Hunt Test Question

[repoman]

wow

[thunderpout]

Labs4me... I agree with one thing ya said earlier, how a person trains his hunting dog on different aspects is a personal thing and there is no right or wrong answer there... But the original comment and one I keep hearing repeated is: The trialing dog is going to be better than the hunting dog...  Well, better at what, and for who? Does that mean the trial dog is better for a trialing guy or the hunter? Here's an analogy, A sports car is better than a station wagon, every time, hands down!  I can see how someone would say that and they may be right if they are someone that likes driving one and it will suit there needs, but what if ya say, have four kids to tote around , or, they need their vehicle to haul shrubs around or deliver alot of packages around with... does that make a truck better than any sports car?  Nope! Only "better" to the person, and for what they are using it for.... Of course, a well trained trial dog will probably fair better hunting, than a hunting dog would do trialing, but that would be only to the fact that trail dogs are trained to perform VERY specific tasks because thry are juged on those tasks... and that makes that dog no better than my dog and how it was trained for the hunting that I do... Hey blabman.... "a bird always always flushes away from a dog..."  ya havent been grouse hunting before, have ya?

[labs4me]

I'm not condemning any hunting dog or how they are trained.  As I said, how you train and hunt your dog is personal prefernce and if it works for you then continue on with that caliber dog.

When I said all trial dogs will be better than a 'hunting' dog I meant it.  It's not taking anything away form a hunting dog... but a trial dog is a finished dog.  The tasks are not specific to trialing.  They are hunting scenarios.  Maybe things that almost never happen in the real world, but you are proving that they can even over come the once in a lifetime scenario on top of 'nuts and bolts' hunting.  I've had many trial dogs and many non-trialed dogs.  My non-trialed dogs are generally brought up to a trained to a trial caliber... except my last one.  My trial dogs generally did not hunt till the age of 3 or 4 but readily moved immediatley into the hunting world without a glich... no learning the ropes on the fly at all.  My 'meat dogs' were hunted hard form a young age, but trained along side my trial dogs to complete the same tasks even though they were never going to compete.  They were exceptional hunting dogs too.  All the dogs i trained to run trials were exceptional hunting dogs and I can say that they were better able to handle tough retrieves and were generally more in control than other dogs I've hunted with. 

There are many trial caliber dogs that will never be hunted just as there are many trial caliber dogs that will never be trialed.  But the training and the instincts and ability is there if they wanted and those are the finished dogs I speak of.

Again I'm not shorting any 'hunting' dog.  That is what I own now.  That is what all my buddies own.  I enjoy hunting with a good hunting dog whether it possess all the skills of a trial dog or not.  I'm just stating that trial dogs indeed are a caliber of dog that is a small percentage of the population, they are the stock we hunter's go to to buy our puppies.  If we didn't feel that the trial dogs are held with a high esteem and they weren't able to produce exceptional offspring, we'd not worry about the lineage or titles in pedigrees.

Good Luck!

Ken

[Cody Gruchow]

no ones going to win this arguement and im sure it will go on for a good while, im not getting my point across and i give up.

[thunderpout]

So true Cody, Ken as I said on a previous post... I went the route of top trial bloodline in the past, and I will never again, least with english setters.  And its not the $$$,  With the right line and top breeders you pay just as much with certain lines. The trial type setters are a completely different type of dog in my experience.  I think youre refering to trialing labs which may have more similarities in hunting situations than pointing breeds when comparing the two "types", and of course there are exceptions.  With setters, The line I started with, is a foot hunting/closer ranging old world style dog... important when grouse hunting the way I and some folks do.  I tried the smaller, wide ranging, amped up, championship line setters, that I thought would be the "monster hunters",  it was definatley not the right fit for me.  This is why I have issues with some blanket statements with the trial dogs just being "better"... so I aint saying hunting lines are better, Im sayin that type of dog is better for ME.... and thats really what is important, eh?

[Cody Gruchow]

fine, i have to test these things out, ill be at some trials next year then and see how my dog fairs out, i may even bring the other lab i was talking about to one or 2.