Cornbelt
UKC Forum Member
Registered: May 2007
Location: NW Iowa
Posts: 311 |
Jim are you telling me all those same arguments that could be made about whose dog is really doing what aren't happening in the hunts right now? You mention dogs going in opposite directions. Wouldn't the garmin better allow you to split the difference and judge the dogs more fairly as opposed to standing right next to the dogs close by not allowing the cast to hear the other guys dog who is deeper, because he moved the track out and treed the coon? IMO using the garmin would be a tool to allow the judge and cast to better judge and score the dogs.
If we don't believe in tracking collars in hunts then why allow them to be worn at all? We could just stick our heads in the sand on this rule as well and say it's just part of competition hunting.
This new rule could read like this.
All dogs must be hunted with no collars of any kind and only bailing twine leads. None of these fancy high tech snap type leads.
If you want to catch your dog during timeout you can practice that during the week with no tracking devices on them.
If your dog is lost, shot or stolen while it is wearing no collar... well those are just the tough breaks that can't be helped.
Meanwhile the rule allowing use of trackers could read something like this.
The tracking devices could be used at any time as long as it is not interfering with the cast. No judgements will be made or dogs plussed or minused soley based on info from any tracking unit. All dogs will be judged like they always have been, by the rules on the back of the card. If you don't have a tracking collar you will not be provided one because one is not required to judge your hound. The allowed use of tracking devices is intended to allow those dogs equipped with tracking collars to be safer and allow the cast to stay in better position to judge the cast.
I will say it again. The argument against this reminds me of the gun control argument. The same guys that are honest now will be honest if garmins are used. The same guys that cheat and bend every rule will be doing the same thing if garmins are used. So the answer is taking away a tool that could make hunts safer, easier to judge, and more enjoyable for the honest guy because a cheater will cheat? I would bet that the quality of the cast you are on and the amount of problems/enjoyment you have will not be determined by the collar the dog is wearing or if they are being tracked during the hunt or not. It will be based on the character of the people in your cast.
*** Most important part ***
Obviously I think there is no competitive advantage in allowing tracking devices to be used in the hunts. IMO Why not do with this situation the same thing they have done with hunt directors. Leave it to the club to hold hunts allowing or not allowing them. Make the clubs hunts listed as Garmin hunts or non garmin hunts and the club must hold the event as listed. Then ukc and those that hunt ukc can have some actual experience and data to form an educated opinion on the good, bad, and ugly as well as the popularity of it. Before the hunt it can be read what the format is just like MOH vs hunt director. If no clubs have them ukc can quickly figure out it is a bad idea. If clubs have them and want more ukc knows that the clubs and hunters think this is a good idea. IMO this beats having the idea die before given a chance or being force fed to those who think they will cause more problems than they are worth. Plus then the club and hunters are not stuck with a rule that can't be quickly fixed if it is a flop.
__________________
Kyle Hough
Iowa State Coon Hunters Website: www.iowacoonhunters.com
ISCHA on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/IowaStateCoonHunters
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|
02-01-2013 08:36 AM
