Rip
UKC Forum Member
Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Morrison TN
Posts: 4927 |
Alan, Rule Interpretation Needed.
So here's the deal I know both sides of the issue and will present them here to try and limit all the opinions, I am just looking for an interpretation because I know this situation WILL come up in my area. I don't care either way, both points of view are valid, I just want to score it correctly.
This concerns the "dog being treed in after the 5" rule. This is a new rule that brings a new problem that used to didn't exist, and that is what to do about dogs at holes in this situation.
1. I know going by the way the rules are written a dog that is declared treed after the 5 and found to be at the hole with the rest of the dogs SHOULD be minused 125 tree points because they are not being minused for being at the hole, they are being minused for not being split, which is what you are declaring with the new rule if you tree your dog after the 5. Its strike points would still be eligible for scoring per the rules, but the minus would come from the dog not being split treed.
2. We have always had seprate rules for holes than trees with different consequences. If the stationary runs and the dog is at a hole instead of a tree the dog is not scratched. Only one dog has to show the hole for all dogs in the vacinity to get their strike scored, you don't have to tree any dog to score a hole etc. This rule says
"*(k) Any dogs declared treed after five minutes expires and tree is closed; call will be accepted as a split tree. If dog is on closed tree when judge arrives, tree points will be minused. Strike points scored in accordance with 4(d)."
You are already making one exception to this rule, since it is a hole you can't minus the strike points and indeed will plus them if the coon is seen (4d says to minus them if the dog comes into a tree late, this is also included in rule k above), the dogs strike points are eligible for scoring per the rules specific for holes.
So do you still minus the tree points even though it's a hole? If so you may be minusing the origional dog because many times you can't hear the one with it's head buryed until you get closer and then it sounds way deeper and you would think it was split until you got there and seen that he sounded that way because he was in the ground.
Personally I don't care either way. I just want to know the way UKC wants it scored because it WILL come up in areas where coon go in the ground. Before only the judge could declare a split if this situation happened the tree points would be deleted because the judge would realize he made a mistake due to the physics of a dog being in the ground. Now we have a rule saying they must be split.
I think there is room to reasonably rule either way. If you minus that is justified because the dog isn't being minused for being at the hole, it's minused for not being split as the rules require.
If you say you can delete those tree points it would be backed by precedent, that's the way it was done in the past with UKC's approval, and the specific rule in question specifically says "closed tree" not closed hole.
I don't care which way you go, would just like an official word so I know I am scoring it right when it comes up.
__________________
Let's go huntin
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
06-03-2009 01:53 PM
WOW!
