UKC Forums - Nite Hunt Scenario

Pages (7): « First ... « 2 3 [4] 5 6 » ... Last »
Show all 172 posts from this thread on one page

UKC Forums (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/index.php)
- UKC Coonhounds (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=4)
-- Nite Hunt Scenario (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/showthread.php?threadid=928501074)

Posted by joey on 03-05-2018 03:04 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by Rip
That may be correct, but it depends on the wording of the trap rule as noted above.

However, if it were that way you still could not assign tree points to the other dog because it wasn't a tree and the Advisor has already ruled assigning tree points and the stationary rule both only apply to trees.

As for intent, intent of the rule never matters only the wording. That's why we had to reword the dog struck when shut out on strike otherwise they had no way to be minused for strike. That wasn't the intent but that is how it was worded so we had to live with it until it was changed.

No Rip UKC always interprets the intent. Always have.

__________________
Michael Rosamond
Sunspot Lights
936-827-6309
http://www.sunspotlights.com/
When brightness matters!!

Home Of:
PKC Ch, Grch Grnch 2008 Tx state champion They call me Crazy Betty

PKC SCh CH Grnch They call me Howler too

Posted by Rip on 03-05-2018 04:40 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by joey
No Rip UKC always interprets the intent. Always have.

I don't agree.

I do not for one minute think all those years their intent was to allow a dog to do whatever he wanted if he was shut out on strike and get clean away with it, even off game. The way the rule used to be worded he didn't have any strike points to minus unless he got treed on a different tree. He could run 5 deer by you and you couldn't minus him, he could quit three tracks. They never went back and said "that's not the intent". They said that's how its worded and we have to go by the rule until it is changed.

The rule was changed and now the dog is accountable for its strike even if it is shut out.

That is just one instance. There have been more.

However, I agree that in one case they did go by the intent, the "competing for strike" thing on the recast rule. They had an official update that went against the way it was written based on the intent of the rule, but that is the only time I can ever remember them going by intent as opposed to what was in black and white. Doesn't mean it is the only time they have it's just the only one I remember.

Intent in the grey areas, sure I have seen them put that in there on those but if it was written down IMO they have pretty much went by the way it was written and punctuated. Shall meant shall, may meant may etc.

That's why I am saying that yes, you may be right in that they have enough wiggle room in the trap rule wording to say they get minused, but depending on the wording just like the "no tree to be scored twice" where they hold to it even if you scored it slick the first time and then they ran a coon into it and you saw the coon they may stick to deleting everything at a trap. I don't know because I haven't seen that wording, but I think it all depends on that.

__________________
Let's go huntin

Posted by joey on 03-05-2018 05:35 AM:

I think we agree on the way this should be scored, but Allen has referenced intent in making interpretations several times. They wouldn't have to interpret anything if it was all black and white in how the rules are written. I don't even remember the subject but this came up a few months back because of how Allen "worded" something. He let everyone know the they are not lawyers and that the rules are not written in such a way.

Posted by sleepy head on 03-05-2018 11:42 AM:

It makes sense that a stationary only applies to a tree, but after a dog is declared tree and the cast is forced to go to the dog/dogs in my opinion if they are showing a refuge every dog there should be scored the same as a tree if it is without a coon. With a coon I agree with how the rules read.

Posted by yadkintar on 03-05-2018 12:03 PM:

Rules or no rules I can't believe that somebody would even expect not to take a minus on dogs barking on an empty cage. But they circle everything now days.

Tar

Posted by Joe Moore on 03-05-2018 02:28 PM:

Curious to see Allens ruling on this today.

Posted by LoggyBayouBlues on 03-05-2018 04:47 PM:

BTT

__________________
John Haun

Posted by Donnie Stevens on 03-05-2018 11:39 PM:

Allen are you still chewing on that honey bun....

__________________
Friends don't let friends hunt blueticks

Posted by yadkintar on 03-06-2018 01:46 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Donnie Stevens
Allen are you still chewing on that honey bun....

Pop tart lol !! I know what I would do and explain to them why in no certain terms.

Tar

Posted by pamjohnson on 03-06-2018 02:07 PM:

4 pages for this. i didn't even read them all. you fellows need allen?
i figured i had enough reading when jim and a few others couldn't man up and take the minus that was deserved. gray areas, twisting,turning things around it's sad.

Posted by yadkintar on 03-06-2018 02:46 PM:

A dog barking at an empty trap deserves more than a minus in my opinion !!

Tar

Posted by Richard Lambert on 03-06-2018 03:13 PM:

Do we really need a separate rule just for live traps? UKC/Allen has already said that live traps get deleted. If a trap with a coon gets deleted, then a trap without a.coon gets deleted also. If you start minusing dogs for empty live traps, then I wonder how many guides will start setting out empty live traps at their spots? Does anyone know where I can buy several live traps? There is a hunt this weekend at my club.

Posted by joey on 03-06-2018 03:18 PM:

No Richard you delete a coon in the trap not the trap. They delete a coon in a trap because it can not get away and its a fair chase issue. When there is not a coon in the trap fair chase isn't a issue. They might very well say its deleted and that's fine but In my opinion it wouldn't be right.

Posted by sleepy head on 03-06-2018 03:21 PM:

If you can't find some traps just take some canning jars, squirt a little coon scent in them. A dog that will tree a empty trap probably won't mind what type of container it is

Posted by yadkintar on 03-06-2018 03:31 PM:

The obvious thing is a dog would have to be a special kinda stupid to tree on a empty trap and his handler would be a slickster to want to get out of a minus on it. If I was a betting man by allens silence he feels the same way. 🙃

Posted by HERSHSHUNTIN on 03-06-2018 03:32 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Lambert
Do we really need a separate rule just for live traps? UKC/Allen has already said that live traps get deleted. If a trap with a coon gets deleted, then a trap without a.coon gets deleted also. If you start minusing dogs for empty live traps, then I wonder how many guides will start setting out empty live traps at their spots? Does anyone know where I can buy several live traps? There is a hunt this weekend at my club.

I think Old Richard is setting a trap--remember he runs Redbones & he says they are more apt to have the coon than not

__________________
Herschel Burt

hershtwo@yahoo.com
Life member NRA
Current dogs
GR CH NT CH RED MIGHTY 90-Bo/Sierra
NT.CH.GR CH BEYOND BILLY HTX --Billy the Kid/ Amber
GR CH 1ST & 2ND place wins 90/4 LIFE GUN-HTX==-Willy BOY/Bigtime Britt
Dogs I have owned
Nt ch Gr ch HERSHS HUNTIN RED IKE
NT CH CH HERSHS HUNTIN BUDDY
GR NT CH MILLERS DIRTY RED
NT CH CH LYNN'S CREEK JULIE
GR CH HERSHS HUNTIN RED KATE
CH NITE CH AMBRAW RIVER TIMBER ROCK
NT CH HERSHS HUNTIN RED CLEM
NT CH ROCKY TOP CHERRY

Posted by Richard Lambert on 03-06-2018 03:55 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by yadkintar
a dog would have to be a special kinda stupid to tree on a empty trap

his handler would be a slickster to want to get out of a minus on it.

If I was a betting man by Allen's silence he feels the same way.

Oh my goodness, there is just so much wrong with this..
Do you have any experience to back this up or are you just making it up? Almost any young dog that has been started on a coon in a trap will bark/bay/tree on an empty trap unless their owner has "broke" them from it later.

Why would not wanting to take minus on something that didn't require you to per the rules make you a "slickster"?

If you were a betting man, I bet that you would go broke. Is that why you are not a betting man?

Posted by sleepy head on 03-06-2018 03:58 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Lambert
Oh my goodness, there is just so much wrong with this..
Do you have any experience to back this up or are you just making it up? Almost any young dog that has been started on a coon in a trap will bark/bay/tree on an empty trap unless their owner has "broke" them from it later.

Why would not wanting to take minus on something that didn't require you to per the rules make you a "slickster"?

If you were a betting man, I bet that you would go broke. Is that why you are not a betting man?

Hmmm don't minis because it's is used to train? Guess we shouldn't minis slick tree's either

Posted by yadkintar on 03-06-2018 03:59 PM:

And Richard lambert would try and win a nite hunt with a dog that would tree slobber mouth on a empty live trap and want to delete it and not be a little bit embarrassed ?

Tar

Posted by Richard Lambert on 03-06-2018 04:02 PM:

Michael, I always thought that they deleted a trap because it was a man-made situation. If they didnt, guides would have traps up in trees and on the ground everywhere. The same holds true for an empty trap as it does for a trap with a coon in it.

Posted by Donnie Stevens on 03-06-2018 04:10 PM:

I've seen dogs barking at feeders too and I've seen kittens actually inside tire feeders. Can I delete those aswell lol

__________________
Friends don't let friends hunt blueticks

Posted by Richard Lambert on 03-06-2018 04:11 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by sleepy head
Hmmm don't minis because it's is used to train? Guess we shouldn't minis slick tree's either

Don't minus or plus but delete because it is a man-made situation and has nothing to do with running and treeing coons. Do you really think that a slick tree is any comparison to a live trap is any way? How in the world did you get"because it is used to train" out of my statement? I really need to work on my writing skills. I need to send my posts to Mr Conkey for a rewrite before I post them.

Posted by Richard Lambert on 03-06-2018 04:24 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by yadkintar
And Richard lambert would try and win a nite hunt with a dog that would tree slobber mouth on a empty live trap and want to delete it and not be a little bit embarrassed ?
Tar

I am never embarrased to follow the rules.

Are you embarrased when your dog makes a slick tree and gets minused? Are you embarrased when your dog makes a slick tree and it gets circled? Are you embarrased when your dog gets first strike on a deer and then switches over and trees a coon?

Remember I hunt Redbones. I am never embarrased when they do something stupid. I am only embarrased when I do something stupid like minusing my dog when their points should be deleted.

Posted by Richard Lambert on 03-06-2018 04:28 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Donnie Stevens
I've seen dogs barking at feeders too and I've seen kittens actually inside tire feeders. Can I delete those aswell lol

Donnie, UKC has not ruled on or made an exception for feeders.
And what I think or "We" think should be done doesn't matter. Only UKC's opinion matters. They said live traps get deleted. Tarbaby, do you think Allen should be embarrased?

Posted by yadkintar on 03-06-2018 04:35 PM:

Richard but it's obvious there is nothing in that trap even to the dog lol .................. Oh my goodness I would have a come apart lol.

They should have put the trap back in the truck before they cut the dogs loose or maybe they didn't have enough time before the dogs were cut loose just sayen lol.

Tar

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:36 PM.

Pages (7): « First ... « 2 3 [4] 5 6 » ... Last »
Show all 172 posts from this thread on one page