Anyone who accepts money to train and/or handle dogs.

Evan

 

So that definition would include the APDTA lady that teaches the puppy classes at PetSmart? I am not being facetious, where do you draw the line?

 

Maybe the rules should be consulted as there's some incomplete and some incorrect information being posted. HPW

 

One way to not be a pro trainer is to buy 20+ puppies a year and train them and sell them as started or finished dogs and make 100,000 a year. but if you teach people to train their dog at Petsmart for $7 an hour you are SOL...LOL

 

Your right Harry! I already have convergent opinions from two folks I respect. Amy says "paid for training hunt or trial/test only". Ken says, "anyone that lays hands on dogs for training". No wonder it is such a divisive issue, is there a source for a real, written definition?

 

is there a source for a real, written definition?

With regard to Amateur status in retriever field trials, the rule book.

Amy Dahl

 

The definition of a Pro?
There have been hundreds of posts on this topic on RTF over the years and I don't think anyone's mind has ever been changed.

Tim

 

The AKC rulebook for Field Trials does not directly define a professional. It gives definitions of what excludes someone from being an Amateur, so by default part of that lists the definition of a professional. It's up to the FTC to determine if the entrant/handler/judge meets this definition. Good luck! HPW

(page 46 I think)

3. The following definitions and standards should be
followed in determining the status of any person to be an
Amateur:
(a) For purposes of eligibility to judge under Section 3
of Chapter 14 of the Rules for Retriever trials, a person
shall be considered an Amateur who during the period of
two years preceding the trial in question has not earned
any part of his or her livelihood from the training of a
dog for hunting or field trial competition and/or from the
handling of a dog in field trial competition at any level.
(b) For purposes of eligibility of a person to compete in
an Amateur All-Age stake at a licensed or member
retriever trial under Section 10 of Chapter 14, the standard
set forth in paragraph (a) above shall apply but the
time period applicable shall be one year preceding the​

trial in question.

 

(page 46 I think)

3. The following definitions and standards should be
followed in determining the status of any person to be an
Amateur:
(a) For purposes of eligibility to judge under Section 3
of Chapter 14 of the Rules for Retriever trials, a person
shall be considered an Amateur who during the period of
two years preceding the trial in question has not earned
any part of his or her livelihood from the training of a
dog for hunting or field trial competition and/or from the
handling of a dog in field trial competition at any level.
(b) For purposes of eligibility of a person to compete in
an Amateur All-Age stake at a licensed or member
retriever trial under Section 10 of Chapter 14, the standard
set forth in paragraph (a) above shall apply but the
time period applicable shall be one year preceding the​

trial in question.

I was just going to type the same Harry. page 34 in my book.
Now if Ms. Molly MiniVan teaching at petsmart
has any of the pups go on to be hunting dogs
or run in a derby or Q she is indeeed a training
pro. and it does not need to be a full time job.
Note "Any Part".... and they do need to be good
at what they do, just get paid to do it.



.

 

Evan very correctly in my view gave the following answer

Anyone who accepts money to train and/or handle dogs.

I'd merely add the rider "and get's away with it over time".

It's a bit like good conduct medals in the military; awarded for a long history of undetected crime.

Eug

 

Well, this is currently a hot topic down south right now.... where one person's status has been challenged. But, the definition is vague in the sense that it does not state whether one has to have their hand over the dog's head to meet the definition of "train" other than the statement "at any level." Personally, I don't think a seminar qualifies any more than one selling video tapes. And, isn't obedience the foundation of our retriever training? Definitely a slippery slope.

3. The following definitions and standards should be
followed in determining the status of any person to be an
Amateur:
(a) For purposes of eligibility to judge under Section 3
of Chapter 14 of the Rules for Retriever trials, a person
shall be considered an Amateur who during the period of
two years preceding the trial in question has not earned
any part of his or her livelihood from the training of a
dog for hunting or field trial competition and/or from the
handling of a dog in field trial competition at any level.
(b) For purposes of eligibility of a person to compete in
an Amateur All-Age stake at a licensed or member
retriever trial under Section 10 of Chapter 14, the standard
set forth in paragraph (a) above shall apply but the
time period applicable shall be one year preceding the
trial in question.
(c) No person shall be entitled to status as an Amateur
if it is determined that it is inappropriate for such person
to judge or to compete as an Amateur by virtue of a relationship
or an association with a professional other than
as a client. The time periods for any disqualification from
Amateur status under this section shall be the same as
those fixed by paragraphs (a) and (b) above.
(d) The determination of Amateur status under these
directives for the purpose of any particular field trial shall​

be made by the Field Trial Committee for that trial.

 

Well, this is currently a hot topic down south right now.... where one person's status has been challenged. But, the definition is vague in the sense that it does not state whether one has to have their hand over the dog's head to meet the definition of "train" other than the statement "at any level." Personally, I don't think a seminar qualifies any more than one selling video tapes. And, isn't obedience the foundation of our retriever training? Definitely a slippery slope.

Good post Susan, couldn't agree more!

 

geez people you make this confusing.

Mr Bora, I think you are wrong.

losthwy, yes what?

 

geez people you make this confusing.

Mr Bora, I think you are wrong.

losthwy, yes what?

That possibility existents with every line I type.
Yet…………
What differs Ms. Molly at petco with the local bubba’s future hunting dogs.
From
The person doing young dog training at Handjem?????

I mean aside from having to clean the ferret pen ;-)


hmmmmmmm


.

 

The original posters questions asked "does it extend to giving seminars" where the person did not touch the dog?.................... not to try to get things back on track or anything....

 

I don't think going out in the back parking lot and doing marks is part of their program.

How bout you have your next chessie exclusively trained by molly and see how far that gets you in the next field trial.

using clickers and teaching, sit, stay, roll over and heel gets you very far and is not a threat to anyone running trials.

 

As stated, it is up to the event giving committee to determine one's status. This is highly unfair to both parties - the entrant and the committee.

My club could ALLOW Danny Farmer or Mike Lardy to run the amateur, and unless someone protests, the placements would stand.

This sport was founded by people who had morals and ethics and the rulebook was written to assume its participants would have the same. Over time, that has proven to be a poor assumption by the original architects of the sport and the rulebook. By in large, its a moot point... but every now and then someone exploits the vagueness/loopholes in the rulebook and I think the community at large handles it very well. Fortunately, the community is very small and tight knit.

If someone trains retrievers for hunting or for the purpose of competing in retriever performance events in exchange for compensation, they are not an amateur. This would also include the handling of retrievers in retriever performance events... Hunting guides who handle a dog for compensation are still amateurs.

It doesn't matter who is a pro, what matters is who is not an amateur.

Holding seminars, making videos, or selling dog training equipment should not affect one's amateur status.

The spirit of the rule is, typically, just as important as the written rule.

SM

 

....

This sport was founded by people who had morals and ethics and the rulebook was written to assume its participants would have the same. Over time, that has proven to be a poor assumption by the original architects of the sport and the rulebook. By in large, its a moot point... but every now and then someone exploits the vagueness/loopholes in the rulebook and I think the community at large handles it very well. Fortunately, the community is very small and tight knit.....



...The spirit of the rule is, typically, just as important as the written rule.

SM

who are you and what have you done to Shayne





.

 

I would think that if said individual profited from the seminar, then yes he is considered a pro, per AKC rules.

 

I was paid $1,000 to use my property and pavillion to hold the seminar. I assisted at the seminar by throwing birds, shooting flyers, shuttling dogs, and even gave advise to handlers (too late on that whistle)............ i'm a pro?

If the seminar guy is a pro... the video guy is a pro... and the equipment salesman is a pro.

SM

 

So is Dennis Voit who just did an advanced seminar with Lardy a pro or Amateur?

 

Dennis Voigt is an amateur and has been one for his entire field trial career

 

So as long as I never touch the dog, I can make as much money as I want and still be an AM?

 

seems to me if you are already a professional dog trainer it would be pretty difficult to continue to do that without ever touching a dog

you can sell insurance, fly airplanes, build houses, be a tradesman, or do most anything except conform to the specific rules regarding training retrievers for field competition and hunting and earn as much money as you want and still be an amateur, you can even be retired and be an amateur......

 

I am pretty sure you get can only earn up to $150,000

 

I just think that rules are out dated. It is funny that my wife who has a PHD works 50 plus hours a week could care less about standing next to a dog is considered a pro and someone who like Evan is not. Sorry but you will never convince me of this one.

 

Well someone on here is right and someone is wrong, now do I believe an ex pro or an old timer

 

Believe in the ex Pro.

 

Dex, your wife is a PHD (Pizza Hut Dude) yep, shes pro

 

I thought Pro was defined as anyone who starts to win consistently in the amateur stakes. And may have given advice to somebody about some dog at sometime, somewhere, for which any money was exchanged, in any venue, OB, Agility, Nutritionist, Dog-Walker. Even so far as buying someone lunch and drinks

 

Unfortunately the spirit only lives in about 90% of us. For the other 10% we need better rules......

 

Retract my question.

 

So how does this relate then to someone running another person's dog in a HT?

Travis

I don't understand your question. If you take money to run someone else's dog in a hunting test, you're fine to do anything you want in hunting tests; ie run any stake or judge any stake.

But, since you took money to handle a dog at a hunting test you can no longer run the amateur in field trials or judge field trials. You are however, eligible to run any other stake in a field trial.

So all this thread concerns is running the amateur stake or judging field trials.

 

Sonny and Cher singing "I've got you, babe" in the background

It's GROUNDHOG DAY!

It's Deja Vu all over again.

Two points:
1) The Rule Book defines what constitutes an Amateur.
2) If you don't like the Rule Book, or think it needs further clarification, feel free to contact the Retriever Advisory Committee

Otherwise, this is just so much more hot air .... swirling around for the upmteenth time

 

Two points:
1) The Rule Book defines what constitutes an Amateur.
2) If you don't like the Rule Book, or think it needs further clarification, feel free to contact the Retriever Advisory Committee

Otherwise, this is just so much more hot air .... swirling around for the upmteenth time

...............

 

I understand there has been some grumbling here and there about people accepting gas/fuel/lodging compensation for taking their "friends" dogs on the road with them and handling them for their friends. I take more issue with a person who may run a dog one weekend then judge it the next.

As the rules read- one could argue that accepting money for expenses isn't accepting money for your livelihood and, one could just as easily argue that it is because accepting money for gas, expenses and handling makes the trip much more affordable and therefore, makes the persons' livelihood an easier existence.

Ted, not sure why you put people down consistently when you don't like the topic they are discussing. Why not just step out if the subject doesn't agree with you? From what I've read, people have brought some good points to light and put some thought into their feelings about the subject. Why is that "hot air swirling around?"

 

Ted, not sure why you put people down consistently when you don't like the topic they are discussing. Why not just step out if the subject doesn't agree with you? From what I've read, people have brought some good points to light and put some thought into their feelings about the subject. Why is that "hot air swirling around?"

Here's the deal

1) If you are going to discuss a topic, some basic research is necessary.
For example, look at the Rules.
2) If you are REALLY concerned about the issue, then do something about it. In this case, get the Rule changed.
3) If you are not able to do 1 or willing to do 2, I don't give much credence to the discussion

But, hey if you and others want to talk about stuff, and act like it means something, but do nothing about it, feel free

Oh, and by the way, IF you wanted to be troubled with previous discussions on this subject, there is that silly little search feature

 

I have an aunt who works for Petsmart but doesn't know what a derby is but knows what a clicker is who has a friend who was married to a pro but they are split up and she has a neighbor who talked at a seminar who took home $700 in cash when it only costed her $300 to get there and she knows someone who owns a pavillion who charged $1000 for someone to sit at the picnic tables and petted their dogs. Is she a pro?