[KwickLabs]

just different.

A recent topic discussed issues with hunting an “early pup” on upland or waterfowl. The issues dealt with a lack of control and limited skills leading to potential complications. For me, there is a huge difference between "early exposure" to birds and "actual" hunting.

Gooser said:

What about a dog that early in life , learns that its his job to hunt up birds, flush and the handler will follow. The dog that has loose reins so to speak finding birds.

Now transfere that dog to running blinds, where the dog has to turn the nose off, and be a team player, taking casts and directions. Possibly ignoring its nose (poison bird) and being cast to a different location?

Seems to me to be a pretty tough transition.

I understand what Gooser was driving at. However, I need to point out the quote started with a pup ("dog early in life") and in one paragraph jumped way ahead to running blinds and poison birds. For my dogs that would be jumping from 4-6 months to about 18 months.

From my experience this does not equate to a "tough transition".

Does anyone have examples of how they introduced live birds, shooting and/or "simulated" upland work early on? Will an upland "intro" make a different program than the tradition Carr based methods? Does this require a longer period of time in developing retriever skills?

Anyway, I recognize that dogs trained for hunt tests need to follow a set program. Retriever training forums generally stress “working the program” with the term "sequential" as key. It is important to note that none of the "in vogue" programs deal with upland hunting as a sequence. Keeping this thought in mind, it is apparant to me that any "infusion" of the "free thinking" required for upland training would require "adjustments" in those programs which in turn adds significantly more time to the total process. Therefore, the addition of upland may be a more difficult transition if attempted in the same time frame.

My goals for a trained retriever are three fold - 1) have the skills necessary to think freely and work the uplands, 2) know the “rules of control & search” while hunting waterfowl and 3) understand the expectations of a hunt test. There is considerable disagreement on which order is more effective. It should be noted that not everyone has the same end product in mind. In any event, it will take longer to do all three.

The question is "upland before or after"? Retriever dogma often states "eyes first, nose afterwards". Somehow this translates to "control first, then freedom". What happened to the concept of "balance"?

Now if I have a really good pup and my training is effective, we might actually do better than some dogs over the same time frame. However, I don't pay any attention to what others are doing in terms of time and certainly avoid comparing individual dogs. We get where we want to be based on how things go and it is always done with balance in mind.

Here is an example of early “bird exposure” for Daisy. Given this sequence, Daisy would require more time to run a cold blind (in theory). Daisy had a flushed rooster shot over her in the uplands at 4 months old. She was pointing and retrieving pheasants in the uplands and running tower shoots when she was 6 months old...before she was FF.

She was not “rushed” and could run long, cold blinds with her head up. Training was sequential, compartmentalized and took as long as was necessary. Daisy didn't run her first hunt test until she was 18 months old. It was an HRC Seasoned test and she passed. None of her training involved difficult transitions.

I think there is a huge difference between 1) “early bird work”, 2) upland & waterfowl hunting, 3) retriever training and 4) testing. The complications created by the order of upland vs. waterfowl vs. testing as they relate to training are manageable......if you know what you are doing.

In any event, if a trainer makes no mistakes, it will take longer with upland "intros" (early or later). I still believe doing very early, live bird work is better in the long run....even if the dog doesn't end up hunting in the uplands. I think in the long run, a dog needs a good reason to train. A few early upland birds produces a lifelong love for being with his trainer.

Daisy (four months old, flushed, shot and retrieved pheasant}

"Say uncle!"

Daisy (six months old - tower shoot)

Daisy's “haul”

Daisy - scanning (note the tab)

Daisy - another one

 

[Dave Flint]

Very good post.

I was training a Springer when I got the Golden in my avatar so I introduced him to upland quartering w/ clipped pigeons very early. He sailed through his Seasoned & Senior tests w/solid performances but got hung up at the Master level because he consistently needed to be handled on a mark in more than 1 series. Although he was the best handling dog I've had, he tended to fall for whatever factors (wind, poison birds, etc) the judges put in front of him. I've always speculated that it was because he tended to trust his nose more than his eyes due to of early success in doing just that in upland training. This assumption is based on a sample size of 1 - the lab in the same avatar who was not exposed as early to upland hunting but who's marking ability was fantastic, so take it for what it's worth.

Notably, the Golden was by far the best all around hunting retriever I've ever seen and I've come to the perspective that a dog that is an outstanding upland dog but only a good marking dog is more useful & enjoyable to me than a dog w/ those attributes switched. The difference between a duck dog that marks every fall vs. the dog that needs a quick handle on 1 or 2 is insignificant (to me) at the end of the day but a dog that produces one more pheasant each outing is measurable.

One thing that I do though to help orient my dogs to the task at hand is to carry 2 different whistles on my lanyard. One is an Acme Thunderer for handling on blinds & the other is a spaniel whistle. Spaniel whistles are quieter & have a completely separate pitch.

 

[Bridget Bodine]

If a dog is to be both upland and waterfowl, I will intro upland first.
I find that after the rigors of waterfowl training and the obedience that goes with it , often the transition to the upland field can be slow , as the dog is not used to the free thinking required . Therefore I do it first, I have not found it to be a huge problem transitioning to blinds, but yes, depending on the dog , it CAN be. I have a show bred do that I work with who has his SH and hunts , mostly upland during the season. When we return to training he is like Stevie Wonder , looking around, using his nose, saying "I got this...", It IS a constant battle with this dog!!

 

[joelvet]

I have had the same experience as Dave. My first lab I trained exclusivly for upland till about 9 months of age. She is great at upland but we are having trouble at master hunt tests. She wants to use her nose more than her eyes. I think you have to decide what is most important to you and train that first. My second lab i trained first for hunt tests and she marks great but in the field she is not as good at covering the field and using her nose. Decide what is most important a dog that uses its nose or its eyes. I think they can do both but they will probably be better at the one you teach first.

 

[22899]

Kwick

Thanks for the well thought out post.

Here is what I believe now after a couple of dogs.

Note I said "Couple" 2......:razz:

I really think it benifical for a dog to be running successful cold blinds that include some sort of difficult suction BEFORE that dog hunts waterfowl or upland.

While I believe a dog can hunt upland early, and then pass HT's running at levels where control is given some lee way,, and the tests by RULE wont have much suction to their blinds, I think a dog needs to develope its eyes first,, and learn to run straight, if it is to be successful at higher levels of testing or trialing.

I have tried to follow the rule on blinds, that as soon as the dog drops it nose, and starts to hunt.... out comes the whistle!!!
A dog that has a early introduction of loose reins in the uplands, finding game and putting it up for the gun,, in my limited experience, tends to drop their nose quickly on blinds,, and starts to hunt. It has been my experience , it gets you in trouble at higher levels of testting.

I think it a better plan now,, to have a dog through transition,, and performing a credible job on cold blinds before it hunts at all.

Intro to live birds is a different discussion.

Upland hunter by trade:

Gooser


Gooser

 

[hrkplabs]

Kwick

Thanks for the well thought out post.

Here is what I believe now after a couple of dogs.

Note I said "Couple" 2......:razz:

I really think it benifical for a dog to be running successful cold blinds that include some sort of difficult suction BEFORE that dog hunts waterfowl or upland.

While I believe a dog can hunt upland early, and then pass HT's running at levels where control is given some lee way,, and the tests by RULE wont have much suction to their blinds, I think a dog needs to develope its eyes first,, and learn to run straight, if it is to be successful at higher levels of testing or trialing.

I have tried to follow the rule on blinds, that as soon as the dog drops it nose, and starts to hunt.... out comes the whistle!!!
A dog that has a early introduction of loose reins in the uplands, finding game and putting it up for the gun,, in my limited experience, tends to drop their nose quickly on blinds,, and starts to hunt. It has been my experience , it gets you in trouble at higher levels of testting.

I think it a better plan now,, to have a dog through transition,, and performing a credible job on cold blinds before it hunts at all.

Intro to live birds is a different discussion.

Upland hunter by trade:

Gooser


Gooser

All one has to do is look at the pass rate at any venue s top HT levels and you will see that
lots of dogs / handlers struggle at upper level tests with their retrievers trained only as retrievers, they just can't blame the 'upland' when they don t pass - of course some blame the judges or the set up or a bad bird. etc. the others look for a hole in their training program and work hard to fix it, still others recognize that their dog just don't have it etc and some go out and fail all the time and do not change a thing because they are having a blast with their dog.

I guess what i am saying its easy to blame upland for lack of success when there is usually more to it then that.

 

[Brian Urban]

I have tried to follow the rule on blinds, that as soon as the dog drops it nose, and starts to hunt.... out comes the whistle!!!
A dog that has a early introduction of loose reins in the uplands, finding game and putting it up for the gun,, in my limited experience, tends to drop their nose quickly on blinds,, and starts to hunt. It has been my experience , it gets you in trouble at higher levels of testting.

Wow! That's an eye-opener for someone like me who is new to retrievers. I understand this at field trails. I know that game is different. But until I read this, I thought that retriever hunt tests were similar in philosophy to NAVHDA where tests were meant to simulate hunting conditions and favor dogs that hunt.

Does this mean that if you want your retriever to actually use its nose and hunt when you go duck hunting, you should avoid training for hunt tests entirely?

This is a head scratcher for me. I understand the need in a hunting situation for having the control to get your dog out of an area with old scent that he mistakenly thinks is where he supposed to be looking for the duck you've sent him to pick up. I've been there. But, are the highest levels of hunt tests really design to penalize a dog that hunts?

Please tell me that they aren't and I'm misunderstanding this. If I am not misunderstanding this and dogs who achieved the highest level of this type of testing are considered the most desirable for a breeding program, in the long run, wouldn't the breeding program produce dogs with weak noses and low hunting drive?

Ah, maybe things are alright and I'm over reacting. Maybe nose and hunting drive come along for the ride with the traits that make a hunt test dog successful. Please help me understand this.

Say that I start with a quality dog.

Say, that at the end of a training program, I want a dog that can find a duck that one of my hunting buddies hit and believes "It came down over there somewhere, I think."

What if I can only guess where the duck is by putting the critter slightly downwind of "I think" and let her do the rest? Would Hunt Test training produce such a dog? Or would such a dog expect me to figure out where "I think" is and put her on top of it?

Should I find smarter hunting buddies?

 

[Brian Urban]

I assume that the lack of response gives me my answer.

Bummer.

From the videos that I've seen for the hunt tests, it seems like a lot of fun.

I guess the challenge for each hunter who owns a retriever is to determine if he/she is a hunter who hunt tests his dog (with the inherent of difficulties being successful as described above) or a hunt test competitor who only hunts with his/her dog after the dog has achieved its owner's hunt test goals.

I'm not sure if I am close to breaking the code because I'm still having trouble wrapping my head around this concept. Maybe I just don't fully understand yet. If my understanding is correct, I still have two questions. Why are they called hunt tests if using a dog for hunting makes it more difficult for a dog to obtain a MH title (as described by MooseGooser)? How do breeders retain a breed's scenting ability or its hunting drive (not giving up on a cripple) if these things aren't part of the testing process? Or are they?

 

[hrkplabs]

i hunt both waterfowl and upland with my personal dogs and I hunt test them. I don t train them during the hunting season, I hunt them.My clients hunt their dogs during hunting season both waterfowl and upland and they don t train. We pass near 100% at the seasoned/senior tests and 70-75% at the master/finished level. You can do both and do good at both if you work hard and your training has continuity your dog will benefit in all aspects. Don t listen to the naysayers let them motivate you.

 

[22899]

I never said it couldnt be done!

What I said was,, I think it prudent to have a dog doing a competent job running cold blinds with diversions before letting that dog hunt. ANYTHING....In other words, a dog through transition.


The original discussion was about letting a young dog ( puppy )hunt Upland

 

[Dwestall]

Upland hunting is really the only thing that matters to me. I can walk out and pick up a duck myself and it adds interest to what is basically sitting on your patootie and shooting at stuff. Finding, flushing and retrieving or chasing a wounded rooster is where I find value in a dog.

 

[Brian Urban]

Upland hunting is really the only thing that matters to me. I can walk out and pick up a duck myself and it adds interest to what is basically sitting on your patootie and shooting at stuff. Finding, flushing and retrieving or chasing a wounded rooster is where I find value in a dog.

Like you, I am an upland hunter first. But, I also really enjoy duck hunting. I have experience in both types of hunting. Hunting pheasants in ND with my DD is absolutely incredible. Sitting in a duck blind in a Delaware marsh and experiencing the beauty and the sound of flight after flight of geese traveling across the sky is awe inspiring.

But how you describe duck hunting has NOT been my experience. It takes a very strong dog to be able to deal with icy water, track down cripple and to find down birds (that it did not see fall) in the phragmites. The reason that I was asking all these questions is that I am new to retrievers and their HTs. I had assumed that the tests were in place to elevate hunting traits (nose, drive, tenacity in duck searches) in order to know which dogs had those traits.

You see, my first DD (not the one in my avatar) and I were insulted on our first Delaware duck hunt. I was insulted by a labrador owning Delawarian in the pre-dawn hours as we were heading out to the blind. The not-so-nice man asked me why I bought a “dog like that” instead of a “real duck dog” like his “champion” lab. I had nothing to say.

But, I knew that I could put my dog on a blind out to about 80 yards. I knew my dog could then use its nose to pick up ducks up-wind of where I put it. I also knew that my dog would not come back without a cripple. The duck-search (NAVHDA) or search-behind-the-duck (VDD) training is invaluable.

What happened? The lab owner and his buddies went to the blind just out of shotgun range to my left. Someone there dropped a duck across a 30 yard channel in a stand of phragmites. He attempted to send the dog on a blind retrieve. For the next 15 minutes, the march and everyone in it witnessed the sounds of whistles, cussing, whining and electricity bestowed upon the guy’s lab.

When it was time to head back and those guys started to pick up their decoys, I did the “neighborly” thing and asked them if they wanted help getting the duck. The lab owner laid some not-so-nice words upon me as he explained that if he couldn’t get his professionally trained lab to go out there, my goofy dog wouldn’t do it. He then added that he’d laugh his a$$ off as I tried. He wasn’t laughing when I handed him the duck.

No. It i hasn’t been my experience that one can just walk out and put up a duck.

I never said it couldnt be done!

What I said was,, I think it prudent to have a dog doing a competent job running cold blinds with diversions before letting that dog hunt. ANYTHING....In other words, a dog through transition.


The original discussion was about letting a young dog ( puppy )hunt Upland

Ok. Now I get it. I jumped in because it sounded to me as if hunting with a dog was a bad thing if you had aspirations of continuing to MH (and weren't a professional trainer). I’m not a professional trainer but I’ve trained 3 of my own dogs (a springer and 2 DDs). All three of of them are/were great duck finders and can/could do blinds. I just couldn't wrap my arms around how hunting with a dog could hurt the preparations for a hunting test.

But, this helps.

i hunt both waterfowl and upland with my personal dogs and I hunt test them. I don t train them during the hunting season, I hunt them.My clients hunt their dogs during hunting season both waterfowl and upland and they don t train. We pass near 100% at the seasoned/senior tests and 70-75% at the master/finished level. You can do both and do good at both if you work hard and your training has continuity your dog will benefit in all aspects. Don t listen to the naysayers let them motivate you.

This helps! Thank you. From what I was reading, I wasn't getting that. I was hoping that the average-joe (with the help of the knowledge learned through joining a retriever club) had a shot at developing a MH dog. It sounds like it is still doable.


==========================================================


Understand, I’m just trying to figure things out. You see, I’ve put two DDs through something called a fall breed test in which the dogs are required to know how to do a blind retrieve, must show tenacity in a search-behind-the-duck and must demonstrate that that they aren’t gun shy. (NAVHDA has similar tests.) As I was going through those tests, I wondered just how much better retrievers were at doing the same thing. I just figured that a DD wasn’t even in the same league as a retriever in executing these tasks.

But, thanks to this thread and the others like it, I believe that I have learned that the although the versatile-dog hunting tests require a dog to demonstrate these valuable hunting skills , the retriever hunt tests do not.

It is my current understanding that a Master Hunter title could be earned by a dog and that dog could be considered a highly prized stud dog even though it has never demonstrated his ability nor was even tested for nose, hunting drive or tenacity in a duck search.

But, those hunt tests do look like a lot of fun. And the FT dogs are amazing.

Thanks for all the responses. I think that I finally got it. Now I can go back to my daughter and explain what I know. Her pup comes soon!

 

[ksn21]

hrkplabs - could you outline the process your go through in raising your dogs to hunt both upland & waterfowl and to succeed in hunt tests. Do you follow a typical Carr method? Is there an early introduction to live birds? Do you shoot live flyers over them at an early age like KwickLabs does? At what point in the process do you teach quartering?
If anyone else could shed some light on this issue it would be appreciated.

 

[golden dude]

I never said it couldnt be done!

What I said was,, I think it prudent to have a dog doing a competent job running cold blinds with diversions before letting that dog hunt. ANYTHING....In other words, a dog through transition.


The original discussion was about letting a young dog ( puppy )hunt Upland

Well I think Gooser is a bit off base here....

I think it is critical to get a pup exposed to birds and all the excitement ASAP. To develop the prey drive, etc.

As soon as my pups are properly exposed to gunfire, I see only positive in letting that pup flush a few Pigeon, Chuckar or similar birds, and shoot them for the pup.( that would be hunting to the dog anyway)

While I would not go waterfowl hunting with a dog that was not yet steady. A Junior level dog that was steady-HELL YES!

Do you need to handle a dog with "a lot of hunt in em" differantly,YEP! Not really a big deal, from what I have seen, anyway.

I do however have Goldens, and not one of them "starter" dogs!

Steve

 

[Blueline]

Golden Dude,

Take a look at MooseGooser's original posting. He states:

"Intro to live birds is a different discussion."

I'm pretty sure that Gooser is on the same page about bird intro and getting the prey drive up.

 

[Paco]

hrkplabs - could you outline the process your go through in raising your dogs to hunt both upland & waterfowl and to succeed in hunt tests. Do you follow a typical Carr method? Is there an early introduction to live birds? Do you shoot live flyers over them at an early age like KwickLabs does? At what point in the process do you teach quartering?
If anyone else could shed some light on this issue it would be appreciated.

The carr methods come later when you have the upland foundation.
Yes to early live bird intro...yes to shooting live flyers pretty early by most standards... doubt they get taught to quarter.. just be smart about how you either plant your training birds, or take them where wild birds are, let them hunt, it's innate, bring it out by exposure.
But I'll let HRK give you a better run down....

What he did not mention was about 80 % pass rate on Master pointing labs tests.... same dogs.

 

[22899]

Introduction to birds,, and allowing free range hunt em ups to find them are 2 different topics.

JMHDAO

Gooser

 

[22899]

Throwing flyers, (tower shoots ect) are very different concepts than a dog being released to FIND a bird in a field he hasnt seen.

One concept the dog uses his EYES,, the other,, the dog uses his NOSE.

I tend to lean toward the camp to teach the dog to use its EYES first..
I also want to teach, that on blinds,, I am driving...not the dogs nose.

Remember also,, that Hunting and Testing are different... Things we do hunting,, will most definatly get you in trouble testing at higher levels.
Allowing a "Hunt em up" on a Finished / Master tests blind,,,,, will get you dropped.

Agin

JMHDAO.

 

[22899]

When we Hunt:

Many times we dont know where exactly where the bird fell. we do have a good idea if the dog saw it or marked it. Those birds where the dog didnt mark the fall(blind) we wil direct the dog to the general area ,, usually down wind,, and let the dog "hunt em up". we ususally release controll to the dog at some point.

When we TEST:

We do know exactly where the blind is. We are also required by the rules to "challenge the blind" meaning ,,,, have the dog work through the factors the judges set up with that days blind. We MUST for the most part,, keep the dog on line,,fight the obstacles,,and show control.

A dog that has been accustomed to having the control released to him in various circumstances,,, MAY have difficulty in some testing situations.

I firmly believe now,, its best to agree the biggest attribute a retriever has is its eyes! I want to develop that trait first. I also believe I want a dog that is a team player on blinds.. Therefore I have decided for me personally,,, to have a dog trained trough transition,, before he hunts anything.

Agin!!!!!!

JMHDAO

 

[TMFLDEM]

When we Hunt:

Many times we dont know where exactly where the bird fell. we do have a good idea if the dog saw it or marked it. Those birds where the dog didnt mark the fall(blind) we wil direct the dog to the general area ,, usually down wind,, and let the dog "hunt em up". we ususally release controll to the dog at some point.

When we TEST:

We do know exactly where the blind is. We are also required by the rules to "challenge the blind" meaning ,,,, have the dog work through the factors the judges set up with that days blind. We MUST for the most part,, keep the dog on line,,fight the obstacles,,and show control.

A dog that has been accustomed to having the control released to him in various circumstances,,, MAY have difficulty in some testing situations.

I firmly believe now,, its best to agree the biggest attribute a retriever has is its eyes! I want to develop that trait first. I also believe I want a dog that is a team player on blinds.. Therefore I have decided for me personally,,, to have a dog trained trough transition,, before he hunts anything.

Agin!!!!!!

JMHDAO

Great post Gooser. I will bet most pros around the country would agree! Hows the new pup?