402 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



[Apml 28, 1894. 



RETRIEVING AT FIELD TRIALS. 



Editor Forest and Stn-eam: 



I have read with much interest the recent articles on re- 

 trieving, and although I am only an amateur breaker I will 

 give you my ideas gained in the field and at field trials. 



My dog breaking began very early with an orange and 

 white setter of the Col. Prince strain, so well known in west- 

 ern Ontario a number of years ago. My father had given 

 him to me with the injunction that I was to leave his dog at 

 home. I fancy I was only partly broken myself then and 

 did the dogs no good. I first started by breaking Snipe to 

 sleigh, and could run away with any of my boy friends ex- 

 cept one who had an Irish setter; as the Irishman could 

 thrash any of the others, his owner when he got behind 

 would generally end the race in a fight. Snipe I got to point 

 staunchly, but I could never get the idea out of his head 

 that he should not try and catch the birds once they got up. 

 I next owned a pointer or two and some native setters of 

 uncertain pedigree, and then I saw Dart and her son Paris 

 at the Detroit show in 1875, and engaged a puppy out of 

 Dart's next litter by Leicester. In due course my puppy got 

 home, but he died a few months afterward of distemper. I 

 bought another of the same litter, but it shared the same 

 fate as the first. I was rather discouraged at my bad luck 

 but determined to try it again, so 1 bought Star, one of the 

 same litter, and my perseverance was rewarded, as she threw 

 to Druid some dogs that have not been surpassed if equalled 

 since, viz.: Dido L, Dido II., Mingo, Kink, Ben, Romp, Mark 

 J., (ringer and others. As retrieving was all the go in 

 America then (no old-fogy English customs for us. etc.), 

 Star was taught to retrieve naturally, as were all my dogs 

 except one; she was forced and was a nice retriever when 

 made to fetch, but she would pass a bird pretending not to 

 know it was there, and could never be got to hunt for dead. 

 I always thought she had the spike collar in her mind, and 

 being a very sensible bitch I suppose she reasoned that if 

 she failed to find the bird there was no danger of the spike. 



Some of the puppies I have had I broke to retrieve and 

 some I did not, and I found that those that did not retrieve 

 were good staunch dogs, one and sometimes two seasons 

 before the retrievers were thoroughly staunch. The retriev- 

 ers, as a rule, always seemed to me to want to get closer to 

 their birds. Of course there were exceptions, some dogs 

 retrieving did not seem to hurt, but others seemed to care 

 for nothing else. 



The last puppies I broke were four that I ran in last year's 

 International Derby, and although they were by no means 

 perfect when they ran, by the end of the season they were 

 as staunch and as good bird finders as any of my old dogs. 

 I did not let them touch a dead bird. They would not even 

 move at a winged bird running from under their nose, but 

 would follow it up and point again when it stopped. They 

 would all seek dead well, and I did not lose more than eight 

 or ten birds during the season, and those usually got into 

 log heaps where a retriever would have done no better. 

 Taken all in all, I never had such satisfaction with young 

 dogs before. 



We are very apt to imagine English sportsmen old fogies, 

 behind the age, etc. , but I think if the truth was known tbey 

 have found out by experience what we are finding out now, 

 or at least what a great many of us who have given much 

 time and thought to dog training think we have found out, 

 viz., that retrieving hurts a dog's other and more essential 

 qualities. I was reading an article lately in Land, and 

 Water in which the writer gave a description of the work- 

 ing of the setting spaniel taken from a book nearly two hun- 

 dred years old. If the description was clothed in modern 

 English it would fit the work of our high-class dogs of to- 

 day. As this was before the day of siiotguns, when the 

 dogs were used for netting only, it is not hard to imagine 

 that retrieving may have been tried and found wanting at 

 some time between now and two hundred years ago. And 

 moreover, whoever saw a good retrieving pointer or setter? 

 I am sure I never did, and I have had and seen a lot. 

 Such dogs as we had here some years ago, Irish water 

 spaniels (but not rat tail), now, alas, extinct, would do tricks 

 at marking and retrieving that I am sure a setter would 

 never dream of doing. Going 20 or 30yds. and picking a bird 

 that you could just as easily have picked up yourself may 

 please some, but it is not retrieving. Thos. Johnson, of 

 Winnipeg, had an English retriever, Old Don, that would 

 mark a duck if hit, and no matter how far it went before 

 falling, he would have it back in no time, and he knew just 

 as well as the shooter when the bird was hit. The way he 

 would track a winged prairie chicken across a big stubble 

 field was something to talk about. I doubt whether a setter 

 or pointer could be found with nose enough to do it, and I 

 certainly would not want one of my dogs to keep his nose to 

 the ground so long. 



The last two days of the quail shooting I took a water 

 spaniel that has been kicking around our club house at Big 

 Point with no one to put him through his paces except my- 

 self ; he has not had sufficient work to be good, but he did no 

 barm, and by the end of the two days was doing the fetch- 

 ing, while the setters were dropped, and I rarely had to 

 move out of my tracks to direct mm. The most ardent ad- 

 vocates of retrieving seem to be the amateur sportsmen, and 

 to my mind they are the least fitted to work a retriever, I 

 don't think it will be denied that setters and pointers that 

 retrieve must be more thoroughly under control than those 

 that do not. The great majority of amateurs that I have 

 seen in the field are apt to get a bit rank themselves. Let 

 the bird fall, the chances are that they will break shot and 

 let the dog do the same. A dog that is fond of retrieving — 

 and he must be to be any good at it— will very soon be fit for 

 the breaker's hands again if he is allowed such liberty. 



My advice to amateur sportsmen is not to have their dogs 

 retrieve. If he is good at seeking dead— and he should be- 

 no birds will be lost. I am glad to see such practical men as 

 Waters and Avent in opposition to retrieving, as from my 

 limited experience I quite agree with them. A number of 

 years ago I bad a very pleasant ten-days' quail shooting in 

 Louisiana with the former. He had then a dozen or so dogs 

 in training a,nd they were all forced retrievers. I feel sure 

 if he was not convinced retrieving was injurious he would 

 not be opposed to it now. Those who want their setters and 

 pointers to retrieve can have them, but no more of it for 



W. B. Wells. 



Chatham, Canada, April 13. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



I am in receipt of your note asking for my views re pros- 

 pective changes in field trial rules. It would be folly and a 

 waste of thought to do this in view of the fact that the same 

 judges are appointed every year who have the same idea of 

 field work, and all the rules in the world could not naturally 

 change them. The rules are all right, but it is the applica- 

 tion of them that causes the difficulty. If the clubs would 

 appoint judges who they know are in sympathy with their 

 views and rules, the judging would work out correctly. The 

 only changes, however, that to my mind need be made are 

 two First, insist on dogs working to the gun. The fanatical 

 nonsense of a dog having more "bird sense" than a human 

 being who has studied the habits of quail for a life time is 

 simply ridiculous; and even admitting they had, I want 

 the dog for my slave, not having any desire to be a slave of 

 the dog. When I want to shoot in a given direction, that is 

 the direction my dog must work, even if birds are more 

 plentiful in some other locality where his dogship wants to 

 go. The second is: Stop handlers from constantly tooting 

 their whistle. I would not own a courageless brute who re- 

 quired whistling at, to make him "stay out at his work." 

 This handler's chestnut, however, is exploded, and the true 



inwardness of the habit exposed when it. is remembered 

 that a certain handler had whistles of all known tones, and 

 used the one that had a sound similar to his opponent, so 

 he could attract an obedient dog from his work, his own 

 dogs being taught to take no notice of a whistle. 



Thos. Johnson. 



AVinnipeo, Manitoba. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



There has been considerable discussion of late upon the 

 requirement of retrieving at field trials, and it is regarded 

 as preferable that a uniform understanding be had upou 

 the subject. Dogs will soon be placed in preparation for 

 the trials and the owners should understand precisely what 

 is expected of tbem. 



The Eastern Field Trial Club, the writer is informed, in 

 their races for 1892. state that retrieving shall not be consid- 

 ered in any stake. Would it not be well for the different 

 field trial organizations to be put in communication upon 

 this subject that a uniform rule may be adopted ? 



The field trial committee of the Philadelphia Kennel Club 

 will be obliged to the secretaries of the field trial clubs for 

 copies of their rules for 1 892 mailed to 



F. G. TAYLOR, Secretary. 



Philauklfbja, Pa. 



POINTS AND FLUSHES. 



C CHICAGO, April 23.— In the report of the meeting of the 

 J New England Field Trial Club, published in Forest 

 AND STREAM of April 7, it is mentioned that the question of 

 wide ranging formed a chief topic of discussion, and that 

 the sentiment of most of the members was that the wide 

 ranging dog of the South was not what was required in the 

 New England country, but that the dog should be trained to 

 work more to the gun. I presume that this was expressing 

 in a general way that the hunting grounds of New England 

 are not of such a character as to make wide ranging success- 

 ful or desirable. I cannot imagine how the question ad- 

 mitted of such discussion. Wide ran gi ug is only useful 5 n a 

 country which is open, or, at least, sufficiently open for the 

 shooter to keep the dog in view enough to know bis course, 

 as in the great quail grounds of the South. Even in such 

 grounds the dog must range intelligently and limit his 

 fling according to the character of the grounds. In chicken 

 shooting on the level prairie where there is no cover, still 

 wider ranging is admissable and useful, since the more 

 ground a dog covers, providing he worked intelligently, the 

 more birds he will find, and there is nothing to obstruct the 

 view on the prairie, the shooter can see his dog at all times 

 and observe every act. But what an absurdity would this 

 wide ranging, useful in chicken shooting, be if applied in 

 heavy timber, thickets and rough ground when hunting for 

 ruffed grouse. The dog would be constantly lost, "and, 

 while he might find more birds, the finds would be of no 

 profit to the shooter. 



In hunting quail in the South, the shooter can ride on 

 horseback and thereby gain several advantages. From the 

 greater height he can see his dog further and better, can 

 mark the flight of birds better, and is saved much exertion 

 and consequent fatigue. If the shooter attempted to bunt 

 ruffed grouse from horseback, it would seem ridiculous; yet 

 it would be no more so than to attempt to work a dog"on 

 ruffed grouse or quail in a rough timber country affcer°the 

 same manner practiced in an open country, Ranging is not 

 a fixed arbitrary quantity in field work. It should be con- 

 ducted to suit the circumstances of birds and locality. A 

 dog can range just as wide in New England as elsewhere in 

 such sections as are open enough to permit it. 



An idea seems to prevail that a close-ranging dog is neces- 

 sarily working better to the gun than a wide-ranging one. 

 The inference is not necessarily correct. A wide ranger may 

 work to the gun to perfection, exercising every effort to the 

 advantage of the shooter. The close ranger may be working 

 for his own gratification and heedless of the interests of the 

 gun. I think the New England Field Trials Club will make 

 a mistake if it insists on close ranging under all circum- 

 stances. No matter what section a field trial is held in, the 

 ranging should be applied according to the character of the 

 ground, and if so defined, it covers all requirements. 



I read the reply of "S„" in Forest and Stream of last 

 week, and I perceive with regret that we are quite as far 

 apart in our ideas on retrieving at field trials as at first. I 

 have a profound respect for "S.'s" judgment and opinions, 

 but in this instance I think he is in error. I will say that 

 my ideas on the subject were, some years ago, identical with 

 his; but they were changed by observation at field trials. 

 On some points I perceive he misunderstands my meaning 

 entirely. When I said: "Moreover, if the value of retriev- 

 ing, which is largely educational, is admitted in the scale of 

 points, other educational qualities, such as turning to 

 whistle, remaining at heel, dropping to order, steadiness to 

 shot, etc., should also have a value, since they are all essen- 

 tial in an ordinary day's shooting." Now, I did not mean, 

 nor do I think the statement will bear the construction, that 

 those acquirements should be abolished. They are educa- 

 tional qualities and only bring the dog's natural qualities 

 into an orderly system, and they can then be exhibited in 

 the conventional manner. The benefit of all the education 

 gets its full value in competition in the superior or inferior 

 manner in which the dog performs his work, in addition to 

 his natural capabilities. 



No one is more willing to concede the value of a retriever 

 afield than I. There is neither pleasure nor profit in shoot- 

 ing without one. While agreeing fully with "S." on this 

 point, I object to it in a field trial because it is not a com- 

 petitive quality with finding dogs, because a thorough test 

 at field trials as now conducted is impossible, and, lastly, 

 because it injures the best performance of a finding dog, a 

 point which I mentioned in Forest and Stkeam of April' 7. 

 I will call this matter to "S.'s" earnest consideration, for I 

 think that he will concede that it has some importance. 

 Briefly considered, the points against it are as follows: The 

 best manner for a finding dog in searching for birds is to 

 carry a high nose and draw and locate by the body scent. 

 AH. dogs can not carry a high nose, but the nearer they can 

 do so, with good performance, the better, as this manner 

 permits of quicker, sharper and more accurate work if the 

 dog can perform well. In most instances it requires care to 

 keep a dog up to this manner, most dogs being prone to get 

 their noses to the ground if at all puzzled on the scent. 

 This low-nose manner may become habitual if not checked. 

 In searching for wounded or dead birds, using a low nose is 

 the best manner; the poorest manner in searching for live 

 birds is the best when searching for wounded or dead. If a 

 high-class dog is used as a retriever and has many birds 

 killed to him, he is almost certain to learn how to follow 

 wounded birds by footscent and rake his ground in search- 

 ing for dead birds. Let a dog once acquire the habit of 

 hunting by footscent and it is almost impossible to correct 

 it. If "S." will consider that a field trial is not an exhibi- 

 tion of an ordinary day's shooting, that it is not intended to 

 illustrate an ordinary day's shooting, that an argument 

 based on an ordinary day's shooting may have little or no 

 application to a field trial, and that the purposes of a field 

 trial are wholly distinct from those of an ordinary day's 

 shooting, some of the ideas advanced by some of the field 

 trial cranks will not seem so unreasonable. 



I will ask "S." to look in the Forest and Stream of 

 Feb. 11, and he will find that the long quotation which he 

 ascribes to me was an extract from a letter written by the 

 well-known field trial handler Mr. A. J. Gleason, of Alma, 

 Kan., and so stated; but this fact was undoubtedly over- 

 looked by "S." I do not mean to imply that the letter con- 



tains no good point, on the contrary, it does— but I wish Mr. 

 Gleason to have credit in full for all the merit therein. And, 

 incidentally, my remarks will be relieved of the apparent 

 inconsistency. I note what "S." says about field trials being 

 lor to teach the lover of the dog which is the best breed or 

 strain to do the work required. On this we are agreed. 

 modestly underestimates his own ability iu writing on the 

 subject. I think be presents his case skilfully and well. It 

 is only by exhaustive discussion that the best lines of pro- 

 cedure can be established and progress made. I believe that 

 every one should have a free and full hearing. In no other 

 way can the demands of sportsmen be known. 



I preceive that Mr. N. Wallace, the eminent field trial 

 judge, in the last issue of Forest and Stream, is opposed 

 to retrieving at field trials, and advances very powerful 

 arguments to sustain his views. It should be noted that he 

 admits the value and necessity of retrieving in actual shoot- 

 ing, but he does not consider it part of a field trial competi- 

 tion. It would be gratifying to know the views of other 

 field trial judges on this and related subjects. I believe that 

 Messrs. F. B Hitchcock, H. B. Duryea, A. Merriman, Wash- 

 ington A. Coster, Major J. M. Taylor and other gentlemen 

 of large practical field trial experience, do not consider re- 

 trieving a competitive quality. 



«■ * * 



While in Denver last week Mr. W. L. Washington, who 

 had charge of Mr. Haeke's Psovois, informed me that Mr. 

 Hack e contemplated establishing a kennel of his dogs in 

 Colorado, thus affording them every facility for proppr 

 training on that most formidable gladiator, the gray wolf. 

 This wolf is said to attain a weight of from 90 to 1201 bs.. and 

 as this weight represents bone and sinew entirely, a fat wolf 

 being a rarity, some idea of the terrific punishing power of 

 this ugly brute can be formed. Dogs bred and raised in 

 Colorado would have the further advantage of being accli 

 mated and physically fit for the work required of them. I 

 was gratified to find in Deuver so many readers of Forest 

 and Stream, and so many who had words of praise for its 

 enterprise, high literary standard and impartiality and 

 justice i a all matters. Enterprise and merit are appreciated 

 by the American sportsmen. 



* * 



In a letter received here from Mr. J. G. Schaaf, it is men- 

 tioned that the Missouri Kennel Club has been organized, 

 with a list of officers as follows: President, Mr. R. Schmidt; 

 Secretary, J. G. Shaaf; Treasurer, W. E. Fields. Applica- 

 tion will he made for membership in the A. K. C. The club 

 expects to hold a great show next year. 



Melac, the famous great Dane, has been found, and the 

 misfortune which threatened to leave Imperator without a 

 rival has been averted. His recovery is thus described in a 

 Chicago paper: "Melac, the noted great Dane dog which 

 disappeared from H. L. Goodman's kennels at Auburn Park 

 last Friday, has been found. Sunday afternoon Pinkerton 

 detectives learned that John Logan, a teamster, had offered 

 to produce the dog for §1,000. He was arrested, and in a 

 saloon at 2942 Wentworth avenue, which Logan frequented, 

 it was found that the dog was in possession of John O'Con- 

 nor, a laborer living on Thirty-seventh court, between Hal- 

 sted and Laurel streets. Melac was surrendered by O'Connor 

 on payment of $o for the dog's care. O'Connor said that his 

 little boy had found the animal in the street and brought 

 him home. He said he wotild have turned the dog loose but 

 for the fact that Logan and his companions were anxious to 

 get him. It is now believed that the dog was lonely and 

 jumped the kennel fence and wandered away. 



# 



* *■ 



Referring to the remarks of Mr. Win, M. Williams, iu the 

 last issue of Forest and Stream, on the effects of retriev 

 ing on a dog's scenting powers, he strengthens his argument 

 by illustration, instancing the effects of an interview of a 

 skunk by a dog, and adds: "You wouldn't expect a dog 

 to smell a bird that day — no ; he couldn't smell another 

 skunk." I will describe a little incident which occurred at 

 Fairmont, Minn., in 18S2, while running the chicken trials. 

 Pink B. came in close quarters with a skunk, with the com- 

 mon unpleasant effects of being loaded with a fragrancy 

 which was boundless. Of course, his chances were conoid 

 ered as being destroyed by the unfortunate happening, but 

 Forest and Stkeam, of Sept. 31, 1882, in reporting the heat, 

 said: "Pink B. came out ot the scrimmage with a most de- 

 cided change of odor, at least it seemed so to us. but Pink 

 soon convinced us that his smell was all right by hand- 

 somely pointing at a long distance a single bird that had 

 remained on the stubble. Scott refused to back and forged 

 ahead and flushed the bird." B. Waters. 



LOS ANGELES DOG SHOW. 



THIS show opened under very favorable auspices April 

 20. The accommodations are much better than last 

 year, the dogs being well benched in Hazard's Pavilion, in- 

 stead of being under canvas as in 1891, Mr. Mortimer com- 

 menced his work at 2:30 P. M-, and judged till 5 P.M., 

 leaving the remainder till the next day. There was double 

 the attendance of last year's first day, and everything points 

 to a success. The awards made the first day were: 



MASTI FFS. — Dogs: 1st, S. Tyler's Draco; 3d, Mrs. D. Lummis's 

 Amado; 3d, M. E. Bragdou's Bishop. Very high com., E. Templar 

 Allen's Maro. High com., C. D. Willard'B Wodan. Com., A. B. 

 Anderson's Richland Commodore. Bitches. 1st, M. E. Bragdon's 

 Phyllis; id, Mrs J. M. Mitchell's Looiita Hilda. 



ST. BERNARDS.— Dogs: 1st, J. B. Martin's Republican; 2d, John 

 HeftVrman's Grand Chancellor. Bitches: 1st and 2d, withheld; 3d, 

 Mrs. N. I, Goucher's Gypsey. 



NEWFOUNDLANDS —Lions: lsst, J. B. Banning's Scott. Pup- 

 pies; ist. Mote Bunker's Rove' - . 

 GREAT DANES.— 1st, A. C. Freeman's lnglewood Rhona. 

 DEERHOUND9—.DO0S: 1st, Mrs. H. W. Vail'a Trojan; 2d, Chris 

 Krempel's Cervas; 3d, A. C. Freeman's McLonghlin. Bitches: 1st, 

 Chris KempePs Flora; 3d, Osgood and Edmond's Lady ot the 

 Lake. 



GREYHOUNDS.—Dops; 1st, G. W. Gordon's Leo; 2d, S. Tyler's 

 Lap: 3d, Ned Carr's Handy. Very bigb com., J. Schieck's Nemo. 

 High c mi., George Robson's Romeo. Com. J. R. M*clintock*s 

 Topsy Fleet and Kenneth and E. P'-eu8s's Jack. Bitches; 1st, S. 

 Tvler's Pronto: 3d, J. B. Proctor's Silk; 3d, G. W. Jordan's Deno. 

 Very high com,, S. Tyler's Fly. High com , G. W. Gordon's Prim- 

 rose. Hi en com.. F. Watson's Annie. Com., K E. Preus-i's . 



FOXliOUNDS.-Dorjs; 1st, Cipt. A. B. Anderson's Yoicks; 2d, 

 Thad Lowe's Dixie; 3d, D. H. Burk's Warrior. Bitches; 1st and 

 3d. Thad Lowe's Music and Patty. 



POINTERS.— Challenge— Dogs: 1st, E. K, Beoehley's Kan 

 Koo. - Open— Dogs (over 551bg.)s 1st, II. M. Tonner's Ah Sing; 2d, 



A. P. KerchofT* Jap; 3d, M. M. Conn's Hindoo. Bit.ciies (over 

 601b*.l; 1st. H. M. T.mner's AmarTllt's. Dogs (undei • 551hs ): ls*\ 

 F. W. Iugall'sKo Kr;2d,J. H. Keiffer's Instone Bang; 31, F, J. 

 Garrison's Ray F. Very hisb com., F. J Garrison's Don F. 

 Bitches (under SOlhg,): 1st, H. Y. Evans, Jr.'s Tippeta; 2d, E. K. 

 Benchley's Kioto; 3d, B. D. Standeford's Bessie Jane. High com., 

 F. J. Garrison's Fraulein. Com.. W. F. McCann's Herma. H. C, 

 Katz's Nellie. Puppies— Dogs: 1st, J. W Eogland's Spot; 3d, E. 



B. Tuft's Lemon. Very tttgh com., J. H. Keitfer's Quail and 

 Baldy. High com.. A. E. Messerley's Point M.. B. D. S'andeford's 

 Commodore. Bitches: 1st, withheld; 2d, H. E. Green's Dessy. 



The rest of the awards and a full report will appear next 

 week. 



In "Rambler's" notes in British Fancicr.Streatham Mon- 

 arch is credited with the paternity of a young bull-terrier 

 ''that looks like making something far above common if be 

 only goes on right." He was seen in Mr. Iddon's kennels. 

 Pursa, sister of Charming Tom, is the dam. 



