RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
319 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
If you were to buy a very good hunting dog, which title says most - MH or QAA?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
I think either title is documentation of a dog that has had considerable training and possesses the natural attributes one desires. For the most part I don't think the title alone makes my decision. A lot depends on why you want the dog. If you want to trial, then the nod would tend to go to the QAA. Hunting, possibly to the MH. I would want to consider the overall breeding, health characteristics, age, looks, style, and possibly color for some would be an issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,411 Posts
What Steve said, as well as how much title documentation you want on the pedigree. QAA is not a recognized title is it? (not to start the battle of which is better, just saying)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
204 Posts
What I'd do: Start your search by asking good dog people which dogs they'd like to get a pup out of.

It's a lot easier to tell someone which dogs you really admire, than to ask someone to tell you about the good, the bad and the ugly about a specific dog.



As for titles:


IMO QAA generally.

For some dogs MH is easy. For others it takes forever to title.

Note that sometimes it's NOT the dog's fault, but the fault of lousy training, lousy handling etc.. so that doesn't necessarily tell you what you'd want to know about the natural instincts of the animal itself.. And some dogs are made into better dogs than what they started out as by a lot of good training.

If you're looking for a pup out of a certain dog, knowing how it titled is important, but difficult to ascertain if you haven't known the dog since it was young.

It really boils down to knowing the dog.

If you can, you should watch the dog in training and at a test/trial or two.

Ideally you should ask people (training partners) who have watched the dog develop since puppyhood about the dog, but if they're like me, they won't bad mouth anyone's dog, especially their training partner's, so the value of that information might not be too great.

Then, if you're thinking of getting a pup out of that dog, you should find out what characteristics that dog tends to pass on.

Visit/look for pups from a previous litter. Do they have a good working attitude and do you like their personality? If you can't visit or see the pups, ask people whose dog knowledge you trust to take a look at them.


I'll go back to my first sentence: Ask dog people you respect which dogs they'd like to get a pup out of. Then go from there..


Good luck!

Bente
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
649 Posts
LH said:
If you were to buy a very good hunting dog, which title says most - MH or QAA?

I highlighted the important part of your question.

For what you state, imho the MH is more meaningful. Not because the QAA isn't an impressive title (it is - arguably more impressive than the MH), but because the MH means the dog had to achieve a certain level of performance at least 6 times. That means consistency.


Important Note: this question implies you are buying THAT dog, not a puppy sired by that dog. If you're talking about a puppy, then either title is quite good, but only tells a portion of the story.... how is the entire pedigree? What about health certifications? etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,916 Posts
When it gets to the "acorn" cutting, QAA is not a title. It is a designation that the dog has at least earned ONE 2nd place in a Qualifying stake. It can also earn this designation for other finishes in higher competetion.

This designation allows the dog to enter certain FT competetions, nothing more, nothing less. We just use it to brag on our young or inexperienced dogs.

At least that's my take on it.

Jerry
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,856 Posts
You shouldn't have one without the other... A hunting dog with depth....

Angie
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
A hunting dog (waterfowl) needs EVERY bit of the distance of an all-age qualified dog in my opinion. I can't count the times that I ran LONG blinds this past duck season.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
Angie B said:
You shouldn't have one without the other... A hunting dog with depth....Angie
Oh Angie, I like that!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,475 Posts
titles alone do not make a good hunting dog. a good bit of that is only acquired thru time in the blind. a good waterfowl dog takes a couple of seasons to develop.

the titles speak to the dog's skills and the ability to use them corrrectly at a trial under very sterile conditions compared to most hunts i have been on. if you can, make a hunt with the dog before you buy.

how does it travel? can it sit for hours with nothing to do without being a pain in the a$$? how is it in heat/cold conditions? general health should be a consideration, as well.

either title says the dog has the skills needed. make sure you buy a dog that compliments your idea of a good hunting dog. good luck!-paul
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
649 Posts
Wildfowl Adventures said:
A hunting dog (waterfowl) needs EVERY bit of the distance of an all-age qualified dog in my opinion. I can't count the times that I ran LONG blinds this past duck season.

You took the words from my mouth.

I had some MARKS that went out to 200 yards this year (talk about your "delayed dead bird")....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
Amen brother!

Something that really wears me out are all of the "wash outs" that are sold as "gun dogs." Granted that some of the dogs that wash will make good hunting dogs but just because a dog has been with a pro for a year ,it DOES NOT mean that this dog is a gun dog. My opinion...If a dog cannot consistently finish a qualifying stake or consistently pass a Master test, he/she is not ready to be my gun dog. Granted there are some other attributes that are needed but if they are not to trained to the above stated level, they are not ready to hunt with me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,168 Posts
200 yard's out of the realm of a good MH level dog, I don't think so? I hunt alot and the number of time's that I really need a dog to do a 300+ yard blind/mark can be counted on one hand quite easily, while most of it is 100 max type of stuff. The reason that I went with a MH dog for this post was the simple fact of what it has already seen and displayed the abilite's needed to earn the title, where a QAA dog will take more work to keep it together in the field.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
Take more to keep it together in the field, I don't think so. I'm not saying that a MH dog won't work...heck, that is what I have.

The qualifications that I stated were MY OPINION and are MY REQUIREMENTS for a "gun dog." If you can count the retrieves over 300 yards you make on one hand, then you are the exception, not the rule. I hunted 57 days in our season this year and I would bet that we had at least one sail every day that we hunted. I either have a dog that will cross 4 rice levees in route to a 300 yard blind in a stiff cross-wind or I walk 300 yards with the dog to get the duck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,168 Posts
And those were my Opinion's :roll: I guess the way I'm looking at it is a QAA dog has not seen alot of hunting type situation's like multiple shot's, short breaker bird's, all retired gun's (no white coats), remote sit's/sends, big decoy spreads, robo duck's, duck call's , to name a very few and while talented in the FT world will have more to deal with in the hunting field's whereas a MH will have a easier time with it especially if it's a high flying QAA washout. I guess it depend's on your use for the dog and how much time you want to put into the dog for hunting purpose's which was what the original poster was likely getting at. Still think that a good MH titled dog should still get those 300 yard "sailer's".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
Wait a minute... :roll: I am not saying nor have I ever said that a MH would not be as good as a Qualified type dog. I said that a dog must be able to consistently finish a "Q" or PASS A MH TEST. This is about as goofy as it gets...My point is that it takes a SUPERB dog for me to call it a gundog. In other words, I do not use the term gun dog as a synonym for a FT or HT washout and IF A DOG CANNOT PASS A MASTER TEST OR BE COMPETITIVE IN A Q, I PROMISE IT IS NOT A GUNDOG FOR ME.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
649 Posts
Wildfowl Adventures said:
Amen brother!

Something that really wears me out are all of the "wash outs" that are sold as "gun dogs." Granted that some of the dogs that wash will make good hunting dogs but just because a dog has been with a pro for a year ,it DOES NOT mean that this dog is a gun dog. My opinion...If a dog cannot consistently finish a qualifying stake or consistently pass a Master test, he/she is not ready to be my gun dog. Granted there are some other attributes that are needed but if they are not to trained to the above stated level, they are not ready to hunt with me.

Well.......

That partially depends on what your level of expectation for each level is, when compared to ability during a normal hunting season. Ie, answer the question

"During a normal hunting season, what percentage of birds should should the dog be expected to retrieve?"

To ME, the answer would be:
* JH - 60%-75%
* SH - close to 90%
* MH, QAA - 99.9%
* MNH, GRHRCH, FC, AFC - 100%

Thus, on any given day, I would pretty happy to take a SH dog out hunting with me. I would be happy to take a JH dog if there was another, higher level, dog going too.


Thus, since a "wash out" might include dogs that semi-regularlly earn JAMS in opens or amatuers (just doesn't have "it" to get the win and earn that title), I don't have any qualms at all about taking a "wash out" as a gundog for the average joe hunter.

After all, if that "average joe hunter" doesn't get a wash out, look at what he is MOST likely to end up with instead? :shock:
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top