The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 9 of 17 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 163

Thread: Master National Retriever Club Proposed Amendment

  1. #81

    Default

    MNRC-Owner handler seems like a good idea to me

  2. #82
    Senior Member Brad B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Winnie, TX
    Posts
    1,656

    Default

    I think the proposal is stupid. What should they care that my 2 yo. quals. for the MN? As I read the letter of explanation preceeding the proposal, it seems unduly focused on the age of the dogs attending. If they think, "it does not necessarily benefit the young dog", then just establish an age limit to attend the MN. Dog's 3 and over with a title and 6 passes in that fiscal year. I don't see it passing. And if it did pass, I'd be hard pressed to find 12 test in my area to run, nor would I want to expend that sort of money in this economy, and I'm betting many others feel that way too and wouldn't stay in the program.

  3. #83
    Senior Member helencalif's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    in the mountains at Lake Almanor, CA
    Posts
    2,006

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tracyw View Post
    Helen, the AKC does make money off of dogs running their tests. I don't know how much but with the shear numbers, they are making money. If 700 dogs run (at a minimum) 6 AKC master test each to qualify to run the MN, then 4200 x what the akc makes per dog (even at $3.50 per dog, they make $14,700) is a good bit of money!
    Yes, I know that AKC makes money off of dogs running their events. A recording fee of $3.50 per entry is paid to AKC after every event -- whether it is a hunt test or a field trial. The recording fee is paid by the club holding the event. The club also pays an application fee to AKC when they apply to hold the event. The application fee is $25 if you are an AKC member club. It is $35 if you are not a member club. If you are a member club, the application fee is waived for the first event the club has in the year.

    Of course, AKC makes money for these events. They also have expenses for those events. This is just a short list:
    AKC Performance Events staff are paid employees. Time is spent by AKC staff to verify the information on every event application before it is approved. AKC prints a number of materials used by event secretaries. Staff time is spent preparing these kits which are mailed to all event secretaries. Every event secretary is shipped 2 rules & regulation booklets, booklets on how to handle problems, and numerous forms to fill out to report field trial wins, placements, and JAMS or hunt test pass/fail. AKC staff time is spent verifying all information on the winners, placers, JAMS, and passes. They check all of the info -- dog name, registration number, owner name etc. to make sure it is accurate.

    AKC staff time is spent on recording and keeping track of winners, placements, JAMS, and passes. When a dog titles, AKC staff time is spent preparing a certificate and then it is mailed to the dog owner at no cost.

    700 dogs x 6 events @ $3.50 per dog... $14,700. Think of the time (salaries) to process the information for 700 dogs x 6 events (info on 4200 dogs) plus the cost of printed materials and postage for those 6 events. I think paying the $25 or $35 application fee and then the $3.50 per dog could be seen by some as a bargain.

    AKC has to make money on Performance Events to cover their many operations, including the salaries of AKC representatives who attend events occasionally to make sure the clubs are following AKC rules and regulations.
    Last edited by helencalif; 04-18-2013 at 04:18 PM.

  4. #84
    Senior Member Codatango's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    217

    Default

    LIke someone said earlier, there are mature dogs form the FT arena that would fall under the "must have an MH, plus 6 passes rule and have to get a max of 12 passes.

    I like the owner/handler idea, but it's not realistic - the handlers that have pros run their dogs because they are not good handlers. And handlers who work and can't go to tests and have to keep a job in order to have a retirement income so they can be full time handlers once they retire!

    Eric is correct about the extra work that Regional can bring to clubs.
    The easiest way for Regionals to work is to take a club's normal HT weekend and CALL it a regional qualifier. One requirement for the club could be to have one judge at each stake be a past MN judge, with the IDEA that the judging should be tougher. But you know how varied that could play out around the country.

    Or 2 clubs get together and hold a special 3 master stake if the AKC will go along with that idea (with the MN judges as well.

    There's no way to have more than one MN. Too much to plan for and the Board and the MN trailer/equipment has to be there as well.

    Debbie

  5. #85
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Boston, GA
    Posts
    2,605

    Default

    Don't you think that somewhere along the way amateur handlers have gotten shoved to the back of the Master National bus?
    Tom Dorroh

  6. #86
    Senior Member DoubleHaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    N. Cackalacky
    Posts
    2,448

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brad B View Post
    As I read the letter of explanation preceeding the proposal, it seems unduly focused on the age of the dogs attending. If they think, "it does not necessarily benefit the young dog", then just establish an age limit to attend the MN.
    That is what they said. Do you believe it? I don't. I think they are looking for a way to reduce entries that will cause the least amount of uproar and came up with that story to justify it.

    I think that if the MNRC wants to limit entries they should propose a limit on entries and not come up with a bogus story about concern for younger dogs. To me, this proposal hurts most the folks who are likely to step up and try to qualify and run a MN when it is close to them--those for whom the MN might be a once in a lifetime experience--and I think it is particularly mean spirited to reduce entries in a way that would disproportionally affect those folks.

  7. #87
    Senior Member cpmm665's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Clifton Park, NY
    Posts
    414

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DoubleHaul View Post
    That is what they said. Do you believe it? I don't. I think they are looking for a way to reduce entries that will cause the least amount of uproar and came up with that story to justify it.

    I think that if the MNRC wants to limit entries they should propose a limit on entries and not come up with a bogus story about concern for younger dogs. To me, this proposal hurts most the folks who are likely to step up and try to qualify and run a MN when it is close to them--those for whom the MN might be a once in a lifetime experience--and I think it is particularly mean spirited to reduce entries in a way that would disproportionally affect those folks.

    I agree. If the MN happens to be in your region within the time frame you earn an MH and qualify to attend the MN so be it. If you pay attention to the Average Age of a MN qualifying dog (via Retriever Results) how many under 3 or even 5 are there?
    Cindy Von Sutphen

    Dai Suki Desu MH
    Reed Lanes Ladies Love a Rockstar CGC
    LPK's If I Can Call You Betty (da behbeh gurl)

  8. #88
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Illinois Wisconsin border
    Posts
    874

    Default

    A MH title is a MH title no matter the age. It's silly to start to decide by age/experience who should qualify by age.
    There are Master Dogs at two three years old talented, trained, ready to compete at the National level. Conversely there are seven and eight year old dogs who needed 20 passes to get thier titles who will never be able to compete or even qualify at anything other then a weekend test. Some hunt tests have small numbers, few pros, easy tests or follow judges that have reps for passing everything. Don't have a solution for numbers outside of raising qualification scores
    As are done in obedience trials and that won't fly, but, putting young MH dogs in the backseat shouldn't fly either.
    Earl Dillow

  9. #89
    Senior Member Brad B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Winnie, TX
    Posts
    1,656

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas D View Post
    Don't you think that somewhere along the way amateur handlers have gotten shoved to the back of the Master National bus?
    No. Why do you think that?

  10. #90
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    1,190

    Default

    It is more economical to send your dog with a pro. Most amat can't take off that long a period while the pros can go down way ahead of time and start training. Most pros pool together rent a house and already have training areas. Amat shows up and he is attending a meeting on how to work wingers etc.
    Gentle in what you do. Firm in how you do it.

    CH SILVERCREEK MURRAY SAMUEL (MURRAY) WDQ CGC MH *** 2/16/00 - 12/26/12
    WESTWIND WHISPERING COVE (LARRY son of Murray) WDQ MH ***
    LPK DELAWARE RIVER WHISPERING COVE **(SAVAGE SAM son of FC Chester MH)
    WESTWIND WHISPERING COVE JAY ** ( Larry's son and Murray's grandson)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •