Registered: Apr 2006
Location:
Posts: 136

Immediate Family

Question: In our neck of the woods, there have been some misconceptions on the “immediate family” issue. I know if I am the Master of Hounds at a hunt, then my spouse would not be allowed to hunt. If I am the Bench Show Judge, then no one in my immediate family would be allowed to enter their dogs in the show. Could you clarify who is considered to be ‘immediate family’? JM/WI

Answer: UKC’s interpretation of ‘immediate family’ is: mother, father, brother, sister, husband, wife, son and daughter. Remember, “immediate family” would also apply to an apprentice at a bench show. Likewise, the spouse of a Master of Hounds or an apprentice at a nite hunt would not be allowed to enter a dog.]


So the question that I have is. Does this mean that inlaws would be able to hunt or show, there dogs as long as my immediate family, names are not on the dogs papers? If I was the MOH or BSJ. Because I have seen this done at some of the clubs around here.
I think that my son in law should not be able to hunt or show under me as a MOH or a BSJ.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2006
Location: NE Kansas
Posts: 43

What about "significant other", boyfriend, or girlfriend? Altho, wouldn't work for me, because my name is on the papers too.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2006
Location:
Posts: 136

btt

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 9268

Sandburr,

Inlaws are not included in UKC's interpretation of "Immediate Family". However, I guess that basically boils down to ethics. I'm sure you would have plenty of participants and spectators frowning when the judge hands the win to his or her inlaw. If that happens and your entries start to decrease you shouldn't be clueless as to what the problem might be. Matter of personal ethics I guess. And others will and do notice those things.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged