Garmin Astro

Neil Mace · Post by **Neil Mace** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 4:13 am

AKC and AFTCA are wrong to not approve the Garmin Astro immediately!

It as though a new safer football helmet that would prevent injury was developed and the NFL would not allow it because it weighed ½ ounce too much.

Recently, while at the Ames Amateur, I watched supposedly experienced, proficient tracker users waive their receivers in the air, ride in the wrong direction, and generally act confused, as there dog remained in danger. I found one on a paved road a quarter of a mile from a major highway, while his handler was looking 3 miles away.

The irony is that we contacted the handler by cell phone!

We won’t allow the Garmin, yet nearly everyone; handler, scout, rode gallery have cell phones.

It is just wrong, and I urge all to sign the petition at: “http://georgiabrittanyclub.org/astro1.html”, then contact FDSB, AKC, and AFTCA to voice your opinion.

After losing one dog, I heard a handler pulled his dogs from the Ames Amateur because they would not let him use the Garmin, which is something to consider.

Neil

rhines · Post by **rhines** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:23 am

As long as the collar doesn't look or feel like an e-collar it should be allowed. A collar weighing more than 5 oz isn't allow. A cell phone has nothing to do with anything as one isn't allowed to use a tracking collar until the dog is out of judgement anyhow. Maybe Garmin can redesign the DC30 to make it lighter - I don't have one, but I hear they are really great units.

shets114 · Post by **shets114** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 8:38 am

I think they are pretty close to approving them if they haven't allready.
Tracker systems are reliable and when used properly by knowledgable user they are just about as effective. In some cases maybe even more effective. Depends on Range the dog is out and how long it is gone. Garmin is a great system but it is not free of faults. I have both, there are good and bad about both.

It is a shame that dogs become in danger, however for the life of me I can't understand why you need to train your dog to hunt beyond your visibility anyway. Even in the AKC Field Trial rules it states that

Page 36

A Gun Dog must show a
keen desire to hunt, must have a bold and attractive
style of running, and must demonstrate not
only intelligence in quartering and in seeking
objectives but also the ability to find game. The
dog must hunt for its handler at all times at a suitable
Gun Dog range, and should show or check in
front of its handler frequently. It must cover adequate
ground but never range out of sight for a
length of time that would detract from its usefulness
as a practical hunting dog.

Now why would there be a need for a Scout if these rules are applied at all trials?

I know everyone and every judge is going to have a definition of what they say is suitable gun dog range and how frequent they should check.

kbshorthairs · Post by **kbshorthairs** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 9:36 am

not all stakes are GUN DOG stakes

rhines · Post by **rhines** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:39 am

shets114 wrote:It is a shame that dogs become in danger, however for the life of me I can't understand why you need to train your dog to hunt beyond your visibility anyway. Even in the AKC Field Trial rules it states that

Now why would there be a need for a Scout if these rules are applied at all trials?

I know everyone and every judge is going to have a definition of what they say is suitable gun dog range and how frequent they should check.

Ummm, dogs can't read the rules

... even short range gun dogs can get on a deer and chase it for miles.

rhines · Post by **rhines** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:42 am

shets114 wrote:I think they are pretty close to approving them if they haven't allready.
Tracker systems are reliable and when used properly by knowledgable user they are just about as effective. In some cases maybe even more effective. Depends on Range the dog is out and how long it is gone. Garmin is a great system but it is not free of faults. I have both, there are good and bad about both.

Yes, the AKC has approved a certain number of tracking collars for use. This thread is about the denial of approval of the Garmin DC30 collar by the AKC because it weighed too much according to AKC specifications.

Post by **ezzy333** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 10:54 am

rhines wrote:As long as the collar doesn't look or feel like an e-collar it should be allowed. A collar weighing more than 5 oz isn't allow. A cell phone has nothing to do with anything as one isn't allowed to use a tracking collar until the dog is out of judgement anyhow. Maybe Garmin can redesign the DC30 to make it lighter - I don't have one, but I hear they are really great units.

Suppose maybe the scouts and people in the gallery just might talk when they are out of sight? From all of the discussions that I have heard over thew years I doubt if there are many people you can trust if winning is at stake.

Ezzy

Post by **slistoe** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:08 pm

ezzy333 wrote: Suppose maybe the scouts and people in the gallery just might talk when they are out of sight? From all of the discussions that I have heard over thew years I doubt if there are many people you can trust if winning is at stake.

Ezzy

It is this same type of reasoning that makes people paranoid that every other person on the street is a gun toting murderer because they read about something happening in the newspaper and then saw it on the news again that night.

shets114 · Post by **shets114** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:16 pm

So use an approved collar.

Not every collar is fault free. I'm sure if the user of the tracker used it properly it would have put him in the right direction. What happens when the battery on the DC-30 goes dead or the user looses contact with the unit. You are out of luck period.
Are the Garmins nice yes but like I said they are not fault free and the user can still screw them up.

It must range well out in
a forward moving pattern, seeking the most promising
objectives, so as to locate any game on the
course. Excessive line-casting and avoiding cover
must be penalized.

Either way, a hunting dog shouldn't be trained to hunt beyond the limits of your handling.

The only thing that is going to prevent a dog from getting in trouble and out of range no matter what collar you have on is a e collar and trianing. So I can't see how a DC-30 would have fully prevented a dog from getting on a road or in dangers way.

Neil Mace · Post by **Neil Mace** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:19 pm

An All-Age dog is bred and trained to run at extreme range, one that remains in sight cannot win. Dogs do chase off game, but more often they just get disoriented and can't regain the front, running out of hearing range. Are you saying if they are not trained to remain within hearing they should die?

I have watched many so-called experts try to use trackers (telemetry) and almost always they waive the things around until the dog returns on his own. Most can use them in practice, but in a trial with cell towers, power lines, metal buldings, hills, and moutains, few can quickly find a running dog.

The Garmin shows you how far away the dog is, in which direction and how fast he is moving. Collar battiers last 14 hours and replacable handheld batters about 36, and with the long range antenna the range is 25+ miles. Since the Garmin is close to idiot proof, you can ride right to the dog without skill and training. It does have holes, but it is much easier for most to use than telemetry.

The reference to cell phones was concerning cheating, which does go on. I am not concerned about GPS units when we have scouting abuses, over-aged Derbies, poor judges, and worse handler interference. We need to enforce the rules we have and allow the Garmin and the next (whatever it might be) advancement that are designed to protect our dogs.

Neil

shets114 · Post by **shets114** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 3:28 pm

Not saying they should die....

I would rather have a dog that hunts with me. If that is what floats your boat have at it. Still doesn't actually follow in the guidlines of the rules though.

The dog must demonstrate its
independent judgment in hunting the course, but
must show a willingness to handle when called
upon.

How can a dog have a willingness to handle when called if it is farther than your control?

Owned trackers for years haven't had many issues other than figuring what is bounce and not.
I have had the Garmin loose contact while hunting. I have also had people tell me they have had batteries die while out.
A 14 hour charge is on average. My Tracker collars are good for 800 hours. At times I would rather have the tracker on, gives me more of a feeling that if somthing goes wrong than I would have more time to react.
Do I like my Garmin? Yes it is great to see where the dog is and all the other features but they still have some work to do.
JMO....

Pineywoods · Post by **Pineywoods** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:11 pm

So let me see if I've got this straight we should approve the Garmin and outlaw scouts... wow. By the time you ask for the
Garmin from the judge a good scout may have found the dog. I'm amazed that people who bash what they allow at trails
are upset that they are taking there time to make a decision here. I know some ole boys that are really good with there
telemetry equipment, just two weeks ago I had a friend tell me were his dog was from 3 miles away on one reading and
he was with in 400 yards...it just takes practice. If it's all about dog safety why not use the equipment that gives you 800
hours of battery life as opposed to 14 hours plus has the longer range...radio telemetry. Since the Garmins use radio signals
to relay from collar to receiver it would be just as affected by cell towers,power lines and metal buildings although I've
seen tracking equipment used around all the above with no ill effect. I would bet my best dog that they don't make a antana
that will track 25 miles for a Garmin or Tracker. As of right now 3 miles is the longest I have know of a Garmin tracking a dog in the woods and the Trackers were more than twice that in the same woods. Ronnie Smith in a blog wrote about losing
contact with a dog at 6th's of a mile on the prairies. Now that was with the DC20 collar. All this being said no matter what
you put on your dog, every time you turn one lose you are taking a chance on losing them.I am not trying to start a fight
here just my thoughts on this. I don't own any tracking my self and I have some dogs that run a shooting dog race and I do
most of my hunting in the pineywoods of north Florida so they are often in and out sight. Every time I ask someone about
there Garmin they tell me its great but when I ask about range they tell me there dogs don't range over a couple hundred
yards so what I would like to here is how far away have Garmin owners tracked dogs from?
Thanks.

shets114 · Post by **shets114** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:37 pm

Deal with alot of coyote hunters and they tell me you would be lucky at 5 miles even with the hand held antenna.
I have lost track of my dog out 300 yds with just the unit. I still use it but, it doesn't perform as they advertise in the situations I have used mine in. Maybe in a flat territory with thin cover but if I were in the hills in thick cover I will not be selling my tracker. I haven't used it yet while under full canopy of trees so we'll see how that goes this spring. I know I have lost coverage with my regular gps unit so I don't see how this wouldn't be affected either.

rhines · Post by **rhines** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:03 pm

shets114 wrote:How can a dog have a willingness to handle when called if it is farther than your control?

As I said before, the dogs don' t know the rules!

They get lost, they do things that they were not trained to do. Broke dog or not. Dogs will be dogs.

The point of a tracking collar in field trials is to track and find a dog IF it gets lost or doesn't handle kindly during a field trial (happens a lot). We got by for many, many years without using these at all. It is another tool to use to catch a dog before it becomes permanently lost or road kill. Use it for that and be thankful. If you use a tracking collar for hunting or other personal use, then standards don't matter.

Cell phones, handlers and scouts - that's just a different subject all together - cheaters will be cheaters.

The AKC set the specifications for tracking collars for use in AKC events. Manufacturers and handlers need to live within these specifications if they want their products used for these events. There are approved units that people can use. If the Garmin DC30 is 0.37 ounces too heavy, so be it - Garmin needs to make it lighter. If the AKC changes the specifications to allow 5.5 ounces so the Garmin DC30 can be allowed - then the next collar up will be 5.75oz and people will raise a stink about that too. Where will it all end? 8 oz; 10 oz?.

We have approved collars now - use them. Manufacturers need to be within specification or they will not be approved - that isn't too difficult to understand.

Should we allow a 21" Brittany to be a Dual champion? No - it is 1/2" to tall - you don't keep moving the bar to accept what you end up with, challenge yourself to conform to the standard.

Chief_dog · Post by **Chief_dog** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:17 pm

Unfortunately the trackers in my experience don't reach their advertised range either. I've been using one for four years, and have come to rely on it heavily. My supralite collar only gives me a little over a mile range in southwestern Kansas on washboard flat ground, and my Strike collar about two miles. Back in November a friend and I were running a brace of derby dogs and lost both when they ran into a herd of deer. It took several hours to find the dogs because neither of us could pick up any signal at all on either of our receivers. My dog was two and a half miles west of us, and his ended up about three miles north. We had to blindly drive roads, stopping every so often to get out and scan for a signal. Luckily, due to the trackers, we did find the dogs. But we only had signal a few times through the whole ordeal.

A few weeks ago, in that same area, I was hunting with a different friend who accidently left his Garmin DC30 collar out on top of the dog trailer when we loaded up dogs to change spots. When we got to our next spot, it showed us where the collar had fallen off six miles back. We drove right back to it with no problem. That sold me on the Garmin. I don't own one yet, but I will be buying one as soon as I can save up the money.

Post by **slistoe** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:28 pm

This is a really funny thread. A fellow insists that the devices are not required in a trial where dogs are pushed to the limit and left behind but he owns and uses both on his hunting dogs. Sounds like someone disagreeing for the sake of such to me.

Pineywoods · Post by **Pineywoods** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:33 pm

Chief_dog wrote:Unfortunately the trackers in my experience don't reach their advertised range either. I've been using one for four years, and have come to rely on it heavily. My supralite collar only gives me a little over a mile range in southwestern Kansas on washboard flat ground, and my Strike collar about two miles. Back in November a friend and I were running a brace of derby dogs and lost both when they ran into a herd of deer. It took several hours to find the dogs because neither of us could pick up any signal at all on either of our receivers. My dog was two and a half miles west of us, and his ended up about three miles north. We had to blindly drive roads, stopping every so often to get out and scan for a signal. Luckily, due to the trackers, we did find the dogs. But we only had signal a few times through the whole ordeal.

A few weeks ago, in that same area, I was hunting with a different friend who accidently left his Garmin DC30 collar out on top of the dog trailer when we loaded up dogs to change spots. When we got to our next spot, it showed us where the collar had fallen off six miles back. We drove right back to it with no problem. That sold me on the Garmin. I don't own one yet, but I will be buying one as soon as I can save up the money.

Something is wrong with your tracker if your only getting one or two miles in Kansas.

Neil Mace · Post by **Neil Mace** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 7:40 pm

I have been told by a number of people I trust that the car top antenna for the Garmin was still working at 25+ miles, I believe it. What I do know, when mine has lost the signal, never at less than a mile (I have used it from SD to MS), it does not just stop working, it will still show you back to were it last had a signal, so I have always been able to promptly pick it up again. I also know that I have lost the same dog twice while wearing a Tracker Strike, and have never lost him with a Garmin.

The 5 ounce rule was arbritary and has no real reason, it could have been a pound. What harm is done by having a heavier collar? I would be ok with a 5 pound one. Since Garmin is selling the Astro to hunters as fast as they can make them, it seems easier and quicker for the ruling bodies to change the rule.

To me, it is all about safety, you all are speaking hypothetically, I am talking about real events, real dogs needlessly being lost. It is not an either or thing, those that can use the trackers and like many of the extra benefits will continue to buy and use them, great.

It is up to you, if you don't care, don't sign the petition,

Neil

sweetsong · Post by **sweetsong** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 8:09 pm

Neil wrote:

Since Garmin is selling the Astro to hunters as fast as they can make them, it seems easier and quicker for the ruling bodies to change the rule.

I have heard many times that we need to attract new people to our sport because participation numbers are falling and the field trial population keeps getting older. It would be great if when attracting new people they wouldn't have to buy new equipment.

Terry

Neil Mace · Post by **Neil Mace** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:45 am

Terry,

We are talking about a fairly expensive sport; a well bred pup is $1,500 to $2,000, a winning Derby sells for $30,000+, a pair of horses and tack is $8,000, the basic trailer 10, and the truck $40,000, entry fees are $250 a trial, plus travel; and you are concerned about the cost of $600 to protect a $60,000 dog?

That is misplaced priorities.

No one will have to buy the Garmin, only those that care about their dogs, which is everyone I know that trials at the highest level. I have yet to see someone knowledgeable try the Astro and not see its value.

It is only guys like you and AKC that are the problem (I have little doubt AFTCA will approve the unit in June).

Neil

Post by **slistoe** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:57 am

I think you missed Terry's point Neil. The new folks coming into the game will already have an Astro - Garmin is selling them to hunters as fast as they can make them. If the Astro is not approved, they will need to buy more equipment - ie. the Tracker when they already have something that can do the job.

sweetsong · Post by **sweetsong** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:43 pm

Thanks Slistoe, that was the point I was trying to make.

Terry

Neil Mace · Post by **Neil Mace** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 5:26 pm

Sorry, Terry, I should read more carefully.

Neil

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:55 pm

At the great risk of being told that I am not a knowledgeable person. I am not in support of this petition. At least not with the present unit.

I have a Tracker and an Astro. The Astro is a phenomenal unit. It is too good to be used in trials. The potential for abuse is too great, and with that goes the integrity of the sport.

I would support this unit IF everyone(gallery, handlers, judges) had the OK to use them at any time, and simply do away with the scouts. The cost savings would be huge! A $600 unit could replace the scout and his horse! AND there would be no more stories of how a scout stretched the rules by giving a dog a ride to the front etc.
Everyone would know where the dog was at all times.
That would be the safest possible scenario for the dog, as if it was to go close to danger such as a highway etc, it would be known to all immeadiatly.
It would also make sure that the best dog won. Not the dog with the most creative scout.

Baring that, I feel the Astro is a great hunting and training tool...And that is where it should stay.

Post by **slistoe** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:50 pm

huntindog wrote: It is too good to be used in trials. The potential for abuse is too great,

Please explain.

Neil Mace · Post by **Neil Mace** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 12:46 am

huntindog wrote: The potential for abuse is too great, and with that goes the integrity of the sport.

Unless you are also anti-gun that is absurd, but then I know people that are anti-death penalty and pro-choice. It is your right. But I have to ask do really feel so strongly to risk the life of a dog?

I can tell you for a fact it is much easier to cheat with a tracker, you do not even have to know the frequency or be within a mile of the dog to "dial it in".

Just like with guns, I have always thought we should punish the offender not the tool. AFTCA and AF have a lifetime ban for cheating with a tracking device.

Neil

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:28 am

slistoe wrote:
huntindog wrote: It is too good to be used in trials. The potential for abuse is too great,
Please explain.

Although one could cheat by using a Tracker in the field, it would be risky as has been pointed out in this thread,, They are cumbersome and much more difficult to use. The odds of getting caught are high.
The Astro could be carried in a scouts vest already turned on (or even off, it turns aquires sattelites very fast) and when needed a quick glance inside the vest would reveal the dogs location and the scouts location. It would be very easy to hide and use unobtrusively.

The Astro can also be used off the field.
I could sit in my trailer and watch my computer screen and see where the dogs are running (I have the TOPO map programs loaded) and most importantly where they are going on point! On every point I could mark the position, and soon a pattern would emerge.
Armed with that knowledge, the days of going birdless would be all but over.

Getting the collar signal with a Tracker could be a bit of a challange as there are 5000 frequencys. And once aquired it would be of marginal use.

Getting the collar signal on an Astro collar would be easy. I just got my extra collar. Marrying it to the handheld requires it to be close enough to the collar to touch it OR knowing the ID number of the collar. MY ID number is 39. Thats right a 2 digit number. I believe that means the Astro collar IDs are limited to 99 possible IDs. That would be plenty for hunting use as the handheld can only track 10 collars at once.

Post by **Greg Jennings** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 5:36 am

Martin,
First, I don't agree with your position that the Astro is "too good". If it's good, it's the best for dog safety and that's what this is all about, IMHO.

Second, I think you are making a lot of assumptions about the technology. Leaping to uses that are much more difficult than you think. For example, assuming that because your collar ID is 39 doesn't at all mean that there are 99 possible IDs or that there will always be 99.

Third, I've had my ears open these past few years and have heard the talk behind the trailers about how to use RF trackers beyond finding lost dogs. My mind there is that cheating is cheating and we should just ban the people for life.

To all: Want to do away with cheating with cell phones? It's not THAT hard. Just be prepared to hear things on the scanner that you really don't want to know.

Wa Chukar Hunter · Post by **Wa Chukar Hunter** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 6:56 am

Cheaters will do so, regardless of the tools or rules. It is a moral choice and making rules to govern morality is not very successful.

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:30 am

Question about the collar - is it possible to change the rate of reporting while the dog is out in the field, or does the collar have to be in hand?

I was just checking out the manual online and there are 3 options; 5 seconds, 10 seconds, and 30 seconds. The manual also states a battery life of 17 hours with 5 second reporting.

If I'm genuinely worried about battery life, would it be possible to set it to a 30 second rate of reporting, and then if I DO lose my dog, then switch it to 5-second reporting so I can find him faster?

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 2:11 pm

If we are truely interested in the dogs well being ABOVE ALL ELSE, then get rid of the scouts and arm everyone with Astros.

That way everyone would know the dogs whereabouts at all times. Waiting for the handler to ask for the unit could be too late.

I don't see any negatives to this approach. Everyone would have access to the same information.

I know this would never fly. Too many people like the scouting system as is. They feel they have an edge this way.

Greg, lets take a little survey. Everyone chime in with their Asto collar IDs.

I really doubt they have a lot of them as they presently have no need. The unit can only track 10 at a time. 99 would be more than enough for the hunting market. Garmin doesn't seem interested in the FT market, at least not now.

I have been messing around with GPS since the begining. Most would consider me an advanced GPS user.The things I talk about can be done with todays technology, and it will only get better with time.

At any rate remember, I said I would not support the present unit. Not all future units.

Post by **Greg Jennings** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 2:40 pm

huntindog wrote:Greg, lets take a little survey. Everyone chime in with their Asto collar IDs.

I really doubt they have a lot of them as they presently have no need. The unit can only track 10 at a time. 99 would be more than enough for the hunting market. Garmin doesn't seem interested in the FT market, at least not now.

I have been messing around with GPS since the begining. Most would consider me an advanced GPS user.The things I talk about can be done with todays technology, and it will only get better with time.

OK, you're a high-end user. Want to sit down with me and derive the Lorentz transform to deal with the Sagnac effect?

I don't just use GPS. I, formerly, did that kind of thing for a living in high-end military applications. I have a good clue.

Dave Quindt · Post by **Dave Quindt** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:17 pm

huntindog wrote:The Astro can also be used off the field.
I could sit in my trailer and watch my computer screen and see where the dogs are running (I have the TOPO map programs loaded) and most importantly where they are going on point! On every point I could mark the position, and soon a pattern would emerge.
Armed with that knowledge, the days of going birdless would be all but over.

You can do that today, by riding all of the braces. Ever see someone try to hack their dog into birds? I have; it's pretty funny and very obvious. In addition, you assume that the bird planter is putting birds in the same places every time. Hacking your dog into a place where there WERE birds is a great way for nonproductives.

If you don't want to ride, and instead sit in the truck and figure out where everyone has a find, then go out and run your dog and hack them into that area, be my guest. It's going to look pretty funny when you let your dog roll into an area and not come out, and since your Astro "told" you that's where all of the "finds" are, you call point and go galloping over there only to find your dog in the water tank!

huntindog wrote:Getting the collar signal with a Tracker could be a bit of a challange as there are 5000 frequencys. .

Just about everyone knows everyone else's tracker frequencies today. You have to know who you might have a conflict with, so if both dogs get lost you are not chasing the wrong dog.

huntindog wrote: Getting the collar signal on an Astro collar would be easy. I just got my extra collar. Marrying it to the handheld requires it to be close enough to the collar to touch it OR knowing the ID number of the collar. MY ID number is 39.

Your ID number is NOT 39. The collar ID is CURRENTLY 39. It can be changed at any time.

If abuse is truly a problem (and not just a theoretical one) there is a pretty simple solution. Judge asks for the Astro collar and receiver, he changes the id that the collar is using and hands the collar back to the handler to place it on the dog. That way, only the judge knows the id that the collar is using. The scout's unit is pretty much irrelevant at that point.

The Astro is a tracking unit, not some James Bond 007-style device that makes your scout invisible and makes your dog handle like a dream when you whisper at them from 1000 yards away. Even if the scout has a Garmin, and knows EXACTLY where the dog is, it still doesn't mean the scout can get to the dog in time to do anything! If the dog is rolling forward with nothing slowing him down, what's the scout going to do about it! Even if the scout can sneak forward who says the dog is going to go with him?

The weight of the unit is a problem to me, but all of these theoretical arguments about cheating and scouting abuses seem to suspend the laws of physics and nature, and assume the judges are complete dolts. Dogs are going to do what they want to do; the Astro is just a better way of reducing the chances that they get hurt.

JMO,
Dave

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 5:38 pm

Dave Quindt wrote:
huntindog wrote:The Astro can also be used off the field.
I could sit in my trailer and watch my computer screen and see where the dogs are running (I have the TOPO map programs loaded) and most importantly where they are going on point! On every point I could mark the position, and soon a pattern would emerge.
Armed with that knowledge, the days of going birdless would be all but over.
You can do that today, by riding all of the braces. Ever see someone try to hack their dog into birds? I have; it's pretty funny and very obvious. In addition, you assume that the bird planter is putting birds in the same places every time. Hacking your dog into a place where there WERE birds is a great way for nonproductives.

If you don't want to ride, and instead sit in the truck and figure out where everyone has a find, then go out and run your dog and hack them into that area, be my guest. It's going to look pretty funny when you let your dog roll into an area and not come out, and since your Astro "told" you that's where all of the "finds" are, you call point and go galloping over there only to find your dog in the water tank!

huntindog wrote:Getting the collar signal with a Tracker could be a bit of a challange as there are 5000 frequencys. .

Just about everyone knows everyone else's tracker frequencies today. You have to know who you might have a conflict with, so if both dogs get lost you are not chasing the wrong dog.

huntindog wrote: Getting the collar signal on an Astro collar would be easy. I just got my extra collar. Marrying it to the handheld requires it to be close enough to the collar to touch it OR knowing the ID number of the collar. MY ID number is 39.
Your ID number is NOT 39. The collar ID is CURRENTLY 39. It can be changed at any time.

If abuse is truly a problem (and not just a theoretical one) there is a pretty simple solution. Judge asks for the Astro collar and receiver, he changes the id that the collar is using and hands the collar back to the handler to place it on the dog. That way, only the judge knows the id that the collar is using. The scout's unit is pretty much irrelevant at that point.

The Astro is a tracking unit, not some James Bond 007-style device that makes your scout invisible and makes your dog handle like a dream when you whisper at them from 1000 yards away. Even if the scout has a Garmin, and knows EXACTLY where the dog is, it still doesn't mean the scout can get to the dog in time to do anything! If the dog is rolling forward with nothing slowing him down, what's the scout going to do about it! Even if the scout can sneak forward who says the dog is going to go with him?

The weight of the unit is a problem to me, but all of these theoretical arguments about cheating and scouting abuses seem to suspend the laws of physics and nature, and assume the judges are complete dolts. Dogs are going to do what they want to do; the Astro is just a better way of reducing the chances that they get hurt.

JMO,
Dave

Easy now. Lets get one thing straight. I don't cheat. I was speaking in the hypothetical ( I suspect you knew that). I don't even have a horse. I compete on foot in horseback stakes. I have even scouted on foot for my wife. (Now that's some rough going). So all of the scout tricks I speak of cannot be laid at my feet. Just as others have mentioned I have heard all the braggin stories from those that do stretch the rules. People aren't even coy about it. It's like if you don't get caught then it's OK.

On to the rest of the disscussion. I checked into the IDs. There are 48 available. So if a scout had 10 IDs preloaded into his unit, or perhaps a couple of units, then he would still have a very good chance of having the ID even IF a judge was knowledgeable enough to actually change it. (on edit) Worse a well meaning, but technolgy challenged judge could possibly mess it up to where the Astro lost communication with the collar.

I don't know where you trial at, but on our large grounds out west knowing which ridge the birds are being found on can be very useful. And yes I can put my dogs anywhere I want without a judge knowing.

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Tue Jan 13, 2009 5:56 pm

Neil Mace wrote:
huntindog wrote: The potential for abuse is too great, and with that goes the integrity of the sport.

Unless you are also anti-gun that is absurd, but then I know people that are anti-death penalty and pro-choice. It is your right. But I have to ask do really feel so strongly to risk the life of a dog?

I can tell you for a fact it is much easier to cheat with a tracker, you do not even have to know the frequency or be within a mile of the dog to "dial it in".

Just like with guns, I have always thought we should punish the offender not the tool. AFTCA and AF have a lifetime ban for cheating with a tracking device.

Neil

It would be very difficult to get proof that would stand up of a Astros use.

I mean, if someone was using a tracker, I suppose some video could be taken, but even then it could probably be challenged as to just when the video was taken.
And the Tracker is VERY hard to hide when it's being used. The Astro could be used very discreetly.

I have seen how toothless AKC is in enforcing some rules. I know of someone who actually licensed his birddog training buisness as an LLC and claimed amatuer status. It is a matter of public record. AKC said that there was no proof.

So getting someone punished for using a Tracker (which likely would be a he said/she said situation) would be next to impossible.

Pineywoods · Post by **Pineywoods** » Fri Jan 16, 2009 8:55 pm

Found this on Strideaway and thought it was a good point.

http://www.strideaway.com/strideaway/in ... sults.html

Edited by Greg to be link vice text copy. No fair copying in content from another site. You can link to it, just don't copy it in without permission.

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 5:52 pm

I found this on the Garmin website.http://www8.garmin.com/support/commProtocol.html

I don't know what the possibilities would be. Probably limited by a programers imagination, and skill.

I also talked to a pro handler about the Garmin. He is against it for a different reason. He doesn't want others to be able to track his dogs! He wants his secrets to stay his! I guess one could always just NOT use the Garmin, and keep ones secrets safe.

Of course nobody is doing anything that they wouldn't do in plain sight of a judge. <BG>

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:23 pm

huntindog wrote:I also talked to a pro handler about the Garmin. He is against it for a different reason. He doesn't want others to be able to track his dogs! He wants his secrets to stay his! I guess one could always just NOT use the Garmin, and keep ones secrets safe.

Can you link up to a collar THAT easily? I understand you can link up if you know the collar ID # - is that true even if the collar is on a dog hundreds of yards away?

Either way, seems an easy answer to your pro's concern is to simply not tell anyone what the collar ID# is.

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 7:55 pm

phermes1 wrote:
huntindog wrote:I also talked to a pro handler about the Garmin. He is against it for a different reason. He doesn't want others to be able to track his dogs! He wants his secrets to stay his! I guess one could always just NOT use the Garmin, and keep ones secrets safe.

Can you link up to a collar THAT easily? I understand you can link up if you know the collar ID # - is that true even if the collar is on a dog hundreds of yards away?

Either way, seems an easy answer to your pro's concern is to simply not tell anyone what the collar ID# is.

It is very easy to link with a collar. The astro has ID's numbered 1-48. The handheld is able to track 10 collars at the same time.

So one unit with 10 ID's preprogramed would have a better than 20% chance of having the ID. The handheld can easily and quickly be reprogramed.

As long as the collar is within radio range, it can be found and tracked by anyones handheld. On or off the course.

Neil on this thread stated that with the right antenna a 25+ mile range is possible.

With a TOPO map program of the course loaded in the handheld, or a laptop anyone could see if a backcasting dog is going to the front via a draw, or behind a hillside etc. The only question would be whether such a move was assisted by a scout or not. I suppose a really good scout would simply turn the collar off (while watering the dog) before making such a move.

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 6:59 am

Interesting.

Well - personally, I think if something like this is going to get approved, there need to be some clear guidelines as to its use, and severe penalties for cheating.
I would also have a big problem with people tuning into dog's collars, especially if they happen to be in the gallery. If someone's back at the breakaway in their trailer and plotting the dog's course, you can't really prevent that ... but I'm not sure how many conclusions they can draw from the data considering they won't know where the dog is in relation to its handler.

I don't know. The whole topic brings up interesting questions.

And for the life of me, I don't understand why Garmin only created 48 collar IDs.

Post by **ezzy333** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:54 am

And for the life of me, I don't understand why Garmin only created 48 collar IDs

I will bet they did it thinking that people would buy it to easily find their dogs and completely forgot that there are people who lack any moral integrity that would try to use them to cheat just so their dog might win what is billed as a friendly competion between the nicest people in the world.

Ezzy

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 8:18 am

Some interesting gossip here...

http://scottlindenoutdoors.com/2009/01/ ... -and-here/

[SHOT Show gossip you didn't hear here: watch for another GPS tracking collar to compete with Garmin, this one with stimulation so your dog doesn't need to look like a retail display mannequin for electronic collars. Maybe as soon as this hunting season.]

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 2:35 pm

phermes1 wrote:Interesting.

Well - personally, I think if something like this is going to get approved, there need to be some clear guidelines as to its use, and severe penalties for cheating.
I would also have a big problem with people tuning into dog's collars, especially if they happen to be in the gallery. If someone's back at the breakaway in their trailer and plotting the dog's course, you can't really prevent that ... but I'm not sure how many conclusions they can draw from the data considering they won't know where the dog is in relation to its handler.

I don't know. The whole topic brings up interesting questions.

And for the life of me, I don't understand why Garmin only created 48 collar IDs.

I don't think that penalties are the answer. Some have suggested banning someone for life for misuse of a GPS. That sounds all well and good but,,, What standard of proof would be necessary before taking such action? Certainly the governing bodies wouldn't just take someones word on it. They would want some sort of ironclad proof. Such proof would be difficult if not impossible to get. I know that NSTRA was for a time (maybe still?) patting people down before they could take to the field.
Do we really want to go there?

I think that Garmin only created 48 IDs, as they really don't care about the small FT market.

Now I do think that the technology is availible to make a secure collar that would solve these problems. Perhaps a good software programmer could create a download for the Garmin that would encrpyt the signal. so that only one unit could read it. Might even be a few bucks availible to someone who could come up with a solution

At some events (usually continuous course) it is common for people to carry collars that they aren't using on their saddle. If a few of these were inadverdantly left on, then it would be clear to anyone monitoring the signals just where the dog was in relation to the gallery. From that it wouldn't take much figuring to know where the handler was.

Ken Lynch · Post by **Ken Lynch** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 4:25 pm

I am surprised that no one has mentioned the following:

January 16, 2009
To: All Pointing Breed Parent Clubs That Held Field Events in 2008
Subject: The Use of GPS Tracking Collars at Pointing Breed Field Events

The GPS tracking collar is a new piece of equipment available to the sport. The introduction of this new technology raises the question of whether GPS tracking collars should be allowed in AKC Pointing Breed field events. The Performance Events Department is preparing to make a
recommendation to the AKC Board of Directors. The purpose of this letter is to request input from the Pointing Breed parent clubs that held field events in 2008.

Background
The current Performance Events policy with regard to tracking collars at Pointing Breed field events limits usage to those units that weigh less than 5 ounces, excluding the strap itself. This weight limitation has been in effect since the introduction of tracking collars fifteen years ago.
At the time the limitation was developed there was wide-spread debate whether a dog would believe the tracking collar was a correction collar and therefore act differently than it would without the collar. Since 5 ounces was less than correction collars at the time, this limitation was
adopted with the thought the dog would be able to tell the difference.

Current Situation
The first GPS unit mounted on a collar (the Garmin DC30) became available in the summer of 2008. For those not familiar this collar, the Performance Events Department has field tested the unit and believes it is simple to use in its most basic mode and will result in faster recovery of wayward dogs. However, the collar exceeds the 5 ounce limitation. AKC’s current position is to enforce the existing policy and therefore has denied the use of the Garmin unit at AKC field events. There will be additional GPS tracking collars available from other manufacturers in the
near future. As best as AKC can determine, all of these units will exceed the 5 ounce limitation. While their exact weights are still uncertain, it is reasonable to assume they will be in the range of 6 to 8 ounces.

What To Do?
The Performance Events Department feels it is appropriate to reexamine the policies regulating the use of tracking collars at field events. The department has received input both for and against the use of GPS tracking collars. Comments have centered on two issues – the weight of the collar and the potential for misuse of the unit.

The Weight Issue
A discussion on weight should consider whether the 5 ounce limitation is still relevant. Over the past fifteen years, correction collars have become smaller - the most recent Tri-tronics unit weighs 4 ounces. There is still some debate whether a dog will act differently when wearing a tracking collar. AKC data has not shown a noticeable change in the success of dogs earning field titles over the time that the use of tracking collars became common.

Possible recommendations regarding the current weight limitation span a range of possibilities:

A. Stick with the 5 ounce limitation. The current policy has worked well for a long time. AKC should not change its policies due to new products. GPS collars in the future will most likely meet the current weight limitation.
B. Modify the weight limitation to include the current generation of GPS units. The technology is too valuable to forego. The safety factor for the dog is more important than maintaining a policy that was somewhat arbitrary to begin with and is now outdated. Establish a higher weight limitation.
C. Using weight as a determinant for collar usage is irrelevant. AKC should still approve
collars in order to maintain order and reasonableness, but any AKC approved collar that is used as it is received from the manufacturer should be allowed. This approach has the advantage of allowing for the quick adoption of new technologies.
D. Allow any collar except correction collars and those with objects that protrude into the dog’s neck.

The Issue of Misuse
There has been concern raised over the potential misuse of the GPS units. The receivers are relatively small (easily concealed) and are not collar specific. This raises the possibility of a number of people tracking the dog and somehow signaling its location to the handler or scout.
While 99+% of the participants in field events are honest, unfortunately there will be a few that will attempt to misuse the unit. Is the potential for misuse of the GPS units significant enough that their use should be denied? Are there restrictions that can be implemented that would
minimize the opportunity for misuse? The department would appreciate thoughts on this issue.

Seeking Input from Parent Clubs
The opinions of the Pointing Breed parent clubs will be valuable as the Department develops its recommendations. The Department is requesting that parent clubs seek the guidance of their field advisory committees in order to involve the breed’s most knowledgeable participants.

Please respond to the following questions:

1. Should the weight limitation policy pertaining to the use of tracking collars at Pointing Breed field events be modified?
2. Is the potential for misuse so significant that the use of GPS tracking collars should be denied? If not, are there reasonable restrictions that should be implemented in order to minimize the opportunity to misuse the unit?

Answers with regard to the weight issue can be A, B, C or D as explained above, or any variation. A club does not have to select a single answer. A difference of opinion can be acknowledged by providing percentages for each position.

All parent club responses must be received no later than April 16, 2009 (3 months). Responses should be e-mailed to Lisa Carroll, Manager of Performance Events, at LAC@akc.org or mailed to:
Lisa Carroll
AKC Performance Events
8051 Arco Corporate Drive, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27617
Questions that arise during the process of developing the club’s response should be directed to AKC Field Representative Tom Maneely at TAM2@akc.org or (402) 606-9936 (Nebraska).

Thank you in advance for your consideration and response.

Sincerely,
Doug Ljungren

I have several questions. In the above letter from AKC it states “…field events limits usage to those units that weigh less than 5 ounces, excluding the strap itself.” My question is what do people think the “unit” consists of? Is it just the piece that consists of the transmitter? Or is it transmitter and antenna? Or transmitter, antenna, and hardware necessary to mount everything to the collar? Garmin advertises their unit (DC 30) as “4.1 oz (116 g) for transmitter and antenna”. Where does the discussion about the Garmin being over weight come from? How does American Field define the equipment used for tracking? What was the rational from American Field and AKC for allowing the use of tracking devices in the first place? Which organization was the first to allow their use?

As for the subject of cheating… There will always be people who will go to any length to take advantage of information not available to the other contestants. Why is cheating even discussed here as though the Garmin device will be THE end all cause of it?

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 8:02 pm

As for the subject of cheating… There will always be people who will go to any length to take advantage of information not available to the other contestants. Why is cheating even discussed here as though the Garmin device will be THE end all cause of it?KenKen Lynch

Absolutly! There will always be cheaters.
There will also always be burglars.

We lock our houses as a reasonable precaution to deter most thieves. We keep our keys in our pockets, not hanging on a hook next to the door.

We should also take reasonable precautions to deter cheaters. We should not give them tools to make it easy for them.

All things in life are a balance. I could die in a traffic accident on my way to work tomorrow. Obviously, I will still go to work, even though it would be safer not to go.

Our dog games are no different. We are not facing a crisis here. We just have a new technology that is not quite ready for our game.

If the gossip mill is correct, and another manufacturer is coming out with a Dog GPS, then Garmin will have competition, and a collar that addresses these concerns will almost certainly follow.

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 8:18 pm

Personally, I DO think penalties are part of the answer. First off, at least with AKC, they need to clarify their stance on cheating and define what happens when you're caught doing it. Right now, there is nothing out there.

What would I consider cheating? For the most part - a handler or a scout with a handheld. I wouldn't consider possession in the gallery by a gallery member as a violation. Use in the gallery, sure, that's bad - but I certainly do NOT want to see someone nailed to the wall because they finish running their dog, rush out to catch the next brace, and forgot to take the handheld off their saddle.

Either way - IMHO, the Astro is going to get approved. I also agree that with new competition entering the market, it's more likely that a dumbed down GPS collar will be available at some point that will lack the functionality that is causing so much concern.

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 8:38 pm

What would I consider cheating? For the most part - a handler or a scout with a handheld.

So how would this be handled? Are we going to start searching Scouts?

I'm not really concerned about handlers, as they should always be in the judges sight.

A penalty that cannot be enforced because the violation cannot be proven is worthless.

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Tue Jan 27, 2009 9:01 pm

Are we searching scouts for tracking receivers now?
Should that change?

Regardless, I have to disagree that it couldn't ever be proven.

huntindog · Post by **huntindog** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:14 am

phermes1 wrote:Are we searching scouts for tracking receivers now?
Should that change?

Regardless, I have to disagree that it couldn't ever be proven.

No we aren't searching them now. The difference is is that the GPS unit could be used in full sight of the gallery/judges without anyone knowing. All that a scout would have to do is have it tucked in a inside vest pocket etc. (Yes I have put mine in a pocket and it almost always maintains signal) A scout could be 100 yards away and simply glance inside his vest/jacket and nobody would know.

That is simply not possibble with the trackers.

I am sure that the governining bodies will not stick their necks out by punisihing someone with out solid proof.

So what level of proof would be acceptable? How would it be obtained?I mean I doubt that anyone will sign a confession.

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 5:58 am

huntindog wrote:
I am sure that the governining bodies will not stick their necks out by punisihing someone with out solid proof.

So what level of proof would be acceptable? How would it be obtained?I mean I doubt that anyone will sign a confession.

Preferably, I'd want to see someone using it. I'd also consider the deterrent factor. I'd have to think scouts would be a lot less likely to cheat if they knew even possessing a handheld on course meant a ban for 5 years, 10 years, life, etc. I would extend the same punishment to the handler because, as you said, it's really easy to just peek into a jacket pocket at an extra handheld.

Question - this pro that's against it - what 'secrets' is he trying to keep?
Yeah, we all know what can go on outside of the judge's sight, and that a lot of it isn't exactly legal. Sounds to me like he might be against the Garmin for the wrong reasons.