[Doug Main]

Does anyone have the new proposed rule changes?

 

[jeff t.]

Does anyone have the new proposed rule changes?

http://www.akc.org/pdfs/events/field_trials/rac_proposals07.pdf

 

[Doug Main]

http://www.akc.org/pdfs/events/field_trials/rac_proposals07.pdf

Thanks

 

[FOM]

Such person shall, at his or her own expense, listen to and observe all aspects of the all-age stake including the entire set-up day; the conduct of the stake itself
including call backs and the placement process as well as all mechanical aspects of the stake. The report of the Field Trial Secretary to the American Kennel Club shall include the name and address of any Apprentice Judge and the identity of the stake observed ​

Two questions:

If you are the "Apprentice Judge" will you be allowed to run the trial, of course the stake you are not apprenticing?

My guess is no, because you wouldn't have time and it would defeat the purpose of apprenticing.

If you can't run a stake while apprenticing, do you think making the person apprenticing pay to go to a trial for a weekend and just watch is going to go over very well and attract new judges?

Granted there are other ways to get "approved" to judge, but just looking at the overall apprenticing concept.

Just thinking out loud.....

FOM

 

[jeff t.]

Two questions:

If you are the "Apprentice Judge" will you be allowed to run the trial, of course the stake you are not apprenticing?

My guess is no, because you wouldn't have time and it would defeat the purpose of apprenticing.

If you can't run a stake while apprenticing, do you think making the person apprenticing pay to go to a trial for a weekend and just watch is going to go over very well and attract new judges?

Just thinking out loud.....

FOM

No, I don't think it will go over well. And it isn't just once, but twice. And it isn't just a weekend, but also setup day...so looking at Thurs-Sun for an Open apprenticeship or Fri-Sun for apprenticing most amateurs...paying travel expenses and missing a trial.

Jeff

 

[FOM]

No person who has not previously judged an all-age stake shall be approved to judge a stake carrying championship points unless that person has satisfied at least one of the following requirements: ​

a. Completion of two assignments as an Apprentice Judge pursuant to the terms of Section 5 of Chapter Five; or​

b. Completion of one assignment as an Apprentice Judge and experience as the judge of two, or more, minor stakes; or ​

c. Experience as the handler of a dog in fifteen or more all-age stakes in the previous three years resulting in the award of a judges’ award of merit or a place in, at least, one such stake. ​

You have other ways around the two apprentice assignments, but another question is how will clubs be able to verify "c"?

Also what happens if a judge is found out not to be qualified?

FOM

 

[jeff t.]

You have other ways around the two apprentice assignments, but another question is how will clubs be able to verify "c"?

Also what happens if a judge is found out not to be qualified?

FOM

Presumably, AKC will catch that...they approve/disapprove judging panels when submitted by the club. On the other hand, that would require them to beef up their judges database, which hasn't been the strong suit of AKC.

 

[FOM]

Presumably, AKC will catch that...they approve/disapprove judging panels when submitted by the club. On the other hand, that would require them to beef up their judges database, which hasn't been the strong suit of AKC.

That was kind of where I was going - may not be an accurate comparision but it is kind of like trying to keep track of Master passes vs. attempts....

FOM

 

[Steve Amrein]

I agree that anything that can improve the sport is a good thing. This may have the opposite effect and not attract any new judges into taking assignments. Even Marvins site has some merit (yes I said it ) Getting someone to accept a assignment is hard enough. I thought it was up to the club that was putting on a trial to insure that the judge would do a good job and if that person lacks experience than a judge that can help them learn how.

using this criteria Forest Gump could still judge.

Our FT club a year or two had a seminar at no cost given by 3 highly talented and well respected judges that was VERY GOOD.

If it becomes harder or unpleasant to judge or get into judging we may be moving towards pro judges and we know how well that works

 

[Tim Carrion]

IMHO the proposed judging changes are a token effort to quite a few people down. Will they improve an individuals knowledge of dogs, or sense of fairness? NO
Most problems associated with AKC FTs do not stem from the judges. The RAC would have better sent their time addressing items such as: shrinking grounds(in size and number), clubs needing to hold fewer stakes/trial, entry size and pro/amat make-up etc.

Tim

 

[Vicki Worthington]

IMHO the proposed judging changes are a token effort to quite a few people down. Will they improve an individuals knowledge of dogs, or sense of fairness? NO
Most problems associated with AKC FTs do not stem from the judges. The RAC would have better sent their time addressing items such as: shrinking grounds(in size and number), clubs needing to hold fewer stakes/trial, entry size and pro/amat make-up etc.

Tim

Maybe its time the AKC began investigating opportunities to assist clubs in obtaining grounds, making public grounds more appropriate for retriever trial use, awarding grants for grounds improvement (much like PRTA currently does) to clubs for use on their trial grounds--private or public. It would be nice to give some of those fees they keep raising back to the organizations that actually put on the events!

Personally, I'm not sure many people--as Lainee and others pointed out--want to judge so badly that they will fund their attendance at one or more trials to "apprentice". That in effect, costs them the same as competition with their dog, with none of the benefits of running a dog. In answer to Lainee's question about running another stake: Judges cannot compete in any stake at the trial they are judging until the completion of the stake they are judging. I would assume an apprentice judge would be bound by the same prohibition.

 

[Vicky Trainor]

Section 8. Appprentice Judges. Just as with Judges, it is strongly recommended that clubs select as Apprentice Judges individuals with broad and extensive background experience in handling and working with Retrievers in the field. All such individuals are encouraged to educate themselves by reading the Regulations and Guidelines, and they shall have qualified a dog at the level that they intend to apprentice before participating as an Apprentice Judge. Apprentice Judges shall diagram and score dogs while under the supervision of the Judges, but their scores and opinions as to the dogs’ abilities shall not be considered in any way by the Judges as part of their official evaluation in determining whether or not dogs qualify. The Judges shall from time to time invite the Apprentice Judge to become involved in conversation with them such as the Judges discussing how and/or why the Apprentice scored a dog the way that he or she did.

Judges shall involve the Apprentice Judge in the setting up of the Hunting Test, and shall instruct them in all aspects of judging Hunting Tests. However, Apprentice Judges shall not advise handlers, signal for birds, take birds from handlers or otherwise be involved in the mechanics of the Hunting Test.

When a club invites persons to judge, the club shall at that time advise the perspective judges of the club’s intent to have a person apprenticing at the level that they are being requested to judge. Clubs shall obtain the consent of the Judges accepting the assignment at that level before authorizing an Apprentice Judge.

Apprentice Judges must be available and on the grounds for the entire time the test level they are apprenticing is in progress, including setup time, through the completion of the tests, tallying of scores and discussion by the judges of those dogs that are to qualify. As with the assigned Judges, the Apprentice Judge may not serve either on the Event Committee or as the Event Secretary. Apprentice Judges must sign the Apprentice Judges Affirmation form. There shall be no more than one apprentice judge assigned to any one set of approved judges at any test level or division of a test level.

The above quote is from the Regulations and Guidelines for AKC Hunting Tests for Retrievers. Looks very similiar to what is proposed for FT. The proposal for FT spells out that the apprenticeship is at the person's own expense. (I don't think I have ever heard of a club paying the apprentice judge's expenses....although they normally do pick up the tab for the meal at the Judges' Dinner.)

Vicky

 

[Marvin S]

Excerpt "It is strongly recommended that clubs select as apprentice judges individuals with broad & extensive background experience handling & working with retrievers in the field." There is also something about apprenticing in the area you have had a competitive dog.

The above quote is from the Regulations and Guidelines for AKC Hunting Tests for Retrievers. Looks very similiar to what is proposed for FT. The proposal for FT spells out that the apprenticeship is at the person's own expense. (I don't think I have ever heard of a club paying the apprentice judge's expenses....although they normally do pick up the tab for the meal at the Judges' Dinner.) Vicky

This excerpt from the "Status of a Judge of Licensed Field Trials" 196X by the AKC - "The judge must be well grounded in knowledge. He must know so much through personal experience with dogs in the field". There is a lot more on this subject.

I fail to see any change - will the AKC just ignore the new guidelines like they have been ignoring the old ones for 40 years - it all sounds good on paper - but it takes some will to make things happen. A lot of our present day judges couldn't qualify based on the experience requirement & they in general are the ones being complained about. & you notice they aren't even addressed in this proposal. What will be done about the present bad judges??