Gun Dog Forum

AKC's research has shown judges have difficulty telling the difference between the DC-50 collar and the Alpha Collar. The Alpha is not allowed because of the training collar option. Since judges have difficulty telling one collar from another, the AKC decided not to allow the DC-50 at this time:?:

This is what I got from AKC when asking about the DC-50.

I have to agree with AKC. Just looked up pics of the DC40, DC50 and alpha 100. I can't tell the DC50 and Alpha apart.

I have no experience with either, nor do I have a dog in the fight, but how hard is it to check for prongs?

Cant they just feel inside the collar for prongs? They don't look the same underneath.

mlittle wrote:Cant they just feel inside the collar for prongs? They don't look the same underneath.

Doesn't seem like rocket science.

Seems like they should be illegal to me. We may be able to tell the difference but I bet the dog's can't. BIG advantage: Handler.

gonehuntin' wrote:

mlittle wrote:Cant they just feel inside the collar for prongs? They don't look the same underneath.

Doesn't seem like rocket science.

Seems like they should be illegal to me. We may be able to tell the difference but I bet the dog's can't. BIG advantage: Handler.

You think all tracking collars should be illegal or just the DC-50? Im willing to bet the dog don't know the difference between the DC-40 and the DC-50 by weight or feel so why would it matter other then to a judge that can't tell by looking at it.

mlittle wrote:Cant they just feel inside the collar for prongs? They don't look the same underneath.

If I'm a judge I have no desire to climb off my horse and reach under the collar of every dog with questionable equipment. In most cases judges ride up to the line from their "meeting" just in time to find out which dog is which and cut em loose again. the fact is, un less a judge is specifically looking at tracking equipment for legality they would never notice and once someone gets away with something it becomes an issue.

Truth is if you are involved in one of the games, you know the rules and do what you have to. You dont waste your money on something you cant use...

Jim

Thus me asking about looking. Show the judge then put it on. Buckling a collar on only takes a few seconds.

I agree displaced texan. I cannot even fatham it is an issue. Too easy to see the difference, to worry about it. A field marshall can handle looking as well, if that poor judge doesnt want to dismount....

Is this rumour or fact? I just bought a new DC50 and Astro controller.

[quote="Quailcommando"]AKC's research has shown judges have difficulty telling the difference between the DC-50 collar and the Alpha Collar. The Alpha is not allowed because of the training collar option. Since judges have difficulty telling one collar from another, the AKC decided not to allow the DC-50 at this time:?:

I copied this off the E-mail I received from the VP of field trials from the AKC.

Just wanted to post this for the ones looking to buy a new tracking collar.

I believe a bigger issue is letting the handler keep the device !! When I judge I do not let them keep it regardless of what the rules say

I guess the bottom line is that if people want to cheat, they'll find a way.

Whose to say the receiver they're handing you is the one paired with the collar? The scout could have the real one in a saddle bag or in his pocket and you'd never know it. With the addition of collars that you can train and track with, AKC will eventually need to change the rules so that collars are brought to the line and shown to the judge before they're put on the dog.

People will still find a way to cheat.

I never liked the idea of tracking collar's in a trial in the first place. Probably the thing to do is make the handler promise not to cheat! That should work well.

DonF wrote:I never liked the idea of tracking collar's in a trial in the first place.

Not sure if I've ever really understood this either.

cr

DonF wrote:I never liked the idea of tracking collar's in a trial in the first place. Probably the thing to do is make the handler promise not to cheat! That should work well.

My dogs aren't run offs, but they will hold point forever - and some of the trial places are super thick. They could be 5 yards away and not see them, nothing is going to get them off a bird. I'd take the chance of getting beat by a cheater than not coming home with my dogs.

Coveyrise64 wrote:

DonF wrote:I never liked the idea of tracking collar's in a trial in the first place.

Not sure if I've ever really understood this either.

cr

What about a dog that goes on point 100 yards off course in the bottom of a gully and no one can see him..... Hence the tracker collar allows the handler to locate his dog. Would you much rather have the gallery and handlers spread out in a line and ride around looking for the dog. Or should we all run dogs that never leave our sight so that we dont have to have trackers. I will take a tracker!

myerstenn wrote:I believe a bigger issue is letting the handler keep the device !! When I judge I do not let them keep it regardless of what the rules say

So you're above the rules?

Elkhunter wrote:

Coveyrise64 wrote:

DonF wrote:I never liked the idea of tracking collar's in a trial in the first place.

Not sure if I've ever really understood this either.

cr

What about a dog that goes on point 100 yards off course in the bottom of a gully and no one can see him..... Hence the tracker collar allows the handler to locate his dog. Would you much rather have the gallery and handlers spread out in a line and ride around looking for the dog. Or should we all run dogs that never leave our sight so that we dont have to have trackers. I will take a tracker!

Yup..... I never trial close to home last year the closest was 4hrs away and the furthest 18hrs, I'm not willing to leave a dog behind. I guess the point of it is, If your gona play the game know the rules and whats allowed and it wont be an issue.

Once the old guard gives it up, and the participation trophy generation takes over we wont even have to unload the dogs, they will just mail you a CH.

Jim

jimbo&rooster wrote: Once the old guard gives it up, and the participation trophy generation takes over we wont even have to unload the dogs, they will just mail you a CH.

Jim

As part of that generation... Sadly it will come to that.

I was born a few decades to late.

displaced_texan wrote:

jimbo&rooster wrote: Once the old guard gives it up, and the participation trophy generation takes over we wont even have to unload the dogs, they will just mail you a CH.

Jim

As part of that generation... Sadly it will come to that.

I was born a few decades to late.

You and me both

Jim

We have had tracking collars in trials for better than 10 years, first telemetry, now GPS, and yet the rule makers cannot grasp how they operate.

The rules read like they were promulgated by an 8th grader that had never held one.

The handheld should be left on with the point alert muted.

I don't much care who carries it, but as a judge I have had as many as 5 hung from my saddle, since handlers forgot to reclaim them, back when the rules said the judge had to control them, I got so I controlled them from the Marshall's saddle.

Elkhunter wrote:......Would you much rather have the gallery and handlers spread out in a line and ride around looking for the dog.

Don't know. What did they do before the advent of the tracking collar, seems like it worked for over 100yrs.

cr

They trained dogs with out an e-collar also 100 yrs ago!

bb560m wrote:

DonF wrote:I never liked the idea of tracking collar's in a trial in the first place. Probably the thing to do is make the handler promise not to cheat! That should work well.

My dogs aren't run offs, but they will hold point forever - and some of the trial places are super thick. They could be 5 yards away and not see them, nothing is going to get them off a bird. I'd take the chance of getting beat by a cheater than not coming home with my dogs.

Ditto and, even worse is a lost dog that holds up the trial. Time is of the essence in our East Coast trials with 120- 140 entries, 1 course, and only 2 days to get it done. Those that cheat will eventually get caught, get banned and lose everyone's respect. That's good enough for me!

Coveyrise64 wrote:

Elkhunter wrote:......Would you much rather have the gallery and handlers spread out in a line and ride around looking for the dog.

Don't know. What did they do before the advent of the tracking collar, seems like it worked for over 100yrs.

cr

I could care less what they did 100 years ago, we have the technology to find LOST dogs that are already out of contention using a simple tracking collar.

You tell me what they did 100 years ago, you are the one advocating no tracking collars. So how should someone find a lost dog in a field trial besides a tracking collar?

How many of us have spent the night sleeping in truck with kennel out where we last seen dog, with dogs blankets inside, waiting for dog to back track to where we lost them during the trial.

Driving around all evening talking to neighbors and letting them know you had lost a dog from the trial.

Even 10 years ago before I got my first radio telemetry system, It was such a gut wrenching feeling when you didn't have them back by dark.

Have had others find dog 2 days later out in the woods eaten by coyotes.

100 years ago, they lost, many died, and never found way more dogs then today because we do have this technology.

Embrace technology, and your dog will thank you when you show up with him on point buried deep in the thicket down in the ditch, or you find him 4 miles away.

Elkhunter wrote:I could care less what they did 100 years ago, we have the technology to find LOST dogs that are already out of contention using a simple tracking collar.

You tell me what they did 100 years ago, you are the one advocating no tracking collars. So how should someone find a lost dog in a field trial besides a tracking collar?

I thought that was one of the reasons for having a scout.

cr

And the ignorance continues.

Neil wrote:And the ignorance continues.

Nobody asked you so, FO.....!

Covey you must think the scout follows the dog around the course?

displaced_texan wrote:

jimbo&rooster wrote: Once the old guard gives it up, and the participation trophy generation takes over we wont even have to unload the dogs, they will just mail you a CH.

Jim

As part of that generation... Sadly it will come to that.

I was born a few decades to late.

I believe it was the "Old Guard" that started the tradition of "dialing to win."

Neil wrote:And the ignorance continues.

Maybe just a lack of understanding

myerstenn wrote:

Neil wrote:And the ignorance continues.

Maybe just a lack of understanding

I am pretty sure that is just what ignorant does mean, a lack knowledge or understanding. It is not near the insult some took it to be. We are all ignorant of so many things, but most of us try to learn before giving an opinion.

But the really good news is that the anti tracker crowd has no influence - none.

What about a club owned collar that is put on each dog by the judge//scout or whatever. Cant cheat if it is placed on the dog in front of everyone.

I have no dog in this fight. Just trying to find a solution that fits everyone.

But as was said. Cheaters will find a way t cheat. I have heard of people putting rocks under a collar to mimik prongs f an ecollar.

Coveyrise64 wrote:

Elkhunter wrote:I could care less what they did 100 years ago, we have the technology to find LOST dogs that are already out of contention using a simple tracking collar.

You tell me what they did 100 years ago, you are the one advocating no tracking collars. So how should someone find a lost dog in a field trial besides a tracking collar?

I thought that was one of the reasons for having a scout.

cr

Coveyrise you need to get out a bit.......

Everyone just needs to be patient. AKC's rules WILL catch up with technology. IMO, they've been very good at that over the last few days. It just doesn't happen overnight. If you have an iron in this fire, if you really want to be able to use the DC-50, contact the performance department at AKC and offer solutions and suggest rule changes.

[quote="Coveyrise64]I thought that was one of the reasons for having a scout.

cr[/quote]

Thats all fine and well if you have a good scout, but all to often, I find my self begging a scout out of the gallery, or worse yet, find myself scouting for some one and a dog I dont know. I was at a trial in CT last spring where a dog ran off and they found it at an airport parking lot or someting crazy like that, and were just lucky enough some one called......

Jim

Coveyrise64 wrote:

Neil wrote:And the ignorance continues.

Nobody asked you so, FO.....!

I did not know I needed your personal invitation to comment.

Since it is clear you do not know the meaning of ignorance, do you know what classless means?

Just look at the hand unit there using. The alpha and the astro are different. And you cant use a dc50 on the alpha.