[Bryan Manning]

With alot of talk about high numbers in trials some think that limited opens are the way to go. My question is what about the people that ignore the rules? If someone suspects a dog of not being QAA what do you do? And how exactly can the AKC uphold a rule such as this if it's not actually a title thats earned?

 

[cakaiser]

I guess you could report it to the FTS, but I would think you better be pretty darn sure of your facts before accusing someone. I think what AKC would do is require the person to provide documentation of when and where they became QAA, if they couldn't, any limited places they received would be invalid. KG might have some thoughts on this.

 

[Bryan Manning]

Not trying to accuse anybody really was just wondering. I guess I was leening more toward how would someone know? And if the AKC doesn't keep up with it then why is it even a rule? My dog is QAA and I would be glad to provide proof. But not everybody is honest. Just something I was thinking about while I am of work with a sick daughter.

 

[jeff t.]

Not trying to accuse anybody really was just wondering. I guess I was leening more toward how would someone know? And if the AKC doesn't keep up with it then why is it even a rule? My dog is QAA and I would be glad to provide proof. But not everybody is honest. Just something I was thinking about while I am of work with a sick daughter.

I suspect it wouldn't be noticed unless the dog received a placement.

 

[EdA]

the competition records of all retrievers entered in AKC licensed or member field trials are available upon request, as field trial secretary I request a review of the competition records of any dog entered that I do not have direct or heresay knowledge confirming that the dog is eligible and some of them are not eligible for the stake that they have been entered in.
Unfortunately at this time there is no penalty for someone who submits an entry for a non-eligible dog, if there was a penalty I suspect the practice would cease.

 

[Bryan Manning]

Unfortunately at this time there is no penalty for someone who submits an entry for a non-eligible dog, if there was a penalty I suspect the practice would cease.

Are you saying that if you find someone not eligible they can still run the trial, or that the only thing you can do is not let them run?

 

[EdA]

Are you saying that if you find someone not eligible they can still run the trial, or that the only thing you can do is not let them run?

the only thing the Field Trial Committee can do (Chapter 8 Section 11) is remove the ineligible dog from the stake.

 

[Sean H]

Forgive my inexprience, but how exactly does a dog become QAA? Reading the AKC rulebook, it looks like all that the dog needs is a 1st or 2nd placement in a single qualifier. Is that correct?

 

[Ga Woodrow]

To further the discussion. What would happen if the non QAA dog did place? Has it happened before?

 

[Bryan Manning]

Forgive my inexprience, but how exactly does a dog become QAA? Reading the AKC rulebook, it looks like all that the dog needs is a 1st or 2nd placement in a single qualifier. Is that correct?

Or you can place or JAM in an All-Age stake.

 

[EdA]

To further the discussion. What would happen if the non QAA dog did place? Has it happened before?

the placement would be voided, then everyone below moves up 1 spot and RJ becomes 4th

 

[EdA]

To further the discussion. What would happen if the non QAA dog did place? Has it happened before?

I think an even more pertinent question is why has it happened, the rules regarding eligibility for various stakes are fairly simple to read and understand

 

[Bryan Manning]

I think an even more pertinent question is why has it happened, the rules regarding eligibility for various stakes are fairly simple to read and understand

I have never been a FT secratary I am just getting started in this game. But do you actually see this a lot?

 

[EdA]

I have never been a FT secratary I am just getting started in this game. But do you actually see this a lot?

No, but some either continue to be ignorant of the rules or just ignore them.

 

[Pete Marcellus]

No, but some either continue to be ignorant of the rules or just ignore them.

I suspect that some enter the ineligible dog, hoping no one will notice just so they can get their handling fee.

Pete

 

[cakaiser]

Wow, somehow I never dreamed this goes on, what world am I living in. Failing at my long time and highly paid duties as fts

 

[K G]

I was hesitant to post on this topic until I had the time to access the Rules on Misconduct. I was reasonably sure that entering an ineligible dog was a Misconduct issue.

Offense
IV. Violation of AKC Rules/Regulations or Club Regulations (Event Suspension)
k. Providing fraudulent information on an entry to show an ineligible dog

Penalty/Mitigated 3 mo/$500
Penalty/Standard 6 mo/$1000
Penalty/Aggravated 1 yr/$2000

I think it could be argued successfully that entering a dog as eligible in a stake when in fact it is NOT eligible to run that stake is Misconduct.

kg

 

[EdA]

I was hesitant to post on this topic until I had the time to access the Rules on Misconduct. I was reasonably sure that entering an ineligible dog was a Misconduct issue.



I think it could be argued successfully that entering a dog as eligible in a stake when in fact it is NOT eligible to run that stake is Misconduct.

kg

that is not an option offered or suggested by the Performance Events Department

 

[Bryan Manning]

that is not an option offered or suggested by the Performance Events Department

Dr. Ed can anybody get a reffrence on a dog from the Performance Events Department at any time?

 

[K G]

that is not an option offered or suggested by the Performance Events Department

Could it be that the person you talked to or corresponded with in Performance Events has never READ the "Dealing With Misconduct" book?

kg