UNCAA – Accademia di S. Uberto Pointing Dogs Trial

Last June I was invited to a trial organized by the UNCAA (National Union of Appennines and Alps Hunters) – ST. Hubert Academy, but the trial was later cancelled and re-scheduled for September.  The grounds and the birds changed as well, the trial was going to be held at the Ruino Estate, on the highest hills of Oltrepo’ Pavese , and the dogs were going to be assessed on grey partridges, no longer on quails Those who know me, are well aware of how much I love Ruino as I spent about eight years regularly shooting and handling English Setters there.  Ruino’s grounds are perfect for pointing dogs, and they are wide and open enough to make any  dogs belonging to a British  pointing breed happy.

In the e-mail I received, there were only a few details on the trial. It was created specifically for those associated to the UNCAA-St. Hubert Academy, nevertheless it was open to everyone.  As I did not know what was going to happen exactly,  I forwarded the invitation only to a few people, next time I will be more generous!

By choosing to be there,  I gathered more details. The trial was open to all the pointing dogs, and most of the competitors were HPRs, you will soon understand why. Dogs were requested to behave like in a ENCI/FCI official trial but, big difference, eliminating any dogs was not on the menu. Major or eliminating faults were going to be written down but, in some cases, especially if the dog was a young one, the judge could decide to let him continue his run, in order to assess his natural qualities.  The  trial’s aim, indeed, was not to nominate a winner but to see, assess and describe each dog natural qualities. At the end of the trial, each dog was going to receive a written evaluation (like it is done in any FCI trials) and a score. Scoring had German hunting trials as a model, this explains why we had so many German HPRs competing, some of which had already been tested at VJP, HZP. VGP, German Puppy Derby and Solms). As you might see  looking at the evaluation form, natural qualities were considered very  important( Ferma = Point; Cerca, impegno, passione, avidità, movimento e stile = Quartering, dedication, passion, avidity, movement and style; Correttezza del cane e collegamento con il conduttore = Obedience/training and connection/cooperation with the handler).

Organizers were expecting 10-15 dogs to compete but 25 showed up: The dogs had different ages (many were around one year old) and very different backgrounds and training. There were some  experienced dogs who regularly attend trials and dogs, without formal training, which are used for rough shooting exclusively.  According to the judge Ivan Torchio (whose mentor had been Giacomo Griziotti), all the dogs, including  the best one, need to explore the ground with more “logic”. He explained the difference between exploring the ground during a “quail” trial (dog should quarter very regularly (left/right), in a very geometric pattern  and not miss any ground) and during a “wild bird” trial (the dog has more freedom but still….) and concluded saying that all the dogs he saw need to be refined under this aspect.  Some dogs proved to be highly skilled and perfectly trained, they waited for the handler on point, roaded on command without being touched, remained steady, dropped and came back when asked to and so on…) others were wilder, some of them were very young and some others paid for their handler’s lack of skills. Several humans, indeed, made awful mistakes: a man roaded and produced in behalf of his dog (then he-the man – literally ran after the bird….); another one insisted on making the bird fly by beating the ground; some kept yelling at the dog… A few handlers asked if they could keep a collar and a check cord on the dog for safety purposes, or if they could pick up the dog before the bird flushed: they were given permission to do so but, of course, this was taken into account in the final evaluation. Silent and “professional” handling, instead, though not compulsory, was appreciated.  Two pups wanted to enter the trial as well and they were asked to find a planted quail while on a check cord. They both found it and the GWP was so careful and concentrated that she remained steady to wing, without having ever been trained for that.

The grounds were those typical of the High Appennines, alfalfa fields, furrow fields, bushes and so on. It was very hot, late in the morning we reached temperatures above 30 degrees, wind was weak and kept changing its direction making the dogs’ job very difficult. Each dog was given ample opportunities to find birds, but a few failed and some, given the difficult conditions, eventually bumped into birds. The organizers plan to have this trial again next summer as it is a very nice way to keep an eye on the most experienced dogs, and to introduce shooters and pet owners to trials.

Briony did very well. She found a grey partridge and a quail. Produced nicely and remained steady.  She got the highest possible score and the judge wrote that her run was at the highest levels for quartering, speed and use of the ground/wind… He would have liked more refined castings (left and right) and that obedience could be more automatic (indeed it was me telling him that she dropped the second time I whistled, not the first!). He concluded saying that she is an extremely high quality dog.

Handlers Opinions:

Sara Orlandi (GSP): This was the second trial organized by the Accademia di St. Uberto that I attended. The previous one was the 24 hours deer tracking trial (FCI recognized) organized in Cecima, this time we are in Ruino… another wonderful place! It was great to see my dog working which such a determination and then receive such a positive written critique by “The Professor” Ivan Torchio! We later had a very tasty lunch with much game and we share opinions on dogs while eating all together. I am likely to show up again at the next trial!

Daniele Malacalza (Spinone Italiano): I felt at ease, people were nice, friendly and funny. Ivan proved to be exremely skilled, more than I expected. Dogs were evaluated differntly than they use to be during ordinary trials.

Note: St.Hubert Academy does not take its name after ST.Hubert type trials (as some misunderstood). It is school (hence the name academy) which organizes classes on shooting (including woodcock counting), stalking,  deer tracking, hound handling, wildlife management and game keeping through Italy. Classes are open to everybody wishing to gain expertise in these fields, some of the classes offer certification which are officially recognized by the Italian government and by several EU countries.

In giugno ero stata invitata alla prova estiva organizzata dall’UNCAA  (Unione Nazionale Cacciatori Appennini e Alpi)- Accademia S. Uberto, ma la prova è poi stata annullata e rimandata a settembre. Sono cambiati anche i terreni e i selvatici: la località questa volta era l’Azienda Agrituristica Venatoria Ruino, in Alto Oltrepo’ Pavese e i selvatici previsti non più quaglie bensì starne.  Conosco molto bene la riserva di Ruino, ci ho cacciato regolarmente per anni e so che offre terreni adatti alla cinofilia, anche alle razze inglesi.  Nella e-mail di invito venivano specificati pochi dettagli sulla prova che, sebbene pensata per i soci dell’UNCAA e dell’Accademia, era aperta a tutti. Non sapendo come si sarebbero svolte le cose  ho diffuso l’invito in maniera “sobria”, l’anno prossimo lo diffonderò meglio!

Dopo aver partecipato sono in grado di fornirvi maggiori dettagli. La prova era aperta a tutte le razze da ferma ma la maggior parte degli iscritti erano cani da ferma continentali, capirete presto il motivo. Nella prova era richiesto ai cani di fare quello che normalmente si fa in una prova ENCI/FCI  ma, a differenza delle normali prove ENCI, non era “prevista” una formale eliminazione. Se il cane commetteva un errore da eliminazione questo veniva “annotato” ma in molti casi, specie con cani giovani, a discrezione del giudice, al cane veniva concessa la possibilità di continuare il lavoro per poterne visionare le qualità naturali. L’obiettivo non era infatti “eliminare” o “premiare”, bensì valutare le qualità naturali del cani e redigere un giudizio. Sono stati usati dei punteggi, su modello delle prove tedesche – da qui l’abbondante presenza di continentali tedeschi (alcuni di loro con alle spalle risultati in VJP, HZP. VGP,  Derby tedesco e Solms). Come potete notare dalla scheda, ampio spazio è stato riservato alla valutazione delle qualità naturali.

Erano previsti circa 10-15 cani ma, inaspettatamente, si sono raggiunti 25 soggetti, di tutte le età (molti i cani giovani di circa un anno) e livelli di preparazione.  Stando al giudice Ivan Torchio (allievo diretto di Giacomo Griziotti), anche i migliori soggetti – continentali e inglesi- devono migliorare il percorso: sebbene si trattasse di una “selvaggina naturale” e non di una prova “a quaglie”, avrebbe voluto lacets più regolari per una più attenta e raffinata esplorazione del terreno. Ci sono stati soggetti molto ben preparati (attesa del conduttore in ferma, guidata a comando, fermo al frullo, obbedienza…) e altri più anarchici, vuoi per età o vuoi per inesperienza dei conduttori, che erano semplici cacciatori e non cinofili garisti.  Diversi “umani” hanno commesso errori come voler guidare e alzare  il selvatico al posto del cane, qualcuno ha  chiesto di lasciare corde e collari “per sicurezza”: il permesso è stato accordato – pur tenendone conto nel giudizio finale. Si è tenuto conto anche della conduzione, più o meno “rumorosa”e più o meno professionale.

Chi voleva poteva legare il cane per fermarlo al frullo e un paio di cuccioli hanno chiesto di “partecipare”, ovvero di incontrare una quaglia trattenuti da una corda.  La drahthaarina si è talmente stupita all’involo da rimanere ferma al frullo, senza che nessuno glielo avesse mai insegnato.  I terreni erano i tipici terreni dell’Alto Appennino: medica, arato, qualche arbusto e molto caldo! Le condizioni climatiche erano ben lontane dall’ideale: vento debole che continuava a cambiare direzione e caldo, molto caldo hanno messo in difficoltà anche soggetti esperti. Si è cercato di mettere ogni cane in condizione di incontrare ma qualcuno non è riuscito a trovare il selvatico o è stato tratto in inganno e ha sfrullato. La prova verrà riorganizzata la prossima estate: è un modo efficace e semplice per tenere d’occhio i soggetti migliori e per avvicinare cacciatori e proprietari di “pet” alla cinofilia venatoria.

Briony ha fatto bene, due ferme, due guidate corrette e due fermi al frullo perfetti. Il percorso è da raffinare, così come l’ubbidienza: ha sempre ubbidito prontamente ai comandi ma per un “terra” sono stati necessari due fischi e non solo uno!

***Opinioni dei partecipanti:

• Sara Orlandi (Kurzhaar): Questa per me è stata la seconda prova con il gruppo cinofilo S.Uberto, la prima su traccia artificiale nella meravigliosa località di Cecima ed appunto questa estiva per cani da piuma nel favolosa riserva di Ruino. È stata una grande emozione vedere il mio cane lavorare con determinazione e ricevere un positivissimo giudizio dal grande maestro Ivan Torchio. Per concludere la piacevolissima giornata ci siamo riuniti tutti in un ottimo pranzo a base di selvaggina da tutti molto gradito parlando dei nostri amati cani, di caccia e cinofilia a 360º Non mancherò al prossimo evento!
• Daniele Malacalza (Spinone Italiano):  Bellissimo ambiente amichevole e goliardico, Ivan competente al livello della sua fama. Forse di più. Criteri di valutazione molto diversi dalle solite prove.