# New RHTAC approved rules coming to you!



## Troy Tilleraas (Sep 24, 2010)

They finally got their wish, all fresh birds for the hunting retriever tests. At July 1st 3 new policies go into effect. Frozen birds are good enough for field trials , but those pesky hunt test folks now gotta use freshly dispatched birds within 24 hours-no frozen nicely thawed flyer from the previous tests will do for our hunting dogs- no sir, nothing but the best! No belly aching from the handler now that the bird was too cold, my fido couldnt wind it from 50 yards away like Jimbos bird... Were all in the same boat. Expect to see $100+Master venue entries folks.
Many clubs should if they haven't thought about it already is to now switch dates and hold their hunt test prior to their field trial to save some costs. 

Retriever Hunting Tests – Three Recommendations
The Board VOTED to approve changes (changes are underlined) to Chapter 1, Section 3, and
Chapter 3, Section 2, of the Retriever Hunting Test Regulations to:
(1) allow clubs, at their option, to hold Master level-only tests at their fifth and sixth
events of the year provided the club has offered each of the test levels at least once
at its first four hunting tests offered in the year.
(2) Require clubs to only use fresh birds at their hunting tests and (3) Move up the
opening date for events by one day so all events open to the public on Wednesday
evening. These changes are effective July 1, 2016 

http://images.akc.org/pdf/about/board_minutes/0416.pdf


----------



## Mike Sale (Feb 1, 2011)

Have they ever made a change that's was actually for the better ?


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

wow! this is because of ????


----------



## freezeland (Nov 1, 2012)

Who defines what fresh is and what is the definition? I couldn't find it in the posted link.


----------



## wsumner (Mar 5, 2004)

Did EE buy a duck farm?


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

wsumner said:


> Did EE buy a duck farm?


I don't care who you are,That is some funny stuff right there!!!

Tail wagging the dog regards


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Isn't it already a HT rule?


----------



## Mike Peters-labguy23 (Feb 9, 2003)

No, it is a new rule.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

So fresh killed birds for blinds too?


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Current rule:
"A minimum of two live birds per entry must be made available for use at the discretion of the Judges in all test levels"

What's the difference other than restating.


----------



## Swampcollie (Jan 16, 2003)

Thomas D said:


> Current rule:
> "A minimum of two live birds per entry must be made available for use at the discretion of the Judges in all test levels"
> 
> What's the difference other than restating.


The problem was some clubs had to try and push the envelope too far and were consistently using bad birds for Licensed Tests. The dogs and handlers are supposed to be retrieving birds suitable for the table, not freeze dried hockey pucks that fall apart or sink as soon as they hit the water. The clubs that were doing this have nobody to blame but themselves.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

I understand the problem, but why not enforce existing rules. Wouldn't a club that ignored old rule ignore new one too?


----------



## NateB (Sep 25, 2003)

I can tell you from personal experience that many farm raised birds, killed the same day, will still be sinking by the end of a series. They just do not have the feather coat or the oils. It helps a lot to dry them with a chamois after they are in the water, but they will still sink after 3-6 times in the water.


----------



## Mike Sale (Feb 1, 2011)

So with this new 24 hr. wording, we cant use any birds killed Saturday early on Sunday afternoon ? Our club doesn't use frozen birds but we do use some of the the same birds as long as they are in good shape and we hang and dry them with fans Sat. night. So does this mean that we are now going to HAVE to buy MORE birds ? I am really just about done with the AKC HT program !


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Need to put a toe tag with time of death on each bird. 

Read earlier posts and link for exact wording of this new rule.


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

Here's the new wording.

Paragraph #2 - A minimum of two live birds per entry must be made available for the use at the discretion of the Judges in all test levels. Only fresh birds may be used at the event. 

It seems to me that they aren't saying anything new but rather just reinforcing what has always been the rule.


----------



## Swampcollie (Jan 16, 2003)

Eric Johnson said:


> Here's the new wording.
> 
> Paragraph #2 - A minimum of two live birds per entry must be made available for the use at the discretion of the Judges in all test levels. Only fresh birds may be used at the event.
> 
> It seems to me that they aren't saying anything new but rather just reinforcing what has always been the rule.



Exactly!

There were a number of clubs that took the position that "It doesn't say you can't use recycled birds" so they started to pull a few birds out of the freezer to start the test with. Then it was a few more, and then a few more. In time a lot of recycled birds were being used in Licensed Events, when the intent of the rule was clear. The birds are supposed to be alive at the start of the test. 

The revision to the rules makes the intent crystal clear. The birds used in the test are to be alive when delivered to the judges at the start of the test.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Swampcollie said:


> Exactly!
> 
> There were a number of clubs that took the position that "It doesn't say you can't use recycled birds" so they started to pull a few birds out of the freezer to start the test with. Then it was a few more, and then a few more. In time a lot of recycled birds were being used in Licensed Events, when the intent of the rule was clear. *The birds are supposed to be alive at the start of the test. *
> The revision to the rules makes the intent crystal clear. The birds used in the test are to be alive when delivered to the judges at the start of the test.


It never stated that. I have no problem with high quality recently thawed birds being used at the dead bird stations for the first few dogs until enough fresh killed birds are available to run the stake without re-birding every three to five dogs. Otherwise we waste a bunch of live flier practice shots just to start a test. I hate it when they shoot six birds, put three at each station, run a test dog re-bird, run three more dogs re-bird, run six re-bird. Just put a sack of "nice" recently thawed birds at each station a get going. I imagine some clubs were starting test with skanky birds and ruined it for everybody.

I've run quite a few trials up in Canada where all the birds are left over frozen from hunting season. They are the finest high quality birds I've ever seen at a trial. The issue isn't fresh or frozen, the issue is quality and proper thawing just prior to the trial.


----------



## DMA (Jan 9, 2008)

freezeland said:


> Who defines what fresh is and what is the definition?


It's not dead it's only sleeping.


----------



## freezeland (Nov 1, 2012)

DMA said:


> It's not dead it's only sleeping.


It's like trying to define what is "is". I see this as a lot of to do about nothing.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

DMA said:


> It's not dead it's only sleeping.


The parrot?


----------



## Final Flight Retrievers (Jan 23, 2010)

I can't believe that of all the things that need to be addressed the RHTAC choose theses item, sad, sad, sad !!!!


----------



## John Kelder (Mar 10, 2006)

reality - the rules said the birds to be available at the judge's discretion . By having crates of live birds on the grounds TECHNICALLY made the clubs in compliance with the rule ..And some clubs took advantage of that little old loop hole like a senator doing his taxes ....So now we will see gassing the birds while the test dog is running regards.........


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

John Kelder said:


> .So now we will see gassing the birds while the test dog is running regards.........


With new emission standards will gassing be effective and efficient???

Tim


----------



## John Kelder (Mar 10, 2006)

Tim Carrion said:


> With new emission standards will gassing be effective and efficient???
> 
> Tim


The HT chair will be required to have a diesel truck ,and if not , Judges with a diesel will be in demand......


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Final Flight Retrievers said:


> I can't believe that of all the things that need to be addressed the RHTAC choose theses item, sad, sad, sad !!!![/QUOTE
> 
> Perhaps more recommendations made but not approved by AKC.


----------



## Terry Marshall (Jan 12, 2011)

Swampcollie said:


> Exactly!
> 
> There were a number of clubs that took the position that "It doesn't say you can't use recycled birds" so they started to pull a few birds out of the freezer to start the test with. Then it was a few more, and then a few more. In time a lot of recycled birds were being used in Licensed Events, when the intent of the rule was clear. The birds are supposed to be alive at the start of the test.
> 
> The revision to the rules makes the intent crystal clear. The birds used in the test are to be alive when delivered to the judges at the start of the test.


Totally agree and extend it to 3-4 live birds per dog in my opinion....nobody is getting wealthy but give all dogs a good look...Too many club members are business guys that need a profit/bank/wall street prospective


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

Swampcollie said:


> There were a number of clubs that took the position that "It doesn't say you can't use recycled birds" so they started to pull a few birds out of the freezer to start the test with.


About 10-12 years ago, the pro that had one of my dogs went to a test in northern Indiana. The club was using all recycled birds and by mid-morning the judges in Senior wouldn't take the birds from the handler but instead just had the handler toss them on the ground. At the land-water change it was obvious that nothing better was going to happen so he pulled all the dogs and went home early. We later heard that the club would buy birds and use them live for training the week before the test and then just haul them out of the freezer.

About 2 years later I mentioned this here and got a call within a day of two from a club member who wanted me to know that the whole club membership was not like that (he confirmed the story).


----------



## cakaiser (Jul 12, 2007)

John Robinson said:


> It never stated that. I have no problem with high quality recently thawed birds being used at the dead bird stations for the first few dogs until enough fresh killed birds are available to run the stake without re-birding every three to five dogs. Otherwise we waste a bunch of live flier practice shots just to start a test. I hate it when they shoot six birds, put three at each station, run a test dog re-bird, run three more dogs re-bird, run six re-bird. Just put a sack of "nice" recently thawed birds at each station a get going. I imagine some clubs were starting test with skanky birds and ruined it for everybody.
> 
> I've run quite a few trials up in Canada where all the birds are left over frozen from hunting season. They are the finest high quality birds I've ever seen at a trial. The issue isn't fresh or frozen, the issue is quality and proper thawing just prior to the trial.


This.
FT, last weekend. 50 properly hung and dried, "good" birds were put in the freezer at the cattle ranch. This I know because my husband did it. And if there is one thing he hates, it is rotten birds.
The HT this weekend used those birds to get started. Not a thing wrong with those birds.

Saves money and time.
Dead is dead. And some "fresh" birds will have to be killed in order to start.

There are plenty of clubs that properly care for birds. Too bad those clubs must now be penalized, for those who do not.


----------



## Troy Tilleraas (Sep 24, 2010)

For those who do not know, live shot flyers actually hold up better for the long haul if removed from the field after being retrieved once and cooled properly rather than continually using them throughout the day. The rules state that the birds can be killed up to 24 hours in advance of the test starting. The part I don't understand is that if it works in field trials (frozen birds) why not in hunting tests... That Sunday Senior or Junior after a Friday Master will be the one paying the piper.


----------



## wayne anderson (Oct 16, 2007)

I think that recently-killed birds (the day before, then hung to dry) are perfectly fine to use. In South Georgia field trials, we ask our entering pros to each bring several birds they shot on Thursday, never in freezer, to use to start Friday tests. This does save on shooting several live flyers on Friday to start a test. On the other hand, using thawed birds which have been in the freezer for who knows how long is not fair to early running dogs. They are at enough disadvantage running early already. Just MHO!


----------



## Daren Galloway (Jun 28, 2012)

I'll go ahead and give any club in the country free reign to throw my dog any bird they see fit, frozen, thawed or otherwise, if he can't find it, thats on him. This is absurd. Glad we're just a FT club but I imagine that will only matter for a few years before they change that too.


----------



## djansma (Aug 26, 2004)

Has any ever been asked about rule changes recommendations by any member of the RHTAC
or have any clubs been consulted 
David Jansma
as for bad birds I have been on both sides
frozen solid and maggots crawling on them
and great birds it just depends on the clubs resources 
and concern for the dogs and handlers


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

Daren Galloway said:


> I'll go ahead and give any club in the country free reign to throw my dog any bird they see fit, frozen, thawed or otherwise, if he can't find it, thats on him. This is absurd. Glad we're just a FT club but I imagine that will only matter for a few years before they change that too.


I think I agree with you.

My question is... do most folks TRAIN with ducks that are w/in 24 hours of their death? Are there retriever people who train nearly daily that never freeze birds for training purposes? 

Holy Smokes. I sure would like to be in that training group. We have ducks we've used so many times, we've named them. And our dogs pick them up. Happily. Even when they are only partially defrosted. 

At the same time, if I'd paid a bunch of money to a club to run a licensed event, it would be appreciated to have ducks that are nicer than the ones I train with. I get that and agree with it. But it wouldn't take a lot to meet that criteria.


----------



## Swampcollie (Jan 16, 2003)

This in an area where there is quite a bit of difference between the Field Trial and Hunt Test Programs. The dogs participating in the Field Trial Program have received dramatically more training by experienced trainers than have the typical dog participating in a Senior or Junior test in the Hunt Test Program. Many of the dogs have never seen the reconstituted frozen hockey pucks many of us call training birds before, let alone be expected to retrieve one. 

The regulations for birds in licensed tests have been consistent for a very long time. Two LIVE BIRDS per entry are to be made available to the Judges for their test. That's what the Judges expect and that's what the handlers expect when they paid their entry fee. To substitute birds used at a previous event pulled from the freezer and maintain they are equal in quality to the birds specified in the Regulations is preposterous and even the most novice handler can see that. 

The AKC Field Reps have been monitoring this situation for the last few years. They have been counting live birds available at tests, reviewing the quality of birds seen at tests and fielding numerous complaints about the quality of birds from both the Judges and the handlers at Licensed Events who are questioning why the rules surrounding birds are not being enforced.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Swampcollie said:


> This in an area where there is quite a bit of difference between the Field Trial and Hunt Test Programs. The dogs participating in the Field Trial Program have received dramatically more training by experienced trainers than have the typical dog participating in a Senior or Junior test in the Hunt Test Program. Many of the dogs have never seen the reconstituted frozen hockey pucks many of us call training birds before, let alone be expected to retrieve one.
> 
> The regulations for birds in licensed tests have been consistent for a very long time. *Two LIVE BIRDS per entry are to be made available to the Judges for their test. That's what the Judges expect and that's what the handlers expect when they paid their entry fee. To substitute birds used at a previous event pulled from the freezer and maintain they are equal in quality to the birds specified in the Regulations is preposterous and even the most novice handler can see that. *
> 
> The AKC Field Reps have been monitoring this situation for the last few years. They have been counting live birds available at tests, reviewing the quality of birds seen at tests and fielding numerous complaints about the quality of birds from both the Judges and the handlers at Licensed Events who are questioning why the rules surrounding birds are not being enforced.


Are we talking about substituting a previously killed dead bird for the live flyer? If that's the case I agree with you. I thought we were talking about the quality of birds at the dead bird stations, assuming there is still a live flyer in the test, two actually if you count all the series. I just think it's much ado about nothing to complain about recently thawed "high quality" dead birds at the dead bird stations versus, just killed birds. Obviously clubs should strive to have the highest quality birds at each station, take care to preserve the birds shot during the test and trash birds that aren't up to snuff.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

I'm just trying to understand what the problems were that were the genesis of the changes. 

If the problem was that the original rule (2 live birds per entry available for the judges) was being violated, then enforce the rule. 

If the problem was nasty ducks... my question is... how bad were they? And are we talking about the first series of the first day of an event where people had not removed the ducks from the freezer in a timely manner? Or are we talking about ducks that were decomposing on a warm day and used the next?


----------



## Eric Fryer (May 23, 2006)

I just read the new rules on the provided link. I do not see where it says 24 hours or gives any time frame, "Only freshly killed birds" WHere is the 24 hour time limit coming from?


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

Eric Fryer said:


> I just read the new rules on the provided link. I do not see where it says 24 hours or gives any time frame, "Only freshly killed birds" WHere is the 24 hour time limit coming from?



That is what I read as well... *"Paragraph #2 - A minimum of two live birds per entry must be made available for the **use at the discretion of the Judges in all test levels. Only fresh birds may be used at *
*the event. "*


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

1tulip-

There's no change in the rules. What there is is an added sentence that places emphasis on the 2 live birds wording that has always been in the rules. Here's what it now says with the new words underlined. 

"2. A minimum of two live birds per entry must be made available for the use at the discretion of the Judges in all test levels. Only fresh birds may be used at the event."


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Nowhere in the board minutes does it mention 24 hrs. Appears that was added by OP.

The rule, as reworded, uses live and the clarifies by using "fresh"?

I think we all know the intent.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

Intent would be quality birds that haven't been used over and over. Still the rule leaves a lot open to interpretation doesn't say anything about them expressly being unfrozen, nor when they have to be put down. Still requires 2 birds alive to be available to use as flyers. Could a bird be put down, stored, never used in a retrieve, or used in one retriever and still be considered fresh? No idea but if it's not expressly forbidden there's wiggle room. Would've made more since to just say clubs must make every effort to have quality birds a their tests. I don't believe any club wants to have crappy birds, sometimes you can't help it, whether they were previously frozen or not, sometimes it rains, everything gets wet, sometimes you get early season birds delivered that don't hold up. i just wonder how your going to enforce it? Do we write up clubs for having crappy birds, do we save birds as example, to what end the AKC tells you oh you have crap bird your written up...ok so we don't put on a test. Yep sound like a good thing for everyone


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Maybe the AKC definition of fresh is: killed within the last 24 hrs.
Guess time will tell.


----------



## splashdash (Aug 1, 2007)

Although it is understandable that people don't like manky birds, no one is under any obligation to enter a test. If you don't like how a club operates their tests, don't enter. We are essentially consumers and your real power is with your choice of whether to enter or not, not more rules.


----------



## Mike Peters-labguy23 (Feb 9, 2003)

Good point, there use to be a club that I would run at that liked to use Chukars. After 1 retrieve let alone a few there wouldn't be any feathers left on them and they were "fresh shot" birds. Long story short I ran at that club twice and after having birds with no feathers both times I decided I could find better clubs to run at.


----------



## Eric Fryer (May 23, 2006)

So the 24 hour thing just appeared because that is somebody's internet interpretation of the new rule then? Maybe not as bad as it initially sounds.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

I remember a long, long time ago... running a derby. And we were running with birds previously used by the major stakes. Let us say... death was not a new experience for these ducks. One CBR ran out... stood over the bird and when the handler started trying to whistle him in... he looked at his handler... and back at the bird... seemed to ponder the situation for a few seconds... then put his shoulder down on the duck and took him a long luxurious roll in it. 

I think that dog was DQ'd for having better judgement than the FT Committee.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

It's a pretty sad thing that RHTAC and the AKC even needed to address this issue, but I applaud them for it. 

One poster said no club wants to have crappy birds, but I have seen clubs ensure this happened first hand. Their bird management policy made it IMPOSSIBLE for all dogs to have good quality birds. The dogs with the least ability to deal with low floating and/or sinking birds paid the price on Sunday afternoon.

In my opinion bird quality should never be an issue. Both of the Clubs that I belong to encourage the judges at all levels to use 2 flyers in their tests, enabling them to have fresh birds throughout the weekend. Saturday evening usually finds a small group of tired but dedicated club members hanging birds in a shed with several fans running all night. Triage is performed then and again on Sunday morning. We still manage to turn a profit. The key is to control ALL of your costs. Splurging on one aspect affects all of the other costs, if you want to stay 'in the black', pay attention to costs. -Paul


----------



## Troy Tilleraas (Sep 24, 2010)

From a discussion our GMHTA president had. " The interpretation of this as explained to me by an Jerry Mann is that the birds must be euthanized within 24 hours of the start of your event. For example, if you have a three-day event beginning on a Friday, you must dispatch birds on Thursday and you may use those birds throughout the three-day event."


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Troy Tilleraas said:


> From a discussion our GMHTA president had. " The interpretation of this as explained to me by an Jerry Mann is that the birds must be euthanized within 24 hours of the start of your event. For example, if you have a three-day event beginning on a Friday, you must dispatch birds on Thursday and you may use those birds throughout the three-day event."


There must be a disconnect, are we talking about clubs that don't shoot fliers during the trial dispatching "fresh" birds the day before the trial? Otherwise we only need 6-10 birds to get started as the fresh shot flyers start adding up.

Paul's point is the bottom line to me, taking care to preserve the birds in as good condition as possible for the duration of the trial. I remember a trial in hot-hot conditions where the fliers shot at 3:00pm on Sunday in the fourth series were all sticky rotten three hours later. We struggled all weekend in cooling birds, hanging them keeping them dry and cool overnight. This is a far bigger issue than whether you start the test with fresh shot or recently thawed high quality birds.


----------



## fishduck (Jun 5, 2008)

One more thing on the to do list. Beginning to wonder if retriever hunt test committee members are passionate or insane.


----------



## swliszka (Apr 17, 2011)

A simple rule of thumb is that the receiving bird judge should instruct any questionable bird be discarded to ensure it will not be used again.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

swliszka said:


> A simple rule of thumb is that the receiving bird judge should instruct any questionable bird be discarded to ensure it will not be used again.


I've not been doing this for very long, but the Master stakes I've helped marshal... this was the common practice. Usually there are experienced workers who show up to move equipment to the next series, and between them, the judges, and the other marshals... the ducks are quickly sorted and the messy ones get disposed of. 

And, as stated above, before any one quits for the day, there is a lot of work going on at HQ hanging ducks to dry. Then again, the next morning, the ducks that get dispensed to the various stakes are those that are worth using.

I have had the good fortune of working at HT's with really experienced Committee members. And with all due respect to the AKC rep... we will do whatever the protocol for duck euthanization is. But it will not improve the quality of ducks we use because... we only use really good ducks throughout the HT. Always have. Always will.


----------



## Dave Burton (Mar 22, 2006)

I don't have anything to do with it but our club takes great care of birds. We have 1 guy in charge of birds and he does a great job. We kill enough to get started then the flyers start adding up. At the end of day one all birds are hung and dried with fans blowing on them. They are usually in very good shape the next morning. If any bird is shot up or used up it doesn't go back out into the field. I usually take 2 or 3 bags home afterwards and use them and refreeze them until useless.


----------



## Karen Klotthor (Jul 21, 2011)

I judges this past weekend that this hunt. We started the master flight with pre frozen birds. those birds held up better than some of the flyers shot that morning. It was hot and the cooler birds seemed to fair better. By the time we started our next series you could not tell which birds were the previously frozen ones. It worked great.



cakaiser said:


> This.
> FT, last weekend. 50 properly hung and dried, "good" birds were put in the freezer at the cattle ranch. This I know because my husband did it. And if there is one thing he hates, it is rotten birds.
> The HT this weekend used those birds to get started. Not a thing wrong with those birds.
> 
> ...


----------



## Tobias (Aug 31, 2015)

The internal temp of a fully feathered duck will not cool quickly after being shot, unless it is put in a cool or cold environment (aka freezer). Being left in an outdoor temp of 60-70 or more degrees only serves to promote 'rotting' (bacterial growth)... esp if stored in a burlap bag at the gun station......The thawed birds that are bought fresh frozen (frozen right after they are gassed) will probably outlast the freshly killed ones(shot fliers or otherwise dispatched before being used) - esp if the outside temps are warm or hot. A fully thawed (fresh) bird may start the day at the hunt test with an internal temp of 40 degrees...the feathers/down serve to help keep that temperature down for at least a little while.
my thoughts (the taxidermist in me)


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

if shot bird is put in freezer one hour after, how long til internal body temp is 40 degrees?


----------



## Mike Peters-labguy23 (Feb 9, 2003)

Karen Klotthor said:


> I judges this past weekend that this hunt. We started the master flight with pre frozen birds. those birds held up better than some of the flyers shot that morning. It was hot and the cooler birds seemed to fair better. By the time we started our next series you could not tell which birds were the previously frozen ones. It worked great.


This is exactly what our club has found and that is how we do ours.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

In talking with others, I got the impression that the advisory committee was responding to people who felt their dogs had been DQ'd for not picking up a frozen duck. ("... simulated hunt..." and all that.)

Personally, my sense is if your dog won't pick up a frozen duck, he/she has other problems as well and frozen fowl may be the least of them.

That's why I was asking what the problem was that this change was expected to address.


----------



## Thomas D (Jan 27, 2003)

Last year I talked with AKC rep who said by far the biggest complaint they had from HT handlers was bird condition.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Thomas D said:


> Last year I talked with AKC rep who said by far the biggest complaint they had from HT handlers was bird condition.


Do you think it's a situation where the average HT bird is of lesser quality of the average FT bird, or as tulip proposes, the average HT handler is more prone to make excuses as to why their dog won't pick up a "bad" bird? Honest question, I honestly have no idea.


----------



## Wyldfire (Sep 24, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> Do you think it's a situation where the average HT bird is of lesser quality of the average FT bird, or as tulip proposes, the average HT handler is more prone to make excuses as to why their dog won't pick up a "bad" bird? Honest question, I honestly have no idea.


Maybe the same bird, but the hunt test bird is used a whole bunch more. Open dogs may only be presented with 8 birds in weekend. Master dogs will have at least 11 retrieves a weekend. Master birds get a lot more exposure to water and since series are shorter get recycled back out quicker with less drying time.


----------



## 1tulip (Oct 22, 2009)

I don't know about that. But then the hunt tests I'm familiar with start with a boat load and a half of ducks. In fact, more than they anticipate needing.

Around here, there is no way to anticipate what the ambient temperature during our scheduled HT will be. I am not sure how you folks back East and in the South have to plan. Last year we were seriously worried about people and dogs having problems with the heat. But a few years before that, we had sideways sleet that would take the skin off your face. (A week ago we were in shorts and T-shirts training our dogs. This morning it was snowing.) So, maybe that's why our very experienced committee plans for every eventuality. 

I guess I still don't get what the Advisory Committee was seeking to do. But I'll bet you anything that this is not going to stop the kvetching.

I don't know... I guess I'm human and might be really disappointed if my dog was doing (IMHO) really well and then blinked a bird, and then found out the thing was nasty or frozen solid or something. But... no... I can't see making a federal case out of it. 

I don't know. Still don't get it.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

1tulip said:


> In talking with others, I got the impression that the advisory committee was responding to people who felt their dogs had been DQ'd for not picking up a frozen duck. ("... simulated hunt..." and all that.)
> 
> Personally, my sense is if your dog won't pick up a frozen duck, he/she has other problems as well and frozen fowl may be the least of them.
> 
> That's why I was asking what the problem was that this change was expected to address.



I think a lot of people are wondering why they are paying $75- $90 per entry and get previously used birds. -Paul


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> Do you think it's a situation where the average HT bird is of lesser quality of the average FT bird, or as tulip proposes, the average HT handler is more prone to make excuses as to why their dog won't pick up a "bad" bird? Honest question, I honestly have no idea.



John,

We're at a point now where most Master tests start 60-90 dogs. The last series is generally a water test with 3-5 birds and probably half of the field still playing. With a 3 bird test, 30 dogs retrieve 90 birds, a 5 bird test would push that to 150 birds. A test that starts 90 dogs probably still has 45 or so playing, so now we're looking at 135 to 225 birds, which makes bird quality even more of an issue. Then consider that many of today's HT's feature 2 (or more) Master tests being held simultaneously. That's a lot of birds to manage properly. If there's no flyer in the last series, it's almost impossible to give everyone a fair shake. 

The last 10 or so dogs at a master HT are getting some pretty wet birds in the final series, which may or may not float well. As a judge, I try really hard to throw most of the dead birds in the final series on dry land, so they can't sink, but sometimes the grounds aren't such that you can. 

Junior and Senior birds get used a lot less frequently due to lower entry numbers and fewer retrieves per dog, so it usually is less of an issue there, but sometimes it is. Some clubs won't throw a flyer for Junior dogs, making bird quality an issue for the judges and handlers to deal with. The youngsters are the least well equipped to deal with poor quality birds.

Compare that to FT'S where there is usually 12 or so dogs in the final series, and almost always a flyer, and I think you'll agree that it's easier to provide good quality birds to all the dogs.-Paul


----------



## Golddogs (Feb 3, 2004)

Thomas D said:


> Last year I talked with AKC rep who said by far the biggest complaint they had from HT handlers was bird condition.


Which is why this rule is a croc and penalizes clubs who do practice good bird stewardship. Judges and clubs who are lazy and do not cull bad birds are the biggest reason for complaints.

Propper prep of birds to freeze and then thaw to make ready is not rocket science but does require some effort. Hung in a blower box to cool, wrapped in newspaper and then frozen will give you a bird that you would be hard presssed to find fault with. 

Even with this new rule you will still see complaints.


----------



## fishduck (Jun 5, 2008)

Bird quality is certainly of great importance. The hunt test committee does its best but there are lots of factors that are beyond their control. Bird quality will probably go down because cooled birds hold up better. Taking a chamois to the line and drying birds would have been much more effective than enacting a new regulation. However the complainers like to complain.


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

paul young said:


> I think a lot of people are wondering why they are paying $75- $90 per entry and get previously used birds. -Paul


Because that would cost $100 per entry? 

I don't mind starting off with dead, previously frozen birds. It does irk me though when the nice recently shot flyers are separated out and hauled off--whether it is to other tests or the club's training bird freezer and we are stuck with the skanky ones. Most clubs try to keep the birds as nice as possible but there are a couple that seem to push the envelope. 

AKC can re-state its intent all it wants but if it is going to do nothing about it, the bad actors will still act badly and the folks doing a good job will have an additional headache and cost. I was at a HT, 5th dog, first day and my dog picked up the walkup, I took the bird from him and gagged it was so rancid. Handed it to the judge who reacted even worse than I did. The field director of sporting breeds was standing right there smiling and enjoying the day. If the guys in the logo hats only care if you actually shoulder the fake shotgun, it isn't going to do anything other than drive up the cost for the clubs that try to do the right thing.


----------



## Rick Hall (Jan 21, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> Do you think it's a situation where the average HT bird is of lesser quality of the average FT bird, or as tulip proposes, the average HT handler is more prone to make excuses as to why their dog won't pick up a "bad" bird? Honest question, I honestly have no idea.


I would think there are a lot more folks whose dogs aren't accustomed to working with test birds than is the case with trialing. I've had judges ask that I move a rack of fresh killed and lightly used on land ducks because they stunk so bad from crapping on each other in the crates, while Joe Hunter's dog may have never encountered such birds. Or even birds wearing the slobber of strange dogs, for that matter. So it could be that part of the "bad duck" problem results from lack of preparation for unavoidable "factors" of the hunt test game.

Know this hunter-first tester has had a Finished level dog refuse to pick up the kind of naked duck it would be fussed for sniffing in the field and learned the hard way to keep some of the nastiest after-test cull birds in his freezer for testing preparation. Just part of it.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

paul young said:


> John,
> 
> We're at a point now where most Master tests start 60-90 dogs. The last series is generally a water test with 3-5 birds and probably half of the field still playing. With a 3 bird test, 30 dogs retrieve 90 birds, a 5 bird test would push that to 150 birds. A test that starts 90 dogs probably still has 45 or so playing, so now we're looking at 135 to 225 birds, which makes bird quality even more of an issue. Then consider that many of today's HT's feature 2 (or more) Master tests being held simultaneously. That's a lot of birds to manage properly. If there's no flyer in the last series, it's almost impossible to give everyone a fair shake.
> 
> ...


Thanks for educating me on that. Out west our numbers are a lot lower, with maybe 10-20 dogs in the last series of a Master. The kind of numbers you're talking about present a way bigger challenge from a bird quality standpoint than what we typically deal with in field trials or lower number hunt test. With those numbers I don't see this new rule making any difference at all. 

Actually the only fix would be to have way more high quality birds available throughout the test, probably double what the rule calls for now. The best way to do that would be having a appropriate number of high quality frozen birds available to supplement the 2+ live flyers shot at the test. If all you have are the 2+ live birds available to the judges, they are going to be so used up during the hunt test that you are doomed to have limp, muddy sinkers in the last series.


----------



## crackerd (Feb 21, 2003)

Use Dokkens and inject them with cat pee for skank realism. NAHRA realism template (with the reality being that it almost destroyed the org. from the misguided notion to "throw them (Dokkens) into the fray" in the first place...)

MG


----------



## Bridget Bodine (Mar 4, 2008)

crackerd said:


> Use Dokkens and inject them with cat pee for skank realism. NAHRA realism template (with the reality being that it almost destroyed the org. from the misguided notion to "throw them (Dokkens) into the fray" in the first place...)
> 
> MG


 From my experience no need to inject them with any pee to make them smell like cat piss


----------



## Terry Britton (Jul 3, 2003)

wsumner said:


> Did EE buy a duck farm?


Maybe the Swishy One bought a duck farm. Where has the Swishy One gone?


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

John Robinson said:


> Do you think it's a situation where the average HT bird is of lesser quality of the average FT bird, or as tulip proposes, the average HT handler is more prone to make excuses as to why their dog won't pick up a "bad" bird? Honest question, I honestly have no idea.


Simple Math is the answer there's more individuals involved in HT's vs. FT's. More amateur handlers, more people running and training their own dogs, thus more potential complainers. Besides that HT requires the dogs to run more retrieves-series (marks & blind together) than F.Ts; also as the HT are to graded to a standard more dogs stay in from series to series. Thus an H.T. requires more use out of their birds, than those required a to complete a F.T. Even if the complaint is the same, official reported-highly vocal complaints most likely aren't. FT are dominated by fewer handlers, running a lot of dogs, most of whom are not likely to lodge official complaint as they've been in the dog game a long time; and heck when your dealing with a venue that ranks dogs one, above another, subject to various interpretations; bird quality is probably very low on the grumble list . Still even if one person does complain, that's one complainer at one event verse several different complainers, at one event. HT people especially those in the lower stakes who haven't been in the sport that long, are way more apt. to be vocal when anything goes wrong, also are more likely to expect more value out of their $70-$90 entry, than a F.T. type person who doesn't blink about continuously putting multiple dogs in a trial for the same $70-$90, week, after week, after week, with perhaps little-no return on the investment. HTers are complainers there I said it .


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> Simple Math is the answer there's more individuals involved in HT's vs. FT's. More amateur handlers, more people running and training their own dogs, thus more potential complainers. Besides that HT requires the dogs to run more retrieves-series (marks & blind together) than F.Ts; also as the HT are to graded to a standard more dogs stay in from series to series. Thus an H.T. requires more use out of their birds, than those required a to complete a F.T. Even if the complaint is the same, official reported-highly vocal complaints most likely aren't. FT are dominated by fewer handlers, running a lot of dogs, most of whom are not likely to lodge official complaint as they've been in the dog game a long time; and heck when your dealing with a venue that ranks dogs one, above another, subject to various interpretations; bird quality is probably very low on the grumble list . Still even if one person does complain, that's one complainer at one event verse several different complainers, at one event. HT people especially those in the lower stakes who haven't been in the sport that long, are way more apt. to be vocal when anything goes wrong, also are more likely to expect more value out of their $70-$90 entry, than a F.T. type person who doesn't blink about continuously putting multiple dogs in a trial for the same $70-$90, week, after week, after week, with perhaps little-no return on the investment. HTers are complainers there I said it .


Ok, you made me laugh.


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

Hunt'EmUp said:


> Simple Math is the answer there's more individuals involved in HT's vs. FT's. More amateur handlers, more people running and training their own dogs, thus more potential complainers. Besides that HT requires the dogs to run more retrieves-series (marks & blind together) than F.Ts; also as the HT are to graded to a standard more dogs stay in from series to series. Thus an H.T. requires more use out of their birds, than those required a to complete a F.T. Even if the complaint is the same, official reported-highly vocal complaints most likely aren't. FT are dominated by fewer handlers, running a lot of dogs, most of whom are not likely to lodge official complaint as they've been in the dog game a long time; and heck when your dealing with a venue that ranks dogs one, above another, subject to various interpretations; bird quality is probably very low on the grumble list . Still even if one person does complain, that's one complainer at one event verse several different complainers, at one event. HT people especially those in the lower stakes who haven't been in the sport that long, are way more apt. to be vocal when anything goes wrong, also are more likely to expect more value out of their $70-$90 entry, than a F.T. type person who doesn't blink about continuously putting multiple dogs in a trial for the same $70-$90, week, after week, after week, with perhaps little-no return on the investment. HTers are complainers there I said it .



'May all your memory birds be sinkers'........You'd be OK with that, right?-Paul


----------



## Hunt'EmUp (Sep 30, 2010)

paul young said:


> 'May all your memory birds be sinkers'........You'd be OK with that, right?-Paul


Of course my dogs love divers, wounded birds tend to flatten on the water, swim away attempting to escape; leaving only ripple trails on the water. Makes a dog use their nose, and brains; How else you gonna teach a pup to river hunt .


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

paul young said:


> 'May all your memory birds be sinkers'........You'd be OK with that, right?-Paul


Paul, do you think this new rule is going to solve the problem as you see it? I don't. What's your solution? Mine would be, in addition to intelligent preservation of the birds during the stake, to make sure the club has lots of clean, dry, nice birds in reserve as the fresh ones naturally deteriorate from use.


----------



## suepuff (Aug 25, 2008)

Re: Regulations, just for kicks and giggles:

Chapter 3:

Section 1. Purpose. The purpose of a Hunting Test for Retrievers is to test the merits of and evaluate the abilities of Retrievers in the field in order to determine their suitability and ability as hunting companions. Hunting Tests must, therefore, simulate as nearly as possible the conditions met in a true hunting situation. 

Dogs are expected to retrieve any type of game bird under all conditions and the Judges and the Hunting Test Committee have complete control over the mechanics and requirements of each test.

Guidelines for the Hunting Test Regulations for Retrievers

Part 1: Judges Responsibilities:

(4) Every bird retrieved, and delivered to the handler, shall be inspected by one of the Judges. Failure to inspect retrieved birds must be catalogued as carelessness, and
as an undesirable practice. It is unfair to the dog whose abilities are being evaluated — not only in respect to the question of “hard-mouth,” but more particularly, since it
may furnish the explanation for a slow pick-up or some other oddity in the dog’s pick-up. Any unusual condition of a bird shall be brought to the attention of the Judges.

We all know how closely hunt test now resemble hunting. I thought somewhere in there it said something about birds unfit for consumption....but all I found was this, related to what the DOG did to the bird:

Chapter 4, Section 9, of the Hunting Test Regulations states in part that:
“A dog cannot receive a Qualifying score if it renders a bird unfit for human consumption. Both Judges are responsible for inspecting the bird and agreeing that the dog alone was responsible for the damage.”

Not agreeing with or disagreeing with the new reg. It's a tough issue all the way around. I unfortunately train on some nasty birds to help with this, but it sucks to have these nasty birds in junior with young dogs. Any way you look at it, its an expense in labor, birds and fees. I'd rather have good birds all the way around. However they get there. I'm re-thinking our bird handling for our June test though...


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

John Robinson said:


> Paul, do you think this new rule is going to solve the problem as you see it? I don't. What's your solution? Mine would be, in addition to intelligent preservation of the birds during the stake, to make sure the club has lots of clean, dry, nice birds in reserve as the fresh ones naturally deteriorate from use.


First step would be to require events, HTs and FTs, to name a Game Steward in the premium. This was common practice in the past but now most clubs,other than national events, don't bother. 
The Game Steward is responsible for the quality and quantity of birds at each stake/test. This gives handlers and judges a specific person to go to for problems and complaints would be recorded in the report to AKC to allow tracking of the clubs and the complainers.

We should not be penalizing clubs that have consistently worked to preserve the number and quality of birds used.

Tim


----------



## Dave Burton (Mar 22, 2006)

My club always has a bird steward as I stated in a earlier post of how we take care of birds. He and others that help out do an awesome job and at our test last week I heard several people talking about how good the birds were. Having someone dedicated to that job sure helps.




Tim Carrion said:


> First step would be to require events, HTs and FTs, to name a Game Steward in the premium. This was common practice in the past but now most clubs,other than national events, don't bother.
> The Game Steward is responsible for the quality and quantity of birds at each stake/test. This gives handlers and judges a specific person to go to for problems and complaints would be recorded in the report to AKC to allow tracking of the clubs and the complainers.
> 
> We should not be penalizing clubs that have consistently worked to preserve the number and quality of birds used.
> ...


----------

