CONSIDER THE GUN
KOBUS DE KOCK
“This is my rifle and this is my gun, this is for shooting and this is for fun,” said the corporal when he handed me my standard military issue 7.62mm R1 assault rifle in 1972. He also sommer gave me a klap for good measure, to remind me never to play with the wrong thing, he said.
My Collins English Dictionary has this to say about a gun: “A weapon consisting mainly of a metal tube from which missiles are thrown by explosion; a firearm in general, cannon, howitzer, rifle, carbine, musket, fowling piece, pistol etc.” Well, my old corporal would have severe difficulties with rifles and carbines and pistols being grouped into that category. Personally I am very happy with fowling pieces or shotguns, as falling into the group of guns. Way back in 1881 W.W. Greener already set the trend when he wrote his famous book, The Gun and its Development. More recently Gough Thomas Garwood wrote the Gun Book in 1969 and even more recently in John Tylor’s Shotgun Encyclopaedia a shotgun is described as “a smoothbore firearm designed to shoot multiple projectiles. The shotgun is primarily a gun for shooting moving targets with charges of shot.”
Thus, broadly speaking, we have established that, and it has become the norm, to talk about a rifle as a firearm shooting a single projectile and a shotgun or “gun” as a firearm shooting multiple little round pellets (shot) – let us for the time being forget about slugs. More or less, even though the corporal may have had something else in mind when he spoke about a gun.
A GUN AS A PERSON
But it’s neither of these firearms that I want to consider here today. Hidden in the small print just after the Collins’ definition of the gun (noun) it says gun (sport) one of a shooting party; - verb intransitive - to shoot with a gun. And this is the topic of my deliberation, that walking gun carriage, that masochistic individual with the dodgy marksman’s reputation, that sucker roped in to serve as “gun” at a dog trial.
Gundog trials come in many different types. There are trials for retrievers, spaniels, HPRs, and pointers or British Breeds, all with their own subtle nuances, all dependant on the likes or dislikes of the different clubs involved. The main purpose of gundog trials is to find the best breeding material (genetics) ensuring that the breed is constantly improved and that prospective buyers and sellers have access to a solid base of information on which selection for trade can be made. That’s of course apart from improving the overall standards of working dogs, and all the social fun to be had in the process of training and education. Especially for those that do not take themselves too seriously, because this business can get very heated with internal and external dog politics. But I presume that’s life, as soon as anybody starts thinking of himself as an expert, professional jealousy starts rearing its ugly head.
LET’S SET UP A TRIAL
So, take an HPR trial as an example that could be set up as follows:
THE DOGS:
This is what it is all about. In this example they will all be hunting, pointing and retrieving dogs – multipurpose dogs, such as German Shorthair Pointers, Vizslas, and Drahthaar Pointers etc. They are the real contestants (not the handlers). In fact, they should really be the only competitors. Why so many handlers or owners cry when their dogs win, I really don’t know. I have never seen a dog crying. I have heard many dogs whining from excitement, but never a crying one. They take it all in their stride, win or lose or booted (disqualified) after a magnificent chase, it doesn’t really matter to them, there is no sulking; they are there for the fun. Unfortunately the handlers for some unbeknown reason sometimes gets so nervous that it is passed onto the dogs, resulting in a vicious circle that can easily spiral out of control.
Dogs are normally run in a brace and must show off everything they have, demonstrate that they can find birds, point, back, retrieve, are steady to shot, and are not going to chase rabbits or bat-eared foxes. Having witnessed some magnificent chases in the past – a field trial without at least one good chase somewhat fails in my book.
THE HANDLERS:
These are the guys that cry at the prize-giving. They also get very nervous before the chief judge takes the stage to announce the winners. They usually claim they have »
» worked terribly hard throughout the year to get their dogs up to standard. Their wives (and dogs) may have different views about this statement. Handlers don’t really work hard at the trials. Their dogs may run for half an hour after which they retire and loaf around all day long till their dogs perform again.
THE JUDGES:
Normally there are three judges; the chief judge and two assistants. One or more of these extremely knowledgeable and experienced experts should preferably come from a different club or region or province than the one hosting the trial in order to lend credibility to the event. These persons are the untouchables, their judgements rule supreme. It’s not a good idea to question their rulings, especially if you are a dog handler with any ambition of your dog getting placed in the competition. They know everything. Or at least they think they know everything. It’s also best to only tell them after the event that they are bloody idiots in need of a serious visit to the optometrist.
THE FIELD STEWARD:
He or she is a very important person at the trial, perhaps the most important. The field steward is the go-to person who runs the show on the day, make sure the dogs are where they should be and the gallery is behaving themselves and carries water and cool drinks to the judges. This person could also be ordered around to sort out any conceivable niggling irritation, like for instance helping a corpulent gun through a stiff barb-wired fence. The field steward should also be carrying the birds, especially when he sees that a gun (already struggling under the weight of his gun and ammo, his water and energy drinks) regularly gets caught up in the fences by the added bulge in the bird pouch on his back. It is at this stage that the gun starts thinking that wearing a shooting vest with a bird pouch on the back is perhaps not ideal for such an event. He vows to leave it at home next time and never offers to carry the birds again. Depending on his age and rank in the club, a field steward can run long distances during an event. It is advisable that they should be almost as fit as the guns.
THE GUNS:
If all goes according to plan, at least one bird should be shot over every competitor (bar for those eliminated before a bird is required). Two “guns” are roped in for this onerous task and these two must go the entire distance, there is no bailing out. Every dog should have an equal chance to have birds missed by the same guns. If this doesn’t make sense to you, don’t worry, it doesn’t make sense to a tired gun either.
The main function of a gun is to kill the bird he is shooting at. The handlers don’t like it when their dogs do all the work, smartly find a bird, holding it to point, being steady to flush and shot and then see the bird disappearing into the blue yonder. For some unbeknown reason they can get very agitated when a gun misses “their” bird. It is poor practice to swear directly at the guns, so they rely on their body language to get the job done. Some handlers have developed their body language to a fine art, a mere glance could kill a gun. I have missed many birds, so my cremated body’s ashes lies scattered throughout the valleys of the Overberg. Fortunately the second gun can help a lot, provided he doesn’t miss the bird as well. It is also not good to shout “hoo-haa!” when you do kill a bird. One’s got to act casually, like it’s a normal thing... even though it may be very hard.
Even worse than missing a bird is wounding it. That’s when the entire field comes to a standstill to do the “ethical” thing and recover the runner. That’s also when the gun craps in his pants for committing such a heinous crime. Only once the bird is found and dispatched can he relax again. Telling the judges he winged the bird on purpose to give the dog a chance to show off his remarkable talent, doesn’t sit well with most judges. The dogs (bless their beautiful souls) can’t care a hoot, for them it’s just extra fun finding that runner.
Guns must only shoot when a dog “holds” the bird on point. Whilst the dog still moves, he must not shoot. If he does, he can expect some form of reprimand from the judges or the poor field steward. I have shot birds when I shouldn’t have and my trigger finger still suffers from some form of psychological dysfunction.
There’s a certain protocol that the gun has to stick too when the bird is being retrieved, i.e. being carried back to his handler. Even though you may feel quite smart about killing a difficult bird out right, and the dog may think so too by bringing it back to you, and therefore acknowledging your skill, you may never accept the bird from the dog. Routinely the dogs take the birds back to their handlers, but occasionally a very smart dog just wants to compliment the gun and delivers the bird to him. I once thought that was very clever, the dog being exceptionally perceptive, and thanking him profusely I accepted the bird, and got crapped on by the entire field! Fortunately, when I thanked the dog and gave the bird back to him, he immediately took it to his handler. Some dogs are smarter than you think!
JUST GIVE A SALUTE
Sometimes the gun will be asked not to shoot, or only to salute (firing a shot but to deliberately miss the bird). When the dog has for instance already had a bird killed over it and the judges only require a back from the brace mate. That’s perhaps the easiest “shot” for the gun, it’s hard to miss if you don’t have to hit the target. But believe me, it’s a bit more complicated than that. Things can get seriously muddled up towards the end of a trial (when things get serious anyway) with dogs at different stages of evaluation. The gun may be asked to shoot to kill, to salute or not to shoot at all. That’s of course if given the benefit of being told what to do. Claiming to have only saluted when you were supposed to kill won’t help at all. I have tried that one too. Arguing with the judges about clear instructions won’t help either. For you must remember, they are the supremoes.
But missing a salute is really the pits. Sounds impossible but I have done that one too. The judges didn’t believe my story either, that I was hoping the other gun was going to do the job. I did not salute and the bird sailed off in perfect silence. Oh well, I was asked to run up a hill only to salute a bloody point at the top and that at the end of three days trialling. I blamed it on my legs.
So, a gun has to know when to shoot and when not to shoot and preferably be able to hit the target without wounding it. He’s got to be fit and strong and carry a gun for three days on the trot whilst fresh handlers and dogs are constantly being added to the mix. He’s got to keep up with the field that will, according to Murphy’s Law, all have longer legs than him. And most of all, he has got to be safe.
So there you have it, a gentle three-day stroll in the mountains. Jip, it’s tough out there, but I wouldn’t miss it for the world!
But missing a salute is really the pits. Sounds impossible but I have done that one too.