Have foot hunting dogs changed?

Birddogz · Post by **Birddogz** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 10:36 am

I think it should be noted that their are many places in the U.S. that have enough birds to make a good bird dog. My point is that it takes as many birds as you can get your dog on, and as many DIFFERENT birds and locations as possible to achieve the potential of the dog. Many people don't have access to lots of wild birds, and this is what has changed the bird dog. They don't have as many opportunities as they once did. Especially in the South East. The numbers of birds are way down, and deer leases have screwed up bird hunting as well. That is what has CHANGED how foot dogs grow as a bird dog more than anything else.

Also, if you love bird hunting and there is any possibility to make a move to a state with nice bird populations, do it. It makes training a dog sooooo much easier.

JKP · Post by **JKP** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 10:40 am

Being new here, I find this site comical. I have had several folks PM me, all but 1 have been extremely helpful and pleasant, thanks. The other, not so much. These threads about events, trainers, FT vs everyone esle, FT dogs, ect, and folks just cant accept that what works for one, wont work for everyone and that "maybe" no one is "right". I posted a question, and received PMs from a guy who pretty much told me Im a retard and to give the dog up and his advise was given in hopes of "saving a pointing dog". I also got some very helpful and thoughtful ones as well. Now, I certainly cant speak for everyone, obviouisly, but if/when I start a thread (one of which was locked) I certainly not doing it with the intent of starting an arguement. Yet it seems there is a handful of guys who seem intent on hi jacking every thread, instead of letting those who would like reply, do so. it should be OK to post an opinion??? It should be ok to have differeing opinions without one of the 2 being an idiot??

If you don't know by now, many folks with dogs need to get a life. Its not about the dogs but about themselves...being right...being the best at something...rising above the pack..somewhere...somehow in life. We live in the age of where all can express themselves endlessly, with or without knowledge, and the internet has become just as much an avenue for self therapy as anything else. We talk in black and white, when in reality its just infinite shades of gray, often indiscernible from one another. Many need to think that they have risen above the others....others just are happy shooting birds and really don't care if they are walking behind the proclaimed "Cadillac" of bird dogs. What is laughable is that most couldn't eat all the game their dogs find....so that a comparison in practical terms borders on the absurd and we are reduced to talking about 3 hour stakes, tail angles, head crank and poses on the horizon.

Realizing all this, you just have to glean what is useful and let the ego, bravado, insecurity and frustration go....just let it go.

tn red · Post by **tn red** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 11:03 am

Birddogz wrote:I think it should be noted that their are many places in the U.S. that have enough birds to make a good bird dog. My point is that it takes as many birds as you can get your dog on, and as many DIFFERENT birds and locations as possible to achieve the potential of the dog. Many people don't have access to lots of wild birds, and this is what has changed the bird dog. They don't have as many opportunities as they once did. Especially in the South East. The numbers of birds are way down, and deer leases have screwed up bird hunting as well. That is what has CHANGED how foot dogs grow as a bird dog more than anything else.

Also, if you love bird hunting and there is any possibility to make a move to a state with nice bird populations, do it. It makes training a dog sooooo much easier.

Easier in no way makes better!!Maybe this is where the difference is some places are just easier!!

Birddogz · Post by **Birddogz** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 11:10 am

Come on Red, you mean to tell me that all things being equal that you would not rather have lots of covies in easy proximity? When I say it makes things easier, I mean all training methods aside, any great trainer I have ever talked with will tell you.."Just hunt them as much as possible and get them into as many birds as possible." A dog in bird heaven is going to be able to learn far faster than a dog with very few birds. It's like expecting kids to learn science with only 40 pages of a book, and the other kids get the whole book.

I honestly cannot for the life of me see how this is even a discussion.

Chukar12 · Post by **Chukar12** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 11:20 am

any great trainer I have ever talked with will tell you.."Just hunt them as much as possible and get them into as many birds as possible

I am really interested in learning. Good dog work has taken a dominant position over hunting for me, in fact I attend seminars with professionals whenever I can to learn and see multiple dogs as access for me to that number of dogs is limited. I have researched extensively, Smith, West/Gibbons, Hickox, Perfection, and I target the field trial pros and try to pick their pockets. They are a bit less "free" with their advice. A great deal of what they tell me is not necessarily congruent with your quote above. Can you share the professionals that have educated you and if you have access do they have anything published you can reccomend?

Thanks, Joe

JKP · Post by **JKP** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 11:25 am

You need to run young dogs on wild birds. If we are going to identify true genetic predisposition, then we need to see 6-8 month old pups on wild birds....watch what contact does...which ones turn on sooner...degree of independence...confidence...which ones instinctively show caution...which ones are greedy.....which ones let us walk up and possibly gun the bird....which ones go pick it up and head back our way...can be talked in and held and praised...will let us take the bird with less pressure....

After we have trained it...we don't have the option of finding that out anymore...then we're breeding trained results. I take all my pups of the year to ND...that's what the trip is really about...I break the gun and I walk and in a few days to a week, I know a great deal about what I bred...and what I need to do with them. I'd rather breed dogs that do more naturally than dogs that I can train to do what I want. You can do it with planted birds...but not as well IMO.

Chukar12 · Post by **Chukar12** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 11:39 am

[quoteYou need to run young dogs on wild birds. If we are going to identify true genetic predisposition, then we need to see 6-8 month old pups on wild birds...You can do it with planted birds...but not as well IMO.][/quote]

I agree, and doubt anyone would argue that wild birds are best, and I personally agree with the assessment and process for 6-8 month old dogs. Then what? I believe this is when the future expectations and the dog, steadiness, style, etc... come into play.

Post by **kninebirddog** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 11:41 am

JKP wrote:You need to run young dogs on wild birds. If we are going to identify true genetic predisposition, then we need to see 6-8 month old pups on wild birds....watch what contact does...which ones turn on sooner...degree of independence...confidence...which ones instinctively show caution...which ones are greedy.....which ones let us walk up and possibly gun the bird....which ones go pick it up and head back our way...can be talked in and held and praised...will let us take the bird with less pressure....

After we have trained it...we don't have the option of finding that out anymore...then we're breeding trained results. I take all my pups of the year to ND...that's what the trip is really about...I break the gun and I walk and in a few days to a week, I know a great deal about what I bred...and what I need to do with them. I'd rather breed dogs that do more naturally than dogs that I can train to do what I want. You can do it with planted birds...but not as well IMO.

Wish that was remotely realistic where I live..I would love to have a place where I could take young dogs and train on wild birds..but it isn't going to happen where I live and specially with the out of control fuel prices

So solid genetics and breeding program and what I do have to work with which is pigeons and for finishing touches quail and a dog heads out and if they have it they will figure out about finding birds...if not then happy stumbling..

I have seen some dogs from certain programs that miss the boat so bad they could care less about any bird..a few wouldn't point a plate of meat to save their lives. so on one hand yes there are many dogs that are better with more of the bred in instincts and then there are those that come from programs where the person that allows their dogs to procreate with no regards to what they are allowing to hit the ground.

JKP · Post by **JKP** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 12:06 pm

I agree, and doubt anyone would argue that wild birds are best, and I personally agree with the assessment and process for 6-8 month old dogs. Then what? I believe this is when the future expectations and the dog, steadiness, style, etc... come into play.

Can't argue with that. I have a bitch that has been steady on her birds since I shot a hun over here at 6 months of age. She's a Vdog so she won't have the style the FT guys are looking for....but she's the best natural bird finder and pointing dog I have ever owned...no CC training...table...whoa post...just took away the chase after the fall and she was steady through the sequence by the time she was a year old...and she's a bird finding machine (not good for trials

).

To get back to the OP, as a kid I remember my father and others buying dogs and just taking them hunting...the ones that did it naturally and matured quick, got bred.....the ones that needed less training, hacking...there were no ecollars...most had a bone yard somewhere (they had beagles too) or gave away dogs. I think it was more about natural selection back then...at least what I saw...we shot rabbits over those setters too (guess I'll get thrown off GDF now

).

Post by **kninebirddog** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 12:08 pm

JKP wrote:
I agree, and doubt anyone would argue that wild birds are best, and I personally agree with the assessment and process for 6-8 month old dogs. Then what? I believe this is when the future expectations and the dog, steadiness, style, etc... come into play.
Can't argue with that. I have a bitch that has been steady on her birds since I shot a hun over here at 6 months of age. She's a Vdog so she won't have the style the FT guys are looking for....but she's the best natural bird finder and pointing dog I have ever owned...no CC training...table...whoa post...just took away the chase after the fall and she was steady through the sequence by the time she was a year old...and she's a bird finding machine (not good for trials ).

To get back to the OP, as a kid I remember my father and others buying dogs and just taking them hunting...the ones that did it naturally and matured quick, got bred.....the ones that needed less training, hacking...there were no ecollars...most had a bone yard somewhere (they had beagles too) or gave away dogs. I think it was more about natural selection back then...at least what I saw...we shot rabbits over those setters too (guess I'll get thrown off GDF now ).

No that's just 30 lashes LMAO..

Birddogz · Post by **Birddogz** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 12:12 pm

Chukar12 wrote:
any great trainer I have ever talked with will tell you.."Just hunt them as much as possible and get them into as many birds as possible
I am really interested in learning. Good dog work has taken a dominant position over hunting for me, in fact I attend seminars with professionals whenever I can to learn and see multiple dogs as access for me to that number of dogs is limited. I have researched extensively, Smith, West/Gibbons, Hickox, Perfection, and I target the field trial pros and try to pick their pockets. They are a bit less "free" with their advice. A great deal of what they tell me is not necessarily congruent with your quote above. Can you share the professionals that have educated you and if you have access do they have anything published you can reccomend?

Thanks, Joe

John Cerda-KC Wes Vickers-Wichita Jim Keller-NE Len Forbush-Ohio-deceased

Jim Keller was the most consistent with this position. Now, of course the dog needs to be whoa broke/FFed, but after that it is wild birds. Here is his phone number 402-724-4022

Chukar12 · Post by **Chukar12** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 12:21 pm

Can't argue with that. I have a bitch that has been steady on her birds since I shot a hun over here at 6 months of age. She's a Vdog so she won't have the style the FT guys are looking for....but she's the best natural bird finder and pointing dog I have ever owned...no CC training...table...whoa post...just took away the chase after the fall and she was steady through the sequence by the time she was a year old...and she's a bird finding machine (not good for trials ).

To get back to the OP, as a kid I remember my father and others buying dogs and just taking them hunting...the ones that did it naturally and matured quick, got bred.....the ones that needed less training, hacking...there were no ecollars...most had a bone yard somewhere (they had beagles too) or gave away dogs. I think it was more about natural selection back then...at least what I saw...

I think that this is a productive discussion and an honest answer. This is not confusing to a simpleton like myself. Some dogs will break themselves, it is more likely that you have to instill some level of discipline. The process by which that is done is where the confusion comes in. You can break a dog early and if you are good not ruin them and they will be not only functional but perhaps excel as a field dog. Especially when we consider the restrictions of many modern hunters. Style is just window dressing from the training perspective, but a barometer of breeding as well, stylish dogs generally carry excellent characteristics as a predator. Trainers of trial dogs will work to preserve that and their training arguments will reflect that. As far as the other....

we shot rabbits over those setters too (guess I'll get thrown off GDF now ).

Chukar12 · Post by **Chukar12** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 12:33 pm

Jim Keller was the most consistent with this position. Now, of course the dog needs to be whoa broke/FFed, but after that it is wild birds. Here is his phone number 402-724-4022

Oh, thank for the number but I won't bother him with a call. Now the items in bold are important details. You cannot be hunting young dogs congruently on wild birds and be teaching these important building blocks can you?

The other interesting thing about Mr. Keller who does a lot with AKC hunt tests if memory serves, are his comment about how important filed trials have been in the development of GSP's. His position is that the breeding and development of field trialers has benefitted hunters and the NSTRA, NAVHDA, folks etc...He is convinced it seems that breeding for trial success has been quite transferable to these other venues.

Did you get a chance to talk any of that in person with him, I only had access to his quotes in print?

Birddogz · Post by **Birddogz** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 12:50 pm

I have talked to him for hours and hours. In person, and on the phone. I really think you should call him and ask what he thinks of HB FTs.

You would be surprised.

First thing I like to do with a dog is put them into lots and lots of birds, and build that prey drive. Let them be a pup. Then when season is over it is time to FF and whoa break the dog. I really think the wild birds and long runs go a LONG way to making the dog that first year. Now, that repetition in the next 2 years, in as many birds as possible, and as many days afield as possible is what makes a dog, in my opinion. Shooting planted birds does not improve the dog that much.

Post by **kninebirddog** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:00 pm

I had a very nice little female that was trained strictly on pigeons and released quail. I sold her because she wouldn't pass OFA was a tough sale because I really liked this dog she was high head high tail scored well in the trials I run pointers judges even liked her run and style. Anyways I sold her to a wild bird hunter ..the first time he put her on the ground she got the grand slam of AZ Gamble Scalie and Mearns first day she did such a good job the guy actually went and got a guides license and there are many people who enjoy how she works and points and finds birds

Guess I should go tell the guy she isn't a good wild bird dog because she was raised on planted birds :roll:

That is the very statements you make that get people on the defensive ..we get the picture You are lucky you have wild birds at your disposal but Please Stop with how you degrade the way another person may have to train and in many places is the only way a person can train and FYI many of those dogs that have planted birds shot over them go on to make pretty nice wild bird dogs despite what you may think.

Oh PS consider this a warning as you placed the bait out for others to get upset with ..Think about your next post.

Birddogz · Post by **Birddogz** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:15 pm

This is ridiculous! I can't be honest, because it may hurt people's feelings? Come on! That is LIBERAL HOG WASH! This is a hunting forum/dog forum, not a PETA gathering.

I NEVER said that a dog trained on planted birds can't be a good dog, but they will improve far faster on wild birds. If that makes people feel bad, then they can't handle reality. Dogs that hunt wild birds a lot will develop far better. The guy that took your dog would say the same! I have lived where there are lots of birds, and where there aren't many. I like lots!

I am in no way saying people who live in birdless areas shouldn't hunt, but if they want the best dog that they can have, they will get them to a trainer, or a state where they can expose them to MULTIPLE types of wild upland birds. I am not trying to offend anyone, I am speaking from experience.

nikegundog · Post by **nikegundog** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:25 pm

I don't know if I understand your logic on the MULTIPLE types of birds. If someone only pheasant hunts, I don't think there is any benefit on putting them on any types of other birds. Could you expand on that.

Chukar12 · Post by **Chukar12** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:31 pm

I have talked to him for hours and hours. In person, and on the phone. I really think you should call him and ask what he thinks of HB FTs. You would be surprised.

I guess if he responded differently than he did in the fourth paragraph in this article posted on his website we would have to question his credbility?

I am trying to draw a link to the original question in this post and the one about field trial dogs. I believe real trainers want all the dog they can get. There is enough difference in the venues or activities in the bird dog world to cause confusion, and a forum allows for various opinions to be shared without regard for the credibilty of the poster. Therefore, the recepient must be aware and prudent in drawing the right conclusions. I know that k-nine has touched hundreds of dogs, her venue is slightly different than mine but our dogs run the same blood, same with Ezzy's and many other Britt owners, you included Birddogz. I would guess that JKP as a breeder and in my suppositions from his written perspective has touched/trained not a few dogs, but I am going to go dozens or hundreds. We do not run the same but I have a hard time disputing his point of view.

I will say this again, foot hunting dogs have not changed, but people and the foot hunters have.

Post by **kninebirddog** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:31 pm

Birddogz wrote:This is ridiculous! I can't be honest, because it may hurt people's feelings? Come on! That is LIBERAL HOG WASH! This is a hunting forum/dog forum, not a PETA gathering.

I NEVER said that a dog trained on planted birds can't be a good dog, but they will improve far faster on wild birds. If that makes people feel bad, then they can't handle reality. Dogs that hunt wild birds a lot will develop far better. The guy that took your dog would say the same! I have lived where there are lots of birds, and where there aren't many. I like lots!

I am in no way saying people who live in birdless areas shouldn't hunt, but if they want the best dog that they can have, they will get them to a trainer, or a state where they can expose them to MULTIPLE types of wild upland birds. I am not trying to offend anyone, I am speaking from experience.

Your communication skills lack severely....No one has ever said you can't post about what You experience but we are consistently asking and telling you to watch HOW you post...as many of your post are very baiting to putting people on the defensive.

and That is what I mean By THINK about your next post..Let me spell it out a little clearer THINK about How you post..stop before you hit that submit button and put yourself in someone elses shoes and reread your post. I get quite a few PMs from people who also feel like you are belittling to others . I have a couple people Pm'ing me asking questions because they are uncomfortable that you will go off on wild bird hunt wild bird and they are wanting answers for what they have available to them..

Wording is everything and we would hope after time and time again and how you are at the main center of quite a bit of the posts being locked that you could figure it out that you are offensive in the WAY you post...Other people here train on wild birds and are able to express themselves in a non offensive manner..Wish you could do the same.

Post by **kninebirddog** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:34 pm

Chukar12 wrote:
I have talked to him for hours and hours. In person, and on the phone. I really think you should call him and ask what he thinks of HB FTs. You would be surprised.
I guess if he responded differently than he did in the fourth paragraph in this article posted on his website we would have to question his credbility?

I am trying to draw a link to the original question in this post and the one about field trial dogs. I believe real trainers want all the dog they can get. There is enough difference in the venues or activities in the bird dog world to cause confusion, and a forum allows for various opinions to be shared without regard for the credibilty of the poster. Therefore, the recepient must be aware and prudent in drawing the right conclusions. I know that k-nine has touched hundreds of dogs, her venue is slightly different than mine but our dogs run the same blood, same with Ezzy's and many other Britt owners, you included Birddogz. I would guess that JKP as a breeder and in my suppositions from his written perspective has touched/trained not a few dogs, but I am going to go dozens or hundreds. We do not run the same but I have a hard time disputing his point of view.

I will say this again, foot hunting dogs have not changed, but people and the foot hunters have.

Cool article

from someone that gets to train on wild chukars...Wish I could and wish my knees could handle it..Also congrats on your dogs last placement..and also I hear your dog is truly very versatile

Birddogz · Post by **Birddogz** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:46 pm

I can say this in total honesty. I have never made fun or intimidated anyone asking questions on this forum. I give my honest opinion. I don't see how anyone could be intimidated by anything I have said.

Birddogz · Post by **Birddogz** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:48 pm

Chukar12 wrote:
I have talked to him for hours and hours. In person, and on the phone. I really think you should call him and ask what he thinks of HB FTs. You would be surprised.

I guess if he responded differently than he did in the fourth paragraph in this article posted on his website we would have to question his credbility?

I am trying to draw a link to the original question in this post and the one about field trial dogs. I believe real trainers want all the dog they can get. There is enough difference in the venues or activities in the bird dog world to cause confusion, and a forum allows for various opinions to be shared without regard for the credibilty of the poster. Therefore, the recepient must be aware and prudent in drawing the right conclusions. I know that k-nine has touched hundreds of dogs, her venue is slightly different than mine but our dogs run the same blood, same with Ezzy's and many other Britt owners, you included Birddogz. I would guess that JKP as a breeder and in my suppositions from his written perspective has touched/trained not a few dogs, but I am going to go dozens or hundreds. We do not run the same but I have a hard time disputing his point of view.

Look, I don't know what you are trying to say? I know I have had many private conversations with Jim, and I know what he thinks.

JKP · Post by **JKP** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:49 pm

That is the very statements you make that get people on the defensive ..we get the picture You are lucky you have wild birds at your disposal but Please Stop with how you degrade the way another person may have to train and in many places is the only way a person can train and FYI many of those dogs that have planted birds shot over them go on to make pretty nice wild bird dogs despite what you may think.

Good word...I don't hear anyone saying it can't be done on planted birds but wild birds are best...but is there anyone here that doesn't think that real bird hunting teaches a dog beyond training? Holy cow..I don't see any insult here.
Phez in thin CRP are a whole lot more difficult that a pen raised hen tucked in the high grass. Jumpy sharpies on a windy day are a WHOLE lot more difficult than chukar from the coop. Its not the easy birds that define a dog...its the tough ones.
You get to ND in Nov, and if a dog doesn't point those sharpies from WAY down yonder...and if you don't speed walk towards the find...you aren't shootin birds.

Come on....training birds aren't near as tough as the wild kind....folks here don't believe that? I train with pen birds too...but I measure the dog on what it does in the CRP and in the grouse woods...on the difficult birds. (Would anybody call throwing a Muscovy in a farm pond duck searching?). Any dog can point a rooster that's roosted in the late afternoon. You train with what you got...but you don't measure a dog by the games (save for the most difficult venues/wild game trials)...IMO you measure them against the tough opponents...the tough birds. I have seen enough top scoring and titled dogs that were not great bird dogs to know that.

What this has to do with the OP, I'm not sure.

Dogs that hunt wild birds a lot will develop far better.

Why do trainers take young dogs south in the winter or north in Aug/Sept?

Brushbustin Sporting Dogs · Post by **Brushbustin Sporting Dogs** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:50 pm

T

Birddogz wrote:I have talked to him for hours and hours. In person, and on the phone. I really think you should call him and ask what he thinks of HB FTs. You would be surprised.

First thing I like to do with a dog is put them into lots and lots of birds, and build that prey drive. Let them be a pup. Then when season is over it is time to FF and whoa break the dog. I really think the wild birds and l
ong runs go a LONG way to making the dog that first year. Now, that repetition in the next 2 years, in as many birds as possible, and as many days afield as possible is what makes a dog, in my opinion. Shooting planted birds does not improve the dog that much.

Well I consider Jim a friend and guarantee I know him a bit better than you.... have you ever trained with him at his house with all his "wild" birds he trains on daily??

Birddogz · Post by **Birddogz** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:53 pm

Brushbustin Sporting Dogs wrote:T
Birddogz wrote:I have talked to him for hours and hours. In person, and on the phone. I really think you should call him and ask what he thinks of HB FTs. You would be surprised.

First thing I like to do with a dog is put them into lots and lots of birds, and build that prey drive. Let them be a pup. Then when season is over it is time to FF and whoa break the dog. I really think the wild birds and l
ong runs go a LONG way to making the dog that first year. Now, that repetition in the next 2 years, in as many birds as possible, and as many days afield as possible is what makes a dog, in my opinion. Shooting planted birds does not improve the dog that much.
Well I consider Jim a friend and guarantee I know him a bit better than you.... have you ever trained with him at his house with all his "wild" birds he trains on daily??

I have trained with him and talk to him often. He told me wild birds is the key after the training is established. How can you argue that?

Brushbustin Sporting Dogs · Post by **Brushbustin Sporting Dogs** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:58 pm

Birddogz wrote:
Brushbustin Sporting Dogs wrote:T
Birddogz wrote:I have talked to him for hours and hours. In person, and on the phone. I really think you should call him and ask what he thinks of HB FTs. You would be surprised.

First thing I like to do with a dog is put them into lots and lots of birds, and build that prey drive. Let them be a pup. Then when season is over it is time to FF and whoa break the dog. I really think the wild birds and l
ong runs go a LONG way to making the dog that first year. Now, that repetition in the next 2 years, in as many birds as possible, and as many days afield as possible is what makes a dog, in my opinion. Shooting planted birds does not improve the dog that much.
Well I consider Jim a friend and guarantee I know him a bit better than you.... have you ever trained with him at his house with all his "wild" birds he trains on

I have trained with him and talk to him often. He told me wild birds is the key after the training is established. How can you argue that?

Jim trains on quail tied to pop bottles!

Post by **kninebirddog** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 2:02 pm

Birddogz wrote:I have talked to him for hours and hours. In person, and on the phone. I really think you should call him and ask what he thinks of HB FTs. You would be surprised.

First thing I like to do with a dog is put them into lots and lots of birds, and build that prey drive. Let them be a pup. Then when season is over it is time to FF and whoa break the dog. I really think the wild birds and long runs go a LONG way to making the dog that first year. Now, that repetition in the next 2 years, in as many birds as possible, and as many days afield as possible is what makes a dog, in my opinion. [b]Shooting planted birds does not improve the dog that much.[/b]

it is stuff like that right there..it is how you worded it

how else is someone to take that other then for those of us who want to train our dogs and all we have is planted birds to work with I guess I should just hang it up all the hard work because my dog will not improve because of the type of bird I shoot. My dogs will go wild bird hunt

might try hunting something other then a field full of pheasant ...dogs here may run all morning and you might find a small covey of birds you might get lucky and have a good year and find some decent covies

Gambles are hard on dogs much less pups I see quite a few people try and do the wild only problem they can hunt from Oct to feb and if they are lucky figure out where a covey is only to be in a an area of a boat load of prickly pear to finally having a young dog have nothing but extreme little bird contact but a boat load of cactus spines...wonderful way to make a bird dog but hey listening to you don't bother with planted birds as it won't improve the dog much at all

again I say Think about What you post and How you post if that isn't clear enough I don't know how else to explain it any clearer to how offensive you can be and how You will continue to have conflict

Elkhunter · Post by **Elkhunter** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 2:14 pm

So what Jim tells BD and what he publishes in GunDog Magazine are different..... Who do we trust??

Birddogz · Post by **Birddogz** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 2:44 pm

[Well I consider Jim a friend and guarantee I know him a bit better than you.... have you ever trained with him at his house with all his "wild" birds he trains on

I have trained with him and talk to him often. He told me wild birds is the key after the training is established. How can you argue that?[/quote][/quote]

Jim trains on quail tied to pop bottles![/quote]

No kidding. I am talking about after the dog has had the initial training. He has told me 20 times that wild birds make the dog. If you don't believe me ask him.

mcbosco · Post by **mcbosco** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 2:46 pm

Is it fair to say the foot hunting breeds and certain lines known for foot hunting are generally larger, calmer dogs?

Mountaineer · Post by **Mountaineer** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 2:49 pm

Birddogz wrote:I know dogs are trained better now because of technology, but does the training make up for the fact that the bird hunting was far better then. For instance, in Ohio in the 50s there were pheasants and quail everywhere....

Well...pheasants were never quite "everywhere" in Ohio, no.

While I recall quail leaving occassional wide swaths of tracks in the snow about 1958-1960, Quail were only a transitory Ohio story...a bit too much N for them.

But when Ruffed Grouse were thick in Ohio in the 60s and 70s tho, there was the chance to develop a true grouse dog.
A ruffed grouse dog does need wild birds to fit the name.

JKP · Post by **JKP** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 3:01 pm

Is it fair to say the foot hunting breeds and certain lines known for foot hunting are generally larger, calmer dogs?

I don't think that's a generalization that can be made...no. Known too many dogs from all backgrounds that had trouble being calm. I think that there are certain venues that put more emphasis on calm dogs...like NAVHDA and especially the Euro clubs. I would say that foot hunting dogs are more dependent or have been made so by their handler...cause they want the dog that way. To be honest, the number of times I have walked to a point over 300 yds away and had wild birds sit that long till I got there ain't many. Early season sharptail (juveniles) maybe....occasional roosting phez...huns if you can find them (numbers are down)....so for me a closer working dog just offers more shooting. Even Gambels down in AZ can start running..like little track stars!!! Can't speak to Bobs...I think they probably sit better. I know a dog 2-300 yds away in the grouse woods where I hunt would be useless...besides I like seeing a dog actually work the bird once in a while.

Mountaineer,
When I was a kid, my father and I could move 10-12 grouse in a morning in NJ!!!! there were wild phez!!! and you could shoot 1/2 dozen bunnies on any farmer's hedgerow in an hour. First the farmers learned how to plant edge to edge...then they sold out to the developers....now kids sit at their computers and twitter.

Vonzeppelinkennels · Post by **Vonzeppelinkennels** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 3:16 pm

BD I think the reason you get under the skin of alot of people here is because you pretty much ignore what anyone says that you don't agree with,but yet you expect everyone to take what you say as gospel.You talk down to anyone that does not agree with you 100%. Know one said that wild birds are not good for a dog,but it does not take a good dog to find birds in a field full of them.You can take a Dobe,Collie,G Shepard into a feild over ran with birds & find birds,maybe not point them but find them or stumble over them yes.
Try that where there are only a few birds in the same size field.

Birddogz · Post by **Birddogz** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 3:22 pm

Mountaineer wrote:
Birddogz wrote:I know dogs are trained better now because of technology, but does the training make up for the fact that the bird hunting was far better then. For instance, in Ohio in the 50s there were pheasants and quail everywhere....

Well...pheasants were never quite "everywhere" in Ohio, no.

While I recall quail leaving occassional wide swaths of tracks in the snow about 1958-1960, Quail were only a transitory Ohio story...a bit too much N for them.

But when Ruffed Grouse were thick in Ohio in the 60s and 70s tho, there was the chance to develop a true grouse dog.
A ruffed grouse dog does need wild birds to fit the name.

I don't know, my Gramps has pics with dozens in the back of trucks near Bowling Green and in Williams county. NW Ohio. In the 50s.

Birddogz · Post by **Birddogz** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 3:25 pm

Vonzeppelinkennels wrote:BD I think the reason you get under the skin of alot of people here is because you pretty much ignore what anyone says that you don't agree with,but yet you expect everyone to take what you say as gospel.You talk down to anyone that does not agree with you 100%. Know one said that wild birds are not good for a dog,but it does not take a good dog to find birds in a field full of them.You can take a Dobe,Collie,G Shepard into a feild over ran with birds & find birds,maybe not point them but find them or stumble over them yes.
Try that where there are only a few birds in the same size field.

Not every field in ND has hundreds of birds, AND I hunt Huns and Sharpies as well, and there aren't that many in an area, and the dogs do fine. The point , is that wild bird contacts are what make great wild bird dogs. The more repetition the better.

Editted to remove the many times I was used unnecessarily and to remove a derogatory remark about people with a different opinion. Ezzy

Mountaineer · Post by **Mountaineer** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 3:54 pm

Birddogz wrote:...I don't know, my Gramps has pics with dozens in the back of trucks near Bowling Green and in Williams county. NW Ohio. In the 50s.

I do...not all Ohio was/is pheasant country, or quail country for that matter....all I'm saying.
You must have left Ohio as a younker....don't know about Gramps.

Mountaineer · Post by **Mountaineer** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 4:04 pm

JKP wrote:
...
Mountaineer,
When I was a kid, my father and I could move 10-12 grouse in a morning in NJ!!!! there were wild phez!!! and you could shoot 1/2 dozen bunnies on any farmer's hedgerow in an hour. First the farmers learned how to plant edge to edge...then they sold out to the developers....now kids sit at their computers and twitter.

Sure....the old story of many places.
Pheasants often prospered where introduced and when farming practices fit the bird's needs.
They are a simple bird to manage if the Will is present.
Look at Pennsylvania...they once notched a million pheasants as I recall.

Ruffed Grouse tho, in Ohio, dropped from unrelenting forest succession aided by Uncle Sam's purchases and a view toward zero forest management by the State and Feds both...farmers and developers had little to do with Bonasa's decline here...comparably.
Some...just not a lot.
Other areas of the range had their own factors of decline...some shared...some not.

Birddogz · Post by **Birddogz** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 4:26 pm

Mountaineer wrote:
Birddogz wrote:...I don't know, my Gramps has pics with dozens in the back of trucks near Bowling Green and in Williams county. NW Ohio. In the 50s.
I do...not all Ohio was/is pheasant country, or quail country for that matter....all I'm saying.
You must have left Ohio as a younker....don't know about Gramps.

All I am saying is that in the 50s there were pheasants and quail everywhere. It was easier to train a good dog because of it.

I hunted grouse in Monroe, Athens, Jefferson, Miegs, Washington, Lawrence, Galia, Guernsey, Muskingum counties from 1986-1990 and would average 25-35 flushes per day. I know it was much better in the 70s.

Mountaineer · Post by **Mountaineer** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 4:45 pm

Birddogz wrote:
All I am saying is that in the 50s there were pheasants and quail everywhere. It was easier to train a good dog because of it.

I hunted grouse in Monroe, Athens, Jefferson, Miegs, Washington, Lawrence, Galia, Guernsey, Muskingum counties from 1986-1990 and would average 25-35 flushes per day. I know it was much better in the 70s.

All I'm saying, again, is No...there were not pheasants and quail everywhere in Ohio....ever.
I do agree that access to wild birds helps with dog training...helps, not a guarantor.

I shot my first ruffed grouse in Ohio in 1964.
Few know how good the grouse hunting was at one time.
35 flushes, if not counting any reflushes(which most secretly or confusingly do), would equate to some 5 birds/hour for most hunters in a day, if not likely higher....while pockets of grouse concentrated by food, by woods activity or, by pre-dispersion are often found...I would find it very hard to believe that 5/hr was common enough to figure in as an average in the year 1990.
However, 3/hr. was common then and shortly past the century's turn.
Ohio did benefit, for a time, with Corporate access and activity which helped.
Ohio, in fact, still has wonderful cover with soft and hard mast for the ruffed grouse in some areas.
That top cover tho is often as empty as a Sunday morning street.

Grouse in Ohio were helped down the decline curve by over-hunting our very accessible coverts and a too-long season...the season issue has been corrected but, even tho hunter numbers have declined along with the grouse, too many are far too little concerned with anything past their own access to the bird.
Small rant, sorry.

Post by **slistoe** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 5:13 pm

mcbosco wrote:Is it fair to say the foot hunting breeds and certain lines known for foot hunting are generally larger, calmer dogs?

I have foot hunted my whole life. I don't intend to quit anytime soon. A dog that is too big to have long term endurance or a dog that won't run all out when hunting are not what I would consider a hunting dog. So....

mcbosco · Post by **mcbosco** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 5:38 pm

slistoe wrote:
mcbosco wrote:Is it fair to say the foot hunting breeds and certain lines known for foot hunting are generally larger, calmer dogs?
I have foot hunted my whole life. I don't intend to quit anytime soon. A dog that is too big to have long term endurance or a dog that won't run all out when hunting are not what I would consider a hunting dog. So....

So what are you saying. That the more traditional (eastern) GSP's & Setters are not hunting dogs? I can recall quite a few 85lb Ryman's doing quite well in the eastern woods.

I will also disagree having competed with JR's that size and endurance are not as closely related as you think. A larger dog covers ground more efficiently. In fact, I can think of half dozen large breeds that are far more robust endurance-wise than smaller bird dogs.

birddog1968 · Post by **birddog1968** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 5:42 pm

Gait seems to me to play a much larger role in endurance and efficiency, than size. A dog that is fast AND light on its feet will most likely outlast a ground pounder, day in and out.

JKP · Post by **JKP** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 6:05 pm

I have foot hunted my whole life. I don't intend to quit anytime soon. A dog that is too big to have long term endurance or a dog that won't run all out when hunting are not what I would consider a hunting dog. So....

I can understand this...I think its better to have a few dogs and simply get the best 2-3 hours and then get a fresh dog. The true endurance dogs are going to be in that 40-50 lb area....the sled doggers have shown us that. That's why hard core FT dogs all tend to gravitate to a similar size and structure if they are going to play the extreme games. The Euro dogs were never intended for this but have been "modified" for the sport. Even the original English Pointer was a gentleman's foot hunting dog, if I'm not mistaken.

Gait is absolutely the secret to efficiency...that and a well ventilated efficient structure.

Vision · Post by **Vision** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 6:30 pm

Vman wrote:

I feel pretty strongly that our dogs today are better than the dogs of yesteryear. Not individual dogs so much, but the breeds as a whole. Fifty years ago they did not have AKC hunt test, NAVHDA Tests, NSTRA trials. They only had HB trials to compare their dogs and find the best of the best for breeding purposes. With these other venues available today more people are involved and I would like to think that they make more educated decisions. Could be wrong on that but I don`t think so at this time. We have the internet now and alot of people come here too further their knowledge on training techniques and breeding choices. I also believe our dogs are healthier today than yesteryear, for several reasons, diet, Vet care, ect.
While some breeds have suffered over the years, Irish Setters, labs, Goldens and a few others. The English Setters, Pointers, GSP,all the Wirehaired breeds, Vizsla, and Britts have all improved due to better decision making by the breeders and owners.
JMO.

All these tests/trials have been created to do what? Replace hunting because the lack of hunting opportunities. So how can the dogs be better today than yesteryear. They can't and they aren't. Dogs today will never see the number of birds that a dog of yesteryear saw and wild birds make true honest to goodness bird dogs. Every trial, test or training situation is to simulate the real thing, some may come close but not the real thing. The other problem with all the tests/trials is the watering down of the rules. I know a GSP of today is not the GSP of 20, 30 or 50 years ago. You can collar them now, they don't have to pass a water retrieve test, only half or less of the stakes are retrieving stakes now, in the day of birdfields in AKC stake the dogs had to retrieve all the birds shot not just one.
I just don't see how the dogs of today are better.

captainshotgun · Post by **captainshotgun** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 8:41 pm

This is a little off of the main thread but other than "Southern" Ohio, phez were pretty widespread. I hunted them in several northern tier counties, as well as Clark, Champaign, & Logan counties, & I knew folks who hunted them in Stark & Columbiana counties. The state still claims that there are wild phez in Pickaway county. Quail were widespread from North & East of a line from Williams all the way South to the Kentucky line & East to Monroe counties. I personally saw dozens of quail dead in the field in Logan county at Thanksgiving time in 1976. My current next door neighbor talks about trapping several quail at a time in a muskrat leghold trap during the depression. He says there were covies & covies of quail in the Port Clinton area at that time.

Mountaineer wrote:
Birddogz wrote:I know dogs are trained better now because of technology, but does the training make up for the fact that the bird hunting was far better then. For instance, in Ohio in the 50s there were pheasants and quail everywhere....

Well...pheasants were never quite "everywhere" in Ohio, no.

While I recall quail leaving occassional wide swaths of tracks in the snow about 1958-1960, Quail were only a transitory Ohio story...a bit too much N for them.

But when Ruffed Grouse were thick in Ohio in the 60s and 70s tho, there was the chance to develop a true grouse dog.
A ruffed grouse dog does need wild birds to fit the name.

Post by **slistoe** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 8:56 pm

mcbosco wrote:
slistoe wrote:
mcbosco wrote:Is it fair to say the foot hunting breeds and certain lines known for foot hunting are generally larger, calmer dogs?
I have foot hunted my whole life. I don't intend to quit anytime soon. A dog that is too big to have long term endurance or a dog that won't run all out when hunting are not what I would consider a hunting dog. So....
So what are you saying. That the more traditional (eastern) GSP's & Setters are not hunting dogs? I can recall quite a few 85lb Ryman's doing quite well in the eastern woods.

I will also disagree having competed with JR's that size and endurance are not as closely related as you think. A larger dog covers ground more efficiently. In fact, I can think of half dozen large breeds that are far more robust endurance-wise than smaller bird dogs.

You are the one who wanted to equate size and "foot hunting".
It matters little what type of terrain I am in. I want a dog that is flat out getting it done to hunt with. If the dog is 85 lbs. and getting it done I have no problem with it. If I simply wanted a companion I would take a human friend.
What I am saying is that your foot hunting dog is not my foot hunting dog. Hunt with what you want, but don't try to tell me that what I do is not hunting from foot, and most certainly don't think that my dogs are not hunting for me.

Post by **ezzy333** » Tue Apr 12, 2011 9:16 pm

slistoe wrote:
mcbosco wrote:
slistoe wrote:Is it fair to say the foot hunting breeds and certain lines known for foot hunting are generally larger, calmer dogs?
You are the one who wanted to equate size and "foot hunting".
It matters little what type of terrain I am in. I want a dog that is flat out getting it done to hunt with. If the dog is 85 lbs. and getting it done I have no problem with it. If I simply wanted a companion I would take a human friend.
What I am saying is that your foot hunting dog is not my foot hunting dog. Hunt with what you want, but don't try to tell me that what I do is not hunting from foot, and most certainly don't think that my dogs are not hunting for me.

I think it would be more accurate to say that the large heavier dogs are not as well suited to fast ranging trial competitors so if that says to you they would be better foot hunters you may be right. But many foot hunters do not want a slow big dog for foot hunting either so it may be a stretch to say they are better. Probably is like practically evey other question about birds dogs and the answer is what ever you like.

Ezzy

huntcrazed · Post by **huntcrazed** » Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:22 am

What a heated debate....I am hooked on this site....now that there is no wild bird hunting .

If some of the members do not mind me make a suggestion.....it is great to see some people here that know hunting to make statements that are true but there is no reason for anyone to get upset or take it personally .....a constructive argument can always let all of us learn a lot!

My personal opinion on this post is that lots of stuff has changed through the years in regards to foot hunting dogs.

I was raised in Europe about half a century ago and I remember hiking with adults since a little kid after Chukar , Huns migratory quail and wood cock.

The pointing or versatile dogs we hunted with then were born to be hunting dogs.....they were neither too slow or too fast and they ranged depending on terrain and the individual dog from one hundred to two hundred yards if the terrain was open on huns in farm fields.

They would not tire easy and when experienced, paced themselves and lasted all day,first light to night fall.

Today we have a zillion clueless breeders that do not even have experience in hunting breeding for various purposes and some more passionate pros influenced by todays demands to have good fast trial dogs so of course the dogs got to be smaller to last being too fast ....it seems that there is so many dogs and it is tougher today to find dogs that are truly great by breeding along.

Too many tests ,events and opinions with a lot less HUNTING so the dogs have become great at what most want today.

Yes they have changed to be better for what they do today but in the past there was a higher percentage of them being best for hunting.

I remember Gsps in Europe at 65 pounds ....alternate between trot or gallop while hunting at speeds that are quite fast since they cover lots of terrain being tall athletic dogs and only a little slower than a very fast smaller much shorter dog and faster dog that could make a trial dog but it needs more breaks ,water in order to last all day since is working much harder.

I see some taller Gsps or DKs today that are disproportionate to their height and weight with conformations that do not give stamina and great looking trial dogs of today that like the wind to blow real fast on their face when they hunt but not methodical by nature to not leave any birds behind.

Bottom line the great ones still exist but are so tough to have if you are just a hunter since they are few.....now I know most of us do not feel that way since the ones we love are the best....being objective is tough.

Some people know and express what they know from personal experience ,it is great to come here and exchange that and have fun....no need for personal criticism if there is a difference of opinion....it is obvious that some know what is based on fantasy or assumption and others what is actual experience....the last one is what we need to share.

Mario

birddogger · Post by **birddogger** » Wed Apr 13, 2011 4:38 am

Very nice post Mario.

Charlie

mcbosco · Post by **mcbosco** » Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:28 am

You are the one who wanted to equate size and "foot hunting".
It matters little what type of terrain I am in. I want a dog that is flat out getting it done to hunt with. If the dog is 85 lbs. and getting it done I have no problem with it. If I simply wanted a companion I would take a human friend.
What I am saying is that your foot hunting dog is not my foot hunting dog. Hunt with what you want, but don't try to tell me that what I do is not hunting from foot, and most certainly don't think that my dogs are not hunting for me.[/quote][/quote]
I think it would be more accurate to say that the large heavier dogs are not as well suited to fast ranging trial competitors so if that says to you they would be better foot hunters you may be right. But many foot hunters do not want a slow big dog for foot hunting either so it may be a stretch to say they are better. Probably is like practically evey other question about birds dogs and the answer is what ever you like.

Ezzy[/quote]

All I was saying is that if you look at traditional foot hunting breeds whether here or in Europe you will find larger, more relaxed, longer-gaited dogs. That is all. My perspective is the Northeast...which in many ways is much like Europe terrain-wise.

Running fast here is not a benefit.