Registered: Oct 2009
Location: WNC
Posts: 51

As per the March coonhound advisor, a handler can call his dog treed on a closed tree even when a split tree is not obvious. If dogs A and B are declared treed in that order and the tree is closed, then a handler declares a split tree for dog C. When you get there dogs A and C are treed seperately and Dog B is on Dog C's tree. How is dog B scored?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2005
Location: SouthCentral Illinois
Posts: 127

If not obvious, how could you tell that maybe dogs A and B where not split first and dog C treed 2nd behind dog B?

__________________
Home OF:
GR Nt Ch Rat's Stylish Candy.
Redfern's Ole Dan (final 4 Baby stakes 2005) RIP. Littermate to Call Girl

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 214

dog c 125 minus for tree dog b 125 plus if coon is seen

__________________
Sleep all day, keep them coons up all night with walker power.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2009
Location: s.c.
Posts: 6961

quote:

---

Originally posted by B&LKennels
dog c 125 minus for tree dog b 125 plus if coon is seen

---

Last edited by l.lyle on 03-01-2012 at 05:28 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2009
Location: WNC
Posts: 51

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary E Redfern
If not obvious, how could you tell that maybe dogs A and B where not split first and dog C treed 2nd behind dog B?

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2009
Location: WNC
Posts: 51

quote:

---

Originally posted by B&LKennels
dog c 125 minus for tree dog b 125 plus if coon is seen

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: North GA
Posts: 14388

Anytime you tree after a tree is closed you tree for 125.. Best thing C could do is tree before the tree closed. That would of helped him.

__________________
Michael Ghorley

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2008
Location: Burlington, CT
Posts: 1758

There are several scenarios that could have played out, but ultimately it will come down to a judgement call. But there's more information needed, like did it sound to the judge that all dogs were treeing, but they were so close that nobody could tell what was going on, and handler of Dog C just held off on making a call? How close were they, and was it too hard to tell from any distance?

This could have been a matter of Dog B moving to Dog C, or was always with Dog C but so close to Dog A that nobody could tell. That's reasonable, and nobody's fault. Even if the dog moved, how could you tell, if you couldn't even tell they were split until you got close???

Some assume Dog C and his/her handler was a hero or "gutsy", but what if Dog C was bouncing between trees, and the handler could tell and didn't call it until he was sure he was settled. Or Dog C was bouncing between trees until it saw it's handler get close and decided it better pick a tree, and by then the handlers were close enought to tell they were split. No fault there either, that's just a handler knowing his dog and not calling him until the dog makes a firm decision.

Or maybe nobody moved... Dogs A and B were always split just too close to tell. Dog C came in way late, but by then the hendlers were close enough to tell they were split and handler of Dog C took advantage of the situation. No real fault there, just a matter of unusual circumstances.

This is why these rules and situations aren't clear cut, as many always argue.

Here's how I would have judged it... if the trees were close, where a split couldn't be determined until we got right up on them, I would have handled A and B just as I would if C wasn't involved, being change Dog B to 125. This means you have to minus Dog C. That's all you can do, if you can't prove someone moved and C took longer than 5 minutes to tree after A had. Short of that, you would have to argue and prove that B moved, and if you can't prove that, you can't justify Dog C's split tree.

Let the debate continue...

David Schmidt

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2003
Location: mid-michigan
Posts: 4437

Not that it means much , but IMO , when the handler treed dog C split , the decision should have been made , as to which dogs were where , BEFORE you go in. Then go in and score it.
Just like when you score 2 trees as one. The decision is made BEFORE shining.

__________________
Bob Brooks /
Jordan Tyler (grandson)

BackWoods River Walkers/Beagles
Just all 'round , meat gettin' hounds.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: North GA
Posts: 14388

I think C didn't say split tree my dog. Its a given after tree is closed. Since they had to be treed close cause it says split is not obvious. B gets 125 something and right off the bat C gets 125-

__________________
Michael Ghorley

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Western N.Y.
Posts: 3995

As i understand it a handler doesnt declare his dog split. That is the responsibility of the judge once it becomes obveous and he must announce to the cast that he is doing it. In the case of a closed tree i dot see why a handler would tree his dog near a closed tree until he was sure the dog was split. I learned this lesson the hard wayLOL.

__________________
Everything that makes them a COONDOG is on the inside

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2008
Location: Burlington, CT
Posts: 1758

You're right John... treeing a dog after the tree is closed, is an immediate split tree and minus, if you're wrong. That doesn't change just because the original tree happened to already be a close split tree, or not. In my opinion, if it's not obvious there's no harm in walking into the original tree and then saying, "hey, split tree my dog right over there." Doing anything else than that, when the trees are close, is either grand-standing or a silly mistake. And yes, I've accidentally done it too.

jackbob42 - have you ever had a split tree situation, where several loud dogs are close together (say 20 yards or less) but are a couple hundred yards away??? It happens to me all the time, and I'm telling you that normally you can't make a determination until you can put a light on the dogs. I think that's the point here... they couldn't determine who was on what tree, or if there was even a true split tree, until they got there. Now if it was obvious, which is why C was split treed, then it should have been obvious to the judge that B moved.

David Schmidt

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2007
Location: BURLINGTON, NC
Posts: 368

dog a could have left just as easily as dog b... so how do u know who to plus, minus and what points to give? AND DID U START A NEW 5 AFTER DOG B WAS TREED AND IF U DID WAS DOG C TREED WITHIN THAT 5? THIS IS A JUDGE AND MASTER OF HOUNDS NIGHTMARE QUESTION.

__________________
LOCKDOWN KENNELS ...HOME OF NTCH HERRON'S LOCKDOWN JENNIE LYNN AND
2015 PKC Bluetick Breed Leader,2014 and 2015 back to back NC PKC state champ, PKC GOLD CH GRNTCH HERRON'S LOCKDOWN BAD ACE

Last edited by blueherron on 03-01-2012 at 08:59 PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2007
Location: BURLINGTON, NC
Posts: 368

AND I AGREE THAT DOG C SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN TREED UNTIL THE CAST GOT THERE TO KNOW FOR SURE

__________________
LOCKDOWN KENNELS ...HOME OF NTCH HERRON'S LOCKDOWN JENNIE LYNN AND
2015 PKC Bluetick Breed Leader,2014 and 2015 back to back NC PKC state champ, PKC GOLD CH GRNTCH HERRON'S LOCKDOWN BAD ACE

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2008
Location: Burlington, CT
Posts: 1758

It didn't sound like Dog B was ever split treed, so it was on the same 5 minutes as Dog A. And I agree it doesn't sound like there's a way of telling who really moved or didn't move. Or if anyone ever moved... so I always fall back to what I can prove, and justify. And if I can't prove that anyone moved, I have to apply the same rules that I would if it was a single tree that was determined to be split when we got in there. I couldn't change my methodology simply becasue some happened to split tree their dog.

Unless... that handler that was so sure his dog was split treed, also made mention that, hey it sound like Dog B moved, or hey I think B already moved and is now with my dog, so minus him and split tree mine, over there. And if they could tell that there dog was split treed but couldn't tell that Dog B was moving or with their dog, then they lose the opportunity to debate the situation. They can't have better hearing than the rest of us, and not help with the supposed moved or moving dog!

David Schmidt

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 214

quote:

---

Originally posted by deschmidt27
You're right John... treeing a dog after the tree is closed, is an immediate split tree and minus, if you're wrong. That doesn't change just because the original tree happened to already be a close split tree, or not. In my opinion, if it's not obvious there's no harm in walking into the original tree and then saying, "hey, split tree my dog right over there." Doing anything else than that, when the trees are close, is either grand-standing or a silly mistake. And yes, I've accidentally done it too.

jackbob42 - have you ever had a split tree situation, where several loud dogs are close together (say 20 yards or less) but are a couple hundred yards away??? It happens to me all the time, and I'm telling you that normally you can't make a determination until you can put a light on the dogs. I think that's the point here... they couldn't determine who was on what tree, or if there was even a true split tree, until they got there. Now if it was obvious, which is why C was split treed, then it should have been obvious to the judge that B moved.

David Schmidt

---

__________________
Sleep all day, keep them coons up all night with walker power.

Last edited by B&LKennels on 03-02-2012 at 12:48 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2008
Location: Burlington, CT
Posts: 1758

B&L - I never said that it was obvious that Dog B moved? Where did you read that??? You quoted me, and it's not even in the quote. What I said, was that "IF it was" obviously a split treee from the get go, then either B moved or B was always split treed.

But... if you read my post a few posts up, you'll see where I wrote that there's many scenarios that could have happened. And unless it's obvious that a Dog moved, you have to score as if one didn't move, which means A and B were always split, you just couldn't tell, and C needs 125 minus on tree, and a minus on track if a coon is seen.

David Schmidt

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2007
Location: LaFontaine IN
Posts: 184

I agree completely with deschmidt... hunting around here you can have alot of split tree's but there is no way to tell it until you get there.. I would score it.... Dog A 125 +/- Dog B 125 +/- Dog C 125- Since dog A & B were not obviously split the time was run as one tree.. then changed to a split tree upon cast arrival with B moving up... and since C didn't tree before the 5 and was not obviously split from A & B and was found to be treeing on either tree he gets minused.. Dog C 's handler shot himself in the foot by not treeing before the 5 and then treeing after the 5 without being 100% sure his dog was split and convincing the judge of this before the cast took one step towards the treed dogs!!.... the key words to this whole scenario is OBVIOUSLY SPLIT TREED!! which apparently they weren't...... and if all the dogs were were moving back and forth from tree to tree and no one in the cast noticed and called attention to it... so be it... it wasn't noticed before the cast arrived so it officially never happened... Jeff

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 214

quote:

---

Originally posted by deschmidt27
B&L - I never said that it was obvious that Dog B moved? Where did you read that??? You quoted me, and it's not even in the quote. What I said, was that "IF it was" obviously a split treee from the get go, then either B moved or B was always split treed.

But... if you read my post a few posts up, you'll see where I wrote that there's many scenarios that could have happened. And unless it's obvious that a Dog moved, you have to score as if one didn't move, which means A and B were always split, you just couldn't tell, and C needs 125 minus on tree, and a minus on track if a coon is seen.

David Schmidt

---

__________________
Sleep all day, keep them coons up all night with walker power.

Last edited by B&LKennels on 03-01-2012 at 11:29 PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland
Posts: 214

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mtn Hunter
So dog C gets 125+ if he alone but 125- if another dog is with him? That dont seem right but neither is it right for Dog B to be split and not get his points moved up. They both cant take 125, can they?

---

__________________
Sleep all day, keep them coons up all night with walker power.

Last edited by B&LKennels on 03-02-2012 at 01:45 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2008
Location: Burlington, CT
Posts: 1758

B&L - I appreciate and respect your apology... Thanks! I've been misquoted and beat up for things I didn't say, often, but it's rare to see a correction. You are the man!

David Schmidt

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2008
Location: Burlington, CT
Posts: 1758

Yes, you could have two dogs with 125 when you come into the tree, but you can't score it that way. Someone has to have their score corrected before shining the tree.

You can only have one first tree per tree.

David Schmidt

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2009
Location: s.c.
Posts: 6961

Help me understand how C could get-125. Was there a coon in A&B tree? Why should B get moved up? B sounds like a second fiddle dog.
The tree is closed to A&B. Dog C trees. What else is handler C to do but tree his dog? If they are on one tree he is shut out anyway. But he was split and I guess with the coon and he is to be minussed for being to only one to get it right?

Remember A&B were in the catbird seat at one time and happy to have C shut out. So I think messing around thinking B "might "have done this or that is not what matters at all.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2008
Location: Burlington, CT
Posts: 1758

There are many questions unanswered in this scenario, but based on what we've been told, and/or not told, this is what we can assume.

Since there was no mention of hearing or seeing Dog B move, and the statement that a split tree was not obvious, we are all assuming that these dogs are treed in close proximity. If that's the case, and again nobody says that Dog B moved, then the assumption is that Dog A and Dog B were always split treed, just nobody could tell until they got in there. And IF that's the case, then Dog C was actually treed in on a closed tree, which as the rules state is an automatic split tree, and minused the 125.

Mtn Hunter agreed with Gary's statement of "If not obvious, how could you tell that maybe dogs A and B where not split first and dog C treed 2nd behind dog B?" Which means you can't prove that anyone moved. And if nobody moved, you would treat B just as you would have if C wasn't involved, that being... you get there and the split tree, that wasn't originally apparent when they were a ways off, now is, and you score it as a split tree.

Now... if Dog C's handler had stated that my dog is way over yonder, well away from Dog's A and B, then this wouldn't be the scenario, the split tree would have been obvious, and B must have moved. But that's not what was described.

David Schmidt

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2007
Location: LaFontaine IN
Posts: 184

A & B were declared treed the 5 is run and expired...C starts treeing his options are be declared treed for 125 in which he must not be on A or B's tree as it or they are dead he has to be by himself..So unless he is sure his dog is not treed with either dog his best bet would have been to do nothing... walk in.. if his dog is on either tree and they had a coon he would only get strike minus.. if it is slick or off game he gets next available tree and strike minus..if it a circle tree he gets his strike circle.. if C is split when they get there tree him then.. in the case of a 3 dog cast all dogs are treed and he can handle his dog doesn't have to wait the 5.. he put himself in this low percentage position by not treeing before the 5... if he is split with a coon he is a hero if he just covered the dogs he's a zero.. he had nothing to gain by declaring his dog treed.... if he is split wait until you get there and then tree him!!!

Last edited by Jeff M. on 03-02-2012 at 01:57 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged