[Guest]

If an amateur is someone who does not receive money to train a dog and a pro is someone who does.

If you are an amatuer and you train a dog that you own and have it at least started and sell the puppy for more than you paid for it does that make you a pro?

 

[Steve]

No

 

[Vickie Lamb]

According to the rules and safely by the rules as they read now: No.

 

[tom]

That is only a pertenant question to someone with a desire to run a dog in an Amateur Stake. (or be a f/t judge) In other words I don't care didley-squat wether I'm considdered a pro or an amateur. It is just not an issue.

Side question: If someone gets paid to Judge (like a conformation judge), can they be an Amateur??

tom

 

[john fallon]

The puppy thing is kind of cut and dried.
What about this: You meet a pro five days a week.You throw birds,shoot flyers help with the leash work and the swim by and run client dog in the Amat. on weekend.For this although you pay for your two dogs on the truck, :roll: you get to run your other two dogs on the big time setups.ect.
:?: :?: :?:
john

 

[Howard N]

For this although you pay for your two dogs on the truck, you get to run your other two dogs on the big time setups.ect

Are you making your livelihood from training dogs? It's getting more gray than selling a dog but I don't think you're making your living or part of your living from training dogs. So I say amateur.

 

[Polock]

NO

 

[john fallon]

What about this: You meet a pro five days a week.You throw birds,shoot flyers help with the leash work and the swim by and run client dog in the Amat. on weekend.For this although you pay for your two dogs on the truck, :roll: you get to run your other two dogs on the big time setups.ect.
:?: :?: :?:
john

This ,of course, is a side questionand is not the topic of the poll.Sorry!

 

[Tim Carrion]

In the original question you are recieving a financial gain from the SALE of a dog. Same as selling a litter of puppies. So you are still an amatuer.

In John's question you and no member of your household are recieving money(or any tangible asset) so no problem. You are still an amatuer.

Tim

 

[Uncle Bill]

I have ALWAYS been an amatuer. I have NEVER played a pro on this or any other board, but I have stayed at a Holiday Inn. :roll:

UB

 

[clipper]

problem: In your original question you ask if this makes you a pro?...then above the poll it says.."still amatuer?..
so not sure how to answer...
well even if i understood the question im still not sure i would know how to answer.. :?

 

[john fallon]

" what about............."?

If the AKC wanted some guideance on what is/is not tangable assetts they cold look to the IRS.They have regs. on" barter" also if the Pro pays workmens comp. on his/her employees they might have trouble with an ins. audit.
Too much of a "hot potato" for the AKC??

 

[Emily Faith]

So some of you are saying that if an amateur keeps a puppy out of a litter thay have and later sell it as a started dog, that makes them a pro? That is completely ridiculous and incorrect under the current rule or its predecessor. Making any part of your livelihood from training other peoples dogs for hunting or field trials is what makes you a pro. Under some peoples misinformed interpretation, everybody who sells a washout would be a pro. By that standard, we would have to do away with the amateur stake because there wouldn't be anyone to run it.

 

[Gerard Rozas]

Ok Emily,

Now what if the ONLY thing that person does as a visible means of support is breed, train and sell dogs - puppies and started - market a training video, and stud out a couple of males. They train every day - travel in the winter and summer and run 25 trials a year. Their whole livelyhood is derived from the FT game, yet they don't have a client dog. But they do have several dogs within intent to sell down the road. What do you call them? By the strict definitions of the AKC they are not a Proffessional dog trainer? But they are a Proffessional Field Trialer.

 

[Emily Faith]

If the so-called "professional field trialer" spends more than he has coming in from the sale of dogs, then no, I do not think he or she is a pro. There are quite a few older field trialers who have retired from their prior profession, who could be "accused" of living in the manner you describe. Heck, that is what I would like to do someday, but I will never be able to get my husband to sell a dog as a started dog. There are plenty of field trialers who are not independently wealthy, who sink way more then we should into the sport, and we might be fortunate enough to get a little of it back every now and then from selling a started dog (Most likely a wash-out), stud fees or selling a litter of puppies. Anyone (That is not training dogs for pay from others) who is achieving any substantial amount of success in field trials is spending and has spent so much money in order to do it that they can never really make a living or a profit for started dogs/stud fees/puppies--no matter what volumn you are talking about. As you might have guessed, I think that this sort of "finger pointing" is extremely detrimental to the sport.

 

[Anthony Heath]

Emily,

1st off I am fine with the designation that a "Pro" is one who gets paid to train dogs blah blah, but does Mary H. not make her living from the sale of puppies?

Didn't Jay and Val make their living selling dogs back in their day.

I would think that there are others, but Hell I don't personally know either of these or have access to their financial records

A.

 

[Lisa Van Loo]

Let's be candid:

The rule designating Amateur vs Professional status is limited to compensation for training or handling, and this is a GOOD THING.

The one, single thing that has led to the erosion of field ability in my breed (Chessies) is the collapse of the big FT breeder. Again, let's be candid. Even in Labs, where quality runs deep, it takes a LOT of litters, and a LOT of raising pups, to learn not only HOW to grade a litter, but also to have replacement pups when the one you picked from the LAST litter doesn't make the grade. Choices are simply either to buy a LOT of pups to start, or breed a LOT of litters until all the stars are lined up in their correct order, and you finally get a winner. You simply can't breed top-quality dogs year after year with only one or two dogs. Eventually you run into some kind of insurmountable issue, and the whole thing goes FOOP! At that point, the "big breeder" has options, while the small-time breeder's whole program goes down the tubes. At which point, the small guy usually gets out, because it is just too hard (and expensive) to sutain a breeding program with only one or two brood bitches. This is what has happened to Chessies. Too many people with one or two litters, then stop breeding. Nobody with a set plan or goal beyond just having a litter this year. No long-range plans, and no definable bloodline.

If we decide that anyone who makes money as a professional Field Trialer (breeder-seller of pups, started/finished dogs, or stud services), then we will be penalizing people for having defined breeding goals, and the ability to turn out top-quality pups on a REGULAR basis (vs the occasional lucky accident). It takes years of dedication to the goal, ability to select mates, then select pups to develop a recognizable bloodline. It requires a number of dogs, otherwise all you see is a general disbursement of good genes here and there in the population. Mass selection doesn't work when you are striving for animals at the top level of FT abuility. To produce that CONSISTENTLY requires a long-range plan, and the ability to actively concentrate genes for good traits while reducing the genes for bad traits. You simply can't do this with one or two brood bitches. You also can't do it by sitting around talking about it. You have to train, and compete with, the dogs you breed, to make sure you are still on the right track. Nobody ever won a field trial just talking about it.

Question for the collective: if "professional field trialers" lose their amateur status, who stands to lose the most?

Lisa

 

[john fallon]

It" don't make no nevermind to me "who is a darn Amateur, but.I think that they should change the rules,if they want to,not look the other way. :idea:


john-Who thinks"Wisdom comes by disillusionment" G.S.

 

[K G]

Gerard Rozas wrote:

"Now what if the ONLY thing that person does as a visible means of support is breed, train and sell dogs - puppies and started - market a training video, and stud out a couple of males. They train every day - travel in the winter and summer and run 25 trials a year. Their whole livelyhood is derived from the FT game, yet they don't have a client dog. But they do have several dogs within intent to sell down the road. What do you call them?"

Anyone who does this bears their own expense all the way up to the time that the pup is sold...or washed out and sold as $1k-$2k gundogs rather than $15-$20k started dogs. I call them unbelievable risk takers.

Anyone who has the expertise and ability to put out a true teaching tool such as a puppy training video, does their best to better both the Golden and Lab breeds through selective, quality breedings, and is able to train and trial full time is a true rarity in the sport....and has done so solely through their own abilities, not by charging clients for training their dogs.

As for their "whole livelihood" being derived from the game, I seriously doubt that that is the case. Many people's "visible means" are just none of our cotton pickin' "bidness."

Keith Griffith

PS...
John, what part of the rule needs changing that is currently avoided by "looking the other way?"

 

[john fallon]

What part of "any" don't we understand. any! nota!zilch! none! not a red cent! Just change the rule...or not.IMHO of course :
john