The Spaniel Spot

Flint · Post by **Flint** » Wed Oct 21, 2015 9:04 pm

polmaise wrote:We have some 'AV' ,All variety trials over here Dave as I'm sure you know

The cover type usually suits the winner ,but that said ..the cream always rises to the top.]

Watching a UK trial is high on my Bucket list. Unfortunately, all I know about them is what I can see on youtube but your Springer cover looks mighty "Cockery" compared to what I'm used to.

It looks like a minefield of birds where the dog is the minesweeper. I wonder if the percentage of dogs that get thrown out for passing a bird is higher than here?

My impression of the UK gundog culture is that there are a lot more of you who work with Springers, Cockers & retrievers than in the US where people tend to stick with one breed. When I look at Jordan's list of US trainers who run both, I'm struck by the thought that those guys (& a few others) are the ones I look up to as "Dogmen".

Flint · Post by **Flint** » Wed Oct 21, 2015 9:34 pm

jhorak wrote: I think that I'd be okay with it, but I don't know if that's my final answer. I think I'd definitely still want Cocker only trials and Springer only trials; but I'd certainly like to have an opportunity to run my Cockers against Springers and feel that we'd hold our own.

There'd be some pros and cons that would have to be weighed out, but if it it were up to the club to decide if it was going to be an inclusive or exclusive trial, what could that hurt?

PROS:
- More accessibility to trials in different parts of the country (not an issue in my area, but parts of the US are totally lacking in Cocker trials)
- Better competition, which would force people to be better handlers and more selective in breeding
- More collaboration between handlers of the different breeds (strength in numbers)
- Ability for an individual to own both breeds and have a really fun weekend

CONS:
- Difficulty in judging objectively with two different breeds running, and even knowing how to judge
- Potential for breeders to veer off from standard breed type and meet "somewhere in the middle", so there'd potentially be a blurring of the lines between the two breeds
- I'm sure the AKC would have logistic issues with making it work.

These are just initial thoughts...I haven't put a lot of thought into it before. What do you think?

I think you & I think a lot alike.

I believe a few clubs either are planning to try it or already have. I expect the trend will be for a smaller Cocker club to invite Springers to pump up entries & they would invite Cocker judges & use Cocker cover so most of the CONS you listed would be mitigated but I remain a little concerned that some judges might reward a flashy bit of work over a more thorough performance. I'd want Cockers to stay "cockery".

Trekmoor · Post by **Trekmoor** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 3:39 am

I was at a 16 dog Open springer spaniel trial yesterday as a spectator. The dogs had to work in several different kinds of cover throughout the day. There was thick bracken that came up to the handlers chins....... very difficult stuff to keep control of a hunting dog in. There were "rashes" or spike grass as I call it, there was "white grass," there was game cover crops. Brambles and gorse were absent and no woodlands were hunted.
Most of the game shot was pheasants , no rabbits at all.

It was not a very good trial to spectate at, I was too far back from the action to be able to see much and the cover hid the dogs for most of the time.
The thing that struck me most about yesterdays trial was not the dog work , it was the high level of friendliness shown by the competitors. I already knew a few of them but just about everybody came over to say hallo and to have a blether with me as the day went on.

I took a few photographs at the trial but I am not a good photographer and could not get close enough to the dogs as they worked so ,in the end, I only kept two of the pics.....here they are.

Bill T.

polmaise · Post by **polmaise** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 4:45 am

Flint wrote: Watching a UK trial is high on my Bucket list. Unfortunately, all I know about them is what I can see on youtube but your Springer cover looks mighty "Cockery" compared to what I'm used to. It looks like a minefield of birds where the dog is the minesweeper. I wonder if the percentage of dogs that get thrown out for passing a bird is higher than here?

My impression of the UK gundog culture is that there are a lot more of you who work with Springers, Cockers & retrievers than in the US where people tend to stick with one breed. When I look at Jordan's list of US trainers who run both, I'm struck by the thought that those guys (& a few others) are the ones I look up to as "Dogmen".

This was the Springer Championships in Jan 2014 ,curiously enough the Cocker Championships this year will be held on the same ground,so it will be nice to see what the Cocker's make of it ?
........
I don't have any facts or figures or even a 'guestimate' regarding missing game but it is a disqualification.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4JAE4csFh4

gundogguy · Post by **gundogguy** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 6:07 am

PROS:
- More accessibility to trials in different parts of the country (not an issue in my area, but parts of the US are totally lacking in Cocker trials)
- Better competition, which would force people to be better handlers and more selective in breeding
- More collaboration between handlers of the different breeds (strength in numbers)
- Ability for an individual to own both breeds and have a really fun weekend

CONS:
- Difficulty in judging objectively with two different breeds running, and even knowing how to judge
- Potential for breeders to veer off from standard breed type and meet "somewhere in the middle", so there'd potentially be a blurring of the lines between the two breeds
- I'm sure the AKC would have logistic issues with making it work.

These are just initial thoughts...I haven't put a lot of thought into it before. What do you think?[/quote]

That is a good beginning of Pros and Cons. I can agree with the basic premise. In the Pros: column accessibility would be the number one positive. I'm not sure about how better competition or more selective breeding works in reality. Cons: I do know that the Springer influence on how Cockers are judged in trial has not really been all the beneficial to Cocker breed. The Cocker is not a small Springer and they really need to establish standards that are more reasonable for the breed. Springer people judging Cocker trials will often forget that they are not judging Springers. As a gun I had more than one judge ask me between the breaks when he would see a dog that really pressed the cover and made big finds and marks( I gun some 30 Cocker Trial over 10 years)

Never trust the AKC to do any thing that will make the issues work out. Look what the AKC did to the Spaniel hunt test program. It is the two Parent Clubs that need to work out the logistics if there is ever going to be a AV system here in the states.
This debate will continue I'm sure, personally IMHO it should be about the dogs and not the people. Best of trials to you and your dogs

Hal

gundogguy · Post by **gundogguy** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 6:12 am

CDN_Cocker wrote:
Flint wrote:Good luck Jordan. I'm not much of a Facebooker but I do keep up with your successes.

Here in Canada springers and cockers always compete against each other. We do not have separate trials. I think its fantastic. The best working spaniel wins, regardless of its breed.

Cass, The Canadian system works because without it there would not be enough dogs available to run a trial of any significance. Get to know the treasury of of one of clubs and learn about bird costs and judges expenses. Without all hands on deck the Can trial system would be in deep doodoo

chrokeva · Post by **chrokeva** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 8:14 am

Not sure how I feel about combining the the cockers with the springers at this point but it does seem that it may compromise the running style of the two breeds. I can say that I wish there were more cocker trials in my area and the lack of trials has made me thought that perhaps getting springer would be a good idea if I want to do field trials consistently going forward. For now I will just keep pushing for more cocker trials and play with hunt tests when available.

crackerd · Post by **crackerd** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 9:20 am

Good possibly productive and certainly stimulating dialog on spaniel trialing.

gundogguy's precis on AKC involvement - and gentle admonition of why Canada holds A/V trials - both spot on

My only qualm, coming from a retriever perspective, is that they allow mighty big blind stakes in them Scottish trials that Trekmoor attended (as illustrated in his last photo above) - spaniels don't get that kind of crutch here when running "memories," Bill...

MG

Flint · Post by **Flint** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 10:07 am

polmaise wrote: This was the Springer Championships in Jan 2014 ,curiously enough the Cocker Championships this year will be held on the same ground,so it will be nice to see what the Cocker's make of it ?
........
I don't have any facts or figures or even a 'guestimate' regarding missing game but it is a disqualification.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4JAE4csFh4

Thanks for that video, the cover looks much like what we might see for Springers here.
Maybe some of the other videos I've seen just had unusually close cover & gave me the wrong impression.

Our club used to hold 2 days of Cocker trials followed by Springer trials on the same grounds. It was my favorite trial to gun because of the opportunity to contrast the different breeds.

gundogguy · Post by **gundogguy** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 12:14 pm

Trekmoor wrote:I was at a 16 dog Open springer spaniel trial yesterday as a spectator. The dogs had to work in several different kinds of cover throughout the day. There was thick bracken that came up to the handlers chins....... very difficult stuff to keep control of a hunting dog in. There were "rashes" or spike grass as I call it, there was "white grass," there was game cover crops. Brambles and gorse were absent and no woodlands were hunted.
Most of the game shot was pheasants , no rabbits at all.

It was not a very good trial to spectate at, I was too far back from the action to be able to see much and the cover hid the dogs for most of the time.
The thing that struck me most about yesterdays trial was not the dog work , it was the high level of friendliness shown by the competitors. I already knew a few of them but just about everybody came over to say hallo and to have a blether with me as the day went on.

I took a few photographs at the trial but I am not a good photographer and could not get close enough to the dogs as they worked so ,in the end, I only kept two of the pics.....here they are.

Bill T.

Bill thanks for the photos and insights. You should never feel like you have to apologise for not getting closer at a UK trial. The number of Uk trials I have attended, just by the format alone I never felt that they were spectator events in the first place.
Here in the States and canada Spaniel trials of both ilks are the most spectator friendly canine events on earth. Even so cover density (Height and thickness) that is the norm here in the upper mid-west during the autumn and early winter makes viewing difficult at best.
The 2nd photo looks like a brace at the break away getting ready push the grounds for available game...

polmaise · Post by **polmaise** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 2:45 pm

Flint wrote: Our club used to hold 2 days of Cocker trials followed by Springer trials on the same grounds. It was my favorite trial to gun because of the opportunity to contrast the different breeds.

Our 'AV' All variety spaniel Trials are just that . All variety ,so Springers,Cocker's ,Clumber's ,Sussex, etc are all allowed. Game finding ability by any is probably the utmost in our 'difference' so the importance of retrieving with the spaniels can either win you the trial or have you eliminated.
Mentioned earlier, It takes a good judge with experience in all to cast a good eye fairly .

You may already know 'Flint' that spaniels are often used in our Retriever Trials to find the game for those sleepy dogs at heel 'Crackered'

crackerd · Post by **crackerd** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 3:14 pm

polmaise wrote:You may already know 'Flint' that spaniels are often used in our Retriever Trials to find the game for those sleepy dogs at heel 'Crackerd'

Hah! As I told you about the "One spaniel, one retriever, one shooter" mantra for the late, great Polmaise Cup, not only would you need just one dog if it were a Boykin, but that Boykins don't sleep at heel, or on their feet in a non-slip posture, either, though they sure find lots and lots of game. Lots of kinds of game, too, using both sight and scent, most often in that order. But as gundogguy articulated, it's not really feasible given the nature of US spaniel trials to brace a springer and cocker, much less a springer and a Clumber, or cocker and a Boykin, though I know a 13-year-old Sussex that in speedier younger days would've liked taking a crack at any such pairing with a center line included. (Not really, that's an implausible scenario, too.)

MG

polmaise · Post by **polmaise** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 3:32 pm

I'm sure the 'HPR' would also do the same 'Crakere'd' ..Hunt -Point-Retrieve game to the end goal of shooting game and bird in the bag . But that's not what the 'Polmaise Cup' was about

. ..The essence was handling two different breed functions and shooting at the same time.
Unlike and remote to a brace of spaniels by two separate handlers and someone else doing the shooting .

jhorak · Post by **jhorak** » Thu Oct 22, 2015 7:49 pm

Flint wrote: I think you & I think a lot alike.

I believe a few clubs either are planning to try it or already have. I expect the trend will be for a smaller Cocker club to invite Springers to pump up entries & they would invite Cocker judges & use Cocker cover so most of the CONS you listed would be mitigated but I remain a little concerned that some judges might reward a flashy bit of work over a more thorough performance. I'd want Cockers to stay "cockery".

Having spent a weekend talking with you (albeit over four years ago), I'll take that as a major compliment if I think like you

gundogguy · Post by **gundogguy** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 5:37 am

polmaise wrote:
Flint wrote: Our club used to hold 2 days of Cocker trials followed by Springer trials on the same grounds. It was my favorite trial to gun because of the opportunity to contrast the different breeds.
Our 'AV' All variety spaniel Trials are just that . All variety ,so Springers,Cocker's ,Clumber's ,Sussex, etc are all allowed. Game finding ability by any is probably the utmost in our 'difference' so the importance of retrieving with the spaniels can either win you the trial or have you eliminated.
Mentioned earlier, It takes a good judge with experience in all to cast a good eye fairly .

You may already know 'Flint' that spaniels are often used in our Retriever Trials to find the game for those sleepy dogs at heel 'Crackered'

Robert you just could not wait to jab at at ol' Crackerd!!

The UK AV system is fine activity for the spaniel community. and game finding would be paramount from a judging perspective. I wonder how many "A" panel judges come from the Clumber, Sussex, Welsh spaniel backgrounds?
With the importance of retrieving being the deciding factor in a many a dogs fate how much handling is to much handling on a "marked" retrieve? The Paul French Vids i have watch tells me there is an extreme amount of handling goin on! The last few years i have noticed an astonishing amount of handling on straight out mark retrieves. In fact the last Cocker trial I attended i made the statement that If I wanted to watch dogs being handled on the retrieve i would have gone to AA retriever trial and watch the best retriever handlers at work.

polmaise · Post by **polmaise** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 6:40 am

gundogguy wrote: Robert you just could not wait to jab at at ol' Crackerd!!

International cross pond 'Banter'

of which I'm more than confident my learned' friend is comfortable with

Yes, There is only one Panel judge that springs to mind who is infamous with Clumbers and Springers.
Agree also on the 'Handling' or rather 'Over handling'

crackerd · Post by **crackerd** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 7:08 am

polmaise wrote:
gundogguy wrote: Robert you just could not wait to jab at at ol' Crackerd!!
International cross pond 'Banter' of which I'm more than confident my learned' friend is comfortable with

So long as no dirks are involved - well, maybe rubber dirks - indeed I'm mighty comfortable with the jabs.

After all I've been jovially jabbing back at Robt. lately in hopes of having a welcoming committee meet him on these shores as a new North American gundog trainer - never know if he might take up the invitation.

polmaise wrote: Yes, There is only one Panel judge that springs to mind who is infamous with Clumbers and Springers.

Probably the corresponding number of A Panel retriever judges that come from the ranks of flatcoats, curlies and IWS - now, if I may digress from spaniels further, what about any A Panel judges over there from a Chessie background, Robt.?

MG

polmaise · Post by **polmaise** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 7:54 am

crackerd wrote: now, if I may digress from spaniels further, what about any A Panel judges over there from a Chessie background, Robt.?MG

Usually the breed reserved for the 'Wildfowler' and most are like your 'rednecks' and competition is not in their repertoire.

There is a guy 'Mark Greenhough' who is a wildfowl officer for 'BASC' uploaded a you tube clip which probably best shows how that breed are used over here,other than the usual 'Show folk' of course which outnumber vastly those that work them

Flint · Post by **Flint** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 7:58 am

gundogguy wrote: With the importance of retrieving being the deciding factor in a many a dogs fate how much handling is to much handling on a "marked" retrieve? The Paul French Vids i have watch tells me there is an extreme amount of handling goin on! The last few years i have noticed an astonishing amount of handling on straight out mark retrieves. In fact the last Cocker trial I attended i made the statement that If I wanted to watch dogs being handled on the retrieve i would have gone to AA retriever trial and watch the best retriever handlers at work.

[/quote]

That's the biggest difference I've noticed in the handlers between Cocker & Springer trials. In the Cocker trials, I've even seen a few judges who call for "eye wipes". I assumed that the theory was that because Cockers are used in heavier cover where a marked fall is more unlikely, they're more likely to need the ability to handle.

I've heard it said more than once that if you need to handle in a Springer trial, you're already out. I think that's an exaggeration but it does seem that most judges prefer to see even a big, extended hunt for the retrieve than for the handler to help out.

gundogguy · Post by **gundogguy** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 8:45 am

Flint wrote:
gundogguy wrote: With the importance of retrieving being the deciding factor in a many a dogs fate how much handling is to much handling on a "marked" retrieve? The Paul French Vids i have watch tells me there is an extreme amount of handling goin on! The last few years i have noticed an astonishing amount of handling on straight out mark retrieves. In fact the last Cocker trial I attended i made the statement that If I wanted to watch dogs being handled on the retrieve i would have gone to AA retriever trial and watch the best retriever handlers at work.

That's the biggest difference I've noticed in the handlers between Cocker & Springer trials. In the Cocker trials, I've even seen a few judges who call for "eye wipes". I assumed that the theory was that because Cockers are used in heavier cover where a marked fall is more unlikely, they're more likely to need the ability to handle.

I've heard it said more than once that if you need to handle in a Springer trial, you're already out. I think that's an exaggeration but it does seem that most judges prefer to see even a big, extended hunt for the retrieve than for the handler to help out.[/quote]

David, I agree completely!

chrokeva · Post by **chrokeva** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 9:05 am

gundogguy wrote:
Flint wrote:
gundogguy wrote: With the importance of retrieving being the deciding factor in a many a dogs fate how much handling is to much handling on a "marked" retrieve? The Paul French Vids i have watch tells me there is an extreme amount of handling goin on! The last few years i have noticed an astonishing amount of handling on straight out mark retrieves. In fact the last Cocker trial I attended i made the statement that If I wanted to watch dogs being handled on the retrieve i would have gone to AA retriever trial and watch the best retriever handlers at work.
That's the biggest difference I've noticed in the handlers between Cocker & Springer trials. In the Cocker trials, I've even seen a few judges who call for "eye wipes". I assumed that the theory was that because Cockers are used in heavier cover where a marked fall is more unlikely, they're more likely to need the ability to handle.

I've heard it said more than once that if you need to handle in a Springer trial, you're already out. I think that's an exaggeration but it does seem that most judges prefer to see even a big, extended hunt for the retrieve than for the handler to help out.

David, I agree completely![/quote]

This is very interesting to me. As I train my cocker almost exclusively with springer people I have been told many times not to handle on the retrieve and to let my my dog work it out (i.e. extended hunt). She is just getting to the point that I can handle her do to over and back drills but not sure how much I should be using these controls when on a retrieve in a cocker trial. It sounds like it would be more acceptable to handle a cocker on a retrieve?

Trekmoor · Post by **Trekmoor** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 2:42 pm

I cannot really say I have noticed much difference here in the amount of handling done in cocker and springer trials. Both breeds are expected to handle onto retrieves as and when necessary. It is when an individual handler decides handling has become necessary that can make a bit of a difference. I have a feeling that the handlers who know their dogs are really good at being handled intervene in their dogs hunts for fallen birds a bit earlier than those handlers who know their dogs are a bit "iffy" when handled do.

I suppose it is the same in America as it is here in at least this regard . An obviously difficult retrieve to find will either pull you up on the judges marking sheet .....or it may eliminate you from the trial. A saying here among trailers is " a good retrieve may not win you a trial but a poor one can put you out." Really difficult to find retrieves are often blinds and blinds require a dog that will handle. The difference between dogs then becomes a matter of which dogs handle in the "tidiest" manner. In other words, less is more, the dog that needs the least handling to find birds and which "wastes" the least game holding ground in it's search, is the best handling dog.

I once saw a dog given the guns award for being "The best handling dog."
I think most people there, apart from the guns, disagreed but were , of course, far too polite to say so. The guns had given the award to "the most handled dog" and not to the best handling dog...... Less is more.

Bill T.

polmaise · Post by **polmaise** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 3:14 pm

UK Handlers ,handle on a seen marked retrieve in a field trial in fear of not getting the shot game in fear of disturbing live game in the area or en route to the retrieve of the fall,or fear of getting an eyewipe if the dog fails to find !.
Most Spaniel handlers in UK trials also do not train for 'Line up or casting drills'

They rely on the stop whistle and direction remote.
If they 'wake up' to many of the Retriever drills I'm sure less handling will be required and more precision accomplished with the momentum

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=av41yFJYrzQ

polmaise · Post by **polmaise** » Fri Oct 23, 2015 5:01 pm

Cass your peeing post went dry ? what happened.

gundogguy · Post by **gundogguy** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 3:56 am

This is very interesting to me. As I train my cocker almost exclusively with springer people I have been told many times not to handle on the retrieve and to let my my dog work it out (i.e. extended hunt). She is just getting to the point that I can handle her do to over and back drills but not sure how much I should be using these controls when on a retrieve in a cocker trial. It sounds like it would be more acceptable to handle a cocker on a retrieve?[/quote]

Even in the AA retriever world it is said that if you are tempted to give and "Over" Command, you are really saying "Over and back to the truck" your done. Marking is an inherited trait handling is a learned behavior. Good judges want to see your dogs natural ability come to the surface. If your dog is steady and dog retrieves to hand and covers his beat without excessive whistle the judge will understand that your dog is trainable. Keep your handling to a minimum in training, force the dog to be successful on his own.
Obviously there is a lot more that could be said here about this subject ...but I'm not going to write a book.

Hie-On!

Hal

crackerd · Post by **crackerd** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 4:44 am

gundogguy wrote:Even in the AA retriever world it is said that if you are tempted to give and "Over" Command, you are really saying "Over and back to the truck" your done.

Aye on! on that, gundogguy - means you've let the dog get "loose" on the line to a blind retrieve, and giving the "Over!" command confirms that to the judges. But it doesn't really apply on water blinds, as "Overs" are how we roll getting a dog off a point or island or even an angle entry getting into the water from an initial line to the blind.

On marks, any handling at all usually sends you and the retriever back to the truck. But as FTs are competitive, dog v. dog, not against a standard, it comes down of course to how the other dogs did in the marking series. Once, in an open, I handled on the last bird of a triple, a quick handle about 100 yards after the dog had gone for the mark. I gave a silent "Over" and the dog went the remaining 250 yards straight to the bird. I recall 19 of 72 dogs were called back for the next series, mine one of them, and the only dog that had a handle.

My question on handling in spaniel trials, where there are no blinds, is: Do the judges allow handler and dog to "move up" toward a long fall that the dog hasn't come up with and resend for the bird (as allowed in hunt tests) - or must the handler stay in place and handle from where he was positioned when the bird was flushed? Or, is an immediate eyewipe opportunity given to the honoring bracemate if the working dog fails to make the retrieve?

MG

CDN_Cocker · Post by **CDN_Cocker** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 8:46 am

crackerd wrote: My question on handling in spaniel trials, where there are no blinds, is: Do the judges allow handler and dog to "move up" toward a long fall that the dog hasn't come up with and resend for the bird (as allowed in hunt tests) - or must the handler stay in place and handle from where he was positioned when the bird was flushed? Or, is an immediate eyewipe opportunity given to the honoring bracemate if the working dog fails to make the retrieve?

MG

Only speaking from my experience in the great white north, but I have seen this happen several times up here. The handler moved a few times in order to help the dog. These dogs were also called back to the next series.

Trekmoor · Post by **Trekmoor** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 9:34 am

I am being given the probably very wrong impression in this thread that trialing spaniels in America do not handle very well because there are no blind retrieves in spaniel trials ? Surely it is still a blind retrieve if a bird has fallen 40 yards away among cover while the dog is so deep inside very thick cover that it could not possibly have seen the bird fall and the dog may have only a very skimpy idea of the direction the flushed bird took ?

So, my question is a bit like MG's, would the handler then be allowed to go with his dog as he hunted it towards the fall ?

In one British spaniel trial I saw a dog sent for a blind retrieve on a bird that "was thought" to be hit . The bird had landed about 50-60 yards from the dog but it may not have been hit. The dog went out and was handled into the fall area but it failed to find the bird. The dog was kept in the trial because it had been an "iffy" bird and the dog was hunted on. As it reached and hunted the fall area it then found the bird and was eliminated ....for eyewiping itself ! What a way to go !

Bill T.

gundogguy · Post by **gundogguy** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 10:03 am

The intent was not about Blind retrieves. Yes Blinds do occur and should be handle accordingly.
The original question about handling on so many situations that generally do not call for handling. It seems that there is a fad so to speak about helping dogs find birds that in essence should have been marked. and Yes, judges will allow a handler to move up and handle, however once you do you better produce the bird for judge. and you had better hope that competition also has to handle as well. In the judges mind you stand out like a sore thumb if the other dogs in your series are spot-on with their retrieves. The other imporatnt reason for being allowed to move up is we really do not want leave dead or wounded game in the field

I have cut and pasted from the Blue book "Conduct and Judging Spaniel field Trials" part 4 page 17 Marking and retrieving.

MARKING AND RETRIEVING Marking the fall or the direction thereof is one of the essential qualities of a good spaniel. However, the eye level of a dog is but a short distance above the ground and some four or five feet lower than that of the handler, gun and judge. Often all the dog can observe, even if heavy cover does not intervene, is the line of flight of the bird. Only under favorable conditions can he be expected to see the actual fall itself. Hence, the importance of the use of the wind cannot be overestimated. If the dog shall go somewhat downwind to the fall whether it be a crosswind or behind him, he assures himself the best opportunity to locate the bird promptly. Certainly under such circumstances a dog cannot be penalized for failure to instantly locate the exact spot. SEARCHING AND HAND SIGNALS Should he miss the fall entirely, he should continue his search in the area until successful. If a bird shall have turned in its flight beyond the observation of the dog, it can of course only be located by searching a gradually widening area of ground. When his search becomes aimless and it is evident it cannot be fruitful, he must of necessity be taken up, provided it can be determined that the bird actually fell in the area. Should, on the other hand, a dog be unable to observe either the line of flight or the bird falling in the air, that is, have a blind fall, the handler should direct the dog thereto by hand, voice or whistle, as quietly as possible. A dog should be credited for willingness, ability and speed in accepting such directions. If a bird proves to be a runner, acknowledgment of the fall is the first requirement from whence the dog should be able to seek out and follow the line to a successful conclusion. More difficult is the problem when a dog misses the fall and in his search may even bring in another bud. The obvious answer is that the dog should be sent out again, as would be done in the field, and if he then fails to bring in the bird, and its presence can be verified, his failure is a fault of very real proportion.

crackerd · Post by **crackerd** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 10:40 am

Bill, to clarify across the pond and the language chasm, by "no blinds in spaniel trials" I was conveying that blind retrieves on land and water are not formally required in spaniel trials as in retriever trials - in which a land blind followed by a water blind constitute two of the four "series" a N. American retriever trial comprises. As gundogguy noted, spaniels do run land blinds in trials but they are blinds only because the dog didn't mark a fall and must be handled to it at the handler's discretion - not because blind retrieves are a formal series under judgment in a spaniel FT. They are not.

Everything else in this "handling" sub-thread - for anyone wanting to learn about US spaniel trials, including myself - has been beautifully articulated by gundogguy calling on his vast experience in the game. Thanks a ton/tonne, gundogguy

MG

Trekmoor · Post by **Trekmoor** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 1:14 pm

My thanks to both of you for your efforts to clarify this for me. Blinds in field trials are just a fact of life here but to muddy the waters a bit more it used to be the case that in HPR trials here a handler could, if he wanted to, take his dog towards a fall area for a blind retrieve and then release it to hunt from the edge of the fall area with the wind completely in the dogs favour. He could handle as much as he wanted to as the dog searched.
I think this became disallowed about 30 years ago but, especially in HPR trials, handlers are often seen trying to "steal ground" by moving closer to the fall.

Just asking the handlers not to do this didn't always work as I found out when I judged a couple of HPR trials. Up until your explanations I had been wondering if your spaniel trials were being worked in a similar way to those trials of yesteryear.

Bill T.

polmaise · Post by **polmaise** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 3:44 pm

Besides Rules in any trial either side of the pond .
When shooting over your dog in any cover type would you handle the dog on a mark if the dog was not in the area of the fall ?

gundogguy · Post by **gundogguy** » Sun Oct 25, 2015 5:45 am

polmaise wrote:Besides Rules in any trial either side of the pond .
When shooting over your dog in any cover type would you handle the dog on a mark if the dog was not in the area of the fall ?

Blinds during a hunt usually happen when the dog was not involved in the flush or production of the bird in the first place. Shooting birds the dog did not produce is absolutely no problem when hunting a spaniel. So yes i would handle to the area of fall. For me personally rabbits are not a concern but i could understand the need for a well versed dog in handling to the area. I can only imagine that not many dogs have an opportunity to mark a shot rabbit. Is this what you are looking for??
Hal

chrokeva · Post by **chrokeva** » Sun Oct 25, 2015 12:21 pm

Thank you for this very informative thread!

polmaise · Post by **polmaise** » Sun Oct 25, 2015 12:39 pm

gundogguy wrote: Blinds during a hunt usually happen when the dog was not involved in the flush or production of the bird in the first place. Shooting birds the dog did not produce is absolutely no problem when hunting a spaniel. So yes i would handle to the area of fall. For me personally rabbits are not a concern but i could understand the need for a well versed dog in handling to the area. I can only imagine that not many dogs have an opportunity to mark a shot rabbit. Is this what you are looking for??
Hal

Cover or obstruction visually or impeding are definitely factors that would determine a 'Mark' that the dog would require handling even if the same dog flushed it.

CDN_Cocker · Post by **CDN_Cocker** » Sun Oct 25, 2015 6:14 pm

chrokeva wrote:Thank you for this very informative thread!

It sure is helpful isn't it? Especially the differences between borders.

gundogguy · Post by **gundogguy** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 5:29 am

polmaise wrote:
gundogguy wrote: Blinds during a hunt usually happen when the dog was not involved in the flush or production of the bird in the first place. Shooting birds the dog did not produce is absolutely no problem when hunting a spaniel. So yes i would handle to the area of fall. For me personally rabbits are not a concern but i could understand the need for a well versed dog in handling to the area. I can only imagine that not many dogs have an opportunity to mark a shot rabbit. Is this what you are looking for??
Hal
Cover or obstruction visually or impeding are definitely factors that would determine a 'Mark' that the dog would require handling even if the same dog flushed it.

Right-On! Training is the one factor that gives a dog an edge in learning how to follow the direction the bird takes when flushed. Training develops the strength needed. Over the years have seen a lot of flush shy dogs that just do not handle the explosion of the wings in the cover. It is the strong dog that can stand the commotion that is taking place at the moment of flush.

Post by **mnaj_springer** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 7:27 am

Gundogguy, when you say training, are referring to specific training to handle such an explosive flush, or training in general that has created repeated positive associations with flushing birds and flapping wings?

I ask because it seems some dogs have that strength you refer to, and some don't. And the same seems to be true with retrieving crippled birds that flap and try to run. At times I think my pup would prefer I cripple birds so she can chase down those birds haha

polmaise · Post by **polmaise** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 12:09 pm

gundogguy wrote: Right-On! Training is the one factor that gives a dog an edge in learning how to follow the direction the bird takes when flushed. Training develops the strength needed. Over the years have seen a lot of flush shy dogs that just do not handle the explosion of the wings in the cover. It is the strong dog that can stand the commotion that is taking place at the moment of flush.

I hear Ya' ..and agree . Many don't 'train' for multi-flush as in a covey. That can spook an untrained dog or encourage 'Flight' and I'm not talking about the bird

I'm sure mine have an advantage which has been engineered where the good lady of the house feeds the pigeons in the dogs courtyard just before I come back with the dogs after exercise every day since they were pups.

The 'strong ones' tune in after training to the swing of the gun to 'pick out' that one from the bunch.

Flint · Post by **Flint** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 1:28 pm

gundogguy wrote:
Right-On! Training is the one factor that gives a dog an edge in learning how to follow the direction the bird takes when flushed. Training develops the strength needed.

I have a theory that smart dogs learn to “estimate” the distance to the fall in these scenarios based on the time between flush & shot. It’s uncanny how some dogs seem to run just the right distance even though there was no way they could’ve seen the bird once it flushed.

CDN_Cocker · Post by **CDN_Cocker** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 1:42 pm

Just want to say a big congratulations to a good friend and training partner of mine Rick Walker. Rick's dog Sally won the Canadian National. Well deserved, she's a fantastic dog and a true joy to watch.

polmaise · Post by **polmaise** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 1:54 pm

Flint wrote:
gundogguy wrote:
Right-On! Training is the one factor that gives a dog an edge in learning how to follow the direction the bird takes when flushed. Training develops the strength needed.

I have a theory that smart dogs learn to “estimate” the distance to the fall in these scenarios based on the time between flush & shot. It’s uncanny how some dogs seem to run just the right distance even though there was no way they could’ve seen the bird once it flushed.

And a joy to watch!

gundogguy · Post by **gundogguy** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 3:50 pm

mnaj_springer wrote:Gundogguy, when you say training, are referring to specific training to handle such an explosive flush, or training in general that has created repeated positive associations with flushing birds and flapping wings?

I ask because it seems some dogs have that strength you refer to, and some don't. And the same seems to be true with retrieving crippled birds that flap and try to run. At times I think my pup would prefer I cripple birds so she can chase down those birds haha

Training: By that I refer to subjecting a dog to a consistent number of birds, may they be pigeons, or pheasants. Think of the dog that has made game and now drives into the nest or track knowing full well they possibly could be hit in the face wings or cover as the bird launches. By numbers I usually budget 45-50 birds per month (3-5 bird work) sessions per week after dog has been steadied. This process may go on for quite a long period of time. many months and possible years. Our current dog Zeta for example from the time she was 8 months until present day.
As long the dog steadiness is proofed, the real behavior I'm looking for is strength of flush and pattern, bird finding under day to day different conditions, and the dogs ability to mark shot flyers in different cover and backgrounds and distances. and of course delivery to hand.
During the course of this intense work period in the young dogs life a handler will come understand if he has a dog that can be all they can be.

gundogguy · Post by **gundogguy** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 4:01 pm

Flint wrote:
gundogguy wrote:
Right-On! Training is the one factor that gives a dog an edge in learning how to follow the direction the bird takes when flushed. Training develops the strength needed.

I have a theory that smart dogs learn to “estimate” the distance to the fall in these scenarios based on the time between flush & shot. It’s uncanny how some dogs seem to run just the right distance even though there was no way they could’ve seen the bird once it flushed.

+1 exactly think back on your retriever training. I personally do not think that All- Age Retrievers actually see a dead duck thrown by a bird boy some 400 yards away, they are conditioned to go deep. Genetically speaking the dogs that cannot be conditioned to go deep do not fare well in trials.
Spaniels learn to mark thru repetition the same way and there is a percentage of spaniels that have real talent in this area. For the average dog there is a limit in which marking can be improved on. Over the years we have both watched dogs come to training sessions run very nice, find birds, and are very reliable with their manners, how ever they consistently fall short in the ability to mark the fall of shot flyers at good spaniel distances.

Hal

crackerd · Post by **crackerd** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 5:06 pm

gundogguy wrote:...think back on your retriever training. I personally do not think that All- Age Retrievers actually see a dead duck thrown by a bird boy some 400 yards away, they are conditioned to go deep. Genetically speaking the dogs that cannot be conditioned to go deep do not fare well in trials.

"Go long or go home!", gundogguy. Of course if you don't go for the much shorter middle indent retired bird, you go home, too!

On a lark, I trained a Boykin as if to run retriever FTs (for which they're not eligible, as you know), and took a different tack with repetition in "stretching her out" for marks - worked a charm, driving through tall cover included.

MG

chrokeva · Post by **chrokeva** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:59 pm

gundogguy wrote:
mnaj_springer wrote:

Training: By that I refer to subjecting a dog to a consistent number of birds, may they be pigeons, or pheasants. Think of the dog that has made game and now drives into the nest or track knowing full well they possibly could be hit in the face wings or cover as the bird launches. By numbers I usually budget 45-50 birds per month (3-5 bird work) sessions per week after dog has been steadied. This process may go on for quite a long period of time. many months and possible years. Our current dog Zeta for example from the time she was 8 months until present day.

I budget 6 birds a week (25 a month) for my young dog and boy does that get expensive quick! At $10 a bird for a pheasant that works out to about $250 a month just for birds. I do have to say that I can see a marked improvement in her bird work the more birds she gets though. I was hoping we could cut back on her bird addiction but not sure that is going to happen anytime soon

.

Post by **mnaj_springer** » Wed Oct 28, 2015 5:27 am

Yeah, I don't think most people can do 50 birds a month, even if they are cheap pigeons. If you can buy them at $3/bird (a ridiculously low price here), that's still $150 a month that I have personally don't have to spare. I may be moving out of town soon though and will begin to build my pigeon coops and another pen for game birds. That way I'll have birds, and I'll sell just enough of them to cover some of the cost.

chrokeva · Post by **chrokeva** » Wed Oct 28, 2015 9:10 am

The cocker nationals are off and running. Hoping to keep updated here https://www.facebook.com/CockerNational/?fref=ts

polmaise · Post by **polmaise** » Wed Oct 28, 2015 2:17 pm

Fortunately and fortuitous over in Blighty we actually get paid for hunting our spaniels hunting and flushing game ! ..You get a healthy meal provided at lunch time for your efforts as well

CDN_Cocker · Post by **CDN_Cocker** » Wed Oct 28, 2015 3:52 pm

mnaj_springer wrote:Yeah, I don't think most people can do 50 birds a month, even if they are cheap pigeons. If you can buy them at $3/bird (a ridiculously low price here), that's still $150 a month that I have personally don't have to spare. I may be moving out of town soon though and will begin to build my pigeon coops and another pen for game birds. That way I'll have birds, and I'll sell just enough of them to cover some of the cost.

Agreed, pigeons here are $5 a piece... I generally only get about 12-24 per month.