Choosing a Dog

[loganwayne]

I would be very interested in hearing your thoughts when training is complete.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just got her back today. She regressed pretty hard, at two weeks he was worried she wasn't going to get past it. By end of last week she was sticking birds, holding to flush and shot. Ended up being the best dog of her class. But he's going to take her back for a couple weeks because he didn't feel like he got everything accomplished he wanted to. We are leaving this coming Thursday for 10 days of grouse/woodcock hunting.

 

[molliesmaster]

Just got her back today. She regressed pretty hard, at two weeks he was worried she wasn't going to get past it. By end of last week she was sticking birds, holding to flush and shot. Ended up being the best dog of her class. But he's going to take her back for a couple weeks because he didn't feel like he got everything accomplished he wanted to. We are leaving this coming Thursday for 10 days of grouse/woodcock hunting.

Good deal. What about in the home? Do you feel like it was worth the expense?

 

[loganwayne]

Good deal. What about in the home? Do you feel like it was worth the expense?

yes, she has calmed down some and is easier to control. That said she is still buck wild, BUT we were warned that she was going to be like this from day one. the breeder said she was probably one of the smartest pups he had breed but also one of the craziest ones as well.

The trainer is a good guy and friend now (has been really) and i think is straight up honest about how he feels about every dog he trains. Im not saying he is the best trainer out there and the way he does stuff doesnt work for everyone.

I will say that he strongly recommends that if the dog is to much to handle training the basic "home stuff" to send it to his business partner for 3 weeks for a more intense in home training situation.


Overall i think the training was worth it and will continue to help her overcome her short coming.

 

[JGood]

When it comes to bird hunting dogs: There are more differences within a specific dog breed than there are between the dog breeds.

I have been fortunate enough to have trained or hunted/guided over most every common dog breed in the United States.... the only thing i can say with certainty is that most people fret way too much over what dog breed they think they should get. Almost every breed has the full spectrum of spectacular dogs and shit eaters. If you're buying a puppy, Get a dog that fits your criteria for looks, coat and size and go find a great breeder and trainor.

Dog Breeders are the real problem. Every backyard breeder with two females and two males thinks they "changed the game" on breeding. Their breed (or breeding) is the "perfect combination of drive and off switch." "Ideal for the foot hunter." This is code for: low energy and close working.

Find a good breeder that, hunts, tests or trials their dogs regularly and you'll be alright.

9/10 times, the hunter/handler/trainer is the problem. Not the dog breed.

 

[Spindrift]

When it comes to bird hunting dogs: There are more differences within a specific dog breed than there are between the dog breeds.

I have been fortunate enough to have trained or hunted/guided over most every common dog breed in the United States.... the only thing i can say with certainty is that most people fret way too much over what dog breed they think they should get. Almost every breed has the full spectrum of spectacular dogs and shit eaters. If you're buying a puppy, Get a dog that fits your criteria for looks, coat and size and go find a great breeder and trainor.

Dog Breeders are the real problem. Every backyard breeder with two females and two males thinks they "changed the game" on breeding. Their breed (or breeding) is the "perfect combination of drive and off switch." "Ideal for the foot hunter." This is code for: low energy and close working.

Find a good breeder that, hunts, tests or trials their dogs regularly and you'll be alright.

9/10 times, the hunter/handler/trainer is the problem. Not the dog breed.

This.

I also worked for a dog trainer and guided many a hunt over every breed I can think of.

I’ve seen fantastic dogs of every breed and absolute turds as well.

Find a breed that suits your climate and use case—don’t get a Griff in Texas for upland and don’t get a GSP for water fowling in Montana.

Find a breeder who tests their dogs via NAVHDA. Ask for references. A breeder who doesn’t hunt-test their dogs should be avoided at all costs. Make sure at least one of the parents are on site.

Most of all, drive and cooperation rule all. You can’t train drive into a dog and an uncooperative dog is a much steeper hill to climb.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[molliesmaster]

This.

I also worked for a dog trainer and guided many a hunt over every breed I can think of.

I’ve seen fantastic dogs of every breed and absolute turds as well.

Find a breed that suits your climate and use case—don’t get a Griff in Texas for upland and don’t get a GSP for water fowling in Montana.

Find a breeder who tests their dogs via NAVHDA. Ask for references. A breeder who doesn’t hunt-test their dogs should be avoided at all costs. Make sure at least one of the parents are on site.

Most of all, drive and cooperation rule all. You can’t train drive into a dog and an uncooperative dog is a much steeper hill to climb.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm curious why you would say that?

To me, I would rather buy a dog from the guy who hunts his dogs all season long over the guy who hunts his dogs twice a year but runs every test in the country. Unless, of course, I was looking for a test dog, then that might be different.

It has been my experience that a good trainer can overcome a lot of a dog's shortcomings with patience, know-how, and a lot of tests. Ribbons don't always equal aptitude.

In fact, for good ole average Joe, I would be looking for the breeder who spends very little time training and more time hunting. Because that's usually what average Joe wants to do, too. Joe doesn't need or want the dog that took two years of professional training to get a solid working dog. Joe needs the dog that got a little bit of obedience in the yard as a pup and then learned all of his hunting prowess from the birds in the field.

 

[KurtR]

I'm curious why you would say that?

To me, I would rather buy a dog from the guy who hunts his dogs all season long over the guy who hunts his dogs twice a year but runs every test in the country. Unless, of course, I was looking for a test dog, then that might be different.

It has been my experience that a good trainer can overcome a lot of a dog's shortcomings with patience, know-how, and a lot of tests. Ribbons don't always equal aptitude.

In fact, for good ole average Joe, I would be looking for the breeder who spends very little time training and more time hunting. Because that's usually what average Joe wants to do, too. Joe doesn't need or want the dog that took two years of professional training to get a solid working dog. Joe needs the dog that got a little bit of obedience in the yard as a pup and then learned all of his hunting prowess from the birds in the field.

A dog the tests can hunt a dog that just hunts cant run tests. In the retriever world any dog with a fc/afc, grand or mnh is a dog that will have the genetics and drive to do what ever the person wants.

Also look at how many tests a dog has to run to get a title. A dog the has went 6/7 in master vs a dog that has went 6/15 isnt the same.

Now pointers might be a whole different story that i cant say.

 

[molliesmaster]

A dog the tests can hunt a dog that just hunts cant run tests. In the retriever world any dog with a fc/afc, grand or mnh is a dog that will have the genetics and drive to do what ever the person wants.

Also look at how many tests a dog has to run to get a title. A dog the has went 6/7 in master vs a dog that has went 6/15 isnt the same.

Now pointers might be a whole different story that i cant say.

I was speaking more generally about the upland/versatile world.

Looking at test/pass ratios is a good note, too.

 

[huntineveryday]

I'm curious why you would say that?

To me, I would rather buy a dog from the guy who hunts his dogs all season long over the guy who hunts his dogs twice a year but runs every test in the country. Unless, of course, I was looking for a test dog, then that might be different.

It has been my experience that a good trainer can overcome a lot of a dog's shortcomings with patience, know-how, and a lot of tests. Ribbons don't always equal aptitude.

In fact, for good ole average Joe, I would be looking for the breeder who spends very little time training and more time hunting. Because that's usually what average Joe wants to do, too. Joe doesn't need or want the dog that took two years of professional training to get a solid working dog. Joe needs the dog that got a little bit of obedience in the yard as a pup and then learned all of his hunting prowess from the birds in the field.

A breeder that trains and tests thier dogs are typically going to pay more attention to breeding more cooperative dogs that still have high drive. Testing shows you the trainability of thier dogs.

NA tests are going to show you whether a breeding program has drive and instinct there. UT tests indicate that a dog is cooperative and easily trainable. Especially if they are getting that title at a young age, even moreso with novice handlers. (A five year old dog getting a UT1 with a pro trainer doesn't show you that, so you need to actually read into the results)

You do want a breeder that hunts. More importantly, you want a breeder that hunts the way you hunt. A great breeder is both hunting throughout the season and testing thier dogs to evaluate and refine thier breeding program.

 

[Spindrift]

A breeder that trains and tests thier dogs are typically going to pay more attention to breeding more cooperative dogs that still have high drive. Testing shows you the trainability of thier dogs.

NA tests are going to show you whether a breeding program has drive and instinct there. UT tests indicate that a dog is cooperative and easily trainable. Especially if they are getting that title at a young age, even moreso with novice handlers. (A five year old dog getting a UT1 with a pro trainer doesn't show you that, so you need to actually read into the results)

You do want a breeder that hunts. More importantly, you want a breeder that hunts the way you hunt. A great breeder is both hunting throughout the season and testing thier dogs to evaluate and refine thier breeding program.

Exactly! Well said.

I didn’t say a breeder who tests INSTEAD of a breeder who hunts. For example, the breeder I’ve got my last three pointers from is a NAVHDA judge and also kills more chukar than anyone I know. He has four dogs from his own bloodline.

Even if I didn’t know him I would have reasonable confidence via test results, hunting and having four dogs on site. Not to mention references galore.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[molliesmaster]

Exactly! Well said.

I didn’t say a breeder who tests INSTEAD of a breeder who hunts. For example, the breeder I’ve got my last three pointers from is a NAVHDA judge and also kills more chukar than anyone I know. He has four dogs from his own bloodline.

Even if I didn’t know him I would have reasonable confidence via test results, hunting and having four dogs on site. Not to mention references galore.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Right, but you did say to avoid breeders who don't test "at all cost", which is why I made the comments.

Caveats with everything. Hedge your bets best you can and roll the dice.

 

[molliesmaster]

A breeder that trains and tests thier dogs are typically going to pay more attention to breeding more cooperative dogs that still have high drive. Testing shows you the trainability of thier dogs.

NA tests are going to show you whether a breeding program has drive and instinct there. UT tests indicate that a dog is cooperative and easily trainable. Especially if they are getting that title at a young age, even moreso with novice handlers. (A five year old dog getting a UT1 with a pro trainer doesn't show you that, so you need to actually read into the results)

You do want a breeder that hunts. More importantly, you want a breeder that hunts the way you hunt. A great breeder is both hunting throughout the season and testing thier dogs to evaluate and refine thier breeding program.

NA tests are great. But there are guys who spend an inordinate amount of time training a dog for an NA test which kind of strip the "natural ability" out of the test, doesn't it?


Tests can be another useful metric to help find a good dog or weed out a bad one. But they are not the silver bullet, end-all-be-all.

 

[huntineveryday]

NA tests are great. But there are guys who spend an inordinate amount of time training a dog for an NA test which kind of strip the "natural ability" out of the test, doesn't it?


Tests can be another useful metric to help find a good dog or weed out a bad one. But they are not the silver bullet, end-all-be-all.

One NA test result isn't going to tell you much, because of that. But looking at multiple tests from pups out of a line of dogs or from a particular breeder can.

1) the breeder had one pup test out of a previous litter, NA 112 at 17 months, breeder was also the handler.
- this doesn't give you very much information, other than the breeder had one pup they probably trained up to test well.

2) I can see multiple pups from the last 3 litters from a breeder. One was a litter out of the female that is having the next litter. All three litters had 2-3 pups NA tested <10 months, all scoring 108 or higher. At least 1 pup from each litter has achieved UT Prize 1 by the age of 3, all with different owners/handlers.
- this paints a pretty good picture of the consistency of the natural instincts from a breeding program, and hints at the level of trainability.

Even if I know that both 1 and 2 hunt thier dogs a lot and have success with thier dogs consistently, I'm choosing a pup from 2 every time I can.

 

[molliesmaster]

One NA test result isn't going to tell you much, because of that. But looking at multiple tests from pups out of a line of dogs or from a particular breeder can.

1) the breeder had one pup test out of a previous litter, NA 112 at 17 months, breeder was also the handler.
- this doesn't give you very much information, other than the breeder had one pup they probably trained up to test well.

2) I can see multiple pups from the last 3 litters from a breeder. One was a litter out of the female that is having the next litter. All three litters had 2-3 pups NA tested <10 months, all scoring 108 or higher. At least 1 pup from each litter has achieved UT Prize 1 by the age of 3, all with different owners/handlers.
- this paints a pretty good picture of the consistency of the natural instincts from a breeding program, and hints at the level of trainability.

Even if I know that both 1 and 2 hunt thier dogs a lot and have success with thier dogs consistently, I'm choosing a pup from 2 every time I can.

We aren't disagreeing at all. I would choose the pup from number 2 as well. I'm not against testing at all. I look at titles and lineages when considering my own dogs. But that is not the only thing I am considering.

Again, I made a comment to a post that said to avoid non-testing breeders at all costs, which I do disagree with.

 

[2ski]

One NA test result isn't going to tell you much, because of that. But looking at multiple tests from pups out of a line of dogs or from a particular breeder can.

1) the breeder had one pup test out of a previous litter, NA 112 at 17 months, breeder was also the handler.
- this doesn't give you very much information, other than the breeder had one pup they probably trained up to test well.

2) I can see multiple pups from the last 3 litters from a breeder. One was a litter out of the female that is having the next litter. All three litters had 2-3 pups NA tested <10 months, all scoring 108 or higher. At least 1 pup from each litter has achieved UT Prize 1 by the age of 3, all with different owners/handlers.
- this paints a pretty good picture of the consistency of the natural instincts from a breeding program, and hints at the level of trainability.

Even if I know that both 1 and 2 hunt thier dogs a lot and have success with thier dogs consistently, I'm choosing a pup from 2 every time I can.

A dog testing NA at 17 months would not prize. No matter how well they did. Considering a dog has to be younger than 16 months for the NA test. Soooooo.........

There is so much more that goes into testing. Handler experience is a big one. No way I could've tested my dog at under 10 months, being a first time handler.
Breed is another. Some breeds don't mature as fast as other breeds. So if I look at a breeders last litter and there's a couple dogs that tested and there's a smattering of different scores, I don't necessarily put all my stick in it.

An hour talk with the breeder gets me further than checking out test scores. Not everyone requires testing. Really only the breeders that are looking for breeder awards. My dog didn't come from a breeder that requires testing. I did test my dog. My breeder hunts. He is a navdha member. I do believe in the club but it's not my be all end all.

Prizes look nice on the wall. My brother will tell anyone that asks, his dog got a 112 prize 1. It's his brag on his dog. His dog got a prize 3 UT. But then my brother doesn't spend his summer training And it's really hard for a first time handler gets a prize 1 imo. There's too many little tricks to the training and testing process they don't know. I've watched trainer handled dogs that got prize 2s that shouldn't prize but the trainer knew tricks. And no prize dogs that I would take in an instant but were handled by first time handlers and knew not the tricks. I volunteer at every test and I've watched many dogs. I've seen tons of great dogs have a bad day. Prize 1 capable UT dogs. I've watched them do everything right training. I know someone that got a prize 3 NA and just put a VC on his dog that's 3. The dude literally spends probably 4 days a week training. Not everyone can do tI'm. His first dog he tested 5 times and never got a prize 1. But he learned each time the little things to test better.

My dog got a 100 prize 3. So tell me about my dogs natural ability. Individual categories matter too. That's pretty high for a prize 3. Everything was prize 1 on him except the track. 30 mph wind. First time handler in a practical panic walking up to the feather pile because of the wind. My release of him sucked and was rushed. So I now know how I did wrong. I would take note of the comments that say "used bird at water". Or got a 1 at water. Ive seen dogs that didnt swim from a breeder tbat breeds good dogs. The owner didn't put any time into the water with the dog. So the puppy balked. I've seen dogs go nuts chasing shore birds so that doesn't necessarily mean it won't swim. I've seen a kildeer fly in and totally ruin a field portion on a dog. My dog got a 3 in pointing because the chukar got up and was popping around. So he didn't point the 2nd bird more than half a second. That's still a prize 1 score on pointing but it wasn't a 4 on the scorecard.

I used to be a prize 1 or bust guy. But I've come to relaize that so much more matters than a 110 and above on NA. Is it something I take note of? Yes absolutely. But it's not my be all end all.

 

[JGood]

I'm curious why you would say that?

To me, I would rather buy a dog from the guy who hunts his dogs all season long over the guy who hunts his dogs twice a year but runs every test in the country. Unless, of course, I was looking for a test dog, then that might be different.

It has been my experience that a good trainer can overcome a lot of a dog's shortcomings with patience, know-how, and a lot of tests. Ribbons don't always equal aptitude.

In fact, for good ole average Joe, I would be looking for the breeder who spends very little time training and more time hunting. Because that's usually what average Joe wants to do, too. Joe doesn't need or want the dog that took two years of professional training to get a solid working dog. Joe needs the dog that got a little bit of obedience in the yard as a pup and then learned all of his hunting prowess from the birds in the field.

A great breeder should do both.

Competition is really the only level playing field when comparing abilities across the spectrum. It’s nice that a guy hunts his dogs regularly, but unless you can quantify how that dog performs against other dogs, there’s no benchmark for what is good and what is bad in dog quality.

This is not to say you can’t get a great dog from a backyard breeder who just hunts, I’ve seen it countless times. It’s just a lower probability.

I get that a lot of trainers and handlers get burned out on the politics/showmanship and gameness involved with trials and tests, but unfortunately it’s the best system we have for comparison and competition.

If you were trying to buy the fastest dog, or the prettiest dog, or the fastest horse, would you even consider buying outside of competitive breeders? Ever hear of race horse that wasn’t out horse racing lines?

this is not to say a guy can’t have great dogs that only hunts his dogs, but if I were looking online for dog and didn’t have a chance to spend hours watching the mother and father hunt in the field, I would not be interested in buying a puppy from them. On the other hand, If the dog comes from two National Championship dam/sires, I’m probably going to buy that puppy.

At the end of the day, if you’re buying a pup you can only count on two things: Pedigree or a Personal relationship with the breeding pair. No one who comes on Rokslide looking for dog buying advise has the latter.

 

[2ski]

A great breeder should do both.

Competition is really the only level playing field when comparing abilities across the spectrum. It’s nice that a guy hunts his dogs regularly, but unless you can quantify how that dog performs against other dogs, there’s no benchmark for what is good and what is bad in dog quality.

This is not to say you can’t get a great dog from a backyard breeder who just hunts, I’ve seen it countless times. It’s just a lower probability.

I get that a lot of trainers and handlers get burned out on the politics/showmanship and gameness involved with trials and tests, but unfortunately it’s the best system we have for comparison and competition.

If you were trying to buy the fastest dog, or the prettiest dog, or the fastest horse, would you even consider buying outside of competitive breeders? Ever hear of race horse that wasn’t out horse racing lines?

this is not to say a guy can’t have great dogs that only hunts his dogs, but if I were looking online for dog and didn’t have a chance to spend hours watching the mother and father hunt in the field, I would not be interested in buying a puppy from them. On the other hand, If the dog comes from two National Championship dam/sires, I’m probably going to buy that puppy.

At the end of the day, if you’re buying a pup you can only count on two things: Pedigree or a Personal relationship with the breeding pair. No one who comes on Rokslide looking for dog buying advise has the latter.

A test isn't a competition or grading against other dogs. It's a test against a standard.

 

[jmez]

Only way to quantity how they perform against other dogs is a field trial. I really have no use for hunt tests. Tells you far more about the trainer than the dog. I hunt upland birds, I don't really care if my dog, or any siblings can do a water mark and retrieve.

As far as breeding goes, how many new lines are out there? Very few guys have developed their own line of dogs. Most all go back to common ancestory.

Versatile to me is good at a bunch of stuff not great at anything. All you need is hunt drive, the rest is just training. With training, obedience is about 80% of it.

Sent from my moto g power 5G - 2024 using Tapatalk

 

[JGood]

A test isn't a competition or grading against other dogs. It's a test against a standard.

Im not sure where I said a test was a competition… But you can still use a test to compare dogs across testing standards.

To be clear, I’m not interested in the offspring of dogs that have just been “tested” and not trialed either.

Unfortunately a lot of testing in the country has resulted in lowering the standards not bettering the breeding.

 

[KurtR]

Was bored so went out pheasant hunting yesterday for a few hours. Shot our six but had one that did the death sail went across a slough and landed over in a cut bean field about 350 ish yards . This is where the retriever shined could i have walked over there sure. It was alot better lining him up dead bird back. Two whistles and he was on his way back. Busting straight line through 100 yards of thick ass cattails made me happy. This is a direct result of running master and finished tests all summer. We only go a few times a year as pheasant hunting is really opposite of all the training we do but its fun for him to have no rules and run around . After having guided for 15 years I got to see all and every kind of dog. If i were to get something other than a lab it would be wirehair to guide again which wont happen. They retrieved decent and didnt quit when it got cold did better than labs in the heat.