Scout and hamdler

[Wagonmaster]

Early in my hunting career I was definitely of the mind that I knew better than the dog, where the dog should go. Some disciplines never have gotten over this impulse, that human handler knows better than dog.

Over the course of many years and many dogs I learned some things from dogs. One is that they have a nose that is hundreds of times better than mine. Some dogs seem to be able to stand at the edge of a field and just know which direction to go to get into birds. So I came to the realization that it is best to let dog make most of those decisions for itself.

Now, this is not a perfect world, and even in ND there is not unlimited room for a dog to run, so handler must have some degree of control.

Also, a dog is like any creature, he/she learns over time. So while dog is gifted with an unbelievable sense of smell, dog does not, at 6 months of age, know what the job is yet - to find and hold birds while I show up.

There are two ways to do this. One is to completely control dog, it goes where I want it to and does what I want it to do, just uses that nose in the places I want it to. The other is to be a coach and partner, over the years and many hours afield dog learns what the meaning of the partnership is, and then when it is 4 or 5 starts to do some really astounding things for you. For example, I had a dog that, all by its self, learned to run upwind of a running rooster to cut it off, then establish point with the rooster trapped between he and I. That was really something.

So over time I have left the "control dog" disciplines behind, they are ok but not my cup of tea, and I prefer the partnership type.

[JKP]

There are two ways to do this. One is to completely control dog, it goes where I want it to and does what I want it to do, just uses that nose in the places I want it to. The other is to be a coach and partner, over the years and many hours afield dog learns what the meaning of the partnership is,

I have trouble with the "black and white" approach to the issue..I don't know anyone that totally controls their dog.... and you leave out the third choice .... to let the dog run and follow it. We read the description of not seeing a dog, locating it by GPS, and finding a dog 1.4 miles away, of riding hard 8 minutes on horseback to get to a dog (still on point!!) would seem to indicate that there is indeed this third choice. This is a symbiotic relationship, IMO, much like putting a transmitter on a goose and let it show you the flight patterns of a flock. I have NO problem with this...only wish that we call it what it is. This dog is not handling or maintaining contact. The goose, or bat or killer whale with the electric transmitter is not working for a scientist nor is it cooperative or handling....its just being tracked. Through repetition, it learns that it does not need to maintain contact because the handlr will appear if the dog stands long enough. I think such dogs are not common place and I AM NOT accusing all big running dogs of such behavior. But, carried to the extreme, I don't see how you can otherwise correctly describe such dogs.

The tipping point comes for me when a dog shows it has little interest in knowing where I am....when I turn and the dog shows up 20 minutes later...or it doesn't show and I have to go find it. Finding a dog on point 1.4 miles away means a dog is steady...not necessarily that the dog is working as a "partner". Again, I have no problem with this..its not the dog I want...but I will defend everyone's right to have the dog they want. Technology and electronics have made such dogs more plausible and I accept that. But we must also admit that technology has also made it possible for a dog to become a drone, tracked by satellite, with physical/visual/audio contact with the hunter/handler almost unnecessary...and that we breed for this total independence. To me that is what is being described taken to the extreme...and many seem to think that such a dog is exciting. It is a logical further development of the extreme hunting dog.

A good friend in SD lost a DD several years ago...she was found on point 11 miles away (yes, you read that right...11 MILES away). So was this dog handling....maintaining contact...working for the gun? I guess my question is, at what point do we call it what it is? which to me is putting a feather seeking "drone" in the field and following/tracking it??....product of the video game culture??

BTW...my comments are meant to invoke discussion....I am not being critical.

[brad27]

The tipping point comes for me when a dog shows it has little interest in knowing where I am....when I turn and the dog shows up 20 minutes later...or it doesn't show and I have to go find it. Finding a dog on point 1.4 miles away means a dog is steady...not necessarily that the dog is working as a "partner". Again, I have no problem with this..its not the dog I want...but I will defend everyone's right to have the dog they want. Technology and electronics have made such dogs more plausible and I accept that. But we must also admit that technology has also made it possible for a dog to become a drone, tracked by satellite, with physical/visual/audio contact with the hunter/handler almost unnecessary...and that we breed for this total independence. To me that is what is being described taken to the extreme...and many seem to think that such a dog is exciting. It is a logical further development of the extreme hunting dog.

in case you didn't know:

from the AKC website

The following Regulations become effective August 1, 2009.

The use of tracking devices is solely for locating the dog once the dog is no longer under judgment. Information obtained through the use of a tracking device must not be used to aid the handler, scout or judges. If the host club allows tracking devices, the following regulations on their use will apply.

1. AKC Approved – Only tracking devices approved by the AKC Performance Events Department will be permitted. The collar and receiver must be used as received from the manufacturer. No modifications may be made other than name tags may be added. The collar surface against the dog’s neck shall be flat. Approval will include both the collar and the receiver.

2. Carrying Receivers – The scout may not carry a receiver. The handler may carry a receiver with the permission of the Judges. The receiver must be turned off while the dog is under judgment.

3. Receivers in the Gallery Must Be Turned Off – No one in the gallery shall track the dogs while the dogs are under judgment.

4. No "Outside" Communications – No one shall communicate in any manner with the handler, scout, judges or gallery any information obtained through the use of a tracking device while the dogs are under judgment. This includes the use of cell phones.

5. Receivers May Only Be Used Once the Dog is No Longer Under Judgment – Receivers shall only be activated once judgment has concluded. If a dog is gone at time, the dog is still under judgment until the judges indicate otherwise.

6. Dogs Lost From Previous Braces – If a dog is lost from a previous brace, the handler and scout may use their receivers during the next brace solely for the purpose of locating their dog. Once the dog is located, they must immediately turn off their receivers. They must not communicate any information they obtain through the use of their receivers concerning the dogs currently under judgment.

7. Judges May Not Consider Information Obtained Through Tracking Devices – Judges are not to consider any information obtained through the use of a tracking device. No one shall use information from a tracking device to attempt to influence a judge or to discredit the judge’s decision.

so these dogs that run off and get lost is NOT what is wanted, but it happens.

[ElhewPointer]

The tipping point comes for me when a dog shows it has little interest in knowing where I am....when I turn and the dog shows up 20 minutes later...or it doesn't show and I have to go find it. Finding a dog on point 1.4 miles away means a dog is steady...not necessarily that the dog is working as a "partner". Again, I have no problem with this..its not the dog I want...but I will defend everyone's right to have the dog they want. Technology and electronics have made such dogs more plausible and I accept that. But we must also admit that technology has also made it possible for a dog to become a drone, tracked by satellite, with physical/visual/audio contact with the hunter/handler almost unnecessary...and that we breed for this total independence. To me that is what is being described taken to the extreme...and many seem to think that such a dog is exciting. It is a logical further development of the extreme hunting dog.

in case you didn't know:

from the AKC website

The following Regulations become effective August 1, 2009.

The use of tracking devices is solely for locating the dog once the dog is no longer under judgment. Information obtained through the use of a tracking device must not be used to aid the handler, scout or judges. If the host club allows tracking devices, the following regulations on their use will apply.

1. AKC Approved – Only tracking devices approved by the AKC Performance Events Department will be permitted. The collar and receiver must be used as received from the manufacturer. No modifications may be made other than name tags may be added. The collar surface against the dog’s neck shall be flat. Approval will include both the collar and the receiver.

2. Carrying Receivers – The scout may not carry a receiver. The handler may carry a receiver with the permission of the Judges. The receiver must be turned off while the dog is under judgment.

3. Receivers in the Gallery Must Be Turned Off – No one in the gallery shall track the dogs while the dogs are under judgment.

4. No "Outside" Communications – No one shall communicate in any manner with the handler, scout, judges or gallery any information obtained through the use of a tracking device while the dogs are under judgment. This includes the use of cell phones.

5. Receivers May Only Be Used Once the Dog is No Longer Under Judgment – Receivers shall only be activated once judgment has concluded. If a dog is gone at time, the dog is still under judgment until the judges indicate otherwise.

6. Dogs Lost From Previous Braces – If a dog is lost from a previous brace, the handler and scout may use their receivers during the next brace solely for the purpose of locating their dog. Once the dog is located, they must immediately turn off their receivers. They must not communicate any information they obtain through the use of their receivers concerning the dogs currently under judgment.

7. Judges May Not Consider Information Obtained Through Tracking Devices – Judges are not to consider any information obtained through the use of a tracking device. No one shall use information from a tracking device to attempt to influence a judge or to discredit the judge’s decision.

so these dogs that run off and get lost is NOT what is wanted, but it happens.

So these dogs that are perfect in retrieving in NAVDA that dont retrieve in NOT what is wanted, but it happens?

[brad27]

So these dogs that are perfect in retrieving in NAVDA that dont retrieve in NOT what is wanted, but it happens?

um, is there a word or two missing from this sentence?

[ElhewPointer]

So these dogs that are perfect in retrieving in NAVDA that dont retrieve in NOT what is wanted, but it happens?

um, is there a word or two missing from this sentence?

nope, just a letter mix up. I'll try again for you.

So, these dogs that are perfect in the retrieving in NAVDA, that don't retieve, is NOT what is wanted, but it happens?

[RayGubernat]

JKP -

There is such a thing as context. You seem to be more than wiling to remove things from context and use them to prove a different point.

The dog I referred to as being 1.4 miles ahead at the end of the course and on point, was mentioned IN THE CONTEXT of having an honest dog...one that will wait for you. The dog was also in an American Field Amateur All Age, one hour stake where a huge forward ground application is expected... and was determined to be out of judgement for being gone too long. That is why the Garmin was in my hand...because the dog was gone too long. It happens.

So in the contest of an honest dog, the dog was indeed honest. If the contest were to be a dog that hndled, I would agree that, that day, she did not handle.

Now, IN THE CONTEXT of handling, I referred to the EXACT SAME DOG at a different trial where she executed a four find, two back half hour performance where all the scout had to do was hold the reins of my horse. That day she handled like she was on a string, but I sure wouldn't use that performance to ascertain whether or not I could trust the dog. You conveniently forgot about THAT performance, did you not??

In case you forgot...dogs are NOT drones, not machines...they are flesh and blood and bone...and free will...unless it is intimidated out of them.

Yeah, I would say that your selective usage of the information provided was being kinda negative. What do they say in a courtroom "The truth, the WHOLE truth...."

All Age dogs are expected to be out of sight a good part of the time they are competing. Sometimes they get too far ahead and then encounter a bird or covey and lock up off course and cannot be located in time. It happens. Sometimes they are so wound up that they blast out the front of the course in order to beat out their bracemate. Dogs can be pretty competitive too. What you refuse to either understand or acknowlege is that in an all age competition, the dog is expected to be at the absolute outer edge of the performance envelope and the fact that the dog comes back at all or checks in at all...is a testament to its cooperative nature. It is also a testament to the level of trust that a handler wil invest in a dog that they know will fade out of sight.

It is painfully obvious that a typical all age performance is not your cup of tea. That is fine. Oh and they had that kind of dog loooong before the technology made it "plausible". And they even got some of them around.

Most of the time, a Gundog performance or a hunt test performance is not my cup of tea either, so I do understand.

Also, what you are deliberately juxtaposing is a highly competitive judged horseback event and a foot hunting hunting scenario. You are using information from an extreme horseback competition to draw conclusions about foot hunting. You fail to acknowledge the fact that several posters have stated on several different occasions that these very same "to the limits" dogs will, very often, shorten right up and come hunting, when the handler gets off their horse and grabs a shotgun. And yes...it is a fact. Dogs shorten up when they are hunting... first becasue we ask them to and second because they know that being close to the gun is the best way to get to wrap their gums around a bird.

To rephrase my earlier statement of preference...the tipping point for me is when the dog will not go anyplace that I cannot go to myself, with relative ease along my line of march. A dog should go here, there and everywhere to search for birds...so I don't have to. That is why I feed a dog...to go places in seach of birds, so I don't have to. A dog that does not search independently is pretty much useless to me as a hunter and totally useless to me as a competitor. If I have to watch so I don't trip over the dog, that is not the dog for me. For you perhaps, but not for me. A dog that is unwilling to get out of my sight might be ideal to you but I would likely consider such a dog to be essentially ruined. If one of my dogs were to drop its nose and commence to tracking a rabbit, I would consider that a serious flaw and would correct the dog...strenuously. Different requirements lead to different performance standards.

We each have our preferences and we each can find negative things to say about the types of dogs we do not prefer. That is easy. Finding things we like about dogs we do not prefer is sometimes a little harder to do.

RayG

[brad27]

nope, just a letter mix up. I'll try again for you.

So, these dogs that are perfect in the retrieving in NAVDA, that don't retieve, is NOT what is wanted, but it happens?

sorry i can't remember if you FT,NAVHDA,NSTRA, hunt test, but have you ever had a dog that got picked up, didn't pass, or made a mistake?


i was commenting on JKP's post about the use of GPS as it applys to FTing. especially this part:

So was this dog handling....maintaining contact...working for the gun? I guess my question is, at what point do we call it what it is? which to me is putting a feather seeking "drone" in the field and following/tracking it??....product of the video game culture??

i gave him the rules concerning the use of tracking collars from AKC incase he didn't know them. this is a thread about FTing. i was hoping to clear up any misunderstanding JKP had about the use of said collars.

[slistoe]

brad, he was supporting your position.The NAVHDA guy criticizing the whole spectrum of the game because something undesirable happened once. Turn about is fair play and the dog that is perfect in retrieving in the contrived set up may fail you one day - stuff happens, even to the best of them in every context. And JKP has no misunderstandings about the use of collars in trial competition - he just ignores in order to make rash and stupid statements.

JKP you are putting nothing forth for discussion because you are making completely bogus conclusions contrived to your satisfaction from bits and pieces of internet speculation. I suppose it was a preponderance of All Age trial influence in the breeding of your friends DD that caused it to be gone 11 miles away. After all, isn't that the crux of your supposition - that we are intentionally breeding dogs to WIN in AA competition that run off?

[RayGubernat]

slistoe-

What is it about DD's? It sure seems that they attract a certain kind of owner, at least n these boards. Didn't 'ol Crazydog finally settle on DD's? He was a big fan of field trial dogs too, as I recall.

Man oh Man...give me a guy with a plain 'ol American bred wirehair any day over those import models. The folks that own them seem to just want to kill stuff over their dogs.

Well - except for Fuzznut. She has some outstanding wirehairs. Not my kind of dog, but boy can they ever get the job done in Gundog competition. She handed me my butt in a Gundog stake one time with one of her fuzzballs. They did a great job that day and were fun to watch.

RayG

[ElhewPointer]

nope, just a letter mix up. I'll try again for you.

So, these dogs that are perfect in the retrieving in NAVDA, that don't retieve, is NOT what is wanted, but it happens?

sorry i can't remember if you FT,NAVHDA,NSTRA, hunt test, but have you ever had a dog that got picked up, didn't pass, or made a mistake?


i was commenting on JKP's post about the use of GPS as it applys to FTing. especially this part:

So was this dog handling....maintaining contact...working for the gun? I guess my question is, at what point do we call it what it is? which to me is putting a feather seeking "drone" in the field and following/tracking it??....product of the video game culture??

i gave him the rules concerning the use of tracking collars from AKC incase he didn't know them. this is a thread about FTing. i was hoping to clear up any misunderstanding JKP had about the use of said collars.

Thank you! You made my point. And BTW, yes. All the time.

[brad27]

Thank you! You made my point. And BTW, yes. All the time.

Yeah, I wasn't really sure what you were asking. Still don't understand, but that's ok.