Who should get the most credit for a great dog???

gus · Post by **gus** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 7:31 pm

If the trainers get the credit then we are paying too much for these pups that have all those champions in their pedigree. We should be paying that money to a trainer.
I have not met a trainer yet that could teach a dog to run a rabbit, work a close check, run for hours on end, and hunt in the briars. I have bought pups that tended to hunt trails and mowed fields. When I encouraged them to hunt in designated areas they looked at me and moved on. If I insisted they began to hunt wider. I have a bitch that when Bred to the right line the pups naturally look for heavy cover. If I take them hunting, most of them hunt close. If I call, they look at me as if to see where I am pointing then head for the spot. I've raised others from different bloodlines that as soon as you turn them loose they head for the hills. They have all been started and treated the same. The trainer is the same, the results are not.

backyard beagler · Post by **backyard beagler** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 9:13 pm

Who should get the most credit for a great dog??
.........................THE RABBIT without it you have nothing lol

to me this isn't even a question I would say breeding first and trainer second, you can take a hound from a long line of walkie talkies and train it to your hearts desire to run lp style and in the end its going to be a walkie talkie, if its in the breeding a good trainer can get it out of them but if its not in their breeding then you are s.o.l.

warddog · Post by **warddog** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 9:24 pm

IMHO a great dog is the result of their genetics and nothing more. A handler, breeder, owner or any other influence is nothing more than someone placing personal preferences on the dog's natural ability. If the genetics are there that dog will do what it's bred to do. Without man's interference the pure genetics would take over and survival of the fittest would prevail. Those that had the right matching of the genetic structure to pursue their quarry to catch and even do so to survive would live to hunt another day. Those whose genetics were not matched up to do so would be culls and die of natural selection. In the wild only the strong survive and get to pass their superior genetics along but not ALL of the offspring will be of survivor quality. When man intervenes those culls would met someones fancy and become survivors to carry on that gene pool. Although I don't trial, I have had some real good rabbit dogs in my time and I can honestly say that I didn't have anything to do with it. All I did was take them from their pen, put them in the wild and let nature take it's course while I sat on a stump and watched and listened. If anyone out there is a maker of great hounds why then are we ALL still searching for that great one and most are just looking for a good one?

tommyg · Post by **tommyg** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 12:48 am

warddog wrote:IMHO a great dog is the result of their genetics and nothing more. A handler, breeder, owner or any other influence is nothing more than someone placing personal preferences on the dog's natural ability. If the genetics are there that dog will do what it's bred to do. Without man's interference the pure genetics would take over and survival of the fittest would prevail. Those that had the right matching of the genetic structure to pursue their quarry to catch and even do so to survive would live to hunt another day. Those whose genetics were not matched up to do so would be culls and die of natural selection. In the wild only the strong survive and get to pass their superior genetics along but not ALL of the offspring will be of survivor quality. When man intervenes those culls would met someones fancy and become survivors to carry on that gene pool. Although I don't trial, I have had some real good rabbit dogs in my time and I can honestly say that I didn't have anything to do with it. All I did was take them from their pen, put them in the wild and let nature take it's course while I sat on a stump and watched and listened. If anyone out there is a maker of great hounds why then are we ALL still searching for that great one and most are just looking for a good one?

Maybe I havn't been fortunate enough to get Hounds that train there self. I don't know how they break there self off trash. I'm not saying breeding is not a part of it,but without guidence and training the hound,won't handle,will not be broke off trash if it runs anything but a rabbit. Thy also need solo time,unless you own 1 hound,thats where the hound learns to run a rabbit,and teaches its self. A trainer can't make a great hound they can only make them greater.

warddog · Post by **warddog** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 11:05 am

Tommyg, you have just explained your personal preferences for the hound. There are folks that want deer, fox or squirrel runners and that is not trash to them. How many rabbit tracks have you smelled and tracked to the gun? NONE you say, then how could you possibly teach a dog to do something you can't do or even have a clue of what a rabbit track versus a deer, fox or squirrel track may be like. Now, you can intervene and specilize that dog to your liking by breaking it of behaviors you don't like but the ability to do what it does is genetic and mans intervention is called domestication not training. I have had dogs that handled great with little to no work and I have had them so boneheaded that you could wear a shock collar out on them. I've had them to have less of a tendency to run game other than a rabbit and I've had them to run everything that ran from them including field mice. I've yet to be able to pat myself on the back and say that I taught one anything other than what behaviors I didn't want them to perform.

ACOMEAU · Post by **ACOMEAU** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 4:16 pm

Amen Gus....Amen. To me its just that simple.

Incahoots · Post by **Incahoots** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 4:33 pm

warddog · Post by **warddog** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 8:17 pm

Incahoots, Sorry that's wrong. What in the heck type of training are you providing that dog by taking it to the field and turning it loose? YOU ain't training crap, all your doing is giving that dog's genetics a chance to come out. If you go back and read my posts I said all I have done is take them from the pen, put them in the wild and let nature take its course. The more you let them do it the better their skills get honed. They don't get any practice at all in the kennel or tied to a chain and you certainly don't train them to do it. I don't know exactly how you TRAIN a beagle to run as I've never been able to smell their quarry and I sure can't run along beside them when they get on a scent. You are right in one of your statements that genetics is just a blue print of a dogs potential and no guarantee. Life makes no quarantees with anything and a dogs genetics is a crap shoot as we have no idea as to what's going to match up with what when two dogs are crossed. It's kind of like playing poker, when you shufle up all those cards and deal them out you're liable to come up with anything. Funny thing is they all look the same from the outside. Giving a dog a chance to utilize it's inherent qualities ( genetics) is NOT you training anything. It is merely you giving it the opportunity to use it's inherited traits that it would have had to use to survive in the wild.

tommyg · Post by **tommyg** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 9:25 pm

warddog wrote:Incahoots, Sorry that's wrong. What in the heck type of training are you providing that dog by taking it to the field and turning it loose? YOU ain't training crap, all your doing is giving that dog's genetics a chance to come out. If you go back and read my posts I said all I have done is take them from the pen, put them in the wild and let nature take its course. The more you let them do it the better their skills get honed. They don't get any practice at all in the kennel or tied to a chain and you certainly don't train them to do it. I don't know exactly how you TRAIN a beagle to run as I've never been able to smell their quarry and I sure can't run along beside them when they get on a scent. You are right in one of your statements that genetics is just a blue print of a dogs potential and no guarantee. Life makes no quarantees with anything and a dogs genetics is a crap shoot as we have no idea as to what's going to match up with what when two dogs are crossed. It's kind of like playing poker, when you shufle up all those cards and deal them out you're liable to come up with anything. Funny thing is they all look the same from the outside. Giving a dog a chance to utilize it's inherent qualities ( genetics) is NOT you training anything. It is merely you giving it the opportunity to use it's inherited traits that it would have had to use to survive in the wild.

Wardog I disagree with you on this one,to make a hound that has the talent to be a great hound it takes training. We are talking about rabbit hounds,a dog in the wild will run anything it can catch for food. I want mine to run rabbits,there for comes the training,trash breaking if needed,solo time is very imporant,run a pup in a pack all the time it will pick up bad habbits and be come a me-to hound,there for soloing a hound is training,giveing it a chance to learn how to jump and run a rabbit. If it back tracks you'll shock it to let it know you don't approve of what its doing, collar breaking one so you can train with a collar is training,makeing one handle-training, Beagles are smart and very trainable they will know the difference in good and bad,if you train them right.

Incahoots · Post by **Incahoots** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 10:34 pm

gus · Post by **gus** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 10:35 pm

Dogs don't become "me to hounds" from running in a pack. They become me to hounds because you are running them with hounds with superior ability. Once the superior hound is removed the next hound with the most ability takes his place unless there are several hounds that have similar abilities then they take their place as ability permits. If a dog has the right amount of independance and is dedicated to the track instead of chasing the other dogs, there again it is genetics, he will not be jerked around by an over running wild hound. I agree that it is very difficult to come up with a hound with the drive to run with a more powerful hound and still stop or make the turn when the lead dog over runs but that is what we should be striving for, IMO.

Anone who believes training is superior to genetics take a typical beagle and train it to retreive. Then get a Labrodor Retreiver and train it to circle rabbits. Bet your training theory will be blown up.

Incahoots · Post by **Incahoots** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 10:46 pm

Anone who believes training is superior to genetics

Not saying it is but one without the other wont make a great dog. Since we can't visually see genetics traits a pup gets only training will reveal it. You will never convince me a dog packed all the time will be as good as one soloed and packed occasionlly though.

tommyg · Post by **tommyg** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 1:23 am

gus wrote:Dogs don't become "me to hounds" from running in a pack. They become me to hounds because you are running them with hounds with superior ability. Once the superior hound is removed the next hound with the most ability takes his place unless there are several hounds that have similar abilities then they take their place as ability permits. If a dog has the right amount of independance and is dedicated to the track instead of chasing the other dogs, there again it is genetics, he will not be jerked around by an over running wild hound. I agree that it is very difficult to come up with a hound with the drive to run with a more powerful hound and still stop or make the turn when the lead dog over runs but that is what we should be striving for, IMO.

Anone who believes training is superior to genetics take a typical beagle and train it to retreive. Then get a Labrodor Retreiver and train it to circle rabbits. Bet your training theory will be blown up.

That don't wash.

tommyg · Post by **tommyg** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 1:33 am

If a sire and dame could throw everything they have to offer in a pup,includeing the training they have had then genitics would be more imporant than training. My wife owned a half border collie and half lab that circled rabbits alot,as far as I know niether breed are rabbit dogs,she went with me and my hounds and my hounds "trained her to run rabbits" and she was good,she also treed squirls,so as far as genitics goes she has herding and bird in her,but when I shot her a few tree rats and rewarded her for treeing and chaseing rabbits all she wanted to do was hunt them,I'd say thats training.

randy37 · Post by **randy37** » Sun Feb 20, 2005 7:40 am

I have pit bulls this breed just the name puts fear into people,But mine are pussy cats. Training.

I have been in beagling for over thirteen years now, now that i am retired,the time i put into my hounds has doubled in the field and in the sport my success has been wins in akc and nkc with the same bloodlines, with less time in the field the succes wasnt there just excuses.

Breeders, any with succes yes they usually have a well breed hound and yes they breed to females with comparable bloodlines but the most important The man usually get the pups into guys who attend hunts or they look for guys who judge and get them to handle and raise the hound,you cant become a well known stud hound if you dont have the right guys doing the work.

Your hound isnt it man best friend, This hound will do whatever he or she thinks you like to please you.