RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner
61 - 80 of 88 Posts
Kevin Said: "Which is better -- having to remember one set of rules and by-laws, or three?

Which is better -- three clubs earning $500 for their respective sanctioning bodies, or $1500 for one?

Which is better -- three sanctioning bodies and two dog registries not working in concert and cooperation for all hunt test participants, or one sanctioning body and dog registry acting responsively to its members?

Which is better -- coming together in unity in the names of principle and pragmatism, or dividing in the name of "choice?"



Okay Chairman Kevin,

So you're a Commie. Just kidding, hope you'll give it a try some day. Think you'll like it.

Counter-revolutionary, Redstar
 
The best of luck in starting your new organization. The more dog games, the better it will be for the dogs.

I hope you succeed

Joe M.
 
Pardon me while I ride the fence. I can see the merits of both sides of this debate and agree with points from both sides. I hope that there will always be people who are willing to take a risk and try something different and new, it keeps things from becoming stagnant. I wish the NFRA the best of luck, it sounds like they are trying to take the best from the other organizations. Having said that I also believe that there is only so much money, clubs and participants to go around and I don't think that there can be this many viable organizations. However this should in no way deter us from trying to build the better mouse trap. Put'em all out there and let the chips fall where they may. It will be very interesting to see who is left stading in a couple of years, maybe everyone.. maybe no one.

As Darwin says, "SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST".

:usa
 
Titles, pedigrees, and choices.

These seem to be some sticking points. AKC only recognizes AKC titles on its pedigrees. AKC does not have intermediate FT titles. So individuals tag QAA dogs with *** or QAA, or AAQ or some such, on hand-typed documents, because AKC does not provide this information, even though these are AKC events. AKC also does not formally recognize those animals who have had multiple completions of a Master National event. Both of these pedigree omissions could be corrected by the FT or HT Advisory Committees. Those committees are made up of US, the retrieverites. The committee is not AKC telling us what to do, it is us telling AKC what we want.

CKC only allows CKC titles on THEIR pedigrees. AKC titles will not show up on CKC pedigrees. Does this make the CKC FT & HT games less valuable to the enthusiast? In my mind, no. What is far more damaging to the percieved value of titles earned in Canada is that there are NO shot flyers allowed in retriever games, by law, nationwide. CKC does have a derby-level title (JFTR) and an all-age title (QFTR). These involve more than just getting a ribbon. For the JFTR, a dog must earn placements and five or more Junior (Derby) points, however a win is not mandatory. For the QFTR, a dog must have a win in Qualifying, plust a total of ten points in Qualifying, OR ribbons or placements in Open or Amateur stakes.

UKC/HRC claims to be working on recognizing any titles a dog has earned on that dog's pedigree. It remains to be seen, when I register Yankee with UKC, if this is so, as she holds both AKC and CKC titles.

AKC, UKC and CKC all have reciprocal agreements with each other as far as registration is concerned. You can register a dog with all three of these organizations. Yet the titles will not transfer, even though the titles are listed on the registration slip when it is sent in as part of the documentation to cross-register.

Championships. There are no less than ELEVEN different agility Championships available for any dog to earn. NONE of these requires a dog to defeat one single other dog to earn it. Yet I have had an agility person tell me with a straight face, that one of these agility Championships is harder to earn than an FC title! Perceptions, again.

I don't see the AKC, CKC, or UKC games going away, or merging, any time soon. All three of these are supported by strong registries, where the bulk of these organizations' revenues come from. NAHRA has no registry to support its programs, neither does NFRA. Therefore, revenues come directly from those who participate in the activity.

Aside from the money issue, there is the communication/support issue. AKC is a republic, meaning that representatives from member clubs vote on changes to rules and regulations. However, the Retriever Advisory Committee is where change initiates. In most cases, if the RAC recommends a change, the AKC delegate body will rubber-stamp it. It behooves anyone running in one of the AKC games to know who is on the advisory committee(s), what the issues are, and to let them know if you have any ideas for changes. This can be done directly, or through your AKC retriever club.

From what I have seen so far, UKC operates in a similar fashion.

CKC is a direct-member organization. Anyone can join the CKC, and if they are a Canadian resident, they can propose rule changes and vote on those changes. CKC has a pretty nifty experiment going on right now, called "publish for comment". On their website, proposals are posted, and members may post what they like or dislike about the proposals.

NAHRA has not published their by-laws, nor yet their rulebook (yet they claimed eight months ago that it was at the printer's). There seems to be little input from the membership, either directly or through their local club's representative.

NFRA was just born yesterday, and I look forward to looking over their by-laws.

I don't know that any of this will "dilute" anything. A lot depends on the region where you live. In Central NY, things are spread out, and there are not many folks participating in ANY of the retriever games. That makes any event hard to put on, because of lack of bodies, etc. Add to that the fact that there are only so many viable weekends to run tests in, and the summer calendar gets pretty full. Where a person chooses to spend their time/money really boils down to what game gives them the most personal satisfaction and/or helps them meet their own self-devised goals. In any event, at least in this neck of the woods, it seems to be the same crowd manning the tests, be they AKC or NAHRA (no HRC events here as of yet). So I doubt that there would be much conflict insofar as an AKC event on the same day as a UKC event, a NAHRA event and an NFRA event. Just wouldn't happen.

It's all interesting, anyway!

Lisa
 
:lol:

When this is all done, could someone post a new thread and tell us what you learned about the new dog organization....................

I aint readin all those postssssss :wink:


Mike
 
Amiable,

Which is better -- three clubs earning $500 for their respective sanctioning bodies, or $1500 for one?

Which is better -- three sanctioning bodies and two dog registries not working in concert and cooperation for all hunt test participants, or one sanctioning body and dog registry acting responsively to its members?

Which is better -- coming together in unity in the names of principle and pragmatism, or dividing in the name of "choice?"


I will preface this with the info that I don't run HTs at this time, just FTs, but.......I ask you that if the above had occurred a few years ago and the one that prevailed had been NAHRA what kind of mess would the HT game be in right now?

Anthony
 
NFRA - To many marsh mops. :p

Wow! Finally we have a program that doesn't allow 17 whistle refusals to get the same ribbon as one with no-whistle refusals.

RC, you?re on to something here. It's the perfect venue to gap the serious dogs that can't compete day-in day-out with the pro-trained amateur run trial dogs. At least I hope that's what this is.

A hunt test with a winner. I like it!

Good luck and I'll be there for the inaugural.
 
Lisa Van Loo said:

AKC also does not formally recognize those animals who have had multiple completions of a Master National event. Both of these pedigree omissions could be corrected by the FT or HT Advisory Committees. Those committees are made up of US, the retrieverites. The committee is not AKC telling us what to do, it is us telling AKC what we want.
Yes and no.

The AKC does not recognize the Master National Retriever title because the Master National Retriever Club is a licensed club just like the Central New York RC or the Atlanta RC...nothing more, nothing less. The MNR title is not likely to be recognized by the AKC in our lifetime due to the large variances in the testing, evaluation, and qualifications for acquiring the title.

As for pedigree omissions, neither the RAC nor the RHTAC has anything to do with the types of titles awarded. They could certainly propose those, or any other, kinds of changes (as you pointed out) but the final word would come from the AKC Delegate Body, which is made up of about 10% field clubs and 90% conformation clubs, or the Board of Directors, of which NONE of the 12 are from a field (HT or FT) background.

Yup...we can tell 'em what we want...but if we don't lobby the BOD or the Delegate Body for the votes, we won't get anything changed.

In most cases, if the RAC recommends a change, the AKC delegate body will rubber-stamp it. It behooves anyone running in one of the AKC games to know who is on the advisory committee(s), what the issues are, and to let them know if you have any ideas for changes. This can be done directly, or through your AKC retriever club.
As Quick Draw McGraw used to say, "Hol' on there BabbaLooey!"

Any recommendation made by the RAC or the RHTAC has to be approved by the Performance Events Dept of the AKC before it is recommended to the BOD or the Delegate Body. Since field trials are run under AKC rules, the delegate body must approve any changes...and those changes better be buttoned up and tighter than a tick on a dog before they're submitted. HTs are run under Regulations and Guidelines, so the Board of Directors can approve those changes without a delegate body vote.

Changes in either discipline can be proposed by individuals or clubs, but they MUST be sponsored by at least two licensed clubs before the RAC or the RHTAC will entertain them. After their merit is determined, they will be denied or proposed to the licensed clubs for discussion, and then a vote, or changes if discussion proves them necessary, and THEN a vote. In short, there are a lot of folks who put their hands on each and every change that is made to rules or regs/guidelines in either discipline before they ever make their way to New York for a vote.

Keith Griffith
 
More organisations=more events=a better chance running a reasonable amount of dogs instead of a 2 day assembly line.

More power to you guys

It's a game and the more opportunities there are means the more people that will get the chance to play.
 
Looks like fun!

:D A little competition never hurt anyone.Were all training with field trial basics....so now theres a game thats hybrid.I hope it takes off.I would like to know if HRC is goint to foil it by not allowing a club to go both ways,because of the competition.We shall see.
 
Jay

What makes you think HRC would foil it?

Do ANY national org.'s foil an attempt to affiliate with more than one national ret. club?

Are you aware that there is nothing in the HRC guidelines for a new affiliate club limiting it to just one national club affiliation? There are printed guidelines if your club is an affiliate with more than one nat'l ret. org.



Curious,

Rick Fanella
 
Andre,

Like you, I spent some time perusing the R/Rs. Just curious as to your take on their 'switch' rule. I agree with a dog switching the AOF being eliminated, but how can a dog switching birds not be. From a hunters standpoint, which is the most egregious error?

Admittedly this program is not set up for hunters, I question that it's really set for hunting dogs. With rules for penalizing popping, but not whining...again, tell me which of those two faults is more problematic for a hunting dog?

It's frequently quite telling just what the founders of an organization view as their personal weaknesses, by the way they structure their rules and regs. A perfect example would be HRC's lax rules for blind running. S'pose that was written so the founders could weakly get through that portion of their tests?

Another would be AKC's claim to be a hunt test, but ignore the importance hunters place on the value of gun involvement. If it's AKC's desire to rid its program of real hunters, just keep forcing those handlers to carry that toy wooden gun. What a farce.

My views about this new NFRA retriever testing program are just that...one persons glance at the R/R and forming an opinion. In the long run, it means squat. The proof in the pudding will be participation, and longevity.
For that, I wish them well.

UB
 
Switch?

Uncle Bill

There are numerous thing in the rules which need adjustment if you ask me and I have not given great consideration to any one of the problems.

What I have done is come to the conclusion that they have a heack of a good start at defining an entirely new program.

Can only guess that with the bylaws as they are written now that the member clubs will have the chance to implement changes. Well, almost. They will be able to contribute through defined guidelines and the BOD will have the final say so.

My main concern is in the actual judging. I suspect there could be a bit of overload involved. Will have to see how it goes to know for sure.

To answer your question... A switch should be a serious deduction. Bird switch or area switch. With exception when the switch is the result of a good nose picking up scent from another fall area while still in the correct fall area.

Andr
 
switching

Dear Sir (Uncle Bill), Thank you for the informative comments on switching. Please note that switching on birds indeed can receive a serious penalty under the judge's subjective scoring system. Although not an immediate disqualification, the judge's can deduct upto 25 percent of the available points for the particular test in which the switch on birds occured. Please refer to Chapter 2, Section15.D and Chapter 8, Section 3 of the Rules and Regulations for NFRA Field Tests regarding the use of judge's subjective scoring.
 
I checked out the new organizations website and liked about everything I read; however, I really dislike the upland part of the senior and master. I simply don't train my dogs to work in the upland fields. I run hunt tests, and I'm getting started, somewhat, in field trials and with that I only hunt ducks and geese with my dogs. At this point I would only run the junior and open with my dogs. I believe, for retrievers, the upland and trailing tests should be optional. JMHAO. Jeff
 
61 - 80 of 88 Posts