Home Forums Birds & Dogs Hunting Dogs Pointing labs

Huntaria, that cuts both ways don't it?

Maybe, I'm missing your question. I've seen pointing labs and I've seen pointing dogs. Neither excels at what the other was originally bred to do. I've had setters sit by my side and deliver doves to hand as well as any lab. I've never had a setter swim for 10 minutes to find a downed duck. I've never had a lab point on its own after casting for a half mile. Its really a different game.

I guess I'm getting old and grouchy, cause I hate to see sweet natured animals of a particular talent put into a box that they will never truly excel. Labs are wonderful retrievers that are smart enough to do other things like point and hold. Setters are wonderful pointers that do other things like retrieve.

I'm really trying to be the advocate for the dog. He has a hard enough time trying to figure out what you want. Sort of like how some folks are good with math and others are better left with English. One thing is for certain, the dog is trying to please you more than you are trying to please the dog. When you finally do put both together, the feeling is out of this world. That's the other reason I posted the pic of the pointer. She and the last 2 setters I've owned have finally been there. I've been training for 30 years. I doubt its the dog...

I know what you mean, I always try and find the things that pleases them, and before you know it, they are trying to please me. It all works out. Not all dogs do things as well as other dogs, but working the dog on the things that excite it is the fun of it. Kinda like listening to a race, nothing like the sound and excitement of a race, and they either do it or they don't.

I said I was going to shut up but that's well said; worth reading, worth thinking about.

I don't doubt that there are "pointing" labs that can do a fair job of being a pointer. However, what about the majority of lab owners that don't want a lab that points? If I get a lab pup and it points it's going down the road, most serious lab owners feel the same way. The problem with allowing both to be registered as labs is that more and more pups will be born with a desire to point. That's fine if that's what you want, but not a good thing for those wanting to use a lab in its traditional role. One poster said that 3 of his labs have pointed and they weren't from pointing lines - unless things have changed, pointing (hesitant flushing) is a breed fault in labs. In other words, not a desirable trait. In order to protect the integrity of the breed from shortsighted breeding practices there should be a seperate registry for the "pointing" dogs. It would be a win-win situation as both labs and any offshoots would be better off without the insertion of undesirable blood.

This is precisely my worry about trying to have a dog be something that he's not, or at least not particularly good at doing. If he can do it well enough for the owner, well great. While I get fairly sick of competitive hunting, that is one thing that it does help. Breeds are more or less purified of undesirable traits; that is why pointers are generally as good as they are. I often wonder at what costs, though.

Most of the labs I've seen that point, know the difference on where they are hunting. Just like most setters know what their ranges are whether they are hunting in the grouse woods or on the prairie. Dogs, I think, are sometimes smarter than we give them credit for. But dogs, like people, have different levels of intelligence. I own one setter that I genuinely believe is mentally retarded (a non-PC term, I know). I couldn't sell her in good conscience, so I had to keep her. God love her, she is so sweet, but she can barely find her way back to the kennel even though she tries.

In getting a hunting dog there are seldom firm guarantees. When I am in the "hunt" for a new pup, I generally check out the lineage. Find out the characteristics of the parents and grandparents and their hunting style. The breed "Labs" are so popular now, I would think that would be minimal due diligence. I wanted a "pointing lab" or at least the possibility of one, so I checked out the ancestry of it's immediate parentage and their hunting characteristics.

About the only guarantee that you have is the blood line. But even then, you have to be careful. Some unscrupulous folks have been known to rig papers. That's one reason that DNA testing has come to the forefront.

In my own dogs, I will not breed either a sire or dam that I have not personally hunted, or have seen hunt. I have to be convinced that the traits I find important are there.

IMO a more valid concern about the breeding of labs would be field trials. Breeding labs to be as hyper as possible and run 300yd blind retrieves in 8 seconds is detrimental to the breed IMO. These "champions" are then bred and pups are desirable. A lot of field trial pups are so hyper only a good trainer can control him enough to compete. That overactive trait has been getting bred into labs for many generations in some parts of the country. A gross difference from their European competitions where dogs are field trialed in a more natural hunting environment based primarily on obedience.

I don't have any problem with pointing labs. My first lab pointed but wasn't bred for it. My new 6month old pup has amazing pointing blood lines. Her grandfather is Sir's Mighty Eli the most decorated pointing field trial champion of all time(4 time grandmaster champion). Her grandmother is also a multi grandmaster champion.

The day I brought her home at 7 weeks she pointed a bird feather under my bird feeder in the back yard and held it for about 30 seconds. We've had weekends this fall where she retrieved ducks on Saturday morning and pointed pheasanst on Sunday. I'm sure she'll never point or honor points like a pointer but she points enough to serve the purpose. IMO this is an advantage and a good example of how breeds are refined over generations. We haven't reached a point where all breeds are perfect and nothing should change from here. Some things can change for the better.

There is no shortage of purist snobbery when it comes to upland bird dogs. Thankfully we're not all like that.

Amen

I mean this sincerely, so please don't take this as any other comment than asking for clarification. On the one hand you have concerns (and legitimate ones at that) about undesirable traits bred into trial dogs, but on the other you tell me that you have a terrific dog out of a championship bloodline.

Things, I hope, do change for the better. But anytime you start tinkering with a breed to gain an edge (such as the trials you mention), an offshoot is sometimes unintended consequences, that, in turn need to be bred out or lived with. I suspect there is a similar tradeoff with pointing labs. The ones I've seen have been by and large nice dogs, but they, like any breed, are not without their warts, either.

As for hyperactivity, this trait seems to be worse in the dogs that really don't seem to know what to do with it and was cause by a cavalier approach to breeding. I have seen more havoc wrecked while pheasant hunting by hyperactive labs that seem to not know what to do but run back and forth. I've seen the same problems with certain Brittany and GSP crosses too while grouse or pheasant hunting. They would point fine; holding seemed to be another matter.

As for purist snobbery, it certainly exists, but its not all necessarily snobbery either. I'm often torn on how dogs are line-bred by trialers. On the one hand, you look for desire, nose, speed and then, if your running horseback dogs, a hint of biddability. This will make for some incredibly hard-headed dogs that are best left to not only experienced, but skilled trainers. On the other, you have folks that will breed and sell to anyone willing to buy what they sell regardless of end-product performance. Here, you never know what you get. In neither case do you receive the moderation in breeding that you sometimes need to produce nice dogs for the serious foot hunter. About the closest that comes to splitting the difference, IMO, are NSTRA or grouse trial pointers and setters.

Finally, overall physical traits really matter. Labs are built the way they are to handle big water. Pointers are built the way they are to find pockets of game over large distances. "Versatile" dogs are intended to split this very large design space.

HORSEMAN!.......I sir, shall try to enlighten you just a little more on the subject of "Field Trial" champions being bred to one another or breeding the best to the best, in order to get the very Best.

Now just so you will know because reading your post, you eveidently don't know the real facts concerning field trial champion bred dogs. We breed German Shorthair Pointers, for those who wish to compete in field trails, NSTRA or just foot hunt them on upland birds. All of my males except one is out of various national champions and that particular dog is a son of FC True Blu's Kicking Up Dust a national runner up Quail Hunting Champion. Our dams are also out of national champions! In the AKC they are titled dogs given the NFC title in front of their registered name, Such as NFC Magnums Touch Of Gold, NFC Heide HO'S MRT, NFC Heide Mighty City Slicker etc.

Now we just might get 2 or sometimes 3 pups out of a litter of 8 say, that will even have the inclination to RUN BIG!!! YOU can NOT teach a dog to run big, it will happen or it will not. This ability is passed on in the genes period.

Now in the GPS field trials, when speaking of the the ALL AGE DOGS, your talking about a dog running over 800 to 1500 yards. Now having a pup that really wants to run big is not easy come by out of a litter of even well breed field trial bloodlines. I have not met anybody yet, that can pick a champion out of a litter of 4 to 10 week old pups.

Further more, if you NEVER let a child taste an ice-cream cone, they will never miss such a treat. My dogs which have National Field Trial Champion Bloodlines, don't get to run BIG. They never get out of a 3 acre area to do their bird work and other training in until they are 14 months old. I am speaking of started dogs.

Our pups get to run with the parents and watch them everyday work in finding birds etc. They get to run 80 yards inside an L-shaped fenced compound and have to make a decision. They either turn or hit the fence and I have not had that happen yet in the last 10 years. I have seen many great champions that were NOT HYPER as you say in the home and hunting upland birds under foot.

Running big is a desirable trait, IMO. Its damn hard to push a rope. Control is acheived when your dog trusts you. I've never seen a field trial champion that wasn't border-line outlaw. You just have to know how to handle the issue.

For the average hunter, this can, and most often is, problematic. It is most often solved with biddable sires and dams. You have to be careful or you'll wind up with a dog too soft to hunt. This is one reason I've tended toward the grouse and NSTRA dogs for foot hunting. In these games, dogs need to know how to search cover quickly, but effectively rather than just run to hit scent. Usually, brains wins out over legs. If a dog can't see you, he's never more than a quarter mile away.

I have both setters and a single pointer now that will go until they find game, or, they figure they've lost you and circle back. If they're gone for more than 10 minutes at a time, I figure its time to locate a beeper on point mode.

Huntaria. I thought there may be some confusion when I wrote that. I was commenting on standard American field trials hence the reference to 300yd blind retrieves. Not "pointing" field trials. And I'm not saying I don't like field trial dogs, just that the breed has been changed significantly from standard American field trials and the average lab is not as doscile as 30 or 40 years ago(hence the trend right now for the import of mellow English labs). I'm no expert but I've owned labs all my life, grew up with a dog kennel, have read many books on dog handling and attended several field trials. Just my .02

Tonk,
Thanks for your attempt at enlightenment. Unfortunately for you I've already been enlightened by several well regarded books about labs and hunting dog training in general. My hunting buddy is also a breeder and approved FEMA search and rescue trainer. The idea that labs from field trial bloodlines can be too hot for the average hunter is not one I dreamed up. Standard American field trials have gotten so far away from hunting scenarios it is a game unto itself. I've hunted with some outstanding dogs that wouldn't be *&%^ in an American field trial. The idea that a dog stopping, looking back at it's handler for guidance on a 300yd retrieve is a deduction is B.S. IMO. In a hunting scenario I want my dog to do that. Retrieving on a small ice cold body of water do you want a dog that's smart enough to skirt the edge to go get your ducks or one that goes in a perfectly straight line through the ice cold water wearing itself out? Good luck with your future field trials and good day.

I appreciate the clarification. The reasons you listed is why I personally quit field trailing several years ago. Most of the trials, particularly horse back, left the realm of practicality years ago. NSTRA and grouse trials too have their issues. Its hard to believe what some folks will do to "win". I finally made the decision that winning to me was hunting my dog and killing game. Past that, its all gravy. Whatever breed folks choose, they should enjoy their bird dogs.

Well said. A back to the basics approach is a breath of fresh air sometimes. I'll take a day in the field over a day field trialing anyday.