# North Texas and their $90 open



## Kim Williams (Apr 29, 2009)

Taking that "everything is bigger in Texas" to the extreme.


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

maybe they are holding it at Jerry's World and the Open will be shown on the jumbotron screen...



and everything is BIGGER in Texas.....its just that "objects in the mirror may seem larger than they really are"


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

The Open is $90. The Amateur is $70. An Amateur competing in the Open and Amateur is paying $160 for both stakes or an average of $80 per stake, which is what many clubs now charge


----------



## mjh345 (Jun 17, 2006)

I'm all for it. 
As a matter of fact I'd like to see it even more stacked; like $120 for the Open and $40 for the Amateur.


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

mjh345 said:


> I'm all for it.
> As a matter of fact I'd like to see it even more stacked; like $120 for the Open and $40 for the Amateur.



easy there pal  even though I understand your reasoning or at least I can guess...dont be giving FT committees any crazy ideas


----------



## Brandoned (Aug 20, 2004)

mjh345 said:


> I'm all for it.
> As a matter of fact I'd like to see it even more stacked; like $120 for the Open and $40 for the Amateur.


I agree 100%!


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

I'm liking this idea of pricing....


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

> As a matter of fact I'd like to see it even more stacked; like $120 for the Open and $40 for the Amateur.


Didn't they try this before and AKC gave them some static when they were getting authorization to have the trial?

Maybe $90 and $70 will fly.

Any coments Dr. Ed?


----------



## Jan Helgoth (Apr 20, 2008)

And why is only the Open $90? ........ because "Legal Opinions" cost more.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Howard N said:


> Didn't they try this before and AKC gave them some static when they were getting authorization to have the trial?
> 
> Maybe $90 and $70 will fly.
> 
> Any coments Dr. Ed?


My logic is that the Open stake or one of it's variants utilizes a minimum of 50% more of a club's resources, so if it was my choice the entry fee would reflect that.

Our original attempt to charge a significant difference in entry fees was rejected by Performance Events who viewed it "as an attempt to restrict competition" since most clubs only charge $5 to $10 more for the Open. I replied with a lengthy explanation why we made that decision and made the point that it was unprecedented for AKC to set entry fee guidelines. I further argued that anyone spending $15,000 or more a year to have a dog trained and run off of a pro truck was not likely to be deterred by an extra $30-$40 for an entry fee.

The $20 differential represents an agreed upon compromise. Hopefully other clubs will recognize that the Open stake or one of it's variants requires an extra day and utilizes much more of the club's resources and will choose to reflect that in their entry fees so perhaps we can someday reach the level of entry fee that reflects the cost of putting on the trial. I certainly think the entry fee should be at least as much as the handling fee for an A list pro......


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Jan Helgoth said:


> And why is only the Open $90? ........ because "Legal Opinions" cost more.


Because the Open stake typically requires one more day and occupies workers for a longer period of time thereby increasing the work burden of the club to put on the other stakes.


----------



## helencalif (Feb 2, 2004)

EdA said:


> Because the Open stake typically requires one more day...


Not only the work burden, but the cost of bird throwers (ours are paid bird boys, not volunteers) for the club for that extra day.

However, out here in CA the Open is the largest stake and requires 3 days so larger trials need the paid bird boys all 3 days.

I could see considering charging more for the Open for smaller trials when the Open can be run in 2 days. I can also hear the Amateur folks who run both Open and the Am complaining if Open fees were raised. The idea would only fly if the fees for the Amateur were dropped as much as the Open was raised. 

But then the "only running the Open" amateur folks would complain. Also, it would look like the club was gouging the owners of Open dogs who had them on a pro's truck. (Uh oh, did I hear some amateurs cheering in the background?)

Right now, I don't think many CA clubs would consider raising Open fees and dropping Amateur fees. but I could be wrong. 

My 2-cents,
Helen


----------



## Mike W. (Apr 22, 2008)

> I certainly think the entry fee should be at least as much as the handling fee for an A list pro......


Could you please explain your basis for saying this?

More than a handful of opens finish on Saturday afternoons. What's really the difference between an 80 dog open and a 70 dog amateur?

Same logic as taxing those who make over $250,000. They make money. They are bad. They can afford it. It's only fair.

They have dogs on a pro truck. They aren't as good as us amateurs who train our own dogs. They can afford it. Make them pay more. Make those out of town dogs who have to come run on the grounds that our dogs get to train on pay more. It's only fair.

I have dogs with a pro, and I also like to run the amateur when I can. $40 bucks here, or $50 there.....over the course of a year running 20 trials, it adds up.


----------



## Losthwy (May 3, 2004)

mjh345 said:


> I'm all for it.
> As a matter of fact I'd like to see it even more stacked; like $120 for the Open and $40 for the Amateur.


Works for me.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

junfan68 said:


> What's really the difference between an 80 dog open and a 70 dog amateur?.


Almost all 70 dog Amateurs are completed in two days, almost no 80 dog Opens are completed in 2 days, which one requires more resources.

Entering a field trial is voluntary and if owners of Open dogs do not like the fee structure they are certainly free to enter a different trial with entry fees more to their liking.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Each club gets to make its own decision as to what stakes they sponsor and what they charge


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> Each club gets to make its own decision as to what stakes they sponsor and what they charge


Well, except for the "what they charge" part...still can't figure out why (or how, really) the AKC is inserting itself into club economic decisions...

k g


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

There are some that would suggest that an entry set up like this would fall under the "strong arm" tactics catagory.




Just can't help it regards,


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Ken Guthrie said:


> There are some that would suggest that an entry set up like this would fall under the "strong arm" tactics catagory.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


to quote one time Cowboy running back Darren Hambrick when asked why he did not participate in non-mandatory preseason workouts 

"what do voluntary mean"....


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

EdA said:


> to quote one time Cowboy running back Darren Hambrick when asked why he did not participate in non-mandatory preseason workouts
> 
> "what do voluntary mean"....


To quote a AL West Division winning manager...

"That just how it go sometime"


----------



## Brian Cockfield (Jun 4, 2003)

EdA said:


> to quote one time Cowboy running back Darren Hambrick when asked why he did not participate in non-mandatory preseason workouts
> 
> "what do voluntary mean"....


Hahaha!! Awesome!!!


----------



## Jan Helgoth (Apr 20, 2008)

EdA said:


> My logic is that the Open stake or one of it's variants utilizes a minimum of 50% more of a club's resources, so if it was my choice the entry fee would reflect that.
> 
> Our original attempt to charge a significant difference in entry fees was rejected by Performance Events who viewed it "as an attempt to restrict competition" since most clubs only charge $5 to $10 more for the Open. I replied with a lengthy explanation why we made that decision and made the point that it was unprecedented for AKC to set entry fee guidelines. I further argued that anyone spending $15,000 or more a year to have a dog trained and run off of a pro truck was not likely to be deterred by an extra $30-$40 for an entry fee.
> 
> The $20 differential represents an agreed upon compromise. Hopefully other clubs will recognize that the Open stake or one of it's variants requires an extra day and utilizes much more of the club's resources and will choose to reflect that in their entry fees so perhaps we can someday reach the level of entry fee that reflects the cost of putting on the trial. I certainly think the entry fee should be at least as much as the handling fee for an A list pro......


So, Dr. Ed, using this same logic: If the Qual only takes one day and uses the same judges as the Amateur, why isn't the Entry Fee $30? Does the AKC allow you to raise your fees based on circumstances relating to the actual event logistics, but not lower them?


----------



## moonstonelabs (Mar 17, 2006)

Ed, I understand, to a point, your reasoning. Opens do cost more......not just in terms of the three days to do one but the cost of judges coming in as well. What I don't get though is that opens also bring in more money due to typically larger entries.

That said I will be running the open at NT. See you there.

Bill


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

moonstonelabs said:


> That said I will be running the open at NT. See you there.
> 
> Bill


Don't go out in the first series. 

Ed will give you a sack lunch, invite you to Three Frogs, and show you some great areas to set up derby tests. 

Lmfao.


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

> What I don't get though is that opens also bring in more money due to typically larger entries.


Not in relation to the cost of holding that stake... More flyers, more help, yadayadayada... The entry fee hardly covers it...

Angie


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

Ken Guthrie said:


> Don't go out in the first series.
> 
> Ed will give you a sack lunch, invite you to Three Frogs, and show you some great areas to set up derby tests.
> 
> Lmfao.


But is that lunch a "welfare cheese" lunch??? :razz:

I'm sure Ron can scrounge up better...

Angie


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Jan Helgoth said:


> So, Dr. Ed, using this same logic: If the Qual only takes one day and uses the same judges as the Amateur, why isn't the Entry Fee $30?


Sounds like a great idea to me, why don't you try that entry fee structure for the next field trial you put on and report back to us


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

It fascinates me that a person whose name I cannot find as ever having entered or run a field trial can post a protest about an entry fee that is $5 higher than I have paid this year and it could generate so much discussion, either my life is too complicated or enriched or the lives of others are too bleak.

Of all of my expenditures with 3 dogs the least is entry fees and if entry fees were that important I would reevaluate my involvement.

We are expecting our largest Fall entry in years so $5 has not seemed to have affcted those who enter dogs.

Perhaps the fact that we have excellent grounds, invite good judges from all over the country, and put on a quality field trial is more important to the retriever community than are our entry fees.

BTW you will notice the absence of my name anywhere on the premium as I have been put out to pasture, thankfully my successors share my views about much that we do.


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

Some people just have to share their opinion whether they play the game or are wannabe's

 :lol:


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

EdA said:


> BTW you will notice the absence of my name anywhere on the premium as I have been put out to pasture,


You were grazing a long time ago...

You just didn't know it yet.


----------



## Barry (Dec 11, 2007)

EdA said:


> Almost all 70 dog Amateurs are completed in two days, almost no 80 dog Opens are completed in 2 days, which one requires more resources.
> 
> Entering a field trial is voluntary and if owners of Open dogs do not like the fee structure they are certainly free to enter a different trial with entry fees more to their liking.


Some clubs seem to have trouble getting a 50-60 dog Open done in three days. I think it's the judges way of saying they don't want to do two stakes and they know they can get away with it.

I think they entries fees for the Open should be more for the reasons that you have stated. I also think that the Open should start on Sat at the conclusion of the Derby.


----------



## Ironwood (Sep 25, 2007)

Take this post with some levity 
Assuming you have 50 dog open
Regular way of charging 50 dog X $80 = $4000 
Charge per series.
First series $20/dog X 50 = $1000
Second series $30/dog X 35 = $ 1050
Third series $40/ dog X 30 = $1200
Fourth seies $50/dog X 15 = $750

Total from the series entry method is $4000
If you are out early you are $20 dollars out of pocket.
The club sends you a partial refund cheque int he mail for $130 because you did not get past the first series.

At any time you can opt out of running the stake once you are invited back you do not get you money back once the stake has started.
Well you ccan imagine the judges trying to keep people in and yet have a challenging test. Drop to many and they don't get the dinner out on the club.


----------



## BirdNMouth (Sep 16, 2008)

$120 for an Open and yet lower the cost for the AM? Thats nothing but favortism for ownerhandlers (who are not Pros). If all clubs did that you may not get ANY Open entries at all. How about both the AM and the Open are $120? Would you still enter as many trials as you do now? This is definately one of those "well it doesnt affect me so I think its great" attitude. Tax the rich! If people really had any balls theyd get rid of the AM altogether and everyone would compete equally. All other dog sports dont get the luxury of splitting the Pros from the AMs.. Not to mention the elitist BS that would start up as the AFC would become the "cheap"..
Really I have a lot of respect for those who achieve the FC/AFC title and its expensive enough as is.. Why make it worse? Remember there IS a limit people will pay JUST to enter an event.


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

BirdNMouth said:


> $120 for an Open and yet lower the cost for the AM? Thats nothing but favortism for ownerhandlers (who are not Pros). If all clubs did that you may not get ANY Open entries at all.



Do you all really think this is an economics issue?


----------



## BenQuick (Jun 3, 2005)

BirdNMouth said:


> $120 for an Open and yet lower the cost for the AM? *Thats nothing but favortism for ownerhandlers (who are not Pros). *If all clubs did that you may not get ANY Open entries at all. How about both the AM and the Open are $120? Would you still enter as many trials as you do now? This is definately one of those "well it doesnt affect me so I think its great" attitude. Tax the rich! If people really had any balls theyd get rid of the AM altogether and everyone would compete equally. All other dog sports dont get the luxury of splitting the Pros from the AMs.. Not to mention the elitist BS that would start up as the AFC would become the "cheap"..
> Really I have a lot of respect for those who achieve the FC/AFC title and its expensive enough as is.. Why make it worse? Remember there IS a limit people will pay JUST to enter an event.


*Really? 
Who puts on the trials? 
Who works the trials for no pay? 
Who is out in the field shooting? 
What do the Pros do? Other than show up FOR PAY and use the charitable work of others for that purpose?

Who is really being favored here? Now what is really elitist BS?
The question that has not been asked let alone answered is the relationship between amateurs and professionals symbiontic or parasitic?*


----------



## BirdNMouth (Sep 16, 2008)

BenQuick said:


> *Really?
> Who puts on the trials? The Amateurs
> Who works the trials for no pay? The Amateurs
> Who is out in the field shooting? The Amateurs
> ...


Most Pros have done YEARS of shooting and volunteering before going Pro. In Hunt Tests I have seen local Pros volunteer to shoot or haul birds. They usually are too busy working but some do help work the tests.
The only reason Pros dont judge is because They Are Not Allowed To.
. If it werent for the Proffesionals we likely never would have seen the full potential of some of histories best FT dogs. Also remember MOST Amateurs put their dog on a Pros truck at some point in the dogs career. Very few dogs are 100 percent Am trained and trialed. In fact the handler who runs a Pro trained dog often gets the credit for the dogs accomplishment when in fact if it werent for the trainer the dog wouldnt be half the animal it turned out to be. The good trial Pros were the exceptionally good Amatuers that excelled enough to turn it into a proffesion.


----------



## BirdNMouth (Sep 16, 2008)

BenQuick said:


> *Really?
> Who puts on the trials?
> Who works the trials for no pay?
> Who is out in the field shooting?
> ...


Actually its SYMBIOTIC.. Do you not use program created by a 
Pro? If you use Lardy, Farmer, Smartworks you use the knowledge of a Pro. Those guys could have kept everything they learned to themselves and not shared it leaving many Ams in the dark about the best training methods. If it werent for Pros most Ams wouldnt know Jack about training because most learned what they know from a Pro either directly or indirectly.


----------



## Buzz (Apr 27, 2005)

Those pros don't make any money at all sharing their training secrets with us in their books and DVDs... </sarcasm>

And the better trained the dogs and handlers are, the harder the tests have to be in order to sort them out.


----------



## BirdNMouth (Sep 16, 2008)

Buzz said:


> Those pros don't make any money at all sharing their training secrets with us in their books and t.


And I suppose you work for free?


----------



## BirdNMouth (Sep 16, 2008)

If you are use any training material written by a Pro such as Smartworks, Total Retriever Training etc.
If you have ever day trained or recieved good training advice from a Pro.
If you have ever been mentored by a top Am such as Judy Aycock...(who learned from a Pro as ALL the top AM trainers have)
You have NO business bashing Pro trainers for being in this sport because they put you where you are now.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Every club gets to make its own decisions about the cost of entry fees. If you don't like what North Texas does, then don't do it for your club's trial.


----------



## wayne anderson (Oct 16, 2007)

I think the good Pros today do quite well with their training and handling fees; the dvd/seminar/etc. incomes are just extras...and as long as folks are willing to pay, more power to them. But we amateurs have basically allowed the Pros to "take over" our sport, so we have no one else to blame but ourselves for their domination of entries not only in the Open/Limited/Restricted stakes but also the Qual. (non-owner/handler) and Derby stakes today. I have no problem with a larger split between Open and Amat. entry fees. Amateurs do all the work putting on the trials, and absentee owners should have no quarrel with helping pay the bills.
(Note to BirdnMouth: If you are actually serious about eliminating the Amat stake, it would be interesting to see how a club would find workers--not only bird throwers/gunners, but also marshals, stake chairs, even judges, and all the other "grunts" who make these trials possible, in MHO).


----------



## BenQuick (Jun 3, 2005)

BirdNMouth said:


> *Most Pros have done YEARS of shooting and volunteering before going Pro. In Hunt Tests I have seen local Pros volunteer to shoot or haul birds.*


Maybe you run in the Peter Pan Circuit. In the rest of the country that isn't reality.


----------



## BirdNMouth (Sep 16, 2008)

wayne anderson said:


> I think the good Pros today do quite well with their training and handling fees; the dvd/seminar/etc. incomes are just extras...and as long as folks are willing to pay, more power to them. But we amateurs have basically allowed the Pros to "take over" our sport, so we have no one else to blame but ourselves for their domination of entries not only in the Open/Limited/Restricted stakes but also the Qual. (non-owner/handler) and Derby stakes today. I have no problem with a larger split between Open and Amat. entry fees. Amateurs do all the work putting on the trials, and absentee owners should have no quarrel with helping pay the bills.
> (Note to BirdnMouth: If you are actually serious about eliminating the Amat stake, it would be interesting to see how a club would find workers--not only bird throwers/gunners, but also marshals, stake chairs, even judges, and all the other "grunts" who make these trials possible, in MHO).


Yes Im serious. Why should they split the Pros from the AMs? AMS can run in the Open and many do. Who cares if it is a Am or Pro running a dog? If there was simply Opens you think all AMs would stop competing? I doubt it. A good trainer is a good trainer regardless if someone has clients that pay them. Appears many here find Pros a threat which is silly considering many trialers are retired and have a lot more time to focus on 1 dog than the Pro dividing his time between 20 dogs. As mentioned earlier NO other dog sport makes a division between Pros and Am. Conformation, Agility, Obedience NONE. So youre all pretty spoiled already. If you cant run with the big boys do Hunt Tests.


----------



## BirdNMouth (Sep 16, 2008)

BenQuick said:


> Maybe you run in the Peter Pan Circuit. In the rest of the country that isn't reality.


Come to California and see for yourself. Heck talk to some Pros and ask how much they helped at Trials before going Pro.


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> Every club gets to make its own decisions about the cost of entry fees. If you don't like what North Texas does, then don't do it for your club's trial.


Ted, I agree with you to a certain extent.

And, I actually agree with the concept of a club charging more for the open stake vs. the amateur stake. Simply on the basis of forcing a pro truck to pull it's own weight in regards to the cost/effort involved in putting on a trial.

Let's be honest here, the issue is not the economics of the trial. It's an attempt to affect the absentee owner and/or the pro who doesn't lend a helping hand during the weekends yet reap the benefit from it.

I too believe that is an issue and a fee structure like this just might help solve some of the problem indirectly.

Although I would be VERY CAREFUL. 

Hypothetically, what if the majority of the clubs in all circuits adapted just the open fee structure? Pro's are not going away. In fact, I agree with BirdNMouth. Pro's actually have impacted the game in a positive way in many aspects.

So now what do you have left? A whole bunch of clubs that charge even higher premiums to enter an open or AA stake that grossly exceeds the cost of actually putting on a trial.

Soon enough, the game is not affordable for the above average income man let alone the common man.

You are correct Ted...every CLUB should have the ability to implement things they feel that are needed.

But, let's look at the southwestern circuit for example. There are few REAL "CLUBS" in the circuit. More so, a select few of participants joined in the game that have land or the access to it. The only thing these participants have that remotely resembles the operations of a club is having their names together on an electronic premium. I would bet that all circuits share this in common with the others. (Although I did run a few trials in Minnesota that were the model for a REAL "CLUB". Clubhouse and all.;-))

So hypothetically, in 10 years, you could have a few "Clubs"; ran by a select few; with land or access to it; being in control of the game essentially.

Would this be good for the game?


There are issues. Each club has to determine what works best for them. But...there is a big picture that needs to be considered.

Hence the reason I believe AKC should...


1. hold the formation of a new "CLUB" to a very high standard.

2. retain the right to step in on matters that normally they don't get involved in. i.e. disallowing a certain fee structure for approval of a trial.


Again, I agree with the premise of the implementation. There is a problem in the game in regards to the amateur, their doings, and how the pro's fit in to keep the game going in the right direction.

But in my opinion, the POWER is within the CLUBS.

The problem is...at least in the circuit I ran in the recent past...there are NO "REAL" CLUBS. 

Fix that problem, and all issues beyond that have a chance to follow suit.

Like most things in life, power lies within the people. Right now, all the game has is a "select fews".


----------



## JKOttman (Feb 3, 2004)

In several areas of the East Coast, pros put on trials and do all the heavy lifting. Here are some examples: Sandhill Kennel puts on two trials per year (CSRA), the Moshers put on two a year (Maine), Alan Pleasant puts on two a year (Down East), another (Rammin Retrievers) brings workers (that we pay, but are thrilled to have) when they run our NJ trials. And from what I have observed the results at those home trials often do not go in that pro's favor! (Perhaps for the same reason amateurs who are working at the trial often don't do as well as they might elsewhere?)


----------



## junbe (Apr 12, 2003)

BirdNMouth said:


> Yes Im serious. Why should they split the Pros from the AMs? AMS can run in the Open and many do. Who cares if it is a Am or Pro running a dog? If there was simply Opens you think all AMs would stop competing? I doubt it. A good trainer is a good trainer regardless if someone has clients that pay them. Appears many here find Pros a threat which is silly considering many trialers are retired and have a lot more time to focus on 1 dog than the Pro dividing his time between 20 dogs. As mentioned earlier NO other dog sport makes a division between Pros and Am. Conformation, Agility, Obedience NONE. So youre all pretty spoiled already. If you cant run with the big boys do Hunt Tests.


BirdNMouth
You should check the facts before you post. AKC has both Open and Amateur divisions for spaniels and pointers. They offer both FC's and AFC's in both groups. This has been the history of our sport for many years. The division in retrievers came in 1951 when the amateur division was started and the other breeds soon followed. 

Jack


----------



## cpj (Sep 28, 2009)

When I was trialing, i'd always hear club members say without trucks full of pro's dogs we can't make ends meet. I guess some clubs don't have that problem. Those who have the ability to take lots of time off or have the resources to support the "professional amateur" lifestyle should remember that others who are passionate about the game have to play it in a way that agrees with their own circumstances. For the several years that I played the game I depended heavily on a pro. I'm self employed in a mom and pop retail business and can't take off a week at a time.


----------



## pam ingham (May 3, 2010)

_Soon enough, the game is not affordable for the above average income man let alone the common man._

Yes Ken- and that is the truth. It will be hard to get new 'blood' into a game where the fees are so high. What mother with a family is willing to take several hundred dollars a month from the budget so hubby can drive around to different venues and may not even get out of the first series? Don't know what the answer is, _not the _pros problem(they are just making a living too- maybe having more fun than most, but it is their _job_), more just basic economics for the 'average' guy. Say you run two trials in a month with two dogs but enter Open and Am or Am and q per trial- that (at an avg. of $80/event) equals $640- a truck payment? - maybe groceries for a month?- maybe part of house payment? In these economic times it can make enjoying the sport laden with guilt- and this doesn't include gas, lodging, food etc. 

That being said - we will participate when we can and just watch our own budget and all others will do the same I am sure. Wish it could be less expensive but then that's why it's called wishing!


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

As with most topics on this forum this was taken a bizarre turn from an entry fee a club is charging to questioning people's motives.

Professional trainers are an integral part of retriever field trials but they are employees in a sense of the people who own and pay the expenses for those dogs including entry fees.

If what Ken calls a real club can host an event and charge $25 that is their prerogative. As with most things in life people can make choices about their disposable income. I find it odd no one started a discussion about the $85 Open at Rocky Mountain.

Perhaps it is just a local thing, with 2 days until closing the Open stake at North Texas has 40 entries and 35 of those are out of state out of area entries. To all who choose to be offended hang on because $100 entry fees are just around the corner.

Happy Field Trialing to all


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

Miriam-Webster:

a : an association of persons for some common object usually jointly supported and meeting periodically; also : a group identified by some common characteristic <nations in the nuclear club>
b : the meeting place of a club <lunch at the club>
c : an association of persons participating in a plan by which they agree to make regular payments or purchases in order to secure some advantage

Dictionary.com:

a group of persons organized for a social, literary, athletic, political, or other purpose: They organized a computer club.

an organization that offers its subscribers certain benefits, as discounts, bonuses, or interest, in return for regular purchases or payments: a book club; a record club; a Christmas club.

Miriam-Webster:

Usually-

2: accordant with usage, custom, or habit : normal2
3: commonly or ordinarily used <followed his usual route>
: found in ordinary practice or in the ordinary course of events : ordinary

Miriam-Webster:

Periodically -

1: at regular intervals of time
2: from time to time : frequently


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Obviously, the topic of entry pricing is a sensitive one.
As is the subject of amateur v. pro contributions to the sport.

The reality is that the sport is expensive

- If you use a pro to train your dog, it probably costs you over $700/month
- If you use a pro to handle your dog, it probably costs you over $50/stake
- If you use a pro to handle your dogs, you are also probably paying a % of the pro's travel costs

That adds up

- If you do it yourself, you are paying for three nights at a motel - 60 x 3 = $180
- You will have food and fuel costs, depending on the distance that you travel to the field trial, you will pay $50-200 

And of course, there are the dog related costs
- The initial cost of purchasing a dog: anywhere from $500 to $5000 a puppy these days
- The cost of feeding Fido
- The cost of Fido's vet bills

It adds up.

Then there are those pesky entry fees.

When I started twelve years ago, entry fees were around $40. A pro cost around $400-500. Of course, gas and everything else was cheaper, too.

At the Rocky Mountain Retriever Club's Fall Trial, we charged

$85 for the Open
$75 for the Amateur
$65 for Qual and for Derby

We had 47 Open Entries, 41 Amateur Entries, and 23 Qualifying Entries. Not enough starters to have a Derby.

We flew in 4 8 point judges, who are well respected in the Sport.

Had a nice field trial. I think Am was done by 2 or 3 pm on Sunday. All the contestants got nice trophies and judges got nice trophies and gifts (Some clubs no longer give the contestants trophies and/or the judges gifts).

Our costs are tightly contained and at the end of the day, we will make around $500. (I think we paid the AKC $350 in fees) So, I am satisfied with our pricing structure.

If your club wants to do it differently,
- Not fly in 4 judges
- Not offer trophies
- Not provide judges' gifts
and thereby price differently, that is your choice. 

Or you can price higher in hopes of making more money
Or you can price lower to remove barriers to people entering the event
Or you can do whatever you want for the reasons you want

But, for me, this thread is a tempest in a teapot.
For example, this weekend, the entries fees for Open/Am are:

Bluebonnet - $80/80/total $160
Missouri River - $75/75/total $150
Nebraska - $85/80/total $165

The Cheyenne Retriever Club, for which Barry was event chairman, charged
$85/70/total $155

Compare this to North Texas $90/70/total $160

What is the beef here?

Ted


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> But, for me, this thread is a tempest in a teapot.
> For example, this weekend, the entries fees for Open/Am are:
> 
> Bluebonnet - $80/80/total $160
> ...


You know, now that I look at it your way as shown above...I don't know. I think you pretty much changed my perspective (in a way) of the North Texas entry fee structure.

Heck, we have our own online "club" so to speak don't you think?

Just another example of the benefits a club can offer regards,


----------



## Barry (Dec 11, 2007)

Over and above the cost of entries are the cost that the club have to cover as far as equipment upgrades, insurance, postage, shells and poppers for the year maintainance and repair on the club trailer. It goes on and on. Cheyenne RC tries to keep its cost down to minimum but what doesn't get fixed or repaired now haunts you down the road. 

Before our fall trial we purchased 7 new popper guns at a cost of $1000. Now it took over two years to save that money but at our spring trial we had two guns and my personal gun go down and we were short guns. These are the types of things that need to be done. These are the hidden cost of the trials.
At this fall trial we paid $1850 for hired help. Almost $1000 more than a year ago. Last fall we had hired help but some of the help didn't show. This year we hired more just in case and had more than we needed. 

It' not the cost of the birds or the expenses that every club have, toilets, lunches, shells, trash pickup, it's the cost of bring in the judges, cost of leasing the land, and hiring the help. 

The high cost of putting on an Open is what is running the clubs into the red. It's pretty easy to understand, extra set of judges because of the size of entries and the Open judges don't seem to get done in time to get to the derby and give the derby people a good shot at a having a good trial. Having to house, feed, pay for rental car for a extra day for these judges aids in the added cost.

For those of you who think that it's not the pro's that add to this cost explain to me why the Amatuer judges can get a Qual done and still have time to do the Am, and the Open judges can't get done with the Open and still have time to do the Derby? It's the size of the stake. 

There comes a time at a trial that sure the more the entries more you make. Sounds good but there is also the double edge sword. The more it cost and the more you spend.


----------



## BirdNMouth (Sep 16, 2008)

junbe said:


> BirdNMouth
> You should check the facts before you post. AKC has both Open and Amateur divisions for spaniels and pointers. They offer both FC's and AFC's in both groups. This has been the history of our sport for many years. The division in retrievers came in 1951 when the amateur division was started and the other breeds soon followed.
> 
> Jack


Jack spaniels and pointers run Field Trials.. Just not the same one retrievers do ;-)


----------



## Barry (Dec 11, 2007)

BirdNMouth said:


> Come to California and see for yourself. Heck talk to some Pros and ask how much they helped at Trials before going Pro.


You've got to be kidding me!!! As if going pro now they are exempt from helping. 

I'm from CA and the pro's out there do very little to help. In fact I can only think of one in Ca and one in OR and one in WA that has anything to do with putting on a trial. Two of them do a PRTA trial each year, One in WA puts on a trial on his grounds. Cuddos to them.

That's three trials a year. There are over 250 trials a year through out the country. Seems to me to support your livilyhood one would do a little more.


----------



## BirdNMouth (Sep 16, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> Obviously, the topic of entry pricing is a sensitive one.
> As is the subject of amateur v. pro contributions to the sport.
> 
> The reality is that the sport is expensive
> ...


Its not North TX that set me off it was the poster and posts following supporting a $120 Open with a far cheaper Am. A small price difference is one thing but there is a point where it becomes ridiculous. IMO there is no reason for entries into dog events being $100 or more as at that point its just ripping people off. And clubs are supposed to be non profit they are not supposed to be making money off the events breaking even yes. None of the local clubs here suffer financially from holding tests and trials so "but the clubs need it" is an excuse. A club can always hold fun fund raising events or up membership fees slightly if finaces are such an issue.


----------



## BirdNMouth (Sep 16, 2008)

Barry said:


> You've got to be kidding me!!! As if going pro now they are exempt from helping.
> 
> I'm from CA and the pro's out there do very little to help. In fact I can only think of one in Ca and one in OR and one in WA that has anything to do with putting on a trial. Two of them do a PRTA trial each year, One in WA puts on a trial on his grounds. Cuddos to them.
> 
> That's three trials a year. There are over 250 trials a year through out the country. Seems to me to support your livilyhood one would do a little more.


Pros are not exempt from helping. However unlike an Am who runs two dogs and has the rest of the day to sit around or help the club the Pro may have enough dogs entered that he is busy running dogs the whole time. Pros bring the club entries they wouldnt have otherwise and their are just as many Ams that NEVER help at events and only run their one or two dogs and go home or back to the motel.
Perhaps clubs can require a certain amount of help from the Pros when they run their trials?


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

The days of $100 entries are just around the bend

One year, two years, three years, it is only a matter of time. As a contestant and as a club member, I am not pleased about the prospect, but I bow to its inevitability.

Clubs have a choice
1) About dates
2) Judges
3) Grounds
4) Entry fees
5) How to make money
6) How much money to make

Contestants have a choice:
1) About dates
2) Judges
3) Grounds
4) Entry fees

I am not much into legislating the choices that either clubs or contestants make

Ted
You can decide to run or not to run based on any of these - or other factors.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

BirdNMouth said:


> Perhaps clubs can require a certain amount of help from the Pros when they run their trials?


How do you propose to do this? What if the Pro says no? Do you think you can refuse entries? I don't


----------



## Barry (Dec 11, 2007)

BirdNMouth said:


> Pros are not exempt from helping. However unlike an Am who runs two dogs and has the rest of the day to sit around or help the club the Pro may have enough dogs entered that he is busy running dogs the whole time.
> 
> 
> > > > Pros bring the club entries they wouldnt have otherwise
> ...


I think that just about says it all. I think that many trial giving clubs could care less weather or not they enter. What we would like to see are their clients to show and volunteer their help.


----------



## Mike W. (Apr 22, 2008)

I think that each of us that runs should try to give back in some way at least 2 times per year. Whether it's judging, marshalling, shooting flyers, etc....I think that would go a long way in terms of giving clubs some of the help they really need.

For me, I usually shoot flyers for two of the trials. Since I'm usually sitting around most of the day, I'd almost rather be out there watching all the dogs and getting to know someone new at the flyers station.

I'm also doing an apprentice judging this fall, and then a minors assignment next spring, so I hope to be able to give back in that way as well.

I try to help here, which in my mind helps pay back for the efforts put forth by the other clubs & their Ams when my dog is "on the road".

There are a lot of amateurs I see trial in and trial out that never lift a finger.


----------



## BirdNMouth (Sep 16, 2008)

junfan68 said:


> I think that each of us that runs should try to give back in some way at least 2 times per year. Whether it's judging, marshalling, shooting flyers, etc....I think that would go a long way in terms of giving clubs some of the help they really need.
> 
> For me, I usually shoot flyers for two of the trials. Since I'm usually sitting around most of the day, I'd almost rather be out there watching all the dogs and getting to know someone new at the flyers station.
> 
> ...


Agreed 100%!!! In fact at my clubs board meeting yesterday it was brought up that about 10 members of our club work our butts off while many only enter their dogs. We all decided that we need to push or possibly require members to do some volunteer work for the club. Personally I volunteer for both my club and for clubs Im not a member of.


----------



## helencalif (Feb 2, 2004)

junfan68;685139
There are a lot of amateurs I see trial in and trial out that never lift a finger.[/QUOTE said:


> Very true.
> 
> Helen


----------



## BirdNMouth (Sep 16, 2008)

Barry said:


> I think that just about says it all. I think that many trial giving clubs could care less weather or not they enter. What we would like to see are their clients to show and volunteer their help.


 Amen! If youre there and have time to sit around volunteer!!


----------



## BMay (Mar 3, 2003)

junfan68 said:


> There are a lot of amateurs I see trial in and trial out that never lift a finger.


___________________________________________________________________________
I've also heard a "Pro" say that his job discription doesn't include working at a trial and I've known a couple amateurs say "for the money I pay to entry fees I shouldn't have to help throw birds. etc." 

I'm glad we that do help out...are there for the clubs. I really don't know how some clubs can function without outside volunteer help.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> The days of $100 entries are just around the bend



Does a club need $20,000 ($100 entry fee)or even $15,000 ($75 entry fee) to put on a 200 dog FT?

john


----------



## BirdNMouth (Sep 16, 2008)

john fallon said:


> Does a club need $20,000 ($100 entry fee)or even $15,000 ($75 entry fee) to put on a 200 dog FT?
> 
> john


Thank you John! I hadnt bothered to add it up but that is a good question.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

The day isn't here yet, at least for the Rocky Mountain Retriever Club to charge $100 per entry, but it is coming.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

junfan68 said:


> For me, I usually shoot flyers for two of the trials. .


Since I know you are relatively new to field trials I will try to be instructive. The easiest job to fill at the field trial is the flyer station. 

Much harder to get the people who show up at 6 AM to get the stake started, the guy in the layout blind at 350 yards, the Marshall at the Amateur trying their best to run in some semblance of order, the last shift of bird throwers in a 12 hour day when almost everyone else is in the cocktail hour, the crew that picks up all the equipment and trash at the conclusion of the series, and the people who sort through the trash, dead birds, and chaos at the end of the day.

Apprentice judge?...who benefits from that and the judges must deal with the distraction. Welcome to field trials Mike, make as much of your experience as you choose, we sincerely hope you become a great contributor.


----------



## just me (Feb 17, 2010)

just as an fyi.. obedience has a split in novice between people who have titled an obed dog and those who haven't..novice B vs novice A..and conformation has both bred by and owner handled classes..so they do divide


----------



## Mike W. (Apr 22, 2008)

> Apprentice judge?...who benefits from that and the judges must deal with the distraction. Welcome to field trials Mike, make as much of your experience as you choose, we sincerely hope you become a great contributor.


Well, if you want to be short sighted you can look at it that way. I would hope that some day my apprenticing would pay some dividends in me becoming a more competent and knowledgable judge. I would think that improving the quality of tomorrow's judges would be considered worthwhile by many.


----------



## Guest (Oct 3, 2010)

just me said:


> and conformation has both bred by and owner handled classes..


What are the "owner handled classes"?


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

junfan68 said:


> Well, if you want to be short sighted you can look at it that way. I would hope that some day my apprenticing would pay some dividends in me becoming a more competent and knowledgable judge. I would think that improving the quality of tomorrow's judges would be considered worthwhile by many.


In 10 or 15 years if you are still involved and well into your third field trial dog we will know if you are a good judge or not but having served as an apprentice in 2011 will have no bearing on that.


----------



## Mike W. (Apr 22, 2008)

Whatever you say Ed.

Glad you were born a 30-year field trial veteran. Must have been nice. 

It's a wonder there are any new people in the sport at all.


----------



## just me (Feb 17, 2010)

it's full name is the amatuer owner handler class ..you must own the dog you are handling and you can never have been a professional handler an akc conformation judge or a pro handlers assistant.. it also excludes the immediate families of same..akc rules applying to diog shows chapter 3 section 7

ed samples


----------



## Guest (Oct 3, 2010)

just me said:


> it's full name is the amatuer owner handler class ..you must own the dog you are handling and you can never have been a professional handler an akc conformation judge or a pro handlers assistant.. it also excludes the immediate families of same..akc rules applying to diog shows chapter 3 section 7
> 
> ed samples


Wow, I had never heard of it. I guess it must not be offered very often. Thanks for the info and sorry about the hijack folks,


----------



## just me (Feb 17, 2010)

think this is the first year they've had it


----------



## North Mountain (Oct 20, 2003)

New Judging requirements. Not saying I agree with them btw but they are what they are.

No person who has not previously judged an all-age
stake shall be approved to judge a stake carrying championship
points unless that person has satisfied at least
one of the following requirements: (a) completion of
two assignments as an Apprentice Judge pursuant to
the terms of Section 4, Chapter 5; or (b) completion of
one assignment as an Apprentice Judge and experience
as the judge of two, or more, minor stakes; or (c) experience
as the handler of a dog in fifteen or more all-age
stakes in the previous three years resulting in the
award of a judges’ award of merit or a place in, at least,
one such stake.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

junfan68 said:


> Well, if you want to be short sighted you can look at it that way. I would hope that some day my apprenticing would pay some dividends in me becoming a more competent and knowledgable judge. I would think that improving the quality of tomorrow's judges would be considered worthwhile by many.





junfan68 said:


> Whatever you say Ed.
> 
> Glad you were born a 30-year field trial veteran. Must have been nice.
> 
> It's a wonder there are any new people in the sport at all.


When your pro was an amateur he was one of the better judges around, I frequently ran under him, selected him to judge a National, he can teach you much about judging, much much more than apprenticing with someone who or may not be good but you have to want to spend the time and he must want to teach you, both Bill and I were fortunate to have had very good mentors, if you aspire to judging seek out those people for many may be gone in a decade.


----------



## helencalif (Feb 2, 2004)

john fallon said:


> Does a club need $20,000 ($100 entry fee)or even $15,000 ($75 entry fee) to put on a 200 dog FT?
> 
> john


Yes, in CA, a club needs about $15,000 income ($75 entry fee) to put on a 200 dog FT to make a profit. However, most CA clubs now charge $80 entry fee. 

Last year one club for whom I am treasurer lost $1,200 on its fall trial because entries were low. We still had to buy trophies, ribbons, catalogs, pay judges expenses, pay bird boys, pay the land use fee to use the property where the trial was held, buy lunches for judges and workers, provide drinks for judges and workers, ice for the ice chests, rental fee for a dumpster and rental fees for 2 porta-potties. In short, we had all of those expenses and others, but fewer entries which meant the club lost $1,200. 

Clubs have to make profits from other events to cover such losses.

Clubs also have to make profits to cover the club's overhead operating expenses such as insurance premiums for liability insurance, workman's comp insurance, repairing equipment, buying equipment to replace lost equipment, paying dues to national clubs, secretary expenses (postage, photocopying, annual post office box fee), treasurer's expenses (postage, envelopes, bank fees), buying ammunition in bulk, and a long list of other expenses. 

One CA club puts on 9 or 10 training days a year for members. That's one training day almost every month. The club picks up the cost of the poppers and live ammunition which runs between $80 and $100 every training day depending on how many show up and how many have live birds shot for their dogs. The Sept 26 training day cost the club over $80 in ammo. You do the math ... 10 training days at a minimum cost of $80 per day for ammo is a minimum cost to the club of $800 a year. 

Membership dues simply do not cover club expenses. The clubs have to make profits on their field trials and hunt tests or they will fold. There will then be fewer field trials and hunt tests. 

Keeper of Two Club Cookie Jars, 
Helen


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Mike

You will have to extend a little grace to Ed. He has been putting on Field Trials for several decades and has seen lots of young (relatively speaking) whipper snappers come and go - each promising to set the world on fire, most of them barely generate a flicker. 

Good for you for shooting the flyer.
Good for you for volunteering to judge the minors.
Good for you for taking time off to apprentice

Even better for you if you become an active member in a club and
- Help locate judges
- Transport the judges to and from the grounds
- Set up before anyone arrives
- Tear down after everyone leaves
- And try to run your dogs while zipping here and there
- Are still hanging around at 4 pm Sunday afternoon when your dogs are out, and someone else's are still playing

It is the folks who are active in their clubs and put on field trials who are the backbone of the sport and who are looking for more help from everyone - including the pros.

If you sit down and talk to the guys who put on trials - their complaint is not the pros per se, but rather those people who play without paying (in sweat equity, not cash)

I was at the Omaha Trial where Dave Harter, Monte Wulf, Barb Farrell and others were at the clubhouse at 5 pm handing out Am placements, with several hours work still ahead. 

Dave said "We put this on for the guys who help put on trials elsewhere"

And you know what ... the guys who placed ... all help put on field trials 

At the Omaha trial, Paul Rainbolt talked about how burned out he was and how difficult it was to put on a FT. So, if you want to offer your help to someone in your neck of the woods, Paul would be a good cause

If you love the sport and want to contribute to it, yes, volunteer, shoot, and judge - but more importantly, join a club, become active in it, and help put on a Field Trial for those people across the country who are putting on trials for you

Ted


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

EdA said:


> When your pro was an amateur he was one of the better judges around, I frequently ran under him, selected him to judge a National, he can teach you much about judging, much much more than apprenticing with someone who or may not be good but you have to want to spend the time and he must want to teach you, both Bill and I were fortunate to have had very good mentors, if you aspire to judging seek out those people for many may be gone in a decade.


Mike

Even though I have never been a client of Bill's, and I compete regularly against him, Bill has always been great about sharing his knowledge of the dogs with me, or with telling me what the tendencies of the dogs have been when I am arriving from the Open to run a test without any opportunity to view the test or other dogs.

I have always been impressed with his knowledge of and passion for the dogs.

He is a great resource and if I were a client of his, as you are, I would take full advantage of his knowledge

Ted


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

And BTW, Entry Express makes it real easy for anyone to volunteer. Just note your willingness to help & in what area during the entry process. I can tell you as someone soliciting help at each Atlanta trial, we always need more help and would sincerely appreciate those willing to help to say so via EE. I know also that not near enough folks take advantage of the easy process to volunteer on EE. Everyone who runs trials should be helping at trials too. You don't have to be a club member to help set-up, shoot flyers, throw birds, marshal a stake, deliver food & drinks and help clean up when the trial is over. Rather than stand around and complain about how something should be handled differently, pitch in and help. Appreciate that everyone is a volunteer and be a volunteer yourself.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

A word of thanks to some pros

In the Colorado Circuit

Paul Knutson has always been an integral part of the Rocky Mountain Field Trials (Spring and Fall)
Kenny Trott has helped put on the Centennial Trials (Spring and Fall)

Kenny and Bill Schrader are busy trying to put together a PRTA Trial in Wyoming for next year.

Ted


----------



## Mike W. (Apr 22, 2008)

Ted & Ed,
I will be up bright and early Saturday morning helping to set up the amateur you will both be running this coming weekend, and will be shooting your flyers. 

It's the club that I am a member of, and therefore try to help as much as I can at their spring and fall trials.

See you this weekend,
Mike


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Mike

Thanks in advance for your work at Cimarron.
See you there

Ted


----------



## helencalif (Feb 2, 2004)

Ted Shih said:


> It is the folks who are active in their clubs and put on field trials who are the backbone of the sport and who are looking for more help from everyone - including the pros.
> 
> If you love the sport and want to contribute to it, yes, volunteer, shoot, and judge - but more importantly, join a club, become active in it, and help put on a Field Trial for those people across the country who are putting on trials for you. Ted


Well said, Ted, well said.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

I've been involved in many club or committee based activities through my life from putting on Ducks Unlimited banquets, organizing sailboat races through the field trial game and the universal constant is the 80:20 rule, actually more like the 90:10 rule, where 80% of the work is done by the same 20% of people involved. I would think most folks posting on this forum are probably the most obsessed and are most likely to belong in that 20% by nature. I have given up being resentful to the other 80%, it just is what it is, like a law of nature. I'll admit that I don't work every trial, but I really try to do my share at my home trials, and help where it seems needed at others. 

I really don't see the reason for antagonism toward pros. They are just doing their job training, transporting, careing for and running clients dogs. I would hate to be a pro, it seems like the hardest, most thankless job in the world. I can't tell from the post I've read if the reason for the higher cost fees for open are motovated by a need to recoup cost due to higher entries or a way to punish amateur clients who have to have a pro run their dog when the dog is on the road during winter. It would seem to be a double edged sword, where you actually could drop the entry number so low that the club doesn't break even regardless of the higher fee. 

BTW as far as pros helping out at trials, I have seen pros offer to put their birdboy out at a station free of charge, when a club was in need numerous times. I have also seen them lend a club equipment from popper guns, radios, even a boat when needed. I only run two dogs in the open and amateur and I get frazzeled running from stake to stake, I can't imagine what it would be like to run 16-20 dogs. I love it when I beat anybody, pro or amateur, but I certainly don't hold a grudge against them.

John


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

EdA said:


> Much harder to get the people who show up at 6 AM to get the stake started, the guy in the layout blind at 350 yards, the Marshall at the Amateur trying their best to run in some semblance of order, the last shift of bird throwers in a 12 hour day when almost everyone else is in the cocktail hour, the crew that picks up all the equipment and trash at the conclusion of the series, and the people who sort through the trash, dead birds, and chaos at the end of the day.


Thanks for reminding me what I have to look forward to this weekend, Ed...;-)

Longing for the days when all I had to do was shoot flyers regards,

k g


----------



## wayne anderson (Oct 16, 2007)

Indeed, the 80:20 (or 90:10) rule applies almost everywhere--field trials, DU events, trade associations, you name it. "The world is full of givers and takers, and latter group is much larger." I really do not have anything against the Pros, and I certainly agree that many amateurs are good at "hiding out" before and/or after running their dog(s). I think Ted made some good observations earlier about all the "grunt" work involved in putting on a trial, and the need for more volunteers to help. In my home club in Minnesota, perhaps 10-15 members, plus a few hired workers do most of the work--problem is, it is usually the same ones, and we're all getting older! Not much new blood coming in these days. How do we fix that problem?


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> join a club, become active in it, and help put on a Field Trial for those people across the country who are putting on trials for you
> 
> Ted


I agree.

But again Ted, you must have "clubs" to join.

Simply stating that "if you want to join our group (aka club), go pick up that dead bird sack and head out to the long retired" ain't going to attract the help you long for.

I feel like I'm beating my head against the wall.

GROUPS WHO HOLD TRIALS MUST MAKE PITCHING IN MORE ATTRACTIVE TO THE NEWBIE, OUTSIDER, OR GUEST.

Have something to offer...like a voice. Yeah, Ed is correct. Most voices don't speak from experience or logic at times. But just making them feel like your listening helps. Even if it goes in one ear out the other.

Something as stupid as collecting a $20 membership and handing out a hat will make someone feel like they are part of something.

Right now, the only thing you get for helping out is..."do it for 15 more years 
and then can say you've done something." Yeah, it's the truth, but it comes across negative. You've got to be positive. Hell, most new folks take an ass whipping in competition with their dogs that the light at the end of the tunnel doesn't shine. Now your going to get them to bust their butt all weekend? Yeah, I know. The game wouldn't have survived without the folks who have already done such. Folks like Ed, Tim West, yourself, and many that came before you have given more than most. But as shown, the burden has become too much. You need help. You have to attract it. Hell, aligning yourself with a DU chapter could do wonders. I've always said that. Yeah, your going to have to put up with Barney who thinks Fido is the best damn duck dog ever. But there are lots of them. That means lots of hands. MAKE IT ATTRACTIVE. BE CREATIVE.

If you don't want to deal with the Barney's, then your going to have to accept the work load. Which I guess leads to $100 entry fees. Which then leads to less average Joe's. Then who are you going to beat on the weekends? Yourself and Dr. Absentee Owner who has a dog on a pro's truck? Have fun at that trial.

I'm not talking about you or anyone in particular. I'm speaking in general.

I'm not dumb enough to think your going to Tom Sawyer anyone into having fun doing the grunt work.

But I damn sure can tell you that somewhat demeaning someone for ONLY SHOOTING THE FLYER ain't going give them the warm and fuzzy feelings when the real work needs to be done.

I know that you and Ed think I'm over the top and speak with little merrit on anything pertaining to this subject...

But I'm convinced that some of the major issues that this game is challenged can be solved with...

Strength in clubs. 

But first, you have to have such clubs with the incentives for one to join.

Young whipper snapper regards,


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

helencalif said:


> Yes, in CA, a club needs about $15,000 income ($75 entry fee) to put on a 200 dog FT to make a profit. However, most CA clubs now charge $80 entry fee.
> 
> Last year one club for whom I am treasurer lost $1,200 on its fall trial because entries were low. We still had to buy trophies, ribbons, catalogs, pay judges expenses, pay bird boys, pay the land use fee to use the property where the trial was held, buy lunches for judges and workers, provide drinks for judges and workers, ice for the ice chests, rental fee for a dumpster and rental fees for 2 porta-potties. In short, we had all of those expenses and others, but fewer entries which meant the club lost $1,200.
> 
> ...



I am not the treasure but I have been an officer or board member of a FT club for a good long time.

I think a club should structure their fee schedual so that they *net* about $2500/3000 . For a 200 dog trial that's $15 a dog over your cost. 

At $75, with 10 paid helpers, 3 or 4 out of town judges, two fliers and the additional items on your list, along with a token or no land use fee and minimal wining and dining, the break even point should be about 160 dogs. 

At 200 you should make the $3000...... If you expect the entries to be closer to 160 dogs the entry fee needs to be higher than $75 

I still see some $65 minor stakes still around, but not many.

john


----------



## helencalif (Feb 2, 2004)

john fallon said:


> I think a club should structure their fee schedual so that they *net* about $2500/3000 . For a 200 dog trial that's $15 a dog over your cost. At 200 you should make the $3000...... If you expect the entries to be closer to 160 dogs the entry fee needs to be higher than $75
> john


John,

Our 2009 fall trial had 100 entries; we lost $1,200. Our 2010 fall trial had 121 entries; financially it was a barebones trial. Most judges charged us next to nothing for travel (gas reimbursement); we had only one motel bill for a judge. The rest of the judges stayed in their travel trailers. There was no wining and dining; no dinners out in restaurants. We fed them Costco dinners and BBQ'd on the grounds. We were frugal in other areas such as judges gifts which was fine with the judges as they knew the trial was small. It helped tremendously. We will make about $550. I am waiting for the last bill to come in to finalize my treasurer's report. Entry fees have been $75 while other CA clubs are $80. We have got to raise our fees to $80.

Our spring trial is larger than the fall trial. 182 entries this past spring. The $800 profit from the spring trial helped to cover part of the fall 2009 f.t. loss.

We do not have 200 dog entry trials. Most of the clubs in CA do not have 200 dog entry trials. 
Helen


----------



## Bayou Magic (Feb 7, 2004)

From the start Mike has been willing to help anywhere needed. We need many more Mikes in this game. 

Mike Loggins, Tim West, Judi and Kent Carter, Mason Mayhue (another youngster!), and I looking forward to seeing ya'll this weekend. We even claim Nik K from time to time. Looking forward to seeing everyone this weekend at Ft Reno. 

Be ready to work your butts off regards,

Cimarron Club


----------



## david gibson (Nov 5, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> Mike
> 
> You will have to extend a little grace to Ed. He has been putting on Field Trials for several decades and has seen lots of young (relatively speaking) whipper snappers come and go - each promising to set the world on fire, most of them barely generate a flicker.
> 
> ...


just curious, as an outsider interested in getting more involved in HT and even trying FT - - what does the bold statement mean?


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Ken

The reason you are beating your head against the wall - at least when it comes to me - is that you are selling something that I am not interested in buying.

The Rocky Mountain Retriever Club basically consists of five guys - Larry Morgan, Jeff Warren, Tom Vaughn, Paul Knutson, and me. David and Lainee Munhollon also belong to the club, but they do alot of the work putting on the Pikes Peak Trial - so in terms of putting on the RMRC Trial - it is the five of us.

Our club exists to put on two FTs a year.
We don't want to do anything other than that. Period.
We can't afford - and never will be able to afford - training grounds.
We don't want to have club training days.
We don't want to affiliate with DU or anyone else.
We just want to put on two FT's a year.

We put on trials for the simple reason that we want to run trials and that the system requires that people across the country put trials on for other people to run.

Our members put on a trial 2x a year.
We go to trials put on by other good people across the country

Cimarron - Tim West, Frank Price, and Judi Carter among others (including it seems Mike Whorton)
Missouri Valley - David Harter, Monte Wulf, Barb Farrell, among others
Nebraska - Gary Kavan, Heidi Hennigson, among others
North Texas - Ed Aycock, Robbie Bickley, Doug Grimes, among others

They come to our trials, we go to their trials
They judge our trials, we judge their trials

We do it because they do it
They do it because we do it
So that everyone gets a chance to run their dogs

It would be great if people volunteered to help us set up or take down, but by and large, we know what we are doing and have a great group of kids who we pay and go a great job. The five of us compete throughout the country and all help get judges. Right now, we have booked all of our judges through 2013. So, in terms of keeping things going, we are doing fine. At our trials, people volunteer to shoot - such as Max Morton "Sinner" on this board - and marshal - like Lainee (FOM) and David (BB No. 1) and we, with the help of our kids, do the rest.

What we want more than anything else is for other people to put on trials - just as we do.

The thing that peeves me more than anything else is the person who runs trials but never helps put one on.

You can say that I need to make it more attractive for that person to put on a trial. I say that person needs to stop taking without giving. I am not interested in giving people lessons in civic responsibility.

Ted


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

Ted Shih said:


> We put this on for the guys who help put on trials elsewhere"
> And you know what ... the guys who placed ... all help put on field trials
> Ted





david gibson said:


> just curious, as an outsider interested in getting more involved in HT and even trying FT - - what does the bold statement mean?


It’s a circle of life, hakuna matata, the love you give is equal 
to the love you get. 
Type of thing.
The love of the sport and the amount you give to, comes back to you.
But don’t worry David, sadly you are not alone.
Many are unfamiliar with the concept.




.


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> Ken
> 
> The reason you are beating your head against the wall - at least when it comes to me - is that you are selling something that I am not interested in buying.
> 
> ...


Ted,

I respect your right to ideas, motives, and objectives concerning the game. Just like a club chooses what is good for them, you can choose what is good for you.

Although, if any new aspiring FT'er or circuit transfer were to read the above, I have to think your going to have to accept the work load and the inconviences you frown on and just deal with it. 

Simply on the basis that the game offers too much infrequent success, even for the successful, for someone to be involved simply to put on a FT because someone else puts one on for them.

No offense, but I think it's a shallow concept.

If a particular baseball club was only concerned about their own well being, it would'nt be good for the league has a whole. The same could be said in the FT scene in my opinion.

It's not about you the owner/handler, your pro, your dogs, your club. It's about the game as a whole. Decisions need to be made by each club that not only benefit their club itself, but ultimately the entire body of clubs within the game. Without the game, there are no clubs. Without the clubs, there are no people. Without the people, there are no dogs.

When average Joe buys his future FC puppy, do you think he is concerned about putting on a trial because someone is giving him a derby to run? Your asking a little leaguer to have the thought process of a Hall of Famer. 

Problem is, there are 1000 little leaguers for every Hall of Famer. So all the H.O.F.er's are growing gray wondering where the little leaguers are to help.

Ain't going to happen Ted. Especially when the mission statement is..."We just want to run trials. Grab a trash bag, a notepad, and get with the program."

The key is how to get those little leaguers to be excited about becoming a H.O.F.er. Explaining what the duties are of a H.O.F.er. Not just how many points your dogs have accumulated, but how the game needs them. 

You ever play for a good coach Ted?

Quality not quantity regards,


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

All I know is this newbie is finding no joying in putting on a FT, anyone who thinks they can do better can stop jaw jacking on RTF and have a go at it, fortunately we have judges lined up through 2012, land is questionable, help is questionable and club member help is limited. And don't give me a load of crap of what a club is - we have 2 training days a month, a singles marathon, and a annual banquet....on average have 6 core members work the trial and a few of them are getting to the age they won't be helping much longer. All this talk is cheap. I use a Pro and I'm not anti-Pro, I'm anti lazy....and if you bring more than 10 dogs to my trial next year you damn well better bring some help I will be calling....also if you enter my trial and you aren't qualified for the particular stake you will NOT get a refund, I don't care if you can't remember what your dog is qualified for or not. And I really like the fee structure of North Texas. And those who question if my club's finances and such, you are more than welcome to come manage the checkbook cause we sure the heck barely break even, what little profit we make goes to pay for our losses on the HT....

Sorry for the rant Dr. Ed but I see way too many people trying to tell me how it's suppose to be when running a FT vs. what it is in reality....and if they can do a better job than what my club is doing they are more than welcome to come show me how to do it....

I need some caffeine....

FOM


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

FOM,

Strengthen your club, spread the burden, and maybe you wouldn't be so disgruntled.

Btw, your club does Waaaaaaay more than any group around here does that puts on trials as far as events/meetings other than the trial itself.


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

Ken Guthrie said:


> FOM,
> 
> Strengthen your club, spread the burden, and maybe you wouldn't be so disgruntled.
> 
> Btw, your club does Waaaaaaay more than any group around here does that puts on trials.


Yeah you make that sound like a piece of cake....I did NAHRA before I got serious about AKC FTs and trust me, you aren't going to just poop out members, especially active members. you can give new bloods all the support in the world, but when it comes to doing the reality is there are way too many excuses....yeah our club does a lot, but I often question why cause even on the training days its the same core people....

I wouldn't call it disgruntle, I would call it "shut up or put up" - you can sit here and talk all you want about how it's suppose to be, but I don't see you doing any grunt work....it's easy to sit in the cheap seats and take pop shots at the rest of us who do the grunt work....so keep sitting there talking crap and telling everyone on RTF how things are done...if you ever want to put some action behind the typing come on out to CO our FT is in July...

FOM


----------



## Barry (Dec 11, 2007)

FOM said:


> All I know is this newbie is finding no joying in putting on a FT, anyone who thinks they can do better can stop jaw jacking on RTF and have a go at it, fortunately we have judges lined up through 2012, land is questionable, help is questionable and club member help is limited. And don't give me a load of crap of what a club is - we have 2 training days a month, a singles marathon, and a annual banquet....on average have 6 core members work the trial and a few of them are getting to the age they won't be helping much longer. All this talk is cheap. I use a Pro and I'm not anti-Pro, I'm anti lazy....and if you bring more than 10 dogs to my trial next year you damn well better bring some help I will be calling....also if you enter my trial and you aren't qualified for the particular stake you will NOT get a refund, I don't care if you can't remember what your dog is qualified for or not. And I really like the fee structure of North Texas. And those who question if my club's finances and such, you are more than welcome to come manage the checkbook cause we sure the heck barely break even, what little profit we make goes to pay for our losses on the HT....
> 
> Sorry for the rant Dr. Ed but I see way too many people trying to tell me how it's suppose to be when running a FT vs. what it is in reality....and if they can do a better job than what my club is doing they are more than welcome to come show me how to do it....
> 
> ...


Right on Lainee you go. If every pro that ran Pikes Peak trial last year brought a thrower you would have had 5-6 throwers. In our case that would have saved the club $1800. Probably around the same for you guys.

I love the one that says you don't need to make money it's non profit. They really don't get it. 

How about when you lose money on a trial can you charge the people after the trial to recoup the money you lost? What if you lose on one trial and make some money on the other doesn't that offset the yearly cost of the club? How many clubs have enough money in the bank to take a lose on a trial? How about those of us that front money to the club to put on a trial? I certainly hope they make money just to pay the members who bought shells, lunch materials, in the case of CRC a free barbecue for who ever shows. It goes on and on.

I for one am not going to take the risk of losing when that cost could risk the lose of the club. A $5 rise in entries for 150 trial is a $750. Not much when you consider that it barley covers the cost shells for the year. 

Our club isn't much different than the rest in the area as far as members. CRC has five,Pikes has what maybe 5, Rocky Mtn 5, Centennial maybe 4, Womans has the most that I know of at least they seem to have a lot. Fort Collins has more also but remember that Womans and Fort Collins have hunt test and some of their workers are HT only.

Here is the best one membership fees that's a laugh. I don't know about the rest of the clubs but is CRC going to charge a fee to the 5 people that we have that run this club? Good Luck!

Now that we are up and running and seem to have a solid foundation next year we will be sending out invitations to join CRC, let's see if all the people that like to trial support our efforts.


----------



## Bayou Magic (Feb 7, 2004)

Apparently many clubs have the same problems that we at Cimarron have. First and foremost is the lack of active members to work our field trials. We exist to put on trials. We have no formal training days. We actively recruit no one. We welcome anyone who wants to learn, is willing to work, and shows a true interest in the game. 

If I were a pro the comments on this topic would cause me to re-evaluate my vocation simply because of the tenuous nature of the events that make it possible for me to earn a living. Many of the very clubs that make field trials a reality are barely managing to survive. Is it time for clubs like ours to set policy that will encourage (demand?) assistance from the pros in the form of working bodies at our trials?

Maybe as a club we simply need to ask the pros for assistance. I like the idea of pros with a substantial amount of dogs entered offering up at least one experienced bird boy. That would be a tremendous help. 

What is reasonable to expect from pros that ultimately depend on trials for their living?

fp


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I think that people who do not live in the Mountain West do not realize

1) How much land costs
2) How much water costs on top of land

Very few clubs have access to land and water for training Fort Collins is a club that does, which is why it has so many members.

If you consider what Barry said that is:

Centennial - 4/5 members, 2 trials a year
Colorado Womens - 10 members, 1 trial a year
Fort Collins - multiple members (most HT), 1 trial a year
Pikes Peak - multiple members (most HT), 1 trial a year
Rocky Mountain - 5 members, 2 trials a year

You can see that:
1) There are a limited number of bodies
2) The system works because different groups of people put on trials

The system depends on people recognizing that if they want to play at someone else's field trial, then they have to pay by putting on a FT of their own.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Bayou Magic said:


> Is it time for clubs like ours to set policy that will encourage (demand?) assistance from the pros in the form of working bodies at our trials?fp


How about if you want a field trial you put on the Open, we will supply judges and pay their expenses, equipment including ammunition, a budget to pay for hired help, food and beverage, and birds, the rest is up to you.


----------



## Bayou Magic (Feb 7, 2004)

EdA said:


> How about if you want a field trial you put on the Open, we will supply judges and pay their expenses, equipment including ammunition, a budget to pay for hired help, food and beverage, and birds, the rest is up to you.


I wouldn't be opposed to it if the smaller pros didn't get stuck with the bulk of the burden. The conditions and stipulations should not be punitive toward anyone. The goal should be to lessen the burden on the clubs so the clubs can continue providing field trials for all. The pros understand, or should understand, that they have more at stake than anyone. 

fp


----------



## savage25xtreme (Dec 4, 2009)

Ken Guthrie said:


> Something as stupid as collecting a $20 membership and handing out a hat will make someone feel like they are part of something.


I paid my 25 bucks to join the SRC this past Spring worked 3 events and "earned" a SRC hat from the club, its one of my most prized possessions, I don't wear is because I destroy hats, but it is proudly displayed on the dash of my truck.

looking forward to the next 15 years Ed 

See you all at Cimmaron this weekend and SRC in 2 weekend 

NOW this thread is WAY off topic :razz:


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

EdA said:


> How about if you want a field trial you put on the Open, we will supply judges and pay their expenses, equipment including ammunition, a budget to pay for hired help, food and beverage, and birds, the rest is up to you.


I like it!!!

Angie


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

FOM said:


> Yeah you make that sound like a piece of cake....


How? I never said it would be easy. Better than any solution I've heard or seen yet though.



> you can give new bloods all the support in the world, but when it comes to doing the reality is there are way too many excuses....yeah our club does a lot, but I often question why cause even on the training days its the same core people....


Hence the reason you have to recruit outside of just the FT scene. i.e. DU Chapters was just one example.



> you can sit here and talk all you want about how it's suppose to be, but I don't see you doing any grunt work....


When I was participating in trials I did grunt work. Simply just didn't come on here and bitch about it like I've seen folks here do for the last 8 years.



> it's easy to sit in the cheap seats and take pop shots


Pop shots? Where? Please explain.



> so keep sitting there talking crap


I'm confused? Have I been offensive?



> ...if you ever want to put some action behind the typing come on out to CO our FT is in July...


My days competiting in FT's have been put on hold for a while. I've made the decision to invest my time and money into my son and family. Once priorities are taken care of, I'll be back running dogs.

Something tells me threre will be the same folks bitching then as they have done for so long.

I have a right to express my opinions for a solution just as much as you have the right to bitch about the percieved problems.

I haven't taken offense to your issue and don't understand why my ideas are taken as such. 

I come from the school if you want something done, do it. If you don't like how it's done...either change it or don't do it.

Too much moaning and groaning over something that is supposed to be enjoyable. 

Get over it, do something about it, or quit.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Of course, it would be great if more new people joined in, BUT

I suspect things would be just fine if those people who either run dogs or have others run their dogs, pitched in and helped put on Field Trials.


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> Of course, it would be great if more new people joined in, BUT
> 
> I suspect things would be just fine if those people who either run dogs or have others run their dogs, pitched in and helped put on Field Trials.


Amen. And it can happen. At least more than what happens now.

I just don't think raising entry fees is the answer.

Has anyone ever drafted and email, gathered all pro contact info., and sent them a request or letter of concern?

How about sending an email to all owners once entries close for your trial?

Baby steps regards,


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Ken Guthrie said:


> How about sending an email to all owners once entries close for your trial?


sure thing, I'm sure everyone has a private secretary with the e-mail address of everyone in field trials....;-)


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

EdA said:


> sure thing, I'm sure everyone has a private secretary with the e-mail address of everyone in field trials....;-)


Get your buddy Shayne to require an address for entry when signing up for your trial.

Customer Service regards,

Where there is a will there is a way regards,


----------



## Aaron Homburg (Sep 23, 2005)

Ken Guthrie said:


> Get your buddy Shayne to require an address for entry when signing up for your trial.
> 
> Customer Service regards,


*Already have to use an email address for your account. Should not be to big of a deal.

Helpy Helperson Regards,

Aaron*


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Ken Guthrie said:


> Baby steps regards,


I am not interested in teaching civic responsibility. When I got into the sport, I joined the Rocky Mountain Retriever Club. A few years later I became Secy/Treasurer. I still serve in that capacity. I did that because I understood that the sport required everyone to pitch in. I judge 2x a year for the same reason

Lainee and David have done that with Pikes Peak.
Barry does that with Cheyenne. So does Brian who has really jumped in with Cheyenne, too. 

They get it.

The ones that don't, don't ever get it.

You can list all the sweet ideas you want.

Those who get it, need no help.
Those who don't get it, never will

Ted


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> I am not interested in teaching civic responsibility. When I got into the sport, I joined the Rocky Mountain Retriever Club. A few years later I became Secy/Treasurer. I still serve in that capacity. I did that because I understood that the sport required everyone to pitch in. I judge 2x a year for the same reason
> 
> Lainee and David have done that with Pikes Peak.
> Barry does that with Cheyenne. So does Brian who has really jumped in with Cheyenne, too.
> ...



I disagree.

I think there are those who want to get it but feel intimidated or don't have the gumption that it takes to take that first step into getting involved.

Not everyone thinks like you Ted. Not everyone has an organized approach to everything Ted. Not everyone has the education or the social skills Ted.

Trust me on this one.

For example, look at the "clubs" up north. You see many of them on here begging for help? 

It's because they have real "clubs". Something to offer besides a premium. Something to pride themselves on. Something to work for. Something as simple as feeling like they belong to a "club".

Not a small group of 5 who are very dedicated and have to do all the work.

People want to help. They just don't know how.

Yes, for people like yourself, FOM, Ed, and a group of others it seems simple. Figure it out and do it.

But it's not that simple for most people.

All it takes a little want to.

What's the alternative? $100 entry fees and a years worth of RTF frustration?

All that does is chase away the maybe's or the future FOM types because they can't afford it.

I remember the first time I threw a bird or the first time I judged a derby...

Aycock basically said..."Hey, get your ass over here and do something."

Which my personality took in stride. 

My point is, if it wasn't for him pushing me to do something...

I would have been the same lazy azz sitting in a chair each weekend that peeves you off.

People want to be involved, people want to help, people want to be accepted.

But some don't know how to respond to an Ed or a Ted that say..."Hey idiot, do your part...we do ours." That is the cold hard truth. But some people can't take the cold hard truth.

It's like raising a puppy...

There are high rollers than can take a high 6....

There are some that can't take any pressure.

But both can be competitive if you train em' right.


----------



## Mike W. (Apr 22, 2008)

Just an observation....

There are alot of "small" clubs out there that are dominated by one or a few individuals. Those individuals make all the major decisions for the 'club', ie who the judges will be, if there will be a trial, where, when, etc. 

It's a little bit of a vicious cycle. They have historically done all the work, and therefore feel they earned the right to make the decisions. Ok, fine. I get it. But then new blood comes around wanting to become part of the group and starts helping out, but once they realize they will never have any voice whatsoever in club matters, they wise up and start to move on. The more that happens, the smaller the club circle becomes. Then all of the sudden people are looking around wondering why they dont have more help.

But I'm new so I probably have it all wrong.


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

junfan68 said:


> Just an observation....
> 
> There are alot of "small" clubs out there that are dominated by one or a few individuals. Those individuals make all the major decisions for the 'club', ie who the judges will be, if there will be a trial, where, when, etc.
> 
> ...


BINGO!!!!!!


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Ken Guthrie said:


> I disagree.
> 
> I think there are those who want to get it but feel intimidated or don't have the gumption that it takes to take that first step into getting involved.
> 
> ...


The concrete business must be slow....;-)


----------



## junbe (Apr 12, 2003)

What happened? I have the 1959 Rocky Mountain Retriever Club booklet with the officers and membership. There are 59 members, all with Colorado addresses. Dr. Paul M. Rice, President; Donald C. Broomfield, Jr., Vice President; E. L. Anderson, Secretary-Treasurer; Board of Directors--Perry Pound, Chairman; members, J. W. McAssey, Wilbur S. Law, Edwin L. Smith, and C. G. Cozart. How could this club be down to just a hand full of members? 

Jack


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

junfan68 said:


> Just an observation....
> 
> There are alot of "small" clubs out there that are dominated by one or a few individuals. Those individuals make all the major decisions for the 'club', ie who the judges will be, if there will be a trial, where, when, etc.
> 
> ...


Come to CO....our newest member is now VP and has input. We have a club meeting every two months and all members have a say......before he was put on the board, he wanted to create a training library for the club, we all supported this decision.

It's not my first rodeo at trying to bring in membership, create active club members....it isn't a matter of sitting around a camp fire and roasting marshmallows, if it were then life would be grand.

How do you sell 4 days of vacation, 12 plus hour days working, no chance in hell of doing good with your dogs, pay for your own hotel, your own gas, your own food all so you can be told what crappy judges you chose, what horrible setups, and the list goes on.....yeah that's a real membership bonus. 

Training days with fliers, a super singles marathons, regular club meetings, hats, t-shirts, an annual banquet, and annual trophy's don't make a FT happen. 

The truth of it, is most people get into the sport, get a JH on their dogs if that and then figure out that it ain't so easy, ain't so cheap, and very time consuming....the newbies come and go and out of every 30 or so you just might get 1 that decides hey "I'm just freaking stupid enough to want to do this as a real hobby."

Yeah I whine and complain, but I also still keep plugging away cause it isn't going to get done on it's own....and maybe someday when I'm in the game as long as Dr. Ed I will find my sense of humor......

FOM


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

junbe said:


> What happened? I have the 1959 Rocky Mountain Retriever Club booklet with the officers and membership. There are 59 members, all with Colorado addresses. Dr. Paul M. Rice, President; Donald C. Broomfield, Jr., Vice President; E. L. Anderson, Secretary-Treasurer; Board of Directors--Perry Pound, Chairman; members, J. W. McAssey, Wilbur S. Law, Edwin L. Smith, and C. G. Cozart. How could this club be down to just a hand full of members?
> 
> Jack


PPRC has a healthy club roster too....but the key word is ACTIVE members.

And I'll add....Mr Swede supports several of the clubs....without his work we would of been short live gunners this past year....


----------



## Losthwy (May 3, 2004)

FOM said:


> And I'll add....Mr Swede (Anderson) supports several of the clubs....without his work we would of been short live gunners this past year....


Second that.


----------



## Bayou Magic (Feb 7, 2004)

junfan68 said:


> Just an observation....
> 
> There are alot of "small" clubs out there that are dominated by one or a few individuals. Those individuals make all the major decisions for the 'club', ie who the judges will be, if there will be a trial, where, when, etc.
> 
> ...


Don't blink. You could become the 2011 Cimarron Retriever Club President.

fp


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Ken Guthrie said:


> I disagree.
> 
> I think there are those who want to get it but feel intimidated or don't have the gumption that it takes to take that first step into getting involved.
> 
> ...


Some have the ability to direct traffic & make people feel they are necessary, most don't. I used to put on entire fun day trials with my friends who liked dogs as the workers by asking them if they could spare a day & come to watch the dogs work. It didn't stop after the day was over as we would have discussions of individual dog performance & where it stacked up on the chart. These were people who in their wildest imagination would never run a trial. Also did not try to squeeze the last drop of blood out ot the body. What I do not see is the personalities, albeit in a few instances, that have the ability to motivate. 



junfan68 said:


> Just an observation....
> 
> There are alot of "small" clubs out there that are dominated by one or a few individuals. Those individuals make all the major decisions for the 'club', ie who the judges will be, if there will be a trial, where, when, etc.
> 
> ...


This began with the hiring help generation. Club officers no longer had to consider the masses & their true personality popped forth. It always amazes me how people will hang on to something to their last gasp even though it means so little.

Just had my rotator cuff done this year. I know the trial that caused it & the judge, George Thrane, who would not let them relieve me on the live bird station. 82 roosters, 5 to 6 lbs apiece will do that to you. My arm never regained the snap it had previously so I could no longer thread a needle with a cantankerous bird. I worked for 35 years at most of the grunt work, left the prestige stuff to others to whom it was important. I enjoyed being out in the field watching the dogs work - up close & personal . My 4 sons worked all the way through their teenage years. Some of the comments they passed on to me at a later time really show just how jerky people can be. 



FOM said:


> PPRC has a healthy club roster too....but the key word is ACTIVE members.
> 
> And I'll add....Mr Swede supports several of the clubs....without his work we would of been short live gunners this past year....


Somewhere along the way, club officers failed to recognize the importance of people with real clout. We had an attorney in the NWRC, long deceased, who could change the bureaucratic mind with a well placed phone call. 

In the world of volunteers not everyone is motivated in the same manner, so those doing the coordinating have to recognize that & utilize whatever someone is willing to freely give.


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

For the record...I don't think those were Aycock's exact words. I probably shouldn't have quoted it.

But more or less you catch the drift.

He knew me, I knew him...he was trying to motivate me in usual brash fashion. What I dish out he can take and visa versa.

I was trying to paint a picture. Maybe I messed up by quoting those exact words.

You get what I'm saying I hope. Right Aycock?


----------



## Barry (Dec 11, 2007)

Ken Guthrie said:


> I disagree.
> 
> I think there are those who want to get it but feel intimidated or don't have the gumption that it takes to take that first step into getting involved.
> 
> ...


What clubs up north? If they have a lot of members that doesn't automaticlly transmit into a working force.

Just for grins I went through our fall trial catalog and saw to my amazment that there was around 3 people that ran our Am that were not locals. We recruited some of the locals to marshal, run to town and get lunches and gun. The locals that helped us out are the same people that run other clubs in the area and one even volunteered to judge the derby. So I don't know where all of these newbies are coming from. I ain't seen them.


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

EdA said:


> The concrete business must be slow....;-)


It's below average.

Really, I'm interested in this topic.

I truely believe that creating stronger clubs with true participation will at least have a chance to conquer the issues that are obvious.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Basically Ted is content with a 5 man band. They exist to put on 2 trials a year. That is their "give back" fund in appreciation for other clubs giving them trials to run.

I get that. And it's cool. 

This way they don't have to worry about 

1. Finding grounds for member training
2. Dealing with ignorant ideas and wasting time
3. Having redundant meetings 
4. Don't have to sit through painful training days watching Mr. Newguy repeat 5 singles with his 6 year old qual dog.

I get it. I agree with it.

But if you want it one way, you can't bitch about the other.

Don't expect Mr. Newguy who sits by his pro's truck during the open to raise his hand and volunteer. Or Mr. Veteran who does the same thing in Florida that Ted's group does that you just don't know because he hasn't ran a national or titled a dog.

Am I making any sense here?


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

Barry said:


> What clubs up north?


I ran a trial in Deluth, Mn. about 6 or 7 years ago.

Now that was a club. 

Ran like a well oiled machine and I saw plenty of smiles on the members faces all weekend.

Never seen one of them coming on here stating there is an issue.

Maybe I'm wrong. Hope not.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Ken Guthrie said:


> Am I making any sense here?


You rarely make sense on the Internet except about hunting ducks, in person you make some sense...;-)


----------



## pupaloo (Jan 6, 2006)

Maybe this is naive and impractical, but...what about adding on a fee to the entry to cover help? $5 to $10 bucks, waived if you sign up to help...then you either have enough help, or you can afford to pay for enough help...


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Ken Guthrie said:


> It's below average.
> 
> Really, I'm somewhat passionate about this topic.
> 
> ...


Yes you are making sense. There are many different approaches to retriever clubs and hosting trials. 

In our area we have both types of clubs. Some clubs have wonderful training grounds that serve double duty as sites for running hunt test and some FT stakes, while other clubs don't have club training events or club land for that matter. But those clubs have very active amateurs and pros who, though they train individually, the get together, divvy up land and resources and put on two trials a year.

I know for a fact that the Missoula club has brought many a newby along with open arms, generous advise and encouragment. I know that because I was a newbe once and that club was very helpful and encouraging to me. Another local club has regular training days and has put on a NAHRA trial each summer.

I think there is some burnout involved here. I know I had to resign my DU chairmanship after many years because of that. I also hear some folks who seem to be under appreciated even though they are working their butt off. To those guys and gals I say, don't let the complainers get you down. There are those who will always gripe about something, next time they do, remind them how well paid you are for doing this, and offer them the clipboard or some other task.


----------



## John Robinson (Apr 14, 2009)

Ken Guthrie said:


> I ran a trial in Deluth, Mn. about 6 or 7 years ago.
> 
> Now that was a club.
> 
> ...


Same thing with the spring Samish trial in SE Washington that Brooke Vandebrake and his family put on. Runs like a swiss watch!


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

Ken Guthrie said:


> BINGO!!!!!!


X2

Angie


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

I did something crazy recently. I worked a day for a local club for pay! They normally use some kids but on a Friday during school they aren't available. It was a long, hot day dealing with bastard pheasants but we got it done and here's the revelation...

They paid my entry fee for a stake in the next trial I enter and my transportation costs + lunch (for somthing local)...

Had I worked all three days they would have paid for either three/four stakes or a weekend at a trial some distance from home. 

I thought that worked out to be a hell of a deal.

I'll volunteer to help out at every event I participate in. Sometimes the club needs me, sometimes not, but I always find the chairman and volunteer my services. I don't expect pay for this, and I would have volunteered for the one I got paid for, but getting paid really turned it into a nice deal.

I'm not sure how this type of scheme would help with the entry fee nightmare, but paying adults who volunteer thier time might increase participation from those of us who train our own dogs and run on a limited budget.

Like I said, I put in my time anyway, but I might not have taken a day off and spent 12 hours there without the pay.

Another thing I have seen work it putting on a complimentary bbq on Saturday night with lots of raffles and other prizes to win based in purchasing a ticket. I think a silent or live auction might work in certain circumstances as well. I know... I know... more work for the club but people love it, it brings in repeat entries and it turns a marginally profitable event into a money maker for the club. Profits made here could be used to some degree to control entry fees...


----------



## John Lash (Sep 19, 2006)

I've read the whole thread and agree with all sides.

There are FT clubs and HT clubs, some do both. Most of the old veterans are FT people. Years ago there were only FT clubs, HT hadn't been thought of.

If you got a puppy and happened to bump into the right person you ended up joining the FT club. If you enjoyed it, usually because your dog did good you stayed. You were recruited to "work the trial." Usually your wife went too and you both marshalled.

Next year you both worked again and entered the trial because you were going to be there anyway. You had basically no chance of doing good at the trial, but you were going to be there all weekend anyway. 

Then you were nominated to be an officer in the club, pretty flattering. If you got frustrated enough with your dog you quit or got another dog and tried again, etc, etc.

Now there are HT where you can train your own dog and have a pretty realistic chance of having at least some success with your dog.

I don't have any statistics to offer but if you added the FT people and the HT people together there would be plenty of people available to work at FT's.

The resources are spread thin. Getting a new person in dogs to start in FT is about impossible. There are too many other options for them. When it was the only option there were plenty to help.


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

DarrinGreene said:


> I did something crazy recently. I worked a day for a local club for pay! They normally use some kids but on a Friday during school they aren't available. It was a long, hot day dealing with bastard pheasants but we got it done and here's the revelation...
> 
> They paid my entry fee for a stake in the next trial I enter and my transportation costs + lunch (for somthing local)...
> 
> ...


Good post Darrin,,,,

I'm the president of a club that's multi venue and it was pretty much dead in the water when I took it on....

I'm looking for ways to reward our members that work along with board members and committee members. They* really* work their butts off....

I started a thread here along the same lines and got some awesome ideas....

We're setting up a club store where workers can redeem worker coupons for merchandise... Some of the stuff is looking really nice....

Ken,,,, You need to set up a "REAL" FT club.... At least a real one in your mind... They don't exsist by and large. Your idea is good and it's a full time/part time job. I'd like to see someone locally do it.... 

FWIW

Angie


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

Angie B said:


> Good post Darrin,,,,
> 
> 
> Ken,,,, You need to set up a "REAL" FT club.... At least a real one in your mind... They don't exsist by and large. Your idea is good and it's a full time/part time job. I'd like to see someone locally do it....
> ...


I should...

But starting a club without having a dog is like going to prom without a date.

I know, if I don't participate I should shut up.

Oh well, I tried.


----------



## just me (Feb 17, 2010)

i marshall 2 weekends a year for mtarc..have for the last 6 or 7 years. ran a dog one weekend.. i guess i'm strange in that i have a blast at the tests..i leave the running of the club to those smarter then me

ed


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Ken Guthrie said:


> I know, if I don't participate I should shut up.


*FIRST THING YOU GOT RIGHT

BINGO*


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

Ken Guthrie said:


> I should...
> 
> But starting a club without having a dog is like going to prom without a date.
> 
> ...


Ya think???? 

You don't need a dog... Just put your money where your mouth is....

Be a leader,,,, set an example....

Start a club that is everything your heart desires...

Angie


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

Angie B said:


> Ya think????
> 
> You don't need a dog... Just put your money where your mouth is....
> 
> ...


I will. Mark it.

As soon as I get back in the game when my son is out of college. ;-)

Ted and Ed's Big Adventure will be alive and well by then. Traveling the circuit with Kweezy prodigy talking about their 5 toed boots, entry fees will exceed $200 while FOM will survive the burden eating elk jerky to live.


----------



## junbe (Apr 12, 2003)

Even the "real field trial clubs" have their problems. It seems like these clubs have a core of 5 or 6 members they can count on to conduct the trial. I personally believe that these real clubs are having the same problems as the other clubs. Some of these clubs do structure their membership so they have a reduced fee if they work at the trials. In the old days it seemed to be a privilege to come and work for a club. I know many people would spend a week end at their expense driving several hundred miles to help a club out and not have a dog entered. I remember Hall of Fame members Charles Hayes and Carl Ruffalo were required to work 4 years for MFTA before they were invited to join the club. My how things have changed.

Jack


----------



## Granddaddy (Mar 5, 2005)

You're right Jack. This is not just a CO, western or even midwest issue. Having 4-6 people who can be counted on to be there, who know what to do & are willing to get it done is almost a luxury, more than many clubs across the country have. Even on "club" training days, these same dedicated folks are expected to make the arrangements & do the work. Like it or not, I think most clubs will wind up (or are there already) with Ted's model where clubs are viable only to hold FTs & HTs so others who hold FTs & HTs can come run. I'm not knocking that model, with the current lack of interest, it's the reality of our sport in most cases. That said, it doesn't bode well for new blood in a sport most of us here love.

I'm sure you (like me) have the same issues with others using your grounds. They love to use the grounds but few are there to help with maintenance.


----------



## Vicki Worthington (Jul 9, 2004)

> For those of you who think that it's not the pro's that add to this cost explain to me why the Amatuer judges can get a Qual done and still have time to do the Am, and the Open judges can't get done with the Open and still have time to do the Derby? It's the size of the stake.


Barry, I normally agree with a lot that you say. Here I have to offer another viewpoint. The fact that Open Stakes run 3 days has a lot to do with the mind set of the judges, who are amateurs. I can't count how many times I've had judges tell me they know they have 3 days, so they are in no hurry. I hate lack of time management in field trials. 

Our trials are rarely over 75 dogs, so we really push our judges to have a 2-day open. It eases the stress on our grounds and other resources. So far we have been pretty successful this year with all but 1 trial (2 clubs/4 trials per year).


----------



## Barry (Dec 11, 2007)

Vicki Worthington said:


> Barry, I normally agree with a lot that you say. Here I have to offer another viewpoint. The fact that Open Stakes run 3 days has a lot to do with the mind set of the judges, who are amateurs. I can't count how many times I've had judges tell me they know they have 3 days, so they are in no hurry. I hate lack of time management in field trials.
> 
> Our trials are rarely over 75 dogs, so we really push our judges to have a 2-day open. It eases the stress on our grounds and other resources. So far we have been pretty successful this year with all but 1 trial (2 clubs/4 trials per year).


I have had people tell me that they can't do the minors if they are doing the Open or Am. I tell them that our derby or qual has never been over 15 dogs. That still doesn't seem to make any difference. Normally judges that we get understand the 65 rule and are willing to do the minor stakes.

If at anytime our Open or Am is over 65 dogs we get an extra set of judges. That's about the breaking point. I just don't understand the mindset that the Open has to take 3 days. Especially when the entries are under 65.

Don't forget that adding extra judges adds to the unexpected cost of the trial. This also has to be considered when you make the decision on what your entry fees should be.


----------



## Vicki Worthington (Jul 9, 2004)

Barry,

We do it a bit differently. Same set of judges do both minor stakes. We normally have a small O/H Qualifying on Friday and a small Derby on Sundays. The Open judges only need to worry about the Open and the Amateur judges only have the Amateur to contend with. It works for us. I've done double stakes out that way before: North Texas comes quickly to mind.


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

Ken Guthrie said:


> I will. Mark it.
> 
> As soon as I get back in the game when my son is out of college. ;-)
> 
> Ted and Ed's Big Adventure will be alive and well by then. Traveling the circuit with Kweezy prodigy talking about their 5 toed boots, entry fees will exceed $200 while FOM will survive the burden eating elk jerky to live.


Was bored tonight and bringing back some old school stuff. 

Read this whole thread. 

Anything changed out there?

Gage has 10 more years till college. 

Wanting a puppy regards,


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Ken Guthrie said:


> Was bored tonight and bringing back some old school stuff.
> 
> Read this whole thread.
> 
> ...


I'll send you a PM Ken.

Chris


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Ken Guthrie said:


> Was bored tonight and bringing back some old school stuff.
> 
> Anything changed out there?


Bored or just stirring an old pot?

"Anything changed....." Yep now both stakes are $90! And good luck with the puppy thing in 10 years, the landscape should be quite different, fewer amateurs and more dogs, start saving up to pay that A list pro, probably $1500-$1800/ month training fees, $200 entry fees, $200 handling fees, and almost no one you know.


----------



## Erin O'Brien (Mar 5, 2010)

EdA said:


> Bored or just stirring an old pot?
> 
> "Anything changed....." Yep now both stakes are $90! And good luck with the puppy thing in 10 years, the landscape should be quite different, fewer amateurs and more dogs, start saving up to pay that A list pro, probably $1500-$1800/ month training fees, $200 entry fees, $200 handling fees, and almost no one you know.


You mean all stakes? I'm planning to run a $90 Q this summer. I'm not complaining, it was a great trial last year, and the grounds were well kept and beautiful.


----------



## Ken Guthrie (Oct 1, 2003)

Oh hell Ed. That don't sound like much fun. 

What at about Metro? Still have big after trial parties?

Chester still around?

Shih and FOM traveling the circuit together making their HOF resume?

What color bikini this year Angie?

Heard Shayne moved to Whacko.


----------



## DSemple (Feb 16, 2008)

Ken Guthrie said:


> What color bikini this year Angie?



What a great question.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Ken Guthrie said:


> Oh hell Ed. That don't sound like much fun.
> 
> What at about Metro? Still have big after trial parties?
> 
> ...


Nope, no party at Metro or any other field trial that I know of

NTRC couldn't have a field trial without Chester

No information on Colorado but Ted and Lainee are still very active in field trials, running, judging, and putting on field trials, Cherylon retired so both have new pros

You will have to ask Angie

No Shayne sighting for a couple of years



Ken Guthrie said:


> Heard Shayne moved to Whacko.


I have seen him once since we went to Winstar to see Merle Haggard which was probably 4 years ago at least


----------



## Breck (Jul 1, 2003)

to limit expenses find yourself a national caliber dog or three, someone determined to win national trophy at all costs and voilà, regular wire xfers.


----------



## Mike Perry (Jun 26, 2003)

I don’t see why AKC has any real say in entry fees at all except for the nebulous rule already quoted. 
IMO, charge me $20 more than “typical” if that is what it takes to get quality grounds, competent bird throwers, and qualified judges that judge to the published standard and know the rules. 
Charge me another $10 to do away with the field trial cannons at hunt tests. I’ll bring my own primer loads if necessary. A field trial type cannon shot at 40 yards ahs cause done of my best girls to be so gun shy that I may never run another test with her again. 
This has never been an inexpensive past time and never will. Some just can’t play just a some can’t play the power boat racing or Thoroughbred games. 
One of my previous employers who I learned the most from, had the philosophy that we were there to make money every day on every sale. If we could not, we were to walk away. I realize that the retriever events are not strictly about P/L, but you can’t lose money time after time and stay viable. 
When you put a pencil to it, the entry fee for a trial or test is the smallest line item expense for the weekend.
MP


----------



## Raymond Little (Aug 2, 2006)

Mike Perry said:


> I don’t see why AKC has any real say in entry fees at all except for the nebulous rule already quoted.
> IMO, charge me $20 more than “typical” if that is what it takes to get quality grounds, competent bird throwers, and qualified judges that judge to the published standard and know the rules.
> Charge me another $10 to do away with the field trial cannons at hunt tests. I’ll bring my own primer loads if necessary. A field trial type cannon shot at 40 yards ahs cause done of my best girls to be so gun shy that I may never run another test with her again.
> This has never been an inexpensive past time and never will. Some just can’t play just a some can’t play the power boat racing or Thoroughbred games.
> ...


Mike, can ya mail me some of those "Common Sense" pills your taking today?


----------



## Bill Cummins Jr. (Aug 2, 2011)

john fallon said:


> Does a club need $20,000 ($100 entry fee)or even $15,000 ($75 entry fee) to put on a 200 dog FT?
> 
> john


I have been on the board of our club off and on (mainly on!) since 1981, and on average we may make or loose $500. Just depends on THAT trials expenses'. Where we make a little money to buy new equipment is our Hunt Test. This past weekend was 399 dogs. And we added a Owner/Handler Qual., on Fri. to accomplish two things. 1. For our club members. 2. Introduce some new people to Field Trials. We had 33 dogs.


----------

