??? SPO Hounds???

[DG TX]

The bottom line is still that a top hound shound be able to go anywhere and compete in ANY format, be it SPO, Large Pack or Gundog Brace and be able to win. He should be able to do it in Maine, Texas, NC, Michigan, Louisiana, or Kentucky!
Some say that when a hound hit a line 50 yards off a check, he's a rabbit hound. Others would say the "rabbit did'nt fly" and he is reaching too much.
The Rulebook: GG Black and others said "All good rabbit(hunting) hounds don't make good trial hounds, BUT, All good trial hounds should make good rabbit(hunting)hounds...
The Bettermant of the Breed: Your average Rabbit Hunter sees the Beagle as an individual that is a tool for his quest, the skillet. Get the came back WHATEVER method it takes, which includes Hooking, swinging, reaching, stealing the line, ect...
The Houndman sees the Beagle as a tool to breed a better hound to hunt with and compete with also. He does this by breeding hounds that run the most rabbit with the least amount of wasted action. (My Definition)
We have both Rabbit Hunters and Houndmen judging today in all formats of AKC trials. I have hunted with men that were avid rabbit hunters but did not have a clue about hound work. They just knew production when the machine(hound) was working. Loose that hound and they were out of business! Time to go BUY another hound. A trialer that has never hunted is just as BAD.
If you ain't confused now, all I can say is I gave it my best shot

[laal]

The way I see it folks in different federations run what they like. I think it was drive on that said he had judged in both medwest and ubgf, and what I think he had to do was pick the dog that done the best in both, if I took a midwest dog to a ubgf trial I would expect to get picked up, the same thing if I took a ubgf dog to a midwest trial.

The dog has to run and work with the pack.

Joe you do a good job explaning your thoughts, I wish I could do as good.

[AlabamaSwamper]

I know Joe, it was just a big mess by the time it was said and done.

I agree with DG/TX on what he said and that is what I am saying.

DIfferent federations? I know what they are but like Joe said, they only use what they want.

If someone brings a dog that is a UBGF dog to a Mid West trial and run the most accurate rabbit, will he win? NO, from what I have been told. WHy, because they like a faster dog. Wait a minute now, how can that be if they go by the same rulebook in both federations??? WHy couldn't that Mid West dog win at a UBGF trial. TO fast??? What, why is that. If he is good enough to win in Kentucky then why not in Ga as long as he runs the most accurate rabbit? Because he is to fast?? What kind of answer would that be. "Oh, your dog is to fast and our poor hounds can't keep up!!" I say, to bad and the best should win.

[laal]

Most of the dogs entered in a midwest trial are midwest dogs.
Most of the dogs entered in a ubgf trial are ubgf dogs.
Whats wrong with that?

If your midwest dog runs all the rabbit, and makes 0 misstakes it might could win in ubgf?

If your ubgf dog could catch the midwest dogs at every check, and run through it, and makes 0 misstakes he could win in midwest?


When you come to my house I make rules. (pick the judges) This is as it should be.

[Joe West]

DG TX: The trials were different in the old days when a statement like that was made.

Over the years from the beggining of trials there have been many hunters who have quit trials in disgust because the trial hounds could not run a rabbit correctly. The first notable one who comes to mind was L.M. (Yellow Creek) Watson. The originator of the Yellow Creek hounds. He quit because the trial hounds were getting too sloppy and his hounds were known to have plenty of foot. The trend continues today for that and other reasons. Of course there are hunters as you describe but they aren't beaglers.

laal: The purpose of the trials is to find the best hound(s); it is not to build the best pack with the available hounds. It makes little sense to try to find the best hounds and then restrict that by saying that they have to fit into the pack. What if the pack is crap and can't keep a rabbit up to save their life? Remind me to never play poker with you. I'd hate to draw a royal flush only to find out after I bet the farm that I loose to a pair of duces.

[Drive-On Kenels]

I am glad that there is the ubgf federation and the mid-west beagle gundog association. both are fine organizations. both have there own interpretation of varous terms in the akc rule book. It isn't any different with religion. and interpretation. but lets don't go down that road for a topic. Since there is diferent formats it's a good thing,because not everyone likes hunting with the same style of beagle. By the way I have seen dogs that run in one federation also compete very well in another association, not many ,but there are some out there.

[AlabamaSwamper]

I agree Drive-on, everyone likes a different dog so we need different formats.

If AKC wants different style dogs, then by all means, have several formats like ARHA. Don't have two totally different style/speed dogs as champions under the same rule book. One step or two ain't a big deal, but when you are talking about a big difference in speed, then that is.

[S.R.Patch]

Another dumb question, We have hounds that we call beagles, the beagle is the breed, we have trials for the purpose of bettering the breed. Now how can we all be bettering the breed(beagle) when there are so many different types? Should we create subdivisions of the breed(beagle) so It is less confusing or is this what we've already done, I think the term I've heard is hobby hounds...Patch

[Joe West]

Drive-On Kennel: Don't be fooled by the INTERPRETATION hoax. They are NOT interpreting the standard they are leaving parts out.

S.R.Patch: Perhaps all that would be needed is to add some things to the title if the hound would make field champion. For example SPO, UBGF,Mid West, F.C., as the tittle so folks would have an idea of how the hound might perform in the field when they see a stud ad for the hound. As it is now with just F.C. one doesn't know is the hound is Brace, spo, large pack or if spo what federation or association the hound comes from to have an idea of how the hound performs. The title F.C. alone tells us nothing about the hounds ability to perform. Isn't it sad that the title F.C. doesn't automatically mean a superior hound.

[DG TX]

Joe, you say that was in the old days...Still using the same ideas that wrote the rulebook as then. IT IS MAN THAT HAS CREATED THE PROBLEM.
The variables are simply WILD! Will it ever settle down again to where we are all looking at the same hound, on the same page? At birth SPO was call a "movement" and it had tremendous power that had to be delt with. The growth came fast and furious! Maybe too fast.

Until we settle down and ALL look for the SAME hound, The great strengths of the hunting Beagle and it's breeders and owners will never be achieved. As for as competition, we should have male producing 100+ field champions with our numbers!
If the folks that run the traditional brace type hounds can ALL LOOK AT THE SAME HOUND, why can't we? Thier hound are worthless for hunting, but they can place the same type nationwide, coast to coast, border to border! That group evolved from the group that Black came from. I think we kind of choked on the power we created.

[DarrinG]

In several federations, "Style" is preferred over "Accomplishment". I personally think it takes a marriage or mixing of both to a certain degree, but in my opinion, too many are putting more emphasis on style over accomplishment. Would you rather take a "stylish" dog to the field under your shotgun or one that "accomplishes" his mission????

Or are we not talking gundogs here??

[Joe West]

DG TX: As things are now we all will never be on the same page. The power that was created with the SPO movement was lost to ribbon chasers and those who knew the least about hounds.

DarrinG: Yes and in other trials footspeed is is all there is.

[Bev]

Joe, I hate to be technical, but when you say the power of the "SPO" movement, you are talking about a field trialing movement. Those standards were written for field trialers in hopes of bettering the breed and keeping it useful for BOTH field trialing and hunting. Lew knew the FC's would be the ones to get bred. The term "ribbon chasers" is used very loosely, so if you want to get technical, all of us who trial are technically ribbon chasers. Heck yeah, I want the blue one, but for now I'd settle for a green one. The success comes in getting a ribbon on a dog today and killing rabbits over him tomorrow. I believe this is what Lew wanted. Regardless of the different types of beagles running today, show me a federation (besides traditional brace) where those owners can't kill rabbits over their dogs.

The standard belongs to AKC. They will have to be the ones to decide if the standard is being carried out properly or misinterpreted. Until AKC refuses to title a hound because it doesn't fit the standard as it was intended, then this whole thing boils down to a matter of taste and interpretation - like it or not. Each federation claims to be the one who promotes the "rulebook" hound. Who has the authority to tell them any different?

[S.R.Patch]

Joe,
Yates told me, their trial hounds in the South had evolved in to 2 hr. rabbit dogs because thats all that was required and tested for. He said, even his own hounds were this way and were even put up at times as to not mess up their style. He said the trialing becomes an obsession if your not careful, and only when he had taken his hounds on a rabbit hunt one season and after a couple of hours, found they were trailing at his heels did he realize what they had become. He said he was on board when the SPO movement started in the South, to get back to a rabbit hound that could run a rabbit all day and then return the next to do so again. He did not try to breed his hounds back up but got rid of them and found the Patches, apparently it is easier to pull the reins, than it is to push the rope.

The Akc is a registry, they keep to their job of keeping records and collecting fees, they let the clubs do what they judge best, the bigger the variety, the more people and hounds involved, the more money comes in.
If I am only a rabbit hunter and I have registered 500 hounds, Akc does not care if they conform to their standard, they are bred to my standard, but the $7500 dollars went to their pocket anyway.
Fads come and go, mostly they evolve into dead end roads. A good rabbit hound will always be popular and in demand, keep'em coming ...Patch

[Steve C.]

Rather than refer to differing associations, I like to refer to different formats. Joe, things aren't quite so bleak as the picture you paint. I believe it was about 1999 that IFC Greenbrier BirchHaven Merlin became the first hound in history to place in AKC Large Pack on Hare, SPO- Hare and Rabbit and Gun Dog Brace on Cottontail. A year or so later, FC Hydeville's Black Slick became the first hound to WIN in all three formats. Since then, FC Chase's Crockett has accomplished the feat and many others such as IFC Sullivan's Sherlock Holmes have placed in all three. These hounds proved that good hounds can succeed anywhere there are competent and honest judges. The problems with beagling are not due to interpretation of the rule book, they are due to judges who do not understand the rule book or show favoritism based on style. Judges who judge hounds based on speed have no understanding of the AKC rule book- they merely are substituting personal preferences for the standard. I find it interesting that all the dogs who have accomplished the feat of placing in all formats came from hare bloodlines. These individuals not only ran according to the rule book, they also possessed the speed to compete in Large Pack but had the brains to gear down enough to compete in GDB. Those are the type of hounds we should be breeding to rather than specialists in one format. The dogs are out there- it's up to us as breeders to find and use them.