Judge’s Corner      October-November, 2007

 

Before getting to the scenarios I’m going to cover in this issue, I have a short story I’d like to tell you.  This happened to a good friend of mine recently down on his farm.  He’s got a nice young lab that I hope he decides to run in some HRC tests someday, but this story isn’t about his dog.  It’s about his bulldozer.  He’s a contractor by trade, and he’s owned and operated backhoes and bobcats and trucks and other equipment for years.  He bought a used bulldozer last spring he was going to use to build a wetland.  It ran fine for awhile, but then just wouldn’t start.  He thought the battery went bad so he replaced it.  It wasn’t the battery, so he pulled the starter and had it checked, and as you might guess, it wasn’t the starter.  He checked the wiring and so on until he was at wit’s end.  One day he ran into a guy who worked on dozers and asked if would ride out to the farm and look at it.  My friend said as they got out of the truck he turned to the guy and said, “I have a funny feeling you’re about to make me look real stupid”.  The guy walked up to the dozer, opened the cab, reached under the seat and flipped the hidden safety switch.  The dozer fired right up.   

A field rep told me a similar story a few weeks ago.  He was at a test that wasn’t running very well.  The judges didn’t understand why the dogs were really struggling but it was obvious to the rep it was because of a poor test setup.  After speaking with the judges, who made the “repair” themselves, it ran just fine.  I think there are a couple of lessons we should take from these stories.  Neither the man who fixed the dozer, nor the field rep wanted to make anybody look stupid.  The gentleman fixed the dozer because he was asked to. The rep got involved in the test because it was his responsibility and his job.  It’s not easy to advise, much less correct what are assumed to be experienced and competent people, and their reaction is anybody’s guess.  My friend’s reaction was to immediately pull out $40 and hand it to the dozer mechanic, who tried to turn it down, saying he couldn’t charge anything for just throwing a switch.  My buddy insisted he take it, saying he was fining himself forty bucks for ignorance!  Perhaps that’s why a couple of judges I know always have a crisp twenty dollar bill in their pocket.  Myself, I have a charge account with several of the reps and my payment is long overdue.  Let’s get to our first scenario.   

Scenario: 

The Finished site marshal at the afternoon test yelled out, “Dog number ___ to the line”.  As they watched the handler and retriever come out of the last holding blind, both licensed judges realized the handler bringing the dog to the line was not the same one that ran the dog in the morning test.  One judge seemed indifferent to the change in handlers.  The other judge decided to ask the handler why they were running this dog now when they didn’t run it in the morning test.  The judge had several other questions running through his mind… 

Questions: 

What if anything does the HRC rulebook say about changing handlers at a test?  Is there an HRC policy on this? Does it really matter who handles the dog?  Should a handler change be something that must be approved or cleared through the hunt test committee?  Do the judges have a say in the matter, and should they be consulted or at minimum informed before the next test?   

Answer: 

Yes – I’m really going to try to answer all these questions in a single scenario.  If successful, this will be a record breaking effort and a personal best for me in this column, thank you.  Seriously, although this scenario occurs infrequently, it does happen.  There is little in our HRC rulebook that directly addresses these questions. In discussing this topic, I’ll tell you why HRC cares about a handler change, and point out some of the ramifications about it you may not have considered. I’ll also offer some protocol, for lack of a better word, for hunt test officials to consider in these circumstances. 

First, let’s agree that our HRC rulebook does not and cannot cover every situation that might occur during a day of testing.  While there is no paragraph titled, “Procedures for Changing Handlers”, or similar wording, there is one very specific rulebook reference to a dog being handled by someone else at a hunt test.  Do you know where that is?  How about, Disqualifications, page 7: “…a disqualified Handler’s other entered dogs may be handled by someone else”.  I can make the case that this topic also is covered by our rulebook provisions for accommodating handlers with physical disabilities.  If there is a portion of a test where a handler with a handicap simply cannot physically participate, for example a walk-up scenario, I don’t believe there is a person in our organization who would argue against allowing another handler to step in and run the dog.  Beyond these rulebook references, we must look to intent and use common sense to find the answers to the questions posed. Lest any of you say, there he goes interpreting the rulebook again; I can report to you that I had considerable help with this scenario.  I consulted with the same distinguished group of HRC experts I continually depend on for advice in answering judging questions – your HRC field reps.  I posed the above scenario to them to solicit their thoughts and comments on two handlers running the same dog.  I think one rep was joking with me in an e-mail that asked, “Where’s all this dog swapping going on? I hope it’s not in my region!”  All kidding aside, the reps were 100% in agreement on the answers to the questions posed and they gave me some excellent reasoning I want to share with you.   

One said they constantly hear folks say we are supposed to be “judging the dog, not the handler”.   The actual rulebook wording on this is under Sportsmanship on page 32 where the rulebook states, “The Judge is to assess the retriever not the Handler….”  It’s a stretch to interpret this wording as meaning it does not matter who or how many handlers run the dog. The wording goes on to describe unsportsmanlike conduct that should result in a major markdown, failure, or disqualification.  We have accepted, I think appropriately, that judges who put an HE (for handler error), or DAH (for…) may use the interpretation of this wording to forgive a small handler faux pas they didn’t want to fail the dog for.  Of course we actually do judge the handler beyond sportsmanship issues.  We judge them for wearing appropriate hunting attire, and for gun safety.  Handlers can fail for touching the retriever at the wrong time, or for excessive noise on the line.   And I don’t believe I need to give any specific examples on how poor handler performance can result in a dog failing.  Sometimes the best effort from the canine side of the team just can’t get a handler through a test.   

And speaking of the handler/dog team…  From the beginning, our tests have been structured to test a dog and it’s handler against a standard.  While a handler may run multiple dogs, nothing in our rulebook remotely suggests a dog was ever to have multiple handlers.  There’s an old saying that given a slight twist sums this up nicely.  The dog should, “dance with the one who brought it to the dance”.  My apologies if this stirs up bad memories from high school for any of you.  It was also mentioned that often two handler’s names will show up on the premium or in the printed hunt test booklet, something like this.  Handler:  John Doe or Joe Q. Public.  One might be a pro working with the dog, and the other the owner who is thinking about running the dog.  Or Handler:  John Doe or Mary Doe (no explanation needed).  When the premium was sent it was simply not determined who would handle the dog.  This is fine as it will get sorted out at handler registration where one handler should ultimately be designated for the dog.  The marshal’s sheet should be corrected in time to list the dog and who will handle it.  A couple of the field reps noted some other instances where two handlers might handle the same dog.  If a handler becomes ill or injured and there is someone the handler feels comfortable letting run the dog in the afternoon, fine.  And at a recent hunt test, a field rep described a situation where at Started the wife ran their dog in the morning test because the husband had a business commitment.  He took over handling duties for the second test because she had a commitment and had to leave.  This was all arranged and approved prior to the hunt.   

The field reps were very concerned at the confusion and delays that can result when a handler decides on their own to let someone else run their dog in the next test.  Here’s what might happen. The test site marshal may be running around looking for the wrong handler, or for a handler that is not there.  The judges might feel it necessary to halt the test, thinking they have the wrong dog number or something worse.  Anytime there is a handler change, somebody in charge should be asking some questions, and the parties to the change should have some answers.  It’s certainly legitimate to ask that a hunt official be notified, given the reasons for the change request, and approve it.  If for no other reason, there are some paperwork considerations I’ll cover shortly.  Further, the judges should be notified when it is convenient and does not disrupt the flow of the hunt, such as before the next series begins, or during a re-bird.  They have every right to ask questions when a different handler shows up suddenly than the one they judged earlier.   

Important Note for Hunt Secretaries and Judges Completing Points Receipts: 

It’s become a common practice, really a necessity with our large hunts, for the hunt secretary to pre-complete the points receipt prior to the hunt.  Judges only need to mark Pass or Fail and sign them.  If two handler’s names appear on the points receipt when in actuality only one handled the dog, no judging credit will be given to the handler for passing a dog at that level.  For example, John Doe or Mary Doe are listed on the premium.  Mary shows up and handles the dog.  Mary wants to begin judging.  She sends in a copy of the points receipt along with other pertinent paperwork as proof she passed a dog at that level.  The receipt will not be allowed to be used because HRC cannot determine if Mary really handled the dog in both the land and water tests which she must do to get credit.  Conversely, if for some reason two handlers shared handling duties for whatever reason, judges should put the second name on the points receipt when they sign them.  It’s possible they are the only folks that know two different handlers worked the dog.   

Let’s add a twist just for grins.  You’re judging and you call for a dog.  You see two handlers and one dog coming out of the final holding blind and heading toward the line. Let’s say it’s Started and dad has the lead on ole Fireball, although you suspect young Johnny is listed as the handler.  When Fireball gets to the line, Johnny will hold him until the mark hits the ground.  Is this okay?  Would you feel differently if this were a Seasoned test? I’ve had this happen while judging on more than one occasion.  I’ll tell you how I handled it in the next Judges Corner.  In the meanwhile, send me an e-mail and let me know what you would do.  Let’s look at our next scenario. 

Scenario: 

The two licensed Seasoned judges were briefing the assembled handlers.  Judge A noted that the retrievers would be required to come to the retrieving line on lead, but at that point once the lead was removed, the judge said it should remain off the dog for the entire test.  Judge B interrupted with the words, “au contraire”.   He agreed the retrievers must come to the line on lead, but said he wanted them to be put back on lead between each successive portions of the test.  A heated discussion immediately ensued with a few handlers getting their opinions in as well.   

Question: 

Does a Seasoned dog have to stay on lead throughout every portion of the test? 

Answer:   

A better question would be why were the two judges arguing in front of the handlers, and why weren’t they communicating with each other before the test briefing? Mechanics, logistics, and objectives should be agreed upon beforehand.  When a Seasoned dog should be on or off the lead in their test is a pretty big item to not discuss.  The judges may have some difference of opinions on their evaluation of the dogs work, but that should be worked out amicably in private at the end of the testing.  Judges should be 100% respectful and supportive toward each other when handlers are present.  When the test judges air their differences in public, it only serves to undermine handler confidence in their judging ability and the decisions they make.  With apologies for getting off topic, allow me to now address the question posed and attempt to sort out some of the apparent confusion.   I want to take a little different approach to this discussion than I normally use.  I’m going to give you what should be a typical Seasoned handlers briefing – specifically, the portion of the briefing where the handlers are told exactly when their dogs need to be on lead or off.  I’ll then explain how this briefing is supported by and complies with our HRC running rules.  By the way, once in a while when I’m asked to judge I’m informed they want me at Seasoned.  But when I can, I try to get assigned to one of the easier levels to judge such as Started, Finished, or the Grand.  Remember that in this partial briefing example, the judges are covering test mechanics only. They would explain the test objectives later in the briefing.  And this briefing is of course incomplete in that we’re focusing only on what is relevant regarding the lead being either on or off.

 Seasoned test briefing example covering use of lead: 

“When we call for your dog, please come out of the holding blind with the dog on lead. The dog must be kept on lead to the retrieving line, which because we’ll be shooting a double marked retrieve first in this test, is the camo bucket by the gun rack you see behind me.  By the way, if you come out of the holding blind without a lead on your dog, you will be asked to go back, put a lead on it and try again.  Upon arriving at the retrieving line one of us will ask if you understand what you are supposed to do, or have any questions.  When you have confirmed to us that you understand the test, you will take the lead off your dog and then you may then pick up the gun and load it with two poppers, etc, etc.…..  After your dog successfully delivers the second bird of the double, we will be ready to proceed to the blind retrieve part of the test. The blind will be run from the second gun rack you can see a few yards to the right of the bucket.  It will be run downwind, and well way from where the marks were thrown.  It’s only a few yards over to where you’ll run the blind so you may walk there with the dog off lead if you wish. Some of you will feel more comfortable putting your dog on lead to go where we’ll run the blind and you are more than welcome to do that.  The dog should of course be off lead before you pick up the gun and load a popper to fire at the blind.  After your dog delivers the blind retrieve bird, you will put your lead on the dog and leave the retrieving line. 

Let’s analyze what was said to the handlers and why. The Seasoned running rules under the sub heading, Handlers on page 38 states, “The Handler must keep the hunting retriever on lead to and from the retrieving line”. In compliance with this, the handlers at this briefing were immediately informed they were to come out of the holding blind with their dog on lead, and the lead was to remain on the dog until it reached the retrieving line, which was described as the bucket where they were to run the marks.  We should all agree that the rulebook wording is unequivocal.  There are no options in play at this point.  Handlers can’t say, “This dog will be running Finished next weekend so I’d like to come to the retrieving line off lead”.  Judges can’t say, “If you want to bring your Seasoned dog up to the retrieving line off lead, that’s okay with us”.  And remember, if the afternoon test included a walk-up to be run first, the retrievers would come out of the holding blind on lead up to the point where the walk-up was to begin.  By the way, the rulebook also states under item IV of the Seasoned Guidelines on page 41, “The Judges should look for the dog that walks obediently to the line… etc.”  This guideline tells us how the dog is to behave while walking on the required lead.   

At this point, the dog came to the retrieving line on lead, it was removed and the first portion of the Seasoned test was successfully completed. Here is where things get very confusing for a number of folks, including experienced judges as evidenced by the following questions we frequently hear.  Is there more than one retrieving line at a Seasoned test?  If so, is the dog required to be on lead coming up to each part of the test?  If not, is it okay for the judges to stipulate the dog must walk at heel off lead between various parts of the test? We can find the answers to these questions by once again trying to understand the intent behind the wording in our rulebook and by applying a little common sense to the whole situation. While I hesitate to state the obvious, I’ve often found it’s helpful as a precursor to an explanation, just as it’s necessary to look directly at some people and speak very slowly.  We expect a Seasoned dog to exhibit control somewhere between a Started dog and a Finished level retriever.  The Started dog is allowed to wear a collar and be restrained during most of the test.  The Finished dog comes to the line off lead and must work off lead during the test.  Seasoned handlers use their leads during parts of the test to establish and maintain an appropriate level of control of their retrievers.  We’ve established the fact the lead must be on a Seasoned dog as it comes to the retrieving line.  However, the rulebook states on page 31 under Manners and Obedience:  “Seasoned… Retrievers should walk quietly at heel off lead, sit quietly in any position designated by the Handler, etc.….”    This implies that at some point in the test, a handler must demonstrate their dog’s ability to show Seasoned level control walking off lead. This is accomplished during the walk-up portion of the test.  However, some judges will point to page 31 to argue it’s their option to tell a Seasoned handler the lead must remain off during the test.  Let me be very clear – this is not acceptable.  If you take nothing else from this scenario, remember that a Seasoned handler should always be allowed the opportunity to walk their dog on lead between parts of the test should they feel it will allow them to maintain proper control.   At the opposite end of the spectrum are those who say a Seasoned dog must be put on lead between each portion of the test.  They argue that because there are multiple locations were the dog runs portions of the test, each is a “retrieving line” and the dog must be brought to each on lead. Let’s examine just how many retrieving lines there really are at a Seasoned test.  I’ll admit we go to great lengths in admonishing Seasoned judges to keep the different elements of a Seasoned tests from interfering with one another.  Where the marks fall should not influence the blind, etc.  And we teach judges that the best way to do this is to keep these elements apart from one another.  There is no question that when coming out of the holding blind to the point where the first element of a test will be run, the dog is coming to a retrieving line.  But beyond that, to simply count how many different places a dog will work from and call each a retrieving line that the dog must be brought to on lead is missing the point.  The point is to always allow Seasoned handlers to control their dogs.  If you are asking them to walk a substantial distance to another spot to run another part of the test, it makes sense to have them put their dog back on lead.  In our example briefing, the handlers were given the option to leave the lead off because they only had to move a few steps to run the blind.  It would be rather silly to require them to pull out the lead, put it on, take a couple of steps, and take it back off.  Physical distance isn’t the only criteria for Seasoned judges to consider.  I’ll explain with an example:  The retriever is brought up on lead to run the first part of the water test which happens to be the blind.  At this location there’s a gun rack and little else.  The team will then move only a short distance to run the marks.  But, they’ll be walking toward a platform and bucket, decoys in the water, judges chairs, the duck drying rack, and perhaps the diversion winger visible close by.  While the distance of the move is not substantial, the inviting nature of the next location is.  Would it not be prudent to tell the handlers to put their dogs on lead when making this move?  This is not a good place to give Seasoned handlers an option regarding the lead.  Many are simply not experienced enough to realize when their dog might break away from them.  Because every test set up is different the judges must be the party to decide exactly when it is okay to allow handlers a choice in using the lead.  Seasoned handlers should never have carte blanche option in this matter. This should be covered thoroughly in the handlers briefing as it was in our example.  There is one more item I need to cover before ending this discussion. 

Our rulebook requires that we give handlers an explanation of test objectives during the test briefing. It’s not difficult.  This is simply the judges advising handlers of the goals you wish the retriever to obtain on various portions of the test. This lets them know exactly what you expect from them and their retriever.  I would start an explanation of the Seasoned test objectives with the very first thing you expect them and their dog to accomplish.  That would be coming out of the holding blind with the dog walking obediently on lead. As you discuss this, it would be a good time to explain that throughout the test the dog will be expected to demonstrate Seasoned level control.  Of course you’ll go on to talk more about control when explaining the blind retrieve objectives.  But here is where I want to make an important point.  If you told the handlers that at some during the test they had the option to move between parts of the test off lead should they choose to, as in our example briefing, you must tell them this in no way releases them from the obligation to keep control of their dogs.  I would perhaps use the analogy of a Started handler having the option to restrain their dog as the mark is thrown.  If the handler chooses not to and the dog breaks, then as the saying goes, “Houston, we have a problem”.  I hope this scenario helps clear some confusion and helps folks make good decisions about using the lead whether running or judging a Seasoned test.  Just so you know, I ran this scenario by the field reps.  I gave them my thoughts and asked for responses.  Several offered some excellent thoughts and I thank them all for contributing to this discussion.  

I mentioned earlier that in the next issue of the Judges Corner I’m going to discuss a situation where two people bring a dog to the retrieving line together.  And if you think you’ve seen every possible marking scenario judges can dream up, well you’ll have to think again.  I’ve got a new one for you.  We’ll also discuss evaluating marginal dog work and factors that will help us determine whether to pass or fail a retriever. 

As always, thanks for taking the time to read this column and for your support.   

We hope the “Judge’s Corner” will both entertain and inform you.  Please send your questions and scenarios to Tim at:

 judgescorner@huntingretrieverclub.org