Page 1 of 1

Early starters vs late starters

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 3:52 am
by twist
Whats your pick and why?

Re: Early starters vs late starters

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 2:41 pm
by CRA
If I had my choice I prefer a pup to show a lot of promise and brains at a very young age. That being said, I don’t necessary want them to start very young. I just need to see enough out of them to know I may have something.

I have seen very early starting pups seem to never progress but look like hell on wheels when in the puppy stage. I have also seen young pups that I believed was started too early fall off into deep canyons following older dogs and get hung up and start howling lost until they are rescued. Sure this shows promise but also shows that they aren’t physically able to get around well enough to run with the big boys yet. I would be more impressed if they left the road and never barked once but made the tree by trailing the covered track to the tree.

I would rather have a pup start when they were actually using their natural bred instincts than just chase the older dogs barking and treeing just to tree and bark like the other dogs. I want mine to start treeing when they actually know the game is up and running a track when they are physically able to apply enough pressure on the game to tree it.

While they are growing to hunting age there is a lot of things they can be learning, (their name, leashing, hauling, getting familiar with livestock, crossing fences, crossing creeks, social skills) etc.

My rule of thumb is they better be showing me promise if given the proper exposure to the woods and game by 12 months or I start searching for a replacement. That sure don’t mean they need to be treeing their own by then, just showing a lot of hope.

During their puppy time I believe in spending a lot of time with my pups and keeping them under constant surveillance by me watching them very closely to see if I notice any good or bad traits they may be doing.

I believe most hound hunters that has raised and trained a lot of pups can tell if they have something or not by around year old.

Re: Early starters vs late starters

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:19 pm
by twist
CRA, that is spot on. Very well said. Andy

Re: Early starters vs late starters

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:24 pm
by Tim Pittman
I don't know how to put it any better than cra!

Re: Early starters vs late starters

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 5:43 pm
by coastrangecathunting
If I raise a pup and it hasn't treed 25 cats solo by 10 months old I give them away. :lol: well said Charlie.

jc

Re: Early starters vs late starters

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 6:04 pm
by al baldwin
I like to see a pup show good at a young, however, in my experience more important how they finish than how they started. I used to keep an open eye for a young hound that was around a year old, knew it was bred right, yet had not showed much & owner wanted to give away. Some worked out good & a few failed. I gave a female away that was about 14


months old, bred very well, but, had not showed a thing. From what I hear she is a dandy. Al I was just kidding if they have not treed at least 30 cat solo at a year old, cannot eat my feed.

Re: Early starters vs late starters

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 7:30 pm
by mark
The weather must be pretty bad out there on the west coast :shock: