Drive-On you are correct, there are various groups that have made the decision to follow the Bible the way “they” want to, as well as individuals who follow the AKC standard the way “they” want. But, truth is truth…it doesn’t change… it’s left up to you and I to comply or not. But, when we change either the Bible or the AKC Standard to fit “our personal” interpretation it know longer is the same Bible or Standard.
That is why in Revelation 22:18,19 it says, “18: For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”
As for the AKC Standard, I think Joe is on the right track, but having some of the same difficulties that I have had trying to encourage others to follow the Bible and not there interpretation of it.
Joe said, “Drive-On Kennel: Don't be fooled by the INTERPRETATION hoax. They are NOT interpreting the standard they are leaving parts out.”
Joe, I think you’ve hit it on the nail head. And people have been changing how “they” want to worship God since Cain and Abel. Abel worshiped God according to God’s Word and Cain did not. Who was accepted by God? Only Abel. (Genesis Chapter 4: Hebrew 11:4 & Romans 10:17) Truth matter then, and it still matters today, but people do what they want to, just like they do with the AKC Standard.
Clyde Gott
Crowley's Ridge Beagles
??? SPO Hounds???
Moderators: Pike Ridge Beagles, Aaron Bartlett
Steve, I agree with most of your post. Patch you too, to a large extent. But the sad fact remains, that the "federations" have come about because of personal taste - not just the judges, but the folks who breed, raise and hunt with beagles.
To keep this from turning into a book, suffice it to say that many folks would not have liked the style of hound that Merlin, Crockett and the others were. You could sell them until you're blue in the face and there would be folks that wouldn't feed them, and don't want to hunt over them. In most forms of competition, you will have this divide in preference. Why else would we have Knicks fans and Jeff Gordon fans (lol!) or Cubs fans, for heaven's sake?!
Folks keep different type beagles for their own reasons. For example, some folks have only small weed patches in which to hunt. They want a hound with strictly a medium foot and close attention to line. Now I have some of those hare-bred dogs that are clean enough and honest workers, but they would blow a small weed patch up in no time flat. No matter how we shake this down, folks will keep vastly different hounds and they will take them to the trials.
The idea of a uniform beagle type all over the country is one of theory and not of practice. The standard for judging that Lew Madden wrote was written and adopted by AKC. It's their ball game and if they choose to simply collect the registration money and leave the implementation of that judging standard to the beaglers, whatcha gonna do? Getting everyone to agree is not going to happen. Damning the different federations/formats will not change a thing. We all will breed and run the type of hound we prefer to hunt over, and the birds of a feather will flock together.
Patch, I'm not doubting Mr. Yates's statement for a minute, but it confuses me. The more running my hounds get, the more settled down they are. If I put them up intentionally, I wouldn't expect to see a hound at the top of his game the first few times out. That theory seems bass-ackwards to me.
I agree with Steve when he says it's not that bleak. Besides the excellent examples he gave, there are many, many hounds out there that can do it all, but the sad fact is, folks won't trot them out to the field trials because perhaps they've heard too much negative stuff about the trials going around. It's a shame, really.
To keep this from turning into a book, suffice it to say that many folks would not have liked the style of hound that Merlin, Crockett and the others were. You could sell them until you're blue in the face and there would be folks that wouldn't feed them, and don't want to hunt over them. In most forms of competition, you will have this divide in preference. Why else would we have Knicks fans and Jeff Gordon fans (lol!) or Cubs fans, for heaven's sake?!
Folks keep different type beagles for their own reasons. For example, some folks have only small weed patches in which to hunt. They want a hound with strictly a medium foot and close attention to line. Now I have some of those hare-bred dogs that are clean enough and honest workers, but they would blow a small weed patch up in no time flat. No matter how we shake this down, folks will keep vastly different hounds and they will take them to the trials.
The idea of a uniform beagle type all over the country is one of theory and not of practice. The standard for judging that Lew Madden wrote was written and adopted by AKC. It's their ball game and if they choose to simply collect the registration money and leave the implementation of that judging standard to the beaglers, whatcha gonna do? Getting everyone to agree is not going to happen. Damning the different federations/formats will not change a thing. We all will breed and run the type of hound we prefer to hunt over, and the birds of a feather will flock together.
Patch, I'm not doubting Mr. Yates's statement for a minute, but it confuses me. The more running my hounds get, the more settled down they are. If I put them up intentionally, I wouldn't expect to see a hound at the top of his game the first few times out. That theory seems bass-ackwards to me.
I agree with Steve when he says it's not that bleak. Besides the excellent examples he gave, there are many, many hounds out there that can do it all, but the sad fact is, folks won't trot them out to the field trials because perhaps they've heard too much negative stuff about the trials going around. It's a shame, really.
-
Alabama John
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 5:56 pm
- Location: Pinson, Alabama
This sure has been interesting. Great opinions and well written responses.
Best of all, no fussing!
Several trialers run their dogs for only short times to get them to put out hard. It is teaching them they will be picked up in an hour. Its called "Squirting"
Patch, I like your posts.
Bev, you are right, most beaglers that I know or have known over the years do not care what others want or what the rules are. Everyone I know wants something a little different in a rabbit dog.
If Lew Madden lived next door, I would never ask him how my dogs are doing or if they met his standard. Who cares, they meet mine. Picture this, his dogs and mine were out running seperately one day and got together on the same big ol canecutter to run and we both sat together on a log and listened to the race. Afterward, he might have come over to see me and asked some advice on standards and breeding.
The AKC adopted his standard HE preferred for beagles and he helped them. That's all.
I bet he was a nice fellow and one you could hunt, trial, and run dogs with. I don't see him as a rules thumper!
Best of all, no fussing!
Several trialers run their dogs for only short times to get them to put out hard. It is teaching them they will be picked up in an hour. Its called "Squirting"
Patch, I like your posts.
Bev, you are right, most beaglers that I know or have known over the years do not care what others want or what the rules are. Everyone I know wants something a little different in a rabbit dog.
If Lew Madden lived next door, I would never ask him how my dogs are doing or if they met his standard. Who cares, they meet mine. Picture this, his dogs and mine were out running seperately one day and got together on the same big ol canecutter to run and we both sat together on a log and listened to the race. Afterward, he might have come over to see me and asked some advice on standards and breeding.
The AKC adopted his standard HE preferred for beagles and he helped them. That's all.
I bet he was a nice fellow and one you could hunt, trial, and run dogs with. I don't see him as a rules thumper!
-
AlabamaSwamper
- Posts: 810
- Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 7:06 pm
- Location: Florence, AL
- Contact:
DarrinG, you said it. To many folks prefer style or accomplishment and that is not helping the breed. Look what happened to those poor walkie talkies. From what I understand, that is what they did and see what it got us. A bunch of useless dogs that are only good for one thing, brace trials.
I tell yall what, I'll judge mine tomorrow when I shoot that bunny. Not that means the most to me. From my experiences, the best gun dog would get picked up in no time because he might be a little to rough. Oh well, I bet that dog has more rabbits killed over him than three of those "trial" dogs because he gets it done faster.
Alabama John, if your dogs were the standard, we would all be in trouble. I don't know many folks that have dogs that darn fast. LOL!!! You would be the all time handler with FCs. LOL!!! I'm ready to watch them hounds do their work and try to shoot a rabbit in front of them. Not sure I am quick enough though.
I tell yall what, I'll judge mine tomorrow when I shoot that bunny. Not that means the most to me. From my experiences, the best gun dog would get picked up in no time because he might be a little to rough. Oh well, I bet that dog has more rabbits killed over him than three of those "trial" dogs because he gets it done faster.
Alabama John, if your dogs were the standard, we would all be in trouble. I don't know many folks that have dogs that darn fast. LOL!!! You would be the all time handler with FCs. LOL!!! I'm ready to watch them hounds do their work and try to shoot a rabbit in front of them. Not sure I am quick enough though.
"No stronger bond exist than that between a man and his dog."
Link to RabbitDawg board. (Old Southernbeagles board)
http://www.excoboard.com/exco/index.php?boardid=6643
Link to RabbitDawg board. (Old Southernbeagles board)
http://www.excoboard.com/exco/index.php?boardid=6643
-
bob huffman
p
Good thread on dogs and field trials. You got your PP and SPO and a wide variety of trials and shows and it sounds like something for everyone! Well not quite! There is a portion of beaglers out there that are not being serve so I have concocted a new trail to serve them and think it will really catch on. It is called a Field trial for preachers. Each preacher brings his own Walkie Talkie and they run in a brace. Once the dog starts the rabbit, the precher has to follow along behind him and every time the dog barks, the preacher has to quote a scripture from the Bible. Each preacher better know a bunch of them scriptures because if you ever seen the Talkies run, it can get pretty involved in regard to the barking and bawling.. I had one of them that could blow a hole right in the ground big enough to plant potatoes in! Come to think of it, he even looked like a potatoe with 4 feet. Well anyway, there will be rules to these trials such as the preacher can't quote the same scripture more than once etc. and many other rules that will interpreted by the judges. The winner is the first preacher to quote half the Bible (up to judges discretion) or convert 3 members of the galley to their religion. We won't give away trophies because that would be showing off and instead the winning preacher gets to be on one of them TV preaching shows like PTL Club or Oriole or Oreo or Oleo Roberts. We are looking for a federation or association to let us have some sanctioned trials just to see if there is any interest in this sort of thing. It will be open to the world and preaachers don't have to be licensed or belong to any preaching club, but, bonus points will be awarded to those sure theirs is the right religion. (up to judges discretion).
-
Guest
Al John, Lew Madden did not have to ask anyone's opinion about a hound. He owned, judged, and handled some of the best in the country and knew what he was doing. Field and bench both. He also carried the "rabbit hound" banner into the 60's & 70's when nearly no one else did, except for the Large Pack folks. At that time he was cussed and exiled from organized Beagling by many for talking about the "rabbit hound" when most had gone to the slower useless type. He damned this useless type of hound and was big part in print for the success of the gundog trial numbers today!
Well now I've seen brace hounds of the modern type run their rabbit under good scenting conditions and circle it several times with out a check. The brace trialer called them his hunting pack. And they weren't walking but were trotting after their game. But I wouldn't consider them hunting hounds. I've seen large pack hounds who were blazing fast but would be as much as 50 yards off the line at times and who would never shut up when off the line and unless you had a marked line you'd never know they had lost contact with the scnet. They were regularly hunted over but I wouldn't consider them hunting hounds. I've seen spo and LP hounds who were more of a medium speed who ran at a good clip but who had little regard for the line and checked a lot but I didn't consider them as hunting hounds. I've seen mixed breed dogs run rabbits and in fact just about any old dog can circle a rabbit to the gun but I don't consider them hunting hounds; I wouldn't consider them field trial hounds either except that there are trials that would promote them. The proceedure five seeks a higher standard if it is followed.
-
Steve C.
Bev, dogs who meet the standard can still be as different as night and day. The "standard" is just that- a minimum requirement for the characteristics to properly perform the job. There is plenty of room for variation provided the hound performs his work efficiently with a minimum of time spent not making progress on the line. Speed is the perfect example. You can have anything from relatively slow to blazing fast and still meet the standard. Too slow and you fail to make adequate progress on the line and this would then become a fault. The same goes for mouth and nose. We can all design a pack that suits our conditions and terrain and still have "rule book" hounds. Where we get in trouble is in designing formats that favor a faulty dog. This all falls back on judging and the lack of sufficient numbers of experienced houndsmen who understand the rule book and the reason for the rules. Today we likely have more hounds gaining titles who can not perform the task they were bred to do than those who can. This is not restricted to any one format or association; it is rampant throughout the sport. Titles don't mean much unless you are VERY familiar with the particular association the hound finished in. We're not doomed by any means but we need to continue breeding hounds for their intended function rather than to merely win ribbons.
Steve, good post, and I agree with everything you said. Especially, "There is plenty of room for variation provided the hound performs his work efficiently with a minimum of time spent not making progress on the line. "
Joe, your opinion of what a hunting hound is, is strictly that.....your opinion. My opinion of a hunting hound is one that hunts and brings a rabbit around to the gun. How he gets it done is a matter of personal taste.
I still say the AKC Standard for judging is "interpreted". Because there are areas within it that are not absolute, it must be interpreted. Now backtracking is backtracking - needs no explanation, but how big is a check area? Quitting is quitting - needs no explanation, but what is "too far and too soon"?
"Interpret" is not necessarily a negative term at all if you stick to the dictionary definition of the word, which is:
1 : to explain or tell the meaning of : present in understandable terms
2 : to conceive in the light of individual belief, judgment, or circumstance
3 : to represent by means of art : bring to realization by performance or direction.
Joe, your opinion of what a hunting hound is, is strictly that.....your opinion. My opinion of a hunting hound is one that hunts and brings a rabbit around to the gun. How he gets it done is a matter of personal taste.
I still say the AKC Standard for judging is "interpreted". Because there are areas within it that are not absolute, it must be interpreted. Now backtracking is backtracking - needs no explanation, but how big is a check area? Quitting is quitting - needs no explanation, but what is "too far and too soon"?
"Interpret" is not necessarily a negative term at all if you stick to the dictionary definition of the word, which is:
1 : to explain or tell the meaning of : present in understandable terms
2 : to conceive in the light of individual belief, judgment, or circumstance
3 : to represent by means of art : bring to realization by performance or direction.
-
Alabama John
- Posts: 2116
- Joined: Sat Jul 27, 2002 5:56 pm
- Location: Pinson, Alabama
Guest, My hat is off to Lew Madden for holding his position on the standard being akin to a hunting hound.
All my kin folks preached that and bred accordingly for the past 80 plus years all through the AKC brace movement.
Either he himself had a pack of what he saw as the benchmark for hunting or someone else did that impressed him and made a believer out of him since he had witnessed what they could do. His standard didn't just come off his imagination I do not believe, but from witnessing some good dogs. Could have been some from around here, who knows. They certainly were not the AKC brace Beagles.
My hat is off also to the owners and breeders that didn't give in to the trialing fad that led to the Brace trials, but, kept on rabbit hunting andstuck to breeding for the ultimate rabbit hunting dog.
Lew Madden wasn't alone in his beliefs, SOME, but very few, AKC folks and breeders agreed with him, but, his thoughts were agreed with by ALL the grade dog owners since they only hunted.
I feel he was a person with only good and honorable intentions and he and I could have been friends and shared ideas as that is exactly how I feel about Beagles. They are for hunting and accomplishment and should be judged so.
All my kin folks preached that and bred accordingly for the past 80 plus years all through the AKC brace movement.
Either he himself had a pack of what he saw as the benchmark for hunting or someone else did that impressed him and made a believer out of him since he had witnessed what they could do. His standard didn't just come off his imagination I do not believe, but from witnessing some good dogs. Could have been some from around here, who knows. They certainly were not the AKC brace Beagles.
My hat is off also to the owners and breeders that didn't give in to the trialing fad that led to the Brace trials, but, kept on rabbit hunting andstuck to breeding for the ultimate rabbit hunting dog.
Lew Madden wasn't alone in his beliefs, SOME, but very few, AKC folks and breeders agreed with him, but, his thoughts were agreed with by ALL the grade dog owners since they only hunted.
I feel he was a person with only good and honorable intentions and he and I could have been friends and shared ideas as that is exactly how I feel about Beagles. They are for hunting and accomplishment and should be judged so.
-
Guest
I'm glad they have differant organization/federations.
I don't think you could have that many people enjoy the same type of hound.
I have hunted in kentucky, arkansas, georgia, ohio,indiana,and michigan.
I have seen vast differances in conditions and hounds.
I think there are some hounds that could do it any were anytime.
But I also think people tend to breed a hound to suite the conditions or areas they hunt or run in.
I personnaly have been to Lp,pp,mid west,ubgf, and ukc hunts.
I can say this if you run with 50 differant people you will probably see at least 10 differant types of beagles.
Heck look at Bev her and Ralph own Black creek and Turbo blood two totally differant types hounds. But they enjoy them and I guess thats all that matters.
I don't think you could have that many people enjoy the same type of hound.
I have hunted in kentucky, arkansas, georgia, ohio,indiana,and michigan.
I have seen vast differances in conditions and hounds.
I think there are some hounds that could do it any were anytime.
But I also think people tend to breed a hound to suite the conditions or areas they hunt or run in.
I personnaly have been to Lp,pp,mid west,ubgf, and ukc hunts.
I can say this if you run with 50 differant people you will probably see at least 10 differant types of beagles.
Heck look at Bev her and Ralph own Black creek and Turbo blood two totally differant types hounds. But they enjoy them and I guess thats all that matters.
-
Robert W. Mccoy Jr
- Posts: 420
- Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 1:57 pm
- Location: Canton Michigan
Bev: It's hard to find the exact words neccissary to get this point across in a limited space but I'll try; it will require a certain amount of understanding on your part. Remember too that I'm no English proffessor with any great writing skills.
What makes a hunting hound isn't a matter of personal taste it's a matter of accomplishment.
There can never be a good slow hound. That is not a matter of personal taste but is a matter of the slow hound being unable to keep their rabbit up and moveing under poor scenting conditions. The hound who cannot find his own game can never be a hunting hound because the hound who can't find game can't run it.
Once the hound has his game up and moveing there are hound actions that promote the run, fail to promote the run and interfear with the run. Any hound who has just a bit too much of those faulty hound actions that either fail to promote the run or interfears with the run cannot be a hunting hound because he will surely loose the majority of his game. Yes you can shoot rabbits over him but he will loose more then he will bring around. The hound who cannot accomplish the task of running his game until acounted for cannpt be a hunting hound. Oh sure maybe someone might use him for that purpose but purely speaking he's not a hunting hound.
You may recall Bev the accounts I gave on this and other boards in the past of those hounds I've seen who gave near perfect performances. They were all, everyone of them, hunting hounds. Able to find their own game and run it until accounted for. One of them, a hound named Girl, was the single fastest hound I've ever seen. So fast that on rabbit her game would just go straight to hole and would not run for her. If you got one full circle before the rabbit went to hole you were lucky. She was from old timey hare breeding but I never saw her on hare. On rabbit she was useless to me because the game would not stay up for her. She was a hunting hound though and the fact that she was useless to me is both a matter of personal taste, I want the game to stay up longer, and necessity, I want to be able to get a shot at the game. There should be no doubt that on hare that does not go to hole she would be most usefull. IN a trial situation I've never seen her equal. Nothing I've ever owned, bred, or seen could beat her; except if personal taste were involved and then any old brace hound or SPO type that wants a certain foot speed would beat her easily; because she was TOO GOOD!!! She was the single most talented hound I've ever seen bar none. She was never in a trial though. The second most talented hound I've ever seen had such a range of gears it was hard to put a speed on her. Bringing up the rear of the pack one day and then leaving the pack far behind the next depending upon the existing conditions. For hunting there was none better simply because she'd always keep her rabbit up and moveing and it was a rareity for her to loose her game. IN trials she had only moderate success. A licensed fourth in Large Pack (I wasn't there) and then picked up in SPO for being too slow. Now mind you When she was picked up in SPO the pack had lost their game because they had run 40 yards past where the rabbit turned before they realized they didn't have any scent and she just turned smoothly with the rabbit and saved them but her foot speed that day didn't match someones taste. If the conditions were better she surely would have left that pack far behind but she ran according to the conditions and that was her downfall. She could keep the rabbit moveing when the others were at a loss and that is accomplishment pure and simple and has nothing at all to do with personal taste. That is the difference in a hunting hound or trial hound if the standard is followed and all the rest. They can accomplish. That is why if the standard is followed the hunting hound and the trial hound are the same.
The standard requires a bit of experiance and hound knowledge to apply. Too far too soon is a matter of the conditions of the day. A hound MUST reach, BUT only when neccissary and NEVER anchor.
What makes a hunting hound isn't a matter of personal taste it's a matter of accomplishment.
There can never be a good slow hound. That is not a matter of personal taste but is a matter of the slow hound being unable to keep their rabbit up and moveing under poor scenting conditions. The hound who cannot find his own game can never be a hunting hound because the hound who can't find game can't run it.
Once the hound has his game up and moveing there are hound actions that promote the run, fail to promote the run and interfear with the run. Any hound who has just a bit too much of those faulty hound actions that either fail to promote the run or interfears with the run cannot be a hunting hound because he will surely loose the majority of his game. Yes you can shoot rabbits over him but he will loose more then he will bring around. The hound who cannot accomplish the task of running his game until acounted for cannpt be a hunting hound. Oh sure maybe someone might use him for that purpose but purely speaking he's not a hunting hound.
You may recall Bev the accounts I gave on this and other boards in the past of those hounds I've seen who gave near perfect performances. They were all, everyone of them, hunting hounds. Able to find their own game and run it until accounted for. One of them, a hound named Girl, was the single fastest hound I've ever seen. So fast that on rabbit her game would just go straight to hole and would not run for her. If you got one full circle before the rabbit went to hole you were lucky. She was from old timey hare breeding but I never saw her on hare. On rabbit she was useless to me because the game would not stay up for her. She was a hunting hound though and the fact that she was useless to me is both a matter of personal taste, I want the game to stay up longer, and necessity, I want to be able to get a shot at the game. There should be no doubt that on hare that does not go to hole she would be most usefull. IN a trial situation I've never seen her equal. Nothing I've ever owned, bred, or seen could beat her; except if personal taste were involved and then any old brace hound or SPO type that wants a certain foot speed would beat her easily; because she was TOO GOOD!!! She was the single most talented hound I've ever seen bar none. She was never in a trial though. The second most talented hound I've ever seen had such a range of gears it was hard to put a speed on her. Bringing up the rear of the pack one day and then leaving the pack far behind the next depending upon the existing conditions. For hunting there was none better simply because she'd always keep her rabbit up and moveing and it was a rareity for her to loose her game. IN trials she had only moderate success. A licensed fourth in Large Pack (I wasn't there) and then picked up in SPO for being too slow. Now mind you When she was picked up in SPO the pack had lost their game because they had run 40 yards past where the rabbit turned before they realized they didn't have any scent and she just turned smoothly with the rabbit and saved them but her foot speed that day didn't match someones taste. If the conditions were better she surely would have left that pack far behind but she ran according to the conditions and that was her downfall. She could keep the rabbit moveing when the others were at a loss and that is accomplishment pure and simple and has nothing at all to do with personal taste. That is the difference in a hunting hound or trial hound if the standard is followed and all the rest. They can accomplish. That is why if the standard is followed the hunting hound and the trial hound are the same.
The standard requires a bit of experiance and hound knowledge to apply. Too far too soon is a matter of the conditions of the day. A hound MUST reach, BUT only when neccissary and NEVER anchor.
-
bob huffman
@
OK Joe, we get it. Thanks for clearing that up for us. The problem with your theory is that trials aren't for dogs. They are for people. I never heard any dog ask when the next trail is and when are we going. You can try to take the human bias out of it all you want but it will NEVER happen becuase field trials are for people, created by people and judged by people. Slow hounds can be good hunting dogs and the fastest dog is not the best hunting hound all the time. I have a slow hound that hardly ever looses a rabbit and will get you a shot quickly because he has an easy mouth and rabbits don't run scared from him. They will hop around and usually make a very small circle back to where they were jumped because of his easy mouth that they are not scared of and his lack of pressure on the rabbit. He never loses contact with the rabbit even though he is slow because he has an outstanding nose and starts and finishes many tracks others can't smell. I have seen dogs run along beside him watching him trying to figure out what he is doing. He can run them under any conditions. He is a hunting dog. You say there can never be a good slow hound. Out here on the flat plains we have rabbits that will run out of hearing many times because of strips of cover that run through open ground. The same rabbits will run in a small circle when Fred is running them which tells me that cover can make a differance what type of hound is most successful that day. Your theory is too somple minded and quantitive just like the rule book. If you wanted to win the Baja 500 you wouldn't use the same car you would to win the Indy 500 would you. You could have a theory about what is the best race car and even put it in book form but it would it would not hold in the real world because it can't be quantified. Way too mant intricate variables to quantify something like a rabbit dog or race car. Its that old black and white thinking again. The boy that has won the most races this year in Nascar doesn't have the fastest car but has learned how to make his fuel last so he makes less pit stops and it has worked for him under the conditions they are running under. He has a fast car but not the fastest and has learned to adapt by having a balanced approach and being flexible in his approach to the wire. The only quantitive aspect to a rabbit dog is how mant rabbits they can put in the pot. Everything else is open to interpretation.
Bob: Trials were originally intended for hounds; I've yet to see a human run a rabbit. You may be correct though and they may be for humans now; brings us back to the ribbon chasrers doesn't it?
We define slow as on a poor scenting day the hounds will not be able to keep their rabbit up and moveing. UNder that definition there can never be a good slow hound because the hound is incapable of running under poor conditions.
I am wondering why a hound with a superior nose is unable to run faster under optimal scenting conditions? Rabbits will run out of hearing here too but a rabbits range is only so big and if the hounds keep pressure on him it's never long before they circle him. Hare are a different story.
Yes you almost got it!!! The best hound is the one who can account for the most game. Now try it this way. Over time just keep a log of how the hounds do when running them. The hound that finds the most rabbits is the best searcher. The hound who accounts for the most rabbits (shot, holed or caught) is the best running hound. It works better though if you don't shoot and let the hounds go and see what happens when they are required to keep their rabbit up until caught or holed.
While your keeping notes on the hounds observe their performance. You will find that there are hound actions that promote the run, fail to promote the run and interfear with the run. These things have been observed by beaglers throughout beagldom. Now check the standard and you will find that those things you've observed in the field are right there in the standard. You see the standard isn't theory, it's the result of observation of the hounds in the field.
Beagleing isn't rocket science. It's really not too difficult or too intricant. It's simple really, the hound who accomplishes the most is the best hound. No human biases there nor any theory just plain and simple accomplish the most is the best hound.
We define slow as on a poor scenting day the hounds will not be able to keep their rabbit up and moveing. UNder that definition there can never be a good slow hound because the hound is incapable of running under poor conditions.
I am wondering why a hound with a superior nose is unable to run faster under optimal scenting conditions? Rabbits will run out of hearing here too but a rabbits range is only so big and if the hounds keep pressure on him it's never long before they circle him. Hare are a different story.
Yes you almost got it!!! The best hound is the one who can account for the most game. Now try it this way. Over time just keep a log of how the hounds do when running them. The hound that finds the most rabbits is the best searcher. The hound who accounts for the most rabbits (shot, holed or caught) is the best running hound. It works better though if you don't shoot and let the hounds go and see what happens when they are required to keep their rabbit up until caught or holed.
While your keeping notes on the hounds observe their performance. You will find that there are hound actions that promote the run, fail to promote the run and interfear with the run. These things have been observed by beaglers throughout beagldom. Now check the standard and you will find that those things you've observed in the field are right there in the standard. You see the standard isn't theory, it's the result of observation of the hounds in the field.
Beagleing isn't rocket science. It's really not too difficult or too intricant. It's simple really, the hound who accomplishes the most is the best hound. No human biases there nor any theory just plain and simple accomplish the most is the best hound.