Back
to CyberHound I am fascinated by the differences between tracking tests at different locations around the country. The most obvious differences are terrain and climate, for which you can train if you know something about the area to which you will travel for a tracking test. However, local tracking customs are often not known by out-of-town exhibitors, and these often have a lot to do with the design of tracks and the success rate. Examples of this include ground conditions for TD and TDX, what constitutes an obstacle in TDX and the time of day that tracks are laid.
The first time I judged a TD test in Houston, there was a wet, marshy area near the end of the last track (but only a couple of inches deep, with good grass cover). With a co-judge from Louisiana and an experienced tracklayer from Houston, I turned to both of them and asked if they normally track TD dogs through such areas in that part of the country. They both said, "yes," so I completed the track and made it the alternate. I had never seen such a wet area on a TD track before, but I have learned that some things are normal in some places that wouldn't be thought of in other places. As it turned out, the alternate track was needed, and the dog (a Golden Retriever) failed the test well before the marsh. However, the exhibitor completed the track and later complained that the marsh was too tough for a TD track. Had the track been in Denver or Albuquerque, where most of my tracking experience is, I would have never plotted a TD track through such a marsh. In Houston however, relying on the experience of local tracking people, I still believe that it was an appropriate decision.
By the way, I just returned from Houston, where I judged a 5-dog TDX test in the same area. It was like tracking on a soggy sponge. Two tracks had marshes two feet deep, each extending over 75 yards on a single leg. A Brittany failed at the marsh because it flushed a bird. On the next track, a Border Collie tracked through the deep marsh for 100 yards like it wasn't even there! Both were local dogs, used to these conditions. There were no complaints from the Brittany's owner.
I have had many discussions with exhibitors and judges about obstacles in TDX, and they almost always relate to local terrain and customs. I have already mentioned the deep marshes in Houston - fair but tough obstacles, which I have never seen anywhere else (not having tracked in Louisiana or in other extremely wet places).
Some places have both paved roads and dirt roads. I once had an argument with a friend and fellow judge about dirt road crossings. She didn't think the dirt road was difficult enough for a TDX obstacle, so we made the crossings at sharp angles. Another judge and I had the same argument about bridle paths (like a dirt road for horses and riders). We did not count the bridle paths as obstacles, because both judges have to agree on them. On both of these occasions, two dogs each failed the road and bridle path obstacles (four altogether). This doesn't necessarily mean that these were either good or bad obstacles, but simply that different customs and judges' interpretations result in different tracks. I don't believe that a TDX obstacle must be an extremely difficult barrier for all but the most athletic, long-legged dogs. In fact, scenting obstacles like a turn at the top of a hill can be more difficult than physical barriers. However, in some areas, the choices for obstacles are limited, and I believe most judges (including me) err on the side of more difficult than less difficult obstacles. Ironically, except for the few examples I have cited, most dogs I have seen fail a TDX test (including my own) do not usually fail on obstacles. If obstacles are extremely easy, as they are in some places, it is not uncommon for judges to put three or four on a track, rather than the required two.
Just to give you an idea how ridiculous some local customs are, I will use my home area (Denver) as an example. Believe it or not, the local custom around here ever since the AKC approved TDX has been to lay the first tracks in the dark with flashlights, so the first dog can run at daybreak. The reason for this is so the first two or three dogs can run the test during the coolest possible time of day, thereby maximizing their chances for success. I thought this was a great idea for many years, until I became a judge. Also, I got tired of being a nighttime tracklayer. TDX judges and tracklayers in Denver have to get up at about 3:00 AM to get out to the tracking site by 4:00 AM, so the judge can watch a flashlight bob up and down in the dark! Despite the good intentions behind this long-standing custom, it encourages tracklaying errors, discourages volunteers to judge and lay tracks, and is sometimes dangerous (imagine walking through a large ditch in the middle of the night!)
Now, you might laugh at these fools in Denver that do this, but it illustrates something that I have observed about almost every dog club and tracking test - that the greatest sin of all is changing the way it has always been done. Some differences between tracking tests result from the natural terrain and conditions that the local people have learned to deal with. An outsider is often at a distinct disadvantage, and perhaps not much can be done about it. However, many things are done simply for the sake of custom and to maintain the inertia that some people started long ago. These are often the customs that need changing, especially where the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.
Let us not forget this is a volunteer sport, which does not pay its own way. Breed and obedience clubs usually subsidize tracking, and those of use who love the sport would be wise to remember this. However, some local customs should probably change before they drive away more good volunteer workers.