess two questions. Why does being out of sight have anything to do with finding birds?
Ms. Sharon the trainability of the dog is not based on range.............................Cj

WHOA!!!

A dog that is out of sight 90% of the time won't be very successful at a trial ...unless you find the dog dead to the front on point...every time.

Even then... one is ONLY referring to ALL AGE performances...which is a VERY select situation, in very special kinds of terrain, and very select dogs and handlers. There is a standard of performance that prizes independent search above virtually everything else.

A dog that is out of sight 90% of the time will not do well in a shooting dog stake...nor should it. A walking shooting dog that is out of it's handler's sight 90% of the time will also probably not do well...unless it is within the sight of the mounted judges and even then, perhaps not....because the standard of performance for these stakes is different from the all age standard of performance...and the dog's ability to hunt for the gun is an important part of that standard.

A hunting dog that is out of sight 90% of the time won't be particularly effective in cover, but in wide open country, especially if it has rolling terrain, a dog can and will "go over the hill" and be out of sight and still hunting effectively.

And since you twisted things around, I'll try to untwist them and close with a question for you to think about ...

If the dog knows where the handler is at all times, why is it important that the handler knows where the dog is at all times? Which one is doing the hunting?

RayG
Last edited by RayGubernat on Wed Feb 11, 2015 9:10 am, edited 3 times in total.

Dirty Dawger
Rank: Junior Hunter
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 9:48 am

Re: FT dogs not such good hunters

Post by Dirty Dawger » Wed Feb 11, 2015 8:55 am

Ms. Cage, I re-iterate there's something out there for us all. The fact that you enjoy NAVHDA is great. I'm glad you didn't say they are "better dogs". Nor do I think they are less capable but each has their forte.
My only reservation in terms of NAVHDA and tests is that they parallel the demands of the hunt club or game farm hunt. It is too synthetic - much like fish in a barrel. Seeing your dog 90% of the time in this venue is not a deterrent for most.
However, as I mentioned before, pointing dogs - by there very nature - are supposed to take their owner/handler to birds and not the other way around. A dog with strictly NAVHDA or test experience will struggle severely on wild birds just as the AA horseback dog might due to the extremity of their finds. Yes....they can make the transition in time but it's really this simple:
- the closer to you (handler) the dog is, the less likely you will have success on wild birds. Like it or not, we sound like a train walking through cover to wild birds. On the prairies the sentinel birds are always on the look out using both ears and eyes. In order for your dog to have 1/2 a chance they must have productive range (depending on species and habitat) and great pace (plodders are useless both on the prairies or in the grouse woods). Capable pointing dogs need an admirable nose to keep up with productive pace, thereby hunkering the birds down and standing them off for the handler to approach and flush. This is why some folk think they have a grouse dog when in fact, they do not. Flash pointing grouse for the gun does not a "pointing" grouse dog make.
And so, the more mechanical co-operative close working dog is OK for certain events but not in trials nor on wild birds.
Now, the expectation of the AF AA dog and a productive hunter is also diverse in terms of independence but seeing a dog 90% of the time is good for NAVHDA/tests or when training young pups. That's about it.
Someone asked how you can judge a dog that you can't see 90% of the time. It's a simple answer, "You can't judge what you can't see." Understanding the demands of the AA pointer/setter is not about not seeing him 90 or 70 or 50% of the time. If you actually attend these events with frequency it is nothing short of amazing to see the enviable control the handlers have of their dogs at extreme ranges. They do sing and/or whistle (another difference between the AA horseback dog and the hunter) but it is truly something to behold. On rare occasion, a dog will make a wrong turn and/or not respond to the handler. I have personally lost the occasional entrant at horseback trials but it was more about the trainer (me) than the dog. That said, dogs - like people - can make a mistake at an AA trial, a NAVHDA event or when hunting. Heck, I even remember missing a bird I shot at.......once. ;)
Lastly, my personal horseback trial dogs retrieved because I required it when hunting.

Post Reply