 |
|
|
|
|
Handling....from the June - July, 1997 Judges Corner by Tim Gibson In the following scenario, a Started dog is failed for poor handling.
Situation:
At
the Started land test, the young retriever did a good job retrieving the right
mark.
The dog was having some difficulty on the left bird however.
After marking the bird in flight, and proceeding to the area of the fall,
the retriever could not find the bird in the moderate cover.
The handler elected to begin handling the dog after a couple of minutes.
As you might expect, the dog did not handle cleanly, but had several cast
and whistle refusals until it was successfully handled to the mark.
At the conclusion of the hunt, the dog was failed.
The judges explained that even a started dog could not have that many
cast and whistle refusals. Question:
Where
the judges justified in failing this “poor handling” started dog? Answer:
I asked a couple of field
reps and some other judges to respond to this scenario which occurred at one of
our hunts. Don Ley sent me a
note with his excellent response, which, with his permission, I’d like to
share with you. Don wrote: “I
don’t know if I have missed something all these years, but I could swear that
HRC does not expect a started dog to handle at all much less poorly.
Also the rule book is very clear that the started dog is tested for
marking, not handling. Some may
argue however, that section I. under the Started Guidelines does suggest a
started dog is tested for handling. Analyzing
the intent of this section, statement by statement, it is still clear that a
started dog should not be judged for handling.”
The rule book states on page 16:
“Hand signals, voice and whistle commands may be utilized by the
Handler to encourage the Started Hunting Retriever to perform”.
Don goes on to say: “This
statement says what a handler is allowed to do to encourage the dog to get the
job done. It says nothing about how
the started dog is expected to respond to the handlers efforts, just that the
handler can use certain signals or commands to help the dog.”
The rule book also states on page 16: “however,
should excessive handling or noise occur, which in the opinion of the Judges
would disturb the hunt, then at the Judge’s discretion, they may declare the
test a failure.” Don writes:
“Again, this statement refers to the actions of the handler.
Too much hollering, too much whistle blasting, and too much jumping about
by the handler may be cause for a failure.
Nothing in the statement says the started dog must respond in a certain
manner to the handlers directions.”
The last two sentences of item I.,
page 16, Started Guidelines state: “The
dog is being tested for its marking ability, not handling.
However, a clean handle is preferable to an extended hunt.” Don
responds: “The first part of this statement is clear and leaves no doubt as to
the intent of the started test. The
“clean handle” part just reflects our desire as hunters to get the bird
picked up as quickly and efficiently as possible.
Still, no reference that a started dog must be able to handle.
If the dog in this case was handled back into the hunt area and completed
the retrieve, the judges should not have failed the dog for poor handling.
They may, however, have been justified to declare a failure if they felt
the handlers actions in handling the dog was disruptive to the test.” We learn in the Judges/Handlers Seminar that once a handler begins to handle a dog on a mark, we should judge the handling (control). This is true at those levels of testing where the HRC rule book has established that we will test the retriever for control (Seasoned, Finished, and Grand). Our judges in the above scenario were wrong for failing the started dog for poor handling. |
|
The Judges Corner - copyright
2006 All Rights Reserved Last modified: February 18, 2008 |