George Streepy wrote: I guarantee you won't be happy with the results.
There are two different philosophies that are being represented here on this topic.The first is summed up in this quote by Mr. Streepy and it is results oriented and is based on immediate gratification.
I don't understand how this would be construed as immediate gratification. When folks say they are worried more about making dogs not trees, I wonder how you judge your success. This sport is all about making trees unless your teaching your dog to whistle Dixie or something. There is nothing instant about working and developing dogs to become a complete pack.
We have all done things to help a dog along in its development that took time away from the others and productive hunting. But isn't the overall goal to have dogs that end up under trees?
George Streepy wrote: I guarantee you won't be happy with the results.
There are two different philosophies that are being represented here on this topic.The first is summed up in this quote by Mr. Streepy and it is results oriented and is based on immediate gratification.
I don't understand how this would be construed as immediate gratification. When folks say they are worried more about making dogs not trees, I wonder how you judge your success. This sport is all about making trees unless your teaching your dog to whistle Dixie or something. There is nothing instant about working and developing dogs to become a complete pack.
We have all done things to help a dog along in its development that took time away from the others and productive hunting. But isn't the overall goal to have dogs that end up under trees?
You are right George.That is the goal.Let me see if I can explain it a little better.Let's say I have 6 dogs to go bear hunting with.2 are finished dogs,2 are 3 year olds that are coming along pretty good but not finished yet and 2 are year old pups.The most effective way for me to put game in the tree would be for me to rig and start with my solid dogs and feed the others in after the race gets going.That ensures that my strikes are straight and that the solid dogs get it lined out and going so I don't have any train wrecks.That method puts the most game in the tree.The problem is that the other 4 dogs aren't learning much.Sure they learn how to get under a tree but they didn't do the heavy lifting to get there.If I decide to use my younger dogs to rig and start with it will be far less effective at getting game in the tree but it will be better for the young dogs in the long run.Some guys go to the woods to put game in the tree and some go to the woods to train dogs.By deferring the immediate gratification of a high catch percentage,you make better dogs in the end.All the dogs in a pack will be more complete.It's a short term loss for a long term gain.
Dewey have no trouble beliving you catch cats running eight. I/ve hunted with large packs that caught cats . Not everyone ran, but had good percentage. Some of those were very barky, even would stand and bark at a bush some. Once they started moving the track, were all business & pushed the track. Think may have been some barking off track, but end results cats in trees. Those large packs were often all roaded togeather, seem to have little trouble getting the correct end of track & noticed when they did get backwards, good to turn the track on thier own, most of the time. It just boils down to what type dogs one likes & a lot of time in the woods with a good trainer. I really enjoyed hunting with those hounds, they made a cat race as exciting as some bear races. I believe dogs become better balanced hounds younger, when freecast with older dogs from start to tree. If one had time to hunt dogs alone would be great but few have the time. If my situation was different would love to hunt with your pack, sure would learn a lot. Also believe you are at the top, ( with a few others) in the cat hunting world. So enjoy your success. As warner 5 said once, one doesn/t stay on top for ever. Just my opinion. Thanks Al Baldwin
Last edited by al baldwin on Fri Apr 06, 2012 11:10 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Al, very well stated when said you believe young hounds become more balanced behind old dogs from truck to tree. This is so true and the ones that dont believe it havent trained to many hounds.(Sometimes when first starting out in the hound world some have to start from ground zero and that is ok) This is my thought on a dog yes I like to be able to do my part as much as possible to get a young dog doing what it is suppose to but since I cant run like a hound so they need to be lessoned and the only real fast way is monkey see monkey do they learn more fallowing a good solid cat dog than they can ever learn on their own in a shorter time. I am in this sport to watch young prospects make dogs and will help them in any way possible but my end result is to catch cats the more the cats the better the dogs get! Andy
Trueblue wrote: You are right George.That is the goal.Let me see if I can explain it a little better.Let's say I have 6 dogs to go bear hunting with.2 are finished dogs,2 are 3 year olds that are coming along pretty good but not finished yet and 2 are year old pups.The most effective way for me to put game in the tree would be for me to rig and start with my solid dogs and feed the others in after the race gets going.That ensures that my strikes are straight and that the solid dogs get it lined out and going so I don't have any train wrecks.That method puts the most game in the tree.The problem is that the other 4 dogs aren't learning much.Sure they learn how to get under a tree but they didn't do the heavy lifting to get there.If I decide to use my younger dogs to rig and start with it will be far less effective at getting game in the tree but it will be better for the young dogs in the long run.Some guys go to the woods to put game in the tree and some go to the woods to train dogs.By deferring the immediate gratification of a high catch percentage,you make better dogs in the end.All the dogs in a pack will be more complete.It's a short term loss for a long term gain.
Put your two best rig dogs on the box with one of your young prospects. Rotate the young dogs on the box with the better dogs. Let them down with the more experienced dogs. Far less likely for off game than letting the young dogs run a muck. Most dogs are competitive and the young ones will start to take responsibilities from the older dogs. Letting young dogs strike and start races will end up moving you backwards more than forwards. It will make you one heck of a pack of trash runners, which is not a long term gain. Young dogs are typically higher energy and carry a little more hustle than older experienced dogs. They will try to show up their elders and screw up, with the older dogs in the race a correction is made and the race continues. Catching game makes young dogs, therefore long term gain.
George,I think we have more agreement than disagreement as I wouldn't find fault with some of your last statement.As I stated in my earlier post,there are no wrong or right ways just different.Every man has got to choose what works best for him.
Last edited by Trueblue on Sat Apr 07, 2012 12:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I get what you were trying to say, I was trying to make it clear that just because someone talks about the results doesn't mean they are looking for instant gratification. Many of us started out working with dogs with the intent and desire to catch game. Some of us were lucky enough to end up with dogs that got it done. I didn't always look to the future and eventually ended up awful light when it came to experienced dogs. That is a mistake made by many, the important thing is to learn from it. I wasn't going to post but wanted to make it clear that your post below could be considered pretty offensive. I think you were making some incorrect assumptions.
Take care and happy hunting, George
Trueblue wrote:There are two different philosophies that are being represented here on this topic.The first is summed up in this quote by Mr. Streepy and it is results oriented and is based on immediate gratification.These people want as many cats in the tree as possible and will travel whatever route is the shortest to accomplish that task.To them,numbers is the name of the game.The flip side of the coin is represented by Cobalt's comments.His idea is to train a dog to be the best in can be as an individual.Sometimes your results or numbers will suffer but that is ok.He doesn't measure success by how many trees he counts at the end of the year.His focus is on making dogs not trees.His enjoyment and satisfaction comes from the process of making the best dog he can, not looking up at as many bobcats as he can.For some people it is all about the dog work and their focus is on each dogs individual abilities and for others the focus is on success and the fastest way to get there.Neither one of them is the right or wrong way,just different,but when it comes time for me to buy a pup,I know which type of program I want mine to come from.
I get what you were trying to say, I was trying to make it clear that just because someone talks about the results doesn't mean they are looking for instant gratification. Many of us started out working with dogs with the intent and desire to catch game. Some of us were lucky enough to end up with dogs that got it done. I didn't always look to the future and eventually ended up awful light when it came to experienced dogs. That is a mistake made by many, the important thing is to learn from it. I wasn't going to post but wanted to make it clear that your post below could be considered pretty offensive. I think you were making some incorrect assumptions.
Take care and happy hunting, George
Trueblue wrote:There are two different philosophies that are being represented here on this topic.The first is summed up in this quote by Mr. Streepy and it is results oriented and is based on immediate gratification.These people want as many cats in the tree as possible and will travel whatever route is the shortest to accomplish that task.To them,numbers is the name of the game.The flip side of the coin is represented by Cobalt's comments.His idea is to train a dog to be the best in can be as an individual.Sometimes your results or numbers will suffer but that is ok.He doesn't measure success by how many trees he counts at the end of the year.His focus is on making dogs not trees.His enjoyment and satisfaction comes from the process of making the best dog he can, not looking up at as many bobcats as he can.For some people it is all about the dog work and their focus is on each dogs individual abilities and for others the focus is on success and the fastest way to get there.Neither one of them is the right or wrong way,just different,but when it comes time for me to buy a pup,I know which type of program I want mine to come from.
My apologies.That was not my intent.We can all be guilty of making incorrect assumptions.
Monkey see, monkey do works for part of training, but if you want to have better than the lead monkey, you might want to think about individual monkey making. It's like going back to the "I can't catch a dry ground bobcat". Build yourself a dryground monkey and you might be shocked at what the other monkeys can do.
i hear ya cobalt. but after watching for awhile i think if ya don't tow the line you may get a one sided spanking. others have expressed this to me but had to have a look see for my self. but am sure you will connect the dots on your own. take care
Cry to the heavens and let slip the dogs of war. For they must feed on the bones of tyranny. In order for men to have freedom and liberty
Your post that was removed was because it was disrespectful. If you have something to add to a conversation it is more than welcome, even appreciated. If it is a negative disrespectful post there are other sections for it.
Slowandeasy,
There isn't a line to toe, it is as simple as being respectful to other participants of this section. If you have a different opinion on a topic by all means lets hear it, that is the whole point in a discussion. Lets just put some big boy pants on and do it with a little class.
As far as Cobalt goes, I wouldn't think he has any reason to be careful. He makes very good points, in a good way. I don't know about everyone else but I look forward to reading his perspectives on things.
There are plenty of folks who have little "arguments" on here, just look at most of page 3 of this topic. Trueblue and myself didn't agree on something and we went back and forth a little. I understand what he was trying to say, it seems he understands my views. It was even discussed respectfully and without name calling or any disrespect.
george, i have my big boy pantys on and will proudly tell everyone that it was here while computer hunting that i was potty trained. and got lined out. adios oh by the way as long as you were concerned about being classy, you handled this with real class. really your no different than lyin hunter you just are able to pull the plug on others posts.
Cry to the heavens and let slip the dogs of war. For they must feed on the bones of tyranny. In order for men to have freedom and liberty
If there is something going on that the members of this forum would like to discuss it could be brought up in the right place. Distracting from posts with childish comments isn't really productive. If I have said something that you feel was disrespectful please let me know. A new topic could be started, PM's, and even the cage is available if need be. Putting a perfectly good discussion in the gutter is what we are trying to prevent.
I will PM the section leaders and moderators to see if they want to see the last few posts moved or erased. To be fair I won't be part of the decision. I have a pretty thick skin and most of the distractions don't really bother me that much. I am just trying to do what was decided by the section leaders to keep positive discussions free from unnecessary distractions.
