Scout and hamdler

[JKP]

JKP have you ever been to a FT?

Yes...but they were here in the east and quite frankly, I didn't get it. The dogs ran no better than many dogs at NAVHDA .... nice snappy dogs and some had very nice manners on their birds. You certainly didn't need a scout for them.

If you want to avoid the discussion by discrediting me...that's fair game. Won't change the fact that a trial dog is being influenced by a second person...the performance is being enhanced by the "persuasion" of a potentially out of sight second handler....that may be accepted procedure....but to me its bogus. Good dogs that are trained shouldn't need enforcement/pressure during an hour in the field to behave properly. I didn't realize that was an accepted part of the game. I guess I was assuming that dogs were honest and really hunting for the handler not being reminded/pressured/influenced by a scout. After 42 years in dogs, I realize any intelligent dog knows where you are and how to find you...if it cares to.

My definition of a cooperative dog is different than yours. Granted, my dogs don't run as big or fast...but frankly, if a dog is trained and cooperative 200 yds or 400 yds...it shouldn't matter.

Why not track these dogs with GPS?? forget the scout and reward the dogs that really maintain contact...get the second handler out of the game. If the dog is off the course and headed to Pittsburgh, it can be picked up...without risk of inappropriate handling by the scout. Be interesting to see a trial with no scouts...and how many dogs finish with the handler.

[Chukar12]

Yes...but they were here in the east and quite frankly, I didn't get it. The dogs ran no better than many dogs at NAVHDA .... nice snappy dogs and some had very nice manners on their birds. You certainly didn't need a scout for them.

That's a fair and honest answer...It is all a game and a tradition and an argument could be made for days about it...When you are riding your speed and ground coverage is much greater than walking. Judges want to watch a dog on course and not ride all over tarnation with the handler, you run out of horse quite a bit as it is...so they send a scout to see if there is anything worth seeing out there (a dog on point) that freedom morphs into the gray area that is debated hotly here and its fair enough. I guess the real concern is whether the aprticipants remain happy.

[slistoe]

We are all learning from this discussion...mostly that y'all are kidding yourself about how honest some of these dogs (and people) are....that a dog can be/will be handled by the scout....corrected....styled.....kept from leaving the course....we all have learned a lot about trials and trial dogs. All this while I though this was an honest sport. Never heard anyone say before that a dog is "dual handled" at trials but that is what has been described. I don't doubt that there are many very good, honest dogs....but I now understand why I see so many dogs from FT lines that are a real challenge for owners. I also know now that it's necessary to ask how a dog finished or if there was suspected double handling during a dog's career....and if the dog is really a 500 yd dog or if its the scout that keeps him out on the edge...and many other questions. I appreciate your passion for the sport but I think y'all have the rose colored glasses on. There's a whole lot that's been learned here....respect it for what it is but know the questions to ask....and for the lurkers and newbies I'm sure this has been valuable. We have heard many casual mentions of dogs being out of sight, having to be located by the scout, unseen by the judges. "two valleys over"....scout steering the dog back on the course.....this doesn't seem to be the description in the "mission" statement at Ames, for example where dogs should "be seen to be evaluated".
I'd be interested to know how long during a 1 hour stake a dog can be gone from view but still win/place. If the dog is unobserved for 50 minutes but is found twice on point to the front....does that work? Take away the scout and require the dogs to hunt to the terrain and remain in view such that the handler could quickly get to the bird and gun it, and this would interest me. Every time a dog is influenced by one of the "handlers", its not the dog that's doing it...can't see how you can see it any other way. If that's the case, the dog is not maintaining contact....the dog is not working for the handler. Dog didn't go to the edge....the scout gave the dog the confidence to go/stay out there....the dog didn't come back to the front/on the course...the scout corrected the dog....the dog's tail and head weren't held high....the scout corrected it out of sight of the judges. Sort of like the surgical wonder babe at the bar that says she's lookin "for a real man".

Sure I'm havin fun with this...but its interesting to me that not one of the died in the wool FT'ers thinks anything is wrong with this...sounds to me like winning at any cost is the rule of the road....and perception is more .important than fact.

How much rationalization and denial is the average foot hunter supposed to put up with?

Guess I'm not the only one that noticed.[/quote]

I don't know who edited this post, but everything I posted has been removed by someone.

[JKP]

Slistoe,
You've been riding my butt for years...but by now you must realize that I don't cut anyone slack, not my own venue either. Whenever you start kidding yourself what a dog is or isn't, you start losing your way. You can call "handling" anything you want, as long as you tell folks that it involves two people getting a dog around the course, I really don't care. We hear an awful lot of hype over FT dogs....but dogs that "show at the end two valleys over" and win...like speaking Greek to the guy who wants to go bird hunting on the week end after T ball and mowing the lawn.

Have fun....wish you all well....and I'm sure...no, I know....that there are sonme very good dogs in your ranks...but which ones are the honest dogs....who knows?? Sounds like the wild west---only matters what you can get away with.

Like I said...put a GPS on these dogs....forget the scout....and count the minutes the dog can actually be seen....that I could respect. You all maintain that these are hunting dogs....then let the handler hunt them....you can't find them then you're not shooting birds.

[tn red]

Slistoe,
You've been riding my butt for years...but by now you must realize that I don't cut anyone slack, not my own venue either. Whenever you start kidding yourself what a dog is or isn't, you start losing your way. You can call "handling" anything you want, as long as you tell folks that it involves two people getting a dog around the course, I really don't care. We hear an awful lot of hype over FT dogs....but dogs that "show at the end two valleys over" and win...like speaking Greek to the guy who wants to go bird hunting on the week end after T ball and mowing the lawn.

Have fun....wish you all well....and I'm sure...no, I know....that there are sonme very good dogs in your ranks...but which ones are the honest dogs....who knows?? Sounds like the wild west---only matters what you can get away with.

Like I said...put a GPS on these dogs....forget the scout....and count the minutes the dog can actually be seen....that I could respect. You all maintain that these are hunting dogs....then let the handler hunt them....you can't find them then you're not shooting birds.

Do you run your dogs in field trials?If not why are you worried about how field trials are played?

[RayGubernat]

JKP -

I do all my field trialing in the East, and I can tell you without reservtion, there are times when a scout is needed simply because the grounds often have twists and turns and the dog may zig when you were hoping it would zag and before it could get back to you it found and pointed a bird.

I do not know what kind of trialing you have witnessed, but it sounds as if it was AKC Gundog stakes or something similar.

If AKC Gundog is your frame of reference, then you are quite right. The dog should be in view of the handler most of the time and should go with the handler with a minimum of verbal direction and YES...should only need a scout to go and see if the dog is on point.

There are three other types of trial stakes where the dog is "expected" to push the envelope as far as ground application. In an AF All Age stake, the dogs are "expected' to be out of contact with their handler for periods at a time. It is not uncommon or unusual to ride for ten minutes in a one hour stake without seeing your dog, only to find the dog standing well to the front. The same can be said, to a lesser extent about AKC All Age and AF Shooting Dog stakes, which in my area are roughly equivalent in terms of what is expected of the dog.

In these types of stakes, the scout may have to do some serious looking to find a dog because there can be many places where the dog may be.

It has been my experience that the winning dogs, in whatever type of stake, most often need very little scouting and seem to be in sync with their handler. However, there are many times where the course seems to have literally "swallowed up" a dog that was doing a wonderful job. That is when and where the scout can really save the day by locating the dog.

There is an old field trial adage that: "On a given day, you can win with most any kind of dog, except a lost dog."

RayG

[Elkhunter]

JKP you have some valid concerns, but why would having the dog be in sight a certain amount of minutes be a requirement for a win? My dog while hunting is out of sight constantly, if he drops in a drainage, or over through some rocks. He is gone all the time. He always shows to the front and has yet to turn up lost yet. He has disappeared for an hour, he was chasing deer, but never lost while hunting. I want a dog with enough independence to feel comfortable out of sight.

[JKP]

Ray,
I know of the differences in the formats. I guess what i have problems with is the oft heard contention that these highly independent dogs, bred to go forward and be followed make great foot hunting dogs for the average Joe. What has been described here is a program where folks are actively engaged in breeding dogs that will run a mile and not look back....that need multiple people to find the dog...hopefully on birds. I have no problem with that. Every game has its rules. But if I'm buying a dog I want to know that...it takes 2-3 people, a gallery and judges to keep track of this dog...and by the way, the handling we speak of could be the owner/trainer, the scout or the guy we have hiding in the bushes ...and as long as we have a scout out there, the dog will come back to the front....which could be 2 valleys over.

Without electronics, are such dogs huntable??

Forget the scout...put GPS on these dogs and find out which dogs are really keeping in touch...I think you guys are kidding yourselves big time. The scout is a crutch...raise the bar...if you want to convince the world these are hunting dogs then show us that these dogs are truly working for the gun...not for themselves ... and its up to us to catch up to them.

I'm done....still think every breed needs these dogs...just disappointed to hear there is so much shenanigans going on...sort of takes the glow off for me.

[Karen]

Wow! I'd like to think my dogs are smart enough to know the difference between a foot handled hunt and a horseback competition. All I have to say is "close" to my big running shooting dogs, and they'll stay within 50 yards of me. THAT is handling kindly.

[Vonzeppelinkennels]

I don't care what the venue is there are little tricks done by the handler that makes your dog look as good as possible,including the show ring & if it takes some one other then the handler to help out it's done.That's the handlers job & if a scout is used it's his job to do the same.If you don't like the game don't play the game & stick to the game you know something about.

[slistoe]

I don't care what the venue is there are little tricks done by the handler that makes your dog look as good as possible,including the show ring & if it takes some one other then the handler to help out it's done.That's the handlers job & if a scout is used it's his job to do the same.If you don't like the game don't play the game & stick to the game you know something about.

This would include hunting. Every hunter has little tricks to help his dog.

[adogslife]

If it's not allowed it's called cheating.
Since all involved know the rules, know that cheating goes on, then all is fair - but it's still cheating.

I am getting the impression that these dogs do not have that big of a run,considering that its the scout that may be pushing the dogs out and that the dog is not aware of the location of the handler and judges,considering that the scout has to heard the dog back and they all may not have that much style,considering the scout may have gotten off the horse and styled the dog. I now see the benefit of a judge only judging what they see.
How about the scenario of the scout throwing down a bird for the dog to point and then calling point,after he has styled up the dog?Now if I was going to cheat, I would do this.

I find it interesting that a dog that can not be seen is still in judgement and this is considered a good thing.
I am at a lose because I can not understand how run is equated to prey drive.
But I guess that's a different can of worms.

This type fo cheating does not occur in versatile dog tests.
Yes, I have seen cheating. Peanuts compared to field trials.

[Vonzeppelinkennels]

If you see it that way dogslife then like I said stick to your game that you know something about.An AA dog pretty much should only be seen at the Breakaway,while on point,& finish.Put that in your pipe & smoke it. Why should it matter to any of you that are against F Trials any way? Really?

How many F trialers are on here critisising your game dogslife,not many you know why? Because we could care less & then again your game is PERFECT!!Yeah Right!!
STAY IN YOUR LANE!! :roll:

By I'm gone Turkey hunting for a couple weeks!!

[nikegundog]

By I'm gone Turkey hunting for a couple weeks!!

Its easiest to sneak in during the night and shoot them off their roost.

[brad27]

Its easiest to sneak in during the night and shoot them off their roost.

Hey, no cheating!

[adogslife]

please explain:
the purpose of the scout is to keep tabs on the dog
why aren't the handler on the entry form and the judges capable of doing this?

[brad27]

please explain:
the purpose of the scout is to keep tabs on the dog
why aren't the handler on the entry form and the judges capable of doing this?

they are capable.
have you ever been to a FT? if you have you would know how much/little the scout is used. you would also know, if you actually went to one, that the handlers and judges have to stay on course and can't be riding all over looking for a dog that might have gone on point behind a bush, or rock, or ridge.

why are you asking questions? do you really care to learn? or are you just doing it to cause problems? if it's the former, my best advice would be to go to one and see for yourself. if it's the later, well, ............................................

[adogslife]

they are capable.
have you ever been to a FT? if you have you would know how much/little the scout is used. you would also know, if you actually went to one, that the handlers and judges have to stay on course and can't be riding all over looking for a dog that might have gone on point behind a bush, or rock, or ridge.

why are you asking questions? do you really care to learn? or are you just doing it to cause problems? if it's the former, my best advice would be to go to one and see for yourself. if it's the later, well, ............................................

How do you know how much a scout is used? From what was posted the scouts work is done under the radar.

IOW, they can't be going on wild goose chases.

Not looking to cause problems, looking for an explaination
Its not so bad that the scout uses his horse to keep the dog to the front,to keep him on course, but to possibly intimidate a dog or touch a dog is well, cheating
We all like to give a dog the best chance at looking good and winning but lets face it, the dogs either got it or doesn't. Now, tell me, how can anyone trust that any particular field trial dog has IT?
What would become of the competition without the scouts?
If you can't trust the system you can't trust the genetics.

[remmy]

Like mentioned, the handler and judge must stay on course. Where I trial, there are a lot of hedgerows intersecting. Do you really think the dog is briefed beforehand on where the course goes? The dog, for the most part, listens to the handler sing...that cues the dog on which way to go. Now, you take a big running AA or Shooting dog thats way out there he can't hear the singing anymore and must make its own decision. The dog comes across an intersecting hedgerow or tree line. Which way does he go? He can't hear his handler anymore so a smart dog would hunt the wind and that can be turning right at the intersecting hedgerow where the course actually turns left. Now that dog ran a few hundred yards or 1/2 mile off course and pointed a bird. Handler gets to that same intersection and goes left following the course. The dog is standing and won't move even if he hears his handler. Now it's the scouts job to find that dog. How is that cheating? We can't use electronics so the scout replaces the e collar, tracker or gps. Do you hunt without a gps, e collar or tracker? If not, shame on you.

[Buckeye_V]

JKP - I do not know you. Have never met you before in my life. The only posts I see from you and your bunk-buddy are negative towards field trialing. Frankly I am sick of it. You ask us a question. We respond. Then you berate us for our answer. Come to a trial and see a good performance. I guarantee you in a good dog, handler scout combo you will not see how masterfully a good scout can do their job. All you will notice is what a cracker-jack job that dog is doing out front.

The scout is extra eyes, ears, mouth and hands for the handler. I can ride the crap out of my horse behind the gallery scouting for the dog and I do NOTHING illegal. All I am doing is watching and giving responses when asked. I ride hard to the front to hold the handler's horse and get water ready for when they are done working a find. Repeat all over again.

Come out and watch. You can even ride one of my horses. Come get an education you will NEVER forget.

Justin Allen
Norwich, OH

[Buckeye_V]

please explain:
the purpose of the scout is to keep tabs on the dog
why aren't the handler on the entry form and the judges capable of doing this?

Who wants to put up a dog both can see the whole way around the course? Have you ever judged a trial? Have you ever seen a good performance at a field trial in your life?

If your purpose of that post was to insinuate that FT dogs/handlers/scouts are merely pushing performances that are less than deserving of a win - you are flat out NUTZ.

Did you get burned at a field trial once? is that the source of your deep-rooted anger and frustration?

[slistoe]

Yes, I have seen cheating. Peanuts compared to field trials.

And how in the world would you have any idea at all???? You don't. You are totally clueless about how much cheating goes on. But if things like this make you feel better about your sport, have at it.

[Wagonmaster]

In response to the OP's original post, I admit that I can be a bit of a hamdler as many of us are. The scout is there to make you look good, or at least look better. Being a natural born hamdler is something of a hamdicap.

[adogslife]

is that the source of your deep-rooted anger and frustration?

Who would you be referring to?
Only anger and frustration I see is from the field trial enthusiats.

[brad27]

How do you know how much a scout is used? From what was posted the scouts work is done under the radar.

IOW, they can't be going on wild goose chases.

Not looking to cause problems, looking for an explaination
Its not so bad that the scout uses his horse to keep the dog to the front,to keep him on course, but to possibly intimidate a dog or touch a dog is well, cheating
We all like to give a dog the best chance at looking good and winning but lets face it, the dogs either got it or doesn't. Now, tell me, how can anyone trust that any particular field trial dog has IT?
What would become of the competition without the scouts?
If you can't trust the system you can't trust the genetics.

i think you're taking all the things rayg said as the rule rather than the exception. does cheating happen. absolutely. is it the norm. no. is there a event involving humans and competion that doesn't have cheating?

now, i've only been to 2 FTs so my knowledge is limited, but out of all the braces i've watched (maybe 15) i have only seen the scout leave the gallery twice. once when a dog ran behind the gallery the scout was sent to get the dog going the right direction. the other time was when my dog decided to turn left and make a 1000 yard cast. both those dogs didn't place.

[JKP]

I think I have figured this out...I have made a wrong assumption. FT'ers DON'T want a cooperative dog...they want a dog that will handle---definition...can be commanded/influenced through voice, singing, visual sign to run to the front.

These are two different dogs (and maybe this is a separate topic). For me a cooperative dog is one that maintains contact on its own...checks in to see where I am regularly such that I pretty much know where it is. You're not looking for that...that kind of dog is too dependent (another great topic---Dependent vs independent). Instead, you want a dog that keeps going, the handler maintains the contact, not the dog...through visual, sound (singing) or influence of the scout. A dog that looks to the handler too much (noting quickly a change of direction, for instance) would NOT be a candidate for FT. A dog that maintains contact too closely, wants to know where the handler is too much, would NOT have the mental makeup for FT. FT is about dogs that have less need for that contact and we use methods to release the dog from the necessity of keeping closer contact...the scout, singing, etc and eventually when hunting GPS. I would assume, that you can't train dogs to do this...they either have this as a genetic default mode or not. Those with that genetic default mode, can then be conditioned to put down the run required to be competitive.

Can we discuss this without someone accusing me of being negative.

[brad27]

I think I have figured this out...I have made a wrong assumption. FT'ers DON'T want a cooperative dog...they want a dog that will handle---definition...can be commanded/influenced through voice, singing, visual sign to run to the front.

kind of..... the good ones learn where they should be with minimal influence from you. they get used to going with you and working for you.

example: the last FT i went to i got to watch ultracarry's dog win a 5 point retrieving major. the handler sang to her only once, the rest of the time she was working out in front doing what bird dogs do.

[RayGubernat]

Ray,

Without electronics, are such dogs huntable??

JKP -

I can only answer for myself. The answer is yes.

My trial dogs and hunting dogs are the same dogs. Yes I hunt them every so often and while I generally run my dogs with e-collars on, occasionally I hunt them without. Since I have had the Garmin GPS, I have tended to use that in place of the e-collar more and more often. Just as a point of reference, my dogs are essentially AF horseback shooting dogs and two of them can and have done a creditable job in AF amateur All Age competition. They can run.

I typically hunt on preserves that range in size from 30 - 70 acres in size. Oh and when they point a bird...they wait for me to get there...however long that may take. They had better or there will be H@!! to pay. I will not tolerate a dog that is not honest. It's job is to find the bird...for me. It is my job to flush and shoot the bird. My dogs know that from a very early age and I make sure they never forget.

RayG

[fuzznut]

Trust me fella's... JKP knows all about trials and trial dogs. Y'all are wasting your time... he doens't want to learn, nor appreciate. There is an agenda here......
Fuzz

[kensfishing]

Ray,
I know of the differences in the formats. I guess what i have problems with is the oft heard contention that these highly independent dogs, bred to go forward and be followed make great foot hunting dogs for the average Joe. What has been described here is a program where folks are actively engaged in breeding dogs that will run a mile and not look back....that need multiple people to find the dog...hopefully on birds. I have no problem with that. Every game has its rules. But if I'm buying a dog I want to know that...it takes 2-3 people, a gallery and judges to keep track of this dog...and by the way, the handling we speak of could be the owner/trainer, the scout or the guy we have hiding in the bushes ...and as long as we have a scout out there, the dog will come back to the front....which could be 2 valleys over.

Without electronics, are such dogs huntable??

Forget the scout...put GPS on these dogs and find out which dogs are really keeping in touch...I think you guys are kidding yourselves big time. The scout is a crutch...raise the bar...if you want to convince the world these are hunting dogs then show us that these dogs are truly working for the gun...not for themselves ... and its up to us to catch up to them.

I'm done....still think every breed needs these dogs...just disappointed to hear there is so much shenanigans going on...sort of takes the glow off for me.

These dogs are extremely huntable. We took RU in an AA Championship with him and hunt him on foot all time. We also run in 20 minute 3 bird competions with the same dog. Dogs are dogs with good and great breeding you can do anything you want with them.

[dan v]

I think I have figured this out...I have made a wrong assumption.

For me a cooperative dog is one that maintains contact on its own...checks in to see where I am regularly such that I pretty much know where it is.............A dog that maintains contact too closely, wants to know where the handler is too much, would NOT have the mental makeup for FT.

Dang...you nailed the reason I find the vast majority of NAVDHA dogs well trained but boring and dependent.

[RayGubernat]

I think I have figured this out...I have made a wrong assumption.

For me a cooperative dog is one that maintains contact on its own...checks in to see where I am regularly such that I pretty much know where it is.............A dog that maintains contact too closely, wants to know where the handler is too much, would NOT have the mental makeup for FT.

Dang...you nailed the reason I find the vast majority of NAVDHA dogs well trained but boring and dependent.

+1 on the boring. I don't have a lot of expereince with Navhda dogs but some hunt test dogs absolutely put me to sleep. To be fair, I have seen some Senior and Master hunter level dogs that were animated, hunted with enthusiasm and joy and were exciting to watch, but they were somewhat the exception.

A dog that hunts at 50 - 100 yards in open country is pretty much a waste of feed, at least for me. I don't need a dog to go to the places I can walk to on my own. I need a dog to go to the places I don't want to go... to see if there is a bird there. I want a dog that covers the whole field then looks back or loops back to make sure that I'm still coming and then punches out and hunts some more. A dog that hunts hard, fast and independently and still checks for me and waits for me is all the cooperativeness I need or want in a dog.

A question for the hunters out there? Is a dog that hunts to the limits, occasionally disappearing and then re-appearing to check up on their human not being extremely cooperative? Think about that for a moment.

The way I see it, the dog that is maintaining contact at the edge of visual and sensory range is displaying an extraordinary level of cooperativeness because that dog could be GONE...GOODBYE, and yet it CHOOSES to keep coming back for its hunter/handler. That, to me is cooperation.

The dog that is always in view at the edge of shotgun range is NOT being cooperative, in my opinion. Cooperation infers a choice. The dog that is hunting under the thumb of the hunter/handler really does not have much of a choice.

To each their own...hunt over what you like. I certainly do.

RayG

[RayGubernat]

Trust me fella's... JKP knows all about trials and trial dogs. Y'all are wasting your time... he doens't want to learn, nor appreciate. There is an agenda here......
Fuzz

Bernee -

I figured that out a few posts back. If someone is taking potshots at field trials and field trial dogs, I view it as an opportunity to educate.

The person taking potshots might not be educable, might have a closed mind on the subject, but there are probably dozens of readers with open minds that might be wondering: "Who is pulling who's chain here?" becasue they might not know and might have heard all manner of horror stories about field trial dogs.

Those folks with honest questions and an open mind are those I would like to speak to.

RayG


RayG

[Hotchkiss]

The first and most important duty of the scout is to be the eyes and ears of the handler where the handler cannot possibly be.
Here is a classic example...If the handler is following the field trial course and the dog is off to the right a hundred or two hundred yards away, on the opposite side of a hedgerrow(because that is the way the wind is blowing)... there is absolutely no way the handler is going to see their dog if it stops and points on the onther side of a twenty foot thick hedgerow. By the time the handler figures out the dog ain't out to the front, they are usually well out in front of the dog and need to go back and check.

That never looks good and if the dog is actually to the front, you may well end up with a lost dog because you chose to go back and check. Bad scene all the way around.

However, if the scout is riding that right edge on the other side of the hedge but roughly parallel(or even hanging back a ways to get a better field of view)to the field trial party, spotting the standing dog and calling point should be routine. This is all in order and a smart as well as totally proper use of a scout. Eyes and ears of the handler where the handler cannot be.


Thanks. Great example.

This allows the dog the freedom to use a much more expansive ground patterna nd application and the handler the assurance that the dog is still where it should be.

RayG

[slistoe]

FT'ers DON'T want a cooperative dog...they want a dog that will handle---

Field trialers demand the most cooperative dogs. They are allowed the freedom to go where they will - they are not directed, controlled and dominated - but they are absolutely expected to make the right choices: go with your handler and maintain the front. Find birds and hold point - out of sight and out of direct control - for as long as it takes.

And this is an awesome thing because I get to have dogs like that to hunt with. A ballet of mutual trust and respect.

[slistoe]

The first and most important duty of the scout is to be the eyes and ears of the handler where the handler cannot possibly be.
Here is a classic example...If the handler is following the field trial course and the dog is off to the right a hundred or two hundred yards away, on the opposite side of a hedgerrow(because that is the way the wind is blowing)... there is absolutely no way the handler is going to see their dog if it stops and points on the onther side of a twenty foot thick hedgerow. By the time the handler figures out the dog ain't out to the front, they are usually well out in front of the dog and need to go back and check.

That never looks good and if the dog is actually to the front, you may well end up with a lost dog because you chose to go back and check. Bad scene all the way around.

However, if the scout is riding that right edge on the other side of the hedge but roughly parallel(or even hanging back a ways to get a better field of view)to the field trial party, spotting the standing dog and calling point should be routine. This is all in order and a smart as well as totally proper use of a scout. Eyes and ears of the handler where the handler cannot be.

This allows the dog the freedom to use a much more expansive ground patterna nd application and the handler the assurance that the dog is still where it should be.

RayG

Thanks. Great example.

The other nice thing about this example is that it highlights the differences between taking your dog hunting and running your dog in a trial. If I were hunting in this scenario I would not need a scout for the dog because 1) I would free to go to the proper side of the hedge and watch the dog myself. 2) I would not have to maintain a continuous forward pace but could choose to stand and watch the dog work the hedge. But in a field trial there are many more things to be accomplished/shown/observed than the simple fact of whether there may be birds in that particular hedgerow. So the course runs as the course runs, scouts become the extra eye, and the dogs need to hunt accordingly.

[RayGubernat]

FT'ers DON'T want a cooperative dog...they want a dog that will handle---

Field trialers demand the most cooperative dogs. They are allowed the freedom to go where they will - they are not directed, controlled and dominated - but they are absolutely expected to make the right choices: go with your handler and maintain the front. Find birds and hold point - out of sight and out of direct control - for as long as it takes.

And this is an awesome thing because I get to have dogs like that to hunt with. A ballet of mutual trust and respect.

+1 on this. A field trial dog is a doga dog that has the drive and desire to hunt at a quarter mile(sometimes more) from their handler. Anyone who does not theink the dog can easily take those extra two steps and go off on their own is wrong. They can. Heck, sometimes they do.

But when they do not...it is a conscious, deliberate choice to stay with and hunt for their master. It is cooperation of the highest degree from an animal that is bred and trained and conditioned to run like the wind.

To those who feel they must see their dog 100% of the time I say this...

There is a joy you will never know.

There is always a little uneasiness when a dog fades out of sight, but unless you deal with that uneasiness with the confidence in your partner's willingness to hunt with you and for you, you can never know the exquisite joy of topping a rise, or turning a corner and finding your canine partner locked up on point waiting...FOR YOU!!

That joy goes beyond hunting...that's bird doggin' and it is waaay cool!!

RayG

[nikegundog]

I figured that out a few posts back. If someone is taking potshots at field trials and field trial dogs, I view it as an opportunity to educate.

The person taking potshots might not be educable, might have a closed mind on the subject, but there are probably dozens of readers with open minds that might be wondering: "Who is pulling who's chain here?" becasue they might not know and might have heard all manner of horror stories about field trial dogs.

+1 on the boring. I don't have a lot of expereince with Navhda dogs but some hunt test dogs absolutely put me to sleep. To be fair, I have seen some Senior and Master hunter level dogs that were animated, hunted with enthusiasm and joy and were exciting to watch, but they were somewhat the exception.

A dog that hunts at 50 - 100 yards in open country is pretty much a waste of feed, at least for me. I don't need a dog to go to the places I can walk to on my own. I need a dog to go to the places I don't want to go... to see if there is a bird there.

Ray, it seems like you might be the one making some of the potshots

[ACooper]

Bottom line is to each their own... if FT dogs were the answer for everyone there wouldn't be NAVHDA or breeders who advertise close working foot hunting dogs.
FT is another game to enjoy dogs and extend your season, but when people loose the ability to be objective about their game of choice or dog of choice there isn't much point talking about it any further. This and several other posts lately have shown a HUGE lack of objectivity from all sides.

[RayGubernat]

If it's not allowed it's called cheating.
Since all involved know the rules, know that cheating goes on, then all is fair - but it's still cheating.

I am getting the impression that these dogs do not have that big of a run,considering that its the scout that may be pushing the dogs out and that the dog is not aware of the location of the handler and judges,considering that the scout has to heard the dog back and they all may not have that much style,considering the scout may have gotten off the horse and styled the dog. I now see the benefit of a judge only judging what they see.
How about the scenario of the scout throwing down a bird for the dog to point and then calling point,after he has styled up the dog?Now if I was going to cheat, I would do this.

I find it interesting that a dog that can not be seen is still in judgement and this is considered a good thing.
I am at a lose because I can not understand how run is equated to prey drive.
But I guess that's a different can of worms.

This type fo cheating does not occur in versatile dog tests.
Yes, I have seen cheating. Peanuts compared to field trials.

The sport that has, per minute played the most cheating,,, is quite probably Professional basketball. Every single player who handles a ball, palms the ball. That is a violation. every single player who picks up their dribble at the foul line on their way to a dunk is walking, that is a violation. Basketball is "supposed" to be a non contact sport. Check out what goes on under the basket at either end of the court. Flying elbows pushing and shoving. All violations.

Nobody gets called on any of that. What a crooked sport. Nobody should watch it on TV.


I have a question about versatile dog testing?

There is a test called Natural Ability. As I understand it, folks train long and hard to get their dogs to pass this test.

Is that not cheating on a grand scale?

The test is called "Natural Ability" is it not. Why should you be permitted to train a dog to do what they should"naturally"? Why should you have to?

Either the dog has it or they don't, I should think...if it really is "Natural Ability". If it isn't maybe they should be honest about it and call it "Trained Natural Ability" ??

Yeah , Yeah, I know...I don't understand the subtleties of the game....but it is ludicrous on its face to call a test that folks train their dogs for months to pass..."Natural Ability".

RayG

[ACooper]

Yeah , Yeah, I know...I don't understand the subtleties of the game....but it is ludicrous on its face to call a test that folks train their dogs for months to pass..."Natural Ability".

RayG

Not everyone trains for the NA test. I ran my pup 18 weeks exactly the funny thing is the only part he didn't score perfect in was "search" ... a couple FT placements later I think his search is just fine!

[JKP]

I know very well what its like to trust a dog...you miss the point....when you have extra people helping to get your dog around, call it what you want but the dog is being coached during the competition...at least as RayG described it.



This is ND and this was shot on 10X zoom...I apologize that the dog isn't going away...I guess I'd have to pick her up...you have to remember that's just a Euro-bootlicker....she was over the ridge....probably 4-500 yds away....no whistle...no using the collar...no GPS....no scout.

Want to find out what your dogs are really doing 500-1000yds out there...don't send the "second handler"....put a GPS on them...then you'll find out how cooperative the dogs are and what their true range is without the support of a second handler....that's all I'm saying. Find out how really honest the dogs are....stop singing and see if they even come looking....I think many of you will be surprised.

[slistoe]

Find out how really honest the dogs are....stop singing and see if they even come looking....I think many of you will be surprised.

So, what do you know about these field trial dogs? What is going to happen?

[slistoe]

This is ND and this was shot on 10X zoom...I apologize that the dog isn't going away...I guess I'd have to pick her up...you have to remember that's just a Euro-bootlicker....she was over the ridge....probably 4-500 yds away....no whistle...no using the collar...no GPS....no scout.

Want to find out what your dogs are really doing 500-1000yds out there...don't send the "second handler"....put a GPS on them.

I have a good idea. Why don't you just put a GPS on that way out there dog and then sit in the camper with a cold iced tea. When the dog finds birds just drive on over there and let a couple shots fly. Call it hunting.

[RayGubernat]

I know very well what its like to trust a dog...you miss the point....when you have extra people helping to get your dog around, call it what you want but the dog is being coached during the competition...at least as RayG described it.



This is ND and this was shot on 10X zoom...I apologize that the dog isn't going away...I guess I'd have to pick her up...you have to remember that's just a Euro-bootlicker....she was over the ridge....probably 4-500 yds away....no whistle...no using the collar...no GPS....no scout.

Want to find out what your dogs are really doing 500-1000yds out there...don't send the "second handler"....put a GPS on them...then you'll find out how cooperative the dogs are and what their true range is without the support of a second handler....that's all I'm saying. Find out how really honest the dogs are....stop singing and see if they even come looking....I think many of you will be surprised.

JKP -

No I am not missing the point. You are... because you do not know the meaning of the word TRUST.

I can still see the dog. No need to trust a dog you can see. Trust comes in when the dog is out there on its own.

What I do not see is the rest of the trial party. Hmmmm.

As far as what my dogs are doing at 500 or 1000 yards, I have pulled out the tracker when I could not find a dog in the time allotted and most of the time the dog was standing somewhere, for Lord knows how long. Last time I lost my oldest female at a trial she was 1.4 miles away at the very far end of the course when I pulled out the GPS and yes, she was on point. Yes she was too far ahead of me. and was gone too long to be in contention.

Oh BTW, she stayed on point until I got to her, flushed the birds, shot and put her in harness. I estimate it took me about eight minutes or so to ride to her because I had to go a long way around due to a creek I could not cross. I think maybe I can trust that dog around birds.

As far as a dog coming back to you, you are being too cutesy here, I think.

If you know as much about field trials as you infer, you must know very well that the singing is to communicate to the dog so that it can maintain contact with its handler at far greater range than by eyesight alone and that the fastest way to get a big running dog to check in with you is to, in fact, shut up.

At least that is what I was taught and what has worked for me. When i stop singing, i expect my dog to come back and look me up. If they do not, they are most likely on point somewhere. That is when a scout can come in handy.

Soooo, what about that Natural Ability test JKP? Do you go to it with an untrained dog...or do you cheat?

RayG

[RayGubernat]

I figured that out a few posts back. If someone is taking potshots at field trials and field trial dogs, I view it as an opportunity to educate.

The person taking potshots might not be educable, might have a closed mind on the subject, but there are probably dozens of readers with open minds that might be wondering: "Who is pulling who's chain here?" becasue they might not know and might have heard all manner of horror stories about field trial dogs.

+1 on the boring. I don't have a lot of expereince with Navhda dogs but some hunt test dogs absolutely put me to sleep. To be fair, I have seen some Senior and Master hunter level dogs that were animated, hunted with enthusiasm and joy and were exciting to watch, but they were somewhat the exception.

A dog that hunts at 50 - 100 yards in open country is pretty much a waste of feed, at least for me. I don't need a dog to go to the places I can walk to on my own. I need a dog to go to the places I don't want to go... to see if there is a bird there.

Ray, it seems like you might be the one making some of the potshots

Nike -

No potshots. No veiled agendas.

Just stating my personal preferences, so that someone will not misunderstand where I am coming from. Each of us has every right to hunt over, trial or test with the kind of dog that they like. That is why there are multiple avenues for evaluating dogs and as many way of hunting as there are hunters.

I don't hunt with a lab in the uplands. Not my cup of tea. That does not mean that the thousands of folks who do hunt with labs in the upland and enjoy the experience greatly are doing something wrong. Far from it.

I simply have no use for a dog that works close in open terrain. Again, not my cup of tea.

That does not mean some other person should not be able to thoroughly enjoy what that dog does. I have no use for a mechanical bird dog either. Again, that does not mean that someone else might not get great satisfaction from hunting with such a dog.

In point of fact, that is why I have refrained from getting certified as a hunt test judge. I have seen enough hunt tests to know that is not something I would really enjoy doing myself and I would probably be overly critical of some of the dogs in certain categories. That would not be fair to the dogs. I do enjoy helping out when I can with things like stocking the backcourse and I always seem to find something I like about just about any bird dog, especially if I am just riding and watching for fun.

However, if someone is trying to deliberately denigrate what I do enjoy doing with my dogs...they can expect some of the same. It is sometimes about mutual respect or the lack thereof.

RayG

[JKP]

RayG,
First off...I believe there are some really great dogs coming through the FT efforts...I believe as you that everyone gets to pick his preference. That is not the point here.

You wrote

The scout can.... tend to keep the dog out on an edge.... can go round up an errant dog ....if it is not listening, can ride it down....give it a quick obedience lesson(out of sight and earshot of the judges and gallery)......return the dog to the handler.... can bring a dog around.....shoot the dog either back toward the handler from the front(without being observed doing so, of course) ..... check to see if birds are present and can reposition the dog and style it up(all of course without being observed) .... can do all of the above and then fade into the scenery as the field trial party approaches.

These are just some of the things I can think of offhand.

I said I find this bogus....who's handling the dog?....how can this dog be working for the handler (which handler?)....that I don't find this an honest piece of work....

I DON'T think all dogs need this kind of intervention/influence...I do think there are honest great dogs out there...but I do think that what you have described is disappointing at the least. Thus my suggestion to do away with the "coach" on horseback and see what dogs actually can be handled and hunted by the owner/trainer...make sure that when dogs show to the front, that its the dog doing it, when dogs are found with style that its the dog doing it, etc. I don't find this out of line at all.....IMO, such a dog shouldn't be helped during a competition to this degree...evidently, you feel differently. I would not be interested in dogs that I have to hotwire, ride down, bully or cajole to act appropriately. We differ....
I am for FT...but making it a whole lot more honest that what you have described.

[RayGubernat]

JKP -

My suggestion is to try it before you go on a crusade to change it.

The current field trial system of evaluating dogs has worked well and evolved over the last hundred years or so in this country.

I have some information on that female pointer I spoke of earlier that I would like to share with you. Perhaps it might be instructive as to what really goes on at a field trial rather than have you speculate.

I recently finished that dog's AKC Field Championship. Over the last four years she placed first in five Open All Age stakes garnering a total of 11 points with one three point major and four two pointers. She second in one Open Gun Dog stake that was a 4 point major for the winning dog and a couple of third places in Open all age and Open Gun Dog stakes She did not place in six other AKC stakes. She also has a few AF placements as a derby and horseback shooting dog but those are not relevant here.

Of the first place AKC placements, two came with her being run by myself without the aid of a scout. On two of her wins the scout found her on point at least once during her brace after being sent to search. On the remaining first place placement, her most recent, I had a scout, but he was not needed for anything but to hold my horse while I flushed...four times...and she had two backs as well...one from about 100 yards.

On several other occasions I ran her without a scout. A few of those runs resulted in placements, but two that I recall, resulted in the dog being lost to the front...on point. I know this to be true because when I pulled out the tracking device, she was to the front...on point. I am pretty sure about it because, well, one remembers that kind of thing. Ouch.

There was one time at pickup that I did not have the dog. i sent the scout in one direction and I went in the other to gather up the dog so as to show the dog to the judges. I rode forward and called for the dog to come in. After a bit, saw her coming to me from the front and was able to gallop back with here more or less at heel, to where the judges were to show them I had the dog. That was one of her first place placements, as it turned out.

I said several times in several different ways, the dog has to do it where it counts..in front of the judges. You persist in decrying "what could be". I have gone though one dog's AKC career, in capsule form, to illustrate "what is" and what really happens. Not once during any of her wins was anything done by myself or my scout, that was in any way "double handling" or anything else remotely improper. It simply wasn't needed.

When the dog and the handler are in sync, you really don't need much scouting. Hmmm, I think I said that too somewhere back there.

I went though this exercise, not so much to brag on the dog, but more to illustrate what you can expect of a fairly good trial dog.

Oh one last item, just so you get the full flavor. My dog is a cross registered pointer. All of her Open All Age wins came in competitions sponsored by Versatile dog clubs, mostly GSP's, in competition with versatile dogs and most often, judged by judges who own and handle versatile dogs or Brittanys. I cannot recall a single judge that judged any of her stakes that was a pointer person and perhaps ther was one that was a setter fancier.

Regardless of breed, I firmly believe a dog man is a dog man. They know what they are looking at and will put up what they perceive to be the best dogs.

If one keeps focusing in on what they perceive to be negative, one can easily miss a lot that is positive.

RayG

[JKP]

Ray,
Sounds like a nice dog and I'm sure there are many.
Good luck...have fun.

[RayGubernat]

JKP -

I sincerely wish you the same. The important thing is to enjoy that which we do.

RayG