# training for 175 yard retrieves



## cut'em

I'm training my Chessie for her first hunt test and in doing so I've had to transition her from a hunting dog to a hunt test dog. She's used to laying in the ground blind and watching and waiting till the shooting stops to be sent for the retrieve. She does Great, 75 geese this year. During my recent training, I've been using an assistant shooting and throwing birds. when I sit her, she watches, the assistant shoots, she goes out and brings the duck back. 150 - 175 yds open ground. She will do this two times in a row shooter throws oppisite directions every time. On the third send, she stops short of the mark and hunts I'm talking out at 50 yards. I'm trying four birds a session but she only gets two. I must note on these two retrieves she runs full speed, jumps the bird and spins back full bore. she sits at my side and another bird is thrown. Do I keep the drills to a limit of two birds or stay at four and decrease the distance?


----------



## BROWNDOG

What do you plan on running (event/level) with her??


----------



## brianb

Are you having one assistant throw 4 birds in one spot and then send her?

Or is one bird - dog retrieves, another throw, dog retrieves, repeat 2 more times?

I am confused.


----------



## cut'em

I plan on doing hunt tests with her She's capable of getting a senior, but I know I'm not as a backyard trainer JH title would be great and maybe someday a work on a senior. When I train her lately it's been with a friend standing out in a field somewhat hidden maybe near a clump of bushes or pile of dirt at about the 150 -175 yd range. I then sit my dog at my side and tell her "mark". When I see she's looking I signal to the shooter and he shoots and throws the bird. This seams long but it's mowed grass. we do one bird at a time in different angles from the same spot. 4 birds = 4 sends. I've also walked her out to a pile of dummies the same distance and she does the same. Two great 100% retrieves and then starts hunting short. I don't see her getting tired as the problem. I'm stumped.


----------



## buckseye

Are you using an open hand palm showing and giving the command back? If you do it will know what back means and when it cant hear you it will see the raised open hand and know what to do. Its awesome communicating with dogs.


----------



## Fosse

You may have to try a few different things. First try Walking Singles. Have your gunner go out about 50 yards or so with half a dozen bumpers. Start to you and the pups right. Have him give a "Hey, Hey" and toss a bumper. Have the pup retrieve it. Line her up on him again as he is walking from your right to your left. He needs to take about 10 paces or so, then stop. Repeat this until all bumper are thrown. This will teach her about gunners in the field and also to pay attention to them. By whatching them move in the feild she should stay locked on the gunner and be ready to be sent at any time. Best thing to do is let the gunner help you out and get her out to the bird. Next, have him take a few bumpers or birds out around 75-100 yards. Have him throw one with the use of a gun. Send her after she has been steady for a few seconds and is locked on the bird. Have him ready to throw another bird if needed. First have him try a "Hey, Hey Hey" if she stops very short. If she still hunts short have him get her attention and throw another bird or bumpper. Last you may need to shorten the distance up a bit to teach the marks to her. Most Junior level tests do not exceed 100 yard marks. Try that and Let us know.

How old of a pup are we talking about?


----------



## gonehuntin'

I don't like what you're doing at all. By having one guy throw four birds you are teaching her two very bad habits. One, to hunt both sides of a gun. Very bad. Two, to return to an old fall. Even worse. The third thing you're doing is boring her to death.

Try this. Never mind about the short cover. Doesn't matter. Get in a large field. 20 acres is fine. Put a man out there with a half dozen dummies. Have him roam all over the field. Have him throw one bird angled back, one square, one angled in, all from different spots and all a good distance from the other falls. Vary the distances. Some will be 75 yards, some 100, 150, 200 and more. It's called a marking drill.

Never let her stop on the way to a retrieve. Make her understand in no uncertain terms that nice doggies don't stop on their way to make a retrieve.


----------



## cut'em

gonehuntin' said:


> Never let her stop on the way to a retrieve. Make her understand in no uncertain terms that nice doggies don't stop on their way to make a retrieve.


This is where i'm at. I appreciate the words and I'm all ears. But you haven't said what to do when she "stops on the way to a retrieve" I've done the short runs haven't done the roaming gunner (that I like) I let my dog take a day off from training today. I think we both need it.


----------



## Fosse

cut'em said:


> But you haven't said what to do when she "stops on the way to a retrieve"


I would think we need a bit more info on where your pup is at in training to give more advise. Is she FF, CC, how old? Please give as much info as possible. There are many different levels of stimulation to take care of this problem, yet we need to know where you are at to give the correct advise. All dogs are at different levels and the correct advise for one may not be for the next.


----------



## jwdinius1

IMO i think she is bored too death! how long have you been doing the same routine? i know i am guilty of the same thing, just wanting to retrieve, retrieve, retrieve. I actually took about 1 month to a month an a half off of retrieving ad worked only oOB,whistle work, and gave him a break, another pssibibility if you are using dummies is she is bored of them. try adding secnt or purchasing pigeons, or what i do is save a couple ducks and geese in the freezer and unthaw them when i know i will train my pup, dummies ans real birds are a huge differance and it may spark her interest! Lemme know what works, i enjot hearing differny stories about pups! :beer:


----------



## jwdinius1

never mind, your taking about a hunt test dog, not problems within the actual hunting field sorry, i gotta stop drinking and coming on here :beer:


----------



## gonehuntin'

*WHY* is she stopping on the way to retrieves? Does she set a bird down on the way in and is she scenting the spot? Answer the other question also; is she forced? Collar conditioned? From good breeding? Need a little more info here.


----------



## cut'em

She's not force fetched or colar conditioned, I have in front of me a dogtra 1700ncp that I bought brand new about a year ago. and also bought at the same time the Mike lardy Total E-collar conditioning dvd. I've been reluctant to use it because she's been doing great. (remember she hunts with me) I can sit this dog on a single whistle blast anywhere in the field, throw multiple dummies 50 yrds and send her to which ever I choose with a hand signal. But I think I've created a monster in that I've trained her to go for a single dummie, straight line on her name command and half way out I hit the whistle she stops and looks back, I signal "down" and she drops to the ground, I would then hit the goose call and throw another dummie. I did this to get her down when another group of geese were coming in during her retrieve so as not ot flare those birds off. It looks good but not practical. She's just turned two and has a great bloodline full of SH and MH's.


----------



## buckseye

> never mind, your taking about a hunt test dog, not problems within the actual hunting field sorry, i gotta stop drinking and coming on here


haha me too I'm just another dog what would I know... :beer:


----------



## gonehuntin'

I'll give you what I consider the easy answer here. Force fetch her and force her back to a pile.

Once this is done, when she hesitates on the way to a mark, yell BACK and nick her with the collar.

I think you're right, this is a problem you've created. I believe that the dog thinks that after the first retrieve, she is going to have to stop or lay down on the next one. That's OK. First solve one problem, then another.

If you don't want to force her, try this. After you throw the first retrieve and she completes it, have the gunner swith positions and be ready. Have him shoot and throw a mark. Have him have another bird ready, hopefully a *clipwing pigeon*. Now watch the dog. When she first hesitates the gunner should immediately yell HEY, HEY!!! and throw the clipwing. This simple drill may get her over the hesitation without the ff. Remember to also use a marking drill as described so each retrieve is different.


----------



## Gamefinder

As the person above said your boring her to death with bumpers and the same basic retrieve. A Lab will keep repeating a Chessie won't!

Start short and do walking singles. Add something to this by backing up 10 yards every retrieve and then after 2 or 3 go to a different training area. Make a big fuss over her when she does it right and if she maks short pick her up and act unhappy. If you know someone that has a dog that is more advanced than she is play the jealousy game. When you pick her up put her on leash and make her watch the other dog have retrieves and be praised. No self repecting Chessy wants the boss upset and certainly doesn't want to be shown up by another dog. The jealousy card is the trump card for any trainer of a Chessie.


----------



## Fosse

A well trained Chessie will do whatever the boss needs done, even if that means repeating a mark.


----------



## Gamefinder

Mr. Fosse, This is obviously a partially trained dog in the hands of someone who is trying to learn. What I suggested from 55 years of actual experience training these dogs, not reading the latest book or looking at the latest video, is what works best when a partially trained Chesapeake needs to be taught to do what it is asked with gentle consequences. Variety stimulates and challenges a dog and that is a positive learning experience. Besides repetition of the same retrieves is something for the owner, not something a Chessie learns much from.

My concern from the training described is that the dog is not being exposed to the scenario of a hunt test situation and for most Chesapeaks something new like this is something to think about not just jump into and perform. Training sessions with groups of strangers and the many scents that will be encountered are definitely advantageous before the expenses of entries and travel; not to mention the frustration of the owner.


----------



## Fosse

Gamefinder, 
I agree and disagree with your statement. I agree with the training advise, as a few of us have said before you in this thread, that walking singles are a great place to start. I disagree that you were just trying to give advise. Like in most of your posts, you try to throw a dig at labs as the inferior dog.


----------



## Gamefinder

I did not merely suggest walking singles but rather an approach to keep the young animals interest this included only as a small part walking singles.

Yes, I pointed out the difference needed in approaching Labs that do well with repetition as do many goldens and pointed out that this approach for a Chessy is counter productive and I will add here disasterous with a flatcoat. I have owned some top notch Labs sired by the likes of Rays Rascal, Super Chief and River Oaks Corky. For what they were selected for Labs are superb dogs and generally push button, The Chessy and more so the flatcoat, need a more varied approach and constant variety in their training.

This repeated above is what my years of experience has taught me and is nor set totally in stone as there are always individual differences within each breed. Generalizing, Labs tolerate a heavier hand, flatcoats require a very firm hand and the Chessy as tough as nails physically is actually the most sensitive of the three. This is why dealing with the young ***** in question that quits on bumpers it is best to use her inate Chessy jealousy and possessivness to teach her that if she quits another dog will steal her attention and get the praise.


----------



## Fosse

My 31 years around the Cheesie breed agrees with you. The Peakes and Peake owners of the world should watch most(if not all) of the training videos with a grain of salt. Chessies have minds of their own most of the time that test the handler to strive to come up with different ways of teaching the lesson at hand. A lesson can be taught to most other breeds of retrievers much easier. Please explain why this makes them the best breed to own?

I do not want to highjack this thread(so we may need to start our own on this question). I would like to have a civilized discussion for all on why you feel the Chessie breed is the best retriever on the face of the earth.


----------



## cut'em

Gamefinder said:


> it is best to use her inate Chessy jealousy and possessivness to teach her that if she quits another dog will steal her attention and get the praise.


 I like what you say here!! I see that in my dog.


----------



## cut'em

Fosse and gamefinder I listen to the words of what I hear. Everyone speakes of Repitition. I'm guilty! I drive to the same location everyday at the same time with my dog and do the same drills. Maybe I try to mix it up a bit, I walk her out 150 yds drop 4 bumpers and walk her back sit her and then send her. The next day I start with 35 yrd. single water retrieves, healing drills and then do the bummper deal. I end it all with a 100 yrd "in the truck drill", which she runs ahead and jumps in the truck I'm alone here where I live, and look to dvd's, and most importantly you guys on what to do. The club I joined is a 110 mile round trip and I'm the newbie. I know my dog can get her JH I just need direction.
THANK YOU :beer:


----------



## Gamefinder

All too often the electric collar fraternity designate the word "training" to mean programing with the negative response of "juice' or even the suggestive "buzz". To me training is 90% teaching the dog to want to learn and then being rewarded with the approval and bonding with the owner. Training tests should be well thought out so that the dog gains knowledge as to how the owner wishes the situation to be handled. If a problem arises where the dog tests the owners authority in the bonding the owner can use various forms of negative response. Force works instantly but doesn't really advance the real desire of the animal to try its darndest to please. Negative approval works to let the animal know that its actions are not making the "boss" happy. Changing the routine at the time side steps the issue and gets some back on track. However, jealousy conquers even the strongest challenge to authority because almost any dog, and I feel any dog worth putting the effort into, wants approval from its "super alpha" the owner!

With a Lab on the whole the breeding program has emphasized dogs that respond better to pressure and repetition. This provides more of a sort that can be controlled to the maximum; ie running great lines, angle entries, accepting what ever the owner/handler does or commands. For those that want total control this is the dog that regiments easiest and stay regimented. For North American field events (FT's and HT's) these dogs fit. For many hunters that just want it done, this suits their base needs. The flat coated retriever, responds to repetetive tests by trying to see if it can do the same thing differently than the last time so repetition becomes a negative for control training. The Chesapeake needs to have total confidence in its owner/handler to accept that the owner/handler knows best and that it should do what it is told instead of using its own devices to figure out the task at hand. If a Lab fails there is good cause to repeat a training test until it succeeds. If a flatcoat does the test perfectly one is better off not to repeat the same test in the same location as it will do it differently just to see if it can. On the other hand my experience is that if a Chesapeake does a sloppy job but finally succeeds, it is not advisable to repeat the test in the same spot or even the same session as in the Chessie mind what ever it did worked the last time so why change what brought home the bacon (ie run the same convoluted hunt pattern).

There are advantages and disadvantages with the psyche of each of these breeds and the "Best" breed (generalizing of course) is what suits the owners needs, and wishes. In truth a good one is just that "A GOOD ONE" in any breed.

When the American team went to the British GameFair to compete against the British and several European teams they dazzled the friends from across the big water with their sharp lines and instant control. However, in the tests where the retrieves were over a hill and in heavy tree lines and the dog had to work out its own problems out of sight of the handler the overly controlled were lost and the dogs selected to work on their own excelled. My personal preference to handle my shooting needs is to prefer dogs that while basically responsive to command naturally switch to solving their own problems when I need them to. While probably challenging to many to train I prefer the flatcoats and Chesapeakes for me. This is not a put down to Labradors at all but a statement of what I personally prefer and need in my shooting dogs. It is obvious that Labs havent become the all conquering in popularity because others are crazy. It is obvious that the Lab fits best for many and that is fine with me. Accepting there are differences in the dogs that man has developed for his hunting helpers and not trying to make all generic is what I am advocating. If you choose the Lab so be it and it is not my place to second guess you. But, understand I enjoy the challenges of the flatcoats and Chessies that are not as push button but provide the work I wish them to.


----------



## Fosse

Gamefinder said:


> All too often the electric collar fraternity designate the word "training" to mean programing with the negative response of "juice' or even the suggestive "buzz".


I am curious...Since you were defiantly training before the collar was invented, have you transformed to the collar or do you use other methods. I started training during the Cattle Prod and Rock Salt loads era and am glad the collar came along when it did. As a young bird boy I saw too many ways to hurt dogs from misuse of these methods.


----------



## Fosse

cut'em,

I may have missed it, but you still have not said what age dog we are talking about.


----------



## Bobm

Fosse said:


> Gamefinder said:
> 
> 
> 
> All too often the electric collar fraternity designate the word "training" to mean programing with the negative response of "juice' or even the suggestive "buzz".
> 
> 
> 
> I am curious...Since you were defiantly training before the collar was invented, have you transformed to the collar or do you use other methods. I started training during the Cattle Prod and Rock Salt loads era and am glad the collar came along when it did. As a young bird boy I saw too many ways to hurt dogs from misuse of these methods.
Click to expand...

I too as a older fart agree with both of these statements.

Game finders observations about how labs are bred also matches my own opinion, natural "hunt" has been made second to control and the mental toughness necessary to handle repetitive training. Its obvious to older trainers.

And Fosse's observation about ecollars being more humane ( if properly used) is a good point, in retriever training the good ol days weren't so good.

This has been a interesting thread, as a moderator I appreciate that it stayed civil, lets keep it that way. Thanks


----------



## Fosse

Fosse said:


> I am curious...Since you were defiantly training before the collar was invented, have you transformed to the collar or do you use other methods.


I do not mean this to come off the wrong way. Gamefinder has alot of knowlege and I *am* truely curious


----------



## cut'em

My dog just turned Two


----------



## Gamefinder

Yes, when I was a child starting out there were some that used brutal methods with terrible attrition to get a FT winner. One very well known operation openly bragged that from every 100 promising adults (Labs)that they bought in only 3 or 4 could take the pressure and get a title. I remember seeing a hip exray of the first flatcoat to place in an Open Stake that was so filled with rat shot it was difficult at best to read and one testicle was destroyed by the shot. In the 1970's I hosted an all breed sanctioned trial for a new club on land I leased and drew the ire of the club for kicking one of the jerks off the grounds for putting his confused dog in a crate and jabbing it with a prod time after time. When judging a trial on the west coast I heard a very faint buzz so told the pro trainer on the line to empty his pockets. He refused but the then AKC director of field trials accosted him as he pulled an electric buzzer out of his pocket. It sounded like a prod and this fellow was set down by AKC for 6 months.

Yes, in the old days there were some very brutal methods used to take total control of the dogs. The big name trainer Chuck Morgan believed you had to beat an animal down to a quivering mass and then build it back up to have a FT winner. In the late 1960's the switch was made first in California and then across the country to electric; prods, collars and even electric ground pads to zap creeping on the line.

The big change in training and field trials in the US took place after World War II with many of the trainers returning from the military canine training center in Ft Robinson, Nebraska. The methods there were set in the war with the pressure of time to stamp out totally controlled animals fast if not faster. Before this period trials and training were more shooting oriented; cover patterns and dogs that could remember multiple falls and handle to a certain bird while going past other falls and live decoys.

The change to the brutal repressive "training" and the very regimented field trial scene evolved from there and has in the past 50 years altered the selection methods in choosing breedings to fit this negative training approach. In its official book the Labrador Retriever Club of America chapter on field trials mentions the change in the breed brought about by the introduction of the collar but I would suggest the change began earlier.

The use of these negative methods suit most pro trainers as volume adds to their income and owners want faster results. The fact that most Labs can be handled this way makes them the preferred breed for pros and the FT/HT croud and this is the shop window for most informal hunters. The golden tends to be a bit softer and require more patience, while the flatcoat and Chessie think for themselves and resist this abuse.

Much recent research in wolves demonstrates that earlier training (very gentle positive teaching) using the peak learning periods teaches a puppy to work as a partner with a human and automatically respond to what it learned in the nest or shortly there after. Infant puppies can learn the priciple of lining, angle lines, casts and multiple retrieves as well as to hunt areas systematically before they are 4 months old. They are too young to understand any correction while learning so the approach has to be totally positive and controlled to prevent the pup from learning a bad habbit.

I have experimented with and used this approach for almost 15 years now and the keys are understanding what stage the pup is in and using that stage to teach what fits the stage. The peak learning periods vary slightly from pup to pup and more generally by breed. Labs mature earlier than flat and Chessies and goldens tend to require a slower approach. The thing is that a pup at 3 months that has learned to line never totally forgets and when close to a year and sight blinds are reintroduced can convert going a relative few feet inside to going 150 yards or more in less than a week. Retrieving taught at 6 weeks become second nature to a pup and they have no need to be forced as that is what they live for. Also pups 14 to 17 weeks that have their exploring stage going strong can learn to hunt and organize their hunts by tossing a scented object into light cover and being allowed to find it on their own.

For a person like myself who has homebred stock with many generations of selection for what I want this early training is a very good selection tool as it allows me to see which pups are faster learners, more focused naturally and which have the special desire to keep on pleasing the owner.

I believe the respondent in NY who started this discussion asking for training help has a 2 year old female.


----------



## Chaws

Edited one comment removed please keep this thread positive and informative like the rest of your post-bobm

The problem you're having with your dog in sending him to retrieve is that he's "Popping." When you mentioned you send the dog out for a bumper and hit the whistle for the dog to down while birds are coming in engraved something in his head. If you go back and think of how far out he got when you hit the whistle using that drill, is that about as far as he gets now when he stops, turns, and looks? You don't necessarily need to force a dog or use an ecollar, however some times it helps. Your decision.

If you had forced the dog before, forcing on the command "Back" is not going to fix this issue. You aren't sending the dog on a blind retrieve, this is a mark. Get the dog going with wide open grounds and start increasing the yardage until the pooch is running the marks out. You can have the thrower stay in the same location and you just move where you're sending the dog from. Another thing you should definitely do is because this dog is going to have issues marking the fall, have the bird boy or thrower help out the dog by saying a little hey hey hey and tossing another bumper next to the first one. If you're working in cover, seed the area of fall with multiple bumpers so there's high success of the dog making the retrieve. We're building confidence in the dog, not teaching it to work in cover or make long long retrieves.


----------



## Gamefinder

Chaws asserts that the actions of this young ***** is purel;y popping. I define popping as an insecurity stop before reaching a mark. This two year old gets the same basic mark two or three times and then refuses. This is not a pop but a dog that is tired of doing the same old thing.


----------



## Fosse

Gamefinder said:


> Chaws asserts that the actions of this young b#tch is purel;y popping. I define popping as an insecurity stop before reaching a mark. This two year old gets the same basic mark two or three times and then refuses. This is not a pop but a dog that is tired of doing the same old thing.


I agree,

IMHO popping is a side affect of stopping a dog too many times in pile work or blind training without letting the dog run through the middle to get to the bird. When doing pile work I will let the dog "get through the middle" 70% of the time and only stop 30% of the time. I try to *never* stop a dog on a mark. The only time I will stop on a mark is to handle to the correct side of the gunner into the area of the fall. This is work for older dogs. In this case( a two year old) I would have the gunner help by tossing another bird to get the dog to the bird.

As described this is not popping, this is a trained responce. If you have tought your dog to remote sit on a whisle and you have tought your dog the word "down", you do not need to teach to lay down on a mark. If you wish to test the dog to see if it will do it here is how I would. (for the dog that is not trained on blinds, which correct me if I am wrong, but I think this is the case) Set a pile of 10-15 bumpers out have one bumper in your hand. Stand 30 yards or so away(or how far you can throw the bumper). Mark the pile(throw the bumper in your hand in the pile). Send her on her name. As she is going move backwards. When she returns line her up(puting your hand over her head, pointing the pile out to her, foot next to her pointing at the pile) and send her on back. Move back again. Repeat until you are 75-100 away(should take no more than 3 bumpers or so. This time stop her halfway there. Tell her to lay down. Get what you need and then cast her "back" to the pile. With 10-15 bumpers do not do this more than twice. *Do not stop her on marks anymore*

If she stops in the middle without you telling her to? To correct this problem I would do this drill the first few times with my hand in the air like I am giving a back cast. When she starts to slow down yell "back". If she quick looks behind her, she will see your hand in the air. If she continues to stop and is not listening, shorten up the distance quick and teach the pile. Too many refusuals on her part could start and continue the habit and you do not want that bug to work out 

Try that tonight...


----------



## Fosse

Chaws said:


> You can have the thrower stay in the same location and you just move where you're sending the dog from.


I have to dissagree with this. He is training this dog to run in HT. If you leave the gunner in the same location and move the line you may be openning another can of worms. You do not want the dog going to an old area of fall. The gunner must move to continue to throw mulitple singles during the same session.

just my $.02


----------



## Chaws

I feel that an old area of fall is identified from the line by the dog as to where the bird fell. If the dog sees the mark from a different location and different marking areas such as a tree, brush pile, etc, the dog sees it as different. Different ground to cover, different types of suction, etc.


----------



## Fosse

In a different test, sure, but not one mark after another. Once the dog comes off the truck the test or training begins until the dog is put back on the truck. An area of fall is where the bird lands, period, it does not matter where you place the line. The line should stay the same throughout each test and never change. If he was training his hunting dog, he could try whatever he needed to. He has placed a consideration of going for an AKC Junior title. He may want to train for the tests that will be given.

Just my$.02


----------



## gonehuntin'

*GAMEFINDER*; Nice post. I learned to train by Morgan's methods. You were a little rough on him. He also was a trainer for the armed forces. Charlie could train any dog. Soft like Rosie, or tough as nails. He was a great trainer. He may have seemed harsh by today's method's but he used what was available to him at the time.

I'll totally disagree with you on force. Every *field trial dog *should be forced. It gives you a set of tools to correct future problems. Force has nothing to do with how much retrieving desire a dog has.

*Chaws *If you train a dog to go back to the area of an old fall, varying the line or not, you won't make it through many hunt tests. Use the marking drill.

If any of you have the interest, and can find Charles Morgan's book on retriever training on ebay, it is a journey into field trialing and the past and has some excellent information on curing problems in dog's on it. DL Walters interviewed him and put the interview on tapes. Those were fascinating to listen to also.

Nice thread, lots of good stuff here.


----------



## Fosse

Gamefinder said:


> Yes, in the old days there were some very brutal methods used to take total control of the dogs. The big name trainer Chuck Morgan believed you had to beat an animal down to a quivering mass and then build it back up to have a FT winner.


I also witnessed the same type of training by a very successful FTer as a young boy. Growing up in Alaska I had Roy McFall to watch and emulate. I have a few memories at trials watching Roy lacing up his black leather gloves so the dogs could see him do it. Then he would drag them out of the crate in the truck an beat the tar out of them. To those dogs those gloves were just as bad as any electric devise could ever be. They knew that if he had those gloves on it ment it was business time. It must have worked, look at his accomplishments:

These fourteen field champions, with an accumulation of over 1400 all-age points, have been owned, trained, and handled by Jo and Roy McFall. Roy has won 10 double headers.
FC AFC CFTC CAFTC Hiwood Piper
347.5 All-Age Points
NAFC FC CFTC CAFTC Piper's Pacer
140 All-Age Points
FC AFC Hiwood Stormy of Alaska
43.5 All-Age Points
FC AFC Hiwood Kelly
103 All-Age Points
FC AFC Hiwood Clincher
166.5 All-Age Points
FC AFC All Stars Jumping Jenny
102 All-Age Points
Dual CH AFC Hiwood Shadow
58.5 All-Age Points
FC AFC Hiwood Delta Dash
59 All-Age Points
FC AFC Hiwood Trooper
129.5 All-Age Points
FC AFC Hiwood kleen Sweep
193 All-Age Points (still being campaigned)
AFC Ripple
30.5 All-Age Points
AFC Hiwood Prancer
32 All-Age Points
AFC Hiwood Apache
24 All-Age Points
FC AFC Hiwood Jaguar
33 All-Age Points (still being campaigned)
1462 all age points and climbing!


----------



## Gamefinder

In reply to Gonehunting; I too learned a great deal from Morgan and also from his contemporaries and the next generation who learned their trade from Morgan. et al. I met Charlie personally around 1956 or 7. The point I was making was not from the book that D.L. and Ann put together, "Charles Morgan on Retrievers" but from my own talks with him. I might add without going back to the book for an exact quote but he speaks about a client that didn't understand that the stage the clients dog was in was being taken down before being built up again.

However, the gentleman who started this thread was not talking about making his ***** into a field trial dog. Its his pet and hunting pal that he would like to run in Junior Hunter. If he uses her natural breed tendencies he should be able to get her trained for this but had he started earlier and if who ever bred the animal had started in the nest it would be easier.

As a person whose stock represent many generations of home bred animals selected to hunt and hunt hard the use of foced methods and collar dogs make potential breeding stock from outside harder to evaluate for natural talents. From about 1800 to the mid 1900's most retriever selection was based upon selecting for bidable animals not animals that regiment for artificial tests. Isn't this why many pure hunters of the Lab pursuasion have migrated toward British or European breeding. I am not speaking of the short legged waddling show dog types but the working dogs from across the herring pond that have many many generations of selection for being bidable but able to hunt on their own. Having shot in Europe and having judges at European type trials the difference in the sort of dogs evolved in the North American style and European style Lab is very obvious. They very simply are not wired the same way anymore.

Similarly, when I see strains of Chesapeakes and to a much smaller extent flatcoats that people are developing based on field trials and MH titles, I see the same sort of schism forming in these breeds also. For my shooting purposes, I find that the NA field trial game and to some extent the HT game, to be subverting the qualities I require. It is also my belief that equating hunting ability for most that hunt not trial with FT awards and titles is wrong. Defining what is a well bred animal is dependent upon needs and selection for those needs not titles is a separate and different game. This is in no way criticising those who play the FT/HT game but they are selecting away from many of the virtues a pure hunter seeks. Granted in the mind of many FT participants the higher, tougher, more rigidly regimented animal makes a "Kick A$$" hunter but for the average hunter most of these animals are too high, lack the natural gamefinding talents and require too much maintenance to live with or work. Similarly, the ones I select to keep for myself are too inclined to follow their noses,
problem solve for themselves and pattern hunt to adopt well to the straight lines of FT/HT competition. In reality as the FT/HT games evolve they become more and more different from actual hunting. Having been involved in both FT and hunting for more than 55 years I chose to concentrate on the hunting needs and walk away from the trials. If another goes the other way that is his choice to make but there is a big difference and the use of dogs selected for one use to make pups to be used for the other is not necessarily wise breeding or ownership selection.


----------



## Bobm

Fosse this is my personal take on those accomplishments, something just are not worth stooping to, for me I would rather never have a title of any kind than to abuse a dog like that.

Note I am not insinuating you would approve of that either.

This is one of the best threads we have had in a long time and I've really enjoyed it , thanks there are some real knowledgable people on here.

By all means keep this discussion going :beer:


----------



## Gamefinder

I definitely agree with the sentiment expressed by Bobm. Winning through total brutality is nothing but animal abuse. In many states it could land a person in the many bared hotel. Actually this is just the sort of thing that fuels the animal rights nuts against hunting, dog owners and breeders. These are the sort of people that need to be run out of the game totally.


----------



## Fosse

IMHO...

I may get a few a little cranky with me, but...

I also think that owning a dog and not having it at home that often is also not good either. Having a dog on a Pro's truck 11 months out of the year is not what owning a dog should be about. Most of these dogs spend atleast 12-14 hours a day in a small space on a dog truck. For some on the winter trips they may not have a proper set up to arrive to in the south. These dogs spend 22hours a day on the truck. It is one thing to send your dog down south with a pro for the winter to get the proper work that can not be done up here. It is another thing to keep them with the pro year round. People that own FT dogs that treat them as property and not a member of the family are just as bad in my book. I train with many different people on a weekly and monthly basis. Some that I train with have thier FT dogs and thier HT dogs and thier hunting dogs. These dogs have thier duties and they rarely cross the lines that are drawn. I say let the dog enjoy life as much as possible. Let the dog be a dog once in a while...

Ofcourse I am only talking about a very small percentage of the dog world. This is not as common as people may think. Most pros have the younger starter dogs on the truck during the main part of the year. I know many people that send thier dog south for the winter. I only personaly know two, that I can think of, that keep the dog on the truck year round.


----------



## gonehuntin'

Wow, great thread. Where have you guys been?

I think a lot is in how a statement is understood, but I have a problem saying that any good trainer broke a dog down to a "quivering mass". Any dog taken that far down could never be brought back up. Now, many old trainers believed that a dog was "broken down" and then you put back what you wanted. This is very misleading.

What trainers did was to make a dog totally submit to their wills, but a dog was never left for a quivering mass. Yes, I trained with a lot of the old trainers and if you were going to win, you better have an exceedingly well trained and reliable dog. In the old days that meant to A70, Shotgun, Prod, or Whip.

But know what was amazing? MOST of those dogs ran with an incredible style and enthusiasm. Few ever exhibited actual fear of a trainer. Respect, but not fear.

I competed against Roy when he was running Piper and Pacer and Pic was a pup. There was another nice fella from Alaska competed all the time, Jack someone; Doug Orr trained his dogs. Point in this boring ramble is, these old trainers, Roy, Doug Orr, Morgan, Cotton, Wunderlich, Walters, were all fine men and trainers. What a field trial competitor considers sound training is what some others may consider excessive. Without this type of advanced training though, no dog will be competitive in an Open All Age stake.

It's all about the foundation laid in a dog, how well the lessons have been taught, then knowing how much pressure to use. I don't buy at all the claim that only four out of 100 dog's could take field trial training. Virtually any dog could take the training; most just weren't. I would say that only four or less in 100 were *gifted* enough to be field trial dogs, maybe less.

I think that as usual, Rex Carr said it best. He said that "First, were more dog's professionally trained and trained long enough, and secondly, were those dog's adequately campaigned, there would be quite a few more field champions". I agree with that statement 100%.

It is not whether or not a dog is capable of taking the training, it is whether or not they intelligent, tractable, and talented enough to become a field champion, that most coveted of all dog's.

Another thing is that never, have I ever seen a single field trial dog that could and did not make the most outstanding hunting dog in the field a man could pop a cap behind. Just my opinions of course.


----------



## Fosse

gonehuntin' said:


> There was another nice fella from Alaska competed all the time, Jack someone


I think you may be talking about Jack Vollstedt. He and Roy are like the Ying and Yang of dog training. Roy is heavy handed and I do not think Jack Has ever used a heeling stick.


----------



## gonehuntin'

Fosse, I think the name was Jack Woodland? Owned a string of laundries as I remember. I don't remember so well at times anymore though.! :wink:


----------



## Fosse

gonehuntin' said:


> Fosse, I think the name was Jack Woodland? Owned a string of laundries as I remember. I don't remember so well at times anymore though.! :wink:


Ahh yes, now you are taking it back a few years...

Jack Woodland, Len Ferucci and Roy Mcfall were the three to emulate and beat in Alaska for a long long time. Jack was the outsider of this triangle of love hate relationships(Len Loved to hate Roy). There was even rumor that when Len had his up and coming Derby dog stolen that Roy may have been behind it. Come to think of it, I do not think Jack Vollstedt lives in Alaska. I think he lives in Washington and travels to AK every summer to train and run.


----------

