Some times less is more.
Thats as true as it gets. If you had 8 hounds and were being sucessfull you could probly get rid of all but the three best and still do just as good. The rest were just allong for the ride anyway. Even if all 8 of them were super dogs you would end up doing more harm than good with that many dogs IMO. Not to mention if a man is having to relay the dogs then he needs some different dogs.
In my opinion having more than four dogs at a bay at one time is over kill and more often than not does more harm than good. I like three experienced dogs at one time. To me that is the magic number where its plenty of dogs but not too many to booger the hog(s) up, or any other animal for that matter. Throw in one young dog, if you've got one that needs some work, and the other dogs can make up for any harm that dog does. Some people say one dog is all it takes and thats true, but I like to have atleast three dogs so that one can pick up the slack if the others are out of shape at a bay or get hung up in the brush and get behind when a hog breaks.
There are allot of junky hounds out there and it takes some fishing to finds good ones. But i really don't prefer the way a typical hound hunts considering where I hunt. They waste too much time on old scent and dont show any consideration for which direction you need hunt in. They just hunt in which ever direction they want too. Fact is that where most of us hunt there are lots of hogs and not a too teribly many acres to cover, so hounds dont typically work that well. For one a person does'nt usually need a dog with that cold a nose, and two it might get you into trouble on small places. Now hounds do have thier place out west where there is more land and less hogs or which ever animal u are after.
Waylon
