That question again - Where are we heading in Retrieving ?

[Kerry Webster]

Having recently returned from yet another trip to the Eastern States of Australia (my seventh, I might add), to attend the National Championships, I am prompted to ask again the question of "Where are we heading with our Retrieving Trials ?". This question was submitted by Joe Law (Articles and Archives) after the 2003 National Championship trial, with some interesting observations by Joe, which were voiced by many during the running of the trials in 2003. Maybe a re-read of Joes submission would not go astray right now, but I too have my voice on the state of trialing.

Whilst at the National competing, I observed several of the tests well within the ANKC rules, and capabilities of our handlers and their dogs during the National, but I, and many others, were left wondering as to what was actually being tested on some runs. Obviously not the marking ability of the dogs, as the bird was so far beyond sighting, & often obscured by background trees,hills etc, to make it a non event. What then was the test ? It turned out to be, how well the handler marked down the fall, and then handled their dog to the mark. Comments were rife about visibility and length. For the first time ever, on one run, I put my distance driving glasses on so I would see the far off mark.......really.

Our rules state that a mark will not be more than 150 metres in length. Rules, mind you, not a mere suggestion. The rule book also states that a mark should be so that a dog should be able to see a bird in the air and as it falls and should where possible break open skyline. Right !!!

Marks at 200 metres, in the terrain that the Nationals were held in, were more than a challenge for handlers and dogs to see, resulting in less than desirable retrieves. But, this must have been expected, as in reality the tasks were blinds, and required control; but, Rule 26 states "A dog on a mark retrieve should not need direction from the handler once the dog has been sent for the retrieve". So when does a mark become a blind ? I'll tell you............When it is not visible !

Another rule book statement in part is, that the competition be conducted "in the field under conditions which emulate as closely as possible those which would be found whilst shooting" etc etc.
I want to see who can shoot a bird at 200 metres with a shotgun. Any takers ?

Personally, I am disappointed that reasonable tests cannot be set within the limit of the rules. Contrary to a recent statement by a person who shall remain anonymous, Rules are not there to be broken, they are there for fairness, equality and the good of the sport. If persons are not prepared to follow these guidelines, then please put us out of our misery and refuse appointments.

Now I know many other triallers voiced opinions on length & visibility of marks during the Nationals, but how many will actually put up their hand and say "this isn't right " Dare I say, NIL. It is sad that such a wonderful sport and past-time as retrieving , is on the way to destroying true amateur competitors, both male and female, and their desire to participate in retrieving. Isn't it difficult enough to have bias and prejudice towards breeds of dogs and handler gender amongst trialers, without unnecessary illegal tasks out in the field.

Where is retrieving heading ? Who knows. To an untimely death perhaps.

BTW I do know my distances. We have paddocks and a vehicle to set 100, 150 and 200 metre distances.

Kerry

[Gareth Tawton]

Kerry,

With due respect, you have to be kidding. Since Joe's artice we have had two of the best Nationals I have ever seen. ( I have competed in about 13). This year I have competed in every State or National Championship held so far, with the exception of the NSW, which I judged. My dog has picked up every single bird of every trial. As a result I would say I am well qualified to comment on the overall runs across the country as to where our trials are headed and the quality of runs.

In my humble opinion this year has seen the fairest and best tests, on average, than in any other year. When judges are picking runs they can only use the terrain and weather conditions that are available. At times you can pick a run in bright sunlight only to be forced to run it in cloudy overcast wet weather. Certainly not something that is controllable by the judge. If the grounds have limited cover judges will be forced to have longer runs than when heavy cover is available. Therefore some runs will end up harder while others easier depending on influences outside the judges control.

I certainly didn't think any of the National runs were beyond max distance. Sure there were plenty at max distance but this is the National not a beginners test. Every mark in the national was retrieved by at least some dogs without any handling. Therefore, one could assume that they were visible and gettable. It just took a good dog. Aren't we here to TEST and find the best dogs. Just because some dogs fail the test does not mean the run is a failure, not with in the rules or illegal. It simply means the dogs were not , on the day, up to the standard required. Of course this is our National championship, so many of us would like to see the standard set at the highest level.

I believe there is no doubt that, in the championships held so far this year the National was by no means the longest or had the hardest marks. The longest would certainly have been the ACT, however the terrain was very light on for cover forcing the judge to use distance as part of his tests. The hardest marks would have been SA. Once again the terrain was influential. The site was full of tea tree and gums making finding skyline very difficult. While the shortest and easiest would have been WA. Perhaps your opinion is clouded by the style and types of runs put on in WA. In all of the championship held so far this year the dogs able to complete the trials have shown great control, excellent marking and the ability to work as a team. When dogs have mismarked they have worked with their handlers to recover the situation and remain in the trial. Its is a credit to all the judges that they have been able to test dogs appropriately, allow the best dogs to shine while losing those not up to standard on the day.

In short I think our trials are headed in the right direction again and Joe's Paper and this website were the catalyst for this. Also those who worked hard and voiced there opinion across the country in our recent rule review had a huge input. Although not perfect, our rules are certainly far better and the standard of runs far better than ever before. But I am just one person and that is my opinion and others, like you, are entitled to theirs.

Regards and good training,

Gareth

[Kerry Webster]

Glad to see that my post had a reaction.

Gareth, I did not imply that all runs, or all Nationals were at fault, or for that matter, State Champ;ionships. I thought last years National & State Champ.(Qld)runs tested all the dogs with their difficulty and standard, as I thought most of this years National runs did.

You say judges will increase a length of run to compensate for lack of cover. That's fine as long as it is within the maximum distance of 150 metres, and I don't think anyone would dispute that. When there is a limit on available land for use then obviously there could be variations, just as long as it is within the recommendations. From what I have seen from past Nationals, the choice of areas for setting of runs has been almost limitless.

My observation was based on how many dogs didn't see marks & needed many commands to achieve the retrieve and this encompassed all dogs. (Many R.T.Champions & non Champs. went out over the course of the trial and my comments were not about whether they were up to the standard or not, just that seeing the marks might have made a huge difference to whether those dogs did a good job).

You too are entitled to your opinion, which you have expressed in what you considered dif;icult trials and not difficult, this year. Whilst I can't comment on any of the E.S. championship trials, not having been there, I can assure you my thoughts are not clouded, as you quaintly put it, by types & styles of runs in W.A. The runs you saw here recently were one judges interpretation of tests folr the dogs. Don't think for a minute that all our trials are conducted in this terrain or without maximum length retrieves.

Luck plays a big part in retrieving, as per weather,(wind, sun, rain etc), and we as trialers accept this as the luck of the game. Colour of birds, size of birds etc etc.all can affect us. Skill plays its part as well, and often it isn't a matter of a dog seeing a mark well, but how good a line it will take from the f.p. I don't dispute this at all, we have all been there, but I do dispute deliberately placing marks outside the stipulated length, or not attempting to provide a skyline.

At least we both agree that trials are to test the dog. The only difference is I think a dog should have the opportunity to see the bird, work out how to get it, and be allowed to use its natural instinct to complete that retrieve, with little & preferably nil commands from the handler. Our rules are now pretty clear in their interpretation, and I would venture to say the majority want the fairness acquired by observing these rules to be adhered to at all trials regardless.

We now have a 7 month break from trials in W.A. Not easy to keep the enthusiasm going in 38' heat and high snake risk through summer, but come April next year, the dogs will be back at it for our very short season, and that is what it is all about isn't it. Keeping people in the sport, striving for the best, and, having fun with their dogs.

Have fun Gareth. Look forward to seeing River competing next year.

Kerry

[Prue Winkfield]

Hi Kerry - the question you raised and Gareth's comments are interesting.
In my humble opinion the sport is splitting into two leagues at the AA level. There will be 12 to 15 people(approx) in the 'Senior League' who take it turns to win Championships around the country - very dedicated people with extremely good dogs. Then there will be the 'Junior League' - those people who enjoy a hobby - train a couple of times a week and like competing and of course winning but without the dedication of these quasi professional handlers. The Senior League people will come from the states where there is the strongest competion. Judges that set tough runs, as judges should be setting the standards, and where there are a handful of handlers prepared to put in the hard yards to train their dogs to beat their colleagues thus ever forcing the standard up- just what happens in any professional sport. Provided this is accepted and the Junior League people continue to be motivated and enjoy their sport, I can't see a problem with this. The big question is how you keep the Junior League people interested in the states which are dominated by these quasi professional handlers. The new title of AA dog should help in this. Prue

[Chris, Jac Van Eekelen]

I was reading this with interest and decided to put my two bobs worth in. I am a new trialer at the Restricted level and recently experienced a single mark retrieve of 246 meters (distance confirmed by the trial manager). Not being aware that marked retrieves can be so long, I had not even considered training for marks at such a distance! It would be nice if rules were followed, even with a bit of give and take, so that us amateurs had some idea what to train for.

[Bob Pickworth]

Chris, Perhaps the distance was measured over the ground (up hill and over dale) as opposed to as the crow flies. The rule book I have (effective - Jan 2000) doesn't state how the distance is to be measured, simply that "The maximum distance for any retrieve will be 150 metres. It is desireable in a Novice Stake that runs should not be more than 100 metres" - Rule 30

A 200m+ retrieve at restricted does not comply with the current rules. However, under hunting conditions, (which a trial simulates), a winged duck could easily carry and fall at that distance, but as it is not in the rule book I guess the options are to lodge a complaint with the trial manager (rule 74) or accept the judges discretion. If judges consistently extend the distance beyond the stated 150 metre maximum and handlers do not appeal, it must be assumed they are happy with the trial conditions. if appeals do not occur, over time the rules may well be changed to absorb the changing culture. (the process by which Common Law and Precedent provide for non "statute" changes in the legal system)

It should also be noted that the "course over which the stake be run shall be selected by the judge and, where possible 2 members of the trial Copmmittee - rule 59. This suggestes that at the minimum, one other person on the trial committee has assisted with setting, or at least agreed with the distance.

Having said this, anyone new to the sport as a novice, would find it uncomfortable to appeal a judges decision.

Bob Pickworth.

[Maureen Cooper]

It is always very interesting to see how many 'hits' a controversial topic attracts and how many or should I say how few, replies are elicited!

I have read all replies several times and given much thought to the comments raised.In response to Kerry's first comments I tend to agree with Gareth's comment that judges pre select runs for the big comps and light conditions can vary considerably on the day of the trial. However I have also seen conditions vary considerably during the course of a run and these are beyond the judges control. Bird colour is also beyond the choice of the judge and that can affect visibility and how I dread being on a thrower when there are one or two white birds in the bag which can make all the difference to the competing dogs!

Personally we train in paddocks where we can have a poor skyline, the run against trees or a hillside so we do not always train for that clear view because in Victoria the background can be very heavily treed on many of the sites I have competed on.Dogs are able to see a moving object far better than we can and there have been occasions when I have never seen the bird but my dog has! I had a problem with a dog who did not look UP so missed high cast birds so I now teach the word 'look up'.

It was interesting to read an article where a large number of either Guide Dogs or other 'working' dogs had their eyesight tested and 35 of them were found to be short-sighted (called conus in the dog) so I guess this would also apply to our working dogs and that also their sight will deteriorate with age. Some of us need glasses with age and some dont.

Prue: You make a very good point! I agree entirely with your comment re Senior and Junior League! I too think the title of AARD will make a difference except that some judges set runs primarily to split those top dogs, the runs being so difficult in some instances that the only dogs to finish are those top dogs so an AARD title is just as difficult to get!

Bob: Having being to several live shoots and field trials the winged bird is NOT shot at 200 metres. They are shot at around 80-100 metres and float as either wounded/dying game to that 200 metre distance. Also it is years since I saw a committee member check on a judges runs pre trial!

Re this years National, the cover had disappeared a great deal to when first chosen so distance had to be extended but as Kerry says, I do feel there should be adherance to the rules whatever the trial. As I did not see the majority of the runs from the firing point I would not like to criticise distances selected. I felt it was more a lighting issue due to storm clouds etc.

TTFN

Maureen

(Quote) It's not whether you win or lose, it's how you look playing the game.