Field Trial Ponderings

[JJWI]

Being a rabbit hunter that has followed hounds for about 55 years I am of the opinion that most hunters I know and have known put little stock in field trials as the determining factor of what they own, hunt and breed. I am NOT a breeder but have had liters over the years when I need to replace old stock. If I am hunting it then, "I" have made the determination that the dog(s) are worth raising a litter out of OR I would not be feeding it. That then makes me the one and only judge that matters in the BIG PICTURE. I suspect that those of us who have hunted for many years need NOT look at a dog for weeks and weeks to JUDGE if we like them or not. I also suspect that also applies to judges as human nature is nearly impossible to eliminate. I do not understand all this and that HYPE about a dog bred to circle a rabbit as they either can or can not do it consistently alone or in company without me freezing to death to bag it. I do however hunt a line of dogs and have for years not because of their trial record but because of the traits that are consistent in that line and HUNT is one of them at the top.

So with that being said, what would of happened if Ranger Dan hadn't been put in the trials and was promoted? What if he was only hunted and never really shown to larger crowd and gained attention at the field trials like he did? How much impact would he of had on the Beagle breed if he wasn't trialed? Without Dan on the trialing circuit in the US and Canada, he would of probably not been bred to a lot of those quality females that had so many great offspring that many beaglers and hunters can trace their bloodlines back to this particular dog. What you said about what your standards are on what makes a dog in your eyes, is the same mentality that all the successful breeders over the years has had. Breed and raise to your standards and take that to the hunts. You know it works, because a lot of dogs that came out of your yard were very successful when put in the trials across the country. The AKC rules for desirable and undesirable traits I feel are spot on for a hunting dog. The problem is, like anything with human interaction, is how some people apply it. And I don't care how set in stone the rules are in any event, people are gonna interpret certain situations. Should you breed to a particular dog just because it is a finished champion? No. But the field trials do give you an opprortunity to go see dogs out of a particular line in action. When you trial, things won't go your way every week, and you can't expect it to. Heck the current National Large Pack 15 female got picked up the week before at Northland's trial, and then went out to Vermont and won the Nationals the next week! Field trials get a bad rap a lot of the time. But I can't see why that anyone that is involved with the Beagle as a hunting dog wouldn't want to spend a weekend with a bunch of people that have the same passion.

[Tim G]

X 2

[Hare Chaser]

+ Well said! Thank you for a well thought out post.

[SNOWDOGS1]

JJWI, pretty much spot on. Good post.

[warddog]

When we bought our first dog from this line I had NO CLUE what the blood lines behind the dog were, only that it was AKC registered. We tried the dog, liked it very much, bought her and got a bonus as she was pregnant. JUST being hunters we didn't care about the papers but when she had pups and we found the ones we kept to possess her hunt we then started to study the line behind her. At that point is when we found out what she was pout of and because we didn't trial we had NO CLUE anyway. We then started to investigate that line and see many of them hunt. What we bought was a dog we liked, to hunt, that happened to be registered and found out that line had been trialed quite a bit although that NEVER mattered to us neither did we know the line at that time. We even traded a pretty fast grade dog in on her so the papers mattered NOT in the least. So, it wasn't the trialing paperwork that brought us to the line we have hunted for years but the traits of the individual dog and others from that same line that made us keep and hunt it. I will agree that without the registration paperwork we would probably never know the lineage of our original female but we didn't buy her because of the trialing record but in spite of it. We just happened to be able to keep it because of AKC registration paperwork not the trialing record.

[Hare Chaser]

When we bought our first dog from this line I had NO CLUE what the blood lines behind the dog were, only that it was AKC registered. We tried the dog, liked it very much, bought her and got a bonus as she was pregnant. JUST being hunters we didn't care about the papers but when she had pups and we found the ones we kept to possess her hunt we then started to study the line behind her. At that point is when we found out what she was pout of and because we didn't trial we had NO CLUE anyway. We then started to investigate that line and see many of them hunt. What we bought was a dog we liked, to hunt, that happened to be registered and found out that line had been trialed quite a bit although that NEVER mattered to us neither did we know the line at that time. We even traded a pretty fast grade dog in on her so the papers mattered NOT in the least. So, it wasn't the trialing paperwork that brought us to the line we have hunted for years but the traits of the individual dog and others from that same line that made us keep and hunt it. I will agree that without the registration paperwork we would probably never know the lineage of our original female but we didn't buy her because of the trialing record but in spite of it. We just happened to be able to keep it because of AKC registration paperwork not the trialing record.

I don't think you are fully understanding what was said by JJWI. Pretty sure his point was were it not for the fact Ranger Dan became a FC through competing regularly on the LPOH trials you quite likely wouldn't have the line of dogs you are so happy with as gun dogs. Were it not for the trial record and FC degree he toted along behind him, it's quite likely that 80-90% of the females bred to him never would have been. Especially given where Ranger Dan originated from.

A good gun dog is not always a good trial dog but every good trial dog had ought to be a good gun dog.

[warddog]

I understood it but do not think you understood my point. I have had rabbit/coon dogs for many years prior to what we have now, MOSTLY GRADE or at least without papers and always had dogs that could circle a rabbit. If not we would not have owned and fed them. They were tools used in our generation as a way of life and toys were few and far between. Some of the best I have seen up to and including today were grade dogs for whatever reason, that were NEVER in a trail to have any title in front of their name other than RABBIT DOG. Many old timers bred a rabbit dog they had for years and that dogs off spring proved what they had not a FC title. Now days there are not nearly as many keeping rabbit dogs as that way of life is gone and it is now sport or hobby and finding one of those ole yellers down the road is nearly gone as well. Not knocking the field trials or the titles as I agree they do serve as a means of folks who do not, will not or can not get around to see a lot of dogs run, being able to recognize names. That said, name recognition then takes more research into what THAT dog has produced and generations later. Years ago ole so and so, down the road that had a good rabbit dog was known and not the dog by a title and most hunters were hunting something out of ole so and so's Jack dog. That dog wasn't even necessarily a full beagle BUT a rabbit dog none the less that reproduced dogs that consistently circled rabbits.

"A good gun dog is not always a good trial dog but every good trial dog had ought to be a good gun dog." If a trial is to judge and better the breed then why would there be any difference in a good trial dog and a good RABBIT dog? The standards are actually set by the nature of the purpose of the breed, the paperwork is that of man and the business of registries. The mere FC in front of a dogs name does not make it a rabbit dog but evidently it does make it a trial dog in my opinion.

[Rabbithoundjb]

Good post Wardog and exactly my experience over the years.

[BMBeagles]

I like the ranger dan stuff ! Hard hunting jump dogs with plenty of nose power ! In all the ones ive had . But was he realy bred to that much ??? Correct me if im wrong but i didnt think he got used much just reproduced well.

[JJWI]

Well we have had totally different experiences with "grade" dogs then. I can honestly say I have ever seen one that I would consistently jump and circle a rabbit. Don't get me wrong, there are probably some outstanding grade dogs out there. Problem I am seeing, especially lately, is a lot of people are breeding just because "it is a beagle, so it should run rabbits" So how many quality rabbit dogs will you get out of a cross like that? Like I said before, it all comes down to the person who owns the dog and sticking to their standards. That goes for registered and non registered dogs alike. No matter how well a dog performs in the field is no guarantee on their ability to pass their qualities to future generations.

So if your female's level of hunt was so impressive to you that it made you go out and research it like you did, why couldn't your grade dogs at that time match it? Hunt is something that is stressed in trials, at least the ones I go to.

[Hare Chaser]

"A good gun dog is not always a good trial dog but every good trial dog had ought to be a good gun dog." If a trial is to judge and better the breed then why would there be any difference in a good trial dog and a good RABBIT dog?

The trials I'm most familiar with are LPOH. At that, basically the only ones I attend are those held at the club I belong to. I'm not a trialer. Yet I can see where many of the trial dogs have had a very positive effect on my current hounds and those I've had in the past. A good trial dog, should have all the traits of what most of us want in a good gun dog: the ability to search for, jump and circle it's game to the gun with minimal losses for lengthy periods of time when required. It should ignore off game, be biddable and handle when it needs to be picked up or advanced to better cover prior to a jump. A good trial dog must also have sufficient independence to maintain composure and stay focused on following the line of scent left by the hare/rabbit when checks come. The ability to stay focused is crucial in maintaining the run, especially if you like to hear a race go on for long periods of time like I do. I want this in all my gun dogs. Many people don't care about that. All that matters is how many hare/rabbits are shot at the end of the day. I want more than that.

For many folks it doesn't matter if it's a full circle on the hare/rabbit or 20 yards. Their main goal is to kill the game and don't really care that much about the quality of the dog work. Many dogs can't handle the pressure of the pack and fall apart when the checks come. Consistently placing and winning trial dogs under several different judges and proven in the field under the gun will often improve the quality of the dogs I like to hunt. My guess is there are many others who feel the same.

[warddog]

Well we have had totally different experiences with "grade" dogs then. I can honestly say I have ever seen one that I would consistently jump and circle a rabbit. Don't get me wrong, there are probably some outstanding grade dogs out there. Problem I am seeing, especially lately, is a lot of people are breeding just because "it is a beagle, so it should run rabbits" So how many quality rabbit dogs will you get out of a cross like that? Like I said before, it all comes down to the person who owns the dog and sticking to their standards. That goes for registered and non registered dogs alike. No matter how well a dog performs in the field is no guarantee on their ability to pass their qualities to future generations.

So if your female's level of hunt was so impressive to you that it made you go out and research it like you did, why couldn't your grade dogs at that time match it? Hunt is something that is stressed in trials, at least the ones I go to.

What I suggest is that we have different OPINIONS about what our dogs are supposed to do and in what they are actually doing. If hunt is stressed in trials I will have to say the dogs I looked at from a guy who was the president of an AKC club sure didn't show me that. Yes they searched out in the stocked enclosure he had, that they ran in and they seemed to know just were to go in it but when I brought them home into the wild they didn't bust the thick heavy brush we hunt. That running enclosure wasn't remotely close to the terrain we hunt and we got a kick out of the guy trying to run behind the dogs were trying. We stayed at the point of the jump and could see as well as hear the dogs on the track from that very point and it did not take us long to know which dogs were doing what in the chase. These dogs were NOT from the same place as we the female we finally liked and bought as we didn't even know or care she was registered as the one we traded in on her was NOT. By the way, we bought her from a trailer that liked a different style/ format and she did NOT fit their liking and the one we traded was way too fast for us and did fit their liking (OPINIONS). The ones at the AKC club ran how we liked but had little hunt when we took them out of the enclosure and tried them. The young male of the two we were trying, ALL the guys at this club said was an up and comer, bred to the hilt and they all liked, but for us, well we did NOT. Because of that we never even looked at the papers of either of them but with the female we did like we thought we might as well see about her ancestry she was already pregnant when we got her. YES, the "FC" title did stick out on Ranger Dan especially when he showed up pretty close on the top and the bottom and that is what caused us to research it like I did. I never knew a thing about IFC ranger Dan at that time but I did read and talk to ALOT of people that did and even one fella, whose name I can not remember now in the Northeast that had him after he got some age on him. As I have stated in this thread, we bought the dog because we liked what she did in the field NOT because of any "FC" title and only learned of it AFTER words. If I would have known the genetics behind her even minus the "IFC" in front of Ranger Dan we would have tried to find others from that lineage. That is exactly how the ole boys did it long before all the HYPE about "FC" titles. By the way walkie talkies have "FC" titles as well and I have seen them in the filed as well.

[sparky]

Consistently placing and winning trial dogs under several different judges and proven in the field under the gun will often improve the quality of the dogs I like to hunt. My guess is there are many others who feel the same.

Some guys will try to determine which dogs are doing the best by listening to them,the dogs that are sounding the best aren't always the ones that are doing the best,in fact when you get in there an actually see the dog work sometimes you will find that your ears are misleading you,the only way to know what's really going on is to see it.

[JJWI]

agree with Sparky and Hare Chaser
Yes, traditional brace does have the prefix "FC" also. One of the reasons I am glad that AKC came out with the different prefixes to properly i.d. the dog (FCLP, FCGD etc) But I don't understand when ever there is a thread about Champions, there are always a group of people that respond that FC don't mean anything and how it has no influence on their breeding programs. But when they post pups or dogs for sale with a pedigree, there are a lot of "FC" that show up in the pedigrees. Like it or not, a lot of traits people look for in a hunting dog, a Field Champion do have. When Green Bay Shooter was at the end of his breeding career, and you bred Nikki to Glacier Ridge Renegade instead, would you have bred to him if he was an unknown dog in Seger's yard at the time? Your female Nikki was one hell of a female and reproducer, but do you think she would of had many of her pups go to the northern part of the country and trialed if she wasn't bred to FC Green Bay Shooter, or FC Glacier Ridge Renegade? All the traits you wanted to be put in your pups, these sires were tested on weekend after weekend until they finished out. Had they not been promoted and brought to the public eye like they were, I highly doubt they themselves or their offspring would of made it to Indiana for you to discover. I know you bred to the males because who they were out of and what they produced, but do you think Adam Seger would of had them in his yard if they weren't Champions? I kind of think it had a big part of them being down there.

Traditional Brace dogs, glad you brought that up. Were would the Beagle be as a hunting dog if people just accepted the Brace format as the primary trial format? Without the SPO movement and the people that helped bringing it to life, I do believe that the Beagle would of went down the same road as the Irish Setter as a hunting dog.

[warddog]

I don't know who JJWI is but evidently you think you know me or my dogs. I knew Adam Seger and his dogs long before he ever got Green Bay Shooter. He knew what I was hunting because he worked some young dogs and started pups for us in his pen and asked me what they were out of. Seems some miss the point in that I NEVER bought that line because of the titles but rather what they did in the field, for me, that just so happened to line up with the Ranger Dan blood ( which I learned after NOT before our first dog of that lineage). Adam had absolutely NONE of it in his kennel at that time but saw and liked the dogs he worked for us well enough to ask what their breeding was. Adam worked some of our others before we even acquired Nikki but he got to see her as well as some of her offspring which was NOT the only Ranger Dan breeding we had. We also had some Top Gun Tyke, Smith's Ranger's Scooter, Blackies Shot of Banjo. ALL of them go back to IFC Wingate's Brandon which is NOT heard of as much as Ranger Dan or Shooter was but from what I was told was the root source. By the way Nikki, nor many of the others had titles but they all showed the same traits in the field, RABBIT DOGS and that is why we owned that line NOT the title in front of their name. I can also tell you since you wanted to bring up the breeding of Nikki to Shooter and Renegade as titled dogs, THEY WERE NOT EVEN REMOTELY CLOSE in what was produced. Both titled dogs from the same lineage but yet the offspring were not even close. Nikki was also heavy bred with Branko "IFC's" but I never crossed her back on any of it because what we liked were the traits stamped from the Dan lineage that we had witnessed in the field. Adam had Haunted Hill stuff and Nikki had a couple shots of that too in IFC Shaker and Harper. The titles in and of themselves had little to do with what he bred Nikki too but rather the hunting traits in the field and if it were the titles we could have went many, many ways as in Nikki's 4 generation pedigree there were 13 "IFC's" and 17 "FC". What I have always said is that the registration paperwork allows those of us the opportunity that are merely hunters to find out what a dogs lineage is rather than the field trial title in front of that name. NOT saying those titles mean nothing as getting one surely means they were tested in the eyes of several others. BUT it is NOT that title that makes a dog but the dog that makes the title and what was the basis of what we have hunted for years. If those titles were the tell all we would have had a very difficult time in breeding Nikki as she had 6 "IFC's", one "FC" and 7 non-titled dogs in her first three generations. Evidently someone other than me felt those non-titled dogs were worthy of breeding and in fact Nikki came from both a non-titled sire and dam and she wasn't titled either for whatever reason(s). By the way we NEVER ran behind her to see or tell what she was doing in the field and we hunted her with many other dogs. Didn't have to do that to know she was a rabbit dog nor did Adam when he saw her as well as some of the others he worked for us. I will end this by saying that Nikki was a real nice rabbit dog but had NO titles and she was trialed before I got her. She evidently did NOT make the grade in the eyes of others judging her BUT sure did mine and went on to produce some that did.