# Western Regional WC/WCX



## PalouseDogs (Aug 14, 2013)

I ran Pinyon in the Western Regional WC/WCX test on Wednesday (5/25/22). He passed both, but it was certainly not because of good handling or preparation on my part. He bailed me out of some big mistakes. 




















The worst error on my part: I had never seen a WC or WCX. I scanned the rules ahead of time and knew there would be gunners in the field in white, like in a field trial, but with much shorter distances. What I did not realize was that it was like a field trial in that there are no duck calls before the birds is thrown, only a gun shot. In many cases, the gun shot was nearly simultaneous with the bird being thrown. I have only done hunt tests. I have never trained for the situation of white-coated gunners and no quack-quack. 

WCX (land triple, water double): In the land triple, with birds at about 80 (first thrown), 70 (second thrown in middle), and 50 yards (flyer go-bird), I had him lined up facing the middle bird. He glanced in the direction of the gunshot from the first bird, thrown against a background of a dark hillside, but I'm pretty sure he didn't see the bird. He easily got the flyer and middle bird. I lined him up for the third and hoped for the best. He bounded out, got halfway, and started searching. He started to come back, changed his mind, and went back and found it. The wind was in our favor. I don't know if he scented the bird or followed dragback or figured out that the bird must be somewhere close to the guy in the chair. On the water double, I thought I was more on the ball, but I again had him looking at the go bird when the memory bird went down. However, he went straight across the water and up the hillside to the memory bird so he must have seen it in his peripheral vision. There were 4 entries and 4 passes in the WCX.

WC (land double, 2 water singles). The WC land double looked deceptively easy. Marks were over 90 degrees apart at only about 40 or 50 yards. 










In normal, wetter years, this grassy bowl is a shallow pond with water up to about where the flyer is being thrown from. Of the 13 dogs that ran, only 7 passed this series. Dog after dog would run to the area of fall, appear to be close to the bird and then not be able to find it. I think these wet "bowls" are very difficult for an inexperienced dog. The birds were landing in beige-colored grass about a foot high. The soft grass and wet ground cushioned the birds' falls, so the dogs could not heard a thud. Scent from the bird that had just fallen was probably trapped by the grass while, at the same time, the wet "bowl" area held the scent of all the other birds that had come before. The dogs that passed had the confidence to stay in the AOF and set up a search until they found the bird. For once, I had Pinyon pointed in the right directions for both falls. He didn't have any trouble. I've thrown marks in this area when it's had water and when it didn't. 

Of the 7 WC dogs that made it to water, 4 passed. They were both fairly simple singles, but some of the dogs seemed reluctant to get a second single that fell close to the gunner. 

Out of 13 dogs that ran WC, 4 passed.


----------



## Hildae (Aug 15, 2012)

Sounds a lot like our first WC/WCX as well! We were also used to the quacking, but luckily I think I needed the quacking more than the dog did as she did fine. As to you lining up facing the wrong bird, which I have never done (wink wink ) the trainer we work with likes to say "sometimes it's better to be lucky than good."😄 Congrats!


----------



## DblTrblGolden2 (Aug 22, 2018)

Congratulations ! As someone that hunt trains and ran a WCX (and failed) a few weeks ago I give you a round of applause. I didn’t realize the differences either. Next time we will practice with no calls and a man in white standing in front of the holding blind on the center bird before we go. 😱😂🤣

Cruz stepped on the first two marks. He was positive he should not run out to the man standing near the center mark. He went 1/2 way, looked back at me like “are you sure???” And then went way behind the guy to hunt. The mark was 3 feet from the man.


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

Well done, Congratulations.



PalouseDogs said:


> The dogs that passed had the confidence to stay in the AOF and set up a search until they found the bird.


You probably already know but others may not.
A very basic drill to teach a dog to stay in the AOF is the "Dirt Clod Drill"
The gunner throws a dirt clod in a bare field. The dog is sent and expected to stay in the AOF, minimal gunner help if needed. Just a "hey hey" if the dog wants to leave. After the dog hunts a while in the AOF the gunner tosses a bird out when the dog is not looking. The dog is rewarded and thinks the bird must have been there the whole time.


PalouseDogs said:


> some of the dogs seemed reluctant to get a second single that fell close to the gunner


Have to be very careful about any corrections near gunners. Marks don't often land near gunners but very often the route to a mark will pass very close to a gunner. Dogs have to be comfortable running past them.


----------



## diane0905 (Aug 20, 2010)

Nice job! I enjoyed reading your experience.


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

IMO duck calls should be used very little if ever in training, I never have. A retriever should be picking out the gunners on the way to and at the line, don't point them out for the dog. You want the dog thinking about and remembering the guns, not relying on you to do it.


----------



## Hildae (Aug 15, 2012)

SRW said:


> You probably already know but others may not.
> A very basic drill to teach a dog to stay in the AOF is the "Dirt Clod Drill"
> The gunner throws a dirt clod in a bare field. The dog is sent and expected to stay in the AOF, minimal gunner help if needed. Just a "hey hey" if the dog wants to leave. After the dog hunts a while in the AOF the gunner tosses a bird out when the dog is not looking. The dog is rewarded and thinks the bird must have been there the whole time.


We did this drill. It helped.


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

Hildae said:


> We did this drill. It helped.


Another great variation of the drill is with a large white bumper and a length of rope. Can even be a boat bumper.
This is used as part of a double. Throw the large white bumper in low cover first followed by a second mark. The dog should be able to see the bumper on the ground from the line so he knows it’s there. When the dog is getting the other mark the thrower pulls the bumper in with the rope. It might be a little bit more black and white to the dog Because they saw the bumper laying there plain as day. It also teaches them to use their eyes to mark the fall rather than counting on their nose to find it.


----------



## PalouseDogs (Aug 14, 2013)

I am a big fan of stand-alones to build persistence and marking ability. You can do them by yourself with a single duck or bumper. Coincidently, there is an article in the current GRCA news by Dennis Voigt about training alone, including diagrams of the basic stand-alone (his version A) and variations that I’ve never tried. In the basic stand-alone, you put the dog in a sit stay. Walk out some distance, toss bumper, release dog, wait. When the dog finds the mark. put him in a sit where you threw from, walk out, throw, send, etc. Mix up distances and cover types. Ideally, walk a big circle, so you get all wind directions. Mix up backgrounds. It helps the dog learn persistence because there is no handler to run back to. There is nothing to do except keep looking for the mark and you are there to help if he starts having problems.


----------



## 3goldens2keep (Feb 13, 2019)

PalouseDogs...congratulations on the WCX our girl got hers a few years ago, and like you I was pleased and surprised how well she did. These dogs are amazing at what the can do if we just stay out of their way. He is a nice looking Golden!


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

Agree, I never use duck calls in training unless it's me doing the calling at the line and only to add excitement in a breaking test, a necessary evil of hunt tests.
Far too many hunt test trainers rely on a duck call to pull their dog to the next mark, an absolutely terrible training habit.
BTW the WCX thrower sitting with a holding blind at the Eastern Regional was absolutely baffling. There was no reason to have the holding blind and it is completely atypical for a WCX. Granted most dogs have seen holding blinds but I think the judges were not intimately familiar with the rules of the WCX, which are very quantified and specific.


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

K9-Design said:


> Far too many hunt test trainers rely on a duck call to pull their dog to the next mark, an absolutely terrible training habit.


Not to mention it's just plain silly. Do people think every bird shot when hunting is preceded by a duck call?


----------



## nolefan (Nov 6, 2009)

Congratulations!!! Thank you for sharing so many details and of course the photos  they are terrific!! I especially like the one out in the field, what a nice looking dog,


----------



## CAROLINA MOM (May 12, 2009)

Congratulations!


----------



## DblTrblGolden2 (Aug 22, 2018)

K9-Design said:


> Agree, I never use duck calls in training unless it's me doing the calling at the line and only to add excitement in a breaking test, a necessary evil of hunt tests.
> Far too many hunt test trainers rely on a duck call to pull their dog to the next mark, an absolutely terrible training habit.
> BTW the WCX thrower sitting with a holding blind at the Eastern Regional was absolutely baffling. There was no reason to have the holding blind and it is completely atypical for a WCX. Granted most dogs have seen holding blinds but I think the judges were not intimately familiar with the rules of the WCX, which are very quantified and specific.


Thank you and @SRW for the tip. I’m going to start training without calls. I honestly just never thought about it. In my training groups field dogs get no calls, but all hunt tests dogs do. I never thought about why??


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

DblTrblGolden2 said:


> Thank you and @SRW for the tip. I’m going to start training without calls. I honestly just never thought about it. In my training groups field dogs get no calls, but all hunt tests dogs do. I never thought about why??


You aren't alone. I see many veteran field people pointing out the gunners to their dogs in training. One of my mentors has always been very adamant about making the dog pick out the guns on its own, it is some of the best training advise I have ever heard. Also let the dog concentrate on the gun locations especially the memory birds, take your time. 
At an event I might help the dog find a gunner if I have to, in training never. I will call for the mark to be thrown even if the dog hasn't found the gun. Might have to re-throw it or ask for a double throw but the surprise of a thrown bird from a gun the dog hasn't found is a great teaching moment. The dog wants those birds even more than you do and it will teach him to keep looking and not just focus on the most prominent gunner in the field. 
Of course in training with multiple gunners in the field, the retrieves should frequently be done as singles.


----------



## PalouseDogs (Aug 14, 2013)

But, in hunt tests, the gunners are hidden. Yes, I know the dogs can often pick them out. If the judges are determined to hide them, they can be very hard to find, especially in our landscape, where there are plenty of rocky mounds and bushes to get behind.


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

PalouseDogs said:


> But, in hunt tests, the gunners are hidden.


Good point.
In AKC tests some are supposed to be hidden and there can also be visible guns. I believe all gunners are supposed to be hidden in HRC tests, not sure of that though.
Either way you are correct. In theory the dog would not be able to find the gun stations. This rarely happens at the tests I have seen or heard about. Usually it is something like this;
















Can anyone spot the gunners in those photos? 


In a hunt test that actually adhered to the rules and concealed the guns, the dog would not be able to pick out the guns and the handler would not be able to point them out. The tests require the handler to have a shotgun and point at the birds as they are thrown. In HRC the handler shoots poppers in the upper levels, in AKC test the handler usually just points. "Following the gun" is something to train on. Dogs that actually hunt pick up on it very quick.

The distances are quite short at hunt tests. The shorter distance not only makes the birds easier to mark, it also reduces the time it takes for the dog to complete the test. The dogs don't have to remember the marks as long. This is one of the reasons to train on longer setups, it demands more precise marking as well as memory.
It is very difficult to create an event atmosphere in training. An old rule of thumb is to expect about 70% of your dogs talent and training to show up in an event. It is often accurate. You can compensate for that by training to a higher level.


----------



## PalouseDogs (Aug 14, 2013)

The last series of a Master test in McCall, Idaho, 2020. You can find two of the blinds without too much difficulty. I am not positive where the third is, but I think it was behind the green mound on the bank at the right edge, which is also where one of the blind planters was.








The difficulty most dogs had with this set up was the scent trapped in the bowl of the pond, combined with the clumps of vegetation making it hard to see a bird floating (or sinking, since it was the second or third day) in the water. This was the second of the two Master tests I’ve run with Pinyon. He picked up the marks (no thanks to me). We went out on the last cast of the last blind. The bird was in front of the green mound on top of the bank on the right side. Pinyon took a nice line across the pond and up the steep bank. I whistle-stopped him on top of the bank at the right side of the mound. I was absolutely, positively 120% sure he knew the bird was a couple yards to the left of where he was sitting, because it was SO CLOSE to him. I gave him a quick left cast….and he did a straight back and followed the scent of the blind planter behind the mound and vanished into the dark trees. Oops.










The second series of a 2020 Master test in McCall on the same weekend (double Master). The judges are on the right side. The blind on the bank in the center is very obvious. There is one in the tree shadows on the left. I’m not sure where the third is. Most of the dogs, as I recall, didn’t have too much trouble on the marks in this test, even in the tall grass. It was the blinds that were tough. One was through the grass in the bowl, the other back behind the judges through the sage. If the dog veered a little off path, he was lost in vegetation. I lost Pinyon on both. On the first, through the sage, into a channel of grass, Pinyon went tearing off and I was too slow on the whistle to stop him before he got into tall grass. He came back with the bird quickly (following drag back). We should have been dropped then, but the judges told me to run the second. I lost him again, this time due more to my poor eyesight. (Pinyon needs to fire this handler and get one that can see.) 

Those two tests were the first two, and so far only, Masters for both me and Pinyon. I went back to chasing OTCH points after that. Since he finished his OTCH early this year, we are taking a break from Obedience and doing a little hunt training. I must be nuts, but I’m planning to enter McCall again in July. It’s a difficult test landscape but a very pretty area, high in the mountains.


----------



## Hildae (Aug 15, 2012)

At our tests the gunners were almost completely hidden behind mounds and debris piles.


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

PalouseDogs said:


> The difficulty most dogs had with this set up was the scent trapped in the bowl of the pond, combined with the clumps of vegetation making it hard to see a bird floating (or sinking, since it was the second or third day) in the water.


Better concealment of the guns than most tests. I've seen plenty that were "hidden" behind a 4'x8' camo billboard.

That much vegetation in the water does make it challenging. Dogs can lose all point of reference.

I hate it when judges feel the need to throw marks in the water. It is rarely the best mark.
We will occasionally throw a bird in the water as a simulated flier the sluice it. This can make the memory marks more challenging.
A bird thrown to the waters edge is often a good mark, especially as a check down following a long go bird.

Good luck in July.


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

WC/WCX rules are annoyingly specific and for the WC they require both water marks to land in open water, and one of the WCX water marks to land in open water. There's little room for interpretation by the judges. I've learned through experience to set up WC/X tests EXACTLY as described in the rules, otherwise you're gonna hear about it from everyone who failed, if you're one degree outside the rules, even though you could have thrown snow geese on a golf course for their dogs and they still would have failed.


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

K9-Design said:


> you could have thrown snow geese on a golf course for their dogs and they still would have failed.


That is exactly what I would do in response to a bunch of whining.


----------



## DblTrblGolden2 (Aug 22, 2018)

K9-Design said:


> WC/WCX rules are annoyingly specific and for the WC they require both water marks to land in open water, and one of the WCX water marks to land in open water. There's little room for interpretation by the judges. I've learned through experience to set up WC/X tests EXACTLY as described in the rules, otherwise you're gonna hear about it from everyone who failed, if you're one degree outside the rules, even though you could have thrown snow geese on a golf course for their dogs and they still would have failed.


There was plenty of whining at the Eastern. I was not one of them. My theory is that if any dog can pass the test mine should, if not I need to train better. Before I run another WCX I’ll practice no calls, and a man standing in front of the holding blind a few feet from the mark. Cruz really had no issue without the calls, he stepped on the two outside marks. The man in white, in front of the holding blind, confused him. That bird was also an angle in. I have never been one to point out the holding blinds at the line. I also had a pro tell me I was fast at the WCX. I’m slowing down lol. I don’t feel bad. We just passed our first SH test, but I was surprised that some MH dogs didn’t pass this specific WCX. We all learn, especially when we don’t pass.
If only I could’ve had a handle lol


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

And see, no where in the WC/X rules are there holding blinds in the field. That was baffling. Why did they have them?
Also it's very specific that WCX land marks are to be thrown 45º angle back. 
Both of the judges were super nice ladies and one of them at least had an immense amount of hunt test experience but why they were not provided the rules and advised to follow them to the letter, I don't know.


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

Sounds to me like those in charge of the WC/X rules have no clue how to train a retriever.


----------



## PalouseDogs (Aug 14, 2013)

K9-Design said:


> ...for the WC they require both water marks to land in open water..


I skimmed the rules before the test, and this was what I thought, too. At our test, the WC water marks landed on land. Dogs had to cross a channel of water, get out, get the bird in very open cover, and swim back. I thought the rules had said the birds had to land in water and the judges had made a mistake. I read the rules more carefully when I got home. They say:

"The retrieving of two freshly killed ducks in swimming water *in light cover *with the ducks approximately 25 to 30 yards from the line." (Emphasis is mine.)
And:
"The back to back water singles demonstrate the ability to swim, to retrieve a waterfowl, and a willingness* to re-enter the water.*" (Emphasis is mine.)

The judges were correct. There can't be "light cover" unless the bird is landing on land. The dog can't "re-enter" the water unless it got out of the water. 

This is a difficult situation to find on many training grounds. The ponds on the Espanola training grounds are mostly oval with gently curving shorelines. This requirement means you either need a fairly narrow channel, like a water-filled ditch, or a man-made rectangular pond that isn't very wide across. In our test, the judges ran it in what I am pretty sure was the only place on the grounds where it was possible to satisfy the requirements. One of the ponds, called the Hourglass pond has an hourglass shape (who woulda guessed?). At the narrowest point in the hourglass, it was about 30 yards. In a wetter year, it would have been 50. The marks had to be right on the shore and landing in pretty much bare dirt with gunners practically back to back because if they had been further apart, the mark would have been too long. Unfortunately, I don't have a very good picture of the setup.

This is Pinyon returning from the first mark. The bird was on the bank about where the end of his tail is. Gunners are to the left outside the photo. 










Here he's heading out for the second mark, which can't be seen in this photo. The gunners for the first mark are in the frame. 










It seemed odd to me that the test requirements were a scaled-down version of a field trial instead of a hunt test, but it was kind of fun to do something different.


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

PalouseDogs said:


> It seemed odd to me that the test requirements were a scaled-down version of a field trial instead of a hunt test, but it was kind of fun to do something different.


Actually the hunt test rules are base on the field trial rules also. Scaled-down is a fair enough description and it causes all kinds of problems. Water, cover, terrain and everything else in field settings are never the same. Specifying distance, cover, bird placement, etc. doesn't work and invites a lot of whining about nonsense.

Train the right way and none of it will matter, your dog will be able to do it all.


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

PalouseDogs said:


> I skimmed the rules before the test, and this was what I thought, too. At our test, the WC water marks landed on land. Dogs had to cross a channel of water, get out, get the bird in very open cover, and swim back. I thought the rules had said the birds had to land in water and the judges had made a mistake. I read the rules more carefully when I got home. They say:
> 
> "The retrieving of two freshly killed ducks in swimming water *in light cover *with the ducks approximately 25 to 30 yards from the line." (Emphasis is mine.)
> And:
> ...


You are mis-interpretting the rules. "Re-enter the water" means retrieve the SECOND water single. Not do a land-water-land mark.


----------



## PalouseDogs (Aug 14, 2013)

What about the “light cover” part of the rules?

Apparently, the judges in our test misinterpreted the rules, too. If GRCA wants the rules followed to the letter, they need to write them so they are less ambiguous.


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

WC Rules : 
"Back to Back Water Singles. The retrieving of two freshly killed ducks in swimming water in
light cover with the ducks approximately 25 to 30 yards from the line."

In swimming water means open water. By light cover I suppose there could be grass sticking out of the water. 

WCX rules:
"One bird shall be in natural, moderate cover not visible from the line as the memory bird and the other shall be fully
visible from the line in open swimming water. "


----------



## K9-Design (Jan 18, 2009)

Trust me I don't relish debating the merits of WC/WCX rules. I personally think it is an obsolete event that could be done away with. All I have learned from judging many of them is that the rules are very specific and much argument and anguish can be eliminated by following them as closely as possible within the allowances of the terrain afforded to the test.


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

PalouseDogs said:


> If GRCA wants the rules followed to the letter, they need to write them so they are less ambiguous.


I would vote for more ambiguous to give the judges more latitude in adapting to the conditions at hand. 

From the field trial rules,_ "Retrievers should perform equally well on the land and in the water, and shall be thoroughly tested on both."_



K9-Design said:


> In swimming water means open water.


In field trial lingo it means water deep enough to require swimming, as opposed to running or lunging water.


K9-Design said:


> Trust me I don't relish debating the merits of WC/WCX rules. I personally think it is an obsolete event that could be done away with. All I have learned from judging many of them is that the rules are very specific and much argument and anguish can be eliminated by following them as closely as possible within the allowances of the terrain afforded to the test.


----------



## PalouseDogs (Aug 14, 2013)

K9-Design said:


> Trust me I don't relish debating the merits of WC/WCX rules. I personally think it is an obsolete event that could be done away with. All I have learned from judging many of them is that the rules are very specific and much argument and anguish can be eliminated by following them as closely as possible within the allowances of the terrain afforded to the test.


Trust me, I agree. Let me be clear: I was not the judge, nor did my dog have any trouble with the WC portion of the test. I am not complaining. I am only saying that I expected WC water marks to land in water, but when I read the rules, I agreed with the judge's interpretation, given the poor way in which they were written. When I read "re-enter the water", to me, that means re-enter the water on a single mark, not do one mark and the re-enter the water on a second mark. 

I think it's an odd test for a specialty, especially if the goal is to get more participation. Far more goldens are likely to get involved with field work via hunt tests than field trials. It would make more sense to me to have it more like a hunt test.


----------



## SRW (Dec 21, 2018)

PalouseDogs said:


> When I read "re-enter the water", to me, that means re-enter the water on a single mark,


That would typically be what is meant by a re-entry.


----------



## FinnTheFloof (Jun 27, 2021)

I don't have anything of value to contribute, but I wanted to say that this has been fascinating to read! Thank you @PalouseDogs for starting this thread!


----------

