Fine Line

[Jay Schrader]

I disagree with Dr. Chris when he says that a 4 year old dog is always better than he was at 18 months. Many dogs that have had tons of hours and lots of trials develop bad habits (back tracking, ghost trailing,swinging). Guys blow dogs up from lots of pressure. Most of us have seen this a time or two. Under normal conditions, I agree that dogs improve from 18 months to 4 years. But it seems like some of these young dogs that are exposed to a lot of pressure for extended time blow up or start bad habits in what should be prime years. Bottom line, every dog is different. Some can take the heat, some can't.

[fulcount]

Schrader
you hit it on the head Under normal circumstances at 4 the dog actually should be the best it will be but campaigning in Large pack at an early age most times will have a negative effect
If you took a poll of the people that campaigned their pup in LPH , If They are honest about
it I would bet the biggest percentage of them would tell you they wouldn't do it a second time
That is if they wanted a reliable gun hound at the age of 4 most would tell you it was fun
while it lasted If just a field trialer and not a gunner that one would just throw that youngster away and go on to the next one or sell it on its record
A lot of you guys that have not been to a LPH trial should make every effort you can
to get to one to get what I am talking about
There is a GREAT differenc e between campaigning in That format and the SPO format believe me
John O

[Jay Schrader]

Yeah, I agree with John O that there's a big difference between some LPH & SPO. It all depends on who's judging the LPH & what the conditions are like. When condition are tough, dry or snow, and the judges are getting in to see the checks I think LPH is great. But when it's high flying and the judges are basically just scoring drive it can turn into a farse. How the dog got to the front is just as important as who's at the front. A judge has to look at the complete picture. I applaud the ones that do. There are many that are excellent at seeing through the b.s.

I attended a LPH trial in Ontario a few years back and was allowed in the grounds during the trial. I saw with my own eyes as the trial ended up being strictly a contest of gambling dogs that would restart a race 100 yards or farther from the point of loss. When I asked the judges afterwards why they never stayed at the point of loss and took notice to which dogs actually worked the check and which bounded off I was told that, though he agreed with me that the gamblers were faulty he stated that this particular club promoted the type of gambling hounds that placed. By the way, most of these gambling hounds were young.

Now I'm not a sore loser, I just won't go back there.

In my eyes, a dog needs to be able to solo a rabbit for a considerable amount of time without too many losses to really be considered an ideal hunting hound. Same way with the hounds that take hours to catch at the end of an LPH trial because they simply have not been trained to handle. Or the dogs that will pound a deer and then go on to place or win the same trial. I've seen it all in the few LPH trials I've attended. If you can't take a dog into the wild by itself and shoot some rabbits with it without chasing it around the county it's not an ideal hunting hound and we shouldn't be promoting it. But that's just my opinion.

Sorry for getting a little off topic.

[fulcount]

Amen Jay Nuff said
John O

[Mapel Valley Kennels LLC.]

How the dog got to the front is just as important as whos in front.Well said and hard to disagree with.The End.

[Jay Schrader]

I personally have put too much pressure on a young dog only to pay the price later with a dog that developed faults. More than once I've let my enthusiasm over a young hound cloud my better judgement. That's human nature.

To every rule there's the exception. I think there are young hounds that are next to impossible to mess up. They are just great hounds. But for every one of those I think there's so many more that get ruined.

Art Beamer told me at a trial once, that when he gets a young dog started he runs it with a pack only a couple times to make sure that it will go in with the pack. After that the dog is given time to mature running solo & brace before it is ran consistently within a pack. Looking back, that seems to be pretty sound advice. I wish I would have followed it on a couple dogs.

I think it's all about what your goals are. If you want to finish a dog early and move on to the next, I can see the logic in running them early if the dog can handle it. I think if your goal is developing a hunting dog that you will keep for it's entire life and plan to enjoy for many years, then patience should be applied while the dog is maturing.

Field trial beagling is definately a sport like any other that you get out of it what you put into it. Just talk to one of the guys that finishes a field champion year after year. They put far more effort and money into it than most of us are willing or able to.

My only issue is when organizations and clubs say they are promoting an all around hunting dog when in reality what they are doing is making field champions at the expense of the future of the sport. The brace beagle was ruined as a hunting tool by people who were chasing ribbons and lying to themselves. History is there to learn from so that mistakes aren't repeated.

[Greg Wells]

How much time on the ground & the type of running the young dog has been exposed to is more important than the age of a dog. I've had a few one year old dogs than were better than some 5 year olds will ever be. If the pup doesn't show me something great within a few weeks of starting, I'm pretty much done with it. Been there and wasted a lot of time on a few average hounds hoping they would get better with age. Look for desire, brains (clean mouth) & instinctive checkwork in a pup. The ones worth keeping will make it look easy.