Hunt tests or trials

[GSP9]

Looking for some info and suggestions...

I have a soon to be 3 year old male GSP. He is turning into a nice bord dog, and I am getting the itch to do some testing, trialing, etc. with him. He has never run in any sort of trial or hunt test, but after all the work I've given him this summer he is steady to wing and shot.

What sort of events should I look to get started in that would be most beneficial to me and the dog? AKC hunt tests, local trials, etc?

Also, we hunt Grouse 90% of the time and I don't want to do anything to really interfere with that. Just looking for something to do on the side and see how he stacks up against other dogs. Maybe he is too old to introduce to these things?

Any advice is appreciated.

[Greg Jennings]

The field trial with a walking amateur gun dog stake would be my first choice. Hunt test, in MH, would be my second. My only reason between the two is that a little less "crap" seems to happen at FT vs HT.

Greg J.

[GSP9]

So basically I can just find one close by...register him...and run him?

Can you elaborate a little on the "crap" at hunt tests if you wouldn't mind? Sorry...I'm a rookie.

[chris andrews]

You might want to look at www.unitedbirdhunters.com. Our field trials are designed with the Hunting Dog in mind. You can field trial and hunt the same dog.

Respectfully,

Chris Andrews

[original mngsp]

You can field trial and hunt the same dog.

I do that with my dogs that I have run in AKC walking trials, AKC and AF Horseback trials. I guess I better quit hunting my dogs since you cant trial and hunt the same dog

[GSP9]

Can you give me any input? Or just hijack the post?

[larue]

ok,hunt tests are judged on a minimum standard,while field trials are a competition.
In other words,if your dog does the work,in a hunt test,he passes for that day,gets a ribbon and you feel like you got something done,which you did.
In field trials,only the winning dog often gets any closer to becoming a fc,so your dog can do all the work,and get nothing to show for it.
To run in any akc event your dog must be registered with the akc.
So which to run depends on you and your dog,but expect some good times and some learning times in either.

[Casper]

I'd say that if you want to say my dog is better than the rest out there than start FTing. It feels good that you have the "better" dog when you get that ribbon. But if you just want to do something when you are not hunting and want to prove your training than give the hunt tests a go. Both can be fun and rewarding in the end.

Crap can be defined in so many ways from politics to phony scenarios to poor judging and the like.

FWIW

[Dave Quindt]

I think field trialing is just about as much fun as you can have with your clothes on. Having said that, my recommendation would be to start with hunt tests; particularly MH.

Hunt tests allow you to learn how to handle your dog under judgment, without the pressures of competition. While some of the situations & judging can be a bit "contrived" IMO they are still a better option for a newbie running a broke dog for the first time. You can have a wonderful dog who gives great performances in a trial, but never get a whiff of a placement because other dogs gave better performances. Or, run a hunt test where your dog's performance is judged against the standard.

I'm not sure where exactly you are located, but assuming in the northern US; the number of walking trials held in the fall is extremely low. Hunt tests are more prevalent and accessible.

I'd start with hunt tests and work towards your MH title. If/when you get that, you'll be in a good position to move up to trials in the future.

JMO,
Dave

[GSP9]

Thanks for the input guys. I think I will read up on the AKC hunt tests, and see when there are some in my area. It seems like that is what I'm looking for. My job is pretty demanding and I don't know if I'd have the time to really get into field trialing.

Thanks!

[original mngsp]

Sorry for being so gruff earlier but when anyone throws out the idea that you cant hunt with a trial dog it really gets my dander up.

I like to hear about anyone that wants to extend thier "dog" season by trialing and/or testing. I started out with NAVHDA testing, moved into AKC testing and then started trialing. If you and your dog are the one dog/one hunter/upland and waterfowl team then make sure you check out NAVHDA, the program there is hard to beat.

Otherwise if waterfowl isnt to much of a concern I would get involved with AKC Hunt Tests. While the MH program and title is impressive, if you are new as a handler but dog is STWS I would reccomend the SH test as a start. Train to the MH level but in SH the handler can do and say more things to help the dog out, more like real hunting.

I am a hunter/trialer now and love it, but wouldn't enjoy it nearly as much or have stayed in it as long if I didnt go through the AKC HT program and learn about handling skills and expectations in a non-competetive enviroment.

Hope you find something that suits you and your dog and enjoy the heck out of it.

[GSP9]

No problem...I just really wanted to make sure I got some good info before the post went sideways.

I am going to do the hunt tests I think. Once I read up on it I might have more questions. Thanks for the info.

[SwitchGrassWPG]

I'd suggest going out to each venue to see what fits your desires and most importantly, your dog. Not every dog is a field trial dog nor is every dog a hunt test dog, no matter how good of a hunter they are. Witness for yourself so you have an idea what is involved in each.

Jay

[Greg Jennings]

Having come up through the HT program and started field trialing, I think I would have been happier going directly to walking field trials. Now, don't get me wrong, a good HT is a wonderful thing and it brings people into the sport. It's just that fewer of them than FT have : 1. Good Birds. 2. A Good Course and 3. Good Judges.

Greg J.

[ezzy333]

My opinion would be do a JH title and then walking trial. Both are fun and good experience.

Ezzy

[original mngsp]

Howie

We are lucky in the fact that many of the local clubs use a single course without a birdbird for the HT, even the ones that still use a bird field are pretty good at using a large one and still laying out a pretty decent course. You go to some other states or regions around the country you can find terrible terible courses and little postage stamp size bird fields.

[Greg Jennings]

I would have disagree with some of this Gregg. In Minnesota HT test are run on the same coarses that the walking field trials are run on for the most part. I have seen good and bad flying birds in both. The
judges are qualified both FT and HT for the most part. Some say that Minnesota is a very tough place to run HT ( MH ) because the judges are so demanding. I like that!!! I hear FT sec. say at FT's well we know that x amount
of dogs will get through the walking Field Trail today because there Master Hunters. Maybe it's a regionalized thing. Howie Hill http://www.northwatersgsps.com

I'll tell you that I've never run a HT on a FT course and further that I've never run a HT that, if I walked normally, didn't hit the bird field in less than 10 min. Many of the courses that I've run had a bird field that I could just about spit across. Most, not all, of the HT judges I've test under were not field trialers. Some I had my doubts had ever hunted a bird.

Demanding: depends on what you mean. If the judge is looking for a bird dog...primarly looking for intelligent application with great manners, than I'm all for it. If, however, "demanding" means that someone is going to pick up a dog for, for example, the dog taking a single step when pivoting 180 degrees to mark, then, well, I'm not for it.

In order to give fair treatment, I guess I need to say that I've been to enough FT to see dogs with a screaming run down the horse path and a broke find get used over dogs with much better application.

Just me and my own experience; understanding that it's somewhat limited: if I had it to do over, I'd skip the hunt test and I'd probably never run my dog as a derby. Puppy, then go train till he's ready for broke-dog stakes. If I did run HT, I'd probably skip the JH.

Ah, NAVHDA. I wore myself out on duck hunting a long time ago, so I'm not deep into it. But, NAVHDA has the appeal of being more focused on training. The clubs have training days about once a month or so. Not many local AKC-oriented clubs do. NAVHDA, definitely has its advantages.

The bottom line for me is that the testing or titles should not drive the training. The training and what the dog needs should come first. Testing/trialing should be secondary. Already made that mistake and living with the regrets.

Addendum: I've said it before and will say it again so the new guy will know where I'm coming from. A good test (or trial, for that matter) is made up of three things (in priority order): 1. Good Birds. 2. A Good Course and 3. Good Judging. If you get good coverage of those, you're going to have a positive experience with your dog and there's nothing better than that.

Greg J.

Greg J.

[Greg Jennings]

Greg, If I offended you I'm sorry, what wrote wasn't meant to do that.

Howie, no offense taken at all. I just got on something of a rip. My GSP is home now and I've been thinking about where I could take him to a hunt test this fall. It's frustrating.

Greg J.