2011 RHTAC Minutes |
Bill Teague delivered the RHTAC report as outlined here:
NOTE: The RHTAC has submitted these recommendations to the AKC Performance Events Department with the understanding the AKC may modify, accept or reject any or all of the recommendations as they deep appropriate before making their recommendations to the AKC board. The committee further understands the AKC may submit recommendations without consulting the committee.
Walk Up
1. Delete the option of a walk up in the junior test.
2. Require the bird seen on the walk up to be no more than 35-40 yards from the line; have the bird launched from a well hidden location so it is a ‘surprise’; delete the option to have an attention getting device (duck/pheasant call, etc.) from being used prior to the release of the bird, i.e., no attention getting device shall be used on the walk up. The handler may give the ‘sit’ command or blow the ‘sit’ whistle when the bird is seen in the air. This is designed to test the ‘steadiness’ of the dog.
Gun Safety
1. Require use of a ‘real’ gun for the line gun and prohibit a ‘fake’ gun of any kind. It may either be ‘deactivated’ (not able to have a shell in it) or a ‘breaking’ gun. If a breaking gun is used, it must be ‘broken’ and cleared by the handler before being handed to the judge or being put down.
2. Move the paragraph relating to when the handler may put the gun down (page 36) to Chapter 3, Section 8 and inserted as paragraph five (5) of this section-right after the statement of Senior & Master Tests handlers having to shoulder the gun. Too many judges are referencing only the paragraph on page 21 and do not include the option now listed on page 36.
Honor
1. Only one dog may be on honor at a time and the honor dog will be required to be stationary.
Standards for Junior Tests
1. Require the dog be under control off lead coming to the line but allow the use of a slip cord or holding by hand by a flat buckle collar at the line.
2. Limit single marks to two per series but don’t limit the number of series.
3. Delete option of using a ‘handle’ on junior marks and emphasize ‘marking is of primary importance’.
4. Delete option of walk up in junior test (duplicate from ‘Walk Up’ above).
Standards for Master Tests
1. The Master test shall consist of a minimum of two triple retrieve situations and should include an additional element of testing, i.e., walk up, diversion bird/shot, blind, etc. be included with a double set of marks. It should be noted the regulations contain theminimum requirements so additional requirements (honor, diversion bird/shot, blind, etc.) may be included with a double.
2. No change in ‘yardages’ for marks/blinds; majority of committee wants it to stay the same. It is recognized that the AKC will allow distances that exceed the ‘approx 100 yds’ if the club requests it in its application. If approved, this option of the club shall be prominently displayed in the premium.
Attention Getting Devices
1. Any attention getting device used in the field (popper gun, pneumatic tube device, etc.) will require personnel meeting the current AKC requirements to use them.
Increasing Junior Entries
1. Change regulations (Chapter 1, Section 3, top of page 3) that currently read: “Clubs that sponsor more than one hunting test in any twelve month period shall be required to offer at least once in any combination, each of the three (3) test levels” and change this to “……more than two hunting tests…”
Judge’s Qualifications (It is noted the local club has the responsibility to determine if prospective judges meet these qualifications, not the AKC. The AKC simply doesn’t have the resources to accomplish it)
1. Require judges to judge a minimum of 2 junior tests before judging senior and 2 senior test before judging master tests in addition to the current requirements.
2. Require judges to have handled and qualified a dog at least once at the level they are judging or higher or have titled a dog at the level they are judging.
3. Require judges to have qualified a dog at the level they are judging or higher within 5 years prior to the judging assignment.
4. Remove the statement about apprenticing at the level judging or higher.
5. On the AKC “Judge’s Directory.” delete the word ‘approved’ and replace with the word ‘eligible.’ Too many clubs/people feel the word ‘approved’ means the individual has been deemed ‘qualified’ to judge by the AKC when in fact it means that the individual has met the ‘eligibility’ requirements only. It is the club’s responsibility to determine if the individual is ‘qualified’ to judge. (Note: although all on the committee agreed to this, AKC advises me this wording “Approved” is an ‘across the board usage’ and will not be changed. Our option is to spread the word to clubs about the difference in ‘eligible’ and ‘approved.’
6. List the names & pertinent contact info for individuals who are ‘approved’ to judge in the “Judge’s Directory” even if they haven’t judged yet; this will help clubs find new judges and increase the available pool of judges.
7. Close the ‘loop hole’ that allows an individual to judge who has never qualified a dog at the level judging or higher and allows for two individuals to judge that don’t have sufficient ‘points.’(see #3)
8. Require prospective judge’s to submit documentation/certification of their ‘eligibility’ to judge the test they are requested to judge to the club inviting them to judge. It is the club’s responsibility to determine if they are qualified
9. Recommend the AKC post, on a periodic basis, all rule/regulation changes and related information on a specified site on their website. This would put the responsibility of staying updated on the rules/regulations on judges and other interested parties and reduce the expense of AKC notifying clubs who conduct licensed/sanctioned events covered by the rules/regulation.
NOTE: The RHTAC has submitted these recommendations to the AKC Performance Events Department with the understanding the AKC may modify, accept or reject any or all of the recommendations as they deep appropriate before making their recommendations to the AKC board. The committee further understands the AKC may submit recommendations without consulting the committee.
Walk Up
1. Delete the option of a walk up in the junior test.
2. Require the bird seen on the walk up to be no more than 35-40 yards from the line; have the bird launched from a well hidden location so it is a ‘surprise’; delete the option to have an attention getting device (duck/pheasant call, etc.) from being used prior to the release of the bird, i.e., no attention getting device shall be used on the walk up. The handler may give the ‘sit’ command or blow the ‘sit’ whistle when the bird is seen in the air. This is designed to test the ‘steadiness’ of the dog.
Gun Safety
1. Require use of a ‘real’ gun for the line gun and prohibit a ‘fake’ gun of any kind. It may either be ‘deactivated’ (not able to have a shell in it) or a ‘breaking’ gun. If a breaking gun is used, it must be ‘broken’ and cleared by the handler before being handed to the judge or being put down.
2. Move the paragraph relating to when the handler may put the gun down (page 36) to Chapter 3, Section 8 and inserted as paragraph five (5) of this section-right after the statement of Senior & Master Tests handlers having to shoulder the gun. Too many judges are referencing only the paragraph on page 21 and do not include the option now listed on page 36.
Honor
1. Only one dog may be on honor at a time and the honor dog will be required to be stationary.
Standards for Junior Tests
1. Require the dog be under control off lead coming to the line but allow the use of a slip cord or holding by hand by a flat buckle collar at the line.
2. Limit single marks to two per series but don’t limit the number of series.
3. Delete option of using a ‘handle’ on junior marks and emphasize ‘marking is of primary importance’.
4. Delete option of walk up in junior test (duplicate from ‘Walk Up’ above).
Standards for Master Tests
1. The Master test shall consist of a minimum of two triple retrieve situations and should include an additional element of testing, i.e., walk up, diversion bird/shot, blind, etc. be included with a double set of marks. It should be noted the regulations contain theminimum requirements so additional requirements (honor, diversion bird/shot, blind, etc.) may be included with a double.
2. No change in ‘yardages’ for marks/blinds; majority of committee wants it to stay the same. It is recognized that the AKC will allow distances that exceed the ‘approx 100 yds’ if the club requests it in its application. If approved, this option of the club shall be prominently displayed in the premium.
Attention Getting Devices
1. Any attention getting device used in the field (popper gun, pneumatic tube device, etc.) will require personnel meeting the current AKC requirements to use them.
Increasing Junior Entries
1. Change regulations (Chapter 1, Section 3, top of page 3) that currently read: “Clubs that sponsor more than one hunting test in any twelve month period shall be required to offer at least once in any combination, each of the three (3) test levels” and change this to “……more than two hunting tests…”
Judge’s Qualifications (It is noted the local club has the responsibility to determine if prospective judges meet these qualifications, not the AKC. The AKC simply doesn’t have the resources to accomplish it)
1. Require judges to judge a minimum of 2 junior tests before judging senior and 2 senior test before judging master tests in addition to the current requirements.
2. Require judges to have handled and qualified a dog at least once at the level they are judging or higher or have titled a dog at the level they are judging.
3. Require judges to have qualified a dog at the level they are judging or higher within 5 years prior to the judging assignment.
4. Remove the statement about apprenticing at the level judging or higher.
5. On the AKC “Judge’s Directory.” delete the word ‘approved’ and replace with the word ‘eligible.’ Too many clubs/people feel the word ‘approved’ means the individual has been deemed ‘qualified’ to judge by the AKC when in fact it means that the individual has met the ‘eligibility’ requirements only. It is the club’s responsibility to determine if the individual is ‘qualified’ to judge. (Note: although all on the committee agreed to this, AKC advises me this wording “Approved” is an ‘across the board usage’ and will not be changed. Our option is to spread the word to clubs about the difference in ‘eligible’ and ‘approved.’
6. List the names & pertinent contact info for individuals who are ‘approved’ to judge in the “Judge’s Directory” even if they haven’t judged yet; this will help clubs find new judges and increase the available pool of judges.
7. Close the ‘loop hole’ that allows an individual to judge who has never qualified a dog at the level judging or higher and allows for two individuals to judge that don’t have sufficient ‘points.’(see #3)
8. Require prospective judge’s to submit documentation/certification of their ‘eligibility’ to judge the test they are requested to judge to the club inviting them to judge. It is the club’s responsibility to determine if they are qualified
9. Recommend the AKC post, on a periodic basis, all rule/regulation changes and related information on a specified site on their website. This would put the responsibility of staying updated on the rules/regulations on judges and other interested parties and reduce the expense of AKC notifying clubs who conduct licensed/sanctioned events covered by the rules/regulation.
