Walking in Horse back trial, and a ?

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Thu Oct 09, 2008 2:07 pm

Neil Mace wrote:AKC is going to have to redefine its rules. It has already added the clarification on horseback and walking range for gun dogs, while leaving the rule that there is to be no difference.

They can't have it both ways.

If you are a horseback handler braced with a walking handler you are at a real disadvantage, you are highly unlikely to win, you will most likely beat your bracemate, but not the other horseback handled dogs.

AKC needs to consider doing as American Field, having seperate horseback and walking trials, not try to mix the two. I know why they have tried to do so, I understand, really, but it just does not work.

I enjoy watching walking gun dogs, a lot, but I should just pick up my dog when I am braced with one in a stake that allows horseback handling.

This is all a carry back to 40 years ago when Delmar Smith made AKC allow horseback handling, and many were against it, then and now. The sport is big enough for both.

Neil

Neil, it really doesn't work out that way most times.A prime example would be our very first trial in Jan. 2005. Julie and Talon were braced against Jimmy Berneathy and Rumor Too. Rumor won, and we (Not knowing that Rumor was the #1 Gundog in 2004) were thrilled to take second in our first trial.

The standard way of doing a mixed brace is to keep the handlers together until there is a find. If it is the foot handlers dog then the horseback handler hits the gas and leaves the foot handler behind. It is rare for us to stay together for the whole brace.
The walker is at a huge disadvantage in HB stakes. His dog has to run as big as the HB dogs in order to win, and the foot handler cannot see nearly as well. The foot handled dog will thus have to be very good and honest in it's birdwork, and in keeping track of it's handler, as the handler will be of minimal assistance.

And no the horseback handlers don't always win. I think that at least half of our wins were foot handled in HB stakes. And we have beat some very good dogs of all breeds on occasion.

Having seperate trials may work in some places.(Speaking from a Brittany owner's perspective) Out west there just aren't enough brits to make it work. We already have to open a lot of stakes to other breeds as it is.

Neil Mace · Post by **Neil Mace** » Fri Oct 10, 2008 1:59 am

Martin,

Tell you what, let's have the horseback handlers vote on it, can't speak for Jimmy for sure, but I am pretty sure what he would think. I am sure he was polite to you, as I would have been, but that does not mean we like it. The better the walking dog is, the worse shape the walking handler is in, and the more finds the horseback dog has the bigger the problem. I have spent too much of too many braces watching the walking handler's dog point while mine backs, or mine back while the walking handler's dog points to agree with you.

Like I said, AKC changed the range definition for horseback and walking GD range, you got an idea why they did that? The AFTCA Guidelines instruct to not mix the two. AKC needs to update its rules. There are lots of walking only trials, there should be horseback only stakes. If there are not enough entries to support either one, it tells you something.

I try to be nice to all handlers, and I welcome everyone to a trial, but the two really don't mix well,

Neil

mm · Post by mm » Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:26 am

Some may do well on foot in a horse trial however the few times I did it I could tell I would have no chance by the way I was treated at the breakaway. I will never walk in a horse trial again. I think there should be horse only and walking only and a mixture of the two is just a way to collect entry fees. Now if ATV,s were allowed that would be a little better and everyone would be able to enter. I understand people dont want the atvs around with the horses. What I am saying if trials are having trouble getting entrys and newcomers are really welcome than they should allow atvs and entries will increase. For some it is to much to own a horse and rental horses can be a problem.
mm

3Britts · Post by **3Britts** » Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:47 am

Well, I can't speak for all walking handlers but, the only time that I was not treated well by a HB handler was when that person did not know how to handle their dog. They rode the dog from start to finish because that dog had no business in the stake. It simply wasn't ready. I also turn to the HB handler and tell them to follow their dog and I would keep up as best I could. That give them permission to run their dog as they normally do and the judges always seem to like it. Manners you know.
Now, can I be competitive. Yes. In my dogs first trial, I started him when he was three, I watched several experienced dogs run right through a certain area that I thought had to have birds in it only to go through without a find. My dogs was running about 100 yards behind a large running setter when he reached it. About 10 feet into the area he spun on his front feet and pointed. He had found a covey of 10 running, they just wouldn't get up, chuckars. Point is, if the dog has the nose for it, he will find birds the hb handled dog will miss. Remember that it is the quality of hunt in the dog that will most often win, not the speed with which it gets around the course.

zzweims · Post by **zzweims** » Fri Oct 10, 2008 9:58 am

This is sort of along the same lines. A few months ago, I agreed to judge a local horseback trial (akc). A few days ago, I received the premium. Of the 7-8 stakes, all but two are 'walking only.' I asked the chairman what gives. How can you advertise a horseback trial and not allow horses? They are covered because at least two stakes 'allow' horses. They may still hold a walking trial if they wish.

Aline
http://sitekreator.com/zzfarms

Post by **kninebirddog** » Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:59 pm

Hey Martin...How many more points do you need to finish Deni AKC titles...she has to be close ...I see you placing quite a bit in AZ and New Mexico

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:41 am

Hi Knine, Deni only needs any 2 points to finish either FC or AFC. Like our other FC/AFCs, all of the points were earned handling on foot in mostly horseback and mostly all breed stakes. Also all points were earned in adult stakes as we didn't get involved in AKC early enough for the juvenile stakes.

Neil, things must be different wherever you are located. Although walking stakes are plentiful in AZ, they were all GSP trials. As a brittany owner you know about the Brittany major rule. What that meant to us was that we HAD to compete in HB stakes if we wanted a chance to title our dogs.

Once I became comfortable and accepted in the FT community, I approached our club leadership with a proposal for a walking trial. I would do all of the work to get it going. Building a trial from the ground up is a ton of work. Working with the red tape of government to secure grounds, etc. Every decision is breaking new ground. In the last two years we have now held a sucessfull walking trial in June. I am very proud of what we have accomplished but,,,, it is only one walking trial. The other walking trial we have access to is in New Mexico. It's about a 1000 mile round trip. That's the most that we as working stiffs can manage as a weekend trial.

mm, I am sorry that you were treated badly. Those people should be ashamed of themselves.
As participants in this sport we are ALL ambassadors for it. On and off the field. We need to conduct ourselves in a manner that is good for the sport and it's future. If one disagrees with a rule (believe me, I have a few on my list) strongly enough, then they have options. The first would be to go thru the proper procedures to try to get the rule changed. The second would be to simply not participate.
The WRONG way to approach it is to treat others (who are participating following the rules) badly.

Now having said all of that, there is a common sense rule change that would make things better. Simply allow the walkers to be braced against other walkers.
The judges would have to set aside any preconcieved notions that the winner would have to be HB handled, and pick the best dog period. Some judges would probably have a problem with this, but they would after a period of time be replaced with judges who do not.
We already have such a rule in place in judging juvenile stakes. It says something to the effect that a judge shall look for potential for a future high class Gundog or All Age dog WITHOUT SHOWING PREFERENCE FOR EITHER CLASS.

AZ Brittany Guy · Post by **AZ Brittany Guy** » Sat Oct 11, 2008 8:18 am

The trials I have competed in, the Clubs always try to match walker with walkers when possible. From what I hear, we all are participating in a dying sport and I think it is in everyone's best interest to be Ambassadors and encourage the new comers. Most people get their start by walking and graduate to horseback. If we take an exclusive attitude rather than a inclusive attitude we are contributing to the demise of the sport. There are too many other "outside influences" that are attacking our sport without us adding to the problem.

Brittguy · Post by **Brittguy** » Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:51 am

[quote="AZ Brittany Guy"]The trials I have competed in, the Clubs always try to match walker with walkers when possible. So much for "luck of the draw"

AZ Brittany Guy · Post by **AZ Brittany Guy** » Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:58 am

Brittguy wrote:
AZ Brittany Guy wrote:The trials I have competed in, the Clubs always try to match walker with walkers when possible. So much for "luck of the draw"

You want to see luck of the draw? Look at the bracing sheets that have a Pro with 15 enteries in a 30 dog stake

Post by **Sharon** » Sat Oct 11, 2008 4:50 pm

or my friend lat month. new young fellow. 3 times braced with the guy no one wants to be braced with. Hmmmm What a co-incidence.

AZ Brittany Guy · Post by **AZ Brittany Guy** » Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:37 pm

I guess we don't live in a "perfect world" and we have to deal with the human element.

There are many more things going on in a trial that effect the outcome besides walking or riding. Dry conditions, wet conditions, windy, not windy, green dog blowing up another dog, on and on an on. :roll: You just gotta like the sport for what it is and realize the people that put these things together do it for the love of the sport and they do it for free. It's not easy and they never win on the deal. I'm about growing the sport. Here's one that will piss some people off but, I think you should try to give as many ribbons as possible. I am not talking about awarding a "championship point" to an undeserving dog (that's where you should withhold a placement) but those 2nd 3rd and 4th place finishers. If we can at all possible get a newbie to go home happy and looking forward to the next trial, then I think that is a positive thing for the sport. Maybe I should not have that view on pro stakes but certainly amateur.

I may be wrong but I always do have an opinion.

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Sat Oct 11, 2008 7:23 pm

AZ Brittany Guy wrote:I guess we don't live in a "perfect world" and we have to deal with the human element. There are many more things going on in a trial that effect the outcome besides walking or riding. Dry conditions, wet conditions, windy, not windy, green dog blowing up another dog, on and on an on. :roll: You just gotta like the sport for what it is and realize the people that put these things together do it for the love of the sport and they do it for free. It's not easy and they never win on the deal. I'm about growing the sport. Here's one that will piss some people off but, I think you should try to give as many ribbons as possible. I am not talking about awarding a "championship point" to an undeserving dog (that's where you should withhold a placement) but those 2nd 3rd and 4th place finishers. If we can at all possible get a newbie to go home happy and looking forward to the next trial, then I think that is a positive thing for the sport. Maybe I should not have that view on pro stakes but certainly amateur.

I may be wrong but I always do have an opinion.

I for one do not think you are wrong! Those ribbons have been paid for anyways and will just get thrown in the trash. Might as well make someones day with them. Of course points should only be awarded to dogs that meet the minimum requirements. This could require awarding 1st, withholding second and awarding 3rd, 4th etc. This way if the winner was later DQed then a undeserving dog could not move up to get points.

I judged a derby stake where no dog established point. All of the dogs did have bird contact. My judging partner wanted to award all placements.
I deferred. I said that I could feel good about awarding a first (and or points) to a dog that had not established point. I would however agree to withholding 1st and awarding 2nd, 3rd, 4th. That is what we did. Yes it was technically incorrect, but I didn't see any harm in it.

Neil Mace · Post by **Neil Mace** » Sat Oct 11, 2008 8:05 pm

When I say AKC needs to change the rules, one way would be to allow a segregation of walking and horseback handlers at the drawing (you might end up with two or more bye dogs, if a bitch also comes in season), but I am ok with that. The rules cover how to do a drawing with a pro having a number of entries, they could do the same with walking/horseback (diferenct color drawing slips).

As it is now, we have one set of rules that explains the range of a walking gun dog is not the same as a horseback one, yet at the same time, it explicitly states to not segregate at the drawing and it instructs the judges to set a pace to accomodate the walking handler if braced with a horseback one. That is real inconsistancy.

Let me say again, I want as many to enjoy our sport as can, I was just giving the other side of the coin, it is not easy, if you are a true sportsman, to win a horseback trial if you are braced with a walking handler. AFTCA agrees with me.

Neil

AZ Brittany Guy · Post by **AZ Brittany Guy** » Sat Oct 11, 2008 8:17 pm

Neil, you may be right, but from my relatively short time in this sport I believe that if your dog hunts forward, hits objectives, handles kindly and is honest, you will have a dog that gets used regardless of what the handler is doing. Your suggestion regarding the bracing is a good one and I believe that many akc clubs try to do it regardless if it is in a rule book or not.

Post by **Sharon** » Sat Oct 11, 2008 10:16 pm

huntindog wrote:
AZ Brittany Guy wrote:I guess we don't live in a "perfect world" and we have to deal with the human element. There are many more things going on in a trial that effect the outcome besides walking or riding. Dry conditions, wet conditions, windy, not windy, green dog blowing up another dog, on and on an on. :roll: You just gotta like the sport for what it is and realize the people that put these things together do it for the love of the sport and they do it for free. It's not easy and they never win on the deal. I'm about growing the sport. Here's one that will piss some people off but, I think you should try to give as many ribbons as possible. I am not talking about awarding a "championship point" to an undeserving dog (that's where you should withhold a placement) but those 2nd 3rd and 4th place finishers. If we can at all possible get a newbie to go home happy and looking forward to the next trial, then I think that is a positive thing for the sport. Maybe I should not have that view on pro stakes but certainly amateur.

I may be wrong but I always do have an opinion.
I for one do not think you are wrong! Those ribbons have been paid for anyways and will just get thrown in the trash. Might as well make someones day with them. Of course points should only be awarded to dogs that meet the minimum requirements. This could require awarding 1st, withholding second and awarding 3rd, 4th etc. This way if the winner was later DQed then a undeserving dog could not move up to get points.

I judged a derby stake where no dog established point. All of the dogs did have bird contact. My judging partner wanted to award all placements.
I deferred. I said that I could feel good about awarding a first (and or points) to a dog that had not established point. I would however agree to withholding 1st and awarding 2nd, 3rd, 4th. That is what we did. Yes it was technically incorrect, but I didn't see any harm in it.

Good for you guys. We best start doing all we can to encourage newbies. Otherwise................

MTO4Life · Post by **MTO4Life** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 7:36 am

Sharon wrote:
huntindog wrote:
AZ Brittany Guy wrote:I guess we don't live in a "perfect world" and we have to deal with the human element. There are many more things going on in a trial that effect the outcome besides walking or riding. Dry conditions, wet conditions, windy, not windy, green dog blowing up another dog, on and on an on. :roll: You just gotta like the sport for what it is and realize the people that put these things together do it for the love of the sport and they do it for free. It's not easy and they never win on the deal. I'm about growing the sport. Here's one that will piss some people off but, I think you should try to give as many ribbons as possible. I am not talking about awarding a "championship point" to an undeserving dog (that's where you should withhold a placement) but those 2nd 3rd and 4th place finishers. If we can at all possible get a newbie to go home happy and looking forward to the next trial, then I think that is a positive thing for the sport. Maybe I should not have that view on pro stakes but certainly amateur.

I may be wrong but I always do have an opinion.
I for one do not think you are wrong! Those ribbons have been paid for anyways and will just get thrown in the trash. Might as well make someones day with them. Of course points should only be awarded to dogs that meet the minimum requirements. This could require awarding 1st, withholding second and awarding 3rd, 4th etc. This way if the winner was later DQed then a undeserving dog could not move up to get points.

I judged a derby stake where no dog established point. All of the dogs did have bird contact. My judging partner wanted to award all placements.
I deferred. I said that I could feel good about awarding a first (and or points) to a dog that had not established point. I would however agree to withholding 1st and awarding 2nd, 3rd, 4th. That is what we did. Yes it was technically incorrect, but I didn't see any harm in it.
Good for you guys. We best start doing all we can to encourage newbies. Otherwise................

I went to my first trial this August. It was highly enjoyable, meeting many great people. I had the chance to handle a dog in the Amateur Gun Dog stake, having never handled a dog before. I took 4th place and that hooked me. I'm not saying I wouldn't still do trials and such without the placement as I would have, but let me tell you... as a newbie, that ribbon really made me look twice at trials and want to get my dog into them more. I don't think with holding 1st and giving 2nd, 3rd and 4th is necessarily wrong, but I am extremely new to all of this, and most have done far more FT's than me, so I can defer to your knowledge. As someone said, at least in the amateur stakes, it is nice to keep the newbies here... and I agree. I'm not here to argue politics, I'm just giving a newbies take on keeping people interested. Maybe in a few years, my opinion will change having run in many trials, but it is like introducing young kids to hunting. If we don't do it, the sport will die. I believe the same goes with FT's, and keeping them coming. That 4th really helped me, and I would promote going to a trial now....

Again, I'm not arguing politics... just giving a view from a new person to trials...

zzweims · Post by **zzweims** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 10:02 am

When a walking handler is braced with a HB handler, both are at a disadvantage. Any sensible HB handler will take the first opportunity to seperate, but if he does move ahead, he is likely to end up handling both dogs. There is nothing worse than working a young dog on point only to see his handler-less bracemate come screaming in for the steal. I don't say 'whoa' to my dogs, (should've last weekend

) but I sure as heck have said it to alot of other peoples dogs. If you are lucky enough to have a good gallery and a sensible judge, a new mounted handler will be assigned to the dog, but that doesn't happen often.

Separating walking and HB handlers at the drawing is a good idea, but the secretaries don't always know who will walk and who will ride. Plus stuff happens. We've all seen walkers mount up at the last minute, and riders get off and walk.

I'd like to see HB only and Walking only trials, but that's not likely to happen. Fewer and fewer people ride these days. And I feel sorry for them. They will never know the view, the flexibility, and the sheer teamwork that comes from riding a horse. When I started in this game, I was told that it was a 'team' sport: one dog, one handler, one scout, and two horses. It seems not many see it that way anymore.

Just a comment on the derby dogs going birdless--it happens. But akc rules state that the dog must establish point in order to receive a placement. Technically, you cannot award even 4th under those circumstances. You can, however, call for a second series. Did you guys not even consider that?

Aline
http://sitekreator.com/zzfarms

Post by **kninebirddog** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 12:23 pm

Not sure about other places but AZ the cover being sparse and the birds not being good flyers...derby's can be and are a train wreck just waiting to happen

I was impressed how ever at the last brittany trail here in AZ when one judge made some comments about a walking handler...the other handler who was on horse back even got upset with the judge and made his horse go much slower then the handler...and the walking handler was any thing but slow...

snips · Post by **snips** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:05 pm

I would not walk at a HB trial.

AZ Brittany Guy · Post by **AZ Brittany Guy** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:13 pm

snips wrote:I would not walk at a HB trial.

If you don't own a horse and can't borrow one you have to walk when walking trials are few and far between.

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:16 pm

zzweims wrote:When a walking handler is braced with a HB handler, both are at a disadvantage. Any sensible HB handler will take the first opportunity to seperate, but if he does move ahead, he is likely to end up handling both dogs. There is nothing worse than working a young dog on point only to see his handler-less bracemate come screaming in for the steal. I don't say 'whoa' to my dogs, (should've last weekend ) but I sure as heck have said it to alot of other peoples dogs. If you are lucky enough to have a good gallery and a sensible judge, a new mounted handler will be assigned to the dog, but that doesn't happen often.

Separating walking and HB handlers at the drawing is a good idea, but the secretaries don't always know who will walk and who will ride. Plus stuff happens. We've all seen walkers mount up at the last minute, and riders get off and walk.

I'd like to see HB only and Walking only trials, but that's not likely to happen. Fewer and fewer people ride these days. And I feel sorry for them. They will never know the view, the flexibility, and the sheer teamwork that comes from riding a horse. When I started in this game, I was told that it was a 'team' sport: one dog, one handler, one scout, and two horses. It seems not many see it that way anymore.

Just a comment on the derby dogs going birdless--it happens. But akc rules state that the dog must establish point in order to receive a placement. Technically, you cannot award even 4th under those circumstances. You can, however, call for a second series. Did you guys not even consider that?

Aline
http://sitekreator.com/zzfarms

Well the other judge said we could do callbacks. My thought was that all of the dogs did have bird contact during the brace and didn't point. (As I stated earlier) So what would a callback prove?.

Yes I know the rule.(As I stated earlier) I had to reach a compromise with a very well known experienced AF judge, yet keep with the intent of the AKC rule. I still think it was the thing to do under the circumstances. And what did it hurt?

Post by **kninebirddog** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:34 pm

Those ribbons can help bring people back
sure besure that 1st place is what it is supposed to be ..but if there are no points at stake..i can only see benefit from giving those ribbons out and not withhold them

we had a guy in cal who would make up trophys for people who's dogs never took a point placement in NSTRA....so those people were asked to put a star by their names and the person who got first among them got a gordon derby prize

he even did things like for 4th place in our format ...like the golden screw award

those little things do a lot to get a person to come back

amazing what a stupid ribbon or plaque can do

Post by **Sharon** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:40 pm

kninebirddog wrote:Not sure about other places but AZ the cover being sparse and the birds not being good flyers...derby's can be and are a train wreck just waiting to happen

I was impressed how ever at the last brittany trail here in AZ when one judge made some comments about a walking handler...the other handler who was on horse back even got upset with the judge and made his horse go much slower then the handler...and the walking handler was any thing but slow...

LOL LOL I love it. My kind of guy.

Razor · Post by **Razor** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 3:25 pm

Neil Mace wrote:When I say AKC needs to change the rules, one way would be to allow a segregation of walking and horseback handlers at the drawing (you might end up with two or more bye dogs, if a bitch also comes in season), but I am ok with that. The rules cover how to do a drawing with a pro having a number of entries, they could do the same with walking/horseback (diferenct color drawing slips).

As it is now, we have one set of rules that explains the range of a walking gun dog is not the same as a horseback one, yet at the same time, it explicitly states to not segregate at the drawing and it instructs the judges to set a pace to accomodate the walking handler if braced with a horseback one. That is real inconsistancy.

Let me say again, I want as many to enjoy our sport as can, I was just giving the other side of the coin, it is not easy, if you are a true sportsman, to win a horseback trial if you are braced with a walking handler. AFTCA agrees with me.

Neil

I agree, this should happen.

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 3:35 pm

snips wrote:I would not walk at a HB trial.

Actually all AKC trials are walking. Horseback handling is PERMITTED, not required.

AZ Brittany Guy · Post by **AZ Brittany Guy** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:54 pm

huntindog wrote:
snips wrote:I would not walk at a HB trial.
Actually all AKC trials are walking. Horseback handling is PERMITTED, not required.

So its kinda like a golf tournament where the handicapped are allowed to ride a cart? I can see why Delmar, a Pro, lobbied for the horse. It would be hard for a Pro to make a living having to walk every brace to handle customers dogs. It's funny how horse handling takes a drivers seat to a "dog event". I hope you know that much of what I just said was with tongue in cheek.

Neil Mace · Post by **Neil Mace** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 5:03 pm

huntindog wrote:
snips wrote:I would not walk at a HB trial.
Actually all AKC trials are walking. Horseback handling is PERMITTED, not required.

Martin,

You are right, but can you explain this rule (direct form the AKC Rule Book)?

*Walking Handler Gun Dog range—In Walking
Gun Dog Stakes, the dog’s range should be suitable
for the walking handler. Horseback Handler
Gun Dog range—In Horseback Handling Gun Dog
Stakes, the dog’s range should be suitable for a
horseback-mounted handler taking into consideration
the cover and terrain.

How would you apply those standards as a judge when braced together?

You could also walk in the National All-Age Championship? Do you think your horseback handled bracemate would be at a disadvantage?

Neil

3Britts · Post by **3Britts** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 5:54 pm

Neil Mace wrote:
huntindog wrote:
snips wrote:I would not walk at a HB trial.
Actually all AKC trials are walking. Horseback handling is PERMITTED, not required.
Martin,

You are right, but can you explain this rule (direct form the AKC Rule Book)?

*Walking Handler Gun Dog range—In Walking
Gun Dog Stakes, the dog’s range should be suitable
for the walking handler. Horseback Handler
Gun Dog range—In Horseback Handling Gun Dog
Stakes, the dog’s range should be suitable for a
horseback-mounted handler taking into consideration
the cover and terrain.
How would you apply those standards as a judge when braced together?

You could also walk in the National All-Age Championship? Do you think your horseback handled bracemate would be at a disadvantage?

Neil

And here is the problem. Do judges look at the range of the differently handled dogs?
I would thing that a walking handled dog would be judged on the merits of a walking handled gundog and the hb handled dog on the merits of a hb handled gundog. Does this happen? I don't know. I have never had a judge be anything but complimentary toward my dog, his movement and ability. But I am sure that some judges also have their own bias' toward walking in a hb trial.
I am not faulting all judges, but I am sure that it happens on occaisions. All judges have those quailities that they like and dislike in dogs which, because of human nature, affect their judgement. I just hope that I keep getting those judges who look for the best of type of gd, aa, derby and puppy.

AZ Brittany Guy · Post by **AZ Brittany Guy** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 6:12 pm

*Walking Handler Gun Dog range—In Walking
Gun Dog Stakes, the dog’s range should be suitable
for the walking handler. Horseback Handler
Gun Dog range—In Horseback Handling Gun Dog
Stakes, the dog’s range should be suitable for a
horseback-mounted handler taking into consideration
the cover and terrain.

How would you apply those standards as a judge when braced together?

Good question but isn't that the challenge that is always presented when judging Derby?

The judge is supposed the have the experience and ability to discern the differences like knowing a good AA prospect and a good GD prospect.

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Sun Oct 12, 2008 6:57 pm

Neil Mace wrote:
huntindog wrote:
snips wrote:I would not walk at a HB trial.
Actually all AKC trials are walking. Horseback handling is PERMITTED, not required.
Martin,

You are right, but can you explain this rule (direct form the AKC Rule Book)?

*Walking Handler Gun Dog range—In Walking
Gun Dog Stakes, the dog’s range should be suitable
for the walking handler. Horseback Handler
Gun Dog range—In Horseback Handling Gun Dog
Stakes, the dog’s range should be suitable for a
horseback-mounted handler taking into consideration
the cover and terrain.
How would you apply those standards as a judge when braced together?

You could also walk in the National All-Age Championship? Do you think your horseback handled bracemate would be at a disadvantage?

Neil

Neil, yes you are right. I have often wondered just what AKC had in mind when They wrote that. Especially knowing what language it replaced. IIRC It was along the lines of " A gundog shall hunt at a range that would be usefull to a handler on foot"

We used to joke about that a lot as it seemed that the dogs that won a lot were tweeners or dogs that couldn't quite do All Age.

The year we went to the Gundog Nationals, I heard a lot of discussion about how maybe the Gundog class should be eliminated as many of the dogs entered were really All Age dogs that just managed to get qualified for Gundog.

I haven't looked at a recent rulebook to see if the statement "The horse is to only be used as a means of conveyance, not as a handling aid" is still in the book.

Maybe someone has access to the minutes where that rule was discussed. That would shed some light on just what they were thinking.

As far as walking in the AA championship, I doubt one could ever get qualified on foot. So even though it would technically be possible, it is a moot point.

mm · Post by mm » Mon Oct 13, 2008 3:11 am

If the goal is to attract new people to the sport then there should be more walking stakes and they should be seperate from horse stakes. It is too much to expect a new guy to come in with a horse and all that is required to keep one, Some may have them but most dont and to use rental horses is a problem for a lot of people. Also I know a lot of clubs are having trouble getting the rental horses to even show up. There have been quite a few walking trials here in the east and the times I have gone to these I have met many new people there for the first time and the atmosphear was very friendly and walking was fun. I think with gas and the economy that getting new people with horses would be harder and harder where on the other hand a walking trial really is a cheap day out.
mm

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:28 am

mm wrote:If the goal is to attract new people to the sport then there should be more walking stakes and they should be seperate from horse stakes. It is too much to expect a new guy to come in with a horse and all that is required to keep one, Some may have them but most dont and to use rental horses is a problem for a lot of people. Also I know a lot of clubs are having trouble getting the rental horses to even show up. There have been quite a few walking trials here in the east and the times I have gone to these I have met many new people there for the first time and the atmosphear was very friendly and walking was fun. I think with gas and the economy that getting new people with horses would be harder and harder where on the other hand a walking trial really is a cheap day out.
mm

A huge part of the problem is that AKC and AF are National organizations that must write rules that can work across the nation. Some areas have an abundance of walking trials and some do not. There can be many reasons as to why this is so. Couple that fact with some of the individual breed rules and there can be no perfect solution that would work everywhere.

Generally though I think that HB stakes are on the way out. The demographics of America are changing, and it cannot be stopped. Fewer and fewer people have the ability to own horses. In my opinion that is why you see the AKC making some of the changes they are. Like any buissness they must be sure that they are positioned to meet the demands of the future. While at the same time trying to meet the needs of the present.

Look at the Hunt test format. It is wildly popular and growing. No horses allowed for handlers. That means that any city dweller can participate. FT must reconcile the changing demographics with their format if they are to survive. This will not be easy as many like things the way they are/were.

Anyways, this is just my opinion. Zipping up my flamesuit now.

Post by **kninebirddog** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 6:40 am

http://www.akc.org/pdfs/rulebooks/RFTPNT.pdf

Judges should not follow a handler that roams off
the designated route of the course. Judges must not
gallop to keep pace with handlers that move faster
than at a flat walk (refer also to Procedure 6-L).

6-S Horseback Handling. The premium list for
any licensed or member field trial must specify
whether or not handling from horseback will be permitted
in any or all stakes. If handling from horseback
is permitted in any stake, the club should
attempt to provide horses. Mounted and foot handlers
are not to be segregated in the drawing.
The Judges shall see to it that any mounted
handler uses his horse only as a means of conveyance
on the course and never as an active aid
in handling. The handlers shall remain on the
specified course in front of the Judges and in the
Judges’ line of travel, except as necessary to handle
a dog that is seen on point. The Judges shall
control the pace, whether both handlers are on
foot or both are mounted. If one handler is
mounted and the other is on foot, the Judges shall
set a reasonable pace to accommodate the foot
handler. Mounted handlers must keep their horses
at a flat walk at all times unless otherwise
authorized by a Judge.
A handler must always dismount before handling
his dog on game and before firing. No handler’s
horse may be brought into the bird field.

[/quote]

shags · Post by **shags** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:29 am

"Walking Handler Gun Dog range—In Walking
Gun Dog Stakes, the dog’s range should be suitable
for the walking handler. Horseback Handler
Gun Dog range—In Horseback Handling Gun Dog
Stakes, the dog’s range should be suitable for a
horseback-mounted handler taking into consideration
the cover and terrain.

The book makes no differentiation between the range of a walking handler's dog and a horseback handler's dog in a HB stake. I'd interpret the rule to be if the dog is entered in a HB stake, his range should be that of a HB dog.
Seems like the Powers That Be attempt to clarify, but only make things more confusing.

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:43 am

All the rules change did was put into writing what most judges were doing anyway.
I've never walked in a horseback stake and expected to be held to a different standard than the mounted handlers were.

Funny story from this past weekend; I ran Shooter and Buffy in a local brit horseback trial, and I walked. Buffy was braced with a GSP and his riding handler, who kept a very reasonable pace throughout. Well, at one point, his dog got hung up on one side of the course, so I moved ahead. I kept going, had one quick find, and as it turned out, the riding handler never managed to catch up to us.
After the brace, he comes over wagging his finger at me, "Now LISTEN!! You walking handlers need to watch what you're doing and set a pace that I am able to keep up with!!!!"

He was kidding, of course, but I thought it was pretty funny.

Neil Mace · Post by **Neil Mace** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 12:46 pm

Martin,

The first pointing dog field trial was held in 1874 not far from my house, you should be interested to know it was all walking. By 1880 most were mounted. As near as I can tell, people have been predicting the death of horseback trials for the same reasons you cite for over 115 years.

Yet even with the high fuel prices, high horse feed costs, and an uncertain economy; this fall has brought us some of the largest entries ever. The Brittany Chicken Ch was 75 dogs! They ran over 250 dogs at GSP trial in NE, the MBC filled up two weeks before the drawing. But I hear walking trials are down.

Horses are expensive, no question. Were it not for dogs I would never own one, let alone three.

Check back with me in 20 years, we will still be running dogs from them.

You need to work on your theory a bit,

Neil

3Britts · Post by **3Britts** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:19 pm

Neil Mace wrote:Martin,

The first pointing dog field trial was held in 1874 not far from my house, you should be interested to know it was all walking. By 1880 most were mounted. As near as I can tell, people have been predicting the death of horseback trials for the same reasons you cite for over 115 years.

Neil

Neil, I was just wondering how that first trial went. Could you see it from your front porch?

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:43 pm

shags wrote:"Walking Handler Gun Dog range—In Walking
Gun Dog Stakes, the dog’s range should be suitable
for the walking handler. Horseback Handler
Gun Dog range—In Horseback Handling Gun Dog
Stakes, the dog’s range should be suitable for a
horseback-mounted handler taking into consideration
the cover and terrain.

The book makes no differentiation between the range of a walking handler's dog and a horseback handler's dog in a HB stake. I'd interpret the rule to be if the dog is entered in a HB stake, his range should be that of a HB dog.
Seems like the Powers That Be attempt to clarify, but only make things more confusing.

So is the glass half empty or half full?
If ALL trials are walking trials and some only PERMIT HB handling then it would seem that your interpretation is wrong.
Neil seemed to suggest that it meant different ranges for HB or foot. I tend to agree.

One could make pretty good case for either point of view.
We really don't know what the intention was, as a lot of the rules are at odds with one another.

My solution would be for AKC to allow seperation during the draw AND judge them each to their own standard. I believe a good judge could do this.

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 2:56 pm

Neil Mace wrote:Martin,

The first pointing dog field trial was held in 1874 not far from my house, you should be interested to know it was all walking. By 1880 most were mounted. As near as I can tell, people have been predicting the death of horseback trials for the same reasons you cite for over 115 years.

Yet even with the high fuel prices, high horse feed costs, and an uncertain economy; this fall has brought us some of the largest entries ever. The Brittany Chicken Ch was 75 dogs! They ran over 250 dogs at GSP trial in NE, the MBC filled up two weeks before the drawing. But I hear walking trials are down.

Horses are expensive, no question. Were it not for dogs I would never own one, let alone three.

Check back with me in 20 years, we will still be running dogs from them.

You need to work on your theory a bit,

Neil

Well Like I've said, Things aren't the same everywhere.
I've been to quite a few HB trials where at least half the entries were foot handled. And qute a few more that NEEDED the foot handlers entries to make the numbers required. I think that may be why some clubs treat the foot handlers better than others.

The walking trial that I started had to turn away entries in it's second year. I am considering expanding the grounds to add a course so we can run more dogs next year. This would seem a no brainer, but it comes with more headaches as we would need a dog wagon, more bird planters etc.

I think my theory is valid, but of course it will vary around the country and my crystal ball is a tad cloudy when it comes to timetables.

Neil Mace · Post by **Neil Mace** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:07 pm

I have enjoy this discussion and have learned a good bit,

Let me be really clear on something, I enjoy watching walking trial dogs, not only AKC, but FDSB, NBHA, ABHA, and US Complete. I think the coverdog trials are one of the hardest to win in the country, taking the best of dogs. So I do not think All-Age, Shooting Dog, or horseback Gun Dogs are better than walking dogs. I have won with the same dogs in All-Age, Shooting Dog, walking and horseback Gun Dog. Good dogs adjust.

And while we are talking about pace, I think those that show up for a walking stake in running shoes and take off at a jog, going a pace much faster than I handle from horseback are doing a real disservice to the sport. I will not longer enter walking trials Many of you have told stories of how you were treated by a horseback bracemate, in a walking trial last spring, I had a back, two finds and a stop to flush, with a nice ground application in the first 12 minutes. While I was working the dog on his finds, the other handler buried me, according to the judge that let him do it, my dog regained the front and was on point for 12 minutes on moving birds before he lost his manners. Walking trials have become a format for the young and fit.

And if you ever show up at a trial where we are braced together and want to walk, first I will try to loan you a horse, if you decline, I will be welcoming and courteous. Not feigned, I really will be happy to see you. But I know the odds are against me getting anything done. That has been my only point, know the other side, walk a mile in their shoes.

Some mornings after being on a horse for 5 or 6 days straight, I feel old enough to have seen the first field trial, but I am not that old. I attended my first trial in 1963.

Neil

3Britts · Post by **3Britts** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 6:50 pm

Neil Mace wrote:Some mornings after being on a horse for 5 or 6 days straight, I feel old enough to have seen the first field trial, but I am not that old. I attended my first trial in 1963.

Neil

What a coincidence, that was the year I was born. You might say that was the year my mother began her trials as well.
I too think that it is up to both parties, when braced together and one is hb and the other is walking, to work together. Again, when I have been braced with those on horses, I tell them to run their dogs as they normally would and I would do the same. It has worked well because we have both thought of the other handler and his or her needs.

AZ Brittany Guy · Post by **AZ Brittany Guy** » Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:52 pm

This has been a very good post from my point of view. Neil, I think you have presented your thoughts very well and I know you appreciate good dogs regardless of the class......after all you have a Rocky dog

Although I don't have a horse, I always try to borrow one at every HB trial I enter. When I am unable to get a horse, I always tell my bracemate that if we can get enough seperation it is ok with me if he takes the front and I try to go to the inside and turn sooner if the judge permits it. I know what you mean when you say you get stuck handeling the walking handlers dog and it is disruptive. I don't want to create those types of problems.

sweetsong · Post by **sweetsong** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 5:23 pm

I have to agree! This has been one of the best and most informative string of posts I have read. I am a new comer to the trial game and have only entered walking trials. I have considered entering a HB trial but decided not to because I did not want to put my self at a disadvantage or my brace mate. I do not own a horse so I do not train from a horse, I'm sure I wouldn't know how to handle from a horse and probably put my self and other in danger. I wish we had more walking trial here in the Midwest.

Thanks to very one, I have learned a lot.
Terry

Neil Mace · Post by **Neil Mace** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 1:38 am

Terry,

I hope I did not sway you from horseback trials. Like so many have said you can walk and win, or you could take riding lessons and borrow a horse.

Good luck we need you,

Neil

jetto · Post by **jetto** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 6:10 am

Ok I was NOT going to get involved with this one but apparently my common sense has left me temporarily, lol...

Neil- You refer to "walking trial dogs" and "horseback gun dogs". This is a subject I've got a real pet peeve on, lol...

We don't have horses and they aren't in the foreseeable future either with the economy the way it seems to be going. We are lucky enough to have good friends who are willing to share their horses with Carl when we are at a horseback trial. And there are times when we utilize the wrangler also if one is available.

I'm going to use our dogs as an example of why I don't buy the whole "Oh it's got to be EITHER a walking dog OR a horseback dog- it can't be both".
Our dogs run in both "horseback" trials and walking trials. Our oldest gun dog who has the most placements has almost an equal amount earned in horseback stakes and walking stakes. On different grounds in 4 different states. His points are also spread pretty evenly between horseback and walking stakes. Our Irish Setter who just finally started to run broke has two placements in walking stakes but has put down nice performances in horseback stakes this fall but went birdless in one- but kept up with the bracemate who does NOT do walking trials at all. Had he had clean birdwork in the one stake- he would have rattled the placements for sure.

Now to our youngsters. During her juvenile career Tilly won a 17 starter Open Derby horseback stake at an all-breed trial with my husband as the only amateur handler in the stake. She also has all of her amateur juvenile points which of course the amateur juvie stakes are all walking- and earned a couple of them on those very same grounds on that very same course. Cruz, our youngest Brittany, earned his open juvie pts from horseback stakes and also has a couple amateur juvie points. Our young Irish Setter is just getting started but he's been handled 4 times in trials- one time walking and 3 times horseback and he had no problem with the transition.

And Cruz's mother is a Nat Am Ch Gun Dog- WALKING Stake....and has also recently placed in some All-Age stakes against pretty decent competition. And his father was a RU Nat GD champion- Horseback stake -who also was run successfully in walking trials.....Go figure huh......So I'm sorry- I don't buy the whole idea that the dog has to be one or the other.

Are there dogs you really wouldn't want to walk behind. I'm sure there are. Are there dogs that really don't look good when in front of a horse- I'm sure there are. The extreme dogs- sure they are going to be one way or the other.

And I'm sure there will be some who blast me and say I'm wrong. And I might be wrong. Maybe you can't have a dog that can do both successfully. The thing is- we keep running dogs from foot and off horseback and keep getting placements at both- so it might be a tough sell, lol...And we see many of our friends do the exact same thing. Actually the majority of our friends run their dogs in both walking and horseback. And I'm sure it can tend to be a regional issue. We are in the East-Central region with the Brittanys so if you run in Michigan in gun dog stakes- you walk- unless it's the Nat Open GD championship.

I will say that the only issue we've ever had with a transition from walking to horseback- was Carl forgetting to speak to the dog before I released him for a horseback brace. I turned him loose, he took off up the line and then came all the way back to ME- because he didn't realize Carl was on a horse on this day and he figured I better get walking if "I" was doing the handling on this day, lol...Once Carl hollered to him and he realized "dad" was on a horse- away he went. We do remember now to have Carl talk to each dog before I turn them loose in a horseback stake, lol...Kristi

Neil Mace · Post by **Neil Mace** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 9:17 pm

Neil Mace wrote:

So I do not think All-Age, Shooting Dog, or horseback Gun Dogs are better than walking dogs. I have won with the same dogs in All-Age, Shooting Dog, walking and horseback Gun Dog. Good dogs adjust.

Neil

Post by **Sharon** » Wed Oct 15, 2008 9:52 pm

"Many of you have told stories of how you were treated by a horseback bracemate, in a walking trial last spring, I had a back, two finds and a stop to flush, with a nice ground application in the first 12 minutes. While I was working the dog on his finds, the other handler buried me, according to the judge that let him do it, my dog regained the front and was on point for 12 minutes on moving birds before he lost his manners." quote Neil

Excellent post Neil. Just for my own education, what should the judge have done here? Thanks.

Neil Mace · Post by **Neil Mace** » Thu Oct 16, 2008 3:55 am

Sharon,

Excellent question, I really don't know what the judge is to do when one walking handler runs off and leaves another. I see it happen too often, and it does not take a find for the faster walker to take off at a jog and the slower walker to see the other handler with both dogs far to the front.

As a judge, I set a pace to acommodate the slower walker on the premise that if you are to do so in a horseback/walking brace, you should do so in a fit/non fit walking brace. But that does not fully cover the working of a find, I have told the faster walker to wait, but not sure that is the offical thing to do. Since AKC has rules on everything else, I think they should cover this. Perhaps something like, "In a Walking Gun Dog stake the judges should set a pace to match that of a walking hunter. In the case of one handler having a find, the other handler's dog should be held on course until both the pointing dog and handler catch up or the dog is no longer in contention."

As it is now I fear we are loosing a lot of walking handlers just because they know they cannot keep up. There are 15% fewer entries in the walking Nat. Amateur Gun Dog Ch. than the horseback Open Gun Dog Ch., I think that is part of the reason. Most any of us can walk at a reasonable pace for a 30 minutes to an hour, but only a few can move at the speed most foot handled stakes are ran.

What I see going on is unsportsman like,

Neil

jetto · Post by **jetto** » Thu Oct 16, 2008 5:56 am

I owe you an apology Neil. I misread your posts and didn't catch that part. That's what happens when I try to peek at this stuff when I'm supposed to be working...

I wonder sometimes if the dogs count the horses to decide if it's a walking or horseback brace they are in...lol....

I do agree that since AKC allows walking handlers in any stake that then they should be segregated if at all possible. Kristi