# JH Question for advise



## Burt Fosse (Jan 12, 2007)

Situation:

Junior Test

Winged live flyer shot 75 yards from line. Dog hits it with a 10 for marking. Sniffs the bird, blinks and continues a wide hunt for a minute and a half. Goes to gunners, says "Hi" and sniffs the bird box. Returns back to the flyer picks it up and delivers to hand.


----------



## Dogtrainer4God (Oct 10, 2006)

Rule Book Chapter 4 section 7: _In Marked retrieves, if a dog, after having been sent to retrieve...(3) fails to pick the bird up, actually leaving it after finding it, it shall be sufficient cause, unless there exist in the opinion of the judges vailid mitigation circumstances, to grade the dog "0" in marking or perserverance. _
There you have it.


----------



## stonybrook (Nov 18, 2005)

Burt -

Since I know the test in question, let's give a little more clarification for the voters.

1. 1st land mark
2. Flyer mallard hit hard enough to knock it down and immobile in knee high/light cover (thick enough for judges to not be able to see the bird on the ground but can see entire body of dog)
3. Dogs pins the mark (runs directly to bird)
4. Dog encounters live bird with flapping wing and attempts to pick up bird
5. Dog decides to not pick up the flapping bird
6. Dog goes on extended hunt, leaving area of fall (hunt not timed - somewhere between 1-2 minutes)
7. Dog visits gunnner station.
8. Dog leaves gunner station and continues hunt (at times near to and within area of fall - sometimes downwind)
9. Dog returns to now still duck and picks it up
10 Dog retrieves bird to handler nicely
11. Judges discuss situation immediately and decide to let dog run 2nd land mark (which dog does decently)
12. Judges consult with live gun station and are told that dog would not pick up flapping bird.
13. Judges consult rule book and decide to not qualify the dog based on it's blinking the bird.

Burt - you have a nice dog. Today you recieved a report card telling you that you have something to work on. That's what we pay for when we ask judges to evaluate our dogs. 

One comment you made today sticks in my mind and I think a lot of JR handlers believe "pick up 4 birds, collect a ribbon". That would be a good poll - How many judges think that way? My vote would be - There's more to it than just pickin' the chickens.

Best of luck to you and Rose on Sunday.

Travis


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

(B) Let's see what happens .
Junior level dog.
Mitigating circumstance: Flapping not dead flyer.
Needs to be able to demonstrate good pick-ups on dead birds AND THE 2nd FLYER to get a ribbon.

Tim


----------



## Guest (Aug 12, 2007)

*JH*

Theres more to it than just bringing back the chickens!


----------



## tex530 (Feb 18, 2007)

I had a situation very simliar to this early in the spring with a young dog at his first hunt test and he was dropped. the dogs running jr's are seeing a lot of things for the very first time and in an uncontrolled enviroment just have to do a little work with live birds and he will be ready to go


----------



## jeff t. (Jul 24, 2003)

> 12. Judges consult with live gun station and are told that dog would not pick up flapping bird.
> 13. Judges consult rule book and decide to not qualify the dog based on it's blinking the bird.


Are you saying the judges did not actually see the dog fail to pick up the bird and dropped the dog solely based on what the gunners thought they saw?

Jeff


----------



## Burt Fosse (Jan 12, 2007)

jeff t. said:


> > 12. Judges consult with live gun station and are told that dog would not pick up flapping bird.
> > 13. Judges consult rule book and decide to not qualify the dog based on it's blinking the bird.
> 
> 
> ...


Absolutely,

But I will let the Judges answer that question...


----------



## Burt Fosse (Jan 12, 2007)

I was told by the judges that my dog "blinked the bird". Could someone give me the full meaning for "Bilnk". 

To me a blink is when the dog hits the bird, leaves and does not return...


----------



## camhuff (Apr 4, 2007)

Blinking is when they don't watch the bird all the way down and then when sent, they don;t go to the AOF. MY two cents. You can't judge what you can't see and conferring with bird boys ain't judging. Somebody got screwed on this one.


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

In the AKC Field Trial regs, in the section on evaluating natural abilities, the following definition is used:



> A lack of perseverance may become
> apparent whenever: (1) he returns to the handler, voluntarily,
> and before finding the bird; (2) he either stops
> his hunt, or continues it in a slow, lackadaisical, disinterested
> ...


Abby quoted the relevant section of the hunt test regs above. I think the intent is pretty clear. It also seems to me that the judges, if they spoke to the gunner, were probably trying to exercise due diligence to decide if there were mitigating circumstances that warranted an exception to the rule. On a different day, a different decision might have been made. That's why we pay the judges the bug bucks. :wink:


----------



## Dogtrainer4God (Oct 10, 2006)

jeff t. said:


> Are you saying the judges did not actually see the dog fail to pick up the bird and dropped the dog solely based on what the gunners thought they saw?
> 
> Jeff


Didn't Travis say.....


stonybrook said:


> 2. Flyer mallard hit hard enough to knock it down and immobile in knee high/light cover *(thick enough for judges to not be able to see the bird on the ground but can see entire body of dog)*


 So obviously the Judges could see the dog very plainly.


----------



## Richard Halstead (Apr 20, 2005)

Blinking the bird as I understand it finding the bird and then leaving the bird to hunt other areas.


----------



## moscowitz (Nov 17, 2004)

Burt your in the junior stage if you are complaining now wait till you move on to other venues. Just accept what happened and be glad we have judges to judge hunt tests. You don't like the call don't run under those judges. Don't like the shooting next hunt test bring your gun and volunteer to help shoot or help run a winger station. 

The question you should be asking is how do I train my dog to pick up wounded birds. Panty hose trick taught to me by a woman pro. Ask the question and you will get good responses on RTN.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

camhuff said:


> Blinking is when they don't watch the bird all the way down and then when sent, they don;t go to the AOF. MY two cents. You can't judge what you can't see and conferring with bird boys ain't judging. Somebody got screwed on this one.


No, what we call "Blinking" the bird is, when the dog gets to the bird and definitely makes visual contact, and sometimes sniffs it as well, and then leaves it and goes someplace else or does something else. I, with my very first retriever at my very first AKC Junior test failed in the exact same way. Dog did not like the flapping quacking duck so went and visited the gunners to say hi and wait for the bird to die. Once the bird dies my dog went over and brought it to me. Thank you for your $65 donation. Would you please bring these drinks out in the field for the workers now.
Ken Bora
BTW what cambuff describes could be called head swinging.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

> Blinking is when they don't watch the bird all the way down and then when sent, they don;t go to the AOF.


This could be a description of "head swinging," not blinking.

Blinking is finding a bird and not picking it up, as has been described. Regardless of whether or not the bird is dead, the judges have the discretion of eliminating the dog for trainability if they agree the dog should have made the retrieve when the bird was first found.

Having said that..... 8) ............I *personally* believe that if a Junior dog blinks a bird, dead or alive, then comes back around and gets the bird, and has no subsequent "blinking" problems with other retrieves, should get the _benefit of the doubt_ in the Junior test level.

But that's just me........ :wink: 

kg


----------



## James A. (Mar 28, 2005)

*....*

This is not intended to sound like an ass, but why do people not read the rules before going to a test? I just do not understand why it is so difficult to read the rule book.

As far as a wounded bird in a test, isn't a junior hunter suppose to be a hunting companion, a dog you would take hunting? I (and I imagine others, but I could be wrong) would not take a dog hunting that would not pick up a wounded bird.


----------



## YardleyLabs (Dec 22, 2006)

moscowitz said:


> The question you should be asking is how do I train my dog to pick up wounded birds. Panty hose trick taught to me by a woman pro. Ask the question and you will get good responses on RTN.


This gives me the opportunity to post, again, my favorite picture of your dog Larry wrestling a duck that was barely nicked in the foot. That's one where it took a while to catch the bird but your dog stuck with it.


----------



## RexG (Mar 16, 2006)

stonybrook said:


> Burt -
> One comment you made today sticks in my mind and I think a lot of JR handlers believe "pick up 4 birds, collect a ribbon". That would be a good poll - How many judges think that way? My vote would be - There's more to it than just pickin' the chickens.
> 
> Best of luck to you and Rose on Sunday.
> ...


The issue came up at the AKC judging seminar in July here in Texas. A junior stake is NOT pick up 4 birds (eventually) and win a ribbon. There are four categories on the evaluation sheet: Marking, Style, Perseverance and Trainability. Judges are expected to evaluate all four categories.


----------



## Sue Kiefer (Mar 4, 2006)

Guess that I would look at it like thisI had this happened to me while judging a few years ago.The poor handler was scared to death.)
First as a judge you make a note on your sheet.
1.) 1st land mark of the day
2.)All other ducks were shot dead for all other Jr. dogs?
3.)This "Is" a Jr. test
4.)I will get another chance to evaluate his dog on another flyer in the water right?
I would first of all have to talk with the gunners if the cover was that high and I couldn't see the duck (dead/alive).
I would score him well on marking,and may give the dog a lower score in perserverance and tell the handler to encourage the dog to come here when he/she got to the bird knowing that it was still alive.
FYI:
Blinking is when a dog goes to the bird/bumper and doesn't pick it up.Runs/walks away.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

camhuff said:


> You can't judge what you can't see and conferring with bird boys ain't judging. Somebody got screwed on this one.


If you can see the entire body of the dog and cannot see the duck well then that sounds like very good cover to me. You cannot have the duck laying there on a silver platter. It is a Hunt test after all, you have to have some hunt to it. And the judges do know where the area of fall is so if the dog runs to the middle of that and looks at something and runs off it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure it was looking at the duck. If they then have the courtesy to ask the gunners who say yup that was the duck well then.....
at home, in training how does the dog do carrying live birds?


----------



## Illinois Bob (Feb 3, 2007)

Burt,I personally am getting a callus on my shoulder from being tapped by the judge so often to get my dog.I am getting pretty good at thanking them and heading home.So far anytime I've gotten a ribbon for anything, I felt we didn't really deserve it because I felt we just sqeaked by.Those ribbons are just about meaningless to me because I know we didn't do that well.I trust the judges and chalk it up as a lesson.I personally only really want the ribbons that you know everything looked good anyway.(I'm still working on it) Good luck on the next one.


----------



## Pat G (Jul 6, 2007)

I saw a dog running a Master today that did that exact thing. He was quickly picked up.I was going to enter my 6 month old pup in a Jr. that runs tomorrow. After thinking it thru, i.e. a wounded duck was a thought and any other problems that might be encountered I decided the negitives outweighed any positives ( a ribbon) . He's being FF now, plenty of time to compete later...


----------



## Bruce MacPherson (Mar 7, 2005)

I've had it called both ways. Just part of the game, keep playing.


----------



## duckbagger (Oct 11, 2003)

I agree w/ K G .....Seen many JH tests were dog clearly never marked the bird runs to the gun station puts on a HUGE hunt (maybe flapping duck dies in the meantime) and then finally finds the bird and brings it back, judges never bat an eye... and on to the next mark / series. So its hard for me to see it being called as described. However it is a JH hunt test, and the title and all the work involved is pretty meaningless no matter how you chalk it up. 

JH tests are about two things and two things only: bringing money/exposure to the club/AKC Hunt tests, and breaking new handlers in on the game. Thats it! JH means squat in terms of dogs ability/ or inability. 





K G said:


> > Blinking is when they don't watch the bird all the way down and then when sent, they don;t go to the AOF.
> 
> 
> This could be a description of "head swinging," not blinking.
> ...


----------



## Burt Fosse (Jan 12, 2007)

duckbagger said:


> I agree w/ K G .....Seen many JH tests were dog clearly never marked the bird runs to the gun station puts on a HUGE hunt (maybe flapping duck dies in the meantime) and then finally finds the bird and brings it back, judges never bat an eye... and on to the next mark / series. So its hard for me to see it being called as described. However it is a JH hunt test, and the title and all the work involved is pretty meaningless no matter how you chalk it up.
> 
> JH tests are about two things and two things only: bringing money/exposure to the club/AKC Hunt tests, and breaking new handlers in on the game. Thats it! JH means squat in terms of dogs ability/ or inability.



I going to have to dissagree with you there. I know in the all mighty skeem of dog tests life that JH is the lowest on the totem pole. I still give it everything I have. If/when you played a competitve sport when you were a kid, did you look at a game in a tourniment that was for third place as it did not mean squat. JH, SH or MH, it does not matter I have a 15 month old dog and those orange ribbons are our Stanley Cups right now, until next year when we move to seniors. I can not see your avatar very well, but if JH does not mean squat to you, Why do you so proudly dispay your pup next to his/her ribbons?

I started this poll to ask a question. I looked it up in the rule book after I got home and it seemed a bit grey to me and the judges could have gone either way with it. I got my answer, 5:30 am central time the vote is about 50/50. I am a guy that learns well from others experience and you have all taught me alot with this poll THANK YOU!!


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

Many junior dogs don't get enough exposure to birds before running, much less cripples. The dog did not just come back to the handler, he came back with the bird. I would have let him run water and see how his work was giving a junior dog the benefit of doubt.


----------



## subroc (Jan 3, 2003)

duckbagger said:


> ...However it is a JH hunt test, and the title and all the work involved is pretty meaningless no matter how you chalk it up.


???????????

WoW!!!!!

Why participate in a thread that concerns JH testing if you have such distain for the effort involved?


----------



## subroc (Jan 3, 2003)

ErinsEdge said:


> Many junior dogs don't get enough exposure to birds before running, much less cripples. The dog did not just come back to the handler, he came back with the bird. I would have let him run water and see how his work was giving a junior dog the benefit of doubt.


I am not an AKC judge, but I agree with this, although the rules clearly allow the judges to disqualify the dog.


----------



## Backcast (Jun 1, 2006)

I worked a gun station at a JH for the first time a few eeks ago. I'll bet 10 people out of a field of fiftyish quietly came up to me and asked that I be sure the flyer was dead because their dog would not pick up a cripple. I was very surprised by this. 
As a newbie, I got the impression that JH were as much for new handlers as they are for dogs. I suspect that a big challenge for a judge is to maintain a standard while trying not to discourage newcommers.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Viewed in the abstract; I'd say it was an anal call, and demonstrative of the symptoms of the problem with an all too large subset of HT Judging over all. It just goes to show why either a lot more *or* possibly a lot less verbiage should be included in the Guidelines :wink: 

A "ZERO"for a Junior dog, after the dog then stays in the AOF, and in short order picked up the bird, not having previously or subsequently shown that it had _*issues*_ in other aspects of that setup relating "trained abilities''....and demonstrated stellar Natural Abilities—the ones that are of primary importance

Some people just hang on way to tight

john


----------



## subroc (Jan 3, 2003)

Backcast said:


> I worked a gun station at a JH for the first time a few eeks ago. I'll bet 10 people out of a field of fiftyish quietly came up to me and asked that I be sure the flyer was dead because their dog would not pick up a cripple. I was very surprised by this.
> As a newbie, I got the impression that JH were as much for new handlers as they are for dogs. I suspect that a big challenge for a judge is to maintain a standard while trying not to discourage newcommers.


WoW!!

I have gunned a time or two and while i have had some ask that we do a better job killing the birds (is this an indictment of my/our shooting ability :lol: chuckling :lol: ) I can’t remember anyone adding the qualifier:



> because their dog would not pick up a cripple


A matter of fact, my experience is, many seem to prefer a dying cripple with a wing flapping as it dies because it helps their dog mark the bird.


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

duckbagger said:


> However it is a JH hunt test, and the title* and all the work involved is pretty meaningless no matter how you chalk it up.
> Thats it! JH means squat in terms of dogs ability/ or inability.*
> 
> Ok, My Turn! all the work involved is pretty meaningless no matter how you chalk it up???. Do you actually mean that all basics, obedience, and rule book reading is useless? That the past 10 months I have spent trying to learn the game meant squat? If it werent for that meaningless work there would be no SH, MH, QAA, FC, AFC, NFC, NAFC, etc. You get the picture. Yes the JH test is only a test of the very basics. But without that, you really dont have squat! Why do pros run JH? Maybe some to get satin for the owner, but in my conversations with them, it is to "test their work".
> ...


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

*Re: ....*



James A. said:


> As far as a wounded bird in a test, isn't a junior hunter suppose to be a hunting companion, a dog you would take hunting? I (and I imagine others, but I could be wrong) would not take a dog hunting that would not pick up a wounded bird.


This begs a second question. In a hunting situation: Would you send an inexperienced (junior) dog for a cripple or would you first sleuth it?

Tim


----------



## DH (Oct 3, 2006)

> This begs a second question. In a hunting situation: Would you send an inexperienced (junior) dog for a cripple or would you first sleuth it?


I would sluice any cripple if it was in range, but an inexperienced dog is more likely to break and not give you a chance. Also, some crips are too far away for a water swat, and I won't even get into divers.

Either way, I'm new to this game and have no opinion on whether the dog should have been dropped. However, I will say that I've never owned a dog of any breed that wouldn't crawl out of its skin to get ahold of a flapping bird. Some of them might not have brought it back, some might have even eaten the thing, but I've never had one that didn't want birds. It kind of surprises me that so many folks have dogs that have problems with them.

DH


----------



## Richard Halstead (Apr 20, 2005)

It all gets back to the question "Is the dog the caliber of what you would want to hunt with?" I think the judges would have done a greater wrong by passing the dog. Instead of a subliminal message to come back wen you have trained more.


----------



## jeff t. (Jul 24, 2003)

Dogtrainer4God said:


> jeff t. said:
> 
> 
> > Are you saying the judges did not actually see the dog fail to pick up the bird and dropped the dog solely based on what the gunners thought they saw?
> ...



Should judges rely on others for information on the dog's performance?

If you don't see it, can you judge it?

Jeff


----------



## BROWNDOGG (Nov 26, 2005)

This was a "HUNT" test and if it was a hunting situation, and the dog went to the fall area and found the mark ( a cripple) and did not pick up the bird right away you would most likely loose that bird, rules are rules, a pass means nothing to me if my dog did not do the work, according to the book, no matter what level you are training for.
________
Buy no2


----------



## JS (Oct 27, 2003)

Burt, I think the bigger question is, "are YOU satisfied with a dog that won't pick up a cripple?". I doubt you are.

So go home and teach him to. It won't take long. And while you're at it, try to think of what else he needs exposed to.

JS

(took a dog to a JH test once who had never swam through decoys. That was a riot!  )


----------



## LabLady101 (Mar 17, 2006)

Burt, I honestly cannot say how a judge should look at that, but I do agree that they shouldn't rely solely on the word of the gunners. They should only be verifying what they saw. Don't feel so bad (I know how hard that is), I talked with some one else whose dog got all the birds pretty nicely (at least from my point of view) and it was still failed by a quarter-point!


----------



## Dogtrainer4God (Oct 10, 2006)

LabLady101 said:


> Burt, I honestly cannot say how a judge should look at that, but I do agree that they shouldn't rely solely on the word of the gunners. * They should only be verifying what they saw.*


 The Judges could see the dog very well just couldn't see the duck. They knew that the dog had ran directly to it because that was where they had seen it land and the gunners affirmed that the dog had indeed ran to the bird.


----------



## larrynogaj (Aug 31, 2004)

*JHT*

I like to see everyone get their ribbon and I believe in giving the benefit of doubt to the dog. Maybe that's what the judges were trying to do. They saw where the mark landed, where the dog went and where the retrieve was made. Rather than assume that the dog blinked the bird and drop it, maybe they were checking to see if there was another set of circumstances where they could have cut the dog some slack.
A few years ago we were running in a SHT. On the water marks were pinched, birds were thrown low and short. Wind was blowing scent from the go bird station right across the line to the memory bird. The go bird was also tossed behind a WALL of cattails. I'd watched all entrants run before we staged ourselves at the holding blinds. I think only 5 of 30 dogs finished without being handled. When it was our turn to run I was thrilled that my dog was taking the true line to the go bird mark rather than swimming around the wall of cattails. Problem was, she couldn't get through them! She got a little shaken, started to head off, so I handled to the mark. Then on the memory bird, just as she gets downwind of the go bird station, the bird boy bangs an oar on the boat distracting her, so I handled her on that bird as well. We got to honor on lead. When I got back to the parking area I heard a lot of complaining about the test and some of it was justified, but all I knew was that my dog didn't get the go bird cleanly. We spent the next week working in cattails and heavy marsh grass. I go with the judges on this one.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

camhuff said:


> Blinking is when they don't watch the bird all the way down and then when sent, they don;t go to the AOF. MY two cents. You can't judge what you can't see and conferring with bird boys ain't judging. Somebody got screwed on this one.


uh, thats bugging not blinking. Blinking is refusing to pick up a bird that it has found...

/Paul


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

john fallon said:


> Viewed in the abstract; I'd say it was an anal call, and demonstrative of the symptoms of the problem with an all too large subset of HT Judging over all. It just goes to show why either a lot more *or* possibly a lot less verbiage should be included in the Guidelines :wink:
> 
> A "ZERO"for a Junior dog, after the dog then stays in the AOF, and in short order picked up the bird, not having previously or subsequently shown that it had _*issues*_ in other aspects of that setup relating "trained abilities''....and demonstrated stellar Natural Abilities—the ones that are of primary importance
> 
> ...


So John, are you saying that a dog that won't pick up a cripple is showing stellar natural abilities? 

/Paul


----------



## Terry Thomas (Jun 27, 2005)

I do judge AKC Hunting Tests and I will drop a dog at any level that blinks a bird. One of the major reasons for hunting with a dog is to pick up cripples. If a dog won't pick up a cripple it's not ready to hunt nor pass a JH. Confirming that the dog blinked the bird by checking with the gun station is good judging. I would not want to make a mistake of dropping the dog only to find out later that the dog did not actually go to the bird as it appeared to me but missed the bird by a couple of feet and then put on a big hunt.


----------



## Burt Fosse (Jan 12, 2007)

I ask one more question about this...

What is is a minimal performance of a JH dog?




Page 39, 2nd to last paragraph, first sentence says it all. "A zero means that the dog did not perform minimally." is what the book reads. At a minimum she did persevere and return with the bird, delivered to hand. 

IMO

In a JH test the minimum is for a dog to come to line under control, be sent to a downed bird, pick it up and deliver to hand. This was accomplished. By definition in the book is a (0) warranted?


----------



## TxFig (Apr 13, 2004)

K G said:


> Having said that..... 8) ............I *personally* believe that if a Junior dog blinks a bird, dead or alive, then comes back around and gets the bird, and has no subsequent "blinking" problems with other retrieves, should get the _benefit of the doubt_ in the Junior test level.
> 
> But that's just me........ :wink:



Fwiw - it's not "just" you. That is exactly what I was thinking.

If it happens in Senior (or God-forbid Master), then the dog is gone. Or even in a Junior test if it goes on for a "long time". But in Junior, the dogs are allowed more leniency for trained behaviors. 

In this case, the dog would certainly get a very poor score from me, but it wouldn't be a zero.


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

Burt Fosse said:


> I ask one more question about this...
> 
> What is is a minimal performance of a JH dog?
> 
> ...


Burt
Are you really happy with a dog that qualifies with a minimum standard? Remember that a zero is the bottom, but even a 4-5 is not good enough. Yes your dog brought the bird back, BUT he passed up a cripple and came back to it when it was dead. This is a lost bird in a real day of hunting. Doing this in a test you cannot receive a qualifying score, but you can receive a minimum score of 2-3. I did not see the test and can only base my opinion on what you have put forth and what others that were there have said, but in my opinion your dog does not qualify with this particular run. He may get a call back, again I did not see it and I will give a little with juniors, but he would have to do a lot better to make up for is low score.
Someone here likes to say that HT are a game of mediocre dogs. I don’t believe that to be true, but if you train and expect minimum standards than you will get a dog that lives up to those minimum standards. If you want a dog that can accomplish more, train to a much higher standard. Always train to the level above what you are running and you will enjoy yourself more. 
You have spent several days now trying to rationalize why your dog should have passed. Instead of trying to justify why your dog did not qualify, why not just use the time to train? Believe me in a year or two you will not even remember or care about a silly day at a junior test. It is not the end of the world, it is just a bunch of dogs picking up the chickens…or not.


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

CNBarnes said:


> K G said:
> 
> 
> > Having said that..... 8) ............I *personally* believe that if a Junior dog blinks a bird, dead or alive, then comes back around and gets the bird, and has no subsequent "blinking" problems with other retrieves, should get the _benefit of the doubt_ in the Junior test level.
> ...


Wow!!!

I realize this is just a LOWLY JUNIOR Test and we surely don't want to discourage any handler that is expecting a ribbon. Besides, none of us expect anybody to REALLY hunt with one of these Junior dogs anyway. Right? :shock: 

Perhaps a review of the HT regulations and guidelines are in order here. 

Section 3 of the HT regulations provide:


> Section 1. The purpose of a Hunting Test for Retrievers is to test the merits of and evaluate the abilities of Retrievers in the field in order to determine their suitability and ability as hunting companions. Hunting Tests must, therefore, simulate as nearly as possible the conditions met in a true hunting situation. Dogs are expected to retrieve any type of game bird under all conditions and the Judges and the Hunting Test Committee have complete control over the mechanics and requirements of each test.


Section 4 of the HT regulations provide:


> *Section 2. The Judges shall score the dogs on (a) their natural abilities including Marking (memory), Style, Perseverance/courage/hunting, and (b) to relatively greater degrees in Senior and Master Hunting Tests their Trainability as evidenced in steadiness, control, response and delivery.
> 
> Section 3. The ability to mark accurately is of primary importance. A dog which marks the fall of a bird, uses the wind, follows a strong cripple, and takes direction from its handler is of great value.
> 
> ...


*
The HT guidelines state:



(6) Running crippled birds, or “runners.” Dogs should be able to follow and find a runner. Since dogs are being evaluated based upon their abilities as hunting companions, the Judges shall evaluate a dog’s abilities when confronted with a runner since the dog should find the birds shot for it. Based on the circumstances
and set-up of the situation the Judges may elect not to score a dog on a “runner,” but, in any case, the Judges shall discuss in advance how they might deal with the possibility.

Click to expand...

It seems pretty clear to me, that "Blinking" a bird, Live or dead is unacceptable. Perseverance is one of the "Natural" traits that we are judging at the Junior level. It's not like the dog just stood over the bird waiting for the handler to tell him to "fetch it up". The dog actually left it!!! 

The "valid mitigating circumstances" that some would use to excuse the Blink was that the bird was still alive!!!! I don't think so!!!! A rotten, stinky, maggot eaten bird that's valid. Not a freshly shot bird that just happens to be still kicking. 

But hey, some judge acording to the regulations. Some don't.*


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Doug Main said:


> CNBarnes said:
> 
> 
> > K G said:
> ...


*

Atta boy Doug. Hit the nail on the head....

/Paul*


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> john fallon said:
> 
> 
> > Viewed in the abstract; I'd say it was an anal call, and demonstrative of the symptoms of the problem with an all too large subset of HT Judging over all. It just goes to show why either a lot more *or* possibly a lot less verbiage should be included in the Guidelines :wink:
> ...


You say won't.
I say for some reason at this one point in time didn't Immediately 
.............. and no one -- certainly not the Judges-- knows for sure that the bird was not still alive(a cripple) when the dog did picked it up.

There are any number of valid mitigating circumstances why a dog does not initially/Immediately pick up *A* *specific* bird at a certain spot in the Universe, not the least of which is that they are only dogs.


In all Stakes "_a certain tolerance must be afforded a dog that still proves effective and accomplishes its objective in the field_."
This *GUIDELINE* should hold even more so in the Junior.

The dog marked the bird and delivered it to hand, with only a slight hick-up in between.

Ding the dog hard in the first and keep an eye out for cumulative problems.

john


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

John and I are on the same page on this one. Hey....it happens once in a year or so! :lol: 

I suppose neither Doug and I nor Paul and I would ever see eye-to-eye on _everything_....but God for-freakin'-_bid_ should we use our X years of personal hunting and dog-running experience to make a decision to call back this dog. Holy hand grenade, Batman....this guy doesn't judge by the regulations and guidelines!

:roll: .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

*"Valid mitigating circumstances"* (_not_ that the bird was alive, Doug... :? ) are in the eyes of the *judges*, guys. That's why it's called JUDGING....NOT "scorekeeping." Given the scenario as described, with the caveats listed, the dog is called back. Will the dog qualify on that day? That remains to be seen...but I've got no problem looking at it again...._none_. After that copious cut-and-paste job, please show me *in the regulations* where this dog *can't* be called back.

Every scenario has its differences regards,

kg


----------



## check171 (May 12, 2004)

Burt Fosse said:


> Situation:
> 
> Junior Test
> 
> Winged live flyer shot 75 yards from line. Dog hits it with a 10 for marking. Sniffs the bird, blinks and continues a wide hunt for a minute and a half. Goes to gunners, says "Hi" and sniffs the bird box. Returns back to the flyer picks it up and delivers to hand.


Burt I would give the dog the another chance 1st bird the dogs get high and lots of energy to get out I would give the dog a low score but I would take it to the next series .

Take this as a learning experience and move on you have a nice dog train more and save the tests for when there is no doubt you will pass . 


The ribbons will come just do the work and test when you know your beyond the level your testing .

Keep your chin up by not Failing a test is where we learn and take it to the next level .

Remember the ribbons are for the OWNERS the dogs could care less about them so take your time and train and go in knowing you will get your moneys worth .


----------



## Terry Thomas (Jun 27, 2005)

Burt Fosse said:


> I ask one more question about this...
> 
> What is is a minimal performance of a JH dog??


Pick up a cripple


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

K G said:


> *"Valid mitigating circumstances"* (_not_ that the bird was alive, Doug... :? ) are in the eyes of the *judges*, guys. That's why it's called JUDGING....NOT "scorekeeping." Given the scenario as described, with the caveats listed, the dog is called back. Will the dog qualify on that day? That remains to be seen...but I've got no problem looking at it again...._none_. After that copious cut-and-paste job, please show me *in the regulations* where this dog *can't* be called back.


Keith you are right the regulations give the judges great latitude in judging. However, the regulations Chapter 4 Section 7, make it pretty clear that UNLESS there exists valid mitigating circumstances it shall be sufficient cause to grade the dog "0" in Perseverance. It seems pretty clear to me. 

What valid mitigating circumstances exist? That it is a Junior? Or that the bird was still kicking? Surely, there HAS to be something better than that! 

Blinking a bird *IS* as bad as it gets for a hunting dog! By the HT regulations, it's the same as coming back without a bird!!! I guess 3 out of 4 isn't bad!!! :shock: Surely, there are SOME standards even in JUNIOR!!


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Doug, one of the things I _enjoy_ about a "discussion" with you is that you keep such an even keel....you know, don't get emotional....excited....torqued up........

8) ..................................................................................................


The poll is running 52% FOR dropping the dog. Obviously the judges were well within their providence in dropping the dog. The regulations and guidelines support their decision. I support those judges in making that decision. That's what judges do...._make decisions_.

A bit less than half believe that the dog should either be looked at again or should pass outright if it delivers the chickens at all. While I don't agree with the latter, I can support the former.

A few years ago, the HT regs/guidelines contained verbage that said the Junior level is to encourage people to train for more advanced work. Not every dog is capable of advanced work, but the main reason (IMHO) that the dogs don't get a shot at the more advanced work is due to the level (or lack thereof) of enthusiasm on the part of the owner. I've seen this lack of enthusiasm caused by many things....a lot of them caused by holes in a training program or a total _lack_ of a training program. I've also seen this caused by a hairline call that could have gone the other way on any given day. The 52%-48% spread on this poll shows that more than a few folks feel that way on this situation. 

I can understand why the call was made. Perfectly. I can also understand how, based on the circumstances, some folks would have called it the other way. Again, just because the dog is called back to the next series doesn't mean the dog passes for the day, unless both judges agree to zero the dog. It takes two judges to drop a dog. It takes only one to call it back.

kg


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Let me add this from page 59, serious faults....



> 12. “Blinks” a bird – fails to pick the bird up, and leaves it after making the find.



/Paul


----------



## TxFig (Apr 13, 2004)

Doug Main said:


> I realize this is just a LOWLY JUNIOR Test and we surely don't want to discourage any handler that is expecting a ribbon. Besides, none of us expect anybody to REALLY hunt with one of these Junior dogs anyway. Right? :shock:


You must have missed the post (by someone else) that if they had a Junior dog in a "real life hunting situation" with a live bird in the spread, that they would sluice the duck on the water first.

I would too. I don't want to waste time watching my dog chase a bird around. Not to mention that even a determined, MH/FC level dog would loose the bird if it got into a swimming race - I have yet to see any dog that could out-swim a duck.


Ergo - picking up a live, flapping duck - while something I do expect , is *NOT* a critical component of real life hunting situations. If the bird is still flapping, I didn't do my job (as the hunter). If the dog can cover for my short comings, that's great. But I'm not going to blame the dog for something that isn't its fault.




> But hey, some judge according to the regulations. Some don't.


And some try to read in things that just ain't there... :roll:


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Thanks, Paul. I was really sort of surprised that didn't come up before now.

kg


----------



## paul young (Jan 5, 2003)

my policyhas become that when judging, all flyers on water are sluiced. if the bird hits the water already dead, the gunners instructions are to sluice the water adjacent to the duck so it looks the same.

saves time, and this type of discussion!  -paul


----------



## DH (Oct 3, 2006)

> I would too. I don't want to waste time watching my dog chase a bird around. Not to mention that even a determined, MH/FC level dog would loose the bird if it got into a swimming race - I have yet to see any dog that could out-swim a duck.
> 
> 
> Ergo - picking up a live, flapping duck - while something I do expect , is NOT a critical component of real life hunting situations. If the bird is still flapping, I didn't do my job (as the hunter). If the dog can cover for my short comings, that's great. But I'm not going to blame the dog for something that isn't its fault.


I'll disagree with this. Picking up cripples is one of the biggest reasons to hunt with a dog. No matter how good a shot you are you occasionally have a cripple. A persistent dog will eventually track it down. I hunt in areas where the water gets deep and a swimming bird can escape me but not the dog. 

As I said earlier I would sluice a cripple but not all are in range. Many are crippled because you didn't hit them hard and they glide down out of range. Also, lots of birds don't sluice well. I've put a lot of rounds into a bufflehead without killing it on the water. 

As I said, I'm not experienced enough to know how the rules handle this and whether the dog should be dropped. But, my opinion as a hunter is that birdiness is probably 1A behind marking. Doesn't do any good to see where it falls if you don't love to pick them up.

DH


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Burt Fosse said:


> Situation:
> 
> Junior Test
> 
> Winged live flyer shot 75 yards from line. Dog hits it with a 10 for marking. Sniffs the bird, blinks and continues a wide hunt for a minute and a half. Goes to gunners, says "Hi" and sniffs the bird box. Returns back to the flyer picks it up and delivers to hand.



So based on this the dog left the cripple and went and elsewhere. I could get in the KG and Fallon camp if the dog stayed there and didn’t leave the bird. To me that would indicate a circumstance why the dog didn’t pick it up. Leaving the bird and going to look around, check with the gunners etc is a bad thing. 

/Paul


----------



## jeff t. (Jul 24, 2003)

Terry Thomas said:


> Burt Fosse said:
> 
> 
> > I ask one more question about this...
> ...


If it is a minimum requirement, shouldn't all dogs have to meet it?

We don't routinely test for that largely because it isn't do-able (given the ban on shackled birds)

So, we pass lots of dogs that might not pick up a cripple.

I don't think it is a big deal for JH.

Jeff


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

john fallon said:


> You say won't.
> I say for some reason at this one point in time didn't Immediately
> .............. and no one -- certainly not the Judges-- knows for sure that the bird was not still alive(a cripple) when the dog did picked it up.
> 
> ...


So, when my dogs switches, I should pass because hey he’s only a dog? When he leaves the area of the fall and run’s all over god’s country in the wild, Wild West but then comes back and SOB’s the bird he should pass because, hey he’s only a dog? The fact is this is a training issue or serious lack of bird drive in a hunting dog; something I personally believe is a bigger fault in the dog. I watched a golden in a master national leave a crippled flapping duck on the edge of pond and my first thought is how does a dog that won’t pick up a cripple get a master title and qualify for the master national. Apparently he ran under you and Keith….

/Paul


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

You're attempting to get creative again, Paul. "Master" doesn't enter into the equation, and you know it.

You can make this personal if you want to.

I'd suggest you not.

kg


----------



## brian breuer (Jul 12, 2003)

> I watched a golden in a master national leave a crippled flapping duck on the edge of pond and my first thought is how does a dog that won’t pick up a cripple get a master title and qualify for the master national. Apparently he ran under you and Keith….


That was good for my morning chuckle. Thanks :lol: 

Not that anyone cares, but I would drop the dog. Cripples are the #1 reason to duck hunt with a dog.


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

brian breuer said:


> > I watched a golden in a master national leave a crippled flapping duck on the edge of pond and my first thought is how does a dog that won’t pick up a cripple get a master title and qualify for the master national. Apparently he ran under you and Keith….
> 
> 
> That was good for my morning chuckle. Thanks :lol:
> ...


My vote was to bring him back and see what happens with the rest of the birds, BUT he would have a lot of ground to make up to qualify. That is not to say that I don't feel that picking up cripples is of the utmost importance in a hunting/test/trial dog and if I had actually judged and/or seen this my vote MAY have been different. I have to believe that the judges have trained/trialed/tested/hunted and evaluated more than a couple of dogs and my gut feeling is that what they saw justified what they did on the score sheet. I have to believe their decision over a handlers (not to say they are never wrong) who has not had that much experience handling in a test and more than likely had line tunnel vision. Who here has not run a dog and been unhappy with a judges decision only to later realize that the dog had actually done exactly what the judges said? Who here has not run a dog in one of its first HT and had it do things that "he never does in training"?


----------



## Burt Fosse (Jan 12, 2007)

I know I have a bias opinion with this topic, but I have to say this. I would say it if I read the situation as it was put out by Travis and myself. The topic continues to be danced around. The comment of the dog left the AOF and the bird would have been lost. The reality is in this situation is the bird was not lost, she did deliver to hand. The ghost issue of what could have happened should not be brought into play. Only the things that did happen should be considered. Like her lowest score for the day was a 7. She only had one of those. The rest where 8, 9 and 10s. 

I wanted to mention the scores, as it is relative to one of the poll options. Also some that was not mentioned was this was the third bird of the day(water was first). 

I am not trying to defend the short comings of this situation. I know this is a major training issue. I have and will continue to work on this. I enjoy HT, because they show me the gaps I have in my training program. It is hard for me to say what happend because I could not see form my view point. I can only take the word of others. I can not get her to do any of these type of things in training :? 

She handles flyers and live birds fine in training...


----------



## Swampcollie (Jan 16, 2003)

Many Junior dogs are experiencing being afield for the very first time when they run their first test. The sights, sounds, smells and trappings are all new experiences. 

The big question that needs to be answered is why did the dog leave the flopping bird? Was it fearful or was it due to curiosity involving the blind, bird crates, and gunners? Birds in crates make noise and gunners are almost never silent when the dogs are working in front of them. All of this needs to be considered when evaluating the dog's performance.

The working "Junior" dog did mark the bird, return with the bird and deliver it to hand. I would say at that point that the dog had performed minimally, so a zero isn't warranted. That being said, there is a lot of room between one and ten on the scoresheet and the dog's performance on this particular bird is likely going to be much closer to a one than it is a ten. It may be so low in fact that it's likely the dog won't pass today, but you still need to call the dog back if there is another series to be run. 

This is a Hunt Test, not a Field Trial. The handler should expect a full and thorough evaluation of his/her dog unless the dogs performance is so poor that it can't continue the evaluation.


----------



## Burt Fosse (Jan 12, 2007)

I have not wanted to say it yet, because I will get jumped on a little bit more. I do believe that her puppy curiosity got the best of her. The next day she passed. On the land flyer she revisited the gunner station again, this time with the bird in her mouth. I think this is the real issue that I need to train out of her. She has always been curious by the gunners in a test. We train with the same set ups and I can not get her to do it in training.

Any ideas???


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

K G said:


> You're attempting to get creative again, Paul. "Master" doesn't enter into the equation, and you know it.
> 
> You can make this personal if you want to.
> 
> ...


There's nothing personal about it Keith. You feel the dog should be passed. Others feel as you do. The fact I disagree is not a personal attack on you. I think though that passing any dog that refuses to pick up a cripple is doing harm to that handler and dog. Ultimately if allowed to go on it just becomes a bigger problem. What happens if/when it gets to senior or master? Then all of a sudden in that handlers mind what was an acceptable behavior now becomes inconsistent judging. Instead of realizing that the rules make no differentiation in this behavior among levels in a HT, it becomes a "judges" problem. I'm all for leniency in human mistake areas, especially minor mistakes, but basic dog behavior of picking up a duck once found should not be in question. I heard someone in a training group just two weeks ago make the comment that the dog doesn't really like birds, but we got her titled and we just bred her. Guess her and her puppies will make some nice SRS dogs...

/Paul


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

Jeff T. made a point that I had written and discarded 2 messages on.

What is to say that the dogs that passed this test would have done so if they had seen a crippled flyer? I don't want to get into the "same test for all" refrain. However, a cripple is an occasional thing and if the dog has only seen a few shot birds, maybe he hasn't seen a cripple. Is the owner to be told go home and cripple birds to train on?

Since I didn't see the test, I won't give a yes or no answer but I'd be inclined to carry the dog to the water. The judges had the dog run the second land mark and apparently he scored at least reasonaby well...well enought to carry had it not been for the decision concerning the 1st mark.

As a dog progresses, it sees more and varied challenges. Failure to pick up a cripple immediately will show up in Senior. Then the absolute rule of blinking should be brought into play. In this specific instance, the dog seemed sort of non-plused at seeing what he didn't expect to see. Practice on cripples? How? 

Eric


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

K G said:


> The poll is running 52% FOR dropping the dog. Obviously the judges were well within their providence in dropping the dog. The regulations and guidelines support their decision. I support those judges in making that decision. That's what judges do...._make decisions_.
> 
> A bit less than half believe that the dog should either be looked at again or should pass outright if it delivers the chickens at all. While I don't agree with the latter, I can support the former.
> 
> ...


Keith

I think this exemplifies a problem with the judging. It's called inconsistency.

It's not about giving the dog the benefit of the doubt or making a hairline call. It's called inconsistently judging to the standard. 

The standard is clear about blinking a bird. Why are so many willing to excuse it? Judge what you see. That's what you signed up to do. 

I've asked a number of times without getting an answer, what valid mitigating circumstances exist? If there aren't any, how can you excuse it? 

I don't get it!


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

Doug Main said:


> K G said:
> 
> 
> > The poll is running 52% FOR dropping the dog. Obviously the judges were well within their providence in dropping the dog. The regulations and guidelines support their decision. I support those judges in making that decision. That's what judges do...._make decisions_.
> ...


I am not sure that KG said he would pass the dog . Just because someone would bring the dog back, it does not mean the dog would pass.


----------



## brian breuer (Jul 12, 2003)

> I am not sure that KG said he would pass the dog . Just because someone would bring the dog back, it does not mean the dog would pass.


This situation gives more jr handlers room for bitching in my opinion. Say the rest of the work is pretty good but not good enough to bring the ave up to a 7. Now, you really have a handler saying what the hell happened, why didn't I get a ribbon. 

I'm with Doug.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Paul Cantrell/Gundog2002 wrote:



> Apparently he ran under you and Keith….


That is what I was talking about with the "personal" issue. Just stay with the point at hand and everything else will take care of itself.

Swampcollie and Eric Johnson put it beautifully, especially Eric's comment:


> "As a dog progresses, it sees more and varied challenges. Failure to pick up a cripple immediately will show up in Senior. Then the absolute rule of blinking should be brought into play. In this specific instance, the dog seemed sort of non-plused at seeing what he didn't expect to see. Practice on cripples? How?"


_There_, Doug. *THAT* is _MY_ "valid mitigating circumstance" with regard to this *one* retrieve. You don't want to run under me? Don't. You won't hurt my feelings one bit....and for the record, this is the ONLY case where I personally take exception to the generic list of SERIOUS faults with regard to Junior dogs. You're suggesting that there is NO leeway, no judgement involved, no need to talk to gunners. Again, Eric's post above sums my feelings up in toto. And to reiterate, just to help refresh any "convenient" memories....the dog _still might not pass_ for the day....a "1" gets the dog called back to the next series. Several other folks here are saying, in essence, the _same_ thing. 

And I totally understand your "not getting it"......I'll score the dog's performance, but I'm not a "scorekeeper." As for handler's bitching 'cause they didn't pass at the end of the day, having a thick skin is NOT one of my challenges! :wink: 

kg


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

K G said:


> Paul Cantrell/Gundog2002 wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I listed you and Fallon because you're the two that are currently debating. I could have went through all 4 pages and listed everyone that feels that same way but it seemed easier to just list the you two...if it makes you feel better Doug and I are in the same camp and I listed us the same way...maybe the skins not so thick….


I’ll stand by my opinion. Nowhere in the standard does it say that blinking a bird is to be handled differently based on level. You quote SC and Eric, but frankly they’re setting up the valid argument for inconsistency in judging. I find it interesting though that you write an article on standard and guidelines for RFTN, yet you clearly are letting your personal views modify what is clearly stated in that standard. Show me in the rules where it states that overlooking a dog that blinks a bird is acceptable in junior? You cannot let your personal feelings towards certain aspects of the work to contradict the clearly stated standard. 




/Paul


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

brian breuer said:


> > I am not sure that KG said he would pass the dog . Just because someone would bring the dog back, it does not mean the dog would pass.
> 
> 
> This situation gives more jr handlers room for bitching in my opinion. Say the rest of the work is pretty good but not good enough to bring the ave up to a 7. Now, you really have a handler saying what the hell happened, why didn't I get a ribbon.
> ...


If I had a dime for every junior dog that I have seen "blink" a cripple.... 
Call it inconsistent, poor judging, or whatever you want, but I am going to take a second look to see if it is a problem. It may not be a written rule but how can you fault someone who is running in their first test (not this particular case) with a dog that has only seen maybe a few real birds and possibly NO flyers? Not everyone has the ability to train using live birds. If this dog truly blinks the bird and never comes back with it, totally freaks out, or puts on an extended hunt out of the area and still does not come back to the bird the dog gets a zero. I cannot give this instance a zero for perseverance, trainability, or marking. IMHO this dog did mark the bird as exhibited by running to the fall. He did what his level of training dictated so trainability is not an issue. While he might not have picked up a flapping bird he did manage to stay close enough, or at least get back, to the area of the fall to retrieve the bird. To me a dog that is frightened by a cripple and leaves it, but then comes back is showing perseverance because I have seen many junior dogs in the same situation do the same but never pick the bird up. Now I would not call this same scenario perseverance in a senior or master level dog, but in a dog that has seen few IF ANY flyers, this is perseverance so a zero is not an option.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

> I listed you and Fallon because you're the two that are currently debating. I could have went through all 4 pages and listed everyone that feels that same way but it seemed easier to just list the you two...if it makes you feel better Doug and I are in the same camp and I listed us the same way...maybe the skins not so thick


One of your typical diversionary tactics....and again, why the sudden switch to a scenario that had NOTHING to do with the discussion at hand? Just curious....that's all....

With regard to the current discussion, my opinion is based on the scenario as described. I've also validated the decision that the judges made.

What more do you want from me? I wasn't there. Based on what was described by Burt, I gave my opinion. What else do I need to know to make the call that you think I should make?

By the way, _any_ time you want to take over "What's The Score?" in RFTN, just let me know and I'll tell you who to contact. Be careful what you ask for.

kg


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

K G said:


> You're suggesting that there is NO leeway, no judgement involved, no need to talk to gunners. Again, Eric's post above sums my feelings up in toto.


I NEVER said that "there is NO leeway, no judgement involved". I said I didn't think a live bird was good enough. 

So, you are now in the live bird is an excuse camp. Before you said live or dead:


K G said:


> Having said that..... 8) ............I *personally* believe that if a Junior dog blinks a bird, dead or alive, then comes back around and gets the bird, and has no subsequent "blinking" problems with other retrieves, should get the _benefit of the doubt_ in the Junior test level.
> 
> But that's just me........ :wink:


Now you admit that your PERSONAL feelings are contray to the regulations. 


K G said:


> Don't. You won't hurt my feelings one bit....and for the record, this is the ONLY case where I personally take exception to the generic list of SERIOUS faults with regard to Junior dogs.


I thought we were supposed to judge according to the regulations. If we don't like them, work to have them changed. I thought I heard that from someone. :wink:


----------



## Ron in Portland (Apr 1, 2006)

This has been a great discussion. On our first Jr. test, my dog swung wide of the bird, put on a HUGE hunt, and I had to handle him back to the bird. The handling wasn't great, but I got him there and he brought the bird back. I was dropped without getting a shot at the second bird. 

Since then, I've reviewed it and can make an argument either way. I've seen much worse pass at other tests (so I should have gotten a chance at the next bird?), but I also realize that pass and "good enough" are two different things. The judges had valid reasons to drop us, and they did. It just made me want to come back the next time and leave no doubt we deserved a ribbon. We went on to pass our next four tests, so it all worked out and failing the first test helped my perspective with a quick reality check.

It sure was tough walking off the line that first time, though. Ouch. 

One point that has been brought up several times is to call back and see how they do on the next flyer. In every junior test I've seen (not many, about ten), there was one live flyer on the first two marks, none on the second, so there's only one chance to judge how they'll handle a cripple.

As a handler, I would always want another chance. You'd like the benefit of the doubt (I know I did), but you don't always get it and the judges did have a valid reason to drop the dog.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

> I said I didn't think a live bird was good enough.


And I do...and I'm not alone....as for the dead bird, a quick recovery after finding the bird and making the retrieve is NOT the same as _not_ making the retrieve.

Look....I've said the judges made a good call. They've got the regs/guidelines to back them up. As for me, I'm going with this from the regs and guidelines: _*A certain tolerance must be afforded to the dog that still proves effective and accomplishes its purpose in the field.* _

The dog made the retrieve. Other factors might come into play that might make me want to zero the dog, like disturbing too much cover, hunting out of the area, hunting in a lackadaisical manner, etc....but this discussion is about blinking, and while some folks will zero that dog, I won't, not as the work was described....because the dog accomplished its purpose in the field...._minimally_, I grant you, but still accomplished.

How much more time do you guys want to spend on this?  

kg


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

K G said:


> One of your typical diversionary tactics....and again, why the sudden switch to a scenario that had NOTHING to do with the discussion at hand? Just curious....that's all....
> 
> With regard to the current discussion, my opinion is based on the scenario as described. I've also validated the decision that the judges made.
> 
> ...


Keith, there was no diversion tactic and it was completely on topic. I find it interesting your accusing me of diversion. Nice. I too am basing my opinion, in accord with the scenario presented and taking the standard/guidelines into account. In my opinion, letting this go in junior leads to either letting it go in senior, then master or sets up handlers with the excuse that it was ok with these judges why not all judges. Those who judge to the standard get penalized for sticking to the book…

/Paul

Ps. When will your latest article be posted to working-retriever? I have a couple of comments. And your welcome for my posts providing the topic for the article.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

K G said:


> > I said I didn't think a live bird was good enough.
> 
> 
> And I do...and I'm not alone....as for the dead bird, a quick recovery after finding the bird and making the retrieve is NOT the same as _not_ making the retrieve.
> ...


So other words, your using a interpretational aspect of the standard to justify ignoring a directive in the standard? Do you use this same thought pattern to a controlled break in Master? How about a dog that won't get in water after repeated commands, runs the bank and retrieves the bird? How about vocalization, ready to put up with a bunch of barking because the dog brought the bird back? Bending the standard to fit your personal preferences goes down a nasty rathole. Inconsistent judging 101. 


/Paul


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> K G said:
> 
> 
> > One of your typical diversionary tactics....and again, why the sudden switch to a scenario that had NOTHING to do with the discussion at hand? Just curious....that's all....
> ...


So you are calling this a gateway blink? :lol: 
I don't buy the argument that letting it go in juniors leads to letting it go in seniors... I say this same thing in seniors gets the dog dropped and I don't really care what the handler thinks about it.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

badbullgator said:


> So you are calling this a gateway blink? :lol:
> I don't buy the argument that letting it go in juniors leads to letting it go in seniors... I say this same thing in seniors gets the dog dropped and I don't really care what the handler thinks about it.


Thus bringing in inconsistancy. Thanks for proving my point.

/Paul


----------



## Burt Fosse (Jan 12, 2007)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> badbullgator said:
> 
> 
> > So you are calling this a gateway blink? :lol:
> ...



In Hockey a kid can not use a slapshot or check until they are in Peewee's. Just like in HT there are different levels of demands. Not the same point in my opinion.


----------



## Terry Thomas (Jun 27, 2005)

Burt Fosse said:


> Only the things that did happen should be considered. Like her lowest score for the day was a 7. She only had one of those. The rest where 8, 9 and 10s.


No, her lowest score for the day was zero in perseverance, she blinked a bird, it is a major fault, there were no mitigating circumstances(which is probably what the judges were looking for when the talked to the gunners)


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> K G said:
> 
> 
> > One of your typical diversionary tactics....and again, why the sudden switch to a scenario that had NOTHING to do with the discussion at hand? Just curious....that's all....
> ...


You are smarter than the average bear, Paul. It is beyond my comprehension that you would believe this progression would happen any more than I would.



> Those who judge to the standard get penalized for sticking to the book…
> 
> /Paul


By whom? Did you miss my statement that the judges were well within their providence to make the call they made? How do THEY get penalized???????????????



> Ps. When will your latest article be posted to working-retriever? I have a couple of comments. And your welcome for my posts providing the topic for the article.


I get a lot of article ideas from RTF, no doubt. Comments from a bunch of folks contributed to the current column, and to most month's columns, truth be told. If it's talked about here, it's probably worth talking about there. As for when it'll be on WRC, I have no idea. As long as they don't promote the site and make the boards more user friendly, I don't see that there's much point.....

'Course, you _could_ send RFTN a rebuttal letter.................... :wink: 

kg


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> badbullgator said:
> 
> 
> > So you are calling this a gateway blink? :lol:
> ...


How exactly is that proving the point of inconsistency? There are a number of things different about juniors/seniors and seniors/masters. I guess allowing a restraint on the line encourages people to do it in seniors or the judges to let it slide

(2) Dogs shall be steady on the line, but a controlled
break or creeping shall result in a relatively lower score
in Trainability, than a controlled break or creeping would
in a Junior Hunting Test.

It kind of seems that AKC feels that there is a different level of difficulty between levels don’t ya think? Judging seniors to one standard and juniors to another and masters to still another is the way it is done.
Numerous statements like the one below kind of bear that out. Now if your talking about inconsistency in the same level I am still confused how my statement proves your point???? 

(4) As in Junior and Senior, situations must simulate
natural and realistic hunting situations. While distance is
not crucial, Master Hunting situations are more severe
and difficult than Senior Hunting situations.


----------



## TxFig (Apr 13, 2004)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> There's nothing personal about it Keith. You feel the dog should be passed. Others feel as you do.



No - I don't think any of us have said that the dog should have "PASSED". Only that blinking a live bird, in a Junior test, does not necessarily warrant a zero score.


There is a big, big difference in those 2 positions.





> The fact I disagree is not a personal attack on you. I think though that passing any dog that refuses to pick up a cripple is doing harm to that handler and dog. Ultimately if allowed to go on it just becomes a bigger problem. What happens if/when it gets to senior or master? Then all of a sudden in that handlers mind what was an acceptable behavior now becomes inconsistent judging.


That is just non-sense. What makes you think that a behavior that, while not desirable in a Junior test, becomes acceptable in a Senior or Master test?

By that logic, we should have the same level of expectation for control (control breaks) in Junior as we do in Master.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

badbullgator said:


> How exactly is that proving the point of inconsistency? There are a number of things different about juniors/seniors and seniors/masters. I guess allowing a restraint on the line encourages people to do it in seniors or the judges to let it slide
> 
> (2) Dogs shall be steady on the line, but a controlled
> break or creeping shall result in a relatively lower score
> ...


Badbull, the standard clearly outlines the differences and difficulity level between the 3 levels. There are aspects though that are the same regardless of levels. This is one of them. Nowhere is blinking a bird mentioned as ok in junior but not allowed in senior or master. The inconsistancy is when people take these areas that are clearly the same regardless and lighten them or disregard them because its a junior or senior. Obviously there is inconsistancy since the poll is 50/50. 

/Paul


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

CNBarnes said:


> Gun_Dog2002 said:
> 
> 
> > There's nothing personal about it Keith. You feel the dog should be passed. Others feel as you do.
> ...


Well, you can call it nonsense all you like but I've heard a lot of bitching about these types of things in the senior galleries and I've seen this exact scenario at a Master National. 

/Paul


----------



## Bubba (Jan 3, 2003)

> Well, you can call it nonsense all you like but I've heard a lot of bitching about these types of things in the senior galleries and I've seen this exact scenario at a Master National.
> 
> /Paul


2 words:
Bull Shirt


Your are sooooooooooo FOS regards

Bubba

PS:

Burt, your little doggie got it's butt kicked by a DUCK for crying out loud. Take what's left of your shredded arse and limp off to lick your wounds. Train and then expect a miracle!!!!!


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

Eric Johnson said:


> What is to say that the dogs that passed this test would have done so if they had seen a crippled flyer? I don't want to get into the "same test for all" refrain. However, a cripple is an occasional thing and if the dog has only seen a few shot birds, maybe he hasn't seen a cripple. Is the owner to be told go home and cripple birds to train on? Practice on cripples? How?
> 
> Eric


set up the classic "Duck Chase". Small pond, wing taped swimming duck, a few dogs let loose one at a time. It teaches so much and the dogs have fun and do not realize they are learning. Yet learning they are.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

CNBarnes said:


> Not to mention that even a determined, MH/FC level dog would loose the bird if it got into a swimming race - I have yet to see any dog that could out-swim a duck.


for real? I have. And when the duck dives and grabs a root to lock onto and die they dive also and bring up duck and bush and anything else, of course if the dog has never practiced swimming after ducks ( did I just type duck chase above) then it does not know it can catch them and so will not persevere.


----------



## Ron Schuna (Jan 22, 2004)

*Can't lurk any longer*

I've lurked on this issue and just want to put a cloud with words to add to the thoughts on this. I was on the phone with folks in Minnesota right after this happened and have heard the scenario from first hand folks back there. Here's one thing that I don't think has been taken into consideration....

I would call it a blink IF...the bird was in plain sight and the dog disregards OR low (less than calf hight cover) and the dog disregards not high cover AND the dog goes there and just doesn't DIG the bird out due to large quantities of fresh blood over the area. In high cover where more than a half dozen flyers have been freshly shot, IF the bird has landed deep in the grasses and is laying amongst a vast quantity of blood from the previous flyers...then it could be envisioned that the dog marked the area of the fall, proceeded to the area of the fall but due to the bird being down deep underneath a large amount of blood scent and grasses, the dog just did not dig the bird out and proceded to work the area until she convinced herself that the bird IS indeed in that TALL COVER where she originally believed her eyes and not her nose. This is what came to my mind with the descriptions I heard. 

I have recently trained a pup in tall cover and threw an ATB into it and watched the pup circle the area of the fall, catch scent, lose scent, and catch scent again and doing what he is supposed to do.......dig it out and return the bird to me and deliver it to hand. 

Several have chided Burt over this being unacceptable. Well....if Burt was afield, dumped a big mallard that fell behind his duck boat and up on the shore in the tall grass that the farmer left for the year, sent his dog to fetch it, AND....she goes to the area of the fall, hunts the tall grass around where she ran to and then gets convinced that the bird is where she originally thought it to be, picks it up, scrambles back to Burt just like she did with the previous two birds and also the subsequent bird, WITHOUT Burt handling her to it, AND, not disturbing his neighboring blind dwellers with whistles and handing directives.....Well, dang, he's got a pretty good dog don't he and in a hunting situation that's what we really want isn't it?. She's a pup and they do typically outgrow visiting the guns, but...she came back and delivered the downed bird to hand without being begged to. 

Recovering game in a simulated hunt AND doing it without a handle.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Ron, you just described "valid mitigating circumstances"..... :wink: ....in my estimation, anyway!  

Good post. Thanks for the point of view.

kg


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Bubba said:


> > Well, you can call it nonsense all you like but I've heard a lot of bitching about these types of things in the senior galleries and I've seen this exact scenario at a Master National.
> >
> > /Paul
> 
> ...


Now bubba, i wouldn't post that without seeing it first hand. I can give you the person's name, the date, location, series, number of bird thrown in series, dog and I was sitting right next to the guys wife when it happened. If you like, I can get the guy on the phone and he can tell himself. Totally sucked, but it happened....

Now if your talking about bitchin in the senior gallery, well then you might be right. We've never heard anyone bitch in a senior gallery.

/Paul


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

*Re: Can't lurk any longer*



Ron Schuna said:


> I've lurked on this issue and just want to put a cloud with words to add to the thoughts on this. I was on the phone with folks in Minnesota right after this happened and have heard the scenario from first hand folks back there. Here's one thing that I don't think has been taken into consideration....
> 
> I would call it a blink IF...the bird was in plain sight and the dog disregards OR low (less than calf hight cover) and the dog disregards not high cover AND the dog goes there and just doesn't DIG the bird out due to large quantities of fresh blood over the area. In high cover where more than a half dozen flyers have been freshly shot, IF the bird has landed deep in the grasses and is laying amongst a vast quantity of blood from the previous flyers...then it could be envisioned that the dog marked the area of the fall, proceeded to the area of the fall but due to the bird being down deep underneath a large amount of blood scent and grasses, the dog just did not dig the bird out and proceded to work the area until she convinced herself that the bird IS indeed in that TALL COVER where she originally believed her eyes and not her nose. This is what came to my mind with the descriptions I heard.
> 
> ...


Well, Ron, this isn't really a blink then is it? The dog never actually got to the bird? Can't blink what it didn't find yet. Yet according to Burt, his dogged blinked the bird. I think the discussion on how to handle a dog blinking the bird is valid. 

/Paul


----------



## Ron Schuna (Jan 22, 2004)

*Blink?*

Burt described it as blink because that's what the judge or judges told him she did so he included THEIR view/words in the poll. That doesn't necessarily mean that is what the dog actually did or didn't do. 

I was told years ago that you can't second guess the judges call and have gone home without completing a trial or test and made sure to train on the issue that sent us packing. Burt went home and did his homework after this event. Guess what.....He found some information in the rulebook that should give him satisfaction for second guessing. Nothing to argue about, just clear discussion


----------



## [email protected]@##? (Jan 19, 2005)

*Re: Blink?*



Ron Schuna said:


> Burt described it as blink because that's what the judge or judges told him she did so he included THEIR view/words in the poll. That doesn't necessarily mean that is what the dog actually did or didn't do.


Not arguing at, but I seem to recall that the Judge's spoke with the gunners about it before deciding??? If they thought he blinked the bird and went so far as to ask the people in the field what they saw, and heard nothing that changed their minds then I think they did the totally proper and fair thing. Sounds like they did all they could could to make the right call and were very fair about it. No Judge (or umpire) is ever 100% right, but when they do all they can to try to get it right, then I think they deserve the benefit of any doubt. FWIW, I probably would have carried the dog, but would not second guess the Judge's if they chose not too. 

How about a thread on how many times a JH handler gets to tell his/her dog to fetch it up when returning to the line. This is my pet peeve and it drives me crazy when the handler has to say it 5-6 times and do the Junior dive to catch the bird, and the dog gets carried and a ribbon???


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

I had this exact senario happen to us in our first Junior test, except the flyer wasnt hit at all and fell to the ground standing up and quacking!!!

I sent the dog when the judge called my number. I actually didnt have a problen at all with a cripple, in fact I kinda hope the dog gets one once in awhile. Nothin like a bird on the ground flappin to the dog, here I am!!  

My dog to my surprise, whent to the bird, tried to grab it, then decided to leave it and hunt for somethin dead!! :shock: The bird ran back to the gunners, and one of them picked it up! :shock: 

The Judges gave me a NO BIRD!!!! :shock: :shock: 
They said they should have asked me if I wanted the bird!!! :shock: 

I considerded their action a gift.

Told me I'd better be workin on cripples more! Kens idea of ducks in a pond is a great way to train for this!.


Gooser


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

I know of one junior judge that counts the number of times the handler says "fetch" before the dog picks up the bird (if it does at all....) to determine the dog's Trainability score.

If I remember correctly, he deducts one point from the Trainability score for every time the handler says "fetch" without the dog picking up the bird. He does that for all birds in all series.

kg


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

MooseGooser said:


> I had this exact senario happen to us in our first Junior test, except the flyer wasnt hit at all and fell to the ground standing up and quacking!!!
> 
> I sent the dog when the judge called my number. I actually didnt have a problen at all with a cripple, in fact I kinda hope the dog gets one once in awhile. Nothin like a bird on the ground flappin to the dog, here I am!!
> 
> ...


Hey Paul......Hey Doug......_here's_ one for you! :lol: :lol: Whaddaya think about this "no bird" on a cripple? :wink: 

kg


----------



## SueLab (Jul 27, 2003)

K G said:


> I know of one junior judge that counts the number of times the handler says "fetch" before the dog picks up the bird (if it does at all....) to determine the dog's Trainability score.
> 
> If I remember correctly, he deducts one point from the Trainability score for every time the handler says "fetch" without the dog picking up the bird. He does that for all birds in all series.
> 
> kg


So, if I might ask, what score does that judge start with...a "perfect 10" and start deducting for all variances in performance or does he start with a 7 or a 5...?


----------



## Georgia.Belle (Dec 5, 2006)

Bubba said:


> > PS:
> >
> > Burt, your little doggie got it's butt kicked by a DUCK for crying out loud. Take what's left of your shredded arse and limp off to lick your wounds. Train and then expect a miracle!!!!!


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

SueLab said:


> K G said:
> 
> 
> > I know of one junior judge that counts the number of times the handler says "fetch" before the dog picks up the bird (if it does at all....) to determine the dog's Trainability score.
> ...


I asked him that, Nancy. I was an AKC rep at the time and he said he always started with a 10 and worked downward. He had more than one dog that ended with minus points on birds. I told him he couldn't score any trait less than a zero, that the regs/guidelines didn't allow for that. He smiled and said, "Well, then, I guess a zero will have to do....."

kg


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

*Re: Can't lurk any longer*



Ron Schuna said:


> I've lurked on this issue and just want to put a cloud with words to add to the thoughts on this. I was on the phone with folks in Minnesota right after this happened and have heard the scenario from first hand folks back there. Here's one thing that I don't think has been taken into consideration....
> 
> I would call it a blink IF...the bird was in plain sight and the dog disregards OR low (less than calf hight cover) and the dog disregards not high cover AND the dog goes there and just doesn't DIG the bird out due to large quantities of fresh blood over the area. In high cover where more than a half dozen flyers have been freshly shot, IF the bird has landed deep in the grasses and is laying amongst a vast quantity of blood from the previous flyers...then it could be envisioned that the dog marked the area of the fall, proceeded to the area of the fall but due to the bird being down deep underneath a large amount of blood scent and grasses, the dog just did not dig the bird out and proceded to work the area until she convinced herself that the bird IS indeed in that TALL COVER where she originally believed her eyes and not her nose. This is what came to my mind with the descriptions I heard.
> 
> ...


I've kept out of this discussion, but have decided to comment here. I think that Ron's comments validate my personal policy which is, in general, I would choose to not say how I'd judge it, since I need to live it, breathe it, see it....in order to state my opinion.

There is a reason why novels and stories are so powerful, yet many are disappointed when a book is made into a movie. We all have our own mental pictures and ideas formed when we read words, based upon our own experiences, preferences and mental wiring. When a piece of literature is put into a movie, you get the interpretation of someone else, and it is frequently not the way you saw it in your head when you read the piece! (could also be a good reason why some like training DVDs/videos to supplement books... Seeing is believing and we can easily misinterpret soemthing we read, versus what our mind's eye sees.)

Those who say "drop the dog for sure" probably have a very clear mental image of what they'd do and likely the drop is justified as per the rulebook. Others have a varied opinion which says that this is a junior level dog who likely deserves the benefit of the doubt.

This is not a competition where there's a first place and everyone else loses. This is the most basic level of a non-competitive program, evaluating performance against a standard. Giving the dogs the benefit of the doubt does not cheapen the test or the evaluations.

I sure as heck hope that the handler calmly and politely said to the judges "Thank you for your time" and departed with class. It appears that in the judges' minds, they had a black and white rule that validated their decision. 

Unlike a couple weeks ago, I don't see a pile-on of opinion after opinion of a general lack of appreciation for the day's work. It appears to be an isolated incident with one call on one dog. 

Try putting yourself in the judges' shoes. They very likely felt themselves in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" position. They had to make a call and it appears they made it.

There will be more junior hunt test chances. If this dog is doing as well in training as it sounds like she is, this is an aberration that will be all but forgotten a year from now. 

Congrats on your new Junior hunter titled dog, coming soon..... Who cares if you didn't go 5 for 5?!!!! It's all good and she got to run all the marks and likely learned something from it. She doesn't give a hoot whether she got a $2.00 nylon ribbon and she won't care if you have two more initials next to her name. 

Smile, enjoy, it's better than a day in the office or getting a root canal! (which reminds me, a buddy of mine told me that dentists have a higher suicide rate than many other professions.... makes sense to me - how many folks LIKE going to the dentist?!)

Chris


----------



## Eric Johnson (Dec 23, 2004)

> KG
> .....Whaddaya think about this "no bird" on a cripple?


Especially after the dog had been out in the field already.

Eric


----------



## Tha Dick (Jul 25, 2007)

After reading all this I just have to put my .02 worth in. I'm not a pro trainer by any means. I'm just a avid duck hunter that got hooked on doggin'.

I've had decisions by judges that I did'nt think was fair, several times. I kinda' got mad about it at first , then I got over it. I finally quit worrying about the almighty ribbon and just started having fun (makes for a lot better weekend). Put yourself in the judges shoes, it's not easy! I'm very grateful they sacrifice their time and efforts to keep the sport we all love alive.

I guess my attitude is, "Just go have fun with your dog, the ribbons are just a bonus".

Throw a happy bumper for me, Mark


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

*Re: Blink?*



Ron Schuna said:


> Burt described it as blink because that's what the judge or judges told him she did so he included THEIR view/words in the poll. That doesn't necessarily mean that is what the dog actually did or didn't do.
> 
> I was told years ago that you can't second guess the judges call and have gone home without completing a trial or test and made sure to train on the issue that sent us packing. Burt went home and did his homework after this event. Guess what.....He found some information in the rulebook that should give him satisfaction for second guessing. Nothing to argue about, just clear discussion


Ah. Well if that was what they were dropping the dog for then it was fair to tell him that was the reason. In my mind, I would have to clearly see the dog and the bird to make this assessement. If I can't see both, then I can't in my mind say the dog blinked the bird. I wanna see them wrestle it out. If the duck wins, well.....

/Paul


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

K G said:


> MooseGooser said:
> 
> 
> > I had this exact senario happen to us in our first Junior test, except the flyer wasnt hit at all and fell to the ground standing up and quacking!!!
> ...


Uh, i'll come back to this, gotta a youngun to work....

/Paul


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

Chris Atkinson said:


> This is not a competition where there's a first place and everyone else loses. This is the most basic level of a non-competitive program, evaluating performance against a standard. Giving the dogs the benefit of the doubt does not cheapen the test or the evaluations.


A program in which the standard as written and taught at the Judges seminar provides that blinking a bird = failrue at all levels. Some feeel that is harsh for a junior dog. Maybe it is. But that's the standard. 

Some think that a live bird is a valid excuse for "blinking" the bird. I don't. 

I used to run and judge HRC. Live birds are not allowed in the HRC started test there for that reason. The AKC Standard for a Junior dog is higher than the UKC standard for started dog. The retrieves are longer, the dog has to deliver the bird to hand, and there are live birds. (There was talk in UKC about making the started dogs deliver to hand and giving a started title, I don't know, if that has been changed or not.) 


K G said:


> Hey Paul......Hey Doug......_here's_ one for you! :lol: :lol: Whaddaya think about this "no bird" on a cripple? :wink:
> 
> kg


 :lol: :lol: 

That was going to be my question for you, keith. Do you think a live bird is unfair?

I was judging a Master at a HT once where the AKC rep told me that one of the Junior judges was calling a no-bird for every still alive bird. :lol: 

Why use a flier in junior if this is an issue for you? They aren't all going to be dead when they hit the ground.


----------



## Bubba (Jan 3, 2003)

Tha Dick said:


> After reading all this I just have to put my .02 worth in. I'm not a pro trainer by any means. I'm just a avid duck hunter that got hooked on doggin'.
> 
> I've had decisions by judges that I did'nt think was fair, several times. I kinda' got mad about it at first , then I got over it. I finally quit worrying about the almighty ribbon and just started having fun (makes for a lot better weekend). Put yourself in the judges shoes, it's not easy! I'm very grateful they sacrifice their time and efforts to keep the sport we all love alive.
> 
> ...


Oh Lordy, it looks I got a cousin on the right edge. That means Yall are surrounded!!!!

Got the left edge covered regards

Bubba


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Doug, if you read Ron Schuna's post, he gives a pretty valid scenario that paints a pictue of reasonable doubt around whether or not the dog truly did "blink" the bird.

I'm quite sure that if you and I judged together, and were sticking to the rulebook, we would agree on whether we saw a blink or not and we would stick to the standard accordingly.

I was not there and neither were most in the exchange. Only those in the judges' chair experienced it and they made their call. It may very well be the one I'd have made as well. Then again, maybe not...I was not there.


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Doug, if you read Ron Schuna's post, he gives a pretty valid scenario that paints a pictue of reasonable doubt around whether or not the dog truly did "blink" the bird.
> 
> I'm quite sure that if you and I judged together, and were sticking to the rulebook, we would agree on whether we saw a blink or not and we would stick to the standard accordingly.
> 
> I was not there and neither were most in the exchange. Only those in the judges' chair experienced it and they made their call. It may very well be the one I'd have made as well. Then again, maybe not...I was not there.


Chris,

If I as a judge have any doubt as to whether the dog found the bird and then left it, I'm going to give the dog the benefit of the doubt. :wink: 

Ron's scenario is not what I am debating. Keith's original post,


K G said:


> Having said that..... ............I personally believe that if a Junior dog blinks a bird, dead or alive, then comes back around and gets the bird, and has no subsequent "blinking" problems with other retrieves, should get the benefit of the doubt in the Junior test level.


is what I have a disagreement with. :wink:


----------



## brian breuer (Jul 12, 2003)

*BBG wrote:*



> It may not be a written rule but how can you fault someone who is running in their first test (not this particular case) with a dog that has only seen maybe a few real birds and possibly NO flyers?


This may not be timely (i got busy) but I read this and wanted to comment. 

As how I can fault this, because that is what is in the rules. What about the senior dog that may never have seen a channel blind? How could you fault a dog that's owner didn't have access to technical water? 

I don't have access to Farmer training my dogs, how can you fault my dog for not being able to do the quad with 2 retired? :lol: 

Life ain't fair regards,

Brian


----------



## TxFig (Apr 13, 2004)

Ken Bora said:


> for real? I have. And when the duck dives and grabs a root to lock onto and die they dive also and bring up duck and bush and anything else, of course if the dog has never practiced swimming after ducks ( did I just type duck chase above) then it does not know it can catch them and so will not persevere.


Yeah - for real. I'm talking about open swimming water. Such as hunting out of a blind in the middle of the bay - nearest land is at least a mile away. Water is between 2.5-4' deep (swimming water for a dog).

A duck *lives* on the water and swims it's whole life. Just by the sheer speed - they can out swim any dog. Now *maybe* a persistent dog would follow a really dumb duck that swam that direct line to the shore a mile away and get the bird. But then the dog would be a mile away in an open bay where there are not only bay boats running full out - but sharks.

Same would go for a large lake (sans the sharks).


Iow, there isn't a dog alive now, nor in the past, that I would want to allow to chase a live swimming duck in open swimming water. The dog's desire isn't the point - no duck is worth the risk to the dog.


----------



## TxFig (Apr 13, 2004)

Doug Main said:


> That was going to be my question for you, keith. Do you think a live bird is unfair?
> 
> I was judging a Master at a HT once where the AKC rep told me that one of the Junior judges was calling a no-bird for every still alive bird. :lol:
> 
> Why use a flier in junior if this is an issue for you? They aren't all going to be dead when they hit the ground.



I'm Chris, but not Akinson. 8) 

To answer your first question - bluntly - yes, a non-dead bird in a Junior test is unfair. It exceeds what is called for in the standard of performance. If it were required, then we would have to use live, shackled birds and test for it.

Now that doesn't mean I'm going to call a no-bird for a live duck in a Junior test - for a majority of the dogs, it helps them more than it hurts them. And in Junior, I'm all about giving the dogs every benefit of the doubt I can.


As for why use a flyer in Junior - well honestly, in Texas it's rare to find a Junior test where we shoot a live flyer (and virtually unheard of to shoot 2). But I can think of valid reasons for doing it that have nothing to do with seeing if the dog will pick up a cripple. Added excitement level is just one reason (if you shoot it as the first bird in a series), will the dog settle down enough to focus on the next mark?).


----------



## Burt Fosse (Jan 12, 2007)

Thank you for all of your posts and opinions. This has been a fantastic learning experience for me and hopefully anyone that has read the thread. 

Also, thanks to the judges for putting in their time at that test. Ribbon or no ribbon, with out their volunteering, there would be no test and their work IS appreciated.


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Doug Main said:


> K G said:
> 
> 
> > Hey Paul......Hey Doug......_here's_ one for you! :lol: :lol: Whaddaya think about this "no bird" on a cripple? :wink:
> ...


The issue for me is this ONE occurrence....the one that I think you've permanently cut-and-pasted to a word document for easy reference.....the one you stated above that quotes my "original post" comment on the subject. No matter how many times you post it, my feelings on the issue are not going to change. I've explained myself as well as I know how to on this issue. As I stated after that post, the still-live bird is the issue, not live birds in general.

That said, I LOVE using flyers in all three test levels. It's a HUNTING test. If we're hunting we shoot things (hopefully.... :wink: ), otherwise we'd just be "practice hunting" and I don't even know what that is....

I brought this subject forth so that I could tell you that no, I don't agree with a rerun because the flyer isn't dead. I DO think that a live bird CAN create an unfair situation for a junior dog, a dog with mostly natural hunting skills, very little expectation for trained skills per the regs/guidelines, and one with minimal experience afield. It's the "dog against the test," not against other dogs as Chris A. put it (excellent observation, btw). While every dog does NOT need to see the same test, I am _extra_ sensitive to "gremlins" that cannot be controlled in the Junior level (bird boys moving, gallery noise, noise from other tests, etc.). A live flyer CAN be one of those gremlins and judges need to be prepared BEFORE THE TEST STARTS to have an idea of what they want to see/how they'll handle it if it happens. If that decision is to eliminate the dog for what was described as a blink, so be it. The regs/guidelines allow for that. 

We've beaten the "blink or no blink" question to death. When it's all said and done, we have to know that we did right by the dogs when it comes to judging. A junior dog that walks away from a flapping bird but then comes back to get it (I don't time them, but I know a hunt when I see one...) has at least tried to stay in the game. Sure, eliminating live flyers would help with regard to this one issue, but I'd rather manage the issue than change the whole style of testing JUST to make sure that the birds were all dead on the ground. It's not a common occurrence, in my experience at least.

kg


----------



## BrettG (Apr 4, 2005)

*Failure*

I have a yellow that went through something similar at his first test. He had 2 hunting seasons with over 200 birds combined and the first bird thrown he blinked. Sniffed it, looked at me, sniffed it, looked at me, I knew I was done by now so I yelled fetch, He then picked it up and returned. I put the lead on him and headed for the truck. The dog did not fail that test. I failed that test for him because he had never seen a pen raised bird before then. I learned a valuable lesson that day.


----------



## Ken Newcomb (Apr 18, 2003)

I voted to carry the dog for another look.

I find it interesting that the most compelling arguement here is that a JH dog should be an adequate hunting companion, however, on the "Adequate Hunter" thread only 13% voted for JH. If a JH is not an adequate hunter should it be required to act like one in a HT?


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> K G said:
> 
> 
> > MooseGooser said:
> ...


Well, this is pretty much a cluster in my mind. Clusters typically I error in favor of the dog. While I would want to drop the dog for blinking the live bird, when the gun station interferes with the test I tend to go for a rerun. I wouldn't call it a no bird though, more interference. There would also be instructions to the station to not do anything until the judges tell them too. 

/Paul


----------



## Doug Main (Mar 26, 2003)

K G said:


> Doug Main said:
> 
> 
> > K G said:
> ...


I've never judged a junior, and don't plan on it any time soon. So I don't know how common it really is in junior. 

However, I've seen it plenty in Master. Usually by the dogs that IMO don't really like birds. Some dogs just have an "Oh Boy!! look when the find a bird still alive, and others have an "Oooh ick" look. 

It's been my experience that a dog with "natural" hunting skills isn't going to have a problem with a still-alive bird. They're the ones that give the "Oh Boy!!" look. I may be in the minority, but I dont think a dog with "natural" huning skills needs to be FF in order to pick up a live bird. :wink:


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

K G said:


> The issue for me is this ONE occurrence....the one that I think you've permanently cut-and-pasted to a word document for easy reference.....the one you stated above that quotes my "original post" comment on the subject. No matter how many times you post it, my feelings on the issue are not going to change. I've explained myself as well as I know how to on this issue. As I stated after that post, the still-live bird is the issue, not live birds in general.
> 
> That said, I LOVE using flyers in all three test levels. It's a HUNTING test. If we're hunting we shoot things (hopefully.... :wink: ), otherwise we'd just be "practice hunting" and I don't even know what that is....
> 
> ...






> I DO think that a live bird CAN create an unfair situation for a junior dog, a dog with mostly natural hunting skills, very little expectation for trained skills per the regs/guidelines, and one with minimal experience afield.


Keith I believe this is where we differ on this subject. There are two types of dogs, train enough of them and you’ll see what I’m describing.
Type 1- Dogs that love to retrieve/chase and don’t care what it is. For these dogs retrieving is the reward, they don’t care what is thrown, bumper, bird, tennis ball, dirt clod, apples, sticks, its all the same to them. They’ll go get it and bring it back. The act of retrieving is the reward. Oh they like birds alright enough but getting to the object is the reward, not the object itself. 

Type 2 – Dogs with strong bird desire. These dogs want birds. Any bird. They’ll pass up food for birds, tear down walls for birds. The act of retrieving is a byproduct of getting what they want most, the bird. 


Here is where we end up getting to blinking the bird situations. Type 1 dogs are more prone to blinking birds, giving up on a hunt, not fighting factors etc. For them the reward has occurred once they get to the area of the fall. Type 2 dogs will never blink a bird, there is no hesitation and they’re gonna stay there until they get what they want most. In my opinion these are the dogs that are exhibiting what you state are natural hunting skills. A dog that gives up on a bird in my mind is not showing natural hunting skills. Type 1 dogs can make great retrievers, don’t get me wrong, but I want type 2 dogs. If I just wanted to see animals chase things, I’d buy a bag of peanuts and throw them for the squirrels. 

/Paul


----------



## K G (Feb 11, 2003)

Were I looking at the scenario from a professional trainer's point of view, I'm sure I would concur.

I would say the _great majority_ of Type 2 dogs as a percentage of entries are found in Senior and Master....IMHO, of course! :wink: 

kg


----------



## [email protected]@##? (Jan 19, 2005)

I know this is way off topic BUT, I have to say one of my favorite parts of hunting, training or running tests is seeing my Chessie (or any other dog) hauling out to a cripple at full speed and nailing it. He comes pretty close to rolling end over end when he gets to the bird. I swear he accelerates when he sees a cripple even though I thought he couldn't possibly be running any harder. The excitment and enthusiasm tells me there is a dog that loves to hunt and for me, that's a real joy. I know he's having fun whether we get dropped or not. :lol:


----------



## mostlygold (Aug 5, 2006)

*JH dog blinking the bird*

Interesting discussion regarding the JH dog that was dropped for blinking the bird. I have been to several hunt tests where dogs were allowed a re-run because their birds were not dead and they would not pick them up. I was gunner at the live station and the judges instructions to me were "to be certain this dog's bird is dead the next time". I was pretty stunned the first time I saw this as I believe hunting dogs should pick up cripples, even young hunting dogs. The judges logic on this was that it wasn't a fair test for that dog as the other dogs birds were dead. However, there were several dogs who had cripples who did fine with them. How then does this logic apply? Do these dogs get extra credit? Fair is a relative term for a hunt test. Is it fair that some dogs get to run in the cool morning and others in the heat of the afternoon? how about sun and shadows affecting a fall? or the 47th dog that has to drive through tremendous drag back scent? That dog certainly doesn't have the same test as dog 1.


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

The judges had multiple non-DQ options: no-bird, sluice, carry the dog and reevaluate...
Those that want to drop this dog must be in the 13% that thinks JR level dogs are considered "adequate" hunting dogs.
For those that have limited experience training on cripples just don't run under this 13% that think JR dogs are true hunters.

Tim


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

That dog I ran in my story,, became a HRCH!!

She LOVES birds!

I think I entered her at to young an age without PROPER intro to birds.
I think MANY JUNIOR handlers do the same thing. 

Makes sense to me that if there is going to be a flyer in what ever level you are about to run,, you had better prepare the dog for a cripple!! :idea: :idea: I learned the hard way!  ,, and quite frankly was surprised by her actions, and darned well thought I should have been dropped!
Most dogs once they learn what they are (cripple),, just love em,, IF IF,, properly introduced!

Gooser


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

I'm a procedural kind of guy.............The judging panel consists of the approved judges --not two judges and a couple of gunners who may not even meet the criteria for being a Judge.

From 75 yards in high cover the Judges  could *not *even be sure that the dog even saw the bird much less blinked it on the first pass through.

That, as they say, is "their bad".

When in doubt the nod should go to the dog.

john


----------



## Terry Thomas (Jun 27, 2005)

Tim Carrion said:


> The judges had multiple non-DQ options: no-bird, sluice, carry the dog and reevaluate...
> Those that want to drop this dog must be in the 13% that thinks JR level dogs are considered "adequate" hunting dogs.
> For those that have limited experience training on cripples just don't run under this 13% that think JR dogs are true hunters.
> Tim


No, I don't think a JH makes a dog an adequate hunting dog. But I recognize a major fault when I see one. 
My MH lab female that is going to this years Master National blinked a live bird in her second junior test we spent the next couple of weeks training with pinioned ducks so all she retrieved for two weeks were live birds. She hasn't blinked a bird since then and has chased down many a cripple both in tests and actual hunting.


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

john fallon said:


> I'm a procedural kind of guy.............The judging panel consists of the approved judges --not two judges and a couple of gunners who may not even meet the criteria for being a Judge.
> 
> From 75 yards in high cover the Judges  could *not *even be sure that the dog even saw the bird much less blinked it on the first pass through.
> 
> ...


John, I agree. In fact I mentioned this in PM to Burt. While I will drop a dog for blinking a bird, I need to see it, not rely on someone else to see it. 

/Paul


----------



## TxFig (Apr 13, 2004)

Ken Newcomb said:


> I find it interesting that the most compelling arguement here is that a JH dog should be an adequate hunting companion, however, on the "Adequate Hunter" thread only 13% voted for JH. If a JH is not an adequate hunter should it be required to act like one in a HT?



You noticed that too, huh? 8)


----------



## TxFig (Apr 13, 2004)

Doug Main said:


> I've never judged a junior, and don't plan on it any time soon. So I don't know how common it really is in junior.
> 
> However, I've seen it plenty in Master.


Hmm.... that actually explains alot to me.

I have a people who only judge the "high level" stakes - imNSho, they cannot truly understand the upper levels if they don't also judge the lower ones.

But that would be a flamewar for another thread...


----------



## TxFig (Apr 13, 2004)

Gun_Dog2002 said:


> Here is where we end up getting to blinking the bird situations. Type 1 dogs are more prone to blinking birds, giving up on a hunt, not fighting factors etc. For them the reward has occurred once they get to the area of the fall. Type 2 dogs will never blink a bird, there is no hesitation and they’re gonna stay there until they get what they want most. In my opinion these are the dogs that are exhibiting what you state are natural hunting skills. A dog that gives up on a bird in my mind is not showing natural hunting skills. Type 1 dogs can make great retrievers, don’t get me wrong, but I want type 2 dogs. If I just wanted to see animals chase things, I’d buy a bag of peanuts and throw them for the squirrels.



I would disagree with your assertation that type 2 dogs won't blink birds. Of the dogs I have seen blink birds, more than half were actually type 2. Where I actually see this happen more than any other time is during a HRC upland test - where a dog will point the bird rather than flush it. This is in fact a type of blinking the bird (ie. they're not just diving in after it).

My old female (before she died) would do this (and she was very much a type 2). I actually liked it because it gave me a chance to get into position to shoot - and it would only take a single "alright, get it" and she would *DIVE* after the bird. I would also see her do this while we would be out goose hunting - where if she got close to a wounded goose she would wait to see if it would run - because she LOVED the chase. Once she had it, she never let it go.
Btw: it's the dog in my avatar I'm talking about...


----------



## Gun_Dog2002 (Apr 22, 2003)

CNBarnes said:


> I would disagree with your assertation that type 2 dogs won't blink birds. Of the dogs I have seen blink birds, more than half were actually type 2. Where I actually see this happen more than any other time is during a HRC upland test - where a dog will point the bird rather than flush it. This is in fact a type of blinking the bird (ie. they're not just diving in after it).
> 
> My old female (before she died) would do this (and she was very much a type 2). I actually liked it because it gave me a chance to get into position to shoot - and it would only take a single "alright, get it" and she would *DIVE* after the bird. I would also see her do this while we would be out goose hunting - where if she got close to a wounded goose she would wait to see if it would run - because she LOVED the chase. Once she had it, she never let it go.
> Btw: it's the dog in my avatar I'm talking about...


Chris, I would be shocked and disappointed if you didn't disagree. 

/Paul


----------



## MooseGooser (May 11, 2003)

> Btw: it's the dog in my avatar I'm talking about...


Well quit huntin PILLOWS!!!!! :lol: 

Sorry!  

Gooser----really sorry


----------



## TxFig (Apr 13, 2004)

MooseGooser said:


> > Btw: it's the dog in my avatar I'm talking about...
> 
> 
> Well quit huntin PILLOWS!!!!! :lol:
> ...




 That was a *REALLY FUN* "pillow hunt". Only 4 of us, opening day of the conservation season. We stopped at 46 geese because we ran out of shells. 

One of the other guys had a "typical bubba dog" - broke on the first shot, ran out and sniffed the bird, decided to play. Owner walked his dog out to the bird and it still wouldn't pick it up. He put his dog on a leash - Pebbles picked up the other 45 birds (including some pretty long "sailers" that went into the next field).

I miss her. http://www.txbarnes.com/dogs/pebbles/


----------



## Dave Burton (Mar 22, 2006)

The beginning of hunting season last yr my 1.5 yr old blf was sent for a drake mallard on a pond. When she got to it it flapped a wing and hit her in the face. She turned around and started to come back. I stopped her and gave a back.She got to it again but when it moves a little she turned around and headed back again. This went on for 4 or 5 backs. Finally I called her in and shot it with her at heel. Sent her and she picked it up and came back in. After that I trained with live pigeons for a week and by the end of season she was chasing a crippled mallard that dove on her 3 times. The 4th time she dove after it and came up with it by the tail feathers and brought it to me very much still alive. Said all that to say this. Train on live birds and expose your dog to everything you would see in a hunting situation. Then train some more


----------



## Steve Bean (May 3, 2004)

labman63 said:


> ...... Said all that to say this. Train on live birds and expose your dog to everything you would see in a hunting situation. Then train some more


Ding, Ding, Ding, we have a winner! I waded through this thread to get to here. I voted 'fail'.. Tests are tests. Some pass, some fail. If you train for 'everything' chances are you pass. We in general simply ask the dog to do ONE thing. Go out and get the bird and bring it back. It doesn't have to be steady, necessarily go straight, etc, etc., but it is a HUNTING dog and they do encounter cripples :roll:


----------

