msinc
Banned
Registered: Oct 2013
Location: Maryland
Posts: 2633 |
quote:
Originally posted by Outback1
usually the man who owns the aggressive dog knows it, if he would just man up and say so, instead of saying "he aint never done that before" when in fact he knows the dog is ill. I would say scratch both unless the handler man's up and take his scratch like a big boy and admit he has a ill dog. imo
First thing we all learn in the nite hunts is that absolutely NOBODY has a mean dog!!!! In this case, as described, both dogs get scratched. The fight wasn't seen, so there is no way to identify the "aggressor." Both dogs are involved, so both dogs get the hammer. As previously posted, we have no way of knowing whether or not the red dog met his match or the blue dog was really the true aggressor. The main thing is that since we don't know we take them both out so it doesn't happen to someone else's dog later in the hunt.
In "The Advisor" there is a blurb about "Remember, though, you only scratch the aggressor {if the aggressor is known} regardless of any retaliation." This implies that if one dog jumps on another or otherwise acts in an aggressive way causing the "victim" dog to fight back you only scratch the first one. But, you would have to be there and see it...otherwise there is no way to know for sure.
This is why a dog has to be "caught" and written up more than once to be barred....if a dog was just a victim of circumstances" {in this case possibly the redbone, who knows possibly the bluetick} he gets one scratch, but if he is truly not the aggressor then that should be the only one and he's got nothing to worry about.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
03-31-2015 06:40 AM
