CKC hunt test rule changes

[Ted Hall]

To all CKC hunt testers. I can not understand why none of you has commented on the rule changes yet.
lets have some good or bad comments.
looks like distances in master is unlimited
camo may know longer be an option but required
judged on gun safety

Lets here some feed back on the changes, and did anyone, or clubs have any input into these changes?

Ted Hall

[deb]

I don't mind being judged on gun safety as long as: 1) the judges give their little speach first about gun safety as they do in HRC 2) they provide proper equipment for setting them down ie. gun rest 3) they should also be real guns not fake guns. I don't like the idea of unlimited distance, as it needs to be realistic. I don't think camo is necessary, just dark clothing. When I go hunting I don't always wear camo. My 2 cents worth.
deb

[Misty Marsh]

Well first of all I have not persoanly read about the new changes in any CKC publication yet, but have heard of a few of the proposed rules from talking to buddies the last little while, and these
looks like distances in master is unlimited
camo may know longer be an option but required
judged on gun safety

look to be new ones. I run alot of CKC HT's and heard that they were going to go back to letting handlers talk to thier dogs after the marks were called for, and that you will now be able to put a bark collar on your dog when in a vehicle waiting to run. Personally I think that some of rules will depend on what side of the competitve fence you stand on? If you look at it from purely a test perspective then I'm OK with not talking to your dog and testing for obediance/steadiness, whereas if it's the hunting side talking to your dog is very opropriate. I do however think that unlimited distance will turn HT's into a game of camo wearing FT'ers which is something that some judges I know will love to death as they have been pushing it for years already and giving them the "green light" to do so will open up a new can of worms that will very likely deter new people from carrying on in the program, and to me is a crazy rule to pass, especially when it does not resemble any bird hunting shoot I've ever been on! I've always been of the opinion that HT's should be the entry level stake of our sport for people to get a feel for the game and then continue on to the FT game if the dog sport was your thing, but leaving the HT as a way to keep your hunting dog sharp for the fall also, now all they have created is a FT hybrid that does'nt do anything for anybody especially the clubs as it will likely reflect in membrship and HT numbers. The bark collar at a trial is another stupid rule in my opinon because it will be used to intimadate dog's into thinking that they are wearing a e-collar either through the stimulation or because some guy/gal will put a e-collar on thier dog and say that they use it as a bark collar, thus changing the dog's attitude, and think it opens yet another can of worms. The mandatory camo will not be a huge issue as you can still buy very dark or very light camo and wear it to suit the test, it will just somewhat level the playing field from the people who will wear black, or light tan. Gun safety is fine as long as the clubs provide gun stands and real guns, as a piece of 2 x 4 does not resemble anything that should be taken seriously!

[Misty Marsh]

I just went though my CKC "official section" and it does not say that MH distance is unlimited, it say's that it should be more challenging than senior and my interpratation of that it means better bird placement and possibly tougher/tighter marks, nothing about distance which makes alot of sence as otherwise it would ruin the fabric of what a hunt test really is, still 125 max. Also it does'nt say anything about having to wear como, it just say's appropriate hunting clothing so that's up to the individual as it always has been. Also you can talk to your dog after the first bird is thrown, but you will be graded down and doing so more than once in a series can result in a "0" score and the end of your day, with master dog's being held to a higher standard due to thei level of training, my spin on it, if you have a master dog don't talk! I see gun safety as something that can ge graded, and ruin your day so this year ask judges what they would like to see becuase pointing a gun, or holding one by the barrel may ruin otherwise good dog work. The bark collar is in and blows my mind, but I think that you will see owners of "high flyers" using it as a way of intimadating thier dog's, but I guess we will see? The only change that I thought was good was the handling on mraks and blinds in that you must not let your dog breakdown and establish a hunt or he/she will be considered out of control. I've seen many handlers not blow the whistle and let dog's stumble on a bird, so this will clean that up and make the handlers, handle. I'm not completly through the 2008 amendments, but see some good, some bad, and some stupid. One I completly diasgree with is that a GMH (grand master hunter) who passes 15 master tests will only be able to put that title as a suffix(after name) when all FT titles except the JFTR are prefixes. Why is a dog at the top of it's perspective game not allowed to place it's title before it's name, I personally see it as a slap in the face and down your nose look at the hunt test program.

[MHgoldk9]

The rule for the distance maximums has not changed,it still exists under Rule 9.3.5,the distances still have to remain under 125 yards.the reference to the distances were removed just for housekeeping,it was repeated to often in other rules.
As for the GMH title being a suffex rather than a prefix is probably because the fact the dog does not defeat any other dogs to achieve it,whereas prefix's are for titles achieved by defeating other dogs as in FTCH and AFTCH.

Oh by the way Happy New Year

Tim

[Misty Marsh]

probably because the fact the dog does not defeat any other dogs to achieve it,whereas prefix's are for titles achieved by defeating other dogs as in FTCH and AFTCH.

The JFTR & QFTR are suffix titles too! The thing that I don't get is that the certificates for my dogs Grand master hunter (GMH), and national master hunter title (NMH) arrived a couple of weeks ago and it was shown as NMH GMH Baileys Misty Lake MH WCX, but shown on the recent "official section" to be suffix titles, go figure?

[deb]

I don't believe all CKC prefix titles are from defeating other dogs. If I am not mistaken the OTCH is a prefix and you don't have to defeat other dogs, just earn the required passes.
deb

[MHgoldk9]

I guess i should have read the changes a few more times.There is no mention of the GMH being changed to a suffix.Under rule 8.6.2 it states the GMH is a prefix,in the previous rule book!!!
I think though all prefix's should be for titles earned by defeating dogs.Just my opinion. :worms:

Tim

[Misty Marsh]

If I'm not mistaken at the end of the retriever hunt test/field trial event amendments the list of titles had GMH as a suffix title? Regardless I puit in an e-mail to my provincial CKC rep to clarify some things. "All in all" the changes are good ones, except for the bark collar at a trial.

[Misty Marsh]

So far the responce that I recieved from my provincial CKC rep is that "she has no clue":wtf: Nice to see she's on top of it, but when you have a rep who only does show crap why would she care?

[krakadawn]

Misty,
Your last point is exactly my point in the field trial section under rule changes.The current process is extremely ineffective and certainly counter productive to either game. I am currently lobbying that all potential changes must be circulated to Retriever Clubs prior to being put on any agenda for decision making. At least clubs will have a heads up to contact their respective rep for input-otherwise we will continue to live with these 'surprises'.
I would suggest that all clubs contact their CKC rep and follow up with a letter to CKC requesting a change in process.Hopefully our reps will also see the wisdom in this type of approach and place this as as agenda item for the Retriever Council as well.
I think both games are now seeing that we do not perceive certain changes as housekeeping and any rep-show or field show understand where we are coming from.
Jim

[Misty Marsh]

Jim, that is a very good idea that I feel many people would greatly appreciate that kind of involvement in the process:nice work: I know that our Manitoba CKC rep was no clue about anything hunt test or field trial related and likely will just go along with the other reps think as she could'nt really care or understand what it means to the people who put in the huge amount of work and money to earn these titles. I recieved an e-mail from the CKC supervisor for shows and trials earlier this morning and she stated that the GMH was a prefix title only to send me another an hour later saying that it was indeed changed Jan 1 2008 to a suffix title again.

[tollerlover]

Earlier this summer, John Chevalier's boy, Kramer, earned his 38th (I think) Master Hunter pass. Out of curiosity, I e-mailed CKC to ask which dog had the most MH passes ever, and how many. The reply was that they didn't keep track of the points accumulated by show dogs and I would have to contact this other person!!!!! I'm pretty sure there was nothing in my original e-mail asking about show points! Pretty hard to confuse that with Master Hunter passes, but they did. After many more e-mails, apparently the CKC doesn't track that information. Unbelievable, surely they have a computer there???? Every communication I have with the CKC leaves me shaking my head more....

[Debbie C]

Just a curiosity question, and it'll probably seem rather stupid to those of you that already know the answer, but I'm ok with that..

When you are doing a hunt test for your Master Hunter, you need pass 4 or 5 tests before you get your actual title right??? So why would a dog have 38 Master Hunt Passes???? I don't get it.

told ya I could come up with some good ones...

[Kevin Hannah]

Just a curiosity question, and it'll probably seem rather stupid to those of you that already know the answer, but I'm ok with that..

When you are doing a hunt test for your Master Hunter, you need pass 4 or 5 tests before you get your actual title right??? So why would a dog have 38 Master Hunt Passes???? I don't get it.

told ya I could come up with some good ones...


He's just showin' off:nice work:

[Misty Marsh]

If you have a senior hunter title you only need 5 master passes to title, but if you go "cold master turkey" with no senior title you need 6 to earn the MH title. Regarding the 30+ MH passes, I would imagine that it's becuase John only runs HT's from what I understand and with a good dog who titles early what else you going to do for the next 5-6 years if the FT game is'nt up your alley or within your dog's ability? My dog's up to 18 MH passes and 1 master national at 3 years of age so I'm likely going to get up there if she stays healthy. I must admit that it pisses me off that the CKC does'nt keep track of stats like this:strangle: , and must admit that they have proven to be useless so far reagrding any specific HT/FT question.

[Vindalbakken]

I don't understand what use there would be for such an "official" statistic.

[franklauzon]

Just for shits and giggles, but it's still nice to see...

[MHgoldk9]

According to Rule 8.5.1 a dog is required to have 5 passes if it has a SH and 6 if it doesn't.As for the GMH there is no referance to it in the rule changes that are published in the January official section,I must have thrown out any of my other official sec so I cannot check them.Unless of course it was not published.
I whole heartedly agree with both Jim and Trent that there need's to be more communication with the people who actually run these games when it comes to these rule changes.What problem would there be with the proposed changes being sent out to the clubs for input? With that said I did see a draft copy of the HT rule changes at the MN last Sept.

Tim

[Misty Marsh]

I don't understand what use there would be for such an "official" statistic. For me it would be a way for people to prove they have bragging rights to a certain achievement. A dog with 38 MH passes is worth recognition, or a open FT dog with 300 points, but since the CKC does'nt keep stats any "Joe" can make a unsubstantiated claim and there is really no way of proving it. My dog has 50 MH passes, prove me wrong?

[Tim]

For me it would be a way for people to prove they have bragging rights to a certain achievement. A dog with 38 MH passes is worth recognition, or a open FT dog with 300 points, but since the CKC does'nt keep stats any "Joe" can make a unsubstantiated claim and there is really no way of proving it. My dog has 50 MH passes, prove me wrong?

I agree it's worth recognition.
Which dog is more consistent, a MH that went 6 for life or one that consistently passes Master tests year after year. Both would be MH but what's the difference if there's no official record.

[AD18]

Back to the original question none of them bother me to much. Master distance should be clearly defined, not left open. Camo shirt and hat should be mandatory for field work. Pants to judges descression. Eliminates the "grey" areas of solid black, beiges, etc. Talking to your dog should be allowed at all levels with "NO" markdown as long as it is deemed quiet talk. Gun usage should be required at senior and master, but allow the use of realistic "wooden" guns so some handlers don't have to spend a fortune acquiring a real gun license and safety handling. Heck, just adopt the HRC rules, less the real gun, and all will be good. As well I believe Kramer's 30+ passes are primarily the result of John's love of running hunt tests.

[Misty Marsh]

Master distance should be clearly defined, not left open. It is defined becuase it has not changed from the original 100 yards, not to exceed 125 yards.
Camo shirt and hat should be mandatory for field work.I agree!
Talking to your dog should be allowed at all levels with "NO" markdown as long as it is deemed quiet talk.I would agree that moderate talking in junior should'nt be seen as a big deal worthy of big mark downs, or failure since you can have a dog on lead and due to the type of work being done talking to your dog excessively after calling for the birds should'nt be something that needs to happen? But I would also say that excessive talking to your dog 9 times out of 10 reflects other issues like trainability. When I judge a junior a handler who has to command "here" 15 times, and "fetch it up" 20 does not deserve the same trainability scores as the dog that came to heal and delivered the bird to hand on command, do you? I persoanly tell handlers that I want to see solid dog work and dancing at the line with a dog that continually drops birds and will not return in a timely manner will not cut the mustard! Any half assed retriever can be held back on a lead and released to pick up a bird, pick it up, drop it multiple times, and not return in a timely manner, that does'nt mean it derserves a pass when it fianlly does. I understand that junior is the entry level stake and should be less strick to encourage continued progression, but it HAS to be judged to a standard and not given away for showing up. The same idea in senior, but becuase a senoir dog should be more polished than a junior, but not a completly "polished" dog "some" quiet talking should be allowed with moderate-excessive talking resulting in a "0" trainability score as your telling the judges that you do not believe that your dog follow your commands. In master think that a dog worthy of the highest title should'nt need to be commanded multiple times, and graded down very quickly as it reflects poor trainability. I mean really when you think about handling a dog at the line you get ample oppertunity to talk to your dog, and needing to do a bunch more reflects tranability issues.

[tollerlover]

You can find out from CKC how many passes any individual dog has, they just don't have stats to tell you who has the most, who was the youngest MH, how many MH Tollers (<GRIN>), etc.

[AD18]

Agree with you Misty, but see no reason why you cannot quietly talk to your dog at any level. Talk all you want to your dog in junior and have some fun. If dog has to be told to "here" or "fetch" more than 3-4 times on any mark I'm roping him.......usually. Senior and Master see no reason why you cannot talk to your dog while the birds are being thrown. Again quietly. Any other repeated obediance related issue and they're done in my opinion. Quiet "mark" or "watch" as each mark is thrown not an issue with me. Same as some judges not allowing you to snap your fingers or pat your leg to help move your dog. I train for my body movement and cycle sound on the gun to move my dogs, but still feel very quiet chat with your dog is not a reflection of poor training, a weak retriever, and is acceptable.

[Misty Marsh]

One I completly diasgree with is that a GMH (grand master hunter) who passes 15 master tests will only be able to put that title as a suffix(after name) when all FT titles except the JFTR are prefixes. Why is a dog at the top of it's perspective game not allowed to place it's title before it's name, I personally see it as a slap in the face and down your nose look at the hunt test program.
Well after a few e-mails back and fourth between myself and a few different people at the CKC I finally got to the director of Shows & trials and guess what, it was determined that the GMH title was supposed to be a prefix title regradless of what the 2008 "official section" had shown and there was a miscomunication between the boss and his administrative assistant:bf_new:

[Misty Marsh]

Senior and Master see no reason why you cannot talk to your dog while the birds are being thrown. Again quietly. I don't think that many judges are going to worry about the "mark", "dead bird", "good", "right there" type commands, it's the "sit" commands between birds that we possibly disagree on atleast in master.

[AD18]

In my neck of the woods Senior and Master no talking means "NO talking" from the time you signal read until all the birds are down. Some judges will give you a break in regards to talking as long as they cannot hear you, but not many. After that you're free to talk quietly all you want too.

[Misty Marsh]

That's how I train and have run my dogs to this point, but this year they have allowed you to talk to your dogs between marks with the number of verbal commands becoming very few as you climb the stake ladder in my interpratation. My impression was that you will get away with one "sit" command all day in a master, unless your judge is lieniant?

[MHgoldk9]

As a master judge I have actually had a handler do this while honoring on a land series.I don't think quietly talking to your dog while the marks are going down is a problem I.E. saying a quiet Here,Here to help move the dog around when moving to see a mark but how do we police the vocalization by handlers without some form of a rule as a guide line.I think this rule gives the handlers room to do as described above and also some teeth to control the amount that is said.Only problem I see is how the rule is interpreted by individual judges and handlers for what is acceptable.If you train to a high standard you should not need to use your voice to help in master (unless it's really needed).

Tim :dog:

[Misty Marsh]

If you train to a high standard you should not need to use your voice to help in master With master being, well a master title the dog's should'nt need more commands other than "sit", just my $0.02, but think that this new rule actually goes backwards and will open the door to more pissed off competors than the cut and dry "no talking" rule of last year!

[luvmylabs]

According to Rule 8.5.1 a dog is required to have 5 passes if it has a SH and 6 if it doesn't.As for the GMH there is no referance to it in the rule changes that are published in the January official section,I must have thrown out any of my other official sec so I cannot check them.Unless of course it was not published.
I whole heartedly agree with both Jim and Trent that there need's to be more communication with the people who actually run these games when it comes to these rule changes.What problem would there be with the proposed changes being sent out to the clubs for input? With that said I did see a draft copy of the HT rule changes at the MN last Sept.

Tim

Am curious why only a few "special" people got to see the rules at the MN. Everyone there either workers or handlers were all interested in the CKC rule changes, but it seems very few actually got to see these rule changes. Why were these rules not made available to all there, so that comments or objections could be made. As well, according to the "Official Section" of DIC the meeting to change these rules was in March. Why were none of the clubs given the option for input to these rule changes. Why was Heather Stewert, one of our reps, telling us on this forum in Sept. that there were no rule changes when the changes had already been adopted by the CKC at the March meeting??? What's with the secrecy???

[Misty Marsh]

Am curious why only a few "special" people got to see the rules at the MN. Everyone there either workers or handlers were all interested in the CKC rule changes, but it seems very few actually got to see these rule changes. Why were these rules not made available to all there, so that comments or objections could be made. As well, according to the "Official Section" of DIC the meeting to change these rules was in March. Why were none of the clubs given the option for input to these rule changes. Why was Heather Stewert, one of our reps, telling us on this forum in Sept. that there were no rule changes when the changes had already been adopted by the CKC at the March meeting??? What's with the secrecy??? Regarding this situation I con't comment, but I know if the CKC is anything like my club they go out of there way to protect thier interests!

[MHgoldk9]

I didn't know I was special,I just happened to be talking to Heather quite a bit during the week of the MN,along with several other people there was quite a bit of discussion that week about some of the upcoming rule changes and ones we would like to see changed.Not that we were the only one's privy to these changes I had heard of them earlier in the summer.I do think as I said in an earlier post the CKC needs to look to the active clubs and people in this game for input before the rules are changed.Anne I'm sorry you did not get to see the rule changes then,I just happened to spend alot of time there hanging out and rule changes were one topic that came up frequently in conversation.

Tim

[luvmylabs]

Tim,

Sorry if I sounded snotty. I was just a little frustrated with the fact that I had talked to a couple of our reps over the summer and had heard that the no talk rule was to be changed. When asked how, they couldn't tell me and yet these rules were supposedly passed in March. Why were our reps not informed about these changes? Another rep tells me there are no rule changes as late as Aug. of this year. Is there none of our reps in the CKC loop? If not, there needs to be something put in place so that they are kept in the loop. The people who run and judge these events should at least have some say & input into these rule changes and not be told 7-9 months after the fact.:mad: :thmdn:

Anne

[HeatherS]

Just a little clarification. My earlier (Oct.) post stated:

<There are no rule changes in the 2008 book that would indicate tests should or will be getting tougher.>

This was in reference to the discussion re distances. There are no changes in distances at any level. To get excited because of PARTIAL information - the CKC offical section indicates the reference to distance is removed in one section but only because it is needlessly repeated and thus is strictly a housekeeping issue - serves only to get people all agitated when there is no need.

The hope of the Retriever Council, as I've stated elsewhere, is to help judges as much as possible by giving them workable parameters and clear rules and yet allow them the right to make decisions based on common sense and experience.

As for keeping everybody happy, we all know that's impossible. When there was the "no talking" rule, many people complained. No doubt the rule as written now will bother some people too. But these things don't just pop out of the air and into someone's head. How many times have these various issues - distances, talking, camo, gun safety, etc. - been discussed at tailgates, in the gallery, etc. And, as stated elsewhere, I am FIRMLY of the opinion that, as non-elected representatives, Retriever Council reps must make every effort to FIND OUT what their "constituents" want. I have no doubt that you will see some changes in this disseminating of information going forward.

As for the timing of things, let me explain a little. When the Retriever Council is told by Shows and Trials there will be a meeting (by phone now), we submit items for the agenda. These can be personal initiatives or from individuals or clubs. They are compiled into one massive agenda, divided into field trial and hunt test items, and sent back to the reps. At the first phone call, we start at the beginning and go as far as we can in one night. Then we have to re-schedule another call, then another and so on. The 2006/2007 "meeting" was at least four calls just to get the first proposals done. The changes are then sent to the CKC Board of Directors for approval, or not. The last time, they nixed a couple of things, approved a bunch and send some back to us for review. That meant more phone calls and revisions then items were sent back to the Board. I think we had items at the March, June and September Board meetings.

For this reason items were approved at various times throughout the year, to say nothing of the effort to get the National Master approved earlier in 2006. The published minutes in the last Official Section are the March minutes only. So I think it may be understandable if there is some confusion as to WHEN things happen but nothing is actually considered a done deal until it is printed in the Rules and Regulations. Our work throughout 2006 & 2007 was aimed at meeting the publication deadline of the new rulebook. The new books should be available shortly.

I'm not sure what reps you're talking about that didn't know anything about the changes. The Retriever Councils reps are the ones that MADE the changes. The CKC website has a list of the Retriever Council reps and their respective zones: http://www.ckc.ca/en/portals/0/pdf/Retriever%20Council.pdf

But you are quite correct when you say that the people who run and judge these events should have some input. If that is the outcome of this forum's discussions, it is well worth it.

Heather Stewart