FT dogs not such good hunters

[ACooper]

At this point there have been enough "NAVHDA" bred dogs do well in field trials, and enough "Field Trial" bred dogs do well in NAVHDA that this argument is just silly. A quality dogs is where you find it! How does a dog have to be bred to be considered a "meat dog" and does this automatically mean that it finds more wild birds?

BTW my personnel preference are dogs from what many would consider "NAVHDA" lines that just happen to have the natural inclination to run a little bigger than some people prefer.

Go watch a bunch of trials and you will see a bunch of really good bird dogs, not trial dogs, but bird dogs! You will also see some not so good, you will see dogs that run the horse path and only find easy birds. Same in a test of any sort you see good ones and bad ones.

[Nutmeg247]

...

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....

Guilty on that count...

I also think that for a young dog, simple math makes a bigger running dog more likely to get briefly lost or plain run off until the dog learns to check back in.

I would say the biggest issue for me hasn't been hunting or hunting training related at all, though, but instead has been hiking in steep terrain with mine, where he takes a bit more management than some other dogs might and probably ends up on a leash more as a result.

[shags]

Ray and Ugo,

Your replies are spot on!

Too bad, so sad, that your years of experience probably won't make a dent with the " I went and kind of watched a couple dogs at a field trial once" crowd.

[cjhills]

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

Ray: I was done with this, But I would like to know what I twisted around, Since it was not me who said the dogs were out of sight 90 % of the time. My dogs are generally out of sight when I hunt. Did you ever hunt Ruffed Grouse. Incidentally, Ms. cage has some of the best Ruffed Grouse dogs you can find.
The dog does not know where the handler is at all times and I would imagine it is important to know when the dog is on point somewhere. I like to think we are both doing the hunting and the dog is doing the finding but then again I do not know because I only have hunting dogs.
We do occasionally let our boot lickers out of the bird pen and once in a while we even get to hunt for some wild birds. Even though, from the sound of this, we are not allowed to hunt the western prairie grasslands. Maybe someday a trialer would let me come with them so I could see a good dog before I die. Someday, I even hope to shoot one them wild birds and see what the dog does, Probably run for the truck............Cj

[Garrison]

I was a referee for a youth basketball league when I was just out of High School, these conversations that always pop up at this time of year feel similar to some I have had with crazed eyed parents on the side line. Style is and always will be subjective, some styles may work better or worse for different situations. It amazes me to see the athleticism and determination of a balls to the walls dog as much as I am amazed how a dog can put a track down on a single running bird across a field through the woods and across water. I am usually pretty happy with what my dog does and that is good with me. Find a dog and a life that suits your style and enjoy.

[Elkhunter]

CJ you just need to get out to actual trials so that people feel you are educated when you talk about trialing. The VAST majority of FT dogs, especially AKC gundogs are literally 100-150 yard dogs. The very few that are All Age dogs and big running Shooting Dogs do get out quite a bit more. I have seen "trial dogs" that I would not feed for one week, and I have seen HT test dogs that are super nice. And I have seen MH dogs that are not worth a nickle. Good dogs everywhere. And I foot hunt my winning All Age pointer 50+ days a year. And he is an amazing hunting dog, and wins trials.

[Mountaineer]

...

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....

Guilty on that count...

I also think that for a young dog, simple math makes a bigger running dog more likely to get briefly lost or plain run off until the dog learns to check back in.

I would say the biggest issue for me hasn't been hunting or hunting training related at all, though, but instead has been hiking in steep terrain with mine, where he takes a bit more management than some other dogs might and probably ends up on a leash more as a result.

It's a normal feeling, we all have felt eyes upon us when a dog is performing less.....than as perfect as we sometimes imagine ourselves to be.
However, ignoring that reality by slamming good dogs is less than admirable....I don't get this impression from you.
I do get it from others.

One issue in this perennial message board subject is the using of extremes to define the reckoned problem.
Dogs are either out at a 1/2 mile + or they are truly underfoot.
Neither, I would guess, is correct for most hunters....the vast middle ground will find all measures of dogs to be workable....because, good dogs are where the birds are.
If one can't see them 150 yards away on point in cleatcut or on point 400 yards away in a grassy swale matters little...especially today where, given advancements, location matters less.
Birds get swatted, regardless, and few of us need to shoot 'em all.
A bell in the grouse woods has always been a way to maintain an idea where a dog is.....as they make a loop smelling about. Checking in...to my eye, has always been about the connection of dog to hunter...not training.
They want to be with us, if deserved, as that is where the fun and payoff lies.
There are times when they are full of themselves but, again, a need for being in Control, with a capital C, occassions most of the angst.....and, turthfully, even bad days pass and dogs mature.
Much ado about little.

I think dogs should be on a leash at times.....all of our conditions can require that wise.
No shame exists in a leash.

And terrain can indeed enter into the nicety of a closer dog....most Apps. grouse understand but then again, one must find the birds....which matters most, what matters most, often drives the division of bird hunters re dogs.
It's more of a shame when the division is driven by the need to feel that any individual has a lock on...best.

[cjhills]

CJ you just need to get out to actual trials so that people feel you are educated when you talk about trialing. The VAST majority of FT dogs, especially AKC gundogs are literally 100-150 yard dogs. The very few that are All Age dogs and big running Shooting Dogs do get out quite a bit more. I have seen "trial dogs" that I would not feed for one week, and I have seen HT test dogs that are super nice. And I have seen MH dogs that are not worth a nickle. Good dogs everywhere. And I foot hunt my winning All Age pointer 50+ days a year. And he is an amazing hunting dog, and wins trials.

This is exactly my point. I have attended more trials than you would imagine. I pretty much like all dogs and the competition. I just do not buy that the dog who wins a trial is necessarily a superior dog over the dog who does not. It merely means that on a given in somebody's opinion it was the best dog that they saw. I have also seen some very questionable judging and judges not see some very serious errors.
My problem as I think Ms. Cage and I pretty clearly stated this. Is why can the few trailers on here not except the fact that some people are not interested in trialing. Neither one of us said a word against the dogs. I have dogs that very likely will run with most people's dogs and have bought puppies from some very some very good trial bloodlines, some I liked, some not so much. That is how dogs are they are not all bad or all good they are dogs.
I do agree that the easiest dogs to pass in a hunt test are not the dogs I like, but when you can take a big running dog and get him to run nicely in a 80 acre hunt test you have a pretty special dog and just maybe know a bit about breeding and training.............Cj

[Neil]

CJ,

I can't find anyone saying trial dogs are out of sight 90% of the time except you.

I said most Hunting Test and preserve dogs are in sight 90% of the time.

In American Field a dog can only be absent 1/3 of the brace at any one time, 1/4 in AKC. But even at the NC of 3 hour heats are the dogs in contention gone more than 15 - 20 minutes, and then as Ray said they need to be found to the front on point.

Neil

[Grange]

My problem as I think Ms. Cage and I pretty clearly stated this. Is why can the few trailers on here not except the fact that some people are not interested in trialing. Neither one of us said a word against the dogs.

Not one word against the dogs? :roll: The sentence right before that claim may not mention dogs but it is insulting to trialers.

The below quote is insulting to trialers and our dogs:

What do you mean "if", Gary Lester does that with alot of his dogs including his National Champion Lesters Snow Watch. Oh by the way he also foot hunts this dog.

I'm willing to bet this is the exception. Sure there are the trial dogs that hunt and hunting dogs that trial.. Would you call a dog that hunts wild birds 3,4 times a yr. a hunting dog? Many hunting dogs do that in a weeks time. Week in week out during season.

Another insulting quote to trialers and our dogs:

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.

For someone that has attended more trials than one would imagine the below quote is insulting to trialers and our dogs. If you've seen a number of trials you should know honoring when the opportunity arises is a must and a dog can turn to mark the bird.

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.

The quote below may not be insulting trial dogs, but it is insulting to trialers. Where did a trialer say they think trial dogs are gods? The thread was started to incite trialers to badmouth non-trialing dogs not the other way around.

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 .

Once again if you attended more trials than one would think you would have a pretty good idea of the answer to your "question" below, which is basically nothing more than an insult to trialers and our dogs.

. Again My question is If the dogs handle so good why do you need scouts and lose so many dogs.

And one last insulting quote to trialers:

Maybe someday a trialer would let me come with them so I could see a good dog before I die.

[ezzy333]

I can tell you right now if any one that has posted on this whole thread feels insulted you are wanting to be insulted. Why can anyone state their ideas as good and accurate information while judging everyone else's opinion as being insulting.? Come on people, everyone and every dog is different. There is not a single statement on here that is correct about every dog. It is interesting to hear what each and everyone of you like but that does not make you the guru of dogdom. You each are just a common person that adds to all of our knowledge when you report what you think but add nothing to the betterment of anyone, yourself included, when you tell us about what others think.

[cjhills]

CJ,

I can't find anyone saying trial dogs are out of sight 90% of the time except you.

I said most Hunting Test and preserve dogs are in sight 90% of the time.

In American Field a dog can only be absent 1/3 of the brace at any one time, 1/4 in AKC. But even at the NC of 3 hour heats are the dogs in contention gone more than 15 - 20 minutes, and then as Ray said they need to be found to the front on point.

Neil

You are right. I did Interpret that wrong. Sorry about that.
The dogs we hunt Ruffed Grouse with are almost never in sight. If you can train a 100 yard dog. You can train a dog at 500 yards. That was my point.............................Cj

[mnaj_springer]

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.

Dirty Dawger, I know this is about pointing dogs, and being a spanieler I do not gain much from taking a side, but I do have a problem with this logic. By the logic of this previous statement folks who hunt flushing breeds would have no success, unless we are defining success differently. What do you define it as?

Otherwise this debate has been quite entertaining!

[Grange]

I can tell you right now if any one that has posted on this whole thread feels insulted you are wanting to be insulted. Why can anyone state their ideas as good and accurate information while judging everyone else's opinion as being insulting.? Come on people, everyone and every dog is different. There is not a single statement on here that is correct about every dog. It is interesting to hear what each and everyone of you like but that does not make you the guru of dogdom. You each are just a common person that adds to all of our knowledge when you report what you think but add nothing to the betterment of anyone, yourself included, when you tell us about what others think.

Oh bogus. Those quotes were making claims and asking "questions" that push negative stereotypes about field trialers and field trial dogs. So unless you think the quote below is serious it was an insult.

Maybe someday a trialer would let me come with them so I could see a good dog before I die

[cjhills]

My problem as I think Ms. Cage and I pretty clearly stated this. Is why can the few trailers on here not except the fact that some people are not interested in trialing. Neither one of us said a word against the dogs.

Not one word against the dogs? :roll: The sentence right before that claim may not mention dogs but it is insulting to trialers.

The below quote is insulting to trialers and our dogs:

What do you mean "if", Gary Lester does that with alot of his dogs including his National Champion Lesters Snow Watch. Oh by the way he also foot hunts this dog.

I'm willing to bet this is the exception. Sure there are the trial dogs that hunt and hunting dogs that trial.. Would you call a dog that hunts wild birds 3,4 times a yr. a hunting dog? Many hunting dogs do that in a weeks time. Week in week out during season.

Another insulting quote to trialers and our dogs:

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.

For someone that has attended more trials than one would imagine the below quote is insulting to trialers and our dogs. If you've seen a number of trials you should know honoring when the opportunity arises is a must and a dog can turn to mark the bird.

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.

The quote below may not be insulting trial dogs, but it is insulting to trialers. Where did a trialer say they think trial dogs are gods? The thread was started to incite trialers to badmouth non-trialing dogs not the other way around.

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 .

Once again if you attended more trials than one would think you would have a pretty good idea of the answer to your "question" below, which is basically nothing more than an insult to trialers and our dogs.

. Again My question is If the dogs handle so good why do you need scouts and lose so many dogs.

And one last insulting quote to trialers:

Maybe someday a trialer would let me come with them so I could see a good dog before I die.

Wow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You sure have a thin skin......................Cj

[Grange]

Thin skin has nothing to do with it. I like calling out bull crap and that's what your claim was.

[ezzy333]

I can tell you right now if any one that has posted on this whole thread feels insulted you are wanting to be insulted. Why can anyone state their ideas as good and accurate information while judging everyone else's opinion as being insulting.? Come on people, everyone and every dog is different. There is not a single statement on here that is correct about every dog. It is interesting to hear what each and everyone of you like but that does not make you the guru of dogdom. You each are just a common person that adds to all of our knowledge when you report what you think but add nothing to the betterment of anyone, yourself included, when you tell us about what others think.

Oh bogus. Those quotes were making claims and asking "questions" that push negative stereotypes about field trialers and field trial dogs. So unless you think the quote below is serious it was an insult.

Maybe someday a trialer would let me come with them so I could see a good dog before I die

It didn't offend me so it isn't the statement but just you. It is up to each individual to learn but if instead you want to be offended it is up to you to correct it. Statements are seldom offensive but some people are always offended and others are never.

[Grange]

I can tell you right now if any one that has posted on this whole thread feels insulted you are wanting to be insulted. Why can anyone state their ideas as good and accurate information while judging everyone else's opinion as being insulting.? Come on people, everyone and every dog is different. There is not a single statement on here that is correct about every dog. It is interesting to hear what each and everyone of you like but that does not make you the guru of dogdom. You each are just a common person that adds to all of our knowledge when you report what you think but add nothing to the betterment of anyone, yourself included, when you tell us about what others think.

Oh bogus. Those quotes were making claims and asking "questions" that push negative stereotypes about field trialers and field trial dogs. So unless you think the quote below is serious it was an insult.

Maybe someday a trialer would let me come with them so I could see a good dog before I die

It didn't offend me so it isn't the statement but just you. It is up to each individual to learn but if instead you want to be offended it is up to you to correct it. Statements are seldom offensive but some people are always offended and others are never.

The point isn't whether or not you are offended, but rather that the comments were meant to be insulting despite the claim by the author that nothing was said against trial dogs. Are you even a trialer or own trial dogs?

[Neil]

I don't care enough to be offended, but have to believe the references to field trial BS and drinking the koolaide were intended as insults.

[ezzy333]

I don't care enough to be offended, but have to believe the references to field trial BS and drinking the koolaide were intended as insults.

I think you are right but it will take a lot more than that to insult me. Why would a person who doesn't know me, has no knowledge about the dogs I have or what I do with them be able to insult me? It would take a lot more than the feeble attempt I have read here that are more comical than insulting.

[Neil]

I don't care enough to be offended, but have to believe the references to field trial BS and drinking the koolaide were intended as insults.

I think you are right but it will take a lot more than that to insult me. Why would a person who doesn't know me, has no knowledge about the dogs I have or what I do with them be able to insult me? It would take a lot more than the feeble attempt I have read here that are more comical than insulting.

Agreed

[birddogger]

Well, one thing about it, I think the OP achieved what he set out to do!

Charlie

[Dirty Dawger]

mnaj, I work with flushers as well as pointing dog so I'll start with that.
I define success as opportunities on wild birds that etch themselves forever in my mind - those wonderful gems known as fond memories. Hopefully, I have a fellow bird dogger along that shares in my passion. These memories can't be taken from you by anyone nor can they be taxed. As such, I'm sure we can all offer special moments with our dogs that we cherish - flusher or pointer.
Technically, I like having a dog that is productive/smart and performs with style. Just finding birds doesn't cut it for me. That was the case when I was 16 but a lot has changed since then - within me and around me.
If I read your intent, I'll answer a little more predictably. Grouse where I hunt them are anything but "fool hens". Slamming your truck door puts you at a distinct disadvantage. Hacking a renegade dog is equally useless or at least you'll save on shells.
In this arena (grouse/woodcock) my setter works at a healthy range from me showing only occasionally as she crosses a two-track - always to the front, good pace and very pleasing to the eye. I don't use a bell but she and I just seem to be connected. It's something hard to put to words. I DO use a point-only beeper, which I disable instantly/remotely, the moment she indicates a find. I search her out, flush my bird and the rest is irrelevant. It bothers me more to miss a bird when she has done such an amazing job because I know her greatest reward comes from a flawless gentle retrieve. I often leave her with the bird as she dances in front of me. I tease her, "Show me your bird! Oh...that's a beauty!" She gets all gussied up and prances displaying the bird. I then ask for it and immediately after delivering it, she rolls around on her back in celebration of the experience. I'm sure there are those of you out there that have seen this back roll phenomenon before.
On the prairies two season ago, we faced VERY hi winds, and next to incessant rain, wind can severely alter the activities of the prairie fowl. We lost one day of hunting when the wind reached 69 miles per hour. It subsided to 40 or so, and we only have a narrow window of days left to hunt so out we went. It was very frustrating initially. Emma would raise her head as if to initiate working scent but birds would flush so far ahead, she didn't even notice them! We soon figured out that contrary to what you might expect, the birds don't go into cover to get out of the wind. They do the opposite! They went into the 2nd cut wheat stubble and since hearing was compromised by the wind, they relied heavily on their eyes.
Emma found a couple more covies and both times she stopped to flush - flushes in the vicinity of 80+ yards from her. What happened next had me concerned. Emma was almost 11 years old then. Regrettably, I had to admit she was showing some aging. The next thing you know, she locks up. My hunting partner and I RACED up ahead and attempted flushing but to no avail. We assumed we had not witnessed yet another distant flush. I walked all the way back to Emma, faced forward, tapped her on the head as usual. My heart sunk as she wheeled around and went the way we came! I remember thinking, "OMG....poor thing is losing her mind. I guess this is Emma's last season."
Emma raced frenetically back, turned right, screamed up the field quite some distance away, wheeled to her right out in front of us some 100+ yards and stabbed another point! My friend and I huffed and puffed until we got some 40 yards from the statuesque setter when a large covey of Huns erupted.
We could hardly believe what transpired right before our eyes but no one could argue the facts, especially when she did the exact same thing twice more!
And THAT is my definition of success. A dog that you trust to work the "appropriate" distance from you (whatever the quarry/habitat/conditions dictate - a dog that has faith in you as a partner in this venture (I'll be there for you as best I can), and that......synergy that you develop over time which blossoms into what I have tried valiantly to describe IS my personal definition of success.
What won't cut it? A dog that is so "obedient" as to be mechanical - a poor dog that had no input on his sire & dam and as such does not have the natural ability traits that connoisseurs of this beloved sport long to have, as such he doesn't have the engine, the nose or the smarts, never mind the style/grace - a dog that whose connectivity to his handler restricts him/her from blossoming into the dog he/she could be, it could sound like this, "...he's too far...." (more-often-than-not meaning, if he screws up the bird will be too far to kill), etc. I'm confident MANY of the folk on this fine forum could explain this even better from their own experiences.
Now, here's MY further interpretation of success which should invoke a healthy response. I would prefer to hunt ditch parrots, waterfowl with a flusher than ANY pointing breed however when it comes to Huns, sharptail, grouse, woodock, quail, chukar, I prefer my pointers.
This does NOT mean you can't hunt what you want with what you want. Your question mnaj was directed to me. I hope I have answered your question?

[cjhills]

I don't care enough to be offended, but have to believe the references to field trial BS and drinking the koolaide were intended as insults.

I think you are right but it will take a lot more than that to insult me. Why would a person who doesn't know me, has no knowledge about the dogs I have or what I do with them be able to insult me? It would take a lot more than the feeble attempt I have read here that are more comical than insulting.

Agreed

Neil
I guess Tammie and I could consider The comment that NAVHDA and Hunt Test dogs are only " good for small tracts, pen raise birds and inexperienced handlers" as a insult to our dogs and ourselves. But since we know that this is not even close to the truth and you have the right to your opinion. It certainly is not and insult to me. Time to move on to more important and interesting things....................Cj

[Neil]

Neil
I guess Tammie and I could consider The comment that NAVHDA and Hunt Test dogs are only " good for small tracts, pen raise birds and inexperienced handlers" as a insult to our dogs and ourselves. But since we know that this is not even close to the truth and you have the right to your opinion. It certainly is not and insult to me. Time to move on to more important and interesting things....................Cj

But I did not say that, I said if that was the way I hunted I would join the trend to acquire Test dogs. Others experiences may vary. I thought I was being nice. On every hunt test grounds I have seen, my dogs would be out the far end before I found the stirrup. Not saying that is good or bad, just a fact.

It is not saying that hunt test dogs won't open up and hunt big country, just they did not demonstration it to gain their titles.

I have never intentionally insulted someone else's dog. Never once claimed they sold BS or drank koolaide.

[Dirty Dawger]

Neil, well stated. NAVHDA and hunts tests do compliment the closer working or hunt-club-style dog but it is not a reflection of your dog's ability to hunt wild birds in another environment. Decent dogs can perform at many levels - as many as their owner provides for them to experience.

[Ms. Cage]

I'm glad my skin is not made of parchment paper, not easily insulted. Dirty Dawger, Thanks for enlighting me on what a Ruffed Grouse dog should be like. Living in some of the USA's best Ruffed Grouse country all our lives we know our way around a grouse dog. My husband with 50 experience hunting ruffed grouse over pointing dogs, I think he's learned a trick or two. Howie hunts 4,5+ days a week during our season We are hunters first. If the dogs we own can't go out and handle ruffed grouse consistently they are down the road. Titles here are secondary.

We have nothing against trial dogs . We breed at times to trial dogs, very selectively. All Howie's early dogs were some of the hottest trial blood of there era. Take a look at our website, retired dogs. Today we prefer the NAVHDA bred dog with some crossing in FT blood for many reasons.

Neil,

Neil wrote: Were I limited to only hunting small tracts and shooting preserves I would join in the trend.

I could take this as a insult IF I WAS THIN SKINNED. But all it does is raise a chuckle. My comment about the BS and Kool Aid I meant. It's being said all around you, all the time. Why do you think some are looking to other venues to buy their future dog. I'm not trying to insult, I'm telling you what is being said. My comment about the elite few dictating what every other hunter should own I meant that too.

For years of reading Gun Dog Forum before joining I've read the MH , Navdha dogs take slams by many of the trial folk , all chuckle , chuckle. Let someone say anything negative about trials or dogs and some want you nailed to a cross.

The OP comes on here with a post that goes against some others grain . Right off the bat he's a troller, this and that. OP has a right to his opinion and express it. Many have all been guilty of pointing fingers and being tunnel visioned ,self included. the inability to look at others opinions subjectively.

[Mountaineer]

I'm entering my 51st ruffed grouse season in 2015.
Over that time, with and w/o birddogs, I have seen that it takes a while for any dog to become truly "consistent" on ruffed grouse...if they ever do, to an honest look.
The conditions a pup is subjected to can vary a great deal and make consistency on the birds a tough go.

However, well before the time that they become reasonably proficient, I find that I have grown accustomed to each one and would be loath to send one "down the road."
Perhaps, because I reckon that if the tables were turned then they would exercise greater wisdom and compassion in sending me, inconsistent ol' me, packing.

:roll:

[Chukar12]

Someone find a thread entitled " hunt test dogs aren't good at...."

[Ms. Cage]

I'm entering my 51st ruffed grouse season in 2015.Over that time, with and w/o birddogs, I have seen that it takes a while for any dog to become truly "consistent" on ruffed grouse...if they ever do, to an honest look.The conditions a pup is subjected to can vary a great deal and make consistency on the birds a tough go.However, well before the time that they become reasonably proficient, I find that I have grown accustomed to each one and would be loath to send one "down the road." Perhaps, because I reckon that if the tables were turned then they would exercise greater wisdom and compassion in sending me, inconsistent ol' me, packing.

There are many who can't send a dog down the road. There are many who can send a average dog packing. We can only have 4 dogs. It cost the same to raise a good bird dog as average. Why settle for average. We love them all , for some that don' t fit our standard we cut them loss. By the time the dog has finished his second grouse season we have a good handle on if the dog will cut it.

[Dirty Dawger]

Ms. Cage, if I said something that was inappropriate or insulting towards your dogs, I apologise.
It was my intention to address the question before me. As such, I tried to convey my personal definition of "success". It wasn't meant to challenge, exclude or judge anyone else's dogs.

[Mountaineer]

....There are many who can't send a dog down the road. There are many who can send a average dog packing. We can only have 4 dogs. It cost the same to raise a good bird dog as average. Why settle for average. We love them all , for some that don' t fit our standard we cut them loss. By the time the dog has finished his second grouse season we have a good handle on if the dog will cut it.

Why "settle"...for average?
They must cut timber high off the ground in MN.

I've found that individual dogs, regardless of breed or breeding, develop at different rates...just me, but I'll give a good go in picking genetics and then trust the dog ...well past any imagined cutoff date for $$$s expended.
While many people do, for a bird hunter, giving up on a dog seems rather depressing despite any supposed rationale in a ROI....especially once thought was given toward making a sound decision to breed or purchase in the first place.
I feel that I owe them that much...at the least.
Each to their own in thinking differently at the second ruffed grouse season mark....and I hope the cycle was up in both seasons.

[Ms. Cage]

Ms. Cage, if I said something that was inappropriate or insulting towards your dogs, I apologise.It was my intention to address the question before me. As such, I tried to convey my personal definition of "success". It wasn't meant to challenge, exclude or judge anyone else's dogs.

You've said nothing inappropriate. It's your opinion, all is well!!!

[Sharon]

LOL Are you not trusting that dog yet? ( You know I'm kidding you.)



"Emma found a couple more coveys and both times she stopped to flush - flushes in the vicinity of 80+ yards from her. What happened next had me concerned. Emma was almost 11 years old then. Regrettably, I had to admit she was showing some aging. The next thing you know, she locks up. My hunting partner and I RACED up ahead and attempted flushing but to no avail. We assumed we had not witnessed yet another distant flush. I walked all the way back to Emma, faced forward, tapped her on the head as usual. My heart sunk as she wheeled around and went the way we came! I remember thinking, "OMG....poor thing is losing her mind. I guess this is Emma's last season."
Emma raced frenetically back, turned right, screamed up the field quite some distance away, wheeled to her right out in front of us some 100+ yards and stabbed another point! My friend and I huffed and puffed until we got some 40 yards from the statuesque setter when a large covey of Huns erupted.
We could hardly believe what transpired right before our eyes but no one could argue the facts, especially when she did the exact same thing twice more!
And THAT is my definition of success. A dog that you trust to work the "appropriate" distance from you (whatever the quarry/habitat/conditions dictate - a dog that has faith in you as a partner in this venture (I'll be there for you as best I can), and that......synergy that you develop over time which blossoms into what I have tried valiantly to describe IS my personal definition of success." DD

[birddogger]

The OP comes on here with a post that goes against some others grain . Right off the bat he's a troller, this and that. OP has a right to his opinion and express it. Many have all been guilty of pointing fingers and being tunnel visioned ,self included. the inability to look at others opinions subjectively.
True, but it seems to me that every thread of the OP's is meant to create controversy. If you think I am wrong, you may be right.

Charlie

[whatsnext]

The OP comes on here with a post that goes against some others grain . Right off the bat he's a troller, this and that. OP has a right to his opinion and express it. Many have all been guilty of pointing fingers and being tunnel visioned ,self included. the inability to look at others opinions subjectively.
True, but it seems to me that every thread of the OP's is meant to create controversy. If you think I am wrong, you may be right.

Charlie

How was the post ever an opinion of the op?

[Neil]

The OP comes on here with a post that goes against some others grain . Right off the bat he's a troller, this and that. OP has a right to his opinion and express it. Many have all been guilty of pointing fingers and being tunnel visioned ,self included. the inability to look at others opinions subjectively.
True, but it seems to me that every thread of the OP's is meant to create controversy. If you think I am wrong, you may be right.

Charlie

How was the post ever an opinion of the op?

The title was his inaccurate opinion of the article, which came to no such conclusions. The author and all those that participated do not believe that field trial dogs are not so good hunters. They are friends that I know well.

[bonasa]

It wasn't the OP's opinion. The original content of this thread was a piece copied and pasted to simply illicit an emotional response by the masses on this board.

The title was controversial and thought provoking likely to cause a debate.Which it did.

The 137 posts surely was a trolling victory by the OP. Much like when children tease each other, invariably towards the end of the banter someone always begins yelling and jumping up and down to get their point across while the other is laughing and unphased by the whole situation.

The OP could have created a post titled "Hilliary" with the content of "What do you think about Hilliary Clinton." Oh wait, that did happen!

[Neil]

It wasn't the OP's opinion. The original content of this thread was a piece copied and pasted to simply illicit an emotional response by the masses on this board.

The title was controversial and thought provoking likely to cause a debate.Which it did.

The 137 posts surely was a trolling victory by the OP. Much like when children tease each other, invariably towards the end of the banter someone always begins yelling and jumping up and down to get their point across while the other is laughing and unphased by the whole situation.

The OP could have created a post titled "Hilliary" with the content of "What do you think about Hilliary Clinton." Oh wait, that did happen!

The title is his opinion, not fact supported by the article.

It would be like linking an article about Beganzi and title it "Hillary laughed while people died".

[birddogger]

It wasn't the OP's opinion. The original content of this thread was a piece copied and pasted to simply illicit an emotional response by the masses on this board.

The title was controversial and thought provoking likely to cause a debate.Which it did.

The 137 posts surely was a trolling victory by the OP. Much like when children tease each other, invariably towards the end of the banter someone always begins yelling and jumping up and down to get their point across while the other is laughing and unphased by the whole situation.

The OP could have created a post titled "Hilliary" with the content of "What do you think about Hilliary Clinton." Oh wait, that did happen!

The title is his opinion, not fact supported by the article.

It would be like linking an article about Beganzi and title it "Hillary laughed while people died".

Exactly right! But just to be clear, I didn't say it was his opinion...I said that IMO all of the threads he starts are intended to create controversy.

Charlie

[Dirty Dawger]

Actually, I enjoyed the exchange. I guess we've got TOO much snow here. Can't wait for this stuff to melt so I can get out with my dogs!

[RyanDoolittle]

Actually, I enjoyed the exchange. I guess we've got TOO much snow here. Can't wait for this stuff to melt so I can get out with my dogs!

Chinook came in yesterday and melted it all here. Going to work dogs tomorrow, need to get them ready for the Big Sky Trial in Montana come march. Its a wild bird trial, dont expect to see many dogs on point though; after all these trial dogs cant find or handle wild birds.

[Neil]

Actually, I enjoyed the exchange. I guess we've got TOO much snow here. Can't wait for this stuff to melt so I can get out with my dogs!

Chinook came in yesterday and melted it all here. Going to work dogs tomorrow, need to get them ready for the Big Sky Trial in Montana come march. Its a wild bird trial, dont expect to see many dogs on point though; after all these trial dogs cant find or handle wild birds.

Good luck, it is a great trial and a true test of a prairie type wild bird dog.

[SCT]

Is this the one over on Ulm Bench Ryan, by Great Falls? Are you going to Circle? Both great venues for sharptails and huns.

Steve Tait

[cjhills]

Great Falls has had a nasty winter hope there are some birds left. We had to quit early.........................Cj

[Ms. Cage]

Great Falls has had a nasty winter hope there are some birds left. We had to quit early.........................Cj

We Are, were planning a 2 week trip to that area next fall. What's Fort Benton, about 40 mi. north of Great Falls?

[RLF]

To me, the original poster as well as others such as Mr. Higgins latched on the term 'meat dog' when the part that I believe was more important was "local" meat dogs and local handlers. OF COURSE, dogs raised and groomed in that area exclusively in that terrain are going to enjoy a big advantage over non-local dogs in the bird finding department.

That said, it does concern me that due emphasis is no longer given to bird finding in some FT circuits, especially wild bird work. Back when the Amesian Standard was written and adhered to, and "The Dean Of Field Trial Reporters." Al Hochwalt, was in the bloom of his influence, bird finding was of paramount importance and that was wild bird work in those days. I do not believe this to be so any more in some FT circles.

Still with a variety of circuits, a person looking for a dog, or a stud dog, can see quite few dogs in more or less equal conditions at a trial than most anywhere else.


RLF

[cjhills]

Yes. Northeast Hiway87. we generally spend the Fall out there. Usually from mid September after the snakes hibernate. 'Til about the first of Dec. Got to cold for my travel trailer and a lot of snow. I have a daughter in Great Falls and a lot of dogs in Northeastern Montana. Great Shartail and Hun country...............Cj

[RyanDoolittle]

Is this the one over on Ulm Bench Ryan, by Great Falls? Are you going to Circle? Both great venues for sharptails and huns.

Steve Tait

No idea, I have never been. All I know is its west of great falls. Not sure about circle. I dont own a horse so I am flying by he seat of my pants.

[RyanDoolittle]

We didnt make out so bad yesterday. Spring is in the air here on the prairie the partridge and sharptails are pairing up. He had 6 finds and a NP in 2.5 hours running him on foot. Guess the "hunting dog" would not have had the Non Productive.

Here he is on a pair of Hungarian Partridge, I was at the bottom of the coulee hill. He had been out of sight for about 10 minutes when I started climbing to find him standing. I am really thinking I need to step up my search for a horse.

DSC_0385