UKC Forums - New Rule On Scratched For Fighting Question

Pages (5): « First ... « 2 3 [4] 5 »
Show all 113 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)
-- New Rule On Scratched For Fighting Question (http://forums.ukcdogs.com/showthread.php?threadid=928524675)

Posted by Redneck Mafia on 12-06-2019 05:30 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by novicane65
You can tell them time and time again. It just falls on deaf ears. There's a bunch to be interpreted in the rules though. What 1 guy says is interfering another says its not. And I know I'm going to hurt feelers saying this but..... by a bunch of these replies, guys are looking for an easy way to get the competition out of the picture. And this is an easy way to that. I've asked several people about the interface part. Some say it's tree jacking, face barking, bumping other dogs on the tree. So I think there's some gray area that needs defined in my opinion. Because what some people are calling "mean" dogs that are far from mean. Face barking and tree jacking doesn't make it a mean dog. Is it a dog that hasn't been taught some manners, absolutely but not mean.

Unless there is an actual fight it is only interfering if a dogs aggressive behavior causes another dog to take a minus.

__________________
Cheyenne & Jennifer Cummings
Seneca , MO
(417)317-4815
"TEAM MAFIA"
*NATIONAL GRNITECH GRCH GRNITECH(5) HALL OF FAME PKC PLATIUM CH REDNECK BACKWOODS SHACK
2014 OK STATE CH, 2015 MO PKC LEADER, 2016 PKC NATIONALS SEMIFINALIST, 2016 UKC TOP 20, 2O17 UKC WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP 3RD PLACE, 2018 PKC SENIOR SHOWDOWN TRUCK HUNT FINAL 4, 2018 MO PKC STATE CHAMPION, 2019 AUTUMN OAKS NATIONAL GRNITE CH, 2019 PKC WORLD CH SEMIFINALIST. 2021 PKC SENIOR SHOWDOWN TRUCK HUNT FINAL 4.
*PKC WORLD CHAMPION PLATNIUM CHAMPION GRNITECH SHACK'S HEATHER ISLAND SOUTHERN STOGIE
2021 OKLAHOMA STATE CHAMPION, 2022 PKC WORLD CHAMPION, 2022 MO PKC STATE LEADER PRO SPORT TRUCK WINNER, 2025 MO PKC STATE CHAMPION

RIP
*GRNITECH PKC SCH REDNECK MAFIA PKC HALL OF FAME REPRODUCER INDUCTED 2022
*GRNITECH CH PKC SILVER CH REDNECK SHACK ATTACK aka TAC 2018 OKLAHOMA STATE CHAMPION, 2020 MO PKC STATE LEADER

Posted by Richard Lambert on 12-06-2019 07:19 PM:

Oh my goodness, are you saying there has to be minus points for there to be interference? If one dog is treeing with his back to the tree and won't let another dog on the tree, is that not interference?
Are you saying that If one dog is face barking and chasing another dog around a tree, he isn't interfering with that dog's ability to tree?
If one dog growls at and shoulders another dog when you cut them loose and the other dog comes back and stands at his handlers side is that not interference?
What does taking minus points have to do with interference? Are you saying that the interference has to be bad enough to cause another dog to take minus? I maybe wrong but I don't remember ever seeing that in the Advisor and I know that it doesn't say that in the rulebook.

Posted by Sonny Phipps on 12-07-2019 01:11 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by Redneck Mafia
Unless there is an actual fight it is only interfering if a dogs aggressive behavior causes another dog to take a minus.

I would agree with you. Common sense tells me this and you feel that way , but show me where that is written so I can enforce it that way.

__________________
Get deep or Get Beat!

Posted by Sonny Phipps on 12-07-2019 01:22 AM:

The rule changes coming are what they are and we will all learn to use them . Change is harder on some of us then others. The thing I don’t get is back when the proposals where being talked about on here it was pointed out about how anyone could scratch a dog without just cause (the sky is falling syndrome) how a dog could get points by treeing second or third behind another dog (every handler owner lives and dyes by the style of dog they hunt). Now dogs can fight on the leash (I don’t see this really being much of a issue myself) and we are ok with silent dogs now also (not that many were ever scratched before). I personally like a independent dog but some don’t and with these rules I think the silent independent dog is full throttle ahead. In the end when some people got on here and said we need these changes “the sky was falling” now the changes are here and “the sky is falling” . Let’s just hunt what we got and see how well it can win under any set of rules.....

__________________
Get deep or Get Beat!

Posted by Kler Kry on 12-10-2019 12:00 PM:

Aggressive Behavior New Rule is Old Rule

quote:
Originally posted by Redneck Mafia
Unless there is an actual fight it is only interfering if a dogs aggressive behavior causes another dog to take a minus.

I'm more concerned about hunting judges that use their authority to scratch the competition.
The independent style dog often leaves a tree because they are antisocial and has nothing to do with leaving due to aggression at the tree. If the hunting judges dog leaves the tree and they can simply scratch the remaining two dogs for aggressive behavior. A tie vote results in the Master Of Hounds supporting the hunting judge.

I realize that a lot of dogs may be light broke and not show aggression when in view, but not requiring the Judge to observe the action before making the decision is a mistake in my opinion.

Hunting judges who unjustly minus or scratch the competition in order to win is a major reason for lower the attendance at the hunts.

I'm disappointed that nothing was added to the rule to restrict the hunting judge's authority to scratch dogs that weren't aggressive. Maybe there should be rule to scratch hunting judges who scratch or minus the competition so that they can win! Ken Risley

Posted by pamjohnson on 12-10-2019 02:28 PM:

I can be understanding to the views of just what is a mean dog? I have owned everything from a sissy dog too down right nasty. Most fellows don't have a clue what there own dog is like let alone some other dog they hunt with just 1 night on a cast. The sissy dog will take minus points easy with just a hard tree dog. So I don't feel just cause they cause a dog to receive minus points would be a very well accepted notion.
Actually that sounds like a bad joke.

Posted by Redneck Mafia on 12-11-2019 02:57 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by pamjohnson
I can be understanding to the views of just what is a mean dog? I have owned everything from a sissy dog too down right nasty. Most fellows don't have a clue what there own dog is like let alone some other dog they hunt with just 1 night on a cast. The sissy dog will take minus points easy with just a hard tree dog. So I don't feel just cause they cause a dog to receive minus points would be a very well accepted notion.
Actually that sounds like a bad joke.

My reference was to visible facebarking, growling and shouldering none of which can be judged without a visual & was in reference to the second part of the scratched for aggressive behavior that caused interfering with another dog. Richard had suggested dogs being scratched for these "offenses" none of which are scratchable on their own all have to include interference. If a dog is not satisfactorily treeing when the judge arrives or a dog being seen ran off a tree ect would result in that dog being minus. If this not treeing or it's leaving was the result of aggressive behavior then the aggressive dog could then be scratched.
Also, to Ken's above post though some may disagree with us on seeing to scratch to overcome judging from those who may be unscrupulous and just trying to get others scratched at least several of the ridiculous scratches are gone with the changes. And in reference to a scenario you mentioned dogs cannot be scratched from afar if there are more than 2 present.

Posted by novicane65 on 12-11-2019 07:37 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Redneck Mafia
And in reference to a scenario you mentioned dogs cannot be scratched from afar if there are more than 2 present. [/B]

Where in the rules is that written? The only thing I see that's different is the words " when off leash". I see nothing about not being able to scratch from afar without seeing it, because it says to scratch all involved if you don't know the aggressor.

6. SCRATCHING OFFENSES
Dog Related Offense:
(a) If a dog has accumulated a total of 400 minus.
(b) For fighting or attempting to fight*, when off-leash
during the hunt, including any time-out periods.
When the aggressive dog is known, scratch the
aggressor only. If not known, scratch dogs involved.
Withdrawing to avoid dog being reported for
fighting is not permitted.
(c) Failing to make an attempt to hunt within any 15
consecutive scorecard minutes.
(d) Bitches smelling strong enough to attract dogs, or a
dog that is just bad to bother* other dogs
(e) For delaying completion of cast for one hour after
time out is called during the hunt in accordance
with Rule 7.
(f) In Champion Division casts; for running, treeing or
molesting off game (off game must be seen) during
hunting time including any time out periods prior
to the expiration of hunt time (exception 5b). In the
event the off game is a squirrel seen in a tree and 2)
the tree is an obvious den tree, refer to Rule 5(d).
Birds are not considered off game.
(g) For running or molesting livestock.
(h) For hunting over or under the advertised hunt time.

__________________
Eric DePue
Hill Country Kennels Itty-Bitty
PKC CH Wax's Late Night Boom
And
Partners on a few common trashy young dogs

Gone but not forgotten

GrNtCh, PKC Ch Hillbilly Bildo
Pr Broken Oaks Wild Blue Gypsy

Posted by Redneck Mafia on 12-11-2019 09:30 PM:

Every reference in the advisor you will find for that situation is stated for 2 dogs. I have searched and have found none for more anywhere.
From afar if there are 3 or 4 dogs at a tree it would be near impossible to determine not only an aggressor but also which were involved if an aggressor couldn't be determined and which were not. Because they can only be scratched like this when it is obvious then when there are more than 2 there it makes it speculative which does not meet the criteria of obvious.
(Personally I think it's speculative from afar period, but this is their interpretation.)
It is also important to remember that facebarking, blowing and growling alone do meet the criteria to be scratched.

Posted by Richard Lambert on 12-11-2019 09:46 PM:

If 3 dogs are at a tree and a fight breaks out at a UKC Major Event such as Autumn Oaks, then all 3 dogs should be scratched. If this is questioned and taken back to UKC, it will be upheld. I have seen it happen more than once.

Posted by novicane65 on 12-12-2019 02:24 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Lambert
If 3 dogs are at a tree and a fight breaks out at a UKC Major Event such as Autumn Oaks, then all 3 dogs should be scratched. If this is questioned and taken back to UKC, it will be upheld. I have seen it happen more than once.

It shouldn't matter what size hunt or how many dogs are there at the tree. But I think there's some dishonest judge's that do use this to get the competition out of the equation. It doesn't happen often, I'd say but I know it does happen.

Posted by Redneck Mafia on 12-12-2019 07:18 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Lambert
If 3 dogs are at a tree and a fight breaks out at a UKC Major Event such as Autumn Oaks, then all 3 dogs should be scratched. If this is questioned and taken back to UKC, it will be upheld. I have seen it happen more than once.

Allen / UKC
Administrator

Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 8669

quote:Originally posted by Richard Lambert_
According to Allen G, if the aggressor is not known, you scratch all dogs involved. There is no speculation here. If there are three or four dogs treeing and a fight breaks out, they all get scratched. Now that is what UKC's "official interpretation" is.
Kinda like the off game thing. If you "know" that they are running off game you minus them. If you "think" that they are running off game you don't. But according to Mr Gingerich, you don't always have to see the off game to "know" that it is off game. I don't know where the "speculation" comes from._

Almost; but when my name is used I want to be clear.__When there are only two dogs at the tree, it's easy to determine who is involved. When there's more than two, knowing which ones are involved becomes a different story and generally results in a no-call._

"Speculation" and "obvious" are, by definition, two very different words that have been used in debate as it relates to dogs running deer or fighting without actually seeing it. One is; rumor, gossip, assumption, guesswork, supposition, hearsay. The other is; clear, apparent, evident, recognizable, observable._

Myself, I'd never scratch a dog for running deer or fighting based on speculation._

Richard, Allen has been over this with you before.

Posted by yadkintar on 12-12-2019 01:27 PM:

Am I missing somthing or is it not procedure with a hunting judge to go to a cast vote first ?

Tar

Posted by Richard Lambert on 12-12-2019 01:43 PM:

A dog fight is a dog fight. There is no speculation to it. I don't have to "see" a dog fight to know that it happened. I can't believe that you don't know that dogs are fighting unless you actually see them.
Why would you want to change the rule to say that you have to see dogs fighting in order to scratch them if that was already UKC's interpretation.
Now, I am not saying that I agree with it but I am saying that from my actual experience with UKC's handpicked most knowledgeable MOH's, if 3 dogs are at a tree and a fight breaks out they will all 3 get scratched.

Posted by yadkintar on 12-12-2019 02:08 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Lambert
A dog fight is a dog fight. There is no speculation to it. I don't have to "see" a dog fight to know that it happened. I can't believe that you don't know that dogs are fighting unless you actually see them.
Why would you want to change the rule to say that you have to see dogs fighting in order to scratch them if that was already UKC's interpretation.
Now, I am not saying that I agree with it but I am saying that from my actual experience with UKC's handpicked most knowledgeable MOH's, if 3 dogs are at a tree and a fight breaks out they will all 3 get scratched.

Not all the time. About 3 yrs ago in a $$$ hunt my female was about 600 yards left handed treed time was up three male dogs just shut up and went to her all the crap hit the fan we get there all three were getting it they pulled them apart on she was gone soon as we hit them with the light one dog turns around and gets up on the tree he trees him I take a minus two get scratched because they were all buddies they let the one off the hook she treed 3 more coons and I win the cast without that one dog ever covering her. Come to find out the owner of the kc decided not to write them up.

Now thats a war story not all this speculation gloom and doom on here. They are just dogs and we are just people and sometimes stuff just happens.

Tar

Posted by Redneck Mafia on 12-12-2019 05:12 PM:

Posted by Allen Gingrich in response to Richard on this same subject I just copied and pasted it......
"Almost; but when my name is used I want to be clear. When there are only two dogs at the tree, it's easy to determine who is involved. When there's more than two, knowing which ones are involved becomes a different story and generally results in a no-call.

"Speculation" and "obvious" are, by definition, two very different words that have been used in debate as it relates to dogs running deer or fighting without actually seeing it. One is; rumor, gossip, assumption, guesswork, supposition, hearsay. The other is; clear, apparent, evident, recognizable, observable.

Myself, I'd never scratch a dog for running deer or fighting based on speculation."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Richard when more than 2 are present and you are judging from afar it becomes speculation not obvious. Also note that the rule says dogs involved it does not say dogs present. "When the aggressive dog is known, scratch the
aggressor only. If not known, scratch dogs involved." Just because a dog is present at a tree does not make it involved.
All references to this situation you will find in the advisor are in regards to only 2 dogs being present, you will not find any that have more than 2 there whether it is current interpretation or from way gone archives.
I can't help what may have happened to you at AO sometime in the past. All these guys are human and mistakes can happen. They way a ruling occurred in the past at AO does not make it right and set president on how all future situations are to be ruled on.
And yes Tar upon a judge's ruling if any cast members disagree you may ask for a cast vote.
Jen

Posted by Richard Lambert on 12-12-2019 05:35 PM:

Then I wonder why all 3 dogs were scratched? I am not talking about hypothetical or scenarios. I am relaying situations that I had first hand knowledge of. And I am not talking about small local hunts. These situations occurred at hunts that Mr Gingerich was present at. I am talking about precedent setting rulings made by UKC Field Rep MOH's not "mistakes".

But I like your use of the words "involved" and "speculation". I guess that everyone can attempt to use them if they ever have a dog that gets scratched for fighting. We will see how that works out.

Posted by Richard Lambert on 12-12-2019 06:05 PM:

So if 3 dogs are treeing and a dog fight breaks out you can't scratch any of the 3 dogs because it is only speculation which of the 2 or 3 dogs were involved? But if 2 dogs are treeing you scratch both of them even though it is just "speculation" as to who the aggressor was? Oh my goodness...

Posted by Donnie Stevens on 12-12-2019 06:09 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Lambert
So if 3 dogs are treeing and a dog fight breaks out you can't scratch any of the 3 dogs because it is only speculation which of the 2 or 3 dogs were involved? But if 2 dogs are treeing you scratch both of them even though it is just "speculation" as to who the aggressor was? Oh my goodness...

Now you got it.

__________________
Friends don't let friends hunt blueticks

Posted by Bill(Chew) on 12-13-2019 05:02 PM:

Richard, if you have three dogs at a tree and a fight breaks out and NO dog is treeing you are speculating on who is involved, do not scratch unless you actually see the fight. ( I'm sorry you got screwed)

If you have three dogs at a tree, a fight breaks out and ONE dog (clearly a specific dog) is still treeing then you have evidence by ear to scratch the two fighting.

__________________
Bill Harper
Washington, NC
252-944-5592

Posted by Richard Lambert on 12-13-2019 10:32 PM:

Sorry but I didn't get "screwed". In the second instance I was actually the judge and scratched all 3 dogs because I already knew what the ruling would be.
If you "know" that your dog isn't mean but he and another dog get treed and a fight breaks out, do you take your scratch? Or do you start talking about "speculation" and "involvement".

Posted by yadkintar on 12-13-2019 10:42 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Lambert
Sorry but I didn't get "screwed". In the second instance I was actually the judge and scratched all 3 dogs because I already knew what the ruling would be.
If you "know" that your dog isn't mean but he and another dog get treed and a fight breaks out, do you take your scratch? Or do you start talking about "speculation" and "involvement".

If I see my dog in a rumble I just take my scratch they are just dogs if it happens to often there are millions of more dogs to hunt.

Tar

Posted by Richard Lambert on 12-13-2019 11:27 PM:

Tarbaby, I think that we have been talking about fights that aren't seen. It is hard to argue "speculation" and involvement when you see it.
What if 2 dogs roll down a hill toward the cast with the third dog chasing them barking and growling? I actually saw this happen one night.

Posted by yadkintar on 12-13-2019 11:38 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Richard Lambert
Tarbaby, I think that we have been talking about fights that aren't seen. It is hard to argue "speculation" and involvement when you see it.
What if 2 dogs roll down a hill toward the cast with the third dog chasing them barking and growling? I actually saw this happen one night.

Good enough for me scratch all three. I ain’t scratching dogs fighting till I see it.

Kinda like the time I hit myself in the eye with a 2lb hammer everybody thought I got in a fight just swore it !! So I got a big huge friend of mine to tell them I put him to sleep with the Mongolian death lock they treated me better for a long time lol.

Tarbaby

Posted by Richard Lambert on 12-14-2019 01:06 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by yadkintar
Good enough for me scratch all three. I ain’t scratching dogs fighting till I see it.

Tarbaby

Oh my goodness, and you are a licensed UKC MOH. You say dogs are fighting and then you say that you won't scratch them. Do they really let you judge out there in Oklahoma?

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:09 PM.

Pages (5): « First ... « 2 3 [4] 5 »
Show all 113 posts from this thread on one page