Printable View
Hi All,
The Pointer & Setter Wild Game Trials are starting very soon after the shooting season ends. First ones are on the 6th/7th September, and two more 20th/21st September.
Entries Close 15th August, Entry forms can be found on the P&S Website in the "Downloads" section on the right hand side...
Pointer and Setter Club New Zealand - News
Join & Share the club Facebook Page for updates and photos (share your photos too...)
https://www.facebook.com/PointerSetterClubNZ
Cheers
Pete
Best of luck!
Wish this puppy would grow faster:D...cannot wait to get him to a trial next year!
SETTERS - Compulsory Metamorphosis?.....
By: Robert F. Truman (2001)
Recurring reports from all over Europe, confirmed by sight of the Swedish Kennel Club Rules for Pointers and Setters reveal a quite disturbing restriction in the permitted behaviour of Setters specifically in their Field Trials, creating some anxiety among working Gordon Setter aficionados in Britain, the hereditary home of the breed. Concern arises from the penalizing of dogs in competition for failing to conform to a specific and ongoing resolve. The essence of this prelude concerns the stance of the Gordon Setter (and the other breeds of Setter) when indicating the presence of game, the 'set'. The mildly apparent reason for this questionable modification serves to transform the conventional, time honoured 'set' into a 'point' which results in what to my mind is the somewhat unattractive stance now prevalent in the USA. It may now be pertinent to enquire if the Gordon Setter breed has such a large gene pool that the 95% and more of blood lines carrying this 'couchant' setting gene can be summarily discarded, since such selective breeding would be the only way to effectively eliminate this age old breed characteristic. We may all perhaps be inadvertently guilty of causing confusion with our tendency to speak of a 'point' instead of a 'set' when discussing Setters, this has always been the case; but the introduced deviation insists that all Setters must now become Pointers and 'point', or suffer downgrading in competition; this modification is strictly by design, appearing to be purely aesthetic ...offered as a suggestion that it looks better.... more class; in whose eyes? I beg to disagree.
In the United States, they like their dogs to point, the set usurped by a contrived point, the tail in an exaggerated arc over the back. When this stance is displayed, the dog is said to be exhibiting 'class', whilst a dog adopting the hereditary and characteristic lower posture is eliminated or at best severely penalized in competition!
It is acknowledged that many Gordon Setters stand to their birds in vaguely similar fashion to the Pointer, but it is also true that there are just as many, if not more, that equally do not; both attitudes have their followers, probably more by accident than design and both are equally efficient; is the performance of the latter inferior? I would passionately suggest not. Such enforced condemnation by Judges challenges a fundamental breed characteristic that has existed for nearly 500 years.
Some might presumptuously argue that along with the net, the 'set' was also obsolete long ago, but bear in mind that it may take a further five centuries to unnecessarily expunge this hereditary factor from the Gordon Setter's genes to complete such change. Not, it appears, for any real logistical advantage but purely on whim or fancy, which I suggest is ludicrous in the extreme. What is the 'reason d 'etre? It undoubtedly stems from some inconvenience when a setting dog drops down into a crouch when setting so making it difficult for an ostensibly backing dog to factually do so. I have said many times that it is simply the job and duty of both dogs to know the location of their bracemate within narrow limits at all times.
This Breed differential specific is proudly and continuously maintained in Britain and in their Guide to Field Trial Judges, the English Kennel Club still firmly instruct that, 'Judges should appreciate that different breeds have different styles of working and should make themselves conversant with these styles to assist in their judgment'.
M.Christine Versavau, a Gordon Setter lover of great integrity who owns several dogs of this illustrious breed in France, where she is actively involved in Trials, wrote recently in an American Gordon Setter Club Newsletter that in France, "the Gordon now has to point standing up, tail horizontally straight." Her report on the 1995 Spring Coupe de Europe in France contained the statement, 'it is the first year the style took so much importance: the Gordons sitting or lying down on the point, for any reason, is no more expected: they will be picked up'. M.Versavau goes on...'a bitch (Gordon) who has won everywhere, did an excellent find and point, raced forward into the wind but gained only the 2nd Very Good because she 'layed down at her handler's arrival'. I am appalled!
Why then are 'pointing' and 'setting' two differing types of index? the reason is not difficult to discover. Setters were kept in Britain long before the appearance of the Pointer for working gamebirds, primarily partridge, where they were indispensable helpmates in the taking of game by net long before the advent of the firearm.
The illustration below, dated 1686 shows how this was achieved. It is at once readily apparent why the dog is required to sink down in order that the net may be the more easily passed over. Surely such an idiosyncratic and nostalgic action has historical value and significance? The Pointer has always stood when pointing and thus enabling the dog to be easily seen, displaying high intensity of purpose. The index of the Setter, developing equal fervour and passion "en couchant", is a typical component of the kaleidoscope of individual breed behaviour, unequivocally not open to modification or eradication. According to Athenae Oxonieses, by Anthony a Wood, (1721), Robert Dudley, Duke of Northumberland, circa 1504, was the first to teach a dog to sit (set) in order to catch partridges. The dog approached game, adopting a low stance, drawing close enough to birds to hold them, thence to sit (set), making for minimum profile and disturbance while a net was manually passed or thrown forward over the dog and onto the covey. Gaston de Foix in his 'Livre de Chasse', (1387) predated Dudley by over a century, stressing the importance of teaching setting dogs to crouch. William Taplin in his 'The Sporting Dictionary', 1803, says; 'The sporting business of the Setting Dog is precisely the same as with the Pointer, but with this difference. That, admitting their olfactory sensations to be equally exquisite and that one can discover and receive the particles of scent as readily and at an equal distance with the other, the difference of the sport in which they are separately engaged renders it necessary that one should do upon his legs what the other does by prostration on the ground'.
In direct contradiction to M. Versavau 's reports is a statement which she was kind enough to locate for me in the R.A.S.G. (French Gordon Setter Club) Newsletter for June 1993, wherein their President M. Yves Guilbert, a long time Gordon lover categorically states. .'lying at the set is not penalizing '. In a later Reunion des Amateurs du Setter Gordon Newsletter of November, 1994 appears, 'in the Working Rules Standard given to the S.C.C. (French Kennel Club) by the R.A.S.G., it is not specified that lying or sitting at the point is forbidden, and a good run (grand parcours) with a dog going down at the set will be eligible for the CACT'. It is encouraging that all do not think alike; there is obviously some dissension in the ranks! I understand that the Club has yet to rescind the old specifics and take heart from the fact that others agree with my sentiments. There is intimation that International Judges in Europe, when judging International Stakes outside their own territory, are not averse to seek an advantage for Setters from their own Country which 'point', by easily eliminating those from elsewhere which do not, flouting the Rules of the particular Country in which they judge, giving rise on occasion to disagreement with the International Committee in Belgium. This in itself is surely a reprehensible practice?
Incidentally, American bred working Gordons imported into this Country already reveal a subtle suggestion in the shifting of tail root placement and a greater inclination of the pelvis to a more undesirable (?) horizontal position. Reference to a USA field trial report in a G.S.Club of America Newsletter expands upon tail position not only when setting, but also when the dog is engaged otherwise, with constant allusion to the relative tail position in any given situation... such terms as, 'both dogs carried nice tails' (nb. what is a nice tail??)...'tail straight off her back with the end curved up'.'dead tail'...'tail little below level', 'carried his tail very high, sickle'.... a backing (honouring) dog, with, 'tail just hanging down'...'established point there, tail ticking a little'. I have, in over fifty-five years of dogging always considered the tail to be an important adjunct to balance when on the move; an indicator of such niceties as the first touch of scent, how far ahead in front of the dog the birds are when coming to set, whether the birds are tending to move and, reading some dogs tail action, flatter myself that I can read indication of what sort of game is involved. All tail actions are by and large, highly individual and should surely continue to be so.
Since a wide diversity of tail characteristics are displayed by all dogs, then I would pose (as a Championship Trial judge) that there are far more important factors to be assessed in the judging process and such subjective superficialities as noting how many inches above or below horizontal the tail carriage alters at work and any signals therefrom should really be left to the dog who knows far better than any onlooker how to use the tail to best advantage.
Moving back to 'couchant' for a moment, recourse to writer after writer through the centuries when discussing setting dogs reveal that dropping down is indeed a very ancient pattern that is deeply ingrained in both Gordon and English Setter. It is surely a fundamental aspect of many hunting animal, both cat and dog alike. The final requirement was for man to intervene at the finale to prevent that final leap onto the game quarry. Dogs through time have successfully resisted any and all attempts to repress such action and some will still fall as if poleaxed in front of their game. Cross breeding has failed to eliminate it. It is regretful that we cannot work with this most powerful instinct rather that against it by attempting elimination. This aspect is not for any facile turning! References to paintings repeatedly reveal a subtle differential between a setting dog and a backing dog. The dog with the birds went down. the backing dog stood high.. Vero Shaw, in his Illustrated Book of the Dog. 1890, suggests, 'where the instinct is very strong, it is a fairly hopeless task to overcome it'.
When contemplating amendment to Gordon (and other) Setter behaviour characteristics in whatever Country, it must surely be politic to indulge in careful deliberation before any major modification such as this is introduced, other than some precise consideration to improve ability for work arising from differing conditions existing in those Countries, (are conditions so very different in Europe? - Sweden is also contemplating this course) and it would be foolish to veto well deliberated and beneficial modification by dog people of experience. Nevertheless, I would entreat those judging in competition to earnestly reconsider the penalizing of those Gordon and English Setters which display characteristic stance. In the meantime, those in favour of modification should substantiate valid reasons for requiring such alteration; the whole aspect can then be reviewed in the light of those essentially practical reasons rather than attempting a fait accompli.
Any intentional major modification of a breed of dog not indigenous to the Country making such alteration is an affront. What price then if Britain specifically modified the set of the tail of say, the Elkhound without the civilities of at least conferring with the parent Country?
Setting. Not Pointing I repeat, it may be that much of the problem under discussion is of our own making, brought about by a continuing substitute of the word 'Pointing' for the action of a Setter, 'Setting'. We do not routinely talk of 'stealing the set', or 'false set' because differentiation between the two actions is superfluous; they are outwardly the same thing.
There appear to be pertinent factors to consider. The first concerns the Handler, whether in Trial context or out hunting with his Setters. Because of the inbred focus of the 'set', we know that Setters quite literally often adopt this crouching position upon the location of birds rather than the upstanding stance of the Pointer. Today, the Handler now maintains that he is frequently unable to see or locate his dog when the dog is setting. I cannot altogether understand this contention other than as a minor element of Setter work since the Setter has behaved in this way for centuries. The reasons for problems arising may be debatable and could involve the increased diversification of ground and ground cover in use.
When working a brace of Setters with a beat of some 400 yards on either side then both dogs are within reasonable view for the majority of the time. Should one of the dogs adopt a sudden crouching set, then failure to reappear on the return beat is promptly noted and a move in the general direction of the dog's last know location invariably reveals the dog's stationary head. If the dog's permitted beat is substantially increased to be wider than that mentioned then there will be an increased risk that the dog could at some stage be technically lost, particularly in thicker cover. I have been involved with dogs that would hunt out of sight by virtue of thick cover if allowed, but do not believe that they were ever originally intended to do so. When working with Setters in Africa in tall grass cover, the dogs were kept in closer so as to remain in view. A further factor today is that there is a smaller gamebird population and dogs are increasingly encouraged to go wider and wider in search of birds and thence out of constant sight. The Americans solve this by taking to horseback and employing 'spotters' to mark their dogs at set.
The correct use of Setters should therefore involve the working of ground within a reasonable distance of the Handler without the dog/s being factually out of sight other than for short periods on undulating ground where they obviously can and do become temporarily lost to view. As a consequence the dog must now stand upright to accommodate such fundamental change and so be more readily seen. Setters must now 'point' and betray their heritage as a result. If there are those who would change this characteristic, it should be borne in mind that the elimination of the dog going down at the set will only evolve over a relatively long period, may involve a reduction in gene pool as a result of excluding dogs known to strongly carry this trait and which ironically, can often be overall the rather better dogs! I would maintain that where two dogs are run together as a brace (and here a subtle differential comes into play in that whilst two dogs are a brace, a brace is not necessarily two dogs!). I must digress for a moment. Many of today's Handlers will not have run in Brace Stakes, that is one person handling two dogs at the same time. This is dogwork at its very best. Now that previous statement that two dogs are not necessarily a brace requires qualification.
A true brace of dogs working together are doing exactly that: working TOGETHER. No first dog to the bird, no jealous action. Working as a team, each complementing the other in seeking, locating and then holding birds for the gun, the second bracemate holding a 'back' when appropriate, preferably reasonably close in so that in the event of the subsequent flush and shot, the dog is not so far away from the action as to be in a hazardous position if a gun should swing through, with the then attendant risk of being shot. When a Setter comes to set, be it standing, half crouch, full lie down, I repeat, it is simply and specifically the business of the bracemate to know at all times where the other dog is, within a few yards; this is teamwork par excellence. I suggest that so often when a dog fails to back on a supposed inability to see the setting dog which may be crouching, it may well be necessary to consider if this was in fact a deliberate jealous action; we have all seen dogs that deliberately turn away and pretend not to see a pointing/setting dog.
With a well trained brace of dogs, fully accustomed to working together, this presumed inability to see the setting dog rarely happens! I appreciate that when two dogs unknown to each other are drawn in a Stake there can be a problem. This surely comes back to temperament and the unselfish attitude a dog must hold when in brace? Even when taking supposed advantage of the upright rather than crouched stance, it is notable that one or the other of the dogs will be periodically afflicted with this apparent inability (non so blind as those who do not want to see!) to see the pointing dog.
There is no doubt that considerations have modified to some extent over the past 30 odd years. There was then a greater confident expectancy that a dog would honour his bracemate's point/ set on sight without any necessity to blow the dog down with the whistle, and that is really how it should be. A moments thought will reveal that when a gun is about to be fired at flying birds, all dogs have a requirement to be stationary in order to be safe from the line of fire and to preclude the possibility of flushing other birds; dogs should back reasonably close in to the dog with the find if they are not to be at risk from a gun swinging through to take a shot behind. Again it comes down to a lack of experience in the shooting field. Of a certainty dogs should and must stop under these circumstances. Handlers running forward with arm aloft blowing violently on a whistle in an attempt to get the dog down are definitely not required when shooting over dogs.
I'd be very worried about changing type to the American field pointer too. They were/are trained to stand with head up with electric collars under the chin. To get the tail straight up like a fox terrier the whole body shape has to change, damn ugly IMO.
I wonder if the changes you write about is because non hunters are taking over?
I think dogs that set are as beautiful as dogs that point, it is all in the intensity of the dog.
How do they allow this crap to happen end evolve .Dog handlers should be refusing to conform to anything unnatural that some seppos want to enforce as but a stupidity and purely on whim or fancy it is allowed . It is hard to believe it is filtering through Europe also .If it came here I would start a club against officialdom to allow normality to prevail
it would be a sad day indeed if setters did not "set",the world a poorer place.
noticed a few pics of the reds pointing at the fielddays.
yes the gingas appeared and I didnt !!!!! what happened to showing greatness
by the way I have named my new puppy Ging-Ga
did ya sell one to cmore ??????
nah he wants to make his own --all sold though which is great and a relief so i dont have to clean puppy shite anymore lol
enough time to convert him to the wirehair then lol.
looking forward to whelping pups in a few months....... not so much the work involved.
lol CMORE a good Setter man --living in a 2 bedder in the city isnt the most appealing place to be raising litters ,still go to now have 7 animals out there !!
Results from the trials?
C'mon El Tweedo I heard you didn't manage to lure Petros in to your love dungeon by the lake?
LUCKY THAT AS I ARRIVED AT MIDNIGHT THE PLACE UNBEKNOWN TO ME WAS FULL SO I WENT TO THE FOREST AND SLEPT IN THE TRUCK . WOKE AT 5.30 AM HOPING IT WASNT ONE OF THOSE SHORT SLEEPS IN AN UNCOMFORTABLE POSITION THAT LASTS AN HOUR . --SHIT CAPS SORRY BUT ARNT GOING TO REWRITE LOL
It's funny but I bet everyone knows that feeling... Trials results?Quote:
Originally Posted by el borracho
good day trialing , petros made a another work excuse and didnt show . 10 birds first day with robyn taking the win . i didnt write notes so only mine will get a mention --our heat failte was ahead of a bird on her beat and i walked it up -didnt see her go on the windward side but if they're in front they're gone burger .inti and his brace mate [pointed a bird but with movement they were out to --to much noise when the bird flew from the brace mate handler and me trying to sit inti to keep him out of trouble =noise confused dogs
still a good weekend with nice grounds and birds is always a pleasure . good to see morrie working his gsp well also !! one red dog on sundays trial which makes for a change . 2 pointers , 2 english setters , 1 irish , i gsp , i gordon --no result
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pointer
The bed offer threw me off guard really... not sure if you wanted to snuggle El B.... hahaha...Quote:
Originally Posted by el borracho
In all seriousness appreciate the phone call...
I really wanted to be at the trials on the weekend, had my car all packed up then canceled last minute....
Congrats on Robyn... Stella is doing great for her age...
North Islands were held in the weekend with reasonable weather finally ! A good comp on Saturday with the braced open trial being won by Robyn with Tonto ..I think .. . The North Island Novice down the line being won by myself and Failte with a stunning little run producing 95/100 points . The Waikato champs on Sunday again won by Robyn with Tanner ,Dave Shelly second and my old dog Inti now 10 years old jointly taking 3rd place with Robyn.Great to see the winning dogs charging at high speed like missiles , its very impressive to see a dog work at the pace shown
Auckland's gsp club ran its two champ trials in the weekend with a good little turn out of competitors .Dave Richardson flew up from the south island to judge and Mac MacArthur came up from Otorahonga to judge also -thanks to them both for their efforts ! Winner and cleaned up both contest with all her dogs was Robyn Gaskin .She looked like Santa Claus had just been with all she won .Dave Sheely was the only other winner with a second -Robyn's team took all other prizes -congratulations for her supreme efforts for the day .
My own dogs all got through all contests and with Feilte running brilliantly with only the retrieve letting us down.This was Failte's first ever pigeon retrieves in a trial so were on our way to getting that sorted and can concentrate on other areas to make her great -although completed with her I had to force the issue of the retrieve .up until the first retrieve I had lost 2 points -running super fast , good quartering and good find and points on the first trial -a little movement on the second but again great running . I though Dave Sheely had won with the run I saw his dog have and I think he was a little confident also but Robyn obviously had a few points on him to take a clean sweep .so ends the day