AKC and handicapped handlers

shags · Post by **shags** » Fri Sep 02, 2011 3:26 pm

Got this email today -

To ALL AKC Pointing Breed Field Trial participants and officers.

For Immediate Release

===============================================================================

Well known Michigan Brittany Field trialer and longtime AKC judge, Jeff Reed, after a 3 year legal fight, has successfully forced the AKC to allow ATVs and horses in all AKC Pointing breed stakes for qualified mobility disabled pointing breed field trial handlers. The following attached AKC letter states under what rules and regulations ATVs and horses in walking stakes can be used without AKC penalty. Medical information is not to be sent to the AKC but to the particular state government controlling the field trial area. For the first time since the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act was passed , the AKC was found to be in total non compliance for 21 years in a continued effort to deny mobility disabled dog handlers a mobility accommodation to run their dogs with alternative means of conveyance such as ATVs and horses. Said Jeff Reed after receiving notice he could use a horse in any AKC stake his dog is qualified to run including ALL walking stakes, "I spent well over $5,000 dollars in legal costs and was prohibited from AKC field trialing for 3 years to get this AKC Pointing Breed Rule Book changed to accommodate the disabled field trial person. I hope to see some folks who were denied the opportunity to run their dogs with ATVs or horses to now run in any stakes they could not medically walk to compete. In Michigan 2 field trialers have already been approved to use an ATV or a horse in a walking pointing breed stakes."

Mr Reed will gladly answer all questions and concerns at Fishreed@aol.com

Chief_dog · Post by **Chief_dog** » Fri Sep 02, 2011 4:08 pm

I'm all for accommodating handicapped handlers, but I'm scared of the potential abuses. I hope this doesn't go the way of the old NBHA years ago when many of the pros started handling from horseback in their walking stakes.

shags · Post by **shags** » Fri Sep 02, 2011 4:53 pm

The information's not all there, but I'd like to know who/how it's determined that someone is handicapped. In USComplete trials, it's up to the stake manager. With HIPAA, I don't know if it's legal to ask for someone's medical details. Alcoholism is covered under ADA, does that mean a handler with a drinking problem is covered? If someone wakes up with a ingrown toenail, do they get to ride?

What about handling birdwork?

Apparently Michigan's DNR has had to allow quads or golf carts on state ft grounds since ADA is a federal thing.

Years ago at a trial we had a double leg amputee handler try to walk his dog in a stake. His prosthetic legs disallowed him riding. I'll always remember that guy's courage and determination.

RayGubernat · Post by **RayGubernat** » Sat Sep 03, 2011 10:10 am

The way I read this stuff, it is pretty much a non event IMHO.

It is the handicapped individual's responsibility to obtain all the necessary permissions and to provide their own, approved tansportation and whatever else they require as a result of their disability. It is NOT the club's responsibility to do ANY of that. Nor should it be.

I simply do not see where any but the most dedicated and determined individuals will choose to compete on a regular basis... and if they do and are...more power to them because they are truly serious about competing.

RayG

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Sat Sep 03, 2011 1:47 pm

My main concern is potential abuse as well. How is the speed of the handler going to be regulated? NSTRA requires a walker for each disabled handler on an ATV, and I believe they're experimenting with speed regulators as well. That appears to me like a very common-sense, easily-applied procedure.
I mean - put me on an atv with no restrictions, let me get to my dog on point quicker, move around the course easier/faster - make no mistake, I'm at a big advantage, no 2 ways about it.
As a chair/secretary/judge, I need to know how to handle this.

Post by **ezzy333** » Sat Sep 03, 2011 2:14 pm

I think the rules are pretty well set since it has been the rule since the start that horses or ATV'ss are strictly a vehicle to get around on but the walking person will set the pace. I think it would have made more sense to just put them in a horseback stake since those arew already in place.

Ezzy

shags · Post by **shags** » Sat Sep 03, 2011 8:20 pm

Ray,

Wasn't there some kind of something about vehicles on State grounds out your way a few years back? I think I remember something about it from some guys on the coverdog board. Apparently Michigan has had to comply with ADA guidelines, so I'm sure other states will follow (I hope they do, rather than just shut down!)

RayGubernat · Post by **RayGubernat** » Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:45 pm

shags wrote:Ray,

Wasn't there some kind of something about vehicles on State grounds out your way a few years back? I think I remember something about it from some guys on the coverdog board. Apparently Michigan has had to comply with ADA guidelines, so I'm sure other states will follow (I hope they do, rather than just shut down!)

Yes but that had absolutely nothing to do with handicapped handlers. It had to do with substituting unlicensed motorized vehicles for horses(which are allowed) on state lands for the purpose of conveying judges and participants who were NOT handicapped. That was and still is a violation of the law.

RayG

original mngsp · Post by **original mngsp** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 4:58 am

In a Hunt Test i wouldnt have any problem having a handicapped handler being on a horse or an ATV so as to be able to enjoy the activities that most of us take for granted.

Here is where I have an issue or question. In a walking field trial stake, if a handicapped handler was able to ride a horse I would have a real problem. All of a sudden that handler has a huge advantage, dogs key of the horse and the handler has a better view than the rest of us.

Just a thought.

gus · Post by **gus** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 6:29 am

As you see I don't post much, but I would bet that he or she would be at a disadvantage as often as not due to the perception of their advantage. Keith

Hotpepper · Post by **Hotpepper** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 6:25 pm

The ADA has been in effect for a long time, 21 years, that is how long ti took to catch up with no motorized rules. Like it or not, in the very near future, all participants will be arriving with the 4 wheel whatever on a trainer behind their vehicle, If one is allowed then all will be allowed.

The states with rules about 4 wheelers and golf carts or whatever just had them tossed out the window, I predicted this 10 years ago and now it is true. Like the states that outlawed field trials on horseback because the huff(?) prints were damaging the grounds.

It will be interesting to see how AKC and American Field attempt to keep a handle on the new procedures that will include motorized trasportation for all who want to "crank tham up". Same with Shoot to Retrieve or NBHA or whatever organization that is not on this list.

Pepper

bigoak · Post by **bigoak** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 8:03 pm

I'm sorry but there are people who will abuse this.There's a joker (Vizslas)from Northern Ill. who has an AKC handi-cap for a disignated flusher.He shows up at a walking trial and walks his brace with the help of a cane and has his buddy who's on horse back flush his birds.Lucklly the dog broke.I just don't think AKC had this in mind. there is an old saying in baseball "If your not cheating,your aint trying". I'm 68 years old,I want to play in the NFL but they won't let me....vern

dan v · Post by **dan v** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 9:42 pm

Pepper,

The solution for the states, and their ban on motorized vehicles on "their" property is simple....no events at all. See how easy that is?

Post by **ezzy333** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 7:09 am

Wyndancer wrote:Pepper,

The solution for the states, and their ban on motorized vehicles on "their" property is simple....no events at all. See how easy that is?

I think this is exactly how it will get handled. Too bd because I do think it is only right for the truly disabled. But I see the states already looking for an excuse to get rid of trialing. I know IL is.

Ezzy

RayGubernat · Post by **RayGubernat** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 7:33 am

Wyndancer wrote:Pepper,

The solution for the states, and their ban on motorized vehicles on "their" property is simple....no events at all. See how easy that is?

That is precisely why I suggested that the trial chairpersons out there insist that, whatever the individual state requirements are, the individual handicapped handler comply with all of those requirements and provide proof of such, before the entry is accepted.

If a participant shows up with a 4 wheeler on state grounds where their use is prohibited...they must leave it on the trailer or go home unless they can produce the appropriate state issued permits. If the participant refuses, the trial chair should call the state DNR and have a game warden explain the facts of life to that person.

In actuality, if the trial chairperson does not report the violation, they themselves can be held legally liable also. In Delaware, that fact is written right into the regulations. If the person responsible for the running of the event hhas knowledge of and allows use of unlicensed motorized vehicles, which are illegal tooperate on ALL state grounds, the responsible person is as culpable as the person riding the illegal vehicle in the fields.

One must remember that to qualify for P-R funding, states MUST provide for and allow gundog training on state grounds, in somke fashion, and this will force them to deal with handicapped handlers anyway.

If a state does indeed choose the "no field trial or hunt test" option... I would support(as we all should) legal action against the state DNR to force them to either change their stance or privatize or otherwise charter grounds for training of gundogs. Failure to do one or the other would result in loss of Pittman -Robertson funding to that state, at the very least.

RayG

snips · Post by **snips** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 7:59 am

I say more power to anyone that qualifies to handle from Atv..They will need a person walking to flush their bird more than likely..I have seen people with no legs or 1 leg try to work their dogs and handle them...My hat is off to you, even hip replacements, extreme heart conditions...My hat is off to you to keep trying to compete or run your dogs..

RoostersMom · Post by **RoostersMom** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 8:53 am

Interesting on the PR funding issue Ray - I had no idea that it was a requirement for a state to allow dog training on the grounds! I guess that could be retriever training or flushing/pointing dogs?

In MO, it is illegal to use ATV's on conservation areas - horses & bikes are allowed on some areas but supposed to only be ridden on designated trails. I do see the ATV's on the field trial grounds though - and horses too. I would guess a special field trial permit must allow for these vehicles/horses. I've never questioned it too carefully since I see no other activities besides area maintenance (burning etc.) that allow ATV use on the areas.

After having spent a weekend with a bunch of disabled folks on a dove/pheasant hunt - I really feel for these guys and the trouble they have getting around. We had two guys in wheelchairs and they were just awesome folks (Disabled law enforcement officers - Hunting for Heroes).

I guess owning a big running pointer wouldn't really technically be considered a disability, right?

snips · Post by **snips** » Tue Sep 06, 2011 1:47 pm

I have delt only with disabled people that run NSTRA...They laid down specific rules and guidelines they have to abide by, (and they are extensive) plus each person that gets a variance is approved by the BOD's. I have never seen a big problem with people using it to their advantage, except maybe going a bit too fast to their dog on point, in which case their gunner would straighten them out, or the walker that went with them...Agree the trial chairmen needs to have the authority to keep it clean. Obviously....

Hotpepper · Post by **Hotpepper** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:49 pm

Can anyone give me the court or docket number and the federal court where the ruling was made. If this is corrwct, it will change trailing in such a way it will not look like anything we have seen before.

goggled it without success

Pepper

Post by **Sharon** » Wed Sep 07, 2011 3:18 pm

We have several seniors in Region 13 who can no longer get off and on a horse, or walk ,who would appreciate being able to use an ATV. We condition our dogs to horses so we would have to condition them to the noise of an ATV.

fishreed · Post by **fishreed** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 12:38 pm

Howdy Guys,fellow dog people and field trialers,

I am the guy in the press release and here is what is going on for all to know and ask about.

One of your German Shorthair members from Evansville, IN emailed me for further information on what I went through with the AKC and to get the REAL story on what the new AKC rules are now in place for mobility disabled people like me. For everyone’s benefit and to quell all concerns and fears, I will give you all the ugly facts and details from start to finish and give everyone the opportunity to ask any and all questions about my situation because what I have accomplished in the past 3 years is going to affect all field trialers in the United States. I have spent more time and money fighting to run my dogs than most of you will spend in a lifetime and all of your possible questions have been covered at least twice since I have been judging Pointing breeds since 1979 and I currently hold the 31 year unbroken record for the youngest 13 month old Brittany trained by me to ever to win an AKC 14 dog Puppy Stake and come back 2 hours later to win a 24 dog Open Gun Dog against 2 pros and 7 finished field champions. I’m no newbie to this sport or to competition birddogs of any breed.

After intensive testing in 2007, I was diagnosed with an autoimmune form of Multiple Sclerosis which my immune system eats the myelin protein nerve coating on the muscles of my arms and legs where a normal case of MS would do the same thing but on your brain and spinal cord. This is called CIDP or Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy and it is rare but affects 2-3 people out of 100,000. I have lost the ability to hold up my right foot and have a fitted brace to keep my foot from dropping and tripping me. Currently, I am getting another brace for my left leg to prevent the same thing from happening. When you lose your feet and toe muscles your balance goes too. This means I have no safe ability to walk on rough ground while trying to keep pace with a normal walking handler. I have fallen twice now and there will not be a 3rd time. My neurologist filled out the necessary forms for the State of Michigan and I received a lifetime handicapped parking permit. I fully meet all current disability definitions set forth in the American with Disability Act of 1990 amended 2008 and Michigan’s Eliot Larson Act. In legal terms I am a "protected " group.

In August 2008, I asked the AKC for a mobility accommodation to ride my walking horse in a walking stake under current AKC rules governing a walking handler in a horseback stake and was told “NO” in no uncertain terms, “if I couldn’t get a normal person to run my dogs at an AKC pointing breed trial, I should refrain from running my dogs in all AKC events where walking was a requirement”.
I told the voice on phone somebody better read the ADA laws or I will fill a lawsuit under state and federal disability laws. The phone voice then jumped to attention in .12 microseconds. In 3 days I had an AKC medical form demanding private medical information against current medical privacy laws. I called the AKC’s Madison Avenue Attorney and told her I have been declared mobility disabled by the State of Michigan by the issuance of a lifetime handicapped parking permit by my board certified neurologist but she said that wasn’t good enough and didn’t meet AKC standards. I then stated it will be a cold day in Hades before I comply which she responded arrogantly , “Have it your way if you don’t comply we will never consider your disability accommodation.”

I promptly went to a disability advocacy agency and had their attorney look over the AKC’s form and when he stopped laughing he told me to NEVER send these “disability law thugs” any information on my disability. He advised me to go directly to the State of Michigan and The Michigan Department of Natural Resources, who owns the land where these field trials are held and explain my disability situation and my mobility needs. He said the legal folks at State level will decide what I can do and can’t do on State of Michigan property and NOT the AKC and their field trial clubs.
Sure enough, I contacted the DNR’s attorney and explained my disease and mobility situation and she saw nothing wrong with me riding my horse in any field trial held in Michigan since it is already allowed. She willing accepted my handicapped parking permit medical information as proof of my disability while she referred to Michigan Parks Chief, Harold Herta, to formally grant me a no cost State permit stating what I could do.

In the discussion of my situation at the Michigan United Conservation Clubs Dog Trial Committee of which Harold represents the DNR, it was decided to add ATV handling as another alternative “Means of Conveyance” for mobility disabled folks who do not have horse riding ability so this disability issue would not have to be covered for a second time if a person requested an accommodation without a horse. This disability accommodation situation was run through the Michigan attorney General’s Office and the Michigan Natural Resources Commission for approval and Needless to say, certain members of all 3 Michigan Brittany Club guys fought this tooth and nail because ALL Michigan Brittany Gun Dog stakes are closed to walking only. It was then decided if the Field trial clubs who have signed a lease agreement with the State of Michigan to use Michigan property to run field trials didn’t want to comply with Michigan disability law and administrative directives as stated in their lease, they could find another place to hold their field trials because it would not be on taxpayer property. Needless to say, my name was slandered and many uncomplimentary and juvenile things were said about my intentions but after 3 years and a ton of money……..I won. In August of 2010 The State of Michigan decided that a qualified disabled person has the choice of using a horse OR an ATV to run his dog in field trial competition on State of Michigan property. On October 7, 2010 The AKC attorney fired off a nasty letter to me that stated since the State of Michigan has given me a choice of a horse or an ATV with the State wanting a preference for the horse, The AKC demanded I use the ATV and I if I didn’t they would take away any placement I may have received if I was allowed an ATV but used my horse. I then went to the news media where I had a great big article with a picture of me, my horse and dog which was seen in all Michigan Booth newspapers. In that article the AKC blatantly lied to the reporter on how the accommodated Pointing Breed field trialers when I was the first guy to press the issue legally. IF you want a link to my Booth news article just ask.
http://www.mlive.com/outdoors/index.ssf ... led_m.html

On August 15, 2011 A letter from the AKC was sent to me and a bunch of other involved folks including the American Brittany Club where the AKC stated they would bow to the legal will of the State of Michigan or the landowner the field trial were being held. I entered the Western Michigan Brittany Club’s September 2011 trial and told them if they attempted to segregate me or do anything contrary to what the State of Michigan has legally allowed me to do, they can look for another place to run AKC field trials which would cancel the October 2011 American Brittany Club’s National and National Amateur Championships.

The AKC, in this August 15, 2011 letter, spells out the rules for mobility disabled field trialers using ATVs and horse and other regulations but the AKC and The American Brittany Club won’t officially announce the rule change to the field trial world because they really don’t want a flood of disabled people running dogs in walking stakes on horseback or using ATVs. Some enlightened folks might call it a cover-up or putting the issue in the closet, but I sent out that letter and will continue to send it to any person or entity who asks for it.

Now, everyone can ask their questions and concerns. I have some answers already.

No, an alcoholic can’t qualify unless he has a disability mobility condition that prevents him from walking other than being too drunk to run his dog.

If you don’t go through the Michigan permit process to get written permission and a no cost permit to use an ATV or a horse in a walking stake……you won’t be allowed either to run your dog at a field trial. I have the contacts and it takes about 2-3 weeks to be approved in Michigan.

No, you can’t train your dog off an ATV when a field trial is not in progress.

NO you can’t plant birds off an ATV even if you are disabled and have a permit because your ATV has be driven on the basic trails of the course. When your dog goes on point you must turn off the ATV and walk to where your dog is on point BUT THE STATE OF MICHIAGN WILL WORK WITH YOU TO MODIFY THE PERMIT TO ALLOW YOU TO DRIVE TO THE DOG ON POINT IF YOU CAN’T medically WALK THE DISTANCE. If you can’t get out of the ATV a designated flusher person can be used, same with riding a horse in a walking stake.
NO YOU CAN’T SCOUT OFF AN ATV. You can ride an ATV to watch the braces but you are required to stay on the basic trail of the course.
Don’t abuse the rules guys because I worked my but off and spent mucho time and money getting what we have now. I don’t need some clown pushing the limits. 3 years ago mobility disabled field trial people were being forced illegally out of the sport, I very proud of what I accomplished now but my phone is not ringing off the hook for judging assignments of which I judge for 100% no costs……which is an entirely a different issue and it has to do with a thing called retalition.

How about somebody disabled running a dog under his disability permit that doesn’t belong to him to get an unfair advantage over a walking handler? I don’t know, I presented that question to the AKC’s Doug Ljundgren and he didn’t know what the heck to do. Go ask him.

How about a person who doesn’t even have his state’s disability handicapped parking permit asking for a permit to run dogs off an ATV or Horse in a walking stake? Doug Ljundren didn’t address that situation either. I said if a person is really mobility disabled he should be required to have his state’s handicapped parking permit but what do I know right?

Ask your questions,

Jeff Reed

fishreed · Post by **fishreed** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 1:48 pm

Hi guys,

Just as soon as a moderator approves my post concerning this topic you will know what has been going on. I encourgage all to ask questions because the you will get more answers from me than you will the AKC. I have the official August 15th AKC letter stating how mobliltiy disabled handlers will be accomadated. IF you want a copy, ASK. I have 30 years of field trial and judging experience so there is no field trial question or what are the rights of a person who does not have the medical ability to walk safely in ANY field trial. It today's world you have options when people tell you to take your crippled lake and get out of field trialing.

Cheers

Jeff Reed

Post by **Sharon** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 2:13 pm

I had 2 brothers in wheelchairs all their life. (Both died before 20 years of age.) Those were the years of no accomodation for the handicapped. One brother got a D in P.E. ( I thought my father was going to go to the school with a gun.) I would certainly hope that in 2011 we could all work together to make life easier for the handicapped. I'm quite willing to condition my dog to an ATV and not just horses. Surely we can work this out.

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 3:17 pm

Are you on Facebook?

RayGubernat · Post by **RayGubernat** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 6:15 pm

I will re-state my position regarding disabled sportspersons.

I believe that participation in the sport of field trialing requires a certain amount of athleticism, as does the sport of upland hunting. Neither is a sedentary or fixed position sport like deer, turkey or duck hunting from a stand or blind. Both require a certain level of mobility to be done correctly and well.

I believe all reasonable accomodation should be made to a disabled handler who wishes to compete.

However, that being said, I feel very strongly that is is solely the responsibility of the handicapped handler to obtain all the appropriate permits and that the handicapped handler must compy with all regulations. In no way should the sponsoring orgainzation assume any responsibilty for providing anything other than a spot in the running order for the handicapped handler. To do so would be to de facto, place the handicapped handler ABOVE all the rest of the participants, when the goal should be that all competitors have an equal chance.

If the handicapped handler requires an ATV, they must bring it, together with all the appropriate permissions. If the handicapped handler requires a horse, they must bring that as well. If the handicapped handler requires a flusher or a gunner,, they must identify that person in advance and make sure they are available when needed.

In short, neither the sponsoring organization nor the other, non -handicapped participants should be penalized because of or relative to the handicapped handler... because that would be unfair.

RayG

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 8:24 pm

Jeff,

Did the AKC provide the event-giving clubs any specific guidance on what would be considered proper usage of a horse/atv while handling?

As a frequent chair/secretary/competitor, my concern is simple; maintaining a level playing field. A horse or atv can be abused, and other organizations, like NSTRA, have developed easy, common-sense policies to help prevent that from happening. I would hope the AKC would do the same.

fishreed · Post by **fishreed** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 10:56 pm

RayGubernat wrote:I will re-state my position regarding disabled sportspersons.

I believe that participation in the sport of field trialing requires a certain amount of athleticism, as does the sport of upland hunting. Neither is a sedentary or fixed position sport like deer, turkey or duck hunting from a stand or blind. Both require a certain level of mobility to be done correctly and well.

I believe all reasonable accomodation should be made to a disabled handler who wishes to compete.

However, that being said, I feel very strongly that is is solely the responsibility of the handicapped handler to obtain all the appropriate permits and that the handicapped handler must compy with all regulations. In no way should the sponsoring orgainzation assume any responsibilty for providing anything other than a spot in the running order for the handicapped handler. To do so would be to de facto, place the handicapped handler ABOVE all the rest of the participants, when the goal should be that all competitors have an equal chance.

If the handicapped handler requires an ATV, they must bring it, together with all the appropriate permissions. If the handicapped handler requires a horse, they must bring that as well. If the handicapped handler requires a flusher or a gunner,, they must identify that person in advance and make sure they are available when needed.

In short, neither the sponsoring organization nor the other, non -handicapped participants should be penalized because of or relative to the handicapped handler... because that would be unfair.

RayG

Ray is most correct. A mobility disabled handler must provide his own horse or his own ATV, but in case he uses his own side by side gold cart style ATV , he is allowed to have separate person as a driver in Michigan. These requirements are spelled out specifically in my Michigan DNR permit and the AKC's new rule for disability handlers. In short, the field trial club is required by law to treat the mobility disabled handler as any other normal handler without prejudice to his particular means of conveyance. As a side note to anyone considereing a new ATV, The new electric Polaris EV with a AC induction motor and 8- 12 volt batteries has a range of approximately 40 to 55 miles before a recharge is required. It is in class by itself for the mobility disabled field trialer. I will have a comprehensive article comparing all the brands in the near future. Electric ATVs and their quiet operation is exactly made with the birdog handler in mind. I quail hunted off an electric Bad Boy Buggy last year in Texas, and only had to walk to the dog on point. It was a Godsend for guys like me who can't walk safely on rough terrain.

fishreed · Post by **fishreed** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 11:25 pm

phermes1 wrote:Jeff,

Did the AKC provide the event-giving clubs any specific guidance on what would be considered proper usage of a horse/atv while handling?

As a frequent chair/secretary/competitor, my concern is simple; maintaining a level playing field. A horse or atv can be abused, and other organizations, like NSTRA, have developed easy, common-sense policies to help prevent that from happening. I would hope the AKC would do the same.

Not really......the use of a horse in a horseback stake where the other handler decides to handle from foot is already covered in AKC Pointing Breed Rule Book. It is the same when a disabled person is allowed to ride a horse in walking stake where the other handler is walking. The mounted handler must ride behind the walking handler and maintain his horse at the pace of the walking handler. That requirement is really easy to do and I did it 2 weeks ago under the watchful eyes of AKC representative Gary Sadler. The same is required of the ATV handler. It just requires good common sense and courtesy toward the walking handler . All I require of my walking horse to do is transport me while I follow and handle my dog while he transports me to my dog on point. My horse is just a substitute for my legs no more no less in a Gun dog stake. When it comes to an ALL-Age stake where both handlers are mounted, I will do what I need to do to show my under horseback to the best of my ability.

The AKC didn't give much guidance let alone publically publish this rule change like the GPS collar rules and other addendums to the rule book. You want a copy of my AKC august 15th letter? Just ask. I can't even get anybody with the guts to even post this AKC letter with disability rules on the Brittany Yahoo Dual board website because they are scared to death that Bernie Crain and/or Pam Baird will ban them from from the board. On the Yahoo Dual Brittany Board opinions contrary to the status quo are not welcomed nor are they tolerated. If you mention why some people are allowed to do things while others can not....you will be booted from that website. I know it firsthand. I questioned why a guy who forgot to send in his final forfeit for his futurity dog had the entire furturity opened up to all litters not previously entered. They told me to shut up and go along with the decision or be banned because I wanted to enter my dog in a futurity where his litter wasn't entered. Some people are higher on the food chain than I am when you play the Brittany game. You can tell them I said that too. Right now the Brittany Powers are not real happy with Jeff Reed and how he single handidly changed the AKC rule book to allow ATVs and horses in walking stake. I say walk a mile in my shoes and see how I live for a day.

fishreed · Post by **fishreed** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 12:28 am

original mngsp wrote:In a Hunt Test i wouldnt have any problem having a handicapped handler being on a horse or an ATV so as to be able to enjoy the activities that most of us take for granted.

Here is where I have an issue or question. In a walking field trial stake, if a handicapped handler was able to ride a horse I would have a real problem. All of a sudden that handler has a huge advantage, dogs key of the horse and the handler has a better view than the rest of us.

Just a thought.

I understand your concern but here is what has been decided by the United States Supreme Court and it pertains directly in birddog field trials and in my situation.

In a U.S. Surpreme Court of PGA vs Martin, The Professional Golf Association denied golf pro Casey Martin to golf in a PGA tournament using an electric golf cart. The PGA said it was a reasonable requirement and if they let a person use an electric cart in would change the nature of the game. Mr Martin has a vascular/cardiac condition and is prone to leg blood clots when forced to walk long disatnces. MR Martin meets the definition of a disabled person by having a condition which restricts major life activities and is covered by the ADA Law. TheU. S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in his favor with the majority opinion stating that any physical advantage he would have over the other golfers by riding in a cart is trumped by his right to use a golf cart to play in the tournament where he would be denied otherwise. Simply stated, the court decided his physical advantage didn't affect the game to where it was a huge advantage over other golfers if he road in the cart. His right to ride in a cart is more important any physical advanatge he would have over other golfers. That height advantage is a problem but the AKC didn't care about the height advantage where in a horseback stake the walking handler was at a height disadvanatge did they?

Put it this way guys, you can't legally force a protected mobility disabled handler with your particular "means of conveyance". Would you want a retail store telling you had to use a non powered wheel chair over a electric scooter or a electric wheel chair? Horseback handling is an accepted means of conveyance used in all pointing breed field trials. Telling a disabled person he has to use a horse or a ATV is going to cost a ton of money in a court of law because you will not win. Every restriction the AKC attorney placed on me was justified as "reasonable" and every time the decision was in the best financial interests of the AKC. They tried to segregate me and force me to bring "disability papers" to every field trial. you just can't do that anymore and call it "reasonable". If the AKC had their way, I would be out of birdog field trialing. The stunning fact is the AKC has no legal power to define what is reasonable on land that doesn't belong to them while being owned by the government. Even on private land the landowner must decide a means of conveyance that includes the opportunity of a disabled person to participate if the landowner is holding a public event available to the general public. If it is a private event by invitation only, the landowner might be able to bump the law a bit but if he holds a field trial under AKC certification, he must comply and accomadate the mobility disabled handler. The AKC can make rules for the game but those rules must not conflict with State or FederalADA law and violate the legal rights of protected groups.

In my situation and for qualifiedmobility disabled people, there is no such thing as a walking field trial anymore. We are now allowed to ride ATVs and/or a horse but it is to be done with some basic rules which are easily achieved as I proved 2 weeks ago at Ionia, Michigan in the Westerrn Michigan Brittany Club's trial where in the Open GUN DOG walking was requiredfor all except for me. It went smooth as silk just how I said it would 3 long years ago. In my case, 2 weeks ago I couldn't even see my dog because he was running too big for a course that was overgrown with vegetation. At 15, he was clocked out after 5 minutes while he returned 2 minutes later. This week he will run in the Open and Amateur All age and he won't be running on Ionia's gun dog course.

Contrary to my critics, field trialing will not be harmed and the sun will rise tomorrow. I guarantee it. We might even see some guys and gals who have been waiting for a ruling like this.

It was a very good question, I hope I answered it.

Jeff

shags · Post by **shags** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 5:10 am

This from AKC-
Performance Event Participants with Disabilities
It is AKC’s desire to make reasonable accommodations in order that exhibitors with disabilities may participate with their dog in AKC events. This process starts by sending a request for accommodation to Heather McManus in AKC’s legal department (HRM@akc.org or (212) 696-8284). The request should specify what accommodation is being requested for which type of event and what rule, regulation or policy needs to be modified in order to participate. The legal department will provide a form which needs to be completed by a physician and returned to the AKC.
The AKC considers these requests on a case-by-case basis. When reviewing the request, the AKC is guided by consideration of whether or not the accommodation fundamentally alters the event and does the accommodation provide a significant advantage or disadvantage anyone participating in the event.
If an accommodation is provided, the AKC writes a letter to the participant specifying the nature of the accommodation. In essence the accommodation letter waives the normal Rules or Regulations and provides accommodations, and the conditions applying to the accommodations, in order for the individual to handle their dog. Accommodations are specific to the individual involved depending on the nature of the request and the sport. It should not be assumed others can automatically apply these accommodations without an AKC accommodation letter.
In order to communicate this information to the host club, the participant must provide the accommodation letter to the event chairperson or secretary. This can be done when entries are submitted or at the start of the event. This allows the club/judges to anticipate the accommodation and facilitates the smooth running of the event.

Post by **kninebirddog** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 6:07 am

Would be SOL here in AZ on public land as there is no motorized riding off roads. That is to protect the ground and vegitation from getting ripped up from the tires...

NSTRA I had a variance there for a while...It was Horrible rather not run then use a 4 wheeler again I do far better with a cane and braces on both knees can move better then trying to handling off the 4 wheeler.

phermes1 · Post by **phermes1** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 6:41 am

The mounted handler must ride behind the walking handler and maintain his horse at the pace of the walking handler. That requirement is really easy to do and I did it 2 weeks ago under the watchful eyes of AKC representative Gary Sadler. The same is required of the ATV handler. It just requires good common sense and courtesy toward the walking handler .

It's easy to do for a handler not interested in taking advantage; I'm more concerned about the handler that is. Going too fast, speeding to his dog on point, etc. If a disabled handler uses his horse in a walking stake the same way that I see most mounted handlers use their horses in a horseback trial, then everybody else is at a big disadvantage. JMHO.

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 6:54 am

Just a comment from the irony department, but it seems a bit hypocritical for AKC to make a big deal out of the Wounded Warriors events in which some clubs participate when the organization does not seem willing to reach out to those individuals as competitors. JMO.

Post by **kninebirddog** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 7:15 am

phermes1 wrote:
The mounted handler must ride behind the walking handler and maintain his horse at the pace of the walking handler. That requirement is really easy to do and I did it 2 weeks ago under the watchful eyes of AKC representative Gary Sadler. The same is required of the ATV handler. It just requires good common sense and courtesy toward the walking handler .
It's easy to do for a handler not interested in taking advantage; I'm more concerned about the handler that is. Going too fast, speeding to his dog on point, etc. If a disabled handler uses his horse in a walking stake the same way that I see most mounted handlers use their horses in a horseback trial, then everybody else is at a big disadvantage. JMHO.

as yes I see this as a huge disadvantage to the person that is on foot it already is at regular trials where one person is on foot and the other is on horse.....The 4 wheeler where it is legal to be off road is one thing

but I disagree with the horse at walking trials..if someone with a disability can ride a horse then there is nothing stopping them from attending trials where horses are allowed.

Post by **ezzy333** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 8:00 am

I had the same thoughts when I first heard bout this, whats the big deal as there are already many many trials that are for horseback riders. I look at it exactly like the situation with high school sports. Girls or boys are eligible to compete in any sport on a team desinated for just boys or girls only if the school doen't offer the sport for both. I am happy that disabled people are allowed to compete but they also need to compete in the arenas that they are qualified to compete in since there certainly is no shortage of those events.

All of this said, I think you will find this of minor concern since there will be very few who will take part. We have to hope that everyone will be treated fairly.

This whole thing would have sounded much better if more emphasis was put on the act itself rather than the effort and money spent by the poster. Way to many "i's" and "I did it all by myself", "I spent more money than most of you have" and how "every one fought me". A lot of that and little about what and why this was needed and how it will work.

JMO

Ezzy

Karen · Post by **Karen** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 8:07 am

I believe the issue was that Jeff Reed, who spearheaded this, lives in close proximity to the Ionia MI grounds....and ALL brittany gundog stakes (other than the ABC Gundog Nationals) are foot handled stakes at Ionia, and Jeff has gun dogs, not AA dogs. This severely limited his opportunities to play the game. I won't weigh in for or against as I can see both sides.

Post by **kninebirddog** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 8:07 am

ezzy333 wrote:I had the same thoughts when I first heard bout this, whats the big deal as there are already many many trials that are for horseback riders. I look at it exactly like the situation with high school sports. Girls or boys are eligible to compete in any sport on a team desinated for just boys or girls only if the school doen't offer the sport for both. I am happy that disabled people are allowed to compete but they also need to compete in the arenas that they are qualified to compete in since there certainly is no shortage of those events.

All of this said, I think you will find this of minor concern since there will be very few who will take part. We have to hope that everyone will be treated fairly.

This whole thing would have sounded much better if more emphasis was put on the act itself rather than the effort and money spent by the poster. Way to many "i's" and "I did it all by myself", "I spent more money than most of you have" and how "every one fought me". A lot of that and little about what and why this was needed and how it will work.

JMO

Ezzy

I agree right there

fishreed · Post by **fishreed** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 9:53 am

ezzy333 wrote:I had the same thoughts when I first heard bout this, whats the big deal as there are already many many trials that are for horseback riders. I look at it exactly like the situation with high school sports. Girls or boys are eligible to compete in any sport on a team desinated for just boys or girls only if the school doen't offer the sport for both. I am happy that disabled people are allowed to compete but they also need to compete in the arenas that they are qualified to compete in since there certainly is no shortage of those events.

All of this said, I think you will find this of minor concern since there will be very few who will take part. We have to hope that everyone will be treated fairly.

This whole thing would have sounded much better if more emphasis was put on the act itself rather than the effort and money spent by the poster. Way to many "i's" and "I did it all by myself", "I spent more money than most of you have" and how "every one fought me". A lot of that and little about what and why this was needed and how it will work.

JMO

Ezzy

Sorry but the current state and Federal ADA law does NOT support your position. You are most correct in the fact that there are many horseback trials for a person using a horse with a mobility disability to to run, but the last thing I am going to do is take a possible Brittany Gun Dog into a Brittany ALL -age stake and think I am going to be competitive. The AKC suggested your scenario and I told them where they could cram it. Would you want to be forced to go to a store to buy what you don't want because another store didn't allow disability access? I have been running Brittanys and judging much longer than you and I know what NOT to do to be competitive. It would be a total stupid thing to do by running a Brittany Gun Dog in an All Age Brittany stake unless you are running at the PA Brittany club's grounds. I didn't even have an opportunity to get juvenile amateur points because AMATEUR PUPPY AND DERBY STAKES ARE WALKING ONLY. I might as well stay home and shoot a pistol tournament or go walleye fishing.

To bring you up to speed the 2011 Brittany Gun Dog National Amateur Gun Dog Championship will be running with mobility disabled handlers handlers eligible to use a horse or an ATV at Ionia, Michigan thanks to what I have accomplished. You are incorrect about the boys and girls thing though. Boys are NOT eligible to play on the girl's volleyball team if only a girls volleyball team is offered. If I had to get Brittany people support to run my dogs with a horse in a walking stake or using an ATV I would still be out of this sport. In the Brittany field trialing it is all about WINNING, if the competition can eliminate you because you are disabled or force you to run a Gun dog in an ALL-Age stake where you have no possibility of competing, the better off they like it. I have owned and ran both Brittany Gun Dogs and Brittany All-age dogs. Unfortunatly the field trial Gods don't give you a choice of an All-age Dog or a Gun Dog when you pick out your puppy. You run in the stake that best suits how big your dog runs. It's ironic now because I think my 2 current young dogs now will both be all-age dogs. My field trial buddy and pro both ran AF horseback pointers and amassed over 50 placements, so I am no stranger to difference between an ALL Age Brittany, and a Gun dog brittany and the long tail versions in between.

The simple stunning fact here is the American Brittany Club, the 3 Michigan Brittany clubs and the AKC fought me every step of the way to get me to QUIT field trialing before they would accomadate my mobility accomadation needs by state and federal law.The only people who understood my situation was theState of Michigan attorney and DNR people. The MUCC gun dog commitee meeting, of which I didn't attend, got hot with slanderous comments about me personally and if my attorney had his way a couple of people at that meeting would be facing defamation charges in court. I took the heat and withheld legal charges when I could have made some of my Brittany colleagues lighter in the check book balance. Did Rosa Parks have a bunch of support when they forced her to the back of the bus? If she didn't use the word "I", she would still be watching the prejudiced world sitting in the back seat wouldn't she? You obviously frequent the yahoo Dual Brittany board so you know not one person stood up for me when I had a 3rd party announce to the world my legal pursuit of getting the AKC rule book changed so mobility disabled folks could finally participate after the AKC was caught by me in an intentional 21 year program of denying disability rights. I had a ton of personal hate mail sent to me ccusing me of everything from global warming to ruining field trialing to just telling me to take my crippled legs and go to Hades. Even Larry Bates wouldn't post the AKC's August 15, 2011 letter because he didn't want to risk being banned from the website by Bernie Crain and Pam Baird.

It was a tough and expensive fight, but I never doubted for a minute I wouldn't win. I apoligize to nobody and my only regret is there are some people in position of AKC and Brittany Club power that need to quit because of how I was treated and what I went through which should never have happened to anyone in 2011 with a disability. My situation should have be solved 21 years ago but most if not all people would NEVER stand up to the might of the AKC and force a legal civil rights issue.

I did it and I did it ALONE without help from any other person except a Weimeraner guy who was the Chairman of the MUCC Gun DOG Commitee, David Carriveau. He has my perpetual respect forever.

Jeff Reed

snips · Post by **snips** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:05 am

Once all the formalities are done, it is solely up to the judges to keep things right, as they would in any other trial...

fishreed · Post by **fishreed** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:09 am

phermes1 wrote:
The mounted handler must ride behind the walking handler and maintain his horse at the pace of the walking handler. That requirement is really easy to do and I did it 2 weeks ago under the watchful eyes of AKC representative Gary Sadler. The same is required of the ATV handler. It just requires good common sense and courtesy toward the walking handler .
It's easy to do for a handler not interested in taking advantage; I'm more concerned about the handler that is. Going too fast, speeding to his dog on point, etc. If a disabled handler uses his horse in a walking stake the same way that I see most mounted handlers use their horses in a horseback trial, then everybody else is at a big disadvantage. JMHO.

This is where knowledgble judging comes into play. If anybody abuses a walking handler by playing " rodeo cowboy" by a mounted handler you have 2 people to blame....THE JUDGES. I find it totally ironic that in the AKC rule book not one word is mentioned about judges who violate the rules. I have said for years there needs to be specific language on rules violation by judges. My concerns have fell on deaf ears. When was the last time your ever heard about an AKC corrective action on judicial misconduct by allowing things against the AKC Pointing Breed Rule Book? NEVER. Even real law court judges can be brought up on judicial misconduct charges but not with AKC Pointing breed judges.

As I have already done, you need to start a list of judges who don't know what they are doing or are incompetant. Don't run your dogs under them and tell everybody why you won't . I have a list that contains 12 names. I sat home this past weekend because I refused to go to Ohio to run my dog under a judge who fought my disability request tooth and nail.

fishreed · Post by **fishreed** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:19 am

shags wrote:This from AKC-
Performance Event Participants with Disabilities
It is AKC’s desire to make reasonable accommodations in order that exhibitors with disabilities may participate with their dog in AKC events. This process starts by sending a request for accommodation to Heather McManus in AKC’s legal department (HRM@akc.org or (212) 696-8284). The request should specify what accommodation is being requested for which type of event and what rule, regulation or policy needs to be modified in order to participate. The legal department will provide a form which needs to be completed by a physician and returned to the AKC.
The AKC considers these requests on a case-by-case basis. When reviewing the request, the AKC is guided by consideration of whether or not the accommodation fundamentally alters the event and does the accommodation provide a significant advantage or disadvantage anyone participating in the event.
If an accommodation is provided, the AKC writes a letter to the participant specifying the nature of the accommodation. In essence the accommodation letter waives the normal Rules or Regulations and provides accommodations, and the conditions applying to the accommodations, in order for the individual to handle their dog. Accommodations are specific to the individual involved depending on the nature of the request and the sport. It should not be assumed others can automatically apply these accommodations without an AKC accommodation letter.
In order to communicate this information to the host club, the participant must provide the accommodation letter to the event chairperson or secretary. This can be done when entries are submitted or at the start of the event. This allows the club/judges to anticipate the accommodation and facilitates the smooth running of the event.

DO NOT SEND ANY MEDICAL INFORMATION TO THE AKC. You need to apply to the state government which governs the area you field trial is being held. The AKC has no legal right to ask you for private medical information nor do you have to bring your "disability papers" to a field trial. This is same biased and illegal crap I went through the last 3 years. As I suggested, the AKC should have a spot on your entry form to check off or a disability number if you are mobility disabled. The AKC refused. How would you like to bring your disability papers to a Walmart store manager just to use an electric scooter?

Post by **ezzy333** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:26 am

Jeff,

I am well aware of what the present interpretation of the ADA is and though it was not what was intended it is what it is. The position I stated had nothing to do with it. I only stated what would be reasonable and not what is legal. And as I said, since there is already trials that are designed for exactly what the law says and that includes Gun Dog Stakes I wonder about the real reason that it was so important to change the way things were being handled. But as I said I find no problem with the act but rather on the attitude you are expressing plus I do have some concern about trying to police the act . But I sure hope it all works out well and we don''t start having people claiming they are discriminated against. That we don't need.

By the way, practically all of our trials have allow horses for AA stakes, also allow them for Gun Dog stakes.

Ezzy

Post by **kninebirddog** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:49 am

Ummm Most Gundog stakes are handled off horse back..I know I got the third fourth and fifth degree about handling my dogs of foot in a trial..The judge made it known to me under no uncertain terms that I was wasting his time by not getting on a horse

I spent my money for fuel driving almost 4 hours one way to go to that trial..I paid My Money to enter those dogs in that trial was pretty disheartening listening to that judge as I walked my braces knowing full well no matter what my dogs did they were not going to be looked at.

So sorry glad You are proud of your self for getting horses included in the walking format...I sincerely hope that judges do not let that advantage be a cause to put those dogs up as it will be a major set back to the WALKING trials

and this is said by someone who no longer can ride like i used to because of lower back hip and knee problems...
I walk my NSTRA trials on foot with a cane and braces on both knees I have someone carry my gun for me but still shoot for myself.

fuzznut · Post by **fuzznut** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 1:00 pm

Question- AKC gave you permission to use an ATV in a walking stake thereby allowing you to participate? Yet, you only wanted to use a horse? You then give us a wonderful description of electric ATV's that are just perfect for the sport, and also tell us you use an electric mule to hunt. Why not the horse?

Fuzz

snips · Post by **snips** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 7:28 pm

fishreed wrote:
phermes1 wrote:
The mounted handler must ride behind the walking handler and maintain his horse at the pace of the walking handler. That requirement is really easy to do and I did it 2 weeks ago under the watchful eyes of AKC representative Gary Sadler. The same is required of the ATV handler. It just requires good common sense and courtesy toward the walking handler .
It's easy to do for a handler not interested in taking advantage; I'm more concerned about the handler that is. Going too fast, speeding to his dog on point, etc. If a disabled handler uses his horse in a walking stake the same way that I see most mounted handlers use their horses in a horseback trial, then everybody else is at a big disadvantage. JMHO.

This is where knowledgble judging comes into play. If anybody abuses a walking handler by playing " rodeo cowboy" by a mounted handler you have 2 people to blame....THE JUDGES. I find it totally ironic that in the AKC rule book not one word is mentioned about judges who violate the rules. I have said for years there needs to be specific language on rules violation by judges. My concerns have fell on deaf ears. When was the last time your ever heard about an AKC corrective action on judicial misconduct by allowing things against the AKC Pointing Breed Rule Book? NEVER. Even real law court judges can be brought up on judicial misconduct charges but not with AKC Pointing breed judges.

As I have already done, you need to start a list of judges who don't know what they are doing or are incompetant. Don't run your dogs under them and tell everybody why you won't . I have a list that contains 12 names. I sat home this past weekend because I refused to go to Ohio to run my dog under a judge who fought my disability request tooth and nail.

That is exactly why I would go....

shags · Post by **shags** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:22 pm

Cajun Casey wrote:Just a comment from the irony department, but it seems a bit hypocritical for AKC to make a big deal out of the Wounded Warriors events in which some clubs participate when the organization does not seem willing to reach out to those individuals as competitors. JMO.

Sorry, but AKC has provisions for handicapped handlers in many if not all performance events. It seems that even so, there are individuals who demand preferential treatment above and beyond those provisions. Folks with special needs who wish to enter competitive events must realize that some of the accomodations to their situations have the possibility of giving them an advantage over, or might interfere with or hinder, the other handlers. AKC is simply attempting to ensure that doesn't happen.

shags · Post by **shags** » Fri Sep 16, 2011 10:31 pm

fishreed wrote:
shags wrote:This from AKC-
Performance Event Participants with Disabilities
It is AKC’s desire to make reasonable accommodations in order that exhibitors with disabilities may participate with their dog in AKC events. This process starts by sending a request for accommodation to Heather McManus in AKC’s legal department (HRM@akc.org or (212) 696-8284). The request should specify what accommodation is being requested for which type of event and what rule, regulation or policy needs to be modified in order to participate. The legal department will provide a form which needs to be completed by a physician and returned to the AKC.
The AKC considers these requests on a case-by-case basis. When reviewing the request, the AKC is guided by consideration of whether or not the accommodation fundamentally alters the event and does the accommodation provide a significant advantage or disadvantage anyone participating in the event.
If an accommodation is provided, the AKC writes a letter to the participant specifying the nature of the accommodation. In essence the accommodation letter waives the normal Rules or Regulations and provides accommodations, and the conditions applying to the accommodations, in order for the individual to handle their dog. Accommodations are specific to the individual involved depending on the nature of the request and the sport. It should not be assumed others can automatically apply these accommodations without an AKC accommodation letter.
In order to communicate this information to the host club, the participant must provide the accommodation letter to the event chairperson or secretary. This can be done when entries are submitted or at the start of the event. This allows the club/judges to anticipate the accommodation and facilitates the smooth running of the event.

DO NOT SEND ANY MEDICAL INFORMATION TO THE AKC. You need to apply to the state government which governs the area you field trial is being held. The AKC has no legal right to ask you for private medical information nor do you have to bring your "disability papers" to a field trial. This is same biased and illegal crap I went through the last 3 years. As I suggested, the AKC should have a spot on your entry form to check off or a disability number if you are mobility disabled. The AKC refused. How would you like to bring your disability papers to a Walmart store manager just to use an electric scooter?

I'm confused now...without some type of verification, how would the ft committe know who is actually mobility impaired and who is simply a piker? There are other venues and formats where the 'handicapped handler' concessions have been abused.

fishreed · Post by **fishreed** » Sat Sep 17, 2011 7:06 am

shags wrote:
Cajun Casey wrote:Just a comment from the irony department, but it seems a bit hypocritical for AKC to make a big deal out of the Wounded Warriors events in which some clubs participate when the organization does not seem willing to reach out to those individuals as competitors. JMO.
Sorry, but AKC has provisions for handicapped handlers in many if not all performance events. It seems that even so, there are individuals who demand preferential treatment above and beyond those provisions. Folks with special needs who wish to enter competitive events must realize that some of the accomodations to their situations have the possibility of giving them an advantage over, or might interfere with or hinder, the other handlers. AKC is simply attempting to ensure that doesn't happen.

Sorry Mr Shags but but for 21 years the AKC had no disability accomadation provisions in Pointing Breed field trialing and made a purposeful and intentional effort to bully, lie and intimadate me and others to leave Birddog field trialing if they couldn't walk. I do NOT demand preferention treatment. I demand what is provided to me in what the ADA law and state law provides me in my situation. IT is against the law to prohibit or segregate out people by a physical condition the right to participate in a public event held on public or private land. By a legal preponderance of the events I was put through for the last 3 years, even a blind person could figure out the AKC wanted no part of allowing mobility handcapped people to particpate in Pointing Breed events. The obvious fact that horseback handling is allowed in Gun Dog Stakes but is 100% prohibited in Brittany Gun Dog Stake held by 3 Michigan Brittany Clubs proves my sitaution including ALL walking stakes by a disabled person. Up until I changed the situation NOT one person was ever accomadated to ride a horse or an ATV in ANY AKC Pointing breed event because the AKC was telling them they couldn't play because it was "reasonable " they would have an advantage over "normal" people. The AKC knew they screwed up and hoped I would go away. I didn't and I got it changed not just for me but for many others.

I suggest you quit making excuses and supporting the AKC for a prejudiced and illegal policy that was finally changed by me . This is the problem with the AKC, they make rules and people think those rules came down with Moses and the 10 Commandmants. People question everything these days but the rules of the AKC are followed with blind obedience.

It is your attitude that the ADA and anti discrimination laws were passed in the first place. If I was forced to follow the AKC rules laid down by them I would be out of Pointing breed field trialing.

Post by **kninebirddog** » Sat Sep 17, 2011 7:28 am

fishreed wrote:
shags wrote:
Cajun Casey wrote:Just a comment from the irony department, but it seems a bit hypocritical for AKC to make a big deal out of the Wounded Warriors events in which some clubs participate when the organization does not seem willing to reach out to those individuals as competitors. JMO.
Sorry, but AKC has provisions for handicapped handlers in many if not all performance events. It seems that even so, there are individuals who demand preferential treatment above and beyond those provisions. Folks with special needs who wish to enter competitive events must realize that some of the accomodations to their situations have the possibility of giving them an advantage over, or might interfere with or hinder, the other handlers. AKC is simply attempting to ensure that doesn't happen.
Sorry Mr Shags but but for 21 years the AKC had no disability accomadation provisions in Pointing Breed field trialing and made a purposeful and intentional effort to bully, lie and intimadate me and others to leave Birddog field trialing if they couldn't walk. I do NOT demand preferention treatment. I demand what is provided to me in what the ADA law and state law provides me in my situation. IT is against the law to prohibit or segregate out people by a physical condition the right to participate in a public event held on public or private land. By a legal preponderance of the events I was put through for the last 3 years, even a blind person could figure out the AKC wanted no part of allowing mobility handcapped people to particpate in Pointing Breed events. The obvious fact that horseback handling is allowed in Gun Dog Stakes but is 100% prohibited in Brittany Gun Dog Stake held by 3 Michigan Brittany Clubs proves my sitaution including ALL walking stakes by a disabled person. Up until I changed the situation NOT one person was ever accomadated to ride a horse or an ATV in ANY AKC Pointing breed event because the AKC was telling them they couldn't play because it was "reasonable " they would have an advantage over "normal" people. The AKC knew they screwed up and hoped I would go away. I didn't and I got it changed not just for me but for many others.

I suggest you quit making excuses and supporting the AKC for a prejudiced and illegal policy that was finally changed by me . This is the problem with the AKC, they make rules and people think those rules came down with Moses and the 10 Commandmants. People question everything these days but the rules of the AKC are followed with blind obedience.

It is your attitude that the ADA and anti discrimination laws were passed in the first place. If I was forced to follow the AKC rules laid down by them I would be out of Pointing breed field trialing.

To start that would be Mrs Shags

But To me if a person can ride a horse there was plenty of trials for a person to RIDE...I can understand the ATV but I do hope that they hinder them with a pacer or the newer governor that restricts the speed to that of a person on foot ..as I saw what happens when there was no pacing or regulations by a couple people who "took Advantage" of the 4 wheeler variance in NSTRA

I also hope that they modify the horse that is has to be at a SLOW walk not a Gait because at the pace of a walking horse in a gait that pace even though considered a horse walk is still much faster then that of a person on foot

I have seen to many people struggle to get more WALKING trials in their area just to have the rug pulled out from under them by having to deal with a person on a horse.

Just saying I know I refer to NSTRA because I participate in it BUT I do support my Friends in the trials they choose to participate in and know the struggle they have gone through and also know the games people on horseback will play on their bracemates on foot

http://www.nstra.org/region_president_letter.htm

shags · Post by **shags** » Sat Sep 17, 2011 8:29 am

Mr. Reed,

I think all of us are happy that accomodations are made for folks with impaired mobility. Some of us have legitimate concerns that they may be abused and we are trying to clarify the rules so that our sport is fair to all entrants. As ft committee members it's incumbent on us to ensure as far as possible that no one gets an advantage. Even in the mainstream we all have certain limitations and they all won't be corrected by lawsuits, threats, rules, etc. I think that inquiring about how committees are to determine who is in legitimate need of accomodation as opposed to any random handler claiming to need accomodation is reasonable. Can someone legally park in a handicap space without displaying the appropriate tag? Those tags are issued to identify legitimate need, not to embarrass or humiliate. The verification for ft chairpersons/secretaries serves a like purpose.

It seems to me that your attitude might be responsible for some of your problems with fellow competitors.

You undoubtably have a tough situation with your physical limitations. Your special accomodations are in place, you are able to handle your dogs, and you have recourse if you encounter problems with clubs denying you. Apparently you are prepared to litigate if you encounter noncompliance. Your bases are covered. What more do want from the field trial community?