Where to from here for QLD

[Wendy Michalk]

It has been bought to my attention what has been going on behind State RAFTS’ closed doors.
Perhaps it’s time for the general retrieving world to get a small insight into the dilemma that I/we in QLD are facing.
FACT
Dogs QLD board put through a motion stopping cold game of any form being used in retrieving trials. (This action was taken without consultation with those involved in the sport in Qld.)
They then put forward a motion to Dogs Australia that artificial game be added to the list of retrieve items & it was passed by Dogs Australia.
Contrary to what many believe,we do not have a problem accessing game. After realising that DQ would not bend on this issue, our retrieving clubs have chosen to purchase Dokkens.. By doing this we have been able to conduct retrieving trials in 2024.
HOWEVER & this is where it hurts, to add insult to injury, there are factions down south who want: (& I do realise this is not everyone.)
1. To have the added items of game removed from the list of game to be retrieved. This basically would leave QLD triallers with nowhere to go. (Our DQ will not reverse their ruling.)

2.That there be no Championship points given to our dogs for winning All Age( which means we
cannot gain our RTCH titles.)
The problems personally as I see them.
I will not be eligible to compete with my up and coming young dog in Championships outside QLD because my wins will not be recognised.
I have given many, many hours to this sport in training my dogs to a competitive level all for naught.
I have held executive positions both in the RAFT in the past & still hold an executive position in my local club which will have accounted for nothing. There will be no club.
I have & am judging interstate, spending time & a considerable amount of money to support my sport in other states, which would no longer happen.
I live five hours north of Brisbane and travelling south (Interstate) to compete will be out of the question due to the expense & time away from work & family.
Consequently my loved sport & pastime of 20 odd years will no longer exist for me or my dogs & my well-trained dogs will enjoy early retirement & sadly become pets.

Putting aside my personal issues, I have watched this issue break long standing friendships & watched members of our QLD team become withdrawn and talking about walking away from a sport they love.
These people have given 30 & sometime 40 years of their time & effort, judging, competing & organising endless trials, only to see it taken away through no fault of their own.

Surely common sense must prevail. We are a sport where we get $30 or a trophy for a win, & spend hundreds of dollars travelling to venues. There are a small few who make some money from breeding purpose-bred dogs for our sport.( not make thousands I might add.)
We have already lost our Field trials ( real hunting) with this decision by DQ & have no doubt if these 2 motions above are passed behind closed doors & with secrecy acts in place, we Queenslanders will lose our sport of Retrieving.
Many life long friendships have been formed all over this wonderful country because of Retrieving .
What a pity to see this wonderful sport, enjoyed by many, being torn apart by the few who are staying in the “Tradition of the game” whatever that means!! Surely there is a way forward that can & will be inclusive for all, not just decisions made by people who are putting their own emotions before the needs of others.

[Peter Butterfield]

There have been several posts now speculating that autonomous changes to the current rules are being considered without standard consultation processes taking place. The possible impacts to our sport suggested here are of significant concern to me from a national perspective, and to the majority of our community I imagine. If this is the case then I think it only fitting that National RAFT respond to these claims to clarify what, if any, proposals or endeavours in relation the above are currently underway.
Fact check please.
Peter Butterfield, NSW.

[Joe Vella]

Hi Wendy,

Thank you, as finally we have someone in Queensland admitting that there is no problem purchasing birds in Queensland.

Extract from your post; Quote;
FACT
Dogs QLD board put through a motion stopping cold game of any form being used in retrieving trials. (This action was taken without consultation with those involved in the sport in Qld.)
They then put forward a motion to Dogs Australia that artificial game be added to the list of retrieve items & it was passed by Dogs Australia.
Contrary to what many believe,we do not have a problem accessing game. Unquote;

To add to the above, Allan Bartram chose to vacate his position as Chair of National Raft which should have meant the Deputy Chair being Paul Littlejohn should have been asked to take over as National Raft Chairman at the very least in interim. This was not to be when out of the blue Ron Jackson was elected as National Raft Chairman, again this action was taken without consultation with those involved with National Raft. (committee members).

Wendy I read your post in full and apart from the above I do not agree with some of your comments.

Queensland has advocated the inclusion of plastic Dummies into the list of game for at least the last 3 rules reviews which ANKC called for.

It has been stated by certain members in the Administration in Queensland (Raft) and others,
Game is hard to source and purchase,
The cost of pigeons high, etc.etc.
Yet some in Queensland have freezers full of birds which can be used to test the Retrieving Gundog as a Gundog, as has been done in the past prior to the modifications made to the list of game by Dogs Australia.

Wendy I am not against anyone wanting to have their dogs tested through the use of plastic. If this is what people want for themselves I have not a problem with this, but I do have a problem when the current Retrieving Discipline is modified to please anyone and by doing so faults in dogs are not picked up and certain tests are eliminated and the Retrieving Gundog is no longer tested as it should be.

The administration in Queensland is not telling the full story and how all this eventuated from that famous argument and how they would not support another discipline which would cater for the use of of the so called artificial game as they believe the New Discipline would interfere with Entry numbers at WAGGA Retrieving Trials.

I believe there is only one way to tackle this and halt all of the arguments we are having now and will have in the future. Clubs and their membership should be given a real choice.
The artificial game discipline which was proposed by Dogs NSW 2018 would most certainly do it. This would be conducted as it’s participants would want it to be. Championship points can be earned and as a Dogs Australia discipline would be set up as a separate entity to the current discipline.

This was voted upon and accepted, National Raft sub committee worked on it’s rules and finalised them, ready for use, and it is just sitting at National Raft waiting to be brought on line.
This would eliminate all of the arguments, if this is not done the arguments will continue into future rules reviews.

I find it ludicrous to accept that anyone owning or hunting with Gundogs wanting their dogs tested through the use of plastic. It just does not make any sense.

Wendy If Queensland is in any position you say it is, this was self inflicted in support of an argument which the rest of the country was not a part off.

Wendy thank you, I enjoyed reading your post.

Joe Vella

[Cathie J]

Hi JO, I have missed you and our healthy debates.
1. Alan Bartram resigned as NRAFT Chair because of constant harrassment... interesting point.
2. Ron Jackson was nominated because no one else was nominated at the following DA meeting to take the role, so Queensland Reps nominated Ron and it was unanimously passed at the DA meeting, check the minutes, and he too resigned because of constant harrassment .... prove me wrong. The current NRAFT Chair was appointed by default.
3. Qld triallers, and Qld Clubs, NEVER stated game was hard to source, what we could not prove was that we were sourcing from authorised vermin control agents. I doubt any club in Australia could prove that. Qld was asked to provide ABN for Vermin coltrol agents, have you been asked to provide that?. And yes, there was a high cost of collecting the game with one or two members travelling hours to collect and pay fuel and toll costs to do so. Electricity cost etc, so yes there is costs involved.
4. Please revise your chemistry lessons from high school. The currently used RG is not plastic.
5. Check with the general membership of Retrieving across Australia, pretty sure you will find around 75% of the population are in favour of including RG as an OPTION.
6. Qld does not need to consider the impact on the SSAA Group. They are doing perfectly fine on their own. The objection to an EXTRA discipline is that, simply, why would we. If Qld will not get ANKC titles, why would be bother, we will certainly just go join SSAA and make them even bigger and more attended. That is actually not our first choice at the moment as many members are breeders and wish to remain under ANKC for pedigree reasons. But you know what, if it happens, it happens. And trust me, IT WILL NOT interfere with entry numbers at WGAA as you put it , they are thriving on their own. And again,why would we bother with an alternative discipline that gives no ANKC titles, if that came to be.

ONE THING WE FINALLY AGREE ON.... give clubs the vote, give clubs and the greater community a voice.
The vote in 2018 you speak of was NOT SECONDED, CHECK your minutes, prove me wrong.
OMG ANOTHER THING WE AGREE ON.....
"I find it ludicrous to accept that anyone owning or hunting with Gundogs wanting their dogs tested through the use of plastic. It just does not make any sense."
Any person chosing a hunting dog soley based on the ANKC titles is an idiot ! It does not make sence. Surely anyone with any brains or knowlege of hunting dogs want more proof , wants to view the parents, wants to see real hunting experience etc etc etc. ANKC titles do not prove a good hunting dog.
Qld is in this position, not because it is self inflicted, but because board members are in touch with the changing ideas of the community and in touch with the need to protect the greater Sporting Dog Disciplines, and in touch with the legislative reqirements of Governament regarding Animal Welfare.
NOT OUR CHOICE, BUT NOW OUR FIGHT !! Bring it on.

[Wendy Michalk]

Hi Joe,
Glad you liked my post, if nothing else it has been able to inform more people of our fraternity of our problem. while Cathie in the above response to your post has covered many areas.
I would like to ask this, does picking up birds that have been frozen & then thawed, some times only partially thawed, trully test a dogs abilty as a hunters companion?
We are talking about hard mouth here I presume!! .The true hunting companion in my opinion needs to prove it will pick up & deliver to the handler quickly & efficiently without damaging , wounded game that has been shot.Added to this it needs to sit or stand as the case may be & take direction from it's handler then when necessary pick up freshly shot game without fuss or bother. do you not agree?
My dogs in the past were capable of doing this & I hunted for many years until our state banned duck & quail hunting & rabbits are few & far between.
I'm sorry but in my opinion picking up the birds we use for trialling doesn't prove this what it proves is the dog has been trained to do so. When I started in this game we used freshly euthanased birds to retrieve being the closest thing to real hunting, but it changed after states put in place laws about transporting live animals ,my recollection of this problem was- okay we put down somewhere else freeze, thaw & use these birds to retrieve , moving with the times but even that has become less acceptable to the non hunting public.

The game we play often doesn't represent the true aspects of the duck hunt, how can it when many judges have not even brought down a bird or shot a rabbit in their lives.

Need I also remind you that it was not the lack of birds in our state that bought this issue into play it was a lack of birds & dare I say it, in another state that approached our members for help & help we did to our detriment.

You suggest we start another discipline we held a trial last weekend & in all we had 34 dogs entered with 16 handlers many of us now handle multiple dogs with the hope of being able to compete in the bigger picture Championships & Nationals.
How would setting up another discipline even be possible?. 17 years ago QLD had a break in our ranks & our sport has never really recovered.
Excluding us because we were forced to not use game won't persuade us to set up another discipline we mostly will walk away & as I said in my post "retire our dogs or make them pets" sad as that may be.