Gun Dog Forum

I judged NSTRA years ago, enjoyed it too. One thing I refused to do back then as a judge was ride all over the field chasing a dog! If you do that, how do you judge obedience? I had a NW trialer get mad at me one time when I refused to go to the other end of the field to see if his dog was on point. I told him no. If the dog is pointing, if should still be pointing when we get there. If I go and get to the dog on point, my present's alone may be all that keeps the dog on point! I told that guy that my job was to judge his dog; his job was to show his dog to me. Today they use 4 wheeler's to judge off of and the things are all over the field. How do those that judge judge the whole thing when you spend so much time scouting the dog's?

In today's NSTRA, it is understood that it is the judge's responsibility to scout their assigned dog and to do their best to indicate to the handler when the dog goes on point. Depending on the cover and the topography of the field, it could take the form of being 100 yards away or you could have to be 10 yards away from the dog. According to the current judging standards, the judgement of the find begins when the dog makes scent contact. The judge needs to have the dog in view at all times to begin judging the find at this point. As they will say, you cannot judge what you cannot see. It is also important to see things like bumped birds. If a dog bumps a bird but then points it and the judge is not there to see it, that dog would receive credit for the find when he otherwise might not since the bird would be marked and the handler would have to successfully call his dog off point without touching the dog. When you say judge the whole thing, what does that mean exactly? The dog is really the only thing you are judging so to me it makes sense to have your attention trained mostly on the dog. If you are near the dog, you will hear the handlers commands to know if the dog is also able to hear and then to respond to determine that one aspect of obedience.

Nick

DonF wrote:I judged NSTRA years ago, enjoyed it too. One thing I refused to do back then as a judge was ride all over the field chasing a dog! If you do that, how do you judge obedience? I had a NW trialer get mad at me one time when I refused to go to the other end of the field to see if his dog was on point. I told him no. If the dog is pointing, if should still be pointing when we get there. If I go and get to the dog on point, my present's alone may be all that keeps the dog on point! I told that guy that my job was to judge his dog; his job was to show his dog to me. Today they use 4 wheeler's to judge off of and the things are all over the field. How do those that judge judge the whole thing when you spend so much time scouting the dog's?

That`s the bottom line for any trial imo. I enjoyed NSTRA in the early 90s. I`m sure it has changed a lot since then.

[quote="nhachman"]In today's NSTRA, it is understood that it is the judge's responsibility to scout their assigned dog and to do their best to indicate to the handler when the dog goes on point. Depending on the cover and the topography of the field, it could take the form of being 100 yards away or you could have to be 10 yards away from the dog. According to the current judging standards, the judgement of the find begins when the dog makes scent contact. The judge needs to have the dog in view at all times to begin judging the find at this point. As they will say, you cannot judge what you cannot see. It is also important to see things like bumped birds. If a dog bumps a bird but then points it and the judge is not there to see it, that dog would receive credit for the find when he otherwise might not since the bird would be marked and the handler would have to successfully call his dog off point without touching the dog. When you say judge the whole thing, what does that mean exactly? The dog is really the only thing you are judging so to me it makes sense to have your attention trained mostly on the dog. If you are near the dog, you will hear the handlers commands to know if the dog is also able to hear and then to respond to determine that one aspect of obedience.

Nick[/quot

X2

nhachman wrote:In today's NSTRA, it is understood that it is the judge's responsibility to scout their assigned dog and to do their best to indicate to the handler when the dog goes on point. Depending on the cover and the topography of the field, it could take the form of being 100 yards away or you could have to be 10 yards away from the dog. According to the current judging standards, the judgement of the find begins when the dog makes scent contact. The judge needs to have the dog in view at all times to begin judging the find at this point. As they will say, you cannot judge what you cannot see. It is also important to see things like bumped birds. If a dog bumps a bird but then points it and the judge is not there to see it, that dog would receive credit for the find when he otherwise might not since the bird would be marked and the handler would have to successfully call his dog off point without touching the dog. When you say judge the whole thing, what does that mean exactly? The dog is really the only thing you are judging so to me it makes sense to have your attention trained mostly on the dog. If you are near the dog, you will hear the handlers commands to know if the dog is also able to hear and then to respond to determine that one aspect of obedience.

Nick

Great answer. Obviously DonF hasn't been to a NSTRA trial recently but I have a hard time believing that the judging has changed that much.

If you find the dog on point, how would you know what the dog did at first scent contact? Did it slam the point? Or did the dog rode in before it pointed? Did it point & take 1 or 2 or 20 steps before you saw it? These are all determining factors in scoring a find, like was said: "You can't score what you don't see". You have to see the dog at all times to judge the trial fairly.

Dakotazeb wrote:

nhachman wrote:In today's NSTRA, it is understood that it is the judge's responsibility to scout their assigned dog and to do their best to indicate to the handler when the dog goes on point. Depending on the cover and the topography of the field, it could take the form of being 100 yards away or you could have to be 10 yards away from the dog. According to the current judging standards, the judgement of the find begins when the dog makes scent contact. The judge needs to have the dog in view at all times to begin judging the find at this point. As they will say, you cannot judge what you cannot see. It is also important to see things like bumped birds. If a dog bumps a bird but then points it and the judge is not there to see it, that dog would receive credit for the find when he otherwise might not since the bird would be marked and the handler would have to successfully call his dog off point without touching the dog. When you say judge the whole thing, what does that mean exactly? The dog is really the only thing you are judging so to me it makes sense to have your attention trained mostly on the dog. If you are near the dog, you will hear the handlers commands to know if the dog is also able to hear and then to respond to determine that one aspect of obedience.

Nick

Great answer. Obviously DonF hasn't been to a NSTRA trial recently but I have a hard time believing that the judging has changed that much.

Actually, yes I have. First thing I noticed was they don't judge from horse's any more. Tell me how you judge a dog's response to the handler and willingness to work for the handler if your generally out on a string somewhere? I suspect the judging hasn't changed that much too. But in my days, judge's would go look for a dog when asked, well most of them. I required the handler show me his dog. I'd only ever had one handler complain about it.

My belief is that for the most part, the judge is able to observe enough of the dog's responses to handler commands while staying trained on the dog. In my experience, most dogs will make their big casts early in the brace and that is when you have the biggest opportunity for the judge to be at a great distance from the handler while scouting the dog. In this case however, most handlers are allowing their dog to make this large cast to pick up the first bird and/or ATV track of the bird planter and are not going to be giving handling commands. I have to again go back to the fact that if the judge is with the dog, he's going to be able to observe any audible or visual commands made by the handler that the dog would be able to hear or see to respond to. When I am judging, I make note of any time I hear or see a command given and if the dog responds accordingly or not and how quickly. On the other side of the coin, obedience points are deducted for such things as not stopping on a wild flush, being out of bounds and working behind the handler. These particular things cannot be judged if you are not in view of the dog at all times.

This excerpt regarding scoring the find from scent contact is from the NSTRA judging guidelines documentation first published in 2005. http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/19484836/9 ... elines.doc

When scoring the dog, you must bear in mind one thing: if you don’t have your eyes on the dog when he actually made his scent contact, you have lost part of your judging of the find. That is why it is critical for a judge to stay in view of the dog at all times. You don’t necessarily have to push him out of the field; you have to get to the vantage points in the field.

Nick

Instead of beating this to death on this forum it would seem the way to solve the issue would be for DonF to attend a judges training seminar. Get instructions as to the judging guidelines and raise his questions there.

I've been to NSTRA trials in a lot of the country and the judge always stays with the dog. As far as horseback, the Arizona region is the only one that I know that uses horses for planting and judging.

Had to chuckle. Wouldn't take Don to lightly. I've had Shorthairs for 40 years. I'd put my knowledge of dogs, pigeons, training, trialing, and dog people at about 10 percent of what Don knows.

greg jacobs wrote:Had to chuckle. Wouldn't take Don to lightly. I've had Shorthairs for 40 years. I'd put my knowledge of dogs, pigeons, training, trialing, and dog people at about 10 percent of what Don knows.

That may be. But when it comes to how to judge a dog in NSTRA Don is just flat wrong for all the reason stated above. I'm not trying to start an argument here, just stating the facts.

Dakotazeb wrote:

greg jacobs wrote:Had to chuckle. Wouldn't take Don to lightly. I've had Shorthairs for 40 years. I'd put my knowledge of dogs, pigeons, training, trialing, and dog people at about 10 percent of what Don knows.

That may be. But when it comes to how to judge a dog in NSTRA Don is just flat wrong for all the reason stated above. I'm not trying to start an argument here, just stating the facts.

The facts as you see them but it sure isn't the way anything else is judged and sure not the way I would judge. There is no way I want a judge on a 4 wheeler between me and my dog. Our dogs will run with a 4 wheeler and that just promotes the dog to hunt for the judge and not the handler. I just don't understand what is being judged when the handler is eliminated from the equation. I have always thought hunting is a sport that includes how the dog hunts for the hunter, at least that is what I train them to do.

Ezzy

I'm not a NSTRA guy, it's not my thing however in helping some NSTRA folks with their dogs I recently attended a NSTRA trial. I have to say that the one thing that turned me off, reaffirmed to me that it wasn't for me, was seeing the judges race around the field on 4-wheelers. When a judge is between the handler and the dog or moving off on a tangent it seems to me that it interferes with the race and the handler's ability to control the dog. Again, I'm not a NSTRA guy so perhaps what I witnessed is the way you folks like, it seemed to me at times like I was attending 4-wheeler races rather than a dog trial. Shouldn't the handler/dog set the pace and the judge place him/herself in a position so as not to interfere with nor distract the dog while observing to the best of their ability?

[/quote] The facts as you see them but it sure isn't the way anything else is judged and sure not the way I would judge. There is no way I want a judge on a 4 wheeler between me and my dog. Our dogs will run with a 4 wheeler and that just promotes the dog to hunt for the judge and not the handler. I just don't understand what is being judged when the handler is eliminated from the equation. I have always thought hunting is a sport that includes how the dog hunts for the hunter, at least that is what I train them to do.

Ezzy[/quote]

It's not the facts as I see them. It's the way NSTRA is judged. The judge should have the dog in site at all times. Tough to score a find if you can't see the dog. Once the dog goes on point the dog cannot move until the handler has flushed the bird. If the dog creeps or takes steps before the handler flushes the bird there is a deduction in points. If the judge doesn't stay in sight of the dog he wouldn't know how well the dog slammed the point or whether or not it took steps before the flush. Also, if the dog goes on point and then proceeds to take the bird out before the flush the dog gets a warning and if the dog does it a 2nd time the dog is DQ'd. If the judge stayed with the handler and the dog is out of view how would he judge know if the dog bumped the bird or just took it out? NSTRA trials are run on field of approx. 40 acres. Many times parts of the field are over a hill. For the most part the dogs a pretty big running dogs and likely a few hundred yards out within the first minute of the brace. Judges don't have to be real close to the dog but must be in a position to observe the dog at all times. Guys, you may not like the NSTRA format and the way it's judged, but that's just the way it is.

I understand but just having trouble with what they are trying to judge. I am not as concerned about how the dog hit it's point as I am as to it handled the bird till the handler gets there and all that means is the bird still there or not. It sometimes seems to me that we start a new completion to judge which dog is the best hunter and then we dream up things to start judging so we can place the dogs other than the things that make a great hunting dog. How far it can run, how fast it can run, whether it takes a step on point, or 2 steps, what position the tail is held, whether it stays in bounds when it doesn't even know what that means, or a hundred other things that make little difference when hunting but ignoring number of birds found, holding them till the handler flushes, stay in contact with the handler, handling in control, marking, retrieving, and other points of that we all look for in our hunting dogs.

By the way, 40 acres is bigger than most of the field I have seen used. That size field would be necessary though for a dog that runs several hundred yards on the opening cast as a square 40 acres is only 440 yards from side to side.

I have always liked the NSTRA format but was negatively impressed big time if that video shows what it has morphed in to and I sure wasn't impressed with having anyone in front of the guys with the guns. Just one of the points that I never allow when teaching, training, guiding, or hunting. But so be it, I will just pass.

NSTRA is supposed to emulate a hunting situation. If the handler can see his dog and get to him to shoot a bird, then the judge does not need to chase the dog and be between the dog and handler. He can be off to one side and still have the advantage of seeing the dog. If the dog is getting out of sight he can run up but off to one side and even stand up on the quad to see. I can see my dogs out in the Nevada desert at 200 to 300 yards, the field size in NSTRA events is such that you can see the entire field from one vantage point. Surely the judge doesn't need to ride up in front of the hunter and at one point pass the dog as shown in the video.

P&PGunsmith wrote:the field size in NSTRA events is such that you can see the entire field from one vantage point. Surely the judge doesn't need to ride up in front of the hunter and at one point pass the dog as shown in the video.

That is not always true. Here in the Mid-North region and other regions I've run NSTRA trials there can be hills and valleys in the field and the dog can get out of sight very easy. In order for the judge to properly judge the dog he must keep the dog in sight. He/she doesn't have to be real close to the dog just close enough to see it.

Dakotazeb wrote:

P&PGunsmith wrote:the field size in NSTRA events is such that you can see the entire field from one vantage point. Surely the judge doesn't need to ride up in front of the hunter and at one point pass the dog as shown in the video.

That is not always true. Here in the Mid-North region and other regions I've run NSTRA trials there can be hills and valleys in the field and the dog can get out of sight very easy. In order for the judge to properly judge the dog he must keep the dog in sight. He/she doesn't have to be real close to the dog just close enough to see it.

This is a goofy set up IMO.

Try watching this video - it shows judges at NSTRA. I wonder why they aren't racing ahead of the handlers? LIsten to the narration.

Where's the video?

Our home fields are 40 acres with a rolling hill and a canyon. AZ and a field I ran on in No Cal were 100 acres. Big country for a big running dog. Judge can tell if dog is checking in with the handler. My dog may be 100 yards out but will hunt the ridge of the canyon till I get near the ridge. The judge needs to be there if my dog makes a find just over the ridge. Judge needs to see the dog on bird contact. Bird flushes. Dogs fault? Did the dog take it out? Do you want a dog that takes out quail on you? or is it a Wild flush? Judge needs to be there. Out of bounds line can be used as a judging tool. Does the dog change direction when he gets command from the handler? This can be part of the Obedience score. I like the game and the folks playing it. I train to release on shot and fall. You can get this easy in a training field but in competition where the dog is anxious to go find the next bird, no so easy. Good place to test your dog training skills.

Dakotazeb wrote:Where's the video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aencoGQmz9I

Sorry, missed putting the link.

The video footage really didn't show the entire brace and focused mainly on the dog on point. But if you listen to the narrative she does say that the judge must be able to see the dog in order to judge the find. The judges don't usually pressure the dog but stay at a distance that still allows them to see the dog.

How many posters on this thread have actually run their dog in a NSTRA trial or attended a judging seminar. Both would but to rest a lot of the questions raised here.

It is difficult but there is a procedure for adding rules or changing rules. I personally will not shoot a bird if the dog breaks before shot. I would like hold till shot to be a plus on the retrieve score. The videos show lots of dogs leaving on flush. Lots of hunters say they get more game if the dog leaves on flush and not enough dogs trained to stay till shot would be available for the NSTRA competition.

Couple questions...I don't do NSTRA (we do horseback trials) but have enjoyed watching a trial or two. A couple things have me scratching my head, can someone clarify?

In the guidelines about scenting and pointing, the phrase 'in your mind' is used in regard to how a dog hits scent and establishes point as far as style and distance from the bird. How can anyone but the dog know about scenting conditions or other circumstances, and score according to what a human thinks is appropriate versus what the dog is experiencing?
Does it make a difference as long as game is produced, whether a dog slams point or not (given comditions on that day) or whether he stops 5 feet in front of a bird, or 20 feet?

And this...

Dogs A and B are working the same scent and dog A establishes point just ahead of dog B. After three seconds dog A breaks point and leaves the area. The handlers have not yet arrived in the area and no flush has occurred. Who’s find is it?

A dog may not relocate on its own. Dog B remained on established point and is therefore credited with the find.

Dog B didn't even find his own bird, how can he be credited with a find in the first place?

Dakotazeb wrote:The video footage really didn't show the entire brace and focused mainly on the dog on point. But if you listen to the narrative she does say that the judge must be able to see the dog in order to judge the find. The judges don't usually pressure the dog but stay at a distance that still allows them to see the dog.

How many posters on this thread have actually run their dog in a NSTRA trial or attended a judging seminar. Both would but to rest a lot of the questions raised here.

In the clip, whenever the judges were shown they were respectful of the handlers and at a reasonable pace and distance behind them. No, I don't run in NSTRA, but I am saying it is a goofy situation to have judges on ATV's racing ahead of handlers in the field.

Dakotazeb wrote:Instead of beating this to death on this forum it would seem the way to solve the issue would be for DonF to attend a judges training seminar. Get instructions as to the judging guidelines and raise his questions there.

I've been to NSTRA trials in a lot of the country and the judge always stays with the dog. As far as horseback, the Arizona region is the only one that I know that uses horses for planting and judging.

I have judged a lot of NSTRA trials in the past. left NSTRA about 1992 and went to AKC, I've judged a good many of their trials too. I was also in the first group of judge's for the AKC Pointing dog test's in the N.W. Even judged a couple AF trials. I got a pretty good idea how to judge. Seeing the dog hit the point is a lot of fun but to score the find you need to judge the whole find, not just the hit! A dog that you find on a point that is intense, hit the point like that. The dog you find on a point that is doing little more than just standing there, hit the point like that. You mission is to judge all the part's of the brace, you can't do that way out in front of the handler scouting his dog! How from up there do you judge handling? How do you really judge ground coverage? The dog is supposed to be hunting for the handler. Then again with you out there, the dog just might be running to you thinking the handler is with you. Your job again is to judge the whole performance; the handler's job is to show you his dog!

[/quote]I have judged a lot of NSTRA trials in the past. left NSTRA about 1992 and went to AKC, I've judged a good many of their trials too. I was also in the first group of judge's for the AKC Pointing dog test's in the N.W. Even judged a couple AF trials. I got a pretty good idea how to judge. Seeing the dog hit the point is a lot of fun but to score the find you need to judge the whole find, not just the hit! A dog that you find on a point that is intense, hit the point like that. The dog you find on a point that is doing little more than just standing there, hit the point like that. You mission is to judge all the part's of the brace, you can't do that way out in front of the handler scouting his dog! How from up there do you judge handling? How do you really judge ground coverage? The dog is supposed to be hunting for the handler. Then again with you out there, the dog just might be running to you thinking the handler is with you. Your job again is to judge the whole performance; the handler's job is to show you his dog![/quote]

Don, I respect your knowledge and years of judging but I have to respectfully disagree on a few of your views. In NSTRA it's basically all about the dog that can find the most birds. The handlers really serious about NSTRA could care less if the dog is hunting for them. They want the dog covering the field and finding birds. If you can't see the dog how can you judge the dog. Yes, if you do find the dog on an intense point they probably hit the point that way. But unless you saw it you don't know? If the dog is out of sight when it hits scent and establishes point how do you know that the dog didn't take steps after establishing point? Any steps after establishing point are a deduction in score. If you aren't there to see that you can't judge it. And what about a dog that goes over the hill and comes back with a bird? Was it a "wild flush", a "marked bird" or did the dog after establishing point "take it out". Since you were not in position to observe the dog you don't know. The handler is not being judged, only the dog. These are just some of the reasons a judge must be able to observe the dog at all times. If that requires speeding up on their 4-wheeler and getting in front of the handler that's okay. Dogs that have run several trials are not bothered by the 4-wheelers or horses in the field. They quickly learn they are there to find birds and pay little attention to anything else.

Personally I feel the thread has about run the course. Really nothing else to be said. Like I said in my previous post; go to a NSTRA trial, observe, ask questions and ride along with a judge during a brace. And if available, attend a judging seminar. If you like the NSTRA format get involved. If not, find another format you like. Some people don't like NSTRA and that's fine. Others don't like NAVHDA or AKC, that's fine also. Whatever trips your trigger. The main thing is have some fun with your dog!

Dakotazeb wrote:

DonF wrote:I have judged a lot of NSTRA trials in the past. left NSTRA about 1992 and went to AKC, I've judged a good many of their trials too. I was also in the first group of judge's for the AKC Pointing dog test's in the N.W. Even judged a couple AF trials. I got a pretty good idea how to judge. Seeing the dog hit the point is a lot of fun but to score the find you need to judge the whole find, not just the hit! A dog that you find on a point that is intense, hit the point like that. The dog you find on a point that is doing little more than just standing there, hit the point like that. You mission is to judge all the part's of the brace, you can't do that way out in front of the handler scouting his dog! How from up there do you judge handling? How do you really judge ground coverage? The dog is supposed to be hunting for the handler. Then again with you out there, the dog just might be running to you thinking the handler is with you. Your job again is to judge the whole performance; the handler's job is to show you his dog!

Don, I respect your knowledge and years of judging but I have to respectfully disagree on a few of your views. In NSTRA it's basically all about the dog that can find the most birds. The handlers really serious about NSTRA could care less if the dog is hunting for them. They want the dog covering the field and finding birds. If you can't see the dog how can you judge the dog. Yes, if you do find the dog on an intense point they probably hit the point that way. But unless you saw it you don't know? If the dog is out of sight when it hits scent and establishes point how do you know that the dog didn't take steps after establishing point? Any steps after establishing point are a deduction in score. If you aren't there to see that you can't judge it. And what about a dog that goes over the hill and comes back with a bird? Was it a "wild flush", a "marked bird" or did the dog after establishing point "take it out". Since you were not in position to observe the dog you don't know. The handler is not being judged, only the dog. These are just some of the reasons a judge must be able to observe the dog at all times. If that requires speeding up on their 4-wheeler and getting in front of the handler that's okay. Dogs that have run several trials are not bothered by the 4-wheelers or horses in the field. They quickly learn they are there to find birds and pay little attention to anything else. Personally I feel the thread has about run the course. Really nothing else to be said. Like I said in my previous post; go to a NSTRA trial, observe, ask questions and ride along with a judge during a brace. And if available, attend a judging seminar. If you like the NSTRA format get involved. If not, find another format you like. Some people don't like NSTRA and that's fine. Others don't like NAVHDA or AKC, that's fine also. Whatever trips your trigger. The main thing is have some fun with your dog!

I have done HT, FT and NSTRA. I have never had the judge ride in front of me. In front off to one side, cross in front to get to the other side, yes. I did not like what was happening in the video in I thought that is what and why don't started this thread. Again, if I can see my dog and know the direction he was going then certainly the judge can be off to one side judging the dog, handling of the dog and seeing a point. If in hill country then yes he may want to ride ahead to view the dog over the hill. if I was the judge I would be more impressed when the handler finds the dog standing on the other side of the hill on point. Should the judge raise his hand that the dog is on point before the handler sees him?

ezzy333 wrote:I understand but just having trouble with what they are trying to judge. I am not as concerned about how the dog hit it's point as I am as to it handled the bird till the handler gets there and all that means is the bird still there or not. It sometimes seems to me that we start a new completion to judge which dog is the best hunter and then we dream up things to start judging so we can place the dogs other than the things that make a great hunting dog. How far it can run, how fast it can run, whether it takes a step on point, or 2 steps, what position the tail is held, whether it stays in bounds when it doesn't even know what that means, or a hundred other things that make little difference when hunting but ignoring number of birds found, holding them till the handler flushes, stay in contact with the handler, handling in control, marking, retrieving, and other points of that we all look for in our hunting dogs.

By the way, 40 acres is bigger than most of the field I have seen used. That size field would be necessary though for a dog that runs several hundred yards on the opening cast as a square 40 acres is only 440 yards from side to side.

I have always liked the NSTRA format but was negatively impressed big time if that video shows what it has morphed in to and I sure wasn't impressed with having anyone in front of the guys with the guns. Just one of the points that I never allow when teaching, training, guiding, or hunting. But so be it, I will just pass.

Great hunting dog is subjective. I wouldn't own a Brittany, and obviously you're thrilled with them.

And yes, I hunt wild birds, and trial in two different formats.

I ride the 4 wheeler just hard enough to maintain sight of the dog. As stated, I cannot judge what I don't see! I will do everything in my power to never push a dog. I will parallel the dog. I will sit at a vantage point that allows sight whenever possible. But the terrain and cover play a huge factor. I take a different stance than some here have stated. Some have said the handler should show you the dog on point. I disagree! I, as a judge by the standards currently taught, will keep the dog in sight. If you don't want me to ride hard or push your dog, handle him in a way that allows me to slowly follow you both.

ncpointers wrote:I ride the 4 wheeler just hard enough to maintain sight of the dog. As stated, I cannot judge what I don't see! I will do everything in my power to never push a dog. I will parallel the dog. I will sit at a vantage point that allows sight whenever possible. But the terrain and cover play a huge factor. I take a different stance than some here have stated. Some have said the handler should show you the dog on point. I disagree! I, as a judge by the standards currently taught, will keep the dog in sight. If you don't want me to ride hard or push your dog, handle him in a way that allows me to slowly follow you both.

Can you tell me just what it is your judging that the dog must be in sight all the time?

DonF wrote:

ncpointers wrote:I ride the 4 wheeler just hard enough to maintain sight of the dog. As stated, I cannot judge what I don't see! I will do everything in my power to never push a dog. I will parallel the dog. I will sit at a vantage point that allows sight whenever possible. But the terrain and cover play a huge factor. I take a different stance than some here have stated. Some have said the handler should show you the dog on point. I disagree! I, as a judge by the standards currently taught, will keep the dog in sight. If you don't want me to ride hard or push your dog, handle him in a way that allows me to slowly follow you both.

Can you tell me just what it is your judging that the dog must be in sight all the time?

According to some on this thread they need to see if the dog takes a step towards the bird after stopping the first time and before the handler comes to flush. Seems like some kind of misguided pretense to me. But whatever.

PS - If you are ahead of me on your machine or horse, you are pushing my dog. Simple fact.

slistoe wrote:

DonF wrote:

ncpointers wrote:I ride the 4 wheeler just hard enough to maintain sight of the dog. As stated, I cannot judge what I don't see! I will do everything in my power to never push a dog. I will parallel the dog. I will sit at a vantage point that allows sight whenever possible. But the terrain and cover play a huge factor. I take a different stance than some here have stated. Some have said the handler should show you the dog on point. I disagree! I, as a judge by the standards currently taught, will keep the dog in sight. If you don't want me to ride hard or push your dog, handle him in a way that allows me to slowly follow you both.

Can you tell me just what it is your judging that the dog must be in sight all the time?

According to some on this thread they need to see if the dog takes a step towards the bird after stopping the first time and before the handler comes to flush. Seems like some kind of misguided pretense to me. But whatever.

PS - If you are ahead of me on your machine or horse, you are pushing my dog. Simple fact.

AMEN Plus there is nothing that would be of importance in a dog's performance that should make any difference in how effective the dog is. No.1 in a dog's performance is finding birds. No.2 is holding birds and No.3 is retrieving birds. That can all be judged by staying with the handler.

Seems like the guidelines put emphasis on how the dog hits his birds e.g. slamming them vs cat-walking in.

Geez guys, you have beat this thread to death. I wasn't going to respond anymore but felt I had to one last time. I appears to me that several of you that are questioning the judging at NSTRA trials have never participated in a NSTRA trial and/or have never gone to a NSTRA judging seminar. I would invite you to do so and I'm sure many of your questions and misconceptions would be cleared up.

In NSTRA the judges are strictly judging only the dog. And like what has been stated several times in this thread, a judge can't judge what they can't see. That's the bottom line. If it requires the judge to get ahead of the handler in order to see the dog then that is what the judge must do. It doesn't mean the judge is pressuring the dog, but he/she must be in a position to constantly observe the dog.

Look, if you don't like the NSTRA format don't participate in NSTRA. But don't knock the format or judging guidelines if you are not properly informed or educated in them.

Enough said!

Dakotazeb wrote:Geez guys, you have beat this thread to death. I wasn't going to respond anymore but felt I had to one last time. I appears to me that several of you that are questioning the judging at NSTRA trials have never participated in a NSTRA trial and/or have never gone to a NSTRA judging seminar. I would invite you to do so and I'm sure many of your questions and misconceptions would be cleared up.

In NSTRA the judges are strictly judging only the dog. And like what has been stated several times in this thread, a judge can't judge what they can't see. That's the bottom line. If it requires the judge to get ahead of the handler in order to see the dog then that is what the judge must do. It doesn't mean the judge is pressuring the dog, but he/she must be in a position to constantly observe the dog.

Look, if you don't like the NSTRA format don't participate in NSTRA. But don't knock the format or judging guidelines if you are not properly informed or educated in them.

Enough said!

So what we are learning is to ignore anything that doesn't seem right since that is the way NSTRA has decided it should be done. I am not asking for change since I am through competing but I sure am disappointed in the changes of what I thought was a great venue. Guess my concern is that it seems like every time a good sport comes along where we judge hunting dogs and it morphs into judging things that has little to do with hunting dog abilities that matter.

Went to NSTRA trial 2 years ago walked behind the judges on horseback, never seen the judges pass the handler, and walked several braces, only time I saw a judge ahead of the handler was when the handler ask the judge to help find his dog.
But as a hunter I don't care how the dog came to point the bird over the hill, just as long as the bird and dog is there when I get over the hill. That is hunting; amazing how trials seem to dictate how hunting ought to be rather than how it actually really is.

DonF wrote:

ncpointers wrote:I ride the 4 wheeler just hard enough to maintain sight of the dog. As stated, I cannot judge what I don't see! I will do everything in my power to never push a dog. I will parallel the dog. I will sit at a vantage point that allows sight whenever possible. But the terrain and cover play a huge factor. I take a different stance than some here have stated. Some have said the handler should show you the dog on point. I disagree! I, as a judge by the standards currently taught, will keep the dog in sight. If you don't want me to ride hard or push your dog, handle him in a way that allows me to slowly follow you both.

Can you tell me just what it is your judging that the dog must be in sight all the time?

The entire job of the dog. Ground coverage. Hunting pattern. Intelligence in working the cover. Did the dog bump the bird and then go point it. Did it road in. Did it slam point or flop. Did it creep. Did it flag before the handler was in sight. Which dog actually pointed the bird. Did the second dog back or steal point. I could go on. But why.

Do I get this right? One person who does not compete or know the guidelines for judges arguing with people who do compete and judge NAVHDA about the rules.
Ezzy says dogs need to point the bird, hold the bird and retrieve the bird. True. But they need to be judged on how the do it.
Dogs can do a lot of things when they are out of sight that you would not want your bird dog to do........Cj

Trying to learn the game I have gotten permission to ride with the judges on their 4 wheelers several times. All of them made a great effort not to affect the dog or handler. They stayed off to the side, shut the 4 wheeler off a lot of the time. And stayed off away when the dog went on point. Never saw a dog affected by the judge in our area.

The clearest example I can give as to why a judge needs to always see the dog would be if the dog goes over the hill. The handler takes 2 minutes to walk to where they can see the dog. If I as the judge am following the handler as some seem to suggest and we see the dog on point, I am now going to start the scoring. But what I didn't see was the bird got up in front of the dog as the dog ran by. The bird flew a short distance and settled back down in the cover. The dog saw this and ran and pointed the bird. This dog will get a find and possibly a retrieve on a marked bird that should have been taken out for no score because it was pointed before the 3 minutes expired. That could knock another dog out of a placement that they deserve.

ANd my dog will not stay intense on planted birds. So if the judge gets there late all they see is my dog checking back to see if i am coming. What the judge misses is the dog slamming into the wind a creeping a few yards with huge intensity before locking on point. It is very impressive at first then goes to heck as time goes on. Also in NSTRA ground cover is a judgement if the dog covered and hunted the whole field. That is a big order if the field is 60 or more acres. I find that a judge on a horse can see a lot more than a judge on a quad, and can stay back further. Using horses adds a lot to the cost of the trial compared to using quads.

So, if your dog hit' a nice point then goes soft, the present's of the judge probably keep's your dog your dog from either taking the bird out on simply leaving the bird. If I watched your dog slam a point and then go soft, that would reflect in the score on that find. There's more than the initial point to figure in. One big one that a lot of judges don't take into consideration i how well the bird is located. A handler out in front of the dog not producing a bird quickly in mot case's the dog stopped on scent but it did not have the bird well located. You would not believe, then maybe you would, the handler's I've seen roaming all over trying to find a bird in front of their dog. That is not good dog work! Dog's going soft on bird's is a training problem. They are relating that bird in the trial to the bird's it's been trained and then it really doesn't give a shite about what's happening. that should all be taken into account if you want your dog sharp. But fact is that in NSTRA it' mostly about number's and you can win with a soft dog.

Here in AZ judging is still done off of horseback. And i have also judged in regions whwre we were on 4 wheelers. Only time i was a head of the handler is when the dog was making a big cast and i only stayed at a point where i could watch the dog and see if it was creeping and roading or once point was established how well the dog remained on point
I dont want to push the dog but i do want to see how the dog does on its bird work

I do prefer judging off horseback it is quieter.

It could get a lot worse, guys. I just saw a video of hunting with Salukis on the desert sands and the dogs were running great, keen hunting, and right next to them was an entire pack of 4WD SUV's, Land Rovers, and that big sort of 4WD, a dozen of them, bouncing over the sands and keeping pace with the Salukis, watching them run.

Hunting with dogs could get a lot more strange, but I guess if Sakluis can get used to being chased by Land Rovers, then bird dogs can get used to being chased around with an ATV.

oregon woodsmoke wrote:It could get a lot worse, guys. I just saw a video of hunting with Salukis on the desert sands and the dogs were running great, keen hunting, and right next to them was an entire pack of 4WD SUV's, Land Rovers, and that big sort of 4WD, a dozen of them, bouncing over the sands and keeping pace with the Salukis, watching them run.

Hunting with dogs could get a lot more strange, but I guess if Sakluis can get used to being chased by Land Rovers, then bird dogs can get used to being chased around with an ATV.

Being use to it is not the question or the answer. It isn't right in my mind to have anyone between me and my dog during a trial or a test. The dog has to know where I am and what I am doing if we are to work together. And the judge needs to be able to see us both to know if the dog is hunting in a manner that is being asked for by the handler.

Ezzy

Ezzy, ezzy, this is NSTRA. It is a race to the birds - most birds wins. Seems some kind of supposition of "style" is more important though than a pretense of "handling".

A question was asked about judging NSTRA and has been answered by several NSTRA members and a couple of current NSTRA judges. Yet several want to tell these folks what is better. If you think the current rules or judging techniques are wrong, then join and submit your rule changes per the current NSTRA rule book section 7 and try to improve the sport as you think best. Section 7 clearly lays out the procedure for submitting rule changes. You have approximately 30 days to get them submitted to be voted on at the October board meeting.