# English Setters



## woodedareas

Your blood line is very similar to the DeCoverly English Setters. They are late developers but you will be surprised at how little training they need. For these type of dogs it is commonly recommended that they do not even go under the gun until at least 9-12 months. This is quite different than other pointing dogs.Your dog is a big pup for only 7 months and I would relax and give him a chance to do what he is bred to do and it will come naturally. i have the same situation with my 7 month old English Setter and I am not a bit concerned. By the way if you see him dragging rugs or towels around that a good thing and a good sign.


----------



## 2ESRGR8

Doublegun said:


> The only solution I can come up with: spend twice as much time hunting!


Genius!!


----------



## Doublegun

woodedareas said:


> Your blood line is very similar to the DeCoverly English Setters. They are late developers but you will be surprised at how little training they need. For these type of dogs it is commonly recommended that they do not even go under the gun until at least 9-12 months. This is quite different than other pointing dogs.Your dog is a big pup for only 7 months and I would relax and give him a chance to do what he is bred to do and it will come naturally. i have the same situation with my 7 month old English Setter and I am not a bit concerned. By the way if you see him dragging rugs or towels around that a good thing and a good sign.


Well, said.


----------



## Setter

Bob,
Once he has been put on birds without competition he will flip the switch. Take Mike up on his offer, you will be amazed. I can't beleive how big Jack and my brother's pup Buddy are at 7 months, his is around 70# too. 
Autumn is probably a little over 40, she is a great pup.
Aspen is in heat again, but we are going to skip this cycle and see about another litter on the next one.
Mark


----------



## Northbound

2ESRGR8 said:


> Got any pictures of the pup?


Yes, post some pics.


----------



## ScavengerMan

Rysalka said:


> I have a Ryman type English Setter mostly Pinecoble linage, he is 7 month old and nearly 70 lbs.
> Beautiful dog, as of this date not birdy.
> I have taken him out with my Springer and flushed birds near him but he does not seem pick up the scent in the area of the recent flush..
> This is my first Setter so my knowledge is limited.
> Springer was hunting hard and flushing birds at 5 month.
> Any suggestions?


The first mistake was running your pup with a flusher. The first thing you are going to have to come to grips with is that the two dogs will NOT be compatible to run together if you have any thoughts of developing a decent pointing dog. I've owned one of Warren Sheckells Pincobble setters, know the breed and can say without reservation there will be no issue with birdiness. As others have mentioned, this old fashioned strain of setter is slower developing, but a strong base of desire has been bred in for many, MANY years. 

Another thing you are going to have to get used to is the drastic difference in the body language and scenting style of your two dogs in the field. Don't assume vacuum cleaner style ground scenting, hyperactivity and body wiggle characteristic of a Springer are the signs of birdiness in a Pincobble setter. You bought a classic old fashioned pointing dog that air scents birds at a distance with a head high, almost exactly the opposite of a flusher. In fact, you don't want to train him to seek out ground scent and start trailing where a bird was flushed. Your Pincobbles ultimate job is to scan the air currents for those telltale signs of body scent and then lock up immediately when his nose gives him confirmation.
[/COLOR] 
The breed you selected is going to work slower and more methodical in a way some would consider being a plodder. Many foot hunting grouse hunters seek out that classic characteristic and consider it a wonderful trait to be sought out. That is why guys like Warren Sheckells who consistently produce old fashion bird dogs like you have almost always have a waiting list. The bottom line is you have two bird dogs at the complete opposite ends of the spectrum and they need to be treated as such.....


----------



## ready4pullback

Birds! Birds! Birds! At that age you should just be getting him all the contact with birds you can. I agree that setters typically may take longer to get all the tricks in their bag. I wouldn't be too concerned about having a broke dog, or even a steady dog at this point, that will come later. If he crashes a bird at this early age it should get him pumped and thats great. The style training will come after he understands that you're out to find birds, not just a romp in the woods. I'd work more with his race at this point, making sure he understands staying to the front, turning with you in the woods, not getting lost. Take him where you know there are birds and get him into them with LOTS of positive encouragement. Good luck!


----------



## Rysalka

I trying to upload a picture of him so far no luck, I will continue to ferret out the answer, must be simple as I've tried all the hard ways.


----------



## geojasstef

open up a photobucket account and just copy the link to the thread......easy peasy.....


----------



## Rysalka




----------



## Linda G.

I haven't seen one yet that didn't make a bird dog, despite the owner...

Birds, birds, birds, birds....he'll be fine. As many wild birds as you can get him into as soon as possible. It's ok to start with pigeons, but don't stick with them. Find pen-raised bobwhite quail if at all possible. And, again, as many wild birds as you can get out there and help him find. 

He'll be fine. One of the greatest mistakes a new Ryman owner makes is being too impatient. You HAVE to be patient for the first year, heck, two years, for some, even three years. But they get better every year, till the day they die. 

You'll be able to run the two dogs together when your Ryman is about three, fully trained, and has had a LOT of birds shot over him. You'll have to have a system to do it. Too long to explain here, but it involves letting the Ryman range out ahead to 50-60 yards, and keeping the flusher close or at heel until he is needed. For most people, that's too much trouble and you'll simply have to get used to running them one at a time. You simply can't run a young pointer with a flusher, you'll get a fllushing dog for your efforts, not a pointer. 

Patience...it's a godly virtue, you know. Or so I'm told.


----------



## Northbound

Rysalka said:


>


Good looking pup!

Jack, Tucker's brother, is working on basic commands, heel, fetch, whoa etc. Everyone tells me patience is the key to Ryman Setters. Admittedly, I struggle with that.

Were putting Jack on live birds in April, Ive been told, given time, Jack will be a hunting machine, Im sure Tucker will be too just a matter of patience. 

Ill post a photo of Jack soon as my wife takes the picture and loads it on the computer, Im not allowed to use the camera, thats another story.


----------



## crosswind

The one consistent thing I have heard about these Ryman / Hemlock/De Cloverly type setters is they are slow coming around ,late bloomers and just keep showing them birds.
My question to the people that own them is this. Why would you mess with a dog that takes twice the amount of time and need to show it twice the amount of birds to get it to the same level of experience/training as another line or lines of bird dog within the same breed???????
Admittedly I am not a setter person. I have broke lots of them for people over the years. Never have I taken a Ryman setter in for training.I just never could understand the thinking process behind having to wait that long. It would seem to me that you are loosing a year to a year and a half of usefullness (as a bird dog anyway) of that dogs life.
Someone mentioned not to send it to a trainer, I can totally understand the reasoning there. As a trainer we are expected to produce realistic results for the money that is charged for the month.It would cost that owner a fortune to have the dog broke.


----------



## BIGSP

crosswind said:


> The one consistent thing I have heard about these Ryman / Hemlock/De Cloverly type setters is they are slow coming around ,late bloomers and just keep showing them birds.
> My question to the people that own them is this. Why would you mess with a dog that takes twice the amount of time and need to show it twice the amount of birds to get it to the same level of experience/training as another line or lines of bird dog within the same breed???????
> Admittedly I am not a setter person. I have broke lots of them for people over the years. Never have I taken a Ryman setter in for training.I just never could understand the thinking process behind having to wait that long. It would seem to me that you are loosing a year to a year and a half of usefullness (as a bird dog anyway) of that dogs life.
> Someone mentioned not to send it to a trainer, I can totally understand the reasoning there. As a trainer we are expected to produce realistic results for the money that is charged for the month.It would cost that owner a fortune to have the dog broke.


Scott,

I have always wondered the same thing. Let's say most dogs can hunt pretty good until they are 10 and then they really decline fast. If your dog doesn't mature till it's 2 or 3 now you only have a 7 or 8 years of good hunting with only 5 or 6 of prime. The first question I ask breeders is how fast does this strain develope? I don't expect a dog to be steady to wing and shot at 6 months but, I do want to be able to kill a few birds over it. I think any bird dog should be birdy at a really young age. Life's too short to have to wait for a dog to mature.


----------



## Mike McDonald

I haven't owned other types of setters, but the Ryman types that I've owned have all hunted at 1 year. They do get better with time and exposure but what dog doesn't. I personally can afford any breed I want and I really like to kill grouse. That said I still choose Ryman type setters. Mike McDonald


----------



## WestCoastHunter

A lot of people want an out-of-the-box pointing dog and think it should be hunting like a pro at one year (indeed, some actually do). But if you read enough or listen to people out in the world you'll see a lot of guys letting their dogs run wild in the woods before they should, others shooting guns over their dogs before they should, and so forth all to bad effect.

There was an article that floated through here at one point where a dog trainer in Wisconsin made the statement that any dog can be made a good quail dog by age 2, but a good grouse dog will almost always be 5 or older. While I don't know how much truth there is to that statement, I will say that Rome wasn't built in a day and molding a quality hunting dog takes time too.

Be patient, enjoy the experience, and don't rush things.


----------



## Dave Medema

I think it's an old wives tale about the Ryman and maturity - kinda like dumb blonds and those of Polish decent. Sure there are a few that are truly slow. Most though are just fine and seem to be hunting well and are on par with the other lines/breeds.


----------



## crosswind

There are several people on this thread alone not to mention I have read his same thing on other forums,those that own or breed these type of setters that make those claims of slow developing.


----------



## Egbert Souse

My Ryman " Cate " was a bird finding, retrieving, backing machine in her first year at 7 months I have another Ryman that hunted her first year at 9 months but was only so so. I would say she took out as many birds as she found but she came around nicely.


----------



## kek25

I don't get all the protective responses. So what if a line develops slowly. If the dog develops slowly, but becomes the hunting companion you were looking for in the end that's all you can ask for. If you know going in that it's a slow developing line then you'll have the patience to work the dog and wait for the light to go on. Knowledge is power as they say. If someone gives the false impression that the dog should turn on within "x" months and it doesn't, then all you're doing is promoting the problem.

Seems like the only ones that worry about this issue are the ones that don't own this type of dog.

And by the way, I think Dave Medema just called Scott Grush an old wife.


----------



## FindTheBird

2ESRGR8 said:


> I'm not whining just stating facts.
> It is what it is. Early development? Not so much.
> Puppies are puppies. They're all knuckleheads in the beginning. That's my point.


Not so fast Scott, I've hear Bruce say some very good things about Katers and I think if you can show her enough birds, you're going to be very pleasantly surprised this fall.



dogwhistle said:


> i wont brag my own dogs. ask find the bird how his hi five pointer did last season.


I ran him a lot (well, every chance that I could) in the July 15--Nov 15 time frame on wild birds on the advice of several coverdog trialers. During that time I sacrificed a lot of time with my other dogs, but it paid-off: by the end of that time it was tough to discern his performance from a reasonably good 2 year old (he was 6 months at the end of that period). Bruce has confirmed my observations during his time with my pup during winter training this year. Granted, he's from good breeding, but I think the more important point is that the more wild birds that you can show a young dog the faster he's going to develop.


----------



## dogwhistle

if the genetics arent there, you can show them a million wild birds and they still wont point. training cant overcome lack of breeding.


"practice doesnt make perfect, perfect practice makes perfect".


----------



## Steelheadfred

I think folks subjective ideas of what a 'poor' 'good' 'great' grouse dog are very different, as different as all the breeds we love and at the end of the day if you are not playing dog games it all matters little if you enjoy your dog and time afield.


----------



## dogwhistle

i dont think it's particuarly subjective, Fritz. go to any championship grouse trial and you can see it demonstrated.

most animal performance is subjective to a degree, but it can be articulated and evaluated in an objective manner. think of gymnastics, a lot more to it than just swinging on a bar. or three day event horses, they require a high level of training, but you cant just "pick one" as a prospect. you start with the right genetics and then sort through inviduals.

i've been around animals since i was a baby. i've owned a lot of different kinds. and i've experiemented with different things with some success. i won some money on a kiger mustang, team penning. it was a tough go, though. but, i've reached the point where life is too short to waste it on cold blooded animals. 

i buy them with the expectation that they will perform reasonably soon, some sooner than others and do it with a lot of class and style. and i find that that kind of animal, dog or horse, trains faster and easier, because they are bred to do it. my nieces husband is a pro horse trainers. he goes all the way to S. Dakota to get the right kind of colts. he will break outside cold blooded horses, but he doesnt buy them for himself.


----------



## Induna

jlock said:


> Heck, I have a belief that trial dogs can't hang with a meat dog on a real hunt with real birds ( not the planted birds from a pen ) escpeacialy on grouse. Give me that slow developing setter over a high strung dog that looks great in a controled enviroment on retarded caged quail. Does this mean trial dogs are not good hunters , no , but most of them would not be allowed to hunt hard on wild grouse in fear that they might break a nail !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:lol:


 By all means bring your meat dog to Gladwin and take home all the money and hardware. It should be easy, after all you'll ONLY be running against those lowly cover trial dogs.


----------



## jlock

Induna said:


> By all means bring your meat dog to Gladwin and take home all the money and hardware. It should be easy, after all you'll ONLY be running against those lowly cover trial dogs.


I've been to the trials at Gladwin many times . It is fun to watch the dogs but is not for me. When I made the comment about MY opinion I was not thinking about cover dogs. My buddies are not in that. But if you ever want to bring your ribbon winning, money making bird machines out for some wild bird hunts just give me a jingle . I could not imagine a ribbon tastes very good with gravy on it :lol:.


----------



## NATTY BUMPO

dogwhistle said:


> my nieces husband is a pro horse trainer. he goes all the way to S. Dakota to get the right kind of colts. he will break outside cold blooded horses, but he doesnt buy them for himself.


I hear that, Mike. And I know somebody who drove all the way to North Dakota to get the right bloodlines in his new bird dog puppy. And then turned around, the very next year, and did that whole thing all over again.

I alway heard that "blood will tell" and I believe it to be true, many gundogs later.

NB


----------



## 2ESRGR8

Steelheadfred said:


> I think folks subjective ideas of what a 'poor' 'good' 'great' grouse dog are very different, as different as all the breeds we love and at the end of the day if you are not playing dog games it all matters little if you enjoy your dog and time afield.


 Holy crap! Fatherhood has softened you.
The kinder, gentler Fritz version for 2009.


----------



## 2ESRGR8

FindTheBird said:


> Not so fast Scott, I've hear Bruce say some very good things about Katers and I think if you can show her enough birds, you're going to be very pleasantly surprised this fall.


 We'll see Mike. I hope you're right.
I've got a measuring stick in my kennel now to measure every grouse dog that passes thru my front door.
We'll see how this little Pointer bitch measures up in a few years. Let me get her grouse contacts up and then I'll judge her.


----------



## Induna

jlock said:


> I could not imagine a ribbon tastes very good with gravy on it :lol:.


 The secret is to wrap it in bacon and grill over high heat.:corkysm55


----------



## dogwhistle

NATTY BUMPO said:


> I hear that, Mike. And I know somebody who drove all the way to North Dakota to get the right bloodlines in his new bird dog puppy. And then turned around, the very next year, and did that whole thing all over again.
> 
> I alway heard that "blood will tell" and I believe it to be true, many gundogs later.
> 
> NB


when i had llewellins, they did alright on grouse, but i felt that they never really handled them well. switched over to cover dog setters and found i was right.

most of the things a birddog does are a result of instinct and genetics. you get that right at the beginning and you are well on your way.

these ryman breeders could breed to trial champions if they chose. a lot of the pups would look like rymans, just smaller and faster. and better intincts. but they choose to stay with rymans or add in show dogs from time to time. they have their minds made up. i think that's a mistake, a quality stud will do you worlds of good in the first generation. the cavalry knew that and so do most commericial beef cattle breeders.


----------



## Steelheadfred

NATTY BUMPO said:


> I hear that, Mike. And I know somebody who drove all the way to North Dakota to get the right bloodlines in his new bird dog puppy. And then turned around, the very next year, and did that whole thing all over again.
> 
> I alway heard that "blood will tell" and I believe it to be true, many gundogs later.
> 
> NB


 
Rod,

One of the great things about Cocker FT's is the FT is very very close to real wild bird hunting, right down to how the field is seeded to retrieving, ect...


----------



## Mike McDonald

It would seem to me that the only true objective measure of a grouse dog is the number of grouse killed in front of it. Trials are nice games but in the end they are only games. Great grouse dogs are hunting dogs and hunting involves killing. So to convince me of a dog's greatness give me his kill numbers not his ribbon count. Again I measure by kills not ribbons. Obviously if the hunter can't walk or shoot then the dog can't be a great grouse because he or she got a poor hunter draw. It is my opinion that most of the people that participate on this board have dogs with the genetic ability to be good grouse dogs at least. Mike McDonald


----------



## Induna

Mike McDonald said:


> It would seem to me that the only true objective measure of a grouse dog is the number of grouse killed in front of it. Trials are nice games but in the end they are only games. Great grouse dogs are hunting dogs and hunting involves killing. So to convince me of a dog's greatness give me his kill numbers not his ribbon count. Again I measure by kills not ribbons. Obviously if the hunter can't walk or shoot then the dog can't be a great grouse because he or she got a poor hunter draw. It is my opinion that most of the people that participate on this board have dogs with the genetic ability to be good grouse dogs at least. Mike McDonald


 I don't agree with the killing part. The measure is the number of grouse pointed and handled properly. Most grouse trialers kill birds over there dogs AND flush the birds and fire a blank pistol. In the end it's the number of birds HANDLED properly. Kill numbers don't mean squat.


----------



## FindTheBird

Induna said:


> I don't agree with the killing part. The measure is the number of grouse pointed and handled properly. Most grouse trialers kill birds over there dogs AND flush the birds and fire a blank pistol. In the end it's the number of birds HANDLED properly. Kill numbers don't mean squat.


Couldn't agree more.


----------



## BradU20

Induna said:


> I don't agree with the killing part. The measure is the number of grouse pointed and handled properly. Most grouse trialers kill birds over there dogs AND flush the birds and fire a blank pistol. In the end it's the number of birds HANDLED properly. Kill numbers don't mean squat.


Yup....killing has just as much (and probably more) to do with the hunter, as it does with the dog.


----------



## dogwhistle

Mike McDonald said:


> It would seem to me that the only true objective measure of a grouse dog is the number of grouse killed in front of it. Trials are nice games but in the end they are only games. Great grouse dogs are hunting dogs and hunting involves killing. So to convince me of a dog's greatness give me his kill numbers not his ribbon count. Again I measure by kills not ribbons. Obviously if the hunter can't walk or shoot then the dog can't be a great grouse because he or she got a poor hunter draw. It is my opinion that most of the people that participate on this board have dogs with the genetic ability to be good grouse dogs at least. Mike McDonald


that is a common misperception. if the object is to "get birds", your local supermarket is the most convenient and cheapest means to that end.

birdhunting with pointing dogs, like fly fishing is an aesthetic sport. there are practical aspects to it, breeding in strong instincts, endurance, handling at long range not just underfoot, ease of training and quickness to learn to name some. it's not always easy to get grouse pointed in hunting conditions, but it's far more difficult to do it in trial condtions. there the birds are especially wild after being flulshed over and over again. a dog is eliminated for flushing a grouse, he has to hold point until he is found and the bird flushed and he has to do it with style speed class and hunt to birdy objectives. and, it's one thing to evaluate your own dogs and quite another to have an independent person do it in a field of the best.

and those same traits carry over into the best hunting dogs. the concept of wild bolters is just prejudice or a factor of lack of experience or skill on the part of the handler. if a handler tries to keep them under his thumb and within his short comfort zone all the time, they resist. let them range naturally and handle them without a lot of force and they handle quite kindly.

if "dual" means performance and appearance, then you should be breeding half the time at least to performance. and there is no reason to prefer that extreme size 60/55 lb males and 50/45 lb females should be the maximum. more speed, more agility, less stress on joints and heart.


----------



## Steelheadfred

So does retrieving have anything to do with what makes a great grouse dog?


----------



## Rysalka

Good point Steelheadfred.....third of the birds we shot this year would have been difficult to impossible to locate if it were not for the retrieving ability of my dog. 
Impossible to discribe the feeling after taking a snap shot at a bird and have the dog disappear into the underbrush and reappear with the prize.

My opinion if a dog does not retrieve they should be considered only half a hunting dog. Hunt, Point or Flush, Retrieve.


----------



## Mike McDonald

Its grouse hunting not grouse finding. Hunting infers the taking of game. I'm sure I'll piss some people off but its my opinion that people that say the kill isn't important for whatever reasons aren't able to kill many. Or possibly unlike their dogs have a low prey drive. Fritz I think retrieving is very very important. mike mcdonald


----------



## 2ESRGR8

dogwhistle said:


> this discussion has migrated away from late developement in rymans. i've been on both sides of the trialing vs hunting dog arguements. but it all comes down to traits. things like strong intincts to point, speed range endurance and class. also trainiblity and bidabliity.
> 
> those are the things are the things that pointing dogs are about. just "getting birds" isnt enough. you can shoot them out of the car window. it's How. just as trout fishing is How. flyfishing is esthetically pleasing, a cane pole or even spinning rod is not. people who hunt just to kill just havent seen enough death to make even the death of a bird an ambivilent experience.
> 
> and to select for those traits, we need to compete to see which animals have the best. those are then the sires that are most popular for breeding. the better and more difficult the competetion the better the selection for breeding.
> 
> and finally in the case of rymans, the huge size is the antithesis of what is needed for perfromance, in a trial but also in the field. there is no reason for it except that it's the fashion.
> 
> as i said, to even hold true to your own goal of dual dogs, you need to have dogs with at least half performance dogs in a pedigree. that's 63 performance dogs in a 6 gen. pedigree. i have seen very few with even 1.


That is the whole point of the Ryman type dog.
Ryman owners do not want small, fast, high tailed dogs that spend most of their time outside of beeper range.

A Ryman dog is a sweet bamboo flyrod to the Ryman owner while a coverdog bred 12o'clock tail setter is a Zebco 202 and fiberglass KMart rod.

The Ryman owner can say the exact opposite of every phrase you've just written and sincerely mean what they say.

The biddability, trainablity, speed, range are all desirable traits to the group of folks that own them.

It's the perfect dog to them just as your cover bred Setter is to you. No right, no wrong it's just the way it is. 
Variety is the spice of life, different strokes for different folks, more than one way to skin a cat.......any more similes or metaphors I can toss out?


----------



## [email protected]

Well said DW, I kept thinking of the flyfishing thing in my head, felt like a good comparison, all serves the same purpose, just different ways of going about it. Not to nock on a breed or anyones dogs, there are all sorts of great ones, just seems if I had my choice, and both had the same ceiling of greatness, I would want the one that did something from 8-12 weeks old on through a mature birddog, not wait until it was 1 before it showed interest in birds; I am not the patient. Every breed has some that will have a experience like this, be it a pointer, setter, brit, etc. just not for me, I want one that wakes up everyday living to find birds from that first encounter on, but to each their own. I could live without some of the speed and style, and range, but if they don't have desire early on, that would be frustrating for me.


----------



## Linda G.

"I want one that wakes up every day living to find birds from that first encounter on..."

That's a perfect description of a Ryman...

Dog, have you seen any of these dogs in the last 15 years? Very few, if any, weigh more than 65 pounds or so...much smaller than they used to be. Again, the really big, slow, dogs that tend to slobber and point a lot of porcupines are from the bench DeCoverly line...

And a lot of bird dog breeds are that large. 

What I've found is that once the "I gotta kill something, win 200 field trials or win a NASCAR race or do something that really feeds my ego" is out of people, that's when they want a slower, more cooperative dog that listens and still finds you a lot of birds. A dog that's just fun to hunt with. 

Of course, there's exceptions, like the die-hard trialers, but for the most part, as you get older, you want your hunting to be more of a pleasure than a foot race. And that's when people get Rymans.


----------



## Steelheadfred

[email protected] said:


> Fritz, I am not saying that hunters aren't out there a lot, only that a "trial" dog has more purpose than to just trial, they are all still birddogs/hunting dogs. Does implying that the killers have the best spots so they kill the most birds mean they have superior dogs, or superior spots, or both? I like to see the ones (dogs) that go to average spots and can still always produce adequate numbers, this way we get a little better grasp of bird finding ability, sort of see the real good ones thinking, like they know where birds should be, and if they are not there they find the next spot (of course great cover is ideal and we hunt those first, but an average birdfinder should still find birds if you are in your best covers) As for the killing, thats a lot up to the handler as well. Some people think its all luck but if you sit there and look at who is always killing birds on a hunt, or who is getting the most shots off, those people are always on the rite edge, always in positioning themselves for the best oppurtunity at a shot. Then the last part, just being able to hit those little buggers with that big ole gun


 
OK,

For arguments sake and since we have gone way off track and this has been a great thread with good discussion when we all have cabin fever.

We agree on the last portion of your argument, killing birds has as much to do with the guy driving the truck and pulling the trigger as the dog IMO.

Average spots will do nothing more then produce an average number of birds, does not matter if the dog is great, good, or poor. The spot still only holds an average amount of birds. The killers will kill less in that spot then they will in a good spot. The "non" killers will killer fewer birds, have fewer contacts than in good spots. There are only so many birds to be found in the average spot. 

I think a "great" grouse dog is a grouse dog that can produce "shootable" birds from the start of the season to the end, not just when its 42 degrees with a 10 mph breeze the afternoon after a nice morning rain. This is different from the great dog that digs a few birds up in an average spot.

I maintain that a lot of guys that claim its all about the dog work would be very impressed by the dogs guys are killing a lot of birds over. It has to do with the guy driving the truck giving his dog the most opportunity. Our Covers at least in the NLP are not big enough to separate a big running dog from a ryman from a flushing dog in terms of flushes per hour.


----------



## 2ESRGR8

Induna said:


> AND CONGRADULATIONS on Taters placement!!!


 Thanks Charlie.


----------



## jlock

Scott Berg said:


> Jlock,
> 
> I am a bit far away for such a challenge. However, I do have a friend in Michigan by the name of Dave TerHaar who runs cover trials. Here is what I propose and I am sure I can convince Dave to participate if you make the wager worthwhile. You bring your best two dogs. You each will put down on dog and hunt together alternating dogs throughout a weekend. One pointed awarded for wach bird handled properly until the handler flushes the bird. Any movement on the dogs part resulting in the bird flushing negates the point. One point awarded for each properly handled find. I am willing to match whatever wager you would like to make on a per find basis. No need for any other dialouge. No points for style or anything else, just pure 100% measure of production for the gun. Either accept the challenge or quit talking.
> 
> SRB


SRB, pretty mannly to make a challenge and have no part in it. You must have had a big sister you hid behind while growing up :lol:. If you would have read my post you would have seen I was not talking cover dogs. I am going out to Washington in the fall to do some Chuckar hunting and if you can scrape up some cash I would love to accept your challenge. I will warn you though a big running dog will not perform so great on those skidish wild chuckars who will be flying down the mountain side in a hurry !! I do like your format though. Will we be wearing knickerbockers and a english hat for this one !


----------



## dogwhistle

i have seen some recentlly. they ranged from large to huge. one young dog belonging to roger moore weighed 90 lbs according to him. i think it was bigger than that.

when george ryman originally bred these dogs, his intent was for a "dual" purpose dog. to do that he bred field/trial dogs to show dogs. but over time, they gravitated towards the show dog in appearrance size and temperment. george bird evans bred another large dose of show dog into them. and today the "dual" is long gone. for all practical purposes they are just another strain of show dog.

if i want cutting horse prospects, i breed cutting horses to cutting horses. if i breed to show horses within two generations they are virtuallly identical to pure show bred horses. large bodies, small feet, and lacking in "cow sense".

as i said earlier, if you bred these dogs so they were at least 50% performance lines, you would be keeping more of those valued performance traits and you wouldnt be waiting 1/3 of the dogs life for it to point birds. it's a formula that is used over and over in animal breeding. the US cavalry stood TB studs in it's remount program to upgrade colts for it's own use. but you have gone the other direction and bred to show dogs or to rymans with bench traits and just made another bench dog.

you didnt try to strike the happy medium, in your fear that breeding to a trial champion, you would end up with a bolter, you instead ended up with a setter that hunts in spaniel range with little to no performance in it's genetics.


----------



## Linda G.

well, you haven't seen enough of them lately, Dog. 

As for the heat issue, that all goes back to the zeal of their owners. C'mon, when it's 75, how long do you hunt?? What good is a dog that can hunt in that heat if you can't??

And I've seen more than a few cover dog ES's, GSPs and pointers that couldn't hack anything lower than 45, which is when most of us up north here in grouse country START getting serious. 

Last but not least, my last Ryman was 50% cover dog..."performance" dog does not apply strictly to field trial breeding...anyhow, Dusty, who was half Michigan cover dog breeding, had so many health issues in her life that I would never go near that line of dogs again. 

As for dogs that last all day long, same thing about Labs-they can't take the heat, either. 

Whatever, guys, you need to own a Ryman to understand it.


----------



## Rysalka

Nothing like stirring up a Hornets nest with a simple question...Glad ya'll did not have this discussion at my house, think I'd be hiding somewhere.

Update on Tucker, we have been out every day without the Springer. I did notice each day he got a little bolder, head up, quartering. Yesterday before the Snow started I, spotted some grouse under a Hemlock, Tucker was off investigating on the other side of the two track.
Started working him from about 100yd on downwind side of the grouse, at about 30 yard he started sweeping back a forth and narrowing his search pattern, at 50 feet he started ***** footing head up straight toward where I'd seen the grouse at about 15 to 25 feet grouse started flushing from all around us and Tucker was off in hot pursuit of a runner....whom flushed after about 15 feet.....

Hey I'm Happy, Tucker is figuring out what his nose is for...


----------



## Linda G.

Wait a couple of days to give that bird a breather if you don't know where any others are, then take Tucker back...and start seriously looking for other wild birds. Woodcock should be back any minute. 

One day soon, he'll stop running, just put on the brakes, and point...with a look on his face like wow what am I doing this for, Dad...you'll never forget that moment...


----------



## crosswind

Linda G. said:


> "I want one that wakes up every day living to find birds from that first encounter on..."
> 
> That's a perfect description of a Ryman...
> 
> Dog, have you seen any of these dogs in the last 15 years? Very few, if any, weigh more than 65 pounds or so...much smaller than they used to be. Again, the really big, slow, dogs that tend to slobber and point a lot of porcupines are from the bench DeCoverly line...
> 
> And a lot of bird dog breeds are that large.
> 
> What I've found is that once the "I gotta kill something, win 200 field trials or win a NASCAR race or do something that really feeds my ego" is out of people, that's when they want a slower, more cooperative dog that listens and still finds you a lot of birds. A dog that's just fun to hunt with.
> 
> Of course, there's exceptions, like the die-hard trialers, but for the most part, as you get older, you want your hunting to be more of a pleasure than a foot race. And that's when people get Rymans.


 Linda , I am not pointing a finger at you.Don't know you at all, have never seen your dogs. There is a huge amount of hunters that use the excuse of wanting a slower,more cooperative type dog that listens. 
When the real reason is they never get their dogs broke,they either don,t know how to get the job done or just flat don't spend the time to get the job done, are not willing to pay someone to do it for them, the list goes on and on. They want that dog in close because they can keep an eye on him because he cannot be trusted to hold point on his birds,they don't have to worry about losing him because he is usually right there in plain site, and last but not least they can shoot at bumped/rooted out birds.
If that is a persons approach to hunting, thats their right, go get you a slow dog.The price you pay for that type of animal is always on the performance end.Personally I don't understand why they choose to operate like that with a pointing dog but there are tons out there every season.
Several times this season we would unload dog as other hunters were loading theirs up and go into an area they had just left and move birds like crazy.Yet as they were packing ,have them tell us they have been having a bad week not seeing many birds.Just go to show you that some people are perfectly content to hunt behind a poor performer. They are happy if old Fido stumbles on a bird and flushes it.Fido will get him a cheeseburger on the way home for a job well done.:lol:


----------



## 2ESRGR8

crosswind said:


> Linda , I am not pointing a finger at you.Don't know you at all, have never seen your dogs. There is a huge amount of hunters that use the excuse of wanting a slower,more cooperative type dog that listens.
> When the real reason is they never get their dogs broke,they either don,t know how to get the job done or just flat don't spend the time to get the job done, are not willing to pay someone to do it for them, the list goes on and on. They want that dog in close because they can keep an eye on him because he cannot be trusted to hold point on his birds,they don't have to worry about losing him because he is usually right there in plain site, and last but not least they can shoot at bumped/rooted out birds.
> If that is a persons approach to hunting, thats their right, go get you a slow dog.The price you pay for that type of animal is always on the performance end.Personally I don't understand why they choose to operate like that with a pointing dog but there are tons out there every season.
> Several times this season we would unload dog as other hunters were loading theirs up and go into an area they had just left and move birds like crazy.Yet as they were packing ,have them tell us they have been having a bad week not seeing many birds.Just go to show you that some people are perfectly content to hunt behind a poor performer. They are happy if old Fido stumbles on a bird and flushes it.Fido will get him a cheeseburger on the way home for a job well done.:lol:


 I know some shorthairs like that. :lol: :yikes: :lol:


----------



## dogwhistle

in any event, you could have saved a lot of trouble and just hunted with bench bred setters. genetically that's what today's ryman setters are.


----------



## Steelheadfred

dogwhistle said:


> in any event, you could have saved a lot of trouble and just hunted with bench bred setters. genetically that's what today's ryman setters are.


 
Scott Grush's Jack is as pure a bird finding dog as I have ever seen, I dont think Jack has a whole lot of "bench" setter in him. If he does, I would care less. Jack simply produces birds for the gun, he points the right distance both from the bird, and the hunter. What I mean by this is that most of the time when you get to him the bird is still with in a nice zone in front of him, your not out at 30 yards from the dog trying to kick the bird out. He pins birds, and Scott's numbers prove his worth. Jack is a "Dual" style dog.

I have had the great pleasure to hunt over both Jack and Dan Ross's pointer Rudy that Bruce handles, these are the two best dogs I have ever seen on grouse. I would not for a second though, and this is no disrespect to Rudy she is a machine, say that Rudy is better then Jack or vise versa. They are very different dogs but just as productive as each other.


I still maintain that range is not an issue for Great Lakes Grouse, if folks want a dog at 60 yards fine, if they want one at 120 fine, both can be and will be successful if they as Scott says are broke pointers that get plenty of exposure to wild birds in wild places over a course of a season. I think some folks pick closer working dogs for other reasons then them not trusting the dog or taking the time to break the dog.


----------



## Mike McDonald

dogwhistle said:


> in any event, you could have saved a lot of trouble and just hunted with bench bred setters. genetically that's what today's ryman setters are.


I own 4 Pinecoble dogs ie Ryman type dogs, the largest weighs 55 lbs. Next year turn on the Westminister dog show. Get an idea of what bench bred dogs look like. I'm sure you are happy with your dogs so am I and obviously other Ryman owners on this board. I'm starting another thread called "Stuff dogwhistle doesn't Like" Ryman setters, RGS, Mi DNR etc. 
It seems that most people on the board are good folks, stop busting their balls. Mike McDonald


----------



## Scott Berg

crosswind said:


> Linda , I am not pointing a finger at you.Don't know you at all, have never seen your dogs. There is a huge amount of hunters that use the excuse of wanting a slower,more cooperative type dog that listens.
> When the real reason is they never get their dogs broke,they either don,t know how to get the job done or just flat don't spend the time to get the job done, are not willing to pay someone to do it for them, the list goes on and on. They want that dog in close because they can keep an eye on him because he cannot be trusted to hold point on his birds,they don't have to worry about losing him because he is usually right there in plain site, and last but not least they can shoot at bumped/rooted out birds.
> If that is a persons approach to hunting, thats their right, go get you a slow dog.The price you pay for that type of animal is always on the performance end.Personally I don't understand why they choose to operate like that with a pointing dog but there are tons out there every season.
> Several times this season we would unload dog as other hunters were loading theirs up and go into an area they had just left and move birds like crazy.Yet as they were packing ,have them tell us they have been having a bad week not seeing many birds.Just go to show you that some people are perfectly content to hunt behind a poor performer. They are happy if old Fido stumbles on a bird and flushes it.Fido will get him a cheeseburger on the way home for a job well done.:lol:


_Scott,_

_You are absolutely right. The basis for this difference in opinion that is constantly debated over the internet is that most field trailers define success as a bird taken over a properly handled bird contact. In other words, the dog points and holds the bird until the handler flushes the dog. I would guess that 90% of hunters not only shoot birds that flush wild but also shoot birds that the dog mishandles. In doing so, they reward the dog for a mistake and perpetuate the problem. Even a dog that possesses the ability to become a proficient bird handler it in all likelihood will not because of this mistake in developing them._

_Mike MacDonald said _My older ones don't bump many birds, but if they do and I get a look I shoot. As you know I get paid to look at dogs and I have for a long time. I made mine not married it so I still value my money and what I spend it on.

_The only reason to keep a dog 50 or 60 yards away is so that the handler can take shots at birds that are not handled properly. A moderate, say 125-150 yard dog in the woods is plenty easy to handle if the dog is reasonably biddable and that dog is without question going to find far more birds. Of course, they have to handle them properly to present a shooting opportunity and that is the basis for keeping dogs so close. Their owners are not confident their dog will handle birds properly._

_Perhaps the most misunderstood principle where field trials are concerned is that their purpose is to identify the best individuals for breeding. Many people go to a trial and say that does not look like what I want for a hunting dog. No, they dont look like what I would propose for a hunting dog either. HB or cover dog trials dogs are pushed to an extreme just as an automobile manufacturer or many other manufacturers push products to an extreme to develop the best products for everyday use. Push trial dogs identifies the individuals with superior intelligence, physical capabilities, biddabilty, and bird handling ability. Take the same dog that won Championships and develop it as a hunting dog and you have an entirely different dog._

_I recently saw a post where a very knowledgeable NSTRA guy (friend of mine) posted he really preferred a NSTRA type dog over an AA dog. Well . his two bests dogs (NSTRA Champions) are as pure AA bred as you can possibly get. The dogs are phenomenal NSTRA and wild bird dogs. They are great around birds and handle easily. My point here is that us dogs folks are so motivated to defend the choices we have already made that it gets substantially in the way of extending our understanding beyond what we already believe to be true._

_SRB _


----------



## Steelheadfred

Scott,

We are going to disagree, you feel the only reason folks own a 60 yard dog is because they want to shoot at everything that flies around them, the kill being most important and a day with fido being secondary.

I assume you have read "For a handful of feathers" - do you remember the passage at the end of the book when the author explains why he has decided to purchase a French Brit instead of a english pointer? This is the same reason why many of my friends, dedicated hunters, who spend 100 days a year in the woods pick closer working pointing breeds. 

Range does not produce more birds in the NLP of MI. I have reason to believe range does not produce more birds across the great lakes grouse region. Choice in breed and style of dog for dedicated hunters comes down to aesthetics preferrred hunting style as it does production. Hence why Ryman style setters remain very popular and very productive.


----------



## Scott Berg

jlock said:


> SRB, pretty mannly to make a challenge and have no part in it. You must have had a big sister you hid behind while growing up :lol:. If you would have read my post you would have seen I was not talking cover dogs. I am going out to Washington in the fall to do some Chuckar hunting and if you can scrape up some cash I would love to accept your challenge. I will warn you though a big running dog will not perform so great on those skidish wild chuckars who will be flying down the mountain side in a hurry !! I do like your format though. Will we be wearing knickerbockers and a english hat for this one !


_When Induna commented on cover dogs you said But if you ever want to bring your ribbon winning, money making bird machines out for some wild bird hunts just give me a jingle . I could not imagine a ribbon tastes very good with gravy on it __[/COLOR]__._

_Yes, I find it offensive when the guys who do nothing to prove their dogs get on the internet and talk big about the guys that are out there proving their dogs in competition. To put it in perspective you are insulting many people for whom I have great respect. Ironically, it is the guys who compete who are least likely talk big. So, I offered you a reasonable challenge (fundamentally and geographically) in a very civil fashion to prove you could whip those ribbon winners, Champions in this case. Obviously, it was a challenge but no insults such as their dogs might break a nail were used yet you come back with I bet you had a big sister you hid behind growing up. _

_One of the best things about this site is that most of the participants are very gracious. I am not going to be part of the name calling. However, I will suggest that unless you have taped on the gloves and stepped between the ropes with hundreds of people watching you should not be talking to me about hiding behind skirts. _

_I have video tape Eric Mauch sent me of 4X CH Tekoa Mountain Patriot hunting Chukkar. He was making 500 yard casts and pointing covies of Chukkar and holding them. Eric would video tape while he closed about half of the distance and then zoom in while his hunting partners walked the rest of the way to the birds and flushed them. Patriot was almost exactly 12 months old at the time. Prairie Chicken, Chukkar, Sharptail, and Huns are all skiddish birds if not handled properly. _

SRB


----------



## BIGSP

Steelheadfred said:


> Scott,
> 
> We are going to disagree, you feel the only reason folks own a 60 yard dog is because they want to shoot at everything that flies around them, the kill being most important and a day with fido being secondary.
> 
> I assume you have read "For a handful of feathers" - do you remember the passage at the end of the book when the author explains why he has decided to purchase a French Brit instead of a english pointer? This is the same reason why many of my friends, dedicated hunters, who spend 100 days a year in the woods pick closer working pointing breeds.
> 
> Range does not produce more birds in the NLP of MI. I have reason to believe range does not produce more birds across the great lakes grouse region. Choice in breed and style of dog for dedicated hunters comes down to aesthetics preferrred hunting style as it does production. Hence why Ryman style setters remain very popular and very productive.


Fritz,

Great point. I don't think "range" produces more birds either. Most of our covers here in MI are 40-100 acres we spend a hour in them and we are gone to the next cover. What you want is a dog that is proficient at hitting objectives and covers the ground in a productive manner. I used to think that all the coverdogs were huge runners but, most of them really aren't from what I have heard. The cover a lot of ground but, not usually out on the horizon. They are just fast athletic dogs don't miss much. Just like your labs. They are fast athletic and don't miss any thing that you walk past.

I chose a Pointer as my next dog for a few reasons. Heat tolerance, ease of training, desire, short coat, and their nose. I am not sure if any of this will pan out with my new dog but, I am young and don't want to be married to one breed of dog because it was the first breed I bought. I love my shorthairs and they do a lot of things well but, aren't exceptional grouse dogs. One does O.K. the other not so great. Both are great on pheasants and woodcock. So, we'll have to see.


----------



## kek25

Scott Berg said:


> . . .
> _I recently saw a post where a very knowledgeable NSTRA guy (friend of mine) posted he really preferred a NSTRA type dog over an AA dog. Well &#8230;. his two bests dogs (NSTRA Champions) are as pure AA bred as you can possibly get. The dogs are phenomenal NSTRA and wild bird dogs. They are great around birds and handle easily. My point here is that us dogs folks are so motivated to defend the choices we have already made that it gets substantially in the way of extending our understanding beyond what we already believe to be true. . .__SRB _


Works both ways, Scott. Maybe the guy was simply acknowledging his preference for the manner in which his NSTRA trained dogs work (i.e. quarter pattern out front vs. running an edge) and not necessarily overlooking or trying to ignore the fact that his dogs are descended from AA lines.  There is a heightened propensity to become defensive no matter what side of the tracks you're from; especially on the internet when the actual intent of a given statement isn't always explored through back and forth dialogue like occurs during a conversation.


----------

