# POLL: Would You Leave AKC HTs as a Judge?



## AmiableLabs (Jan 14, 2003)

This poll could prove interesting. The topic of the moment. Let us assume it is 1/1/07 and nothing has changed --

_If you are an AKC HT judge and they said you are only allowed to judge AKC HTs or lose your license, would you give up your AKC license to judge elsewhere?_


----------



## AmiableLabs (Jan 14, 2003)

I am not a judge yet, so with me it is moot.

But if it were me, since AKC was forcing my hand, I would give up the license to judge HRC. :?


----------



## Steve Bean (May 3, 2004)

Now let me see....a judge has to take tests, go to seminars, run and/or train his dog, etc.etc. Take his own time, vacation, etc., to judge a test, that may have more dogs than can reasonably be judged, because of no limits. Withstand the forces of mother nature, hot, cold, rain, snow, etc. AND all without pay, and then the AKC wants to monopolize that judge without any contractual arrangement/reimbursement? It is an all 'volunteer army'......let's see, let me think about that..... :? :roll: :roll: :?


----------



## Mike Perry (Jun 26, 2003)

When I voted, only 34 were submitted, but I cannot believe that the largely independent, free thinkers that seem to frequent this forum would vote like that.
Even if I were not an advocate of the HRC program, it goes up my butt sideways to have someone tell me what to do. 
No way I'm allowing some stuffed shirt tell me how I am going to spend my free time and where I can or cannot volunteer.
Maybe it's the type A personality in me coming out.


----------



## Vicky Trainor (May 19, 2003)

Mike Perry said:


> When I voted, only 34 were submitted, but I cannot believe that the largely independent, free thinkers that seem to frequent this forum would vote like that.


Mike,

Don't forget that this poll might be affected by people judging that ONLY judge AKC events or they don't judge at the present time and only run AKC events. They have nothing to lose. 

Vicky


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

To me it seems like a safe way to cut numbers. If you get rid of your assets your bottom line is lower. Thus making your life less complicated.
They oviously don't care about the HT program.

In all of the HT I ever attended I find good competent judges. Most who have never taken the test. I have also run under good judges that could'nt pass the written exam. And will no longer be judging,.

Dogs are not brain surgery. Most who have a passion to leann,,,,, will ,,,,and will be good at it. Test or no test.

So quitting might just be what the AKC has in mind? Maby?

All I know is people who run buisnesses find the easiest most economical way to make money.
Akc is a buisness.

Either that or their plain snooty?


----------



## Losthwy (May 3, 2004)

Steve Bean said:


> Now let me see....a judge has to take tests, go to seminars, run and/or train his dog, etc.etc. Take his own time, vacation, etc., to judge a test, that may have more dogs than can reasonably be judged, because of no limits. Withstand the forces of mother nature, hot, cold, rain, snow, etc. AND all without pay, and then the AKC wants to monopolize that judge without any contractual arrangement/reimbursement? It is an all 'volunteer army'......let's see, let me think about that..... :? :roll: :roll: :?


That is how I view it as well. Judges are *VOLUNTEERING* their time to give to the sport and the AKC is slapping them in the face with this and those tests. Instead of being inclusive and seeking judges opinons from around the country they are dictating from afar. Recipe for disaster.


----------



## KJB (Jul 1, 2003)

I didn't vote, because I don't judge AKC HT tests. But if I had to choose b/w judging AKC field trials and other organization's hunt tests, I'd have to choose the FT for now.


----------



## Bob Gutermuth (Aug 8, 2004)

I play only AKC games. There is no HRC within 5 hrs of my home and no NAHRA to speak of, though they do hold an occasional event. I also hold a judging license for F/Ts although I haven't done much of that, no other game hasF/Ts


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Since I don't judge HRC, it's also a moot point with me.

However......

I do believe that there will be some good judges lost with this edict, some of whom will leave simply on principle. I strongly support those who choose not to judge AKC based on this proposed short-sighted, monopolistic, high-handed rule change.

Sadly, I believe it will take just this sort of exodus to show the non-performance oriented AKC BOD the error of their ways. Losing good judges will have -zero- effect on their bottom line until they start losing events themselves. THAT is when the pain level will wratchet up due to loss of revenue.

I hope performance events has a fast-track judge approval plan in the works to replace the ones they're going to lose....... 8) 

_Ahh_....who am I kidding.....ready/shoot/aim........ :? .....................

kg


----------



## junbe (Apr 12, 2003)

I have concerns with this new policy. I was at the delegate meeting where this policy was discussed by the delegates. At the time that this was discussed the term ?licensed judge? was used in the context of conflict of interest. Discussing this with a Board Member, he said this would not affect hunt tests and field trials because we have ?approved? judges, not ?licensed? judges. I was surprised when I saw the final draft approved by the Board and they put in ?approved? judges, which would affect field trials and hunt tests. As you may not be aware, policy is written by AKC staff and presented to the Board for their approval. As an AKC delegate I have a direct hot line to the President and CEO of AKC to use when ?you have a question, concern, comment or idea.? As soon as my club gives me direction, I will personally discuss this with the President and CEO of AKC.

The American Kennel Club, founded in 1884, is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of purebred dogs. The AKC maintains the largest registry of purebred dogs in the world, oversees the sport of purebred dogs in the United States, and along with its nearly 5,000 licensed and member clubs, educates the general public about responsible dog ownership. More than 18,000 competitions for AKC-registered purebred dogs are held under AKC rules each year including conformation, agility, obedience, rally, tracking, herding, lure coursing, coonhound events, hunt tests, field and earthdog trials. Affiliate AKC organizations include the AKC Canine Health Foundation, AKC Companion Animal Recovery and the AKC Museum of the Dog

Jack


----------



## Wiley Coyote (Feb 7, 2005)

K G said:


> I hope performance events has a fast-track judge approval plan in the works to replace the ones they're going to lose....... 8)
> 
> _Ahh_....who am I kidding.....ready/shoot/aim........ :? .....................
> 
> kg


This is another topic that people should be writing the BOD on. With the recent rule change on judges being re-approved after they have taken two seminars, it will be increasingly difficult for clubs to host a judging seminar due to the lack of participants eligable to attend.


----------



## Uncle Bill (Jan 18, 2003)

junbe said:


> I have concerns with this new policy. I was at the delegate meeting where this policy was discussed by the delegates. At the time that this was discussed the term ?licensed judge? was used in the context of conflict of interest. Discussing this with a Board Member, he said this would not affect hunt tests and field trials because we have ?approved? judges, not ?licensed? judges. I was surprised when I saw the final draft approved by the Board and they put in ?approved? judges, which would affect field trials and hunt tests. As you may not be aware, policy is written by AKC staff and presented to the Board for their approval. As an AKC delegate I have a direct hot line to the President and CEO of AKC to use when ?you have a question, concern, comment or idea.? As soon as my club gives me direction, I will personally discuss this with the President and CEO of AKC.
> 
> The American Kennel Club, founded in 1884, is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of purebred dogs. The AKC maintains the largest registry of purebred dogs in the world, oversees the sport of purebred dogs in the United States, and along with its nearly 5,000 licensed and member clubs, educates the general public about responsible dog ownership. More than 18,000 competitions for AKC-registered purebred dogs are held under AKC rules each year including conformation, agility, obedience, rally, tracking, herding, lure coursing, coonhound events, hunt tests, field and earthdog trials. Affiliate AKC organizations include the AKC Canine Health Foundation, AKC Companion Animal Recovery and the AKC Museum of the Dog
> 
> Jack



Since you so close to the 'top', Jack, let me ask if there's any chance of us peons getting that BOD to change their minds on this policy? Do you believe our letters requesting reconsideration carry any weight? Are they even read by the movers and shakers, or are they summarily dropped by staffers-under-instructions.

Finally, who does the BOD and CEO answer to? What is the makeup of ownership in AKC? Are they approachable? 

When I hear that ideas sent in by no less an Icon than the good Doctor Ed seemingly fall on deaf ears, how can any of our comments be expected to carry any weight concerning this current situation?

Many enquiring minds would like to know. And while you can't give us any definitive answers, just providing your guesstimate of what may happen would be worthwhile.

Thanks for your time.

UB


----------



## junbe (Apr 12, 2003)

UB

I?ll try to answer some of your questions to the best of my knowledge. First, AKC is a club of clubs. These clubs are called member clubs. Each club is permitted to have a delegate to represent their club at AKC meetings. The delegates meet quarterly. The delegates may serve on committees. The delegates may speak on the floor of the meeting and even introduce rule changes from the floor. Certainly any rule change in AKC must be voted on by the delegates. Any bylaw changes of AKC must be voted on by the delegates. One of the most important committees is the nominating committee for the board of directors. Each year a new class of 3 or 4 board members are voted in. To a tee the board members that I have met have been very impressive and have a long history of dedication and service to the dog fancy. The board is only responsible to the constitution and bylaws of AKC. If the delegates do not like the direction of a board member, they have the opportunity each year to vote in more board members with their point of view. Make no mistake about it, the board (and especially the chairman) are the ultimate decision makers in everything. Each year they hire or rehire the executive officers. This includes the President and CEO, executive Secretary, and several other top level officers. These in turn hire a lower level staff. Currently AKC employs over 400 staff members, has an annual revenue of about $62,000,000. And annual expenses of over $61,000,000. To take a look at the Performance Dept., last I checked it had spend over $2.3 million and had revenues of only $600,000. In other words, the performance event is being subsidized by other revenue sources of AKC. And yes I do believe that the board is responsive to the dog fancy and if they do believe in the long run the benefit to change the conflict of interest policy, this will be done. Hopefully exceptions will be added to protect performance events from possible erosion.

Jack


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

junbe said:


> And yes I do believe that the board is responsive to the dog fancy and if they do believe in the long run the benefit to change the conflict of interest policy, this will be done. Hopefully exceptions will be added to protect performance events from possible erosion.Jack


or the Field Trial/Hunt Test community will gravitate to other sanctioning organizations as the Pointer Field Trail people did who aligned themselves with The American Field

I have (for a very long time) had the opinion that the future of retriever field trials will be with a sanctioning body other than AKC


----------



## Vicky Trainor (May 19, 2003)

How sad......53 (assumed) judges will be willing to leave the AKC. 

Potentially 53 less judges in the judging pool. 

Think it's hard to find judges now???? If something isn't done to help out our retriever events by the AKC BOD, it's going to become very hard to fill those judging slots. 

Wow. 

Vicky


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

I wonder if any of those 53 (now 55) have written letters to the AKC BOD questioning or protesting the proposal...... :? ...............

kg


----------



## AmiableLabs (Jan 14, 2003)

Ed said:


> I have (for a very long time) had the opinion that the future of retriever field trials will be with a sanctioning body other than AKC


I am afraid you are right; I hope you are wrong.

When (not "if") the antis come after us, it sure would be nice to have the whole AKC on our side.


----------



## B. A. (Feb 4, 2005)

As far as the poll is concerned, I suspect that a large percentage of the respondents are not judges, but are persons who responded as if they were.

Not saying there won't be repercussions, but I'm confident that AKC retriever events would barely notice if all the cross-over judges jump ship to UKC. I don't believe a large vacuum will be created in the AKC program.

Not saying AKC is doing the right thing, just saying it won't make a big difference to those that only run AKC events.

Time will tell.


----------



## SueLab (Jul 27, 2003)

In our big state of Texas, there are 3 clubs that are AKC licensed that are NOT dual. This year, one club became dual adding AKC and one became dual adding UKC. Another club is deciding right now whether it will become dual adding UKC...I don't think that the decision will be that hard. The judging mandate is making the decision easy for that club's board.

Keep in mind that this state is equal to several of the smaller states added together and judges may travel 200-300 miles round trip to judge for a local club. Houston is a 3.5 hour drive as is Dallas from the Austin area. You would think that there are plenty of judges. You would be wrong...

I would also say that many of the judges down here judge both venues and most may think: There are only 3 AKC events but there are 7 UKC events for the upcoming season, If I want to participate in more events, I will run (judge) UKC where there are more choices. I don't need to do the tap dance for AKC nor do I need to be insulted and belittled by the poorly written test that is required now. 

This new decision and the administering of a questionable test are just about ruining our club. We had the most difficulty finding good judges last season - it will be harder in the future. Forcing people to make a choice will do nothing to enhance the AKC program. Our club (that was extremely viable before this year) appears to be becoming a dinosaur near extinction.


----------



## Terry Thomas (Jun 27, 2005)

I'm almost afraid to answer this. When is the last time you purchased a non AKC registered retiever? When you look for a stud dog for your bitch how many non AKC registered studs do you consider? What titles appear on your dogs Pedigree? I'll stick with AKC.


----------



## Losthwy (May 3, 2004)

Bob A. said:


> As far as the poll is concerned, I suspect that a large percentage of the respondents are not judges, but are persons who responded as if they were.


I am not currently a judge but am schedule to apprentice in a month and I will honor that commitment. But, given the current atmosphere I very much doubt I will judge though. I talked with a long time respected judge here a couple of weeks ago who stated,"I'm through judging AKC they can stick that test up their..." those were his exact words. Yes folks getting judges is going to get MUCH tougher for AKC in the future and the CLUBS WILL BE FOOTING THE BILL with increased costs of flying in judges from around the country. Anybody on a HT committee should be pondering the consequences of these latest developments on how it will be effecting your club's BOTTOM LINE.


----------



## swamprat II (Feb 22, 2004)

My question is how is the AKC going to even enforce this? Are they going to actively go out and seek information on judge to see who is judge what & where??


----------



## achiro (Jun 17, 2003)

Terry Thomas said:


> I'm almost afraid to answer this. When is the last time you purchased a non AKC registered retiever? When you look for a stud dog for your bitch how many non AKC registered studs do you consider? What titles appear on your dogs Pedigree? I'll stick with AKC.


I don't look at the registry. I look at titles. Granted, most of what I look for is coming from AKC but doesn't have to. Looking at pointing breeds there are a couple of registries that I would look at(because of titles)and AKC isn't at the top of that list. 

Never say never.


----------



## HarryWilliams (Jan 17, 2005)

One of the affects will be those that continue judging multiple venues anyway. Kind of like driving 55 MPH on a road which is straight with no traffic and no houses alongside but has a posted speed limit of 50 MPH. Some will justify because of a rule that isn't "just" in their opinion. 

Enforcement will no doubt become the responsibility of the trial/test giving club. Looks like another complaint opportunnity for the committee. HPW


----------



## 2blackdogs (Apr 28, 2003)

I am not an AKC judge so I did not vote. I am an HRC judge and AA at all levels. I am also a member of a local AKC club and run several FT & HT each year. My plans were to join the AKC judes pool and start giving back to those that have judged my dogs in the past. Looks like I won't need to be looking for an AKC seminar now. The HRC ain't perfect but I don't have anyone telling me what I can and can't do. I will continue running AKC events because I enjoy the challenges. I do not hold any grudges toward any AKC club for what has come down from the BOD. I hope finding judges will not be the problem that it could become.

2blackdogs


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

"Yes." In a heartbeat. If this policy is in fact put in place - there seems to be some doubt whether the intent was to include HT judges - I will not turn my back on the UKC clubs. I run and judge in both and each has their good & not so good points. But, I am tired of the heavy handed politics of AKC Performance Events.

Well I just scrolled down and read Bill Speck's response. Sounds like the die has been cast. This started with the rather peevish decision to not allow non-AKC titles to be listed on the official program. Now AKC is trying to keep me from particpating in non-AKC events. Sorry boys. You can make any rule you like regarding standards and conduct during an AKC event. But don't presume to tell me what I can or can not do outside that event. 

Memo to the AKC clubs that have asked me to judge. Sorry. I'll be there, but running my pups. Kind of looking forward to that for a change.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

So, "Good Dogs," are you willing to write a letter to the AKC Board of Directors (not Bill Speck....he doesn't have BEANS to do with this policy...) with your real name, suggesting that they have erred in their ways and that to allow this policy to proceed as written will result in their loss of your services as a judge?

Keith Griffith


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

I voted not sure, as I currently do not judge AKC events, but will next Spring. I have judged NAHRA in the past (don't now) and have judged NFRA - this will effect those who currently judge and those who plan to judge in the future.

I voted as "Not Sure" because I don't....I'll probably stick with AKC, but that is what I'd do today, who knows about tomorrow?

FOM


----------



## Wiley Coyote (Feb 7, 2005)

I'm an AKC judge and I'm ubstaining from voting and for this reason, I only judge AKC events and have never wanted to judge anything but AKC events. However this rule does both anger and bother me because I believe it is hypocritical and bogus, especially for what reason they supposodly are passing it. Please AKC hasn't spent a million dollars on the training of Hunt Test judges in the whole history of the program. Clubs and willing participants have. Start paying me to judge your event and then you can tell me what to do.

For the record I have sent my letter asking them to reconsider their position on this and the recent changes on how judges to qualify for re-approval. In addition, I have asked them to consider updating their seminar to actually cover judging scenarios rather than reading rules to us from rule book via a power point slide show. This current seminar does little in training judges, however it does prepare you to become the Hunt Test Secretary or serve on the Hunt Test Committee.

P.S. KG I did use my real name and actual home address (not the ACME Co.) I know you've been worried.


----------



## John Gassner (Sep 11, 2003)

What if I only judge FTs with 8 point judges? I have never had to take the AKC judges test for FTs so no money spent for me on that. If I only judge with 8 point judges, then the AKC won't have to spend money with keeping my records/points.

If this is the reason (as they say), then I should be OK judging FTs in this fashion, right? :wink: Just have to stay away from taking tests/seminars for HTs.

John


----------



## Lisa Van Loo (Jan 7, 2003)

I didn't vote, because I don't think the last chapter on this issue has been written yet. 

Therefore, I'm not going to get my panties in a wad until January 1st, when the new policy actually takes effect. There's a lot of real estate between now and January 1, and a lot can happen between then and now. I'd drather spend my energy doing those things that I hope will help make those things happen.

Lisa


----------



## Paul Stuart (Aug 3, 2003)

Terry Thomas said:


> I'm almost afraid to answer this. When is the last time you purchased a non AKC registered retiever? When you look for a stud dog for your bitch how many non AKC registered studs do you consider? What titles appear on your dogs Pedigree? I'll stick with AKC.



By the way, I would also leave the AKC judges pool. I don`t like monpolies.


----------



## Bob Gutermuth (Aug 8, 2004)

If one looks in Retriver News, there are plenty of ads for pups. Close to 100% of these are for AKC registered dogs with AKC titles. The vast majority of stud ads are for AKC registered stud dogs. Its not a matter of elitism, its a matter of economics. When someone is going to spend a grand or 2 getting a competition prospect pup, the AKC registration is the sine qua non to much of the retriever world. That is not to say that the dogs registered UKC are not good dogs, but in many parts of the country UKC doesn't have a presence. I have never had anyone ask if my Chessie pups were UKC registered, but nearly everyone who is new to the game asks if they are AKC registered. Plainly, AKC is the bull of the woods in retrieverdom. The new police doesn't affect me in any way, as AKC is the only game I play, but I can understand where those with fingers in more than one pie might well be upset.


----------



## Uncle Bill (Jan 18, 2003)

Bob Gutermuth said:


> If one looks in Retriver News, there are plenty of ads for pups. Close to 100% of these are for AKC registered dogs with AKC titles. The vast majority of stud ads are for AKC registered stud dogs. Its not a matter of elitism, its a matter of economics. When someone is going to spend a grand or 2 getting a competition prospect pup, the AKC registration is the sine qua non to much of the retriever world. That is not to say that the dogs registered UKC are not good dogs, but in many parts of the country UKC doesn't have a presence. I have never had anyone ask if my Chessie pups were UKC registered, but nearly everyone who is new to the game asks if they are AKC registered. Plainly, AKC is the bull of the woods in retrieverdom. The new police doesn't affect me in any way, as AKC is the only game I play, but I can understand where those with fingers in more than one pie might well be upset.



OK, Bob. Please explain to me, where one has to do with the other? Aren't you discussing some apples/oranges issue? How in the world does forcing judges to make a choice of which venue they will participate in have anything to do with dog registrations?

My dogs are dual registered. If I quit judging AKC hunt tests, are my dogs AKC pedigrees gonna disintigrate? What's your point?

For those of you in your other brother Bob....Bob A's camp that think this won't adversely affect the AKC hunt test program, you have your head in the sand...or stuck somewhere. 

As Chris B. has said, if this policy is left to stand, it will be the beginning of the dismantling of that organizations hunt test program. It just can't be viewed in any other light. There is no other upside to a decision of this magnatude. 

The hubris involved in announcing this policy, with the incredulous chest thumping about how much has been invested in AKC judges, has got to be laughed at, if it weren't all so damned frightening. Talk about a major smoke screen. I never realized my 20 years cost them so much. That record keeping must really add up eh?

So please explain to me how this edict can possibly be viewed in a positive manner? If the ruling members of AKC can stomp on the volunteers among their field/sporting programs, why would those still involved not be looking over their shoulder, waiting for the next shoe to drop?

As KG implied...someone must have a reason and an explanation for what is so undeniably needless.

UB


----------



## Bob Gutermuth (Aug 8, 2004)

UB, the main thrust of my post was in answer to Pauls response to Terry's post.

If I understand the AKC's original intent, it was to short circuit those who judge conformation events for rival entities, not performance. Conformation is a much bigger moneymaker for AKC than any other venue. IF that is the totality of their proposal then I have no problem with it. If the proposal will involve performance events, then yes, in some regions of the country it may cause a loss of judges for one of the retriever testing organizations. In either event I don't have a dog in that hunt. My information is that only conformation judges will be affected.


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Bob Gutermuth said:


> ... My information is that only conformation judges will be affected.


Somewhere in the thread I think someone asked AKC specifically about FTs & HT judges participation in UKC & the AKC said that come Jan 2007, AKC would not allow its judges to judge in other registry venues - period. The intent & focus may be conformation but AKC has written the policy very broadly & it appears (from AKC correspondence) to cover performance events too. It's a shame......


----------



## Steve Hester (Apr 14, 2005)

At a time when Retriever Sport groups ought to support each other and stand as a united front against the antis, AKC's new judging policy serves to splinter the retrieving world as a group. If AKC's new policy is not aimed at killing off their Hunt Test program, then it is the most assanine and arrogant rule they've ever come up with.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

It's right up there, Steve, for sure, as one of the most devisive and potentially damaging statutes they've ever put forth...IMHO, anyway.



> If the proposal will involve performance events, then yes, in some regions of the country it may cause a loss of judges for one of the retriever testing organizations. In either event I don't have a dog in that hunt.


With all due respect, Bob, you surely DO have a dog in that hunt.

Let's say 30% of all Master judges are affected by this move. Let's say 50% of that 30% decide "Fon-goo you, AKC....you can take my judge's number and shove it." Sayonara, Good Night Gracie, the ajudicators have left the building...... 8) 

Now, let's say the same number of retriever clubs hold the same number of tests and <gasp> even try to add a few....*with 15% fewer judges*....an already overworked group of judges will get 15% more assignments added to their plate....they'll start saying no....or you'll start seeing even MORE of the same judges on the same circuit judging the same tests....or clubs will have to stop holding tests 'cause they can't get judges....or all of the above. WHEN, not "if," this happens, any AKC test holding club will be affected, and that includes the several that you participate in on the eastern shore.

There's just no good reason for the AKC to include performance events in this legislation. We need to keep a united front in contacting the AKC BOD and letting them know they've dropped the ball on this one.

Keith Griffith


----------



## SueLab (Jul 27, 2003)

K G said:


> Let's say 30% of all Master judges are affected by this move. Let's say 50% of that 30% decide "Fon-goo you, AKC....you can take my judge's number and shove it." Sayonara, Good Night Gracie, the ajudicators have left the building...... 8)
> 
> Now, let's say the same number of retriever clubs hold the same number of tests and <gasp> even try to add a few....*with 15% fewer judges*....an already overworked group of judges will get 15% more assignments added to their plate....they'll start saying no....or you'll start seeing even MORE of the same judges on the same circuit judging the same tests....or clubs will have to stop holding tests 'cause they can't get judges....or all of the above. Keith Griffith


I agree totally with what you have posted EXCEPT...we've already lost judges because of the new test. _*Some are excellent judges who missed the cut and refuse to retake the poorly written test and others are just saying "Thank you but NO thank you I am a volunteer and enough is enough!" *_ I think that the percentage is already at 15% lost and with this new mandate, the percentage in this area may be much closer to 50%...


----------



## Bob Gutermuth (Aug 8, 2004)

AKC has a VERY good reason(in their mind) for the rule change.......Sheckels, Voluta, Dinero, the almighty buck. They have had a virtual monopoly for years on most big money dog sports, and don't want to lose a dime to the 'upstarts' in the dog world.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

> I agree totally with what you have posted EXCEPT...we've already lost judges because of the new test. *Some are excellent judges who missed the cut and refuse to retake the poorly written test and others are just saying "Thank you but NO thank you I am a volunteer and enough is enough!"* I think that the percentage is already at 15% lost and with this new mandate, the percentage in this area may be much closer to 50%...


While the test could use some "tweaking," it is an open book exam. What I don't understand is why you have to make a 95 on it when the FT judge's exam only requires an 80% score..... :? 

I get your point, but I have about as much sympathy for those that won't retake the test as I did for those who wouldn't attend a seminar when they became a requirement. Retaking the test and passing it allows you to skip seminars for at least 4 years....a small price to pay, IMHO.

I also don't think that anywhere near 50% of AKC HT judges also judge an HRC (or another) venue. I also believe a majority of those that do would choose AKC if they had to choose....but my point is *they shouldn't be forced to choose*. Absolutely -zero- good can come from this if it stands.

kg


----------



## KNorman (Jan 6, 2003)

I find it interesting to look at people's profiles and see their geographical location. From what I can see, if you look at location and the HRC club map, there's an almost direct correlation between the lack of a HRC presence and unabashed AKC support/dismissal of this rule's impact.

Rest assured that you have to step out of a localized view of things.

While I wouldn't make the assertion that HRC rivals AKC's HT program (yet), if you make the analogy of AKC as the 800 pound gorilla, HRC is a 600 pounder and gaining weight fast. 

Think about how the majority of us got involved in retrievers...I would feel pretty confident with the statement that most on here began running dogs as an extension of bird hunting.

AKC's decision is pretty short-sighted...almost like they see the HT program as a static entity that doesn't change, when in fact, anyone knows that to have a growing (dynamic) organization, you have to have new blood and the judges and new members are obviously key in this respect.

HRC has been effective because it is a democratic organization that puts a priority on hunting, fun and family while running dogs. That's an appeal that (I think) the majority of folks out there share. There are more pure hunters out there than "hunting retriever" or "dawg" people....so, when average Joe or Jane decides he/she wants to get a "hunting dawg", where do you think that person is going to gravitate? And once the hook has been set, many times that person moves onto advanced HT levels or trials.

I don't run nearly as much AKC as HRC, but I can say without reservation that I have more "fun" at HRC events. IMO, AKC stuff tends to be a bit more technical (dogwise) but the friendly atmosphere/tailgates/family aura of HRC events go a long way too. One of the last HRC HT's I attended, it was HOT so the club had planned to have a waterslide for the kids. We BBQ'ed and watched the kids play, and you could tell that there were some very relaxed parents around who didn't have their kids up their butt looking for entertainment. That's just one example but I can find many more...AKC is missing the boat on getting the kids involved and you have future members, duh :roll: 



Don't discount the effect of this rule on "potential" judges also. 

I voted on this poll even though I'm not a licensed judge because I don't think I would be interested in being an AKC judge if I have to make a choice. Right now, I'm finishing up my requirements to become a HRC judge and had every intention of doing the same with AKC. Now I'm not so sure and that's something that I don't like at all. :?


JMO


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Cat Squirrel said:


> HRC has been effective because it is a democratic organization that puts a priority on hunting, fun and family while running dogs. That's an appeal that (I think) the majority of folks out there share. There are more pure hunters out there than "hunting retriever" or "dawg" people....so, average Joe or Jane decides he/she wants to get a "hunting dawg". Where do you think that person is going to gravitate? Then, once the hook has been set, many times that person moves onto advanced HT levels or trials.
> 
> JMO


Kev, I take exception to the 'pure hunter' comment. If I had to choose between hunting with pure AKC folks on their duck leases as compared to the HRC folks I know and their duck leases, hands down, I'd pick the AKC folks. :wink: 

And, where HRC may be more about a family thing, I think the AKC has their priority straight as far as having higher standards for retriever work. I take it that MH is the most coveted of HT titles.

I agree with KG on this; that there is no upside to this ruling by the AKC and I'm sure their decision had to do with Conformation events. Afterall, that is were the big bucks are.


----------



## SueLab (Jul 27, 2003)

K G said:


> While the test could use some "tweaking," it is an open book exam. What I don't understand is why you have to make a 95 on it when the FT judge's exam only requires an 80% score..... :?
> 
> I get your point, but I have about as much sympathy for those that won't retake the test as I did for those who wouldn't attend a seminar when they became a requirement. Retaking the test and passing it allows you to skip seminars for at least 4 years....a small price to pay, IMHO.
> 
> ...


A couple of points...

When an open book test takes longer than attending a seminar and has several viable answers to several questions and the pass percentage is so high...is it really worth it to not attend a seminar? 

Another problem that no one has addressed is that many clubs will not have enough people to take the judges seminar. The clubs in this area are already trying to figure out how as a goup, we can get enough attendees...(our last seminar would not have had enough eligible judges if they had been told prior to the seminar that they had to take the test)...

And finally, TN has 4 HRC clubs, Ky has 2...Keith you live in an area with very little HRC iinfluence.

Texas has 13 HRC clubs, La. has 7, Ok has 2...all of these states are options for dog enthusiasts in this area. Texas has more HRC clubs than AKC clubs and it is growing FAST...Most of our judges DO judge both events! 

And finally, all of hoopla about MN has probably been solved in some areas with this last rule...


----------



## Lisa Van Loo (Jan 7, 2003)

> AKC's decision is pretty short-sighted...almost like they see the HT program as a static entity that doesn't change


I'd be willing to bet that the HT program wasn't even thought of when they made this policy.

As KG said, ready/shoot/aim.

Much as we saw with the Hillman decision, part of the problem (a BIG part, IMO), is that retrieverites have never given much thought to the part that AKC plays in our lives. No idea how things work, how to effect change, how to be heard. It's up to US to lead the way by calmly and logically explaining why rules that MAKE SENSE for conformation don't necessarily MAKE SENSE for HT and FT. 

Time for the retriever world to stop considering AKC in the light of a distant afterthought (if that), and start taking positive measures to have our voices heard. Shed the apathy, pay closer attention to what goes on in NY and Raleigh, and be proactive in getting information out to the decision-makers. They won't know how things will affect our little world if we never tell them.

How many times over the past 2-3 years have I started discussions about the CONFLICT OF INTEREST COMMITTEE, and how that MIGHT JUST AFFECT US, with very little response or concern from the 5,000+ people who inhabit this board. Things don't happen in a vacuum, and we heard the warning shot 3 years ago.

Oh, and if your club isn't an AKC member, make it so!

Lisa


----------



## KNorman (Jan 6, 2003)

Mr Booty said:


> Kev, I take exception to the 'pure hunter' comment. If I had to choose between hunting with pure AKC folks on their duck leases as compared to the HRC folks I know and their duck leases, hands down, I'd pick the AKC folks. :wink:
> 
> And, where HRC may be more about a family thing, I think the AKC has their priority straight as far as having higher standards for retriever work. I take it that MH is the most coveted of HT titles.
> 
> I agree with KG on this; that there is no upside to this ruling by the AKC and I'm sure their decision had to do with Conformation events. Afterall, that is were the big bucks are.


I DO NOT disagree with you Franco. I also believe that AKC has relatively higher technical standards and I applaud that.

My "pure hunter" comment is directed at the average Joe who knows nothing about dogs or about AKC, HRC, NFRA, NAHRA, etc. They are looking for direction on training and then they are introduced to the world of HT's. Then, they get into running more and more until they end up like the folks on this board...experienced dawg folks.

People gravitate to where they feel comfortable and have a sense of belonging....and from what I have seen, HRC tends to cater more to that individual, and the hook is set. A friendly atmosphere recruits on it's own.

Franco, you (and most of the folks on this board) really aren't who I'm talking about. It's the newbie that's searching for the answers that finds a place where they feel comfortable and keeps an organization from withering on the vine.

I think this new potential policy of AKC discourages participation by destroying some enthusiasm of a select slice of the judging pool. And where do they and their buddies gravitate to?

It happened with NAHRA and I will bet that it happens (on a smaller scale) with this decision, if it comes to pass.

BTW, I've sent an e-mail to AKC protesting this...I want to become a licensed AKC judge and give back to BOTH organizations.


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Cat Squirrel said:


> BTW, I've sent an e-mail to AKC protesting this...I want to become a licensed AKC judge and give back to BOTH organizations.


Kev, yesterday I copied and pasted some post by KG, LVL and others and forwarded the email to a member of the RAC. I'm hoping they may see the light and take this issue up with the AKC.


----------



## Bill Watson (Jul 13, 2005)

This is Cleo and on reflection this has been slow to develop but the handwriting has been on the wall for over 20 years.

I had a beautiful Chocolate male, Gator Point's Mr. T (B.A.), the grandson of a bench champion. The owner of his Sire, a very good friend, kept badgering me to take him to the show ring. She talked me into going to a 'fun match' when he was about 7 months old. I couldn't understand why they kept letting me go and then calling us back and handing us ribbons. My friend was beside herself and asked me why I wasn't elated too. I told her that I had no idea what we had done or what I was doing. She said that he MUST go to the 'ring'. I told her if she wanted to run around a 'ring' with a dog on a string she could take him and I would pay for it.

We had been training him to participate in the hunting program and he had attained his JH title, but I let my friend take him anyway. He took the point, much to my ignorant surprise.

Well my friend continued to worry me into showing him myself and I relented. We entered several events and we won some and lost to others. One time to a yellow that had to be dragged around with his tail tucked between his legs. Another time there was an 'old' judge from Sun City, AZ who refused to even touch the chocolate dogs being presented but was very thurough with the blacks and yellows.

My last time in the ring was with a very nice judge who examined BA and commented on his beautiful muscled conformation. He asked me if he was a 'working' dog and I proudly told him he had his Junior Hunter title. He very kindly told me that he would give him the point this day but he would never get his CH (we had 9 points at this time). I asked 'why' and he said that the other judges would not 'put up' a working dog, they didn't like dogs that were well muscled and prefered the 'English type'.

Since the majority of the AKC events are with the show ring, it stands to reason that with that mind set, they would rule the day. Personally I feel this is their loss. But then, HRC events are much friendlier and a lot more fun than the others. You see, we are running against a 'standard' and not for the Blue Ribbon - first place or have so many dogs entered that the field must be cut down to a workable number.

AKC must have complete control or they won't let you play their game and their restriction on the judges is just another phase.

We have found that HRC is a club of inclusion and not exclusion.
________
Vaporizer Safety


----------



## Lisa Van Loo (Jan 7, 2003)

I don't know if HT will get major damage or not (possibly), but obedience will take a HUGE hit. Lots of folks judge for different organizations, and the sport is shrinking. AND (BIG and), AKC developed a fast-track approval process for obedience judges. The number of new people judging that sport is practically nil, and they are trying to attract more judges to it. They really can't afford to lose any of the current ones, but that is exactly what will happen.

If AKC is concerned about people being hazy on procedural issues as they switch back and forth between organizations (and it's a legitemate concern, I have seen evidence), then they can address it via judge education, or set policies that address these situations individually.

FWIW, they have already started this process for conformation. International judges' approvals are going through a major overhaul, and they are expected to jump through a few different hoops in order to maintain their licenses. This because both procedures and standards can vary widely between US and overseas (or even Canadian) organizations. And, what to me is MOST significant, they have started a process whereby judges who are licensed can have one or more breeds removed from their license if they prove to be incompetent.

Either of these processes could easily be tailored to retriever venues. Base it upon the individual's actual performance, not some broadly applied policy. If someone can flip between AKC/HRC/NAHRA/NFRA without skipping a beat, set up and test dogs within the boundaries of AKC, then there should be no problem. Those who demonstrate thay don't have a clue, or take the attitude that "I'm gonna show these AKC Bozos how we do things in X retriever events" (which I personally have witnessed on more than one occasion) should be flagged as not being allowed for further approval. Any club that puts them on their event form will get the form kicked back with a "try someone else to judge your event" notation.

I must be old, but the line from the Six Million Dollar Man keeps running through my head: "We have the technology."

Lisa


----------



## Bob Gutermuth (Aug 8, 2004)

Just wondering; does this policy affect foreign judging assignments? There is a bunch of conformation folks who judge in other nations, and more than a few AKC f/t judges who judge in Canada, as well as some Canadians who judge field trials in the states.


----------



## Lisa Van Loo (Jan 7, 2003)

Bob Gutermuth said:


> Just wondering; does this policy affect foreign judging assignments? There is a bunch of conformation folks who judge in other nations, and more than a few AKC f/t judges who judge in Canada, as well as some Canadians who judge field trials in the states.


Read the policy. It only applies to judging non-AKC events within the US. Does not apply to judges who judge in Canada, etc.

The international judging policy that AKC has whipped up applies only to conformation judges. AKC now requires overseas judges to have fulfilled the same requirements to judge breeds as our home-grown judges do. Attendance at parent club seminars, provisional judging assignments, the whole enchilada. No more free passes to people just because they are famous in their home territory.This spring, Rummy was judged by 2 overseas judges, neither of whom had ever seen a Chessie before. Tell me where this makes any sense! It's high time AKC got smart about clubs hiring "rock star" judges from overseas. 

Lisa


----------



## surfspeck (Nov 30, 2004)

JMO[/quote]


And, where HRC may be more about a family thing, I think the AKC has their priority straight as far as having higher standards for retriever work. I take it that MH is the most coveted of HT titles.

[/quote]



All in all, I would rather hunt with an HRCH dog than a MH dog. Although a MH might have proven it is capable of performing more technical dog work than an HRCH dog, it has not proven that it will mark off the gun or remain steady while the handler is actually handling a firearm. The most coveted of hunt test tiles IMHO is the GRHRCH. I was considering a run in AKC master, however, all this talk about AKC forcing its judges to choose "AKC or nothing" is enough to keep me right at home in the HRC arena. Hopefully AKC will review this hogwash and change their minds.


----------



## 3 dog knight (Jul 9, 2003)

surfspeck said:


> All in all, I would rather hunt with an HRCH dog than a MH dog. Although a MH might have proven it is capable of performing more technical dog work than an HRCH dog, it has not proven that it will mark off the gun or remain steady while the handler is actually handling a firearm. The most coveted of hunt test tiles IMHO is the GRHRCH.


 I'd love to hear your take on this once you've run a couple master tests... 

Alright, back to your regularly scheduled bashing. 

3DK


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

> Although a MH might have proven it is capable of performing more technical dog work than an HRCH dog, it has not proven that it will mark off the gun or remain steady while the handler is actually handling a firearm.


I've talked to more than one HRC participant who has admitted to noticing a degree of hearing loss in their dogs after a few years of being shot over multiple weekends a year.

If I had to pick between a dog that could handle in the field versus one that could mark off the gun (marking is marking in both venues), I'd pick the handling dog if for no other reason than to help preserve its hearing.

kg


----------



## SamLab1 (Jul 24, 2003)

surfspeck said:


> JMO


And, where HRC may be more about a family thing, I think the AKC has their priority straight as far as having higher standards for retriever work. I take it that MH is the most coveted of HT titles.

[/quote]

All in all, I would rather hunt with an HRCH dog than a MH dog. Although a MH might have proven it is capable of performing more technical dog work than an HRCH dog, it has not proven that it will mark off the gun or remain steady while the handler is actually handling a firearm. The most coveted of hunt test tiles IMHO is the GRHRCH. I was considering a run in AKC master, however, all this talk about AKC forcing its judges to choose "AKC or nothing" is enough to keep me right at home in the HRC arena. Hopefully AKC will review this hogwash and change their minds.[/quote]

What a bunch of crap.....over and over. I wish HRC actually cared about testing dogs rather than playing like they are hunters in a fashion show. I don't like what AKC is doing but I still want to test the dog not play like I'm hunting. I quit that 40 years ago.

"You have to shuck a gun" ...I got my first pump when I was 11 what the he!! is the big deal to shuck a pump gun other than to people that have never hunted. 

"Your dog has to follow the gun" BS...you pheasant hunt with your dog at your side...you ever hunt in a blind with a dog and in the flooded timber...follow the gun..BS...they follow the birds and mark them, if not you handle...which a MH has been trained to do so you can get the birds and get back to hunting.

"You can talk to your dog while birds are being shot" ..don't know about you but I trained my dog so I don't have to talk to him when birds are coming in

"UKC has better food and raffles"...good I'm all for that

"For hunter by hunters".....BS, then why were 65% of the dogs being run at the grand handled by Pros? Do 65% of the HRC HT people take their Pro hunting with them to handle the dog. 65% is huge..2 out of every 3 dogs run by a pro in HRC. Different kind of hunting I guess.

I could go on but it isn't worth it, they are just different games with a different focus, calling it more like hunting is bogus and any real hunter/dog trainer knows it.

For the record some of nicest people I've met in my life are at AKC HT's and FT's also some buttheads but they are in HRC also. If you want to play dress up and not keep score...HRC, you want to test dogs...AKC.

Just pick the one you like, you don't need to put down the other, they are all just games. Sorry...it just gets old after a while.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

> I wish HRC actually cared about testing dogs rather than playing like they are hunters in a fashion show.


I wish I hadn't had a mouth full of water when I read that.... :lol: And then this: 



> If you want to play dress up and not keep score...HRC, you want to test dogs...AKC.


Where's a good towel when you need it! :lol:  :lol: :lol: !!!!!

kg


----------



## surfspeck (Nov 30, 2004)

SamLab1 said:


> surfspeck said:
> 
> 
> > JMO
> ...


All in all, I would rather hunt with an HRCH dog than a MH dog. Although a MH might have proven it is capable of performing more technical dog work than an HRCH dog, it has not proven that it will mark off the gun or remain steady while the handler is actually handling a firearm. The most coveted of hunt test tiles IMHO is the GRHRCH. I was considering a run in AKC master, however, all this talk about AKC forcing its judges to choose "AKC or nothing" is enough to keep me right at home in the HRC arena. Hopefully AKC will review this hogwash and change their minds.[/quote]



Just pick the one you like, you don't need to put down the other, they are all just games. Sorry...it just gets old after a while.[/quote]

Everyone is entiled to their own opinion bud and I repect yours, however, where do you see in any of my comments above where I put down the other organization ???


----------



## KNorman (Jan 6, 2003)

The concept of one organization being better than the other is ludicrous.

My personal ambition is to have a GRHRCH/MH. That way I know my pup has truely proven she is an all purpose "hunting" retriever that is technically sound at the line AND in the field.

Peace my brothers 8) 


Weren't we talking about a shrinking AKC judges pool or something like that??? :wink:


----------



## Wiley Coyote (Feb 7, 2005)

While this is all entertaining and making us spew liquid from our mouth laughing, lets focus people.

Remember when addressing this matter that this is a blanket policy that effects all AKC judges, not just Hunt Test Judges.

If you have friends that play dog in other venues, obedience, agility, tracking, herding, etc. let them know what is going on. 

We have friends, let use them. They are in the same position we are in.


----------



## Lisa Van Loo (Jan 7, 2003)

Wiley Coyote said:


> We have friends, let use them. They are in the same position we are in.


Right on!

Lisa


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

I'm not an AKC HT judge and will probably never will be!.I've judged FTs, SRS and GOD games.
I don't own a range finder.
I run HTs when they have good judges with FT experience. This may make some people mad but IMHO FT judges place more importance on dog work and bird placemement then rule books and line choreography.

Tim


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

Notwithstanding what some think of AKC or HRC hunt tests & titles, AKC has adopted (not going to adopt, not potentially adopt, not under consideration) an offical policy to be effective 01 Jan 2007 which prohibits its judges from judging in non-AKC venues within the US.....It's a bad policy for AKC whether the BOD, managing officials, particularly for the volunteer judges & those of us who like to play both AKC & HRC HT games.

I do believe it was not directed specifically toward HTs but that just goes to show how little AKC thinks of HTs as a performance event. Fine, if a lobbying effort can get this changed but AKC HTs will suffer that's a certainty & those that enjoy playing the game will be the ones to bear the fallout of this bad decision.


----------



## Steve Hester (Apr 14, 2005)

I don't come to RTF very often anymore, and now I remember why. It's because a bunch of FT wannabe's always manage to knock HRC Hunt Tests. Say whatever you want, but the HRC Hunt Tests are closer to the way I hunt than the other programs are. When was the last hunting trip where you had somebody standing in the middle of the field wearing a white coat?? How many 300 yard marks does your dog have in a hunting session?? If you have very many at all, you need to practice your shooting. And I really don't know where the fashion show crap came from. HRC requires proper hunting attire, preferably camo(I do believe most people hunt in camo). And I'm quite sure that Cabela's, Bass Pro, or any other sporting goods store sells 100 times as much camo as they do white coats. Gimme a break with this arrogant BS!!


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

> When was the last hunting trip where you had somebody standing in the middle of the field wearing a white coat?? How many 300 yard marks does your dog have in a hunting session??


It's been decades since retriever field trials resembled hunting.

All one needs to do is look at pedigrees to see what effect FTs have on the sport of dogs. If FTs didn't matter, FT dogs wouldn't be in pedigrees.

End of story.

kg


----------



## Keith S. (May 6, 2005)

I thought this thread was about AKC judging restrictions, how is it turning into AKC vs. HRC??? :?: Both are good programs otherwise they wouldn't be around still...right?


----------



## Uncle Bill (Jan 18, 2003)

Well,Well,Well...lookee here, a batch of Texans ready to fall on the sword for their favorite hunt test organization...and God forbid if anyone should disagree with their way of doing things.

You all need a good boot in the arse for getting into a pizzing contest about a 'he-said-she-said' scenario. 

I couldn't give a FRA about what you would rather hunt with. If it's so damned important, start a thread and rail away. But both camps are way off base if they think they are in any way helping to resolve or even adding insight to the current situation.

If all you've got to offer is pot stirring and slamming someone elses form of dog testing, then contact Roger Perry. He can get you all started on the right path so no one will feel left out, and you can puff your chest and throw those barbs at each other until you finally realize how small you are thought to be.

Whether you are AKC or HRC or anything else...hunt test or field trial or confirmation...and you don't see this as being a problem affecting us all, then please stand back and allow those that do some reasoning room.

Those of you in the schadenfreude arena....just move on--you're making me sick.

UB


----------



## Robert S. Libberton (Feb 7, 2005)

Steve Hester said:


> I don't come to RTF very often anymore


Why are you back?


Steve hester said:


> It's because a bunch of FT wannabe's always manage to knock HRC Hunt Tests


Tim is an AA F/T Judge and has been in this game for a long time, he is a gentleman and has not slandered you for your opinions.


SH said:


> When was the last hunting trip where you had somebody standing in the middle of the field wearing a white coat??


Last time I hunting in a snow field.


SH said:


> How many 300 yard marks does your dog have in a hunting session??


A crippled diver, a goose that floated down river around a couple a season. I guess you just lose the ducks or use your boat to get the duck.


SH said:


> And I really don't know where the fashion show crap came from. HRC requires proper hunting attire, preferably camo(I do believe most people hunt in camo)


Go to a F/T and wear whatever you want, you dont have to wear white, you can dress in Camo, you sound like a guy who likes to see for himself why others look both ways before they cross the street. Keep running across the road buddy...


SH said:


> Gimme a break with this arrogant BS!!


 I guess no one could possibly know more about retrievers that you do huh? Tim is a good guy and is about as humble as they come but you know better than that huh?

I'll cut to the chase, you could always honestly appeal to Tim and admit he hurt your feelings. Was this the comment that hurt?


Tim Carrion said:


> IMHO FT judges place more importance on dog work and bird placemement then rule books and line choreography


 I think I feel the same because the F/T judge has to design a test that finds a winner, its inheriently easier to design a test that tests to a standard and every dog that meets it gets a ribbon. I feel that the F/T judges I have trained with learned alot more about the dynamics of how a dog marks and how marks influence each other much better than the H/T Judges I have trained with. This is of course my personal opinion and not mean't to offend.

Not to Hijack this post, I am a F/T Judge and would judge a stake this fall if it does not conflict with the Southwest circuit I am running in. I dont think the real problem is with the AKC ruling its with club's not introducting new member's to judging, Club's should encourage a new judge in each minor stake they hold. As a F/T sec I did not have a hard time slotting in a new Judge in my club's minor's and paired them with 8 PT all age stake judges.


----------



## Patti Maye (Jan 6, 2005)

Steve Bean said:


> Now let me see....a judge has to take tests, go to seminars, run and/or train his dog, etc.etc. Take his own time, vacation, etc., to judge a test, that may have more dogs than can reasonably be judged, because of no limits. Withstand the forces of mother nature, hot, cold, rain, snow, etc. AND all without pay, and then the AKC wants to monopolize that judge without any contractual arrangement/reimbursement? It is an all 'volunteer army'......let's see, let me think about that..... :? :roll: :roll: :?


*DITTO!*


----------



## Steve Hester (Apr 14, 2005)

Uncle Bill,
If you would do a search on here, you would find that until today, I have never said anything about AKC Field Trials or AKC Hunt Tests. And I didn't see anybody "falling on their sword for their favorite hunt test organization". That's a little dramatic, don't ya think?? Anyone can run any venue they choose. I just get tired of the constant negative references to HRC and their Hunt Test program. And to use one of your frequent sayings, I could give a "FRA" about what you think of me or HRC. You don't have the slightest idea of what I stand for or think. I too agree that this new ruling by AKC will have a negative impact on retriever sports as a whole. And my experience with you is that YOU are the one who jumps all over anyone who disagrees with you, no matter how politely they disagree. Your lack of tolerance for other's opinions is arrogant and disgusting. And let's don't even go there with the boot in the arse thing. That's nothing more than big talk on the internet. :roll: 

Robert,
I will come here as often, or as little as I please, unless Chris kicks me off. I don't even know who Tim is. I wasn't referring to him. For the record, I can handle my dog at 300 yards also. But the occasion is very rare when it's needed. I only made the points I made to demonstrate that every venue has rules that probably aren't perfect. That's why there are different games to run. So that as many people as possible can enjoy retriever sports. And I have never claimed to be a retriever expert, so I don't know where that even came from. Like I said, I wasn't even responding to Tim's comments, he gave his opinion in a polite way. 

And to everyone on this message board, I apologize about the FT wannabes comment I made. It was uncalled for. I usually try very hard to keep my comments to myself, unless someone slams me personally.


----------



## Steve Bean (May 3, 2004)

It is a very emotion filled issue....and one really where I see no one supporting the AKC position, and I have not seen anyone putting down one venue or the other. I think we are all on the same page, it just effects some more than others; but don't think just because you don't run HT or HRC, that this can't eventually spread. It is sort like issues with gun control, breeding regs, etc. We need to be represented as a united front. I can see where this could spread to the SRS, and other similar venues.


----------



## Noah (Apr 6, 2003)

I AM A HUNTER and I LOVE DOGS. I play the HRC game and the AKC game. If and when I have the skill, the time and a dog with the ability I will play the SRS, WRC, and the Field Trial Game. It's all good and it's my right to do so...so why shouldn't it be my right to judge any if I meet the requirements, and am conscientious in my effort to do so?

ps...a gorilla only gets to be 800lbs..if we let it.


----------



## Guest (May 29, 2006)

*AKC JUDGING CONFLICT- NEW POLICY*

Hi All....

I will also NOT be Judging any more AKC Hunts after Jan 1 if the policy isn't changed.. I hope everyone makes enough noise to do so!!!!!!!!!! The Judging pool is small enough now!!!!!!!!!!!

Susan F
Happy Go Lucky Retrievers


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

Lisa Van Loo said:


> > I'd be willing to bet that the HT program wasn't even thought of when they made this policy.
> 
> 
> You'd win. When it was first published I talked to friend who is on the Board. I was told that retriever hunt tests were never discussed in relation to the policy. I didn't ask about obedience but from the way the conversation went, I would not be surprised to learn obedience/rally/agility wasn't discussed either.
> ...


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> Now let me see....a judge has to take tests, go to seminars, run and/or train his dog, etc.etc. Take his own time, vacation, etc., to judge a test, that may have more dogs than can reasonably be judged, because of no limits. Withstand the forces of mother nature, hot, cold, rain, snow, etc. AND all without pay, and then the AKC wants to monopolize that judge without any contractual arrangement/reimbursement? It is an all 'volunteer army'......let's see, let me think about that..... :? :roll: :roll: :?


Don't conformation judges get paid as opposed to performance judges? Is that what's going on (they get paid so they have to be loyal to AKC?)


----------



## Harry Gooch (Aug 5, 2004)

*Judging Conflict*

Hopefully everyone is writing to the AKC Board on this issue. Letters to the Performance Events department are simply receiving a cursory answer, "of we don't make the rules we only enforce them". Susan F stated she would no longer judge AKC if the Conflict Policy stands. She is one of the hunt test comittee for her AKC club. As I sure she is aware of at least three of her judges for the Spring Test in Feb. or Dual Venue judges. This means she may be three judges short. Sadly, neither the other two or myself won't to be forced into this decision. I have nothing against the AKC, I do not believe one organization or testing venue is better than the other. I do have a problem being told I have to exclusively judge for one organization. It is sort of like the Red Cross saying we won't take your donation if you give to the United Fund. It is "Ivory Tower Management" by people out of touch with the grass roots of thier organization.


----------



## Losthwy (May 3, 2004)

ErinsEdge said:


> > Now let me see....a judge has to take tests, go to seminars, run and/or train his dog, etc.etc. Take his own time, vacation, etc., to judge a test, that may have more dogs than can reasonably be judged, because of no limits. Withstand the forces of mother nature, hot, cold, rain, snow, etc. AND all without pay, and then the AKC wants to monopolize that judge without any contractual arrangement/reimbursement? It is an all 'volunteer army'......let's see, let me think about that..... :? :roll: :roll: :?
> 
> 
> Don't conformation judges get paid as opposed to performance judges? Is that what's going on (they get paid so they have to be loyal to AKC?)


 I was talking with someone who runs conformation and she said those judges get paid about $1.50 per dog and there might be 300 dogs. That for some of the judges that is what they do for a living. Maybe we are in the wrong racket. I don't run HRC, only AKC. Have no plans to judge HRC only AKC, nothing against other clubs. Some like chocolate some like vanilla, some like both. But am opposed to AKC policy for two reasons. One- You don't dictate such limiting rules to unpaid volunteers. Two- There is already a shortage of good judges who the clubs would like to see judge their tests. And AKC is going to cause a system melt down. I know of some clubs that had a very hard time finding master judges THIS year. It is going to get much worse next year. It is going to make finding judges harder for both venues, HRC and AKC, if you split the Judging pool. 
P.S. I agree with what you stated above.


----------



## Lisa Van Loo (Jan 7, 2003)

ErinsEdge said:


> Don't conformation judges get paid as opposed to performance judges? Is that what's going on (they get paid so they have to be loyal to AKC?)


Some get paid...most do not. There are all sorts of other issues with being a professional judge in conformation or obedience. In any case, there is a tiny handful who actually make their living by judging. The rest cover expenses and a little extra, but not much. Most are just giving back, like FT & HT judges do.

No, this is to stop the "bleeding" that has happened with some licensed judges setting up shop with their own brand-new registries and show-giving for-profit outfits. In some cases, they have piggy-backed to a remarkable degree on AKC events, to their own benefit (and considerable profit), and the detriment of AKC. IMHO, AKC needs to address these situations individually, not with broad-brush policy making.

Lisa


----------



## Bob Gutermuth (Aug 8, 2004)

10 yrs ago when I was still showing on occasion, there were judges getting $3 per dog plus expenses. The daily limit was 175 dogs so if a judge had enough breeds they could make a pretty good chunk of change. For the mathematically challanged that equals out to $525 per diem. If its a big cluster like Tar Heel, a judge with a lot of breeds can knock down some serious coins in a couple of days.


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

So far it's 2 to 1, leave or stay with the AKC. Now it might be a stretch but if the poll represents a cross section of "approved" judges might that mean that the judges' pool could be reduced by 1/2 next year?

Whether you play the UKC/HRC venue or not this has the potential of a major impact on all HT clubs. Consider what would happen if the available judging pool were significantly reduced. To date I have not had any contact with a "dual" judge who says they will give up their UKC committment to continue judging AKC events. That includes some MNRC delegates. 

Multiple queries to Performance Events and AKC have not genereated anything other than "it's the policy until the policy is changed."

Maybe if we keep up the noise we can affect a change. I've written the letters, fired off dozens of emails. If the HT community can't make themselves heard and affect a change maybe that tells us something more important than the new policy. 

And by the way KG,

Regards to all,


Bob Swift


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

> Maybe if we keep up the noise we can affect a change. I've written the letters, fired off dozens of emails. If the HT community can't make themselves heard and affect a change maybe that tells us something more important than the new policy.


Well said, Bob.

The monkey is squarely on our backs. If we want it off, we need to buck HARD.

kg


----------



## red devil (Jan 4, 2003)

Have not voted in this poll. Several years ago I was an approved AKC Jr & Sr judge. At that time I was running AKC HT's, HRC HT's and Working Certificates. I even ran a few sanctioned FT's with some modest sucess (Quals). I enjoyed all immensely. The satisfaction of reaping all the rewards of training made it all so very worthwhile.

At the time, I was running mostly AKC HT's and travelled over a large part of the Mid West to do so. I decided to give something back and the readily available venue was the AKC.

Many people I talked with at events encouraged me to go forward and apprentice for approval, I felt I had the experience and desire to become a good fair judge. I had attended some seminars in the past and had the relevant qualifications. The first hurdle was finding clubs and judges willing to take on apprentices - or at least apprentices not a regular part of an AKC club or a pro's groupie. After much effort (and sacrifice) I won apprenticeships at some AKC events and sat back waiting for the phone to ring - I'd still be waiting. Took the offensive (against AKC guidelines) and got myself some assignments. I should note that at all levels of this endeavour I was treated like a second class citizen or worse. I should also highlight the individuals at events that felt my dog was also a second class citizen because he was a) a swamp collie and b) just a meat dog.

Several years back, I was judging a JH with an experienced judge. We were setting the test up and a fairly good idea where we were going to throw the marks, we were in agreement. I was checking the skyline on one of the marks when I was approached by the HT Chair who got in face loudly and rudely, wondering "what the frick" I was doing throwing such a nasty mark - it wasn't, and every JH dog was going to cheat - they didn't, not one. This same HT chair owns a well known NAFC dog. He said that not a single dog could pass the test. We passed 23 out of 24. After the test, same chair passed out ribbons w/o a single acknowledement of myself or my co judge and then began to berate us both - in front of the crowd for passing out so many passes and that 50% was a more proper number

I cite this example as it was the most egregerious(sp?) but not alone by a long shot 

I have not judged or attended an AKC event since.

The HRC as a testing venue and as a breeding program has become increasing relevant to me. I still train with AKC complexity and I still love above all else to see wonderful retrievers work. HRC has become my home. I encourage new members to our club to try all available venues and decide for themselves which is the most enjoyable and satisfying for themselves and more importantly for their dogs. I for one will not belittle anyone's choice.

Please don't berate anyone for choreography or for costume, they can be just as funny at both venues (more so at the AKC because many take themselves waaay too seriously).

One other point, when reading out pass slips after judging a HRC event, most judges take the time to include ALL titles when reading the dog's name - when was the last time you heard that at an AKC event?

Stu Henderson

HRC Judge# 6518


----------



## Cindy Read (Nov 13, 2004)

*show judges getting paid*

Yes, but they are paid by the club they are judging for NOT AKC. Their expenses are also paid for. Now, remember a bench club may have 2000 dogs per day entered at a cluster event, 3 or 4 shows in a row in the same place. Most judges brought in will judge at all the shows so expenses are shared. 

Cindy R.


----------



## Guest (May 31, 2006)

*Re: Judging Conflict*



Harry Gooch said:


> Hopefully everyone is writing to the AKC Board on this issue. Letters to the Performance Events department are simply receiving a cursory answer, "of we don't make the rules we only enforce them". Susan F stated she would no longer judge AKC if the Conflict Policy stands. She is one of the hunt test comittee for her AKC club. As I sure she is aware of at least three of her judges for the Spring Test in Feb. or Dual Venue judges. This means she may be three judges short. Sadly, neither the other two or myself won't to be forced into this decision. I have nothing against the AKC, I do not believe one organization or testing venue is better than the other. I do have a problem being told I have to exclusively judge for one organization. It is sort of like the Red Cross saying we won't take your donation if you give to the United Fund. It is "Ivory Tower Management" by people out of touch with the grass roots of thier organization.



Yes Harry... I'm very Aware -- actually 3/4 of the Judges for the MFGRC Spring Test are Dual Judges... & I'm pretty sure all will not be judging if the Pompus & Asinine Policy is not changed!!!! SOOOOO com'on everyone.. KEEP MAKING NOISE with your letters & emails to the AKC Board & Bill Speck.. so we can still be 'Having Fun' in both AKC /HRC Hunts!!!!!!!!!!

Susan F
Happy Go Lucky Retrievers


----------



## thelabguy (Jul 20, 2004)

*Re: Judging Conflict*

Susan F wrote


> KEEP MAKING NOISE with your letters & emails to the AKC Board & Bill Speck


I wrote Bill Speck that I would no longer be accepting AKC HT Judging assignments if the policy goes into effect, and I hoped that he would be able to take information such as this to the Board to urge their reconsideration. His (canned?) response was "Thank you for expressing your sentiments. Your name will be removed from our approved Judge's directory, per your request, on Jan. 2, 2007 if the Board policy has not been rescinded."

From his response, it seems to me that this is barking up the wrong tree. Our comments need to go to someone on the Board (or someone who would take it to the Board) so they can realize how this will negatively impact the Performance Events department, without giving them any benefit they (publicy stated they) were seeking. Anybody got an e-mail address for such a person?

Why isn't the Performance Events Department up in arms about this? Or are they?

Kevin


----------



## Steve Bean (May 3, 2004)

*Re: Judging Conflict*



thelabguy said:


> Susan F wrote
> 
> 
> > KEEP MAKING NOISE with your letters & emails to the AKC Board & Bill Speck
> ...


From the above response, it would seem that the AKC wants to be the ONLY dog game period. You will either play by their rules, take it or leave it. I don't think they really care. They probably feel that the HT program causes more work with little additional revenue.....that's just my guess, don't have any facts to back it. So, everyone will pony up and do it their way, or the highway. If the original intent was that this ruling apply to HT, then I bet it doesn't change.....the question is, will everyone else be willing to change to the AKC way?


----------



## Good Dogs (Nov 1, 2005)

The FAQ on AKC.org directs questions on the new policy to Performance Events - Bill Speck. Bill replies that Performance Events only enforces board policy. Classic beauraucratic run-around. 

I'd like to think that the AKC will realize that this policy will hurt the retriever HT program. More important, I'd like to think that they give a dam about it.


----------



## Cindy Read (Nov 13, 2004)

*Judging other venues*

Wonder if that also applies to judging field or bench events in other countries? What if you are asked to judge a trial in Canada? Are you now excluded from judging in the US?

And we thought we had a hard time picking judges now, yikes next year will be a nightmare. 

Cindy R.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Folks, we can whizz and moan about Performance Events' inability to affect change on this all we want to and it will have -zero- effect on the policy.

The only way to get it done is to contact the AKC BOD.

The only way to get it done is to contact the AKC BOD.

*The only way to get it done is to contact the AKC BOD.* 

And oh, by the way...._the only way to get it done is to contact the AKC BOD_.....and perhaps James Crowley, AKC Secretary. All can be reached at the 260 Madison Avenue address listed on the AKC website.

If the "noise" doesn't come from the folks most affected by this silly policy, it won't have a prayer of being changed.....

kg


----------



## Losthwy (May 3, 2004)

Anybody have email addresses for the board members?


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

With all due respect, email will not have the same impact as snail mail. Here are their names:

http://www.akc.org/about/board_of_directors.cfm

c/o The American Kennel Club
260 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10016

kg


----------



## Pat F. (Jan 3, 2003)

K G said:


> With all due respect, email will not have the same impact as snail mail. Here are their names:
> http://www.akc.org/about/board_of_directors.cfm
> c/o The American Kennel Club
> 260 Madison Avenue
> ...


Keith:

Is there one person on that BOD that knows/is familiar with the field aspect of testing retrievers or any of the other hunting breeds for that matter??? 

Pat


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Pat,

Nope. Sad, ain't it.....  ..................

Kenneth Marden, a pointing breed guy, was recently voted off. Makes me wonder if _any_ of these current BOD members have ever been in the field with a sporting dog...... :roll: 

kg


----------



## Pat F. (Jan 3, 2003)

Someone who is usually _"in the know"_ told me not too long ago that word is there are BOD members that stated they would like nothing better than to see an end to the "blood sport" of h/t and f/t which would obviously include *ALL* the hunting breeds. Maybe a couple of BODs' are PETA members........... :twisted: 

Judging from all that's going on it might be a possibility this could come to be down the road. Since we are such a minority and not a big money-maker for AKC I seriously doubt any input we have would do much to change their minds should they decide to go that route. 

But then again, we can sure put up a good fight!!!!!

Pat


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Well, if anyone has ever had any inclination toward putting up that good fight, now is the time to do it.....more than _ever_....

If we don't fight this movement, we'll set a precedent that we'll regret down the road.....and not too far down the road at that.

Keith Griffith


----------



## Lisa Van Loo (Jan 7, 2003)

Pat F. said:


> Someone who is usually _"in the know"_ told me not too long ago that word is there are BOD members that stated they would like nothing better than to see an end to the "blood sport" of h/t and f/t which would obviously include *ALL* the hunting breeds. Maybe a couple of BODs' are PETA members........... :twisted:
> 
> Judging from all that's going on it might be a possibility this could come to be down the road. Since we are such a minority and not a big money-maker for AKC I seriously doubt any input we have would do much to change their minds should they decide to go that route.
> 
> ...


Next time your "in the know" person starts this kind of rumor, ask for a source.

Sounds like so much rumor-mongering to me.

None of the BoD is a PETA member or PETA-type. If this "in the know" person enjoys the fruits of AKC events, then they should be ashamed for starting this kind of talk. Sounds like pure taking and no giving behavior to me. 

Wonder if they wrote one single line to any of the BoD addressing their concerns, or did they just run their mouth? This type of irresponsible/defamatory talk does more to damage US, the HT/FT folk, than anything else.

Lisa


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

This is a no brainer from a buisness or political point of view.
any halfwit can smell the roses. or pig poop. 
People who head major enterprizes are often wolves in sheeps clothing. They smile and shake your hand to your face with a great big halo on ,,only to have it morph into a set of horns when you turn your back.

Do you really think most polititians at an upper level want to stop illegal alliens from coming here,,,because they say so. Or do they convince you that they are sincere when they tell you that amnesty,welfare,hospitalazation and food stamps will prevent them from coming. :shock: :roll: 

It is no different than a board of directers telling you you can't play other games and by the way to play ours ,,, you must pass our little test.
So is this how you bring new people in? What new people? We can't find a judge to judge their dog.

This has nothing to do with a monopoply. This is a recipee for extinction.
On the other hand maby they are just highly educated idiots. By that I mean they lack common cents. Nothing derogratory ment by that comment. 
I thought I would give them the benefit of the doubt since I don't know them or there little going ons. Mabe its innocent mabe its not.
There did I cover my a$$ like a good poly tick tion
Do you really think they don't know what people are saying about their decisions
remember these are sharp dudes they are. They don't half a$$ it without testing the waters.
OR maby we are all paranoid and need to JUST TRUST, just trust, just ,trust,just trust, 
I am getting sleepy regaurds


----------



## AmiableLabs (Jan 14, 2003)

K G said:


> With all due respect, email will not have the same impact as snail mail. Here are their names: http://www.akc.org/about/board_of_directors.cfm


Patti Strand is a friend of the "blood sports." As founder and head of the National Animal Interest Alliance she has done more to protect us from the antis than most.


----------



## Lisa Van Loo (Jan 7, 2003)

> OR maby we are all paranoid and need to JUST TRUST, just trust, just ,trust,just trust,


There's a whole lot of real estate between paranoia and blind trust.

Try occupying the middle ground some.

Write letters. It is up to US to educate those who do not participate in our sport, and do not understand the ramifications of this policy. 

Or, just continue the hand-wringing over the falling sky and the impending doom of retriever events.

It's all about choices. Those who choose to DO NOTHING (and griping on this board amounts to DOING NOTHING) have made a choice for apathy. And apathy will kill ANY sport faster than anything else.

Lisa


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

K G said:


> With all due respect, email will not have the same impact as snail mail. Here are their names:
> 
> http://www.akc.org/about/board_of_directors.cfm
> 
> ...


Would you recommend one letter to each BOD member or a general one to the BOD?

Letter writing regards,

FOM


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

I'm going for one letter each. Volume is the key, IMHO.



> ...I mean they lack common cents.


Oh, I'm sure they each have plenty of cents........................................ 8) ................................

kg


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

LVL,

You had posted a rough draft of a letter in another thread, I attempted to find it but I can't. You made a couple of points I wanted to capture in my letter - can you repost the info or help me find the correct thread....

Thanks In Advance,

FOM


----------



## Bayou Magic (Feb 7, 2004)

FOM said:


> LVL,
> 
> You had posted a rough draft of a letter in another thread, I attempted to find it but I can't. You made a couple of points I wanted to capture in my letter - can you repost the info or help me find the correct thread....
> 
> ...


How about someone posting a good letter as a sticky to make it easy to find?

fp


----------



## Lisa Van Loo (Jan 7, 2003)

K G said:


> I'm going for one letter each.


Now _there's_ a man who doesn't quibble over a few 39 cent stamps!

Here's a copy of the letter I sent. Tweak and personalize as needed!



> American Kennel Club
> 260 Madison Ave, New York, NY 10016
> Attn: James P Crowley
> 
> ...


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

39 cents per board member PLUS AKC Sec'y James Crowley is a small price to pay to let them know they're on a fast track to hades relative to performance events judges......

kg


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

Lisa, THANK YOU!

I'm not a very good word smith!

Now it would be interesting to do a poll to see how many actually sent/wrote letters? 

Letter Ready For the Mail Regards,

FOM


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

One letter addressed to the Board but mailed to James Crowley will produce a copy of the letter in every Board members correspondence file.

Eric


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

That's fine. Whatever works.

I'm trying the Joe S. "carpet bombing" technique...... :wink: 

Firing-for-effect regards,

kg


----------



## surfspeck (Nov 30, 2004)

Nicely said Catsquirrel!!!!!! I believe your right on the money & good luck in your pursuit to become a judge. One of these days and it wont be long, Im gonna venture over to, Deep East TX, LA and Ark and run some tests with you boyz!!!! 



Cat Squirrel said:


> I find it interesting to look at people's profiles and see their geographical location. From what I can see, if you look at location and the HRC club map, there's an almost direct correlation between the lack of a HRC presence and unabashed AKC support/dismissal of this rule's impact.
> 
> Rest assured that you have to step out of a localized view of things.
> 
> ...


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

Holy cow, nearly 200 Hunt Test judges here on RTF!


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

200 replies does not mean 200 judges replied....

Newspaper circulation deja vu regards...... :wink: 

kg


----------



## Franco (Jun 27, 2003)

K G said:


> 200 replies does not mean 200 judges replied....
> 
> Newspaper circulation deja vu regards...... :wink:
> 
> kg


Ya, but read the thread title. The poll ? is being asked of judges. :wink:


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Yeah, and we know *everybody* reads the title........and *nobody* would reply if they weren't a judge................................................. 8) 

Franco, I've got some bayou property in Arizona you might be interested in....... :wink: 

kg


----------



## Lady Duck Hunter (Jan 9, 2003)

Now, Keith, isn't that property in Arizona more "Coastal Marsh" than "Bayou" after all there is all that sand. :wink:


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

I'll consider rewording the marketing materials if it doesn't sell as a "bayou!" :lol: !

kg


----------



## MikeBoley (Dec 26, 2003)

KG, 
Dont to forget the realtor ease "can see forever' aka in the middle of no where.


----------

