Training an HPR

[crackerd]

If an HPR in one of our trials , even at Novice standard, tore through a field and missed birds it would be eliminated even if it did point a couple of them. We like our dogs to "go" but they must always point any birds within the hunted area.

Thing is, Bill - as your trials presumably resemble a natural day's shooting and dogs don't hunt the same ground as a dog that ran before them - how would you know if a dog had missed birds until the next dog or the next or still another after that came along and "found" those missed birds?

Perhaps the UK would be better following the Pan European & American format, whereby, as I understand it, dogs must compete in several types of event to earn their titles.

Naj, this doesn't jibe with what I know of American pointing dog titles, and certainly not the HPR breeds. If anything pointing titles are handed out wholesale like corn-syrup flavoured cans of Coca-Cola - there's one for everybody and most every dog. The Weims have their own NFC (national field champion), the Brits (Brittanies) have their NFC, the GSPs, the GWPs, the Vizslak have theirs too. Really devaluing such if you're comparing them to retriever trials - where there is one NFC made up each year from all the retrieving breeds combined. (Which for comparison's sake means there will probably never be a goldie NFC, flatcoat NFC, curly coat NFC and only long odds of their being a Chesapeake Bay dog NFC.)

The pointing and HPR FTCh titles go the easier route too - they can be earned from breed-exclusive trials and those trials are pretty much down to field work (pointing). The retrieving tested, if required at all, is negligible, as is the water work if required. The Brittany by the way has about 20 times the number of dual champions (bench and field) the US over the next nearest breed and it's by mere dint of their field trials being 95% limited to Brittanies, nobody else need apply.

That's why NAVHDA rates higher by far if you want an HPR trained to do the "type of work for 'ordinary' hunters" - a NAVHDA test (there is no NAVHDA field trial) has pointing elements, retrieving elements, trailing or tracking elements and obedience (albeit on lead), and also puts a dog up against it in a duck hide as well as a "bird field." But again the titles earned are not FTCh but UT (Utility Test) Prize I, Prize II, Prize III - and if your dog earns a Prize I and you choose to run it at the NAVHDA "Invitational" (misnomer), the dog can be awarded the VC (Versatile Champion, not Victoria Cross) title even though that's also a test instead of a field trial. As dogs are not competing against other dogs for placements, but against a "standard" (with point accumulation from the various tests taking the dog to the appropriate total for its VC).

Always thought NAVHDA, or a NAVHDA-style org., were there enough interest from Joe Bloggs HPR handlers, would go over big in the British Isles - but there again you've got the problem of liberated birds and equal opportunity for all to deal with.

MG

[Cambusvale]

If an HPR in one of our trials , even at Novice standard, tore through a field and missed birds it would be eliminated even if it did point a couple of them. We like our dogs to "go" but they must always point any birds within the hunted area.

Thing is, Bill - as your trials presumably resemble a natural day's shooting and dogs don't hunt the same ground as a dog that ran before them - how would you know if a dog had missed birds until the next dog or the next or still another after that came along and "found" those missed birds?

MG

The only way they would be put up is by the following gallery of spectators and handlers/dogs waiting there turn, you would also have the guns could bump them up walking in line before the dog covers the ground or misses and game themselves not staying still for what ever reason and running through the line. The game such bumped must be seen by the judge, the same would apply to Spanials or Cockers in their trials.

[trekmoor]

I agree with Cambusvale, a trial dog could miss birds without anyone ever knowing and thus remain in the trial. I have seen the judges or the guns walk into missed birds behind a dog and that dog is eliminated. I have also seen (twice) a competitor called into hunt his dog just after a dog that either tore across the ground or hunted at very close range, decide to back-cast his dog over that ground .(remember our trials are not neccessarily held into the wind so doing this is not always putting a dog at a disadvantage.)

One handler had seen a pheasant sneak into cover in a fields corner that the previous dog had omitted to investigate. He back-casted his dog and it found the bird, got the marks for a full hunt-point- retrieve and at the same time eliminated the previous dog.

In another trial that was desperately short of game only one or two dogs had found game. An Irish handler with a very good dog decided the previous dog had not hunted a promising looking field very well. He took a big chance and back-cast his dog on a tail-wind over that huge field of rashes. His dog pointed on a single partridge . It was a very good bit of dog work. It raised his dog in the trial while putting out the other dog. The owner of that other dog felt this was unsporting behaviour to indulge in but I.M.O. it was just another form of eye-wipe.

Wullie

[Naj]

I'm happy to stand corrected, MG. Must be thinking of the NAVHDA tests. Although I do believe that the Pan-European trials are run along the lines that I mentioned.

As regards the trial scene in the States, I've nothing against breed specific trials, although we wouldn't be able to muster the numbers in the UK, apart, perhaps, from GSPs. I often wonder how you can sensibly, & fairly, compare the work of a Brittany or a Bracco Italiano as against that of a GSP or a Vizla or Wiemeraner. I've also nothing against working Utility Tests where dogs compete against a standard - providing that the 'standard' is a meaningful one.

Naj

[trekmoor]

I am not really in favour of breed specific trials. I think that the best dog there should win no matter what it's breed is. I won trials working a brittany against every other breed that was competing, others have done the same. I think that if you pander to breeds by giving them breed specific trials then you are working towards breed mediocrity. That trial judges judge fairly is all I ask.

If the smallest of all the HPR breeds , the brittany, can win in competition against GSP's or Wiries , why shouldn't the other HPR breeds ? Some of them have but they should all be able to , or, as someone who wants a good working dog , I would not want to buy one of those other breeds.
I don't buy dogs because of their colour or shape, I buy expecting them to be as good as a dog from any other breed as workers.

Wullie

[crackerd]

I see it both ways (save for the "excessive" titling for individual breeds) - whilst no Bracco or Spinone is likely to keep pace with a kurzhaar or draht afield, regardless, I believe field trials should be open for those wanting to give it a try with their "underdogs." And what if the trial were run in different kind of cover and required a dog to scour an area, as your trials apparently do, rather than running full-throttle over flat expansive fields as most "birddog" trials in the US are? The spins and bracci might just hold their own in those circumstances.

Sorry to say, Naj, the Brittany probably wouldn't have a lot of trouble with Weims or Viz based on the quality of those breeds that I've seen afield. And spinoni eat them alive in NAVHDA because there's water work and retrieving, two more areas where they've been found lacking.

I've not heard the German testing system called "Pan-European," so I might be thinking of something altogether different. But that system (Jagdgebrauchshundverband - or JGHV) as deployed in North America is much reminiscent of NAVHDA and at its highest level (VGP) tests close to a dozen different areas of a dog's abilities. One of them - to my amusement - is the retrieve of a dead fox, which necessitates not having the dog chase down and dispatch a fox to prove its mettle, but having the trainer send away - mail-order if you will - a deceased reynard and get the dog accustomed to handling it. Another, er, distinction from NAVHDA is JGHV allows even at highest level (unless it's recently been changed) a trainer to toss a pebble into a pond or loch to make a splash and entice his or her reluctant dog to go into the water.

MG

[trekmoor]

I'm told it's not quite so easy now but our K.C.'s gundog working certificate was just a joke where retrievers were concerned. The dogs trying for this certificate were taken to trials but not as competitors. They would probably have failed on the very first retrieve if not before that !

At one trial the judges called the dog to be tested in and on short bare grass it was required to sit and then be sent when a shot was fired and a bird was thrown to land probably no more than 20 yards from the dog. The dog waddled out, picked the bird and waddled back to it's owner again at a pace a snail with a bunion would have thought slow. The dog got it's certificate and the judges got back to eating their lunch all within the space of 3 minutes. I bet that dogs owner bragged about her marvellous working lab to her show dog cronies for years to come.

A lady turned up at an HPR trial to try for the same certificate. As we all walked up a lane a few dogs pointed while still on lead towards the grass at the base of the hedge. There was a pheasant hiding there. The hopeful lady asked what was going on and when she was told she at once took her dog up very close to the bird and held it there on the lead. She called for a judge to witness the "point" and said that only left the retrieve still to do ! I am pleased to say the judges did not accept that as a hunt and a point !

In general I agree with MG that vizslas and weims are not very good water dogs but neither are some of the GSP's or the brittanies here ! The best vizsla by far that I have seen in water is Rosie, the one I work. She didn't start out that way and I give most of the credit for the way she is now to her owners. They are a water sports family and they went swimming in rivers etc. while encouraging Rosie to join them in having fun.

Rosie still does not go swimming just for the hell of it but she enters water very readily at any distance from me if sent in the direction of the water. I watched a test for HPR's a year or so ago. Having seen that performance while the handlers stood right up at the edge of the little river with their dogs , I wondered just how many of those dogs would have entered the water at all had they been sent for the same retrieve from 50 yards back from the water ?
Had it been a retriever or even a spaniel test most of those HPR's would have lost most or even all their points before they even entered the water due to the excessive commands, threats and entreaties made just to get them in !

Wullie

[Naj]

It's not a German testing system, MG. As you know the German system is more of an aptitude/competence test where dogs compete against a standard, rather than each other. The Pan European trials I am thinking about are the ones run by the FCI(?) which are international competitive trials for the pointing breeds. Some breeders now breed & train specifically for these & are looking for more pace & a longer nose in their dogs &, I as I understand it, don't require the tracking work/ground scenting abilities that dogs like the GSP/GWP etc. were originally bred for.

I can understand what Wullie is saying about the breeds competing against themselves for the best dog on the day to win but from what I have heard of HPR trials in the UK,the best dog - as regards natural gamefinding ability & style/pace - doesn't necessarily win. And if some breeds are, as has been stated, weaker than others, then they will never have much of a chance against dogs like the GSP & GWP, which doesn't give enthusiasts much incentive to persevere. You get a similar situation in spaniel trials, where the chances of a clumber, (and Field or Sussex) winning a trial against springers is non-existence, & in retriever trials, where Flatcoats, Chesapekes &, to a lesser extent, Goldens, find it difficult to compete against the ever popular Labradors. Cockers have always had the opportunity to compete in their own breed trials, even when they were less popular. After saying that, I appreciate that it would be practically impossible to have breed specific HPR trials in the UK.

Naj

[crackerd]

Naj, would sheer numbers prevent it, or would it be lack of sufficient interest from owners, or both?

I've gone through this with a couple of spaniel breeds, a toller and of course a spinone. What it amounts to is, If the breed interest is there - and in the US that would have to be affirmed by the a breed's "parent" club - any gundog breed can have its own AKC field trial.

Some of the lesser breeds make out quite alright with trials at their "breed specialty" event. The past weekend, for example, the Flatcoated Retriever Club of America held its specialty and attendant field trial. But there so few field flatties and especially flatties of high caliber that their trial is limited to a "qualifying" stake, no open stakes included. That's still better than most of the minority gundog breeds. I could never see a Sussex spaniel field trial or probably not a spinoni FT either - even if they had the numbers with dogs to do it.

MG

[Naj]

I would think that we lack the numbers to run specialised breed trials, & therefore the interest. I wouldn't be surprised if HPR trials in general struggle to make up the numbers even when open to all breeds. This simply comes down to the fact that the mainstream shooting scene in the UK is more suited to the training & working of spaniels & retrievers than it is to the pointing breeds. Pointer/Setter trials still retain their support because you don't necessarily have to shoot over them to bring one up to trial standard. As I understand it, our HPR Championships were originally stopped because of the sub-standard quality of many of the entrants. HPR trials in general would still appear to have a higher incidence of trials where top places are withheld than you find in either spaniel or retriever trials, so there must still be problems either with the trials or the participants. As for the 'lesser breeds', some breeds are better suited to competitive sport & will always outshine the others, hence the numerical supremacy of Labradors entering & winning field trials. It surely doesn't mean to say that the other breeds necessarily lack merit or working ability, just because they are less capable of competing against labs at that particular discipline. If you expect them all to work in the same manner as a Labrador, or, in the case of HPRs, say, a GSP, then there would be little point in having the different breeds & their idiosyncrasies.

Naj