Last trip of the season

I'm leaving tomorrow morning for a 3-day trip to look for chukar in the moutains east of Bishop, CA. The bird numbers are way down - I have not even shot at a chukar in California in the past two years, but for a few years before that I had pretty good hunting. But I really like to be in the field on New Year's Day, just to set the tone for the year. I would watch USC in the Rose Bowl if I were home but I'd rather be up in the high, lonely places.

Take care all, and may the new year be good to you.

Pete.

Garmin Astro -technology and tradition collide

As is inevitable with new technology (what Ester Dyson would call 'disruptive technology') the collar mounted Garmin Astro tracking unit is stirring a lot of discussion and head scratching in field trial circles.

Hunters love it. I love it. But field trialers are of mixed opinion. So here is the current situation as I understand it - along with my opinion and a few choice observations from others.

The major field trial organizations - AFTCA, American Field and AKC have all established maximum weight limits for electronic tracking aids. The reason for this is that they are concerned about collar mounted devices that would emulate the weight of an electronic training collar, which is banned for use in field trials. 

These organizations have recently weighed in with decisions about the use of the Garmin Astro in the events that they sanction.

AFTCA - I spoke with Linda Hunt, Secty of the AFTCA, yesterday. She said that they will not allow the use of the Garmin Astro in their sanctioned amateur trials due to the receiver and collar exceeding the established maximum allowable weight. When asked if she had heard any philosophical arguments against the use of GPS tracking collars, she said no, it is just the issue of weight.

American Field - The AF has decided to allow the use of the Garmin Astro in OPEN stakes. The AFTCA and AF are usually closely aligned on these issues, and it is expected that the AF and AFTCA will try to 'get on the same page' during the annual Summer meeting of the Trustees.

AKC - Has decided against allowing the Astro in their sanctioned trials, stating that the weight exceeds their allowable limit.A website has been established to petition for a reversal of the rulings of both the AKC and the AFTCA: Astro Petition website.

Meanwhile, the new field trial website/blog, Strideaway, has weighed in with an editorial - The Best of Intentions, the Worst of Results. In the editorial the authors (unsigned, but I assume the primary blog authors - Chris Mathan and Mazie Davis - wrote the piece) put forth the idea that the GPS based device, beyond opening the door to abuse, would somehow undermine the sovereign principle of subjective judging. 

My response to the Strideaway editorial is that, minimalism and 'purity' would best be attained with just grounds, wild birds, dog, shoe leather, and handler. I understand the thrust of the argument, which is motivated by traditionalism and concern over the possible use of technology. 

Planted birds,radio telemetry tracking collars, 4 wheelers, mounted scouts ... all these have made a departure from 'purity' and have added complexity to the game. Limiting the employment of technology at this point seems to be a little like acceptance of the idea that one can be a little bit pregnant.Is a GPS locating collar somehow less pure than a radio tracking collar? Does it really threaten to compromise judging or ethical handling? It's up to the club, participants, and the judges, isn't it? 

I posted this thought on the Coverdog Trial BBS, Chris Mathan wrote: 

I don't know how much judging you do Mike, but try if you can to put yourself in this position:

You have just judged an all-age championship with a large entry. You looked at many fine performances. You and your fellow judge made your decisions based on...what judges have based their decisions on since the beginning of field trial history. After the trial, an owner of a dog, make it three owners, march over to you, all three with their GPS receivers in hand. One guy's dog, according to the data, ran 700 yards (official all-age range!) to the front, (beautiful pattern on that LCD screen) and had two finds, the other two guys then show you their dogs' data and all three ask why their dogs didn't win. They are pretty mad and decide to post all this stuff on the internet on their favorite chat board. Do you think you will take the next judging assignment you're offered?

The editorial goes to some length to distinguish between the two technologies. The GPS collar can and will be matched to any number of hand-held devices which will be on even if the receiver the judge has is turned off. How could that be prevented? They are small and will get even smaller and more sophisticated in a short space of time. The exactness of the data and size of the handheld receiver will certainly make it easier if someone wants to cheat while scouting but the key issue is that it will gather data that should not be gathered in the first place. The editorial was written and posted on Strideaway because, regardless of what your feeling is about the GPS, the issue should be carefully considered. The GPS is a huge departure from what we currently use to safely retrieve a lost dog. 

Frankly, if I were judging and someone showed me a Garmin Astro track of their dog's performance I'd disqualify their dog and toss them out of the trial... it's illegal to use an electronic tracking device in a trial. It may only be employed after a dog is declared lost and is 'out of judgement' and the judge is the only person allowed to carry the tracking unit.

A few sample responses in the same thread:

"The answer to the 3 wise men would be simple. Maybe your dog ranged further, or maybe it was faster but I could hardly look at your dog as It was braced with the winner. The winners running style, style around game, and everything about it totally outclassed the dogs you wise men are complaining about. Oh bye the way I will be judging again at Blankity Blank. You can stay home if you wish, as I will use my discretion again. And if the same thing happens, results will be the same." - J.M. 

"...I agree that the use of GPS collars does raise some questions, and they do need to be addressed. I'm not even convinced that the GPS units should be allowed... But let's talk about the realistic issues that will arise, and not theoretical ones born out of misunderstanding of both the new and old technology. And while we are talking about real issues, I find it sad that the editorial fails to address the health and safety of the dogs we are running. The health of the individual dog is paramount to the theoretical health of the sport, is it not? " - D.Q.

People objecting to the use of GPS technology have not mentioned the main reason to employ such a device - the health and safety of our dogs. A number of dogs have been lost at trials - veering off course and crossing busy roads and being killed by automobiles, or by simple being lost and never retrieved. Anything that prevents this tragedy should be welcomed.

Field trials have a 130 year history in the United States. Tradition is a good thing, but must not blind us to aids that will help guarantee the safety of our dogs. There will be more said on this subject before the dust settles, but I believe that GPS technology will be allowed by all three major sanctioning bodies, and we will wonder what the argument was all about.

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

I have been reading and watching the development of a phenomena. The term 'Purebred' applied to dogs is being transformed from a positive into a pejorative.

Since the airing of the BBC's exposé of pedigree dogs, an attack on the breeding of show dogs in the UK, the term purebred has begun to represent all that is bad in dog breeding and keeping. The BBC report showed that these bench bred dogs were being bred with high incidences of genetic diseases. It was illustrated with grisly and disturbing videos showing some very nasty stuff.

My dictionary tells me that purebred (when applied to an animal) means, “bred from parents of the same breed or variety.” Pretty innocent usage. But there is a potential threat when concerned people – knowledgeable and otherwise – suggest that something needs to be fixed and politics and regulation raise their ugly head. Animal welfare and animal rights organizations have joined in with condemnation and contempt for people who bred pedigree (purebred) dogs.

I would like to use this forum to try to sort the rat shit from the pepper.

What is a pedigree?

Simple – a record of an animal's ancestry showing it to be purebred. Without debunking this idea here, I'll simply say that in and of itself, a pedigree is meaningless – simply a tool for a breeder's use in tracking a dog's ancestry.

To get closer to the root of the controversy it is necessary to examine the breed clubs, registries, breeding pools, and, especially, the breeders of dogs, their practices and motives.

Breeding and breed standards

The AKC is a for profit registry for dogs. They codify breed standards that are developed by the member breed clubs. They maintain the registries for recognized breeds, and sanction shows and to a lesser extent, field and performance trials.

The standard for English setters, for example, states:

An elegant, substantial and symmetrical gun dog suggesting the ideal blend of strength, stamina, grace, and style. Flat-coated with feathering of good length. Gaiting freely and smoothly with long forward reach, strong rear drive and firm topline. Males decidedly masculine without coarseness. Females decidedly feminine without over-refinement. Overall appearance, balance, gait, and purpose to be given more emphasis than any component part. Above all, extremes of anything distort type and must be faulted.

It goes on to describe the desired physical attributes of an 'ideal' English setter. The standard was most recently ratified in 1988, after the breed had been in existence for at least 300 years. This suggests that the Breed Standard is subject to whim and revision.

What is missing? Any mention of function or capability – nose, endurance, intelligence, pointing and hunting instinct – the very things that motivated the development of the breed and allow it to do its job are nowhere mentioned in the AKC breed standard. A pity that the English setter's very reason for being has been so lightly discarded.

In this breed the bench (show) lines diverged from the field (hunting) lines long ago, and the gulf between them grows ever wider.

It has been seriously suggested that breed registries should be eliminated – that breed standards should not exist. Two different things, in my view.

If the goal is to breed healthy dogs, a registry is a critical tool in understanding and breeding sound dogs. It is the breed standards that need to be changed. The reliance on a physical description needs to be tempered, at least, with a minimum performance standard. The likelyhood of this happening is very low, indeed.

The Field Dog Stud Book is a registry of pointing breeds (open to any pointing breed) that has no breed clubs and no breed standards. This has been working well for the FDSB breeders for over 100 years, because these breeders are interested in a single goal – performance in the field. And field trials are the place where this performance is proved. That is their standard.

Open and closed book

Most registries are 'closed' – that is, they do not accept dogs of other breeds or unregistered dogs as breeding candidates. This is not harmful if the gene pool within a breed is large and diverse and breeders are working to breed sound dogs. If the breeding population is small and/or carries a heavy burden of negative genetic traits, it is not healthy.

Some people are calling for open registries with the idea that this would be good for an at risk breed. Perhaps it would... the red setter breeders interested in reviving the field capability of their breed proposed breeding to the higher performing lines of English setters were met with a hailstorm of protest from the AKC breed club, and ended up going their own way and registering with the FDSB. But if I breed my English setter to an Airdale, what do I get? Not an English setter, but a largely unknown mix of genetics. I cannot see how this helps me get a better setter or a better Airdale. Of course, the bird dog world is rife with suspicion that so-and-so breed pointers into his German shorthair or setter line. And it happens.

Fix the problem, not the blame

My take on this is that dog breeding is subject to Mendelian genetics. Breed junk and that is what you will get. Breeding run of the breed dogs will only result in producing the mean of genetics common to all dogs in the breeding population, and the overall quality of dogs will tend to decline over time. But breeding within a line of dogs and outcrossing for strong contributions from outstanding individuals in the breed, and culling (removing from the pool of breeding candidates) for sound dogs with desired performance characteristics will result in dogs that have less genetic faults than the general breed population and that will perform better. Over time, this breeding ethic, an overhaul or elimination of breed standards, and a strict registry will raise the overall level of the breed.

Political fallout

I sincerely hope that there are no attempts to further 'regulate' dog breeding. This only plays into the agenda of organizations who would like to eliminate the private ownership of animals by making dogs more difficult to breed, obtain, and keep. And believe me, these organizations are working at all levels of government to make this threat a reality.

Holiday food for thought

It's a breezy 78 degree Christmas day here in Discovery Bay, Jamaica.

I have long believed that, like the man said, "Just because we can, does not mean that we should." In this vein, my holiday thought - enough is as good as a feast. 

Of course, one reason that we hunt is to get the bird in our hand, and to reward the efforts of our dogs. But if we measure the success of our efforts afield based solely on the number of birds in the bag, we miss out on the many intrinsic rewards that make a day afield rewarding - the sight of October aspens, the smell of sage on the wind, and the sound of chukars on the far rimrock. These things matter.

Tom Chandler lives and fishes on the Upper Sacramento River in Dunsmuir, California and offers an entertaining and off-center blog - Trout Underground  In this essay on 'body counts' in fishing he presents the idea that 'counting' degrades the sport. An idea that I heartily agree with. Also applies, in my opinion, to bird hunting.  Here's a sample from Tom's essay...

Sport is a reflection of society, and there's little doubt that society today is largely a numbers game. We measure ourselves not by the quality of our lives or the experiences we take from each day, but by the digits on our pay stubs, the model number of our automobiles, the square footage of our homes - even the modulus of our fly rods. Higher is almost always better, and even those who might not otherwise play get sucked in by its brutal simplicity.

Merry Christmas! I hope that everyone's Christmas exceeds their hopes and prayers.

Photo by Clair Kofoed

Traveling with bird dogs

Many hunters and trialers drive thousands of miles a year with their dogs. I am no exception. Some of you might find something in my experiences that you can put to good use. Some of you may have different ideas and practices – if so, please share them.

I travel in either my Ford Expedition or my Toyota Landcruiser. I sold my last pick-up truck some years ago. Traveling with dogs in an SUV has some good and bad points. Good points are that I can keep my dogs warm in cold weather and cool in hot weather. I can keep a close eye on them in the event of a problem. Bad points – dog farts, and space constraints. One requires power windows, the other careful organization.

Pete Houser built a drawer system for me to hold guns and small gear (thank you, Pete!) in the rear portion of the SUV. Guns, ammunition, stake outs, dog gear and tools are handy from the tailgate without digging through gear or moving anything.

Every dog deserves a place of his own where he is protected during emergency maneuvers and feels comfortable. Dogs should be crate broke when they are puppies and will learn to love riding in their crates. The crates go on the top of the gun box. This puts dog crates up high enough that they limit the rear view significantly. My answer is to employ wire crates that allow me to see through to the rear window. They also allow the dogs to see out and they fold up for easy storage when not in use. While traveling (and for most of the season) the crates are secured to the gun box by a pair of ratchet straps so they will not shift or tip over.

For water, I carry a 20 litre water jug made of heavy plastic – a bomb proof product from Scepter of Canada. It is similar in design to a fuel jerry can, but made of plastic rated for potable water – no weird chemicals in the water. The can sits neatly on the floor at the rear between the gun box and the side of the truck. After trying many different designs and mopping up leaking water from lesser products, I have settled on this can as the best. I also carry a stainless water dish for each dog. Offer your dogs water at each rest stop.

I have seen a number of watering systems made of PVC pipe. There are possible risks using this material... PVC should be used for cold water only, or venting. CPVC can be used for hot and cold potable water supply. Connections should be made with primers and solvent cements as required by the plumbing code. No sense in putting harmful chemicals into your dogs.

Dogs need regular breaks to stretch and do their business. I stop about every three to four hours. The interval should be regular so that the dogs can anticipate when a stop will occur. When traveling, I recommend that you avoid highway rest stops with 'doggie areas'. These spots are used by many travelers and are a vector for disease pathogens. A lonely stretch of highway with a wide spot to park is a better bet.

A check cord is essential when you stop for a travel break. A 15' or 20' check cord with a quality brass swivel snap should be handy whenever you open the tailgate. I never let a dog out of his crate without a check cord, leash or other restraint. They know this and are trained not to step out of the crate unless they have the check cord secured to their collar. There are too many things that tempt a dog that has been confined for several hours. Hazards include traffic, barbed wire fences, road killed wildlife, and rubbish (you name it... from broken bottles to used disposable diapers!) along the road side. Maintain positive control of your dog during travel stops.

In Jamaica

After the usual travail of international travel, I am in Jamaica or a few weeks. Had a nice dinner of rainbow parrot fish and snapper - cooked with country (scotch bonnet) pepper, onions, allspice and vinegar. This a  classic Jamaican dish, prepared by scaling the fish and frying whole in oil (usually coconut oil) until crisp. The fish and oil is then removed and the vinegar, sliced peppers, sliced onions and allspice grains are added to the pan to deglaze and meld the falvors. The pan sauce is then poured over the fish and it is chilled and served cold. Usually served with roast breadfruit or roasted white yam. Amazing!

John Yates on Ed Soph's Crockett setters

Crockett's Capriole - Owner, Joe Kormuth of Pennsylvannia

John has provided some interesting information (along with his point of view - TBE) about Ed Soph and his Crockett line of setters. I will quote his contribution - with minimal editing - below:

Ed Soph was one of the truly great setter breeders, and his Crockett dogs (along with the Commanders and Wonsovers) played a major role in restoring setters to competitiveness in all age stakes following the decades of domination by pointers since the 1930's.

Ed, while of modest means, devoted his entire life to improving setters. He is a great example of the importance of truly dedicated breeders.

He developed his own line of dogs by linebreeding on Eugene M, which possibly was the most prepotent setter sire in history.

Joe Kormuth became one of Ed's early disciples, and Joe's breeding program focused on Soph's ideas and linebreeding from Soph dogs for several decades. Probably Joe's best known dog was Hot Cell Man, which racked up roughly 50 horseback shooting dog wins around 1970; he was an all age dog, but Joe could get him around as a shooting dog.

Crockett dogs were noted from extreme toughness (both mentally and physically)and endurance. They were big dogs, as a rule, 60 pounds-plus. To be blunt, these dogs probably were far too tough for most people, and few people kept pure Crockett lines.

I started out with Crockett dogs, and loved them. But I wanted a more biddable dog, while retaining the toughness, and a somewhat smaller dog (50-to-60 pounds is what I shoot for). While Crockett dogs were my anchor, I also mixed in Sam L's Rebel lines (Crockett and Wonsover) through Sam L's Sequoia, Nabob and Rawhide, and Johnny Crockett (about a quarter Crockett, with more Wonsover). I also used Wonsup and Woncount.

Joe and I parted company about my liking for Johnny Crockett. Joe was utterly opposed to breeding to a small dog. Actually, I agreed with him, but saw true greatness in Johnny Crockett, and bred him only to big bitches.

Except for my use of Johnny Crockett, Joe and I maintained fairly similar bloodlines in the 20 years after Ed Soph's death.

Many of my dogs from this line wound up in the "too tough" category in the 1990's, and some were downright renegades. When I was younger, I liked this kind of dog. I've mellowed considerably with old age. I searched around and mixed in Tekoa Mountain Sunrise to give me gentler dogs that had a desire to please (but, of course, I couldn't resist mixing in more Johnny Crockett through Crockett's New Horizon).

I almost bred to one of Joe's males about five years ago, and, in retrospect, I think I made a mistake by passing up this opportunity. I had planned on breeding two Passenger's Blue Shadow b###hes to Joe's dog, Crockett's Capriole. Blue (which was about a quarter Soph-line Crockett)was as tough of a dog as anyone could ever want, and I was worried that breeding his daughters to Cappy would create beasts.

When I think of the setters I have had in for training over the past 10 years, especially from several grouse trial lines, I think we all could use a lot more toughness in our setters. We need a few beasts.