# What's your hunting dog's level of training?



## kwas (Nov 17, 2007)

Thousands in training just for me to undo when I get him back my first dog he's now 3....started work was easy but Once he sarted coming into his own I lost all control of my high powered pointing lab. So sent him to pro trainer. My second dog a female pointing lab no pro trainer if I can't figure out how to train my own dogs this may be the last of upland dogs for me. I have learned some from books, videos, and retriever hunt club training days and some from trainer. And going to ukc judges seminar that was really good to attend for fully understanding test. I'm better at training now but still do to many mistakes like to much pressure. My pro trainer pointed this out and was right on. Opps. In the future want to attend more seminars like the Rick Smith. I train dogs a lot and run them 4-7 days a week in the winter. The summer I work a lot of hrs so not much training. And I'm training for finished work.. Is that enough info?


----------



## Rudi's Dad (May 4, 2004)

My dog knows a few commands including WHOA. She is not steady to shot or flush.
I never have used a pro. Not a rich man.


----------



## WestCoastHunter (Apr 3, 2008)

BIGSP said:


> Jarl, I think you're right. High powered dogs often times require a little more time and pressure to finish but, once they are done are awesome. Most of us don't have the experience required to tame an animal like that.


I won't disagree with you either Brent. I just think a lot of people would be better served with a more low key dog as their first pointing dog. I came into all this in the reverse order. My first two might be rescues, but that doesn't mean they haven't been a handful. There were a lot of times in the beginning with the first of those knuckleheads where I wondered what I got myself into and probably should have found a pro. 

That said, 3 1/2 years later that's now the dog I prefer to hunt with. He keeps getting better with age, he responds to the commands I have deemed most important, hits and hunts cover like a tornado, and I've had him on the ground with "calmer" pointing varieties and they tend to get backing practice when he's on the ground. He's a fiend.

It was only my stubborness that got the dog to where he is and probably why he isn't at a higher level. But he knows what I want and I know how to read him now so the arrangement works very well these days. But you're always hunting on the edge with him.

He is far more dog than the typical beginner should have without a trainer.


----------



## 2ESRGR8 (Dec 16, 2004)

k9wernet said:


> Between all the "double face palming" in regards to the MAFTC Hunting Dog Trial, and the performances at last Saturday's RGS fun trial (where some dogs ran as Jay Johnson described above, while others looked like polished champs), I guess I was just curious where most of our "hunting dogs" fall.
> 
> 
> KW


The difference, I bet, is that Jay has learned to SHUT UP.
If the dog is not going to listen to you then why continue to give commands it will only disobey?


----------



## Double Gun (Feb 22, 2005)

BIGSP said:


> Brian,
> I think that will work for some dogs but not all. I tried that with my Maverick dog and all I got was a really good bird ripper. I think some dogs really need yard work and pigeon work in order to become proficient at holding birds. My pointer pup had a bunch of yard work and mostly wild bird work and that's all she needed but, I wouldnt classify her as a high powered dog.


Brent, I don't want to put words in your mouth but by bird ripper I assume he wasn't big on pointing them. The truth is if I need to teach a dog to point he is going to have to find another home. I don't think high powered has to equal out of control bird ripper.


----------



## Dave Medema (Jan 18, 2005)

k9wernet said:


> Just curious Fritz, what was your experience with gun dogs and grouse hunting prior to Hilde?
> 
> Edit: I guess I'm more than "just curious." You say "you get out what you put in," so if what you put in is amateur, misguided, or simply put.... CRAP, well... follow that to its logical conclusion!
> 
> ...


I may be typical, maybe not. But here goes. I grew up in Denver hunting but never had bird dogs. We had dalmations and trained them ourselves. Dogs are dogs. Obedience is obedience. 

When I moved to Michigan after college, I had never even heard of a grouse. Thru a friend at work, I hunted a few times and had fun. Thru my FIL, I found a setter and bought my first pup. I read, read, watched videos, and finally figured out how I thought the 2 of us could figure this out. 

At the time, I had lots of time and we hunted alot. Within a few years, the dog was pretty darn good but I didn't know it. I just thought that all bird dogs should be this way. I never thought about the possibility of dogs that didn't find grouse, point them, and hunters shoot them. I know....a simplistic view but thats how I roll. 

With the dog about 3, word got out about him and we were asked to guide for the RGS hunt in MN. Turns out he was a really, really good grouse dog. From there, I eventually worked for RGS and spent 60+ days chasing grouse with RGS supporters for a few years. We racked up huge numbers and he just got better and better until age got to him. 

So.....first time hunter, first time dog owner, no pros, etc. Still had a truly remarkable dog.


On a side note....I spent Saturday at the Highland trial and watched most of the open shooting dog races. A couple of things struck me. 1) it reinforced my belief that in order to win the dog has to be solid without any mistakes. It was evident who were the best dogs on that day. 2)most dogs would have made truly comfortable hunting dogs. They handled well and the range was within reason. 3)There are lots of solid grouse hunters with dogs that could compete well in the trials. The difference from my perspective was not range, speed, staunchness, or bird finding. The difference was nearly 100% of what happens after the bird flies which goes more to training to the next level. With that said, most hunters just don't need it and therefore don't train to that level. It has nothing to do with the dog but with the hunters demands. I think it goes hand in hand with the fact that plenty of people buy pups from quality breedings and choose to hunt vs. trial. Same litters with dogs going to different people doesn't affect the talent of the individual dogs. 

Repeat with dogs 2 and 3 but with maybe a broader range of understanding that makes the process a bit easier.


----------



## FindTheBird (Dec 18, 2004)

Double Gun said:


> Brent, I don't want to put words in your mouth but by bird ripper I assume he wasn't big on pointing them. The truth is if I need to teach a dog to point he is going to have to find another home. I don't think high powered has to equal out of control bird ripper.


One could take it a step further; many of the highest power dogs are also some of the better bred dogs and those better bred dogs can have enormous natural pointing instinct. This in turn, can make them really easy to "train" on birds, at least to a gun dog level (or so I've heard ).


----------



## Steelheadfred (May 4, 2004)

k9wernet said:


> Just curious Fritz, what was your experience with gun dogs and grouse hunting prior to Hilde?


 
I grew up with three bird dogs, two I got to "Walk" behind but never hunt behind as I was not old enough to hunt. The third I got to hunt behind a fair amount but really had no idea what I was doing. My father perscribed to the Scott Grush method of "basic obedience, take em hunting." He never even did any formal bird intro or gun breaking, just took em hunting. 

Previous to Hilde I owned a lab named Harry that I did the Dave Medema method on, I read, read, watched, read, I lost that dog too young, and only had one hunting season over him. Hilde was my second dog, but that said she was the first dog I owned that saw more than one hunting season.



> Edit: I guess I'm more than "just curious." You say "you get out what you put in," so if what you put in is amateur, misguided, or simply put.... CRAP, well... follow that to its logical conclusion!


Well see I disagree with this, I think you need to give the dogs more credit, I took a dog with fair breeding, not crap, but not what I would get now either. Her drive overcame my mistakes, if she had better breeding, it would be even easier for her drive to overcome my mistakes. I mean what I wrote, as a first timer if you read, read, read, watch, and work with the dog, then I think you end up with a servicable bird dog if there is any kind of genetic make up there. Another note, I have never owned a pointing dog. But I worked really hard to learn, had a dog that put up with my "efforts" and found success pretty quick. Really no different then learning how to become good at fishing, or golf, or business or what ever.



> I have 2 six year old dogs that I still struggle with largely in part to my amateur, misguided efforts early on.


Are you sure? Are you sure it is you and not the dog? Not trying to be critical here just seems you might be a little hard on yourself with that comment.



> I spent 24 years on this earth before ever stepping into the woods in pursuit of grouse. I had never owned my own dog, or handled a gun for that matter. I did all kinds of reading, watched all kinds of videos, and chatted with all kinds of idiots on MS )) but lacking any real clear understanding of what results to look for, I probably stopped short in every effort to "do it myself" with these dogs.


All that reading and bs'ing did not give you an understanding of "what results to look for?"



> I guess my point is, when you're walking in 100% fresh to the sport, it's not quite as easy as you make it sound in your above post.


I am going to disagree with you again, I can give you example after example of folks that worked hard with their first dog, with and without pro's help and ended up with very servicable bird dogs.



> I'm not saying buying a started dog or sending the pup off to a pro is your only option, but it certainly would have saved me a WHOLE lot of frustration.


Started dogs are great for many people, and maybe for me some day, I am not slamming them and have pushed many friends in that direction. I was steelhead fishing with a friend/family member of mine a couple years ago, he was struggling, I was tired of his poor attitude about it, he said to me "You would be frustrated and pissed also if you watched your buddies hook 10:1 over you all day." My reply was, "No, I would not be, cause I was you, it just motivated me to learn, observe, and figure it out." We saw the situations different I guess, and nothing wrong with that. I tend to turn frustration into motivation.




> That said, I sure have learned a whole helluva lot that I won't soon forget!
> 
> KW


Agree, my first dog and third dogs were far more naturals, better bred than Hilde, but through exposure and team work, that dog gave me everything she had, I got everything out of her I could. She is far from perfect but man in her prime when she physically able we got it done. I learned to adjust to her and she learned to adjust to me, I learned what I wanted different in the future, and where I needed to improve in the future. At times that was using a pro for one on ones, and to increase my knowledge.


----------



## Double Gun (Feb 22, 2005)

I couldn't agree more. I can't imagine a dog that has to be zapped, pulled, tricked etc to point would ever make a grouse dog. One of the best bird finders I have ever walked behind was an out of control setter. He was a self hunter but when found was almost always pointing a bird. To say he was high powered would be an understatement.


----------



## BIGSP (Sep 16, 2004)

Double Gun said:


> Brent, I don't want to put words in your mouth but by bird ripper I assume he wasn't big on pointing them. The truth is if I need to teach a dog to point he is going to have to find another home. I don't think high powered has to equal out of control bird ripper.


Brian
He would point but as soon as I got close he would rip. This needed to be fixed by a pro not by more birds. 

Mike,
I agree most of those dogs have a ton of natural point in them but some of them you have to direct that energy a little bit.


----------



## Firemedic (Apr 5, 2005)

BIGSP said:


> Brian
> He would point but as soon as I got close he would rip. This needed to be fixed by a pro not by more birds.
> 
> Mike,
> I agree most of those dogs have a ton of natural point in them but some of them you have to direct that energy a little bit.


Brent, that is a very easy fix. I am trying my hardest to stay outta this thread. Good reading though!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Socks (Jan 8, 2007)

kwas said:


> Thousands in training just for me to undo when I get him back my first dog he's now 3....started work was easy but Once he sarted coming into his own I lost all control of my high powered pointing lab. So sent him to pro trainer. My second dog a female pointing lab no pro trainer if I can't figure out how to train my own dogs this may be the last of upland dogs for me. I have learned some from books, videos, and retriever hunt club training days and some from trainer. And going to ukc judges seminar that was really good to attend for fully understanding test. I'm better at training now but still do to many mistakes like to much pressure. My pro trainer pointed this out and was right on. Opps. In the future want to attend more seminars like the Rick Smith. I train dogs a lot and run them 4-7 days a week in the winter. The summer I work a lot of hrs so not much training. And I'm training for finished work.. Is that enough info?


Hey man don't beat yourself up too much. It takes time. You've got a different thing going on. After reading the posts here they only really apply to a a true pointing dog. If you throw in the retriever aspect that's a whole nother skill set. I've spent almost all my time learning the retrieve stuff and I still don't know much. I know almost nuthin' about the point and I, just like you, try not mess up what a pro does.
I've spent a crap load of money on planted bird and self planted birds. That helps, but only if you're trying to do it right. Do you train with a shooter on birds so you can concentrate on the only the dog? Try it sometime and it'll open up your eyes. My $0.02.


----------



## k9wernet (Oct 15, 2007)

Steelheadfred said:


> I think you need to give the dogs more credit, I took a dog with fair breeding, not crap, but not what I would get now either. Her drive overcame my mistakes, if she had better breeding, it would be even easier for her drive to overcome my mistakes. I mean what I wrote, as a first timer if you read, read, read, watch, and work with the dog, then I think you end up with a servicable bird dog if there is any kind of genetic make up there.


I agree that good breeding and a healthy dose of bird exposure can overcome a lot. My pointer is testimony to that. My GSP mix on the other hand probably DOESN'T have the same high genetic quality, but also got away with A LOT when she was a pup, mainly due to my own ignorance. I shoot a lot of grouse over the pointer. Not so much with the GSP. They've had essentially the same training and the same bird exposure, so yeah, genetics is a big factor.



Steelheadfred said:


> Are you sure? Are you sure it is you and not the dog? Not trying to be critical here just seems you might be a little hard on yourself with that comment...





Steelheadfred said:


> All that reading and bs'ing did not give you an understanding of "what results to look for?"


Take gymnastics, or figure skating, or showing horses (something you haven't paid much attention to throughout your life). Do a little reading and then get out there and evaluate the field. Better yet, jump right in teach someone to do it. Maybe I'm a visual learner, or need more hand-holding than most, but I guess what I'm saying is it's a difference between book-smarts and street-smarts. It's the difference between knowing something and having the experience to apply that knowledge.

Remember, I sort of backed into this. First got the dog, then, over a period of years, got the hunting bug. I entered very casually, and yes, without clearly defined expectations or training goals. Ok, so maybe I learned what to look for, but definitely questioned how far I wanted to go with it. So yes, I think a combination of ignorance, arrogance, and lack of commitment on MY PART was detrimental to the end results with both of my dogs.



Steelheadfred said:


> I am going to disagree with you again, I can give you example after example of folks that worked hard with their first dog, with and without pro's help and ended up with very servicable bird dogs.


Hey I'm not saying it can't be done. I'm not even saying it shouldn't be done. Feeling my way through has been a valuable experience for me. All I'm saying is that getting behind a top notch dog is the best way I've found to figure out what to look for. As RecurveRX put it, it shortens the learning curve. Maybe that means a started dog. Maybe it means working with a pro. Maybe it just means walking in the woods with your dad and his buddies. 

If what you're after is quality time spent with man's best friend, by all means get out there and do it yourself. If what you want is a top notch bird hunting experience, it might be wise to look at pro help or a started dog. I'm not here to judge either decision.

Maybe you're right. Maybe I'm too hard on myself. Maybe I'm too hard on my dogs or expect too much from them given their background. However, in school, in business, in fixing up my house, in parenting my kids, "good enough" has never been good enough for me. Sounds like maybe we have that in common.

KW


----------



## #8 shot (Aug 27, 2009)

I have trained my dog by myself and with help of some knowledgeable friends in NAVDHA. I would not say they are pros, but more like mentors that have been there. And so far things have went pretty well. 

But I may go with a pro to force fetch train my male. I have never done it and have heard horror stories of other people's mistakes.


----------



## RecurveRx (Jun 21, 2004)

The enemy of good is great. Sometimes good is good enough.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## k9wernet (Oct 15, 2007)

RecurveRx said:


> The enemy of good is great. Sometimes good is good enough.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I don't expect greatness from myself, my kids, my coworkers or my dogs. Just a genuine commitment to improvement.

KW


----------



## k9wernet (Oct 15, 2007)

Dave Medema said:


> I may be typical...
> 
> first time hunter, first time dog owner, no pros, etc. ... I eventually worked for RGS and spent 60+ days chasing grouse with RGS supporters...


I'm going to go with "not typical!" :lol:

Still a great story, and you make some good points! Thanks for sharing!

KW


----------



## BIGSP (Sep 16, 2004)

Firemedic said:


> Brent, that is a very easy fix. I am trying my hardest to stay outta this thread. Good reading though!
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


It is but, my point is more bird exposure was not the ticket and neither is shocking the hell out of the dog. Whoa post, repititon and keeping the dog close along with increased pressure allowed the dog to learn what I wanted it to do. Point is not all dogs are going to become good or great because of bird exposure.


----------



## WestCoastHunter (Apr 3, 2008)

BIGSP said:


> It is but, my point is more bird exposure was not the ticket and neither is shocking the hell out of the dog. Whoa post, repititon and keeping the dog close along with increased pressure allowed the dog to learn what I wanted it to do. Point is not all dogs are going to become good or great because of bird exposure.


Brent, at what age did that problem start to pop up in your dog? Or was it always there?


----------



## BIGSP (Sep 16, 2004)

WestCoastHunter said:


> Brent, at what age did that problem start to pop up in your dog? Or was it always there?


Jarl it was always there. It just got worse over time. I just kept trying to put more birds in front of him. A pro couldve figured it out in 5 minutes. Too many people just said more birds more birds and that wasn't what he needed and I didn't know any better.


----------



## Scott Berg (Feb 24, 2008)

Good thread KW. I read through most of the posts and found the discussion interesting.

Double Gun, I am not sure if you had a specific "major flaw". It might help drive the discussion if you described the specific or a specific flaw. For many people, getting rid of the dog is not an option so it might help a number of people if the more experienced members of the board could address a specific problem. 

SRB


----------



## k9wernet (Oct 15, 2007)

Jay Johnson said:


> "easy" when the dogs body language is clear they are making game,
> 
> "come around" usually when the handler thinks they have a better idea of where a birds are than the dog and are trying to direct them, and the classic
> 
> "whoa" when the dog is already standing still on point.


I think "whoa" and "easy" are most likely in response to a dog who has proven that they're not always 100% staunch and steady. We can debate whether or not that dog belongs in the woods, but some guys will always just work with what they have.

On "come around" or directing the dog... I don't know. Some might see any amount of this as over-handling, but I've definitely directed my dog into cover where she's pointed a bird on more than one occasion. I'm not constantly steering my dog (although after judging me on Sat, Scott might have something to say about that!), but even the best dog only sees what he sees and only covers what he covers. Maybe it's a matter of degree. Maybe it's just an indication of where I'm at as a handler.

You're probably right that all of that _can be_ excessive, unnecessary, and confusing to the dog. Very good point.



Jay Johnson said:


> 2) Causes of a "cluttered mind" are a result of a handler thinking they need to direct their dog to the birds and help them handle them, and the resulting hacking and chatter that comes with it. The dog starts worrying more about what their handler is going to ask them to do than seeking, finding and handling birds.


I definitely see where you're coming from here, but again, I think it's a matter of degree. While you don't want the dog wholly fixated on the handler, this...



Jay Johnson said:


> I just turn them loose and let them take me to where the birds are. Trying to handle them is generally an effort in futility.


...sounds like a recipe for a lost dog or worse. Seems like at the very least, you'd want a dog keyed into your direction changes, instructions to stay off the road, and obedient to your call of when to pack it up.

Maybe I'm viewing things too simplistically, but I see handling as an extension of obedience, if not the same thing. I don't see over-handling as particularly productive, but neither is complete disobedience.

KW


----------



## Jay Johnson (Jan 10, 2008)

k9wernet said:


> I think "whoa" and "easy" are most likely in response to a dog who has proven that they're not always 100% staunch and steady. We can debate whether or not that dog belongs in the woods, but some guys will always just work with what they have.
> 
> On "come around" or directing the dog... I don't know. Some might see any amount of this as over-handling, but I've definitely directed my dog into cover where she's pointed a bird on more than one occasion. I'm not constantly steering my dog (although after judging me on Sat, Scott might have something to say about that!), but even the best dog only sees what he sees and only covers what he covers. Maybe it's a matter of degree. Maybe it's just an indication of where I'm at as a handler.
> 
> ...


Everyone has to find their own comfort level on such things. 

As far as the dog being keyed on my direction of travel, they keep track of that. I have had dogs that have bad compasses and poor hearing and I have found that they more than others benefit from being forced to keep track of me by me keeping silent. 

Now if I have a complete run-away, self-hunter, that is another issue. I have made such dogs handle and made them useable as a result. Frankly, they were nowhere near as much fun to hunt with as a cooperative dog and nowhere near as productive. That was when I was younger and had more time (potential years of grouse hunting) and less sense. If I got one of those today, I would find it a pet home and buy another prospect. 

In an effort of full disclosure, I do train my dogs to come, sit, heel, kennel, and whoa. I can get my dogs to come in at the end of a hunt but they kind of do it on their own sweet time and if they are distracted, forget it! 

I have found that if you buy a prospect out of proven grouse gun dog lines they generally just do not need much in terms of formal training or handling to make them effective grouse hunting dogs. And, it is their pre-disposed genetic potential that seems to determine how good they become more so than any amount of formal training and handling. 

As Fritzs would say, my "program" is very relaxed and all about just running them into grouse and letting their inbred abilities express themselves. When they start pointing and allowing me to flush the bird, I start killing the birds. If they are natural retrievers that great, if not, no big deal.

This lack of handling and the quiet traveling through the woods is one of the things I like about grouse hunting with my pointing dog. I can just walk quickly, lost in my thoughts, enjoying the natural world until I hear the point signal and then dive into action. It works really well for me but others mileage may vary.


----------



## Dave Medema (Jan 18, 2005)

k9wernet

Lack of commands doesn't necessarily = lack of obedience. It may simply mean really nice cooperation.


----------



## BIGSP (Sep 16, 2004)

Scott Berg said:


> Good thread KW. I read through most of the posts and found the discussion interesting.
> 
> Double Gun, I am not sure if you had a specific "major flaw". It might help drive the discussion if you described the specific or a specific flaw. For many people, getting rid of the dog is not an option so it might help a number of people if the more experienced members of the board could address a specific problem.
> 
> SRB


Scott,

Have you ever had a dog that had a ton of drive, would point birds but would then rip them? What would you do with such a dog?


----------



## kek25 (Jul 9, 2005)

BIGSP said:


> Scott,
> 
> Have you ever had a dog that had a ton of drive, would point birds but would then rip them? What would you do with such a dog?


Not to answer for Scott, but I had one like that, and a lot of guys told me I probably wouldn't be able to get him under control. By his third year he was an excellent bird dog, holding point, and bringing the birds to me alive if they were winged. Sometimes the drive is just too powerful for them to control, and it takes time and patience to get them to do what you want, as long as the dog has the intelligence to learn. Some people don't have the patience and want a full broke bird dog by 24 months. I don't blame them a bit, as everyone has their own reasons for wanting what they want. There's only so many seasons to hunt, after all. But I'm one of those that will give the dog the time it needs to get it right.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 10, 2006)

BIGSP said:


> Scott,
> 
> Have you ever had a dog that had a ton of drive, would point birds but would then rip them? What would you do with such a dog?


Your describing most dogs @ some point
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## WestCoastHunter (Apr 3, 2008)

BIGSP said:


> Scott,
> 
> Have you ever had a dog that had a ton of drive, would point birds but would then rip them? What would you do with such a dog?


Here's my question.

At what age would you choose to crack down on this? I've read a fair amount about, and seen for myself in my own dogs, behavior that is downright infuriating in dogs between the age of 9 months and 2-2 1/2 years, but then something "magical" happens around age 3 and they settle down and start pointing again, stop ripping birds, and actually cooperate.

I know the common recommendation is to start formally training from day one and try to prevent these issues from ever happening, but I don't like that mentality. Either I have a dog that has the instincts or I don't. I realize that's easy to say and that most people don't want to throw the dog they got out the door or bench them so they train them and I'm fine with that.

But at what age do you decide that you have a problem if you're of the "drop the tailgate and let them hunt" mindset? Based on my limited experience age 3 seems to be about right, but maybe some of you have had other experiences???


----------



## Jay Johnson (Jan 10, 2008)

WestCoastHunter said:


> Here's my question.
> 
> At what age would you choose to crack down on this? I've read a fair amount about, and seen for myself in my own dogs, behavior that is downright infuriating in dogs between the age of 9 months and 2-2 1/2 years, but then something "magical" happens around age 3 and they settle down and start pointing again, stop ripping birds, and actually cooperate.
> 
> ...


As soon as I felt that I could without diminishing their drive or bird lust. I certainly wouldn't waste three years watching them take birds out as I approached their point. Life is too short! 

Natural staunchness is a good trait in a dog.


----------



## RecurveRx (Jun 21, 2004)

Jay Johnson said:


> As soon as I felt that I could without diminishing their drive or bird lust. I certainly wouldn't waste three years watching them take birds out as I approached their point. Life is too short!
> 
> Natural staunchness is a good trait in a dog.


Would you consider use of libbies effective in this example?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## k9wernet (Oct 15, 2007)

Jay Johnson said:


> This lack of handling and the quiet traveling through the woods is one of the things I like about grouse hunting with my pointing dog. I can just walk quickly, lost in my thoughts, enjoying the natural world until I hear the point signal and then dive into action. It works really well for me but others mileage may vary.


I 100% agree with this thought. In an ideal situation, the only noise I'd hear in the woods would be the birds chirping, the flush, the shot, and a few words of encouragement to my four legged companion on a job well done. I've experienced that. Not every time out, but on occasion. It's nice!

In REALITY however, a dog just flat-out disappears once in a while.



Jay Johnson said:


> I have had dogs that have bad compasses and poor hearing and I have found that they more than others benefit from being forced to keep track of me by me keeping silent.


I'd like to know how you handle that, short of causing a ruckus to bring him back and verbally getting on the dog.

KW


----------



## FindTheBird (Dec 18, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> Your describing most dogs @ some point
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Touch'e!



WestCoastHunter said:


> Here's my question.
> ...
> But at what age do you decide that you have a problem if you're of the "drop the tailgate and let them hunt" mindset? Based on my limited experience age 3 seems to be about right, but maybe some of you have had other experiences???


That probably depends upon degrees of exposure and intelligence ("Damn, I really _can't_ catch these things can I?"). But it's my guess that in many dogs, the continued chasing will begin to be ingrained as the norm and it will only continue--at least without human intervention. If that's the case, we can only hope that the dog is a boot polisher or the owner won't be burning much gun powder.

This goes against conventional wisdom, but I started steadiness training on my current pup extemely early using only a light tug on the check-cord at the flush without saying a thing. She had no idea she was even being trained--she just became conditioned over time to accept the fact that she wasn't supposed to chase. This light- handed approach has taken none of the fire out of her and she's completely bird crazy. Last night we had 3 broke finds on woodcock and she's a little over 9 months old. I'm still looking for the negatives in this early training method


----------



## Double Gun (Feb 22, 2005)

Scott Berg said:


> Good thread KW. I read through most of the posts and found the discussion interesting.
> 
> Double Gun, I am not sure if you had a specific "major flaw". It might help drive the discussion if you described the specific or a specific flaw. For many people, getting rid of the dog is not an option so it might help a number of people if the more experienced members of the board could address a specific problem.
> 
> SRB


Scott, I really didn't have one in mind. My thought was guys get a dog do some yard work and a little bird work and take a dog hunting. When issues that they can't live with appear they head to a pro. Unless they work with the pro and are willing to maintain that level of training they will very likely end up with the same dog. I have a feeling most would benefit by simply cutting ties and getting a different dog. I have learned I am not a trainer and I believe most guys that just hunt aren't either.


----------



## Jay Johnson (Jan 10, 2008)

k9wernet said:


> I 100% agree with this thought. In an ideal situation, the only noise I'd hear in the woods would be the birds chirping, the flush, the shot, and a few words of encouragement to my four legged companion on a job well done. I've experienced that. Not every time out, but on occasion. It's nice!
> 
> In REALITY however, a dog just flat-out disappears once in a while.
> 
> ...


First off I walk in the direction I last saw them headed and keep my ear tuned for the point signal. I don't start to even worry about an absence for at least 10-15 minutes. If gone longer I hit the whistle now an again to reveal my location and just wait for them to find me. My experience has taught me that if the dog wants to find you they generally can and will and if they want to stay gone a lot of screaming an hollering doesn't do a lot of good and can sometimes just confuse them if they are not very good at figuring out where the sound is coming from. 

Of course their are exceptions to every rule.


----------



## WestCoastHunter (Apr 3, 2008)

Jay Johnson said:


> As soon as I felt that I could without diminishing their drive or bird lust. I certainly wouldn't waste three years watching them take birds out as I approached their point. Life is too short!
> 
> Natural staunchness is a good trait in a dog.


What if the dog was pointing staunchly up until it hit puberty?


----------



## mudbat2128 (Sep 7, 2004)

WestCoastHunter said:


> What if the dog was pointing staunchly up until it hit puberty?


If he's allready broke just pick him up and put him back don't allow it to keep happening and don't keep shooting birds for him if hes not doing things right.


----------



## WestCoastHunter (Apr 3, 2008)

mudbat2128 said:


> If he's allready broke just pick him up and put him back don't allow it to keep happening and don't keep shooting birds for him if hes not doing things right.


Does "broke" really apply to dogs being run in the manner discussed here? Or is that a term better used in reference to dogs put through a more formal training program?

I agree with your general point however.


----------



## mudbat2128 (Sep 7, 2004)

WestCoastHunter said:


> Does "broke" really apply to dogs being run in the manner discussed here? Or is that a term better used in reference to dogs put through a more formal training program?
> 
> I agree with your general point however.


I guess staunch or steady to wing would have been the better choice of wording.


----------



## BIGSP (Sep 16, 2004)

FindTheBird said:


> Touch'e!
> 
> 
> That probably depends upon degrees of exposure and intelligence ("Damn, I really _can't_ catch these things can I?"). But it's my guess that in many dogs, the continued chasing will begin to be ingrained as the norm and it will only continue--at least without human intervention. If that's the case, we can only hope that the dog is a boot polisher or the owner won't be burning much gun powder.
> ...


Mike this is what I was talking about earlier and you said most of the well bred dogs have all the natural point built into them. Which I partly agree with but those good dogs also have a lot of prey drive and sometimes that over rides the point. Which for a young trainer means get a pro. This is where I don't subscribe to more birds. I've tried it and it didn't work. 

My current pointer has a fair amount of drive but, we have been working on letting her chase so we can then take it out of her. Seems kinda counter productive but, this is why I work with a pro. Stuff I'd never think of.


----------



## BIGSP (Sep 16, 2004)

kek25 said:


> Not to answer for Scott, but I had one like that, and a lot of guys told me I probably wouldn't be able to get him under control. By his third year he was an excellent bird dog, holding point, and bringing the birds to me alive if they were winged. Sometimes the drive is just too powerful for them to control, and it takes time and patience to get them to do what you want, as long as the dog has the intelligence to learn. Some people don't have the patience and want a full broke bird dog by 24 months. I don't blame them a bit, as everyone has their own reasons for wanting what they want. There's only so many seasons to hunt, after all. But I'm one of those that will give the dog the time it needs to get it right.


Keith,

I'm sure those guys weren't trial guys. I've heard Scott Townsend talk about dogs like that on this board and how they end up being some of the best dogs. You can't put more horsepower into a dog but, if you can harness it and direct you have something special.


----------

