Most judges deal with this by using a mat and specifying either dog or handler must be on the mat for all sends or sometimes instructions may be something like "4 out of 6 feet must be on the mat". LOL
Judging has gotten a little lax. Dogs should sit tractably at heel in the position designated and not be 6 to 10 feet out in front of the handler when the last bird goes down. Usually you have a handler barking heel a dozen times at a creeper until dogs' tail finally touches the mat and everybody thinks it's OK. Meanwhile the honor dog has to sit there and listen to this crap. I'd like it if judges would simply tell the handler to pick up their dog at that point or at a minimum the creepers who don't heel on the first command should be dismissed.
The sport after all is meant for the Non-Slip Retriever no?

 

If a dog can creep & still mark the birds, more power to them. If mine moves @ all, she's gone.

 

Maybe 10 years ago or more, I attended a judging seminar with a panel of Judy Aycock, Mitch Patterson, and Tony Snow, moderated by Ed Aycock.
Mitch said that he liked to require the handler to be on the mat. His rationale was that if the dog got ahead of the handler, the handler couldn't help the dog. That made sense to me, so I have used Mitch's system over the years. I have been happy with the results, and see no reason to change.

When a dog creeps out too far, I will require the handler to re-heel the dog.

I don't like creepers and whiners, but I won't drop them for it. Poor line manners are a minor, not a moderate or serious fault. I prefer to judge dogs by what they do in the field, not on the mat.

If problems with line manners persist, I might drop a dog. I haven't done it yet, though. I have dropped a dog's placement for line manner issues, though.

 

I agree as well with this.

 

Ted,

I like that thinking. With regards to if the dog goes out too far the handler can't help the dog.

Janet

 

I've also weighed a dog's line manners in placing a dog. Once judged a dog in an Amateur stake that whined, loudly, in all four series on the mat, in the honor box and in the holding blind. The dog's work in the field was exceptional. When it came time to determine placements there was another dog that did similar, but not quite equal, work without the noise and received the blue. My co-judge and I felt that the accrued faults were of a nature to deny a win. Too bad.

I used to feel that a dog needed to stay on the mat at all times but attended a judge's seminar once where John Russell voiced his belief that a creeper would ultimately penalize itself. I've worked hard on tractability at the line and feel that it is a very important quality. I'd like to see that trait encouraged, held up as an ideal behavior, and rewarded. However, like Ted, I now let them creep and only ask to have them re-heel once they pass a predetermined line in the field.

 

And to add more to my post. John Russell once encouraged me to set up my tests in such a fashion so as not to penalize dogs that possessed the qualities that I personally found most desirable. While I have worked hard to train a dog that would sit calmly at the line and work with me to watch the birds or run a blind, the quality that I like the most is a dog that feels that it must have every bird and is prepared to go to almost any length to get it. That, and a dog who can flat-out mark. I have chosen to make some concessions on line manners for those animals. Which is certainly not to say that there aren't many great dogs who sit calmly at line yet also possess tremendous desire and skill.

 

Hi,
I've mostly run HTs, but that changes tomorrow. This statement seems to imply you can talk to the dog while the birds are going down. "Usually you have a handler barking heel a dozen times at a creeper until dogs' tail finally touches the mat and everybody thinks it's OK. " Is this different in FT vs HT?

Thanks,

 

Hi,
I've mostly run HTs, but that changes tomorrow. This statement seems to imply you can talk to the dog while the birds are going down. "Usually you have a handler barking heel a dozen times at a creeper until dogs' tail finally touches the mat and everybody thinks it's OK. " Is this different in FT vs HT?

Thanks,

This is after the judge has given the dogs number, and the handler is reheeling before sending the dog.

 

Thanks that was what I thought the answer would.

 

You could always save yourself a large headache and train to close to 0 movement as you can! Not even a butt muscle twitch!

 

Thats easy for you to say, you have a Dude pup!

 

The issue isn't with the dog, but whether the hadler is moving right with the dog.

 

John, it's an interesting question, and one that probably has many opinions. As a judge i prefer to give a few intructions as possible. The handlers know the rules and so should the judges. If a mat is on the line it should be used by the handler because it's put their for their benefit. In my mind it doesn't require intruction. If your dog creeps it may interfer with his/her ability to mark a fall.
As a handler it's your call on how to handle a dog on a mat. I'm willing to give a dog it's number even if he/she has crept. I would hope to see a handler re-heel and get their their dog under control, but it's their choice.
As a judge it's my responsibility to make a judgment on a repeated action. I wouldn't drop a dog for poor line manners, but you can be sure at the end of the day that a dog that demonstrates a repeated looseness on line will have a comment on the sheet.

What I believe to be most important is the question of standards. Is a creep acceptable for you? If it's OK for you, then don't worry about it.

My preference is to use a mat as a training tool for my own level of accepted behavior. A creep is never acceptable for me and hope to never have one , especially, in a 4th series.

 

STANDARD PROCEDURE FOR NON-SLIP
RETRIEVER TRIALS
In order that trials may be conducted as uniformly as
practicable, standardization of objectives is essential and,
therefore, all Judges, guns, contestants and officials who
have a part in conducting trials should be familiar with and
be governed so far as possible by the following standard:
BASIC PRINCIPLES
1. The purpose of a Non-Slip Retriever trial is to determine
the relative merits of Retrievers in the field.
Retriever field trials should, therefore, simulate as nearly
as possible the conditions met in an ordinary day’s shoot.
Dogs are expected to retrieve any type of game bird
under all conditions, and the Judges and the Field Trial
Committee have complete control over the mechanics
and requirements of each trial. This latitude is permitted
in order to allow for the difference in conditions
which may arise in trials given in widely separated
parts of the United States, which difference may well
necessitate different methods of conducting tests.
No live game bird, or any other species of bird or fowl,
shall be used in a test while under any form of restraint
or physical impairment at any sanctioned, licensed, or
member club event for Retrievers.
26
2. The function of a Non-Slip Retriever is to seek and
retrieve “fallen’’ game when ordered to do so. He
should sit quietly on line or in the blind, walk at heel, or
assume any station designated by his handler until sent
to retrieve. When ordered, a dog should retrieve quickly
and briskly without unduly disturbing too much
ground, and should deliver tenderly to hand. He should
then await further orders.
Accurate marking is of primary importance. A dog
which marks the fall of a bird, uses the wind, follows a
strong cripple, and will take direction from his handler
is of great value.

 

Breck, as long as we're quoting the rule book, I thought it might be helpful to post up the list of faults.

You implied earlier that you would have a handler just pick up it's dog for poor line manners. Is elimination from the stake warranted based on the category that particular fault is in? How "severe" must the infraction be to put it into the serious fault category?

Man, I have a terrible time editing and formating posts with this new and improved interface...

I. SERIOUS FAULTS. (Serious faults listed cover all those instances where the Standard describes conduct of the dog which in and of itself justifies elimination from the stake. There are in the Standard three descriptions of handler misconduct justifying elimination from the stake i.e., blocking a dog’s view of a mark, throwing objects to encourage water entry and carrying exposed training equipment and other excessive restraint of the dog. While these are certainly to be enforced, they are not listed here under serious faults demonstrated by retrievers. The failure to list handler misconduct under serious faults in no way means that such misconduct is less serious or does not justify elimination from the stake.)

1. Repeated evidence of “poor nose.’’
2. Failure to enter either rough cover, water, ice, mud, or any other situation involving unpleasant or difficult “going’’ for the dog, after having been ordered to do so several times.
3. Returning to the handler without the bird where not called in, except on a marked retrieve where the dog was confused as to whether it was sent.
4. Stopping the hunt or ignoring a bird when found and leaving it.
5. “Switching birds,’’ i.e., giving up after a hunt in the area of the fall for one bird and going to and hunting “the area’’ of another “fall,’’ or dropping the bird being retrieved, and picking up another.
6. “Out-of-control,’’ i.e., paying no attention to many whistles and directions by the handler.
7. Extreme “freezing,’’ i.e., refusal to release a bird on delivery for an unreasonable period of time or until com- pelled to do so by severe methods.
8. Retrieving a decoy, i.e., returning to land with it — mandatory elimination under the “STANDARD.’’
9. Breaking mandatory elimination under the “STANDARD.’’
10. “Hard-mouth,’’ or badly damaging a bird, which, in the opinion of the Judges, was caused solely by the dog without justification — mandatory elimination under the “STANDARD.’’
11. Loud and prolonged whining or barking.
12. Unauthorized watching of the location of a fall for another dog or the planting or retrieve of a blind — manda- tory elimination of the dog under the “STANDARD’’ and possible elimination of the handler from the stake or trial.
13. Failure to find a dead bird which the dog should have found.
14. Breaking for a fall for a dog under judgment by a dog still in the stake but not on line under judgment where, in the opinion of the Judges, the breaking dog or its handler interferes with the normal conduct of the stake.
15. Returning to the area of an old marked fall and hunting.
16. Failure to go when sent on a blind retrieve. 17. Handling on a mark in the Derby Stake.

II. MODERATE FAULTS. (Infractions in this
category may actually be so slight as to warrant their consideration as only a “minor’’ fault, or they may be so severe as to warrant their consideration as a “serious fault”; also, repetitions of a “moderate’’ fault or combination of several of these faults may readily convert the total infractions into a “serious’’ fault.)

1. Failure to mark the “area of the ‘fall,’ ’’ requiring that the dog be handled to the bird; worse on the first bird retrieved than on subsequent birds.
2. Disturbing too much cover either by not going to the area or by leaving it.
3. Reluctance to enter rough cover, water, ice, mud or other situations involving unpleasant “going’’ for the dog.
4. Hunting in a slow and disinterested manner.
5. Poor style, including a disinterested attitude, a slow
or reluctant departure, quest for game, or return with it.
6. “Popping,’’ i.e., stopping and looking back for
7. Not stopping for directions, after two or three whistles
which the dog should have heard.
8. Failure to take lines and directions or to hold lines
and directions more than a short distance.
9. Moderate whining of short duration.
10. Going out of the way by land to a “fall,’’ to an excessive degree to avoid going into the water on a water
retrieve.
11. In any stake other than an All-Age stake, a slight
break after which the dog is brought immediately under control.

III. MINOR FAULTS. (Either severe, or repeated, or combinations of these “minor’’ infractions may summate into a “moderate,’’ or even a “serious’’ fault. Also, they may be so slight as not to warrant any penalty at all.)

1. Going out of its way by land, to an excessive degree, on the return from a water retrieve.
2. Lack of attention.

3. Poor line-manners; “ heeling’’ poorly; not
immediately taking and staying in the position designated; dropping a bird at delivery; jumping after a bird; not remaining quietly on-line after delivery.
4. Slow pick-up of a dead bird (except when fluttering or badly shot-up); dropping bird; handling game in a sloppy manner.
5. Unsteadiness on-line, including creeping.
6. Not stopping at the first whistle that should have been heard, but stopping at the second or third.
7. Popping on a blind retrieve where there are no extenuating circumstances such as distance, wind, shallow (running) water or other conditions which make it difficult to hear the handler’s whistle.
8. Occasional failure to hold the line or take the handler’s directions for more than a few yards.
9. Slight “freezing,’’ or reluctance to give up a bird.
10. Slight short whining or one bark, on being sent toretrieve.
11. Roughness with game.

 

"

The issue isn't with the dog, but whether the hadler is moving right with the dog."
I haven’t seen handlers actually “follow” a bad creeper very far. Maybe they’ll take a step or two forward, since dog has trained them heel means to stay in step with the dog not vice versa, but if dog continues to creep these handlers will generally stop moving forward and let the dog go.
On the other hand you will see handlers who will step over, behind, and dance circles around the dog while barking commands.

 

I have seen FC/AFC dogs who have crept out 10 ft., come back a few feet on the re-heel, dance around out of control, and then the handler would move out to the dog and send it from 7 - 10 ft. from the line. A few dogs were/are famous for this behavior. Whether to drop or not to place is up to the judges and what they will or will not tolerate.

Some will drop, some will withhold the blue or lower a placement for this behavior, some judges don't care. Those who have dogs with these problems soon know who the more tolerant and the less tolerant judges are.

Helen

 

Yea Buzz I know where you're coming from, but in my opinion a dog that does not assume the position, ie sit at heel right here on this black mat, could be considered "out of control" if he does not. A Major Fault.
Anyway, in Field Trials judges don't necessarily need to justify eliminating dogs by citing elimination faults from the rule book.


6. “Out-of-control,’’ i.e., paying no attention to many whistles and directions by the handler.
In my opinion this can interpreted as "paying no attention to many commands" as in handler commanding "heel" 20 times after judges as creeping dog to heel. No different than a cast refusal really.

 

Yea Buzz I know where you're coming from, but in my opinion a dog that does not assume the position, ie sit at heel right here on this black mat, could be considered "out of control" if he does not. A Major Fault.
Anyway, in Field Trials judges don't necessarily need to justify eliminating dogs by citing elimination faults from the rule book.

If it takes 10 "heels" to get a dog on the mat, sure you could say it's out of control... No, you don't need to justify a drop based on elimination faults, but I think that when I judge, I like to keep things in perspective by referring to the list of faults so I'm not unfairly penalizing dogs based on my personal prejudices.

 

Some really good responses so far! I think we all want a dog with a "ton of go" that also exhibits a "ton of whoa".

I personally don't like reading too much into the rules and making my own. I don't drop, or even ding dogs for minor line movement or slight creeping. A dog should want to reposition itself to best see the birds fall. Our job as handlers and trainers is to not let them get too carried away with this and strike some balance.

I can find plenty of "faults" with dogs not being perfect on the line or in the field. My job when judging is to find the one with the most positives such as marking. I try not to crucify dogs that give a little whimper on the send or take a half step in front of the handler to better see the birds fall.

Mick has hit on my real question. I know how most of what I consider good judges feel about dog generated infractions.

What I really want to know is how much movement should be allowed by the handler after they have signalled for the birds and before being released by the judges? If the dog creeps 5 feet, should the handler be allowed to creep with the dog? What about dogs swinging for the flyer second, when the flyer is actually third bird down?

I recently witnessed an AA stake where several handlers walked up several steps in order to block out the flyer station after calling for the birds. One handler went so far as to walk around his dog and then block out the flyer by getting to that side after calling for the birds. Another handler actually stepped on her dog's tail accidentally while miving around to block the flyer.

I know how I feel about this and how I will handle it should it happen to me in the future. I am curious as to how others view this. What rules are you using to form your position?


John

 

What I really want to know is how much movement should be allowed by the handler after they have signalled for the birds and before being released by the judges? If the dog creeps 5 feet, should the handler be allowed to creep with the dog? What about dogs swinging for the flyer second, when the flyer is actually third bird down?

I recently witnessed an AA stake where several handlers walked up several steps in order to block out the flyer station after calling for the birds. One handler went so far as to walk around his dog and then block out the flyer by getting to that side after calling for the birds. Another handler actually stepped on her dog's tail accidentally while miving around to block the flyer.

John

If you require that the handler stand on the mat, you eliminate alot of this stuff.

 

If you saw handlers doing that the judges should have immediately asked the handler to put the lead on their dog and excuse them.
This is one area where the handlers actions, not the dogs warrants elimination from the stake. Block dogs view of a fall and you're history. This includes while on honor.

 

If you saw handlers doing that the judges should have immediately asked the handler to put the lead on their dog and excuse them.
This is one area where the handlers actions, not the dogs warrants elimination from the stake. Block dogs view of a fall and you're history. This includes while on honor.

I agree with the "block the view of the fall and you're history. The difference is, the handler did not block the view of the fall, just the view of the flyer station before the bird was thrown/shot.

For example; middle bird thrown first, dog watches bird and then swings (incorrectly) to flyer. Handler blocks view of flyer station so that dog will focus on bird #2 which is right-hand bird. Handler then allows dog to see bird #3 which is left-hand flyer.

John

 

I didn't read your original post close enough. As long as they're not blocking the view of an actual fall I guess it's OK but if they touch their dog it could be an issue.

To your original question I don't recall if the rules address excessive movement of the handler as in following a creeper or whatever. I sure don't like watching handlers or dogs that are all over the place but admit I did get a kick watching the antics of a dog named Lefty on the line.

 

This is what the Rule Book (page 28) says

10. When on line, a handler shall not place his dog or himself so that the dog’s full vision of the bird is blocked as it falls. This applies to the working dog and the honoring dog. Violation of this provision, if determined by the Judges to be deliberate, is sufficient cause to justify elimination from the stake.

 

I'm having a very hard time with a creep being a major fault. Sorry, but that's just not @ all how I view it. They usually hurt theirselves. Others have this incredible set of peepers that can get away with it. I personally want & expect my girl to not flinch a muscle while on line. I'd have a hard time dinging a dog for creeping. Now if this dog was extremely vocal, it would be noted. That said, show me good to great work in each series. I'd be much more concerned about bringing total failures back to the next series & them placing, than a dog that doesn't stay on the mat.

 

I'm having a very hard time with a creep being a major fault. Sorry, but that's just not @ all how I view it.

​How does the Rule Book view it?

 

Could be a minor to medium fault. Unless the dog was extremely vocal, I wouldn't fault the dog. If I can't come up with more separation than what a dog does online, I shouldn't be judging. Just my opinion.

 

Could be a minor to medium fault. Unless the dog was extremely vocal, I wouldn't fault the dog. If I can't come up with more separation than what a dog does online, I shouldn't be judging. Just my opinion.

So you only judge part of the dog's performance?? Are the dogs not judged from the time the judge says come on down?

 

Next time you have several wild childred in your line up try this. Have dogs honor just before they run, in the holding blind, off lead, no talking. Half of em probably wont be able to stand it. Lol

 

The first open I ever ran Bert Carlson was judging and he did just what you said. Dog honored before he retrieved, watched the birds then went back to the hold.

 

John

I think that there is a difference between what I like and what the Rule Book establishes. I like a dog that sits and watches the birds without a lot of drama. I like a handler that is quiet and graceful on the line. But, that is my personal preference. Others differ. To me, these are tie breaker issues, not call back issues. However, if I saw a dog that was unruly, noisy and a general pain in the butt in three series - I might express my opinion to my co-judge that the dog should not see a fourth series - in the same vein as I would treat a dog with poor style. Repeat offenses make minor faults, moderate, then serious faults.

To the extent that the RAC or the AKC thinks that the Rule Book prohibits the "dance", etc. - I disagree. Of course, we could always change the Rule Book, but that would only continue what I believe to be the RAC's path of over management.

I am far more concerned about issues of dog safety, visibility of guns and birds, the ability of dogs to hear and see their handlers, and the ability of handlers to see their dogs, than I am about these issues. If we were going to legislate, I would argue for legislation about these fundamentals rather then handler/dog movement.

Overall, I think that the handlers who are bouncing all over the line, are not particularly effective. They aren't usually around by the fourth series - if the tests are sufficiently difficult. So, I am not inclined to toss them for line manner issues, but rather let them self eliminate for performance in the field issues. There are very few dogs that can deal with really tough tests without handler assistance. If the dog is 10 feet ahead of the handler when it is time to send, and the handler must be on the mat, well, no more Jockey influence.

If you wanted a basis in the Rule Book for elimination - as opposed to downgrading a dog's performance, you could look to page 32 of the Rule Book

The Judges may require that dogs which have so jumped or crept forward be brought back to heel before being sent for their birds. A handler so ordered should bring his dog to a position satisfactory to the Judges and remain with him in such position until his number is called. In tests including honoring, care should be exercised to treat creeping, on the part of either dog, in a manner not grossly unfair to the other.

Frankly, if I thought the honoring dog/handler were making such a commotion as to interfere with the working dog, I would tell the handler to honor on lead, and drop the dog

As for the mat, I like it because it is uniform

If you say both feet on the mat, there is no confusion (or game playing) Before mats came into vogue, I remember using painted rocks to establish the line and watching pros moving them to widen the strike zone. The first time it happened, I thought it was accidental. The next time, I knew it was deliberate and told the pro to knock it off.

I have done the tufts of grass with tape on them, only to watch the pros "accidentally" step on them to widen the strike zone.

Who needs to police that stuff

Also, if the dogs get wet, the mat helps you keep the handling area from becoming a bog

So I am a mat man.

 

Earlier this month I judged an Open with over 70 starters. The line manners of both the dogs and handlers were very good. Not one dog was asked to reheel. I use the mat with the instructions in the last holding blind. Handlers on mat during all marks. Dogs are to be sent from the mat on blinds.
If a problem did arise, I would use the rule book as guidance in my decision. Under Trial Procedures you will find “When coming to line to be tested, and while on line, the dog and handler should assume such positions as may be directed by the judges.” Also you will find “When ordered to retrieve, the handler shall direct his dog from any position designated by the judges.”
In Line Manners, you will find “During the period from the moment the handler signals readiness for the birds to be thrown until the dog’s number is called, the handler of the working dog or honoring dog shall remain silent.” I may add the handler cannot initiate any noise, both vocal or otherwise, which may include jiggling a choke chain in their pocket, buzzing a mini-prod in their pocket, or stomping their feet. Also you will find no handler shall … or use any other equipment or threatening gestures in such a way as a threat in steadying or CONTROLLING A DOG.
In the Recommendations, that includes faults, you will find the following statement: “The faults included in this classification are those which are observed most often at retriever trials. Others may occur and this classification may serve as a helpful guide on these occasions as to determine the relative importance of such offenses. Finally, the primary consideration of judges in respect to the importance of the faults listed here, as well as others which may occur, is to determine to the extent to which any of the such infractions would detract from the full enjoyment of ‘an ordinary day’s shoot.’”
All of these problems should be discussed with the co-judge prior to judging and the degree of penalty that would be assessed.

Jack
,

 

So you only judge part of the dog's performance?? Are the dogs not judged from the time the judge says come on down?

As I stated earlier, I expect mine to not flinch a muscle. When she does move, she's gone, AKA she broke. A little creep or a big creep does not really concern me that much. Now a dog that's vocal (Not a little whining. That's totally different.) to an annoyance is another thing for myself. Do I prefer watching dogs sit still or just a tad bit of movement? You bet. I certainly care more about marking & blinds than a little animation on the line.