Hunt test distance change for master

[fishduck]

First let me qualify this by saying this is my opinion. Opinions are like armpits. Everyone has a couple and sometimes they stink.

I would much prefer an increase in distance than increasingly tighter marks. Marking scenerios with very close areas of fall are sure to cause handles. When a switch means you are out then the handles come quicker and quicker. Judges are then faced with a decision of which handles were good enough. Two and sometimes even three handles can result in a qualifying score. Seems ironic when marking is of primary importance as the keystone of the rule book.

Adding 50 yards should allow my hunting dog to hunt. Not handle efficiently because I as a handler am intimidated by the old falls. 50 extra yards in many areas allows terrain to become a factor instead of the marking configuration set up of the day.

Lets face it. A well trained dog will understand hip pockets and mom/pops but this is a totally contrived concept. Regardless of the story told during the handlers briefing, I have never walked into a field with 3 blinds in plain view, who then flushed and shot ducks from their feet. It ain't hunting and that is fine. I just love to play the game.

Personally I would like to see more distance.

[Paul "Happy" Gilmore]

Distance means nothing without good bird placement.

[fishduck]

Distance means nothing without good bird placement.

Amen! Nothing further to add.

[Good Dogs]

Agree, but I might amend that to "marks mean nothing w/o good bird placement."

[Meleagris1]

Distance is just one factor, but assuming normal conditions and factors, IMHO a MH caliber dog should be capable of running a 150yd mark with ease. We are talking basically 1/3 the distance of a "relatively" long FT mark. I've also had plenty of opportunities to make 150 yard retrieves while hunting, especially geese, so again IMHO, its a practical skill for my dog to have and any MASTER caliber dog to have. Teach long, and you can easily hunt short, but not the other way around.

[Larry Housman]

Well, if you are able to watch him sail away for 200 yards, your dog can too. That is a significantly different mark and retrieve than one coming out of a winger at 150 yards.

Just because there MIGHT be a few real hunting retrieves at distance does not mean we can or should necessarily test for them.

As we get to page three on this thread, I think dixidawgs point is being glossed over. we all have long marks in hunting, but those marks are shot at less than 40-50 yards at the most and then sail out to 150+. I've never shot at a bird that was at 150 when i shot it. i just think 150 marks in a hunt test don't make a great deal of sense. Now what i do think makes sense is going out to 150 yards on blinds. that will represent those 150 yard sailers we have in hunting better than throwing marks out that far. As with many other threads here of late, if you want long marks get a white coat and have at it; don't try to keep moving hunt tests toward field trials. Nothing wrong with playing both but lets stop trying to incrementally move hunt tests to field trials. And I do run both so I'm not afraid of long marks; I just think field trials and hunt tests are two related but ultimately separate games, and lets keep them that way. Separate but equal didn't work so well in the 50's, but i think it would be great here!

[dixidawg]

Are the current batch of MH's in the field today not picking up these long retrieves?

What is "broken" in weekend tests that would be "fixed" by going to 150 yards?

You can train as long as you want or need for your situation. You have a lot of long retrieves when hunting? Train for them. The VAST majority of the time they are under 100 yards.

You want to be tested at longer marks, go run field trials.

Leave the weekend tests alone.

[Thomas D]

Part of the OP question was to ask about the RHTAC and how club members could get involved in the process. While AKC has it on their website, and we know who the key players are, it appears as if the actual process is somewhat vague. If I understand it correctly, the RHTAC sends the recommendation they are about to make to the club presidents. Comments by the club presidents drive the recommendations to either be shelved or sent on to the AKC.


Maybe some club presidents could chime in and let us know if they receive those recommendations from RHTAC.

[Hunt'EmUp]

. I am not sure what the HRC rules are for Finished but we ran a Finished land test the other weekend that had a go bird at 147 yards.

Seems like the AKC's just keeping up with the HRC on this one, 150 yards is their distance for land marks in Finished. Wouldn't want to accused one venue, of allowing more marking yardage than another . 147 yards (very specific) I bet there was about 12 contestants out there with range finders ensuring that mark was in code. The gallery, usually has a fun time estimating, checking & correcting distance in HRC tests. One of the reasons, I bought a range finder when I started running HRC, was because everyone had one, it's almost standard equipment.

[Granddaddy]

150 for land marks, 125 for water marks...all blinds are 100.

Blaine, you type too fast......

While I don't run many HTs, I do prefer the HRC set-ups (you use the gun & talk to your dog like you are actually hunting). But one thing I've never understood about the HRC rules is having blinds shorter than marks. Just doesn't seem logical to me.