It’s mid-March as I’m writing this article and already I’ve had the pleasure of attending several hunt tests in 2006 as both judge and handler.  One of the hunts happened to be the big Upland test in Kentucky co-hosted by Music City and Central Kentucky HRC clubs.  You might have heard about this test.  The wind was howling and the snow flying and it was something like nine degrees out.  It would have been slightly nicer weather had the clubs moved the hunt somewhere else, like say the Artic Circle.  I won’t pull any punches and say there were no problems.  A handler showed up thinking this was a combined Finished/Upland event and was wondering how the club was going to run the water series as the ponds were quickly freezing over.  And there were bird problems.  I suppose when you buy 300 plus chuckars you’ll get at least one crazy one.  A chuckar puffed out his chest and charged a bewildered dog.  It then had the audacity to lunge at both a judge and a gunner.  Bad move as it was finally shot.  The gunner claimed self-defense.  Seriously, the clubs did a great job of organization and dealing with the inclement conditions and despite some minor cases of frostbite, everyone had a great time.   Many thanks to Upland judges Rod Rombauer and Mike Witt who showed the club that even chilly chuckars will still flush.  Try saying that three times fast as you can.  Every time I have the opportunity to run my dog, I am deeply appreciative of our clubs for their commitment to HRC and the hard work they all do to put on quality events.       

For those of you who have gone through the steps to obtain your coveted HRC judging license, you’ll perhaps remember that as an apprentice you had to show up on time, usually early Friday afternoon, and participate fully in the test setup process.  Failure to do so would result in not getting a judging credit for the hunt test.  At our annual meeting in Memphis in 2002, the HRC Board of Directors voted to implement a program that they felt would put apprentice judges under the tutelage of our best, brightest and most experienced judges.  The new “Apprentice Approved” judging program went into effect on January 1, 2003.  With this program, a judge has to have judged a minimum of two licensed hunts at a level before they can earn the designation of AA judge at that level and take an apprentice under their wing.  AA judges are the most important “teachers” in our judging program.  You might be wondering why I’m mentioning all this.  Well, it seems some of our teachers have been missing the first period of “class”.   

There have been a couple of instances recently where a AA judge has not been around for test setup, instead, showing up Saturday morning to judge.  In one instance, the club was only running one flight and the apprentice had to setup the test.  As you might have guessed, the AA judge showed up Saturday morning and wanted to change a few things, which meant the test did not get started as early as it should have.  HRC has a Judge Confirmation form that a club should send to all judges, which will specifically indicate who and what is the judging status of their co-judge.  I want to thank all of you who are our AA judges, but kindly remind you that if you accept a judging assignment that pairs you with an apprentice, you must be present during setup.  By accepting the assignment, you are agreeing to be a teacher as well as a judge at the test.  I realize emergencies happen and plans must change accordingly, but if you know that as an AA judge you can’t be there to work with your apprentice on Friday afternoon, don’t agree to judge the test.  Our AA program is strictly voluntary and if a judge does not want the responsibility of teaching, Claudene will simply remove the AA status from the judge’s record.  

I’ve been asked to remind judges about the Test Briefings that are now available on the HRC website.  More of the reps would like to see these briefings used, especially by a few judges in each region that are notorious for short and rather uninformative handlers meetings.  I would suspect the problem is perhaps not so much poor test briefings as incomplete ones. They’re okay as far as they go, they just don’t cover everything that should be covered.  It is very difficult to remember all that you should tell the handlers.  If I had to pick a couple of items I regularly see judges forget to mention, I’d probably pick test objectives and clothing requirements for the test.  These briefing forms are especially valuable to new judges.  I would be willing to bet an apprentice using an official HRC test briefing form could give a more thorough and informative briefing than a veteran judge who was winging it.  Lest you veteran judges think you don’t need to use these new test briefings, I would remind you that the most experienced airline and military pilots would not think of taking off without running through a checklist.  You don’t have to read the test briefing item by item, just glance at it after you’ve given the handlers your speech and make sure you’ve not missed anything.  You’ll be pleasantly surprised at how much better your test briefings will become.   Let’s get to our first scenario. 

---

Scenario: 

 The Finished test consisted of a left, right, middle triple mark at distances of about 20, 40, and 115 yards respectively.  The first bird was thrown and the handler shot at it, and then turned toward the second mark.  Bird two hung in the winger pouch and one of the judges said, “no bird”.  About that time, bird boy number three threw the third mark.  The dog broke for this bird.  The judge told the handler to “stop your dog” two times.  The dog refused the handlers multiple whistle commands to stop and made it all the way to the mark and retrieved it.  The handler asked for a re-run on the grounds that a no-bird was declared and the test was stopped.  The dog was failed for lack of Finished control.   

Question: 

Should the handler get a re-run?  

Answer: 

A very experienced judge who I have great respect for sent this scenario to me recently.  He was judging this test, and indicated he and his co-judge were prepared to give this handler a lot of leeway in stopping the dog and getting it back under control, which did not happen.  He said there seemed to be two camps on the following questions.  Does a no-bird stop a test?  And is the dog still under judgment following a no-bird? The judge also said he seemed to remember some discussion on this but didn’t know if it was on the tailgate of a truck or perhaps in the Judges Corner.  

I’ll admit that a lot of in-depth discussions of judging issues take place on truck tailgates after hunt tests, especially when an adult beverage is being enjoyed.  Probably more than I could write about if I was given the whole magazine for this column.  However, I did write about this topic in December of 2002.  In that scenario, it was an honor dog that broke after a no-bird was declared.  The judges at that test told the honor handler the no-bird only pertained to the working dog.  The scenario generated quite a lot of debate on the message board at the time. Since some folks still have questions about how to properly handle a situation like this, it would seem more discussion might be in order.  To simply focus on a no-bird scenario is to miss the bigger picture and the more important question.  That being, when is a dog being judged? 

Finished handlers should understand that they are being judged from the point where they have been instructed to take the dog off lead coming into the test to the place or point in the test where they are told to put a lead on the dog.  Judges should make this unequivocally clear.  In fact, the first two bulleted points under Mechanics and Logistics on the Finished Test Briefing document I mentioned earlier are: 1) location where judgment will begin and end, and 2) the point where the lead is removed.  Judges should clearly state that regardless of what happens during the test, the dog is being judged unless the handler is told otherwise.  Just as you would not let a handler declare their own no-bird, you should not let a handler decide when they are or are not under judgment.  I strongly recommend that judges tell any handler whose dog is not being judged, yet it is to remain on the line, to put a lead on their dog until such time as judgment is resumed.  It should not be hard for everyone to understand a concept as simple as; lead off, under judgment or alternatively; lead on, not under judgment!  So what about the argument that the no-bird stopped the test?  Sometimes a test is stopped, think lunch or equipment failure, but often it is merely interrupted or just temporarily halted for a variety of reasons. Examples would be a bird boy out of place or bringing more poppers to the line. Regardless, judging is not suspended until the judges say it is. In my 2002 article, I made the case that while the marking sequence was halted by the no-bird, the dogs were still being judged and the honor dog had no reason to break unless it’s name was No Bird.  I pointed out that our rulebook says, “The Finished Hunting Retriever must respond promptly to either voice or whistle commands and remain steady and under control at all times”.  In our current scenario, the working dog had no excuse for breaking and the judges made exactly the right call.  In our next scenario, we’ll take a look at control coming to the retrieving line.  This scenario is somewhat unusual because it does not take place at a hunt test.   

---

Scenario: 

At the Judges and Handlers Seminar the field rep presenting the seminar made a statement something to the effect that if a handler cannot at least touch the tip of their dog's tail while going to and from the line at the Finished level, the handler will not have met the "control" objectives required at the Finished level.  A local club asked the rep if it was okay to put this statement in the club newsletter and suggest people train with this criterion in mind when preparing their dogs for Finished. 

Question: 

Is being able to touch your dog’s tail the standard of control to train for when heeling a dog to the Finished retrieving line? 

Answer: 

Of course the answer is no.    I don’t believe it would be a stretch to say we’d all like our dogs to heel better than that to the line.  I wrote extensively about control to the line in an article in 2004.  In the scenario I presented in that article, a dog was oblivious to commands to heel and beat the handler to the line.  That is clearly unacceptable behavior and showed excessive lack of control.  The field rep in this scenario was not talking about a standard judges should be looking.  I want to share some of the reps excellent comments when he responded to the club’s request regarding their newsletter.   

The rep told the club that the comment about touching a dog’s tail going to the line was meant as an illustration for judges at the seminar to understand the maximum unacceptable behavior that might be allowed.  I’ve used that criteria myself in seminars and I think it paints a good picture for the judges.  If a dog is out beyond reach and won’t walk with a handler, the dog is bringing the handler to the line.  The rep told the club the handler should be leading the parade or at the least, the team should arrive together.  He noted the standard for control coming to the line should be the dog walks obediently beside the handler, which should be easy for everybody to understand.  The rep cautioned the club about teaching new members what they might get away with at a test versus the right way to bring a dog to the line. He made a statement that I think more judges should think about when deciding if a markdown is warranted for a performance. With reference to the dog that walked at arms length in front of the handler, he said ask yourself this question;  “Would this behavior be acceptable if you were giving new handlers a demonstration of the technique for proper heeling?”  The answer should be obvious.  Judges should look for proper behavior and not hesitate to mark down poor manners, poor obedience and lack of control.  I’m not sure how it worked out this way, but each of the topics discussed in this issue of the Judges Corner has been addressed in past articles to one degree or another. Our last scenario is no exception.  Several folks said it is currently being discussed on the HRC message board.  I addressed it as a Seasoned scenario in 2002 and it has resurfaced as a Finished scenario which I’ve been asked to comment on. 

---

Scenario: 

The judges greet the working dog and handler at the last holding blind.  As they move forward the team gets a walkup, which is successfully completed.  They proceed to the bucket for the remaining portion of the test. The judges instruct the handler to load the gun and signal ready. 

Question: 

It seems the question on everybody’s mind at this point is can the handler touch the dog before picking up the gun and proceeding?  

Answer: 

I received several e-mail messages on this scenario from folks on both sides of the issue asking my opinion.  One gentleman was kind enough to copy me with some of the posts from the message board, which I’ve not seen.  Even highly experienced judges and handlers seem divided on this question, or at best somewhat unsure about it, which of course is leaving the new ones mighty confused. I’ll try to sort out some of this confusion. Understand that we are talking about touching a Seasoned or Finished dog at the retrieving line. Started handlers may hand hold their dogs so touching is a moot point.  Grand handlers are specifically forbidden to touch their dogs.  The test rules for Seasoned, item III on page 39 says:  “At the retrieving line the hunting retriever may be touched to steady, but when the Handler signals ready the hunting retriever should not be touched again.  The wording for Finished on page 44 while not identical is essentially the same.  It might be helpful to sum up the arguments being made both for and against touching a dog during a test.   

Proponents arguing that a dog cannot be touched during a test are making the case that the retrieving line for all practical purposes is the last holding blind because that’s where judgment begins.  They say touch all you want in the holding blind but when you step out you’re signaling you are ready to begin the test.  They say if that’s not the case, what’s to stop a handler from touching a dog at any point along the way to the bucket?  This group believes a handler that wants or needs to touch their dog, especially at the Finished level, is in fact addressing a training issue or trying to get away with something.   

Those arguing that a dog can be touched during the test are saying our rulebook clearly states that touching a Seasoned or Finished dog at the line before signaling ready is acceptable.  They also point to the fact that judges have always allowed handlers to help a dog up on a stand or into a boat, and to check a dog if it returns from a retrieve limping, with something in its eye or other physical problems.  Some of these folks are implying that touching which includes re-positioning the dog is probably okay up to the point the handler signals ready.   

A little perspective might be in order.  When writing the HRC rulebook our founders considered what should set judging our hunting dogs apart from judging retrievers in the other games.  Two items that quickly come to mind is that given certain well defined limitations at the various testing levels, we hunters could talk to our dogs and in fact touch them during HRC tests, both strictly forbidden in some of the other retriever testing programs.  If you look closely at the Grand test rules on page 51 you’ll find the same paragraph that says you can’t touch a Grand dog at the retrieving line goes on to say it’s okay to continue to talk to the dog quietly and in a non-intimidating manner.  I’m not sure this is just a coincidence.  In the 2002 Seasoned touching scenario I alluded to earlier a handler gave his dog a pat on the side as praise when it brought the last bird back.  The judges wanted to fail the handler for touching the dog.  I said the judges were wrong.  Under Manners and Obedience on page 30, our rulebook says failure “may” result from a handler touching the retriever after they signal ready.  The word may gives judges an out to forgive a happy handler.  So where do we go from here? 

I believe folks that are focusing on the location of the retrieving line are missing the real issue.  From a judging perspective the question I have is not can a handler touch their Finished dog during a test, but why would they need to? I think the rulebook is crystal clear about being able to do so but make no mistake; the rulebook is also very specific that a dog may only be touched to steady it.  Perhaps a gentle hand on a Seasoned dog’s rear to get it to sit on the line would be okay, but where do we draw the line at Finished where dogs are supposed to exhibit more control?  I think a handler is starting down a slippery slope when they begin to touch their dog on the line in that a touch can be interpreted many ways. The handler is forcing the judges to decide if the contact was to steady the dog, or remind it who is in charge.  I would bet in many cases the handler would not like the call.  Touching a dog between the holding line and the retrieving line won’t fly, nor will pulling the dog around at the bucket so it faces the right direction.  These actions don’t fall under the “may be touched to steady” wording in the Seasoned and Finished rules.  The first will likely be interpreted as either intimidation or restraint and the second as positioning a dog physically that won’t respond to verbal commands.  When you decide to touch your dog on the retrieving line you’re hoping the judges understand exactly what the rulebook allows.  Good luck.   

It seems when the HRC website was transferred to a new server a while back, the fonts and colors on the Judges Corner website, which is a sub-web on the HRC site, became unreadable.   I am going to try my best to make time to correct this and bring the site up to date.  With my busy schedule, it’s not been high on my priority list, for which I apologize.  Hopefully, by the time this magazine reaches you, those looking at the JC website and trying to find information on a topic or read past articles will be able to do so.  Thank you for reading this column and I hope to see many of you at upcoming hunt tests.   

---