The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 108

Thread: Pointing labs!!

  1. #81

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Socks View Post
    I know a breeder (notice I didn't say a PL breeder) that took a PL from thier breeding and put a QAA on it. Just sayin'

    My dog doesn't do slow motion in the field, but like you said to each their own.
    Rooster Smasher I'M guessing. My pups sire. She is a monster on birds and throws a mean point. And definently isn't scared of birds lol. No slow motion to this pup either.

  2. #82
    Senior Member helencalif's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    in the mountains at Lake Almanor, CA
    Posts
    2,006

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by westksbowhunter View Post
    But constantly here the field trial people slamming the pointing guys. Makes it hard to have respect for some of you.
    I have read this entire thread. Some are for pointing labs, some are not. This forum is a place to exchange information and express opinions. I don't recognize the names of most posters. Usually, I can't tell from their posts which ones were posted by "field trial people" and which were not.

    Westksbowhunter, there are many on this forum who are avid field trialers. They take time to post with helpful information and opinion. It is a dis-service to use a broad brush and label those who run field trials as snobs.

    Helen

  3. #83
    Senior Member Socks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ypsilanti Twsp, MI
    Posts
    1,063

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by helencalif View Post

    I have read this entire thread. Some are for pointing labs, some are not. This forum is a place to exchange information and express opinions. I don't recognize the names of most posters. Usually, I can't tell from their posts which ones were posted by "field trial people" and which were not.

    Westksbowhunter, there are many on this forum who are avid field trialers. They take time to post with helpful information and opinion. It is a dis-service to use a broad brush and label those who run field trials as snobs.

    Helen
    Actually I can see where he'd get that idea. Sometimes the FT attitude can come across here as a little superior. Just my opinion, nothing more
    Joe Dickerson

    R.I.P. 4xGMPR HRCH Hunters Marsh Jack Daniels Bubba Jazz MH
    Call Name: JD

  4. #84
    Junior Member Fran Seagren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Posts
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Flint View Post
    There are a lot of reasons for a steady upland dog.
    • It’s safer.
    • It doesn’t distract the shooter.
    • It doesn’t block the shot on a low flying bird.
    • It doesn’t flush other birds while chasing a hen.
    • It doesn’t run across the road after a missed bird or hen.
    • It marks the fall better.
    • It saves energy (on misses or fly aways).
    • It’s a more “refined” performance.
    • It doesn’t steal the other dogs retrieves.

    There is typically only one reason given for not having a steady upland dog and that really is inconsequential for one reason; you can send the dog early if you cripple the bird.
    EXACTLY why I train my labs to sit to the flush. Not that they always do it - but that's the rule and they get corrected when they break it. Not once have we lost a rooster that only had a broken wing, etc. due to having the dog wait to be sent. But, I've had to pull up on low-flying birds(roosters and quail) because my dog "broke the rule." You can send them before the bird hits the ground. My old lab (now gone) would wait under some high flying roosters as they fell. Even though I didn't let him go until I knew the bird was hit.

  5. #85
    Senior Member Swack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Socks View Post
    I would contend that your question raised his hackles because it can be read as that PL's are a detriment to the lab breed.



    I think a lot of PL's people get upset because the people who don't like PL's start in right away by implying that a PL in wrong or inferior. They're just labs that point instead of flush. I agree if a breeder only breeds for pointing only that's probably a bad thing, but I wouldn't want a pup from a breeder like that.

    As for conformation I'll consider it in the FT and HT area as soon as the bench people produce dogs that can actually do the work the breed was intended to do.

    The APLA is a good organization in my opinion. What I've found is that what makes the APLA tests hard is going from the control required for retrieving to going straight to the upland where you let loose the reins and let them hunt, but walk that edge of lose of control. Each test is a day long and it can be a very long day. It's hard to keep together sometimes.
    Socks,

    I can tell you "have a dog in the fight" based on your signature line and the fact that you've replied to folks on this thread three at a time! So with that said, be assured I'm not picking on you. I could easily have replied to a dozen different posters since my early post on this thread.

    For those who are keeping score, I have a bitch out of a GMPR who I'm planning to breed to another GMPR. However, let me go on to say that I didn't select these dogs based on their "pointing Lab" status. Yes, I'm an upland hunter. No, I don't run APLA tests. Yes, it's OK if my dogs point. No, I don't train them to point and it doesn't bother me if they don't. My bitch's sire is also a MH and the dog I'd like to breed her to is a MH, HRCH, and QAA. They have proven themselves capable in traditional retriever testing.

    So, besides the fact that they are titled and have their health clearances, why did I select them to be in my breeding program if not for their pointing ability? Because they meet my standards for conformation!

    Why the heck would you suggest that you won't consider conformation in field bred Labs until the show breeders get the field work right!?!? Do you think "proper conformation" means a Lab should look like many of the show Labs? Not the way I interpret the standard! Just because the show breeders have lost their way doesn't mean we shouldn't try to produce a Lab that meets the standard as we understand it! Actually, the fact that they may have it wrong makes it even more imperative that we get it right!!! You claim you want to insure that the pointing Lab has all of the traditional working talents that "standard" retrievers do. Why not go all out and try to breed them to look like the standard describes a Labrador should look as well?

    I was with you up until you made the statement I emboldened in your quote above. I think you might want to rethink that comment!

    Swack

    P.S. Socks, If I were a betting man, I'd bet the dog in your avatar is a son or grandson of Lean Mac. I had a grandson of Mac who loves to lay on his back like that and get a belly rub!
    Last edited by Swack; 03-11-2013 at 10:40 PM.
    Jeff Swackhamer

  6. #86
    Senior Member Swack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry Beil View Post
    On Conformation, it should be against the breed standard. There is already a divide there between show and field, and that's not good for the breed. Another division - pointing or flushing is probably also not good for the breed, but maybe not. I don't know. I think conformation should have a place in the field, unfortunately the show dogs that are put up are generally not built to do the work that is described in the breed standard, which in turn allows the FT folks to completely ignore the standard as long as the dog can do the work. It would be better if the ring and the field dogs were in sync.
    I agree! See my post above.

    Swack
    Jeff Swackhamer

  7. #87
    Senior Member Swack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    377

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lonnie Spann View Post
    I don't know whether I sould chime in or not BUT I purchased a really nice bred lab puppy from an FC father and a MH mother, Lean Mac was the grandsire. When I went to pick up the puppy the breeder took a duck wing on a fishing pole and just flipped it around and several of the puppies pointed the duck wing. This was a repeat breeding and a few from the first litter had really good derby careers.

    Lonnie Spann
    Lonnie,

    Are you insinuating that Lean Mac may have had some English Pointer in his background!?!?

    Swack
    Jeff Swackhamer

  8. #88
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Fall City, WA
    Posts
    4,622

    Default

    Many bench labs don't fit within the written standard either. Most are too heavy, many are too short.

  9. #89
    Junior Member Fran Seagren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Posts
    18

    Default

    A statement from Pupaloo in a previous post: "To me, it is a simple matter of preference-do you want a pointer or a flusher?"

    Will I start another heated discussion if I answered with, "Can't we have both without people getting mad about it?"

    I'm a firm believer that it's OK to have whatever breed of dog you prefer. And, it's OK to train them to what ever level you want. It's not OK to tell others their choice sucks. Even if that's what you really think - unless that person is a really good friend - or maybe not even then.


    We have two labs, two red (Irish) setters, and one brittany. The labs flush and the setters and brit point. We have a ton of fun hunting with these guys. I hated it when the season ended and used to get really bitchy about it - many years ago. So, I started training them for hunt tests and field trials in the off season. Even though there are lots of people more successful than I am in both hunting and
    competitions. That's OK. I'm having a good time year-round.

    It would be great if we could hear the different opinions and experiences without the nasty stuff.

  10. #90
    Senior Member hotel4dogs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    SW of Chicago, IL
    Posts
    2,324

    Default

    But can you train them to seat on a duck???

    Quote Originally Posted by Hunt'EmUp View Post
    The versatility of the lab is almost par to none, for those who want them hold pause or those who want to them to boldly flush, natural inclination or not. Trainabilty, tractablity, and intelligence of is something to strive for. A lab with a point still needs to be steadied and a flushing lab still needs to be taught to hold a flush with-in gun range. If I can't train any lab to pause-point, flush or even throw double-back flip, turn 3 circles, and bark, when he comes upon a bird. He's just not smart enough for me, the ability to learn and adapt needs to be in the blood, to be considered a Lab, whether were training for upland, duck, SAR, OB, Agility, detection, or tap-dancin in the rose Parade.

    Barb Gibson
    with
    CH Rosewood Little Giant UDX VER RA SH MXP MJP OFP VCX WCX CCA CGC FFX-OG
    also UCH HR UUD UJJ URO1 UHIT
    (golden retriever) born 3-10-07
    a.k.a. "Tito", "The Tito Monster"
    www.GoTeamTito.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •