I love hunting with dogs, I have hunted with terriers for nearly a decade now and have had a wonderful time doing it. I think in most sportsmen's minds it is not the dogs that bother them. They are just doing what comes natural to them and they have no sense of sportsman ship. They act out of instinct. The dogs cannot be blamed for being un-ethical.
I am torn on this subject because as a dog hunter I can relate directly with the connection between a man and his dog. It is a tight and emotional bond that cannot really be explained in print. On the other hand I think that if a dog hunter wants to continue doing what he loves he should pay close attention on how he does it and how he represents his given sport.
I agree with CDENTON a hundred percent. Gray hounds/gray hound crosses don't need training they just need exposure. If a dog wagon slid up behind a deer rather than a coyote the chase would still be on.
Where everything goes south with this kind of topic is the sporting aspect. Fun? Yes probably but sporting? A tradition? That depends on whom you talk to. Traditionally 4-WDs, CB radios and section line roads were not available. It was done a horse back or on foot. Somewhere along the lines body count replaced traditional values. But this transition is not unique only to dog hunting. It has spread as fast as the technical advancements in gear have allowed it to in all facets of hunting. Including predator calling.
For instance, in England the Jack Russell Terrier was originated by Parson John (aka Jack) Russell in the early 1800s. The Parson bread for what he called (gentlemanly) characteristics in his strain. He adamantly insisted that the terrier should not be required to hurt or kill the fox but rather nip and harass the fox in order to get it to bolt from the den. Thus allowing the hounds to continue the chase. The kill was anticlimactic compared to the sporting aspect of the chase and the legendary duels between the sly and crafty fox and the hound.
Like in so much of hunting anymore technology replaces skills and body counts replace sportsmanship and maybe even the appreciation of nature. In our own way we are all a little guilty of it.
Good hunting.
Q,
I am torn on this subject because as a dog hunter I can relate directly with the connection between a man and his dog. It is a tight and emotional bond that cannot really be explained in print. On the other hand I think that if a dog hunter wants to continue doing what he loves he should pay close attention on how he does it and how he represents his given sport.
I agree with CDENTON a hundred percent. Gray hounds/gray hound crosses don't need training they just need exposure. If a dog wagon slid up behind a deer rather than a coyote the chase would still be on.
Where everything goes south with this kind of topic is the sporting aspect. Fun? Yes probably but sporting? A tradition? That depends on whom you talk to. Traditionally 4-WDs, CB radios and section line roads were not available. It was done a horse back or on foot. Somewhere along the lines body count replaced traditional values. But this transition is not unique only to dog hunting. It has spread as fast as the technical advancements in gear have allowed it to in all facets of hunting. Including predator calling.
For instance, in England the Jack Russell Terrier was originated by Parson John (aka Jack) Russell in the early 1800s. The Parson bread for what he called (gentlemanly) characteristics in his strain. He adamantly insisted that the terrier should not be required to hurt or kill the fox but rather nip and harass the fox in order to get it to bolt from the den. Thus allowing the hounds to continue the chase. The kill was anticlimactic compared to the sporting aspect of the chase and the legendary duels between the sly and crafty fox and the hound.
Like in so much of hunting anymore technology replaces skills and body counts replace sportsmanship and maybe even the appreciation of nature. In our own way we are all a little guilty of it.
Good hunting.
Q,