cartwright
UKC Forum Member
Registered: Sep 2008
Location: HUNTERS HAVEN, WV
Posts: 3631 |
I’m Not Hearing It!
Posted on 01/19/2015 in The Coonhound Advisor.
“I’m Not Hearing It”!
I’m thinking some of our Master of Hounds, and most of our competitors, would benefit from a quick discussion on the following topic. That being Masters of Hounds who refuse to listen to questions brought back into them.
This is a touchy subject, for sure. I believe that there are times when a Master of Hounds can politely and tactfully instruct the cast that they “have no question(s)”. A handler wishing to question a call that was made, or a call that should have been made but wasn’t, must follow a certain procedure to do so.
Rule 16 (b) (outlines the procedure for questioning a call) is quite clear in that the call must be questioned at the time a decision is made, and it must be voted on by all cast members. It takes a majority of cast decision to overturn a hunting Judge. If the complainant is still not satisfied, he must see that a question mark is placed on the card. If the questioning procedure is not properly followed, I maintain that a Master of Hounds could explain that, because the procedure for dealing with questions was not followed, his hands are tied and he cannot issue a decision that will affect the outcome of the cast.
Handlers have a basic responsibility of knowing the Nite Hunt Honor Rules as they apply to questioning the call of a hunting judge. So, too, must they know the procedure for questioning the decision of a Master of Hounds. Once a Master of Hounds makes it perfectly clear that he may not render a decision that will change the outcome of the cast, it’s up to him whether he listens to the question to attempt to “help” or “educate” those in the cast. It happens all the time in my job with UKC Field Operations. Every Monday the phone rings and a handler tells me that he would like to ask a question regarding a hunt in which he participated over the past weekend.
The very first thing that I ask every time is, “Was there an Appeal filed on this matter?” If the answer is no, I make it very clear that while I would be happy to listen to the caller’s account of the situation, I will not be able to make any changes that affect the outcome of the hunt. In most cases, the handler is fine with that and just wants to be heard and take any advice for future reference. Sometimes the satisfaction of knowing whether or not they were right or wrong is worth more than whatever placement they may have earned at the hunt.
As Master of Hounds you can do the same thing, provided that you are not totally backed up with other casts coming in at the same time. Make it clear that because the procedure for asking a question was not followed, you won’t be able to change anything. Perhaps at this time you instruct the handler on the proper procedures for questioning a call. You might also agree to listen to the question to try to help interested cast members better understand the rules for dealing with the situation at hand. Not all of these questions are life-or-death, first-place-win matters. (Some of them are though, so use good judgment.)
Let’s say that Handler A follows all procedures and still disagrees with the decision of the hunting judge (Handler B) and the rest of the cast members. Handler A asks the Judge to put a question mark on the card so he can bring it up to the Master of Hounds. Upon returning to the clubhouse, the Master of Hounds says, “I don’t want to hear it. You’re supposed to settle this type of question in the woods. No question.” Sound familiar? Is this an acceptable response from the Master of Hounds?
The answer is no, this is not an acceptable response from the Master of Hounds. The Master of Hounds has an obligation to politely listen to and issue a ruling on all questions that are procedurally, properly asked. I’ve listened to many a MOH start off their pre-hunt speech with remarks pertaining to handling questions in the field. It is a good reminder for a Master of Hounds to make. It’s necessary for the cast to make decisions in the field. However, a Master of Hounds should never take that so far as to think that they have the authority to decide which questions they will listen to and which ones they won’t.
The bottom line is, if the procedure for asking the question is followed right to the “T”, then the MOH must listen to the question and render a decision no matter how insignificant the question may seem. It’s one of the very basic rights of a handler in an event; the right to take a question back to the Master of Hounds.
Eligible to Re-Tree on Same Tree?
Q: This question involves scoring a dog that leaves the tree and is re-treed on the same tree. Dogs A, B, C and D are declared struck. Dogs A, B and C are declared treed and the five (5) minutes started. Twenty seconds later, Dog A leaves the tree and goes back to trailing. His tree points are minused. A little time later with Dog A now trailing around, Dog D is declared treed with Dogs B and C. Here is the question. At this point, is the tree dead or does Dog A still have the remainder of the five (5) minutes to be re-treed? If he can be re-treed, how many points does he go down for?
A: Dog A in this scenario can be re-treed and receives 25 tree points on the card to be scored accordingly, depending on what is or is not seen in the tree. Three dogs were declared treed for 125, 75 and 50 points, and the dog holding 125 leaves the tree.
Now we have two dogs treed, holding 75 and 50 points. Dogs do not move up when a position is minused. The tree is still open and a fourth dog gets treed for 25 points. We must keep the five (5) minutes running because all dogs are not declared treed. If Dog D had been declared treed before Dog A left the tree, the tree would be “dead” and the cast would go immediately to the tree.
Understanding that much, we now have Dog A coming back on the tree before the five (5) minutes has expired. Since all positions have been taken, and realizing that a dog cannot receive a position higher than what is being held, Dog A gets 25 points. Although Rule 2(d) deals specifically with strike points, the portion that states; {Multiple dogs may occupy fourth position.} would apply for scoring trees as well.
Intent of Five-Minute Rule
Q: Please explain to me why if all dogs in a cast are declared treed, you can go directly to them without the five-minute rule being applied? But if you have one dog remaining in the cast and the dog is declared treed, you have to apply the five minutes to the dog.
A: The main reason the five-minute time requirement was instituted was to insure that a dog would stay treed and as a “courtesy” to other handlers so that their dogs would have the opportunity to tree on that tree. When all dogs are declared treed, the courtesy time is not necessary and the cast may go in.
When it gets down to one dog in the cast, however, the competition factor is eliminated. The dog receives first strike and first tree without having to beat the other hounds to the punch. Making him hold his tree for five minutes was designed to make him “work” for the points he gets when hunting without competition. Requiring the five minutes wait before going to the tree has tripped up many a handler who might otherwise bring in a “dream” score.
In the case of separate trees, if all dogs are declared treed, we go directly to the dogs since the need for the “courtesy” time is eliminated. If one or more dogs are out and or not declared treed, then separate five minutes must be kept on each tree, allowing time for the remaining dog(s) to be treed on one of the trees.
“Yup, I See It.” “Wait a Minute; that’s Not a Coon!”
Two separate casts came back to me as the Master of Hounds at a big hunt recently. Both were the same type of question although with slight differences.
Cast A: All dogs were declared treed. The cast starts shining and right away sees eyes in the tree. All cast members agreed, “Yes, we see it.” However, after they had all agreed they saw it, one member throws a bright light up there and sees it is a possum instead of what they thought were coon eyes. Since they all agreed they saw it, is it considered scored and over with, regardless?
Cast B: Three-dog cast. Two dogs are left in the cast toward the end of the hunt. Both dogs fall treed but are split from each other on separate trees. The three members shine Dog A’s tree. After a little while, the judge says, “Here-ee is.”
The second cast member comes over and says, “Yep, I see it.”
The third cast member comes over and throws a bright light up there and says, “That’s nothing more than part of a limb, it’s not a coon.” After taking another look, the second cast member agrees that it is simply a limb and not a coon.
My ruling as the Master of Hounds was that a handler could in fact change his vote in both scenarios. Unfortunately, my ruling created a little debate, and the one handler was obviously not pleased with it. I know my ruling was correct based on confirmation from United Kennel Club; however, I think both of these scenarios would be a good to address in the Advisor Column again.
A: Most hunters with a good number of nite hunts under their belts have seen both of the exact situations as described. You throw your low light into the tree and at the spot as directed by a cast member. At first glance your initial thought is, “Yup, I see it,” and we verbally say so. Then you keep shining and looking a bit longer and you’re like “wait a minute”. You realize it’s not what you initially thought it was after all. Regardless, the question in either situation is; can a handlers change their vote after having verbally said something to the affect that he or she saw the coon?
To be fair and for the purpose of scoring trees correctly, UKC maintains that a tree is not considered to be officially scored until majority of the cast members are satisfied with their vote. This doesn’t mean you can vote one way at the tree and then vote another way at the trucks or at the clubhouse. The decision must be made at the tree. If we were to allow plus points on off game or dark spots on tree limbs simply because of initial first reactions or petty technicalities, then something is terribly wrong.
__________________
"PROUD SPONSOR OF BREAST CANCER AWEARNESS"
"Tell the truth the first time and you won't have to remember what you said!!!"
"25 years and still breeding coonhound to coonhound. Our goal is to bred yesteryears hound back into today's hounds"
"Remember the next time you go hunting take a child"
HOME OF THE RED WHITE AND BLUES
Please visit our website at the following link..
http://plainenglishkennel.weebly.com/ [/url]
E-mail us...
plainenglishjr@yahoo.com
PLAIN ENGLISH KENNEL EST. 1989
Join us on Facebook click on link below
https://m.facebook.com/plainenglish.kennel
HOME OF OUR VERY OWN
UKC 'PR' PLAIN ENGLISH'S MADDY GEES OL' BLU
UKC 'PR' PLAIN ENGLISH'S MADDY GEES SUE
Our Co-Owned Hounds
UKC 'PR' Given's Plain English Lil' Blue w/Chad Given
AND REMEMBER "KEEP'EM ENGLISH"
*Proud Member of UEB&FA, SEA, BRAXTON CO.CHA, Mud River Coon Club Inc. Pocahontas Nicholas CHA*
Junior Cartwright (304) 575-4495 cell
We Use And Recommend BLAZER & TRI-TRONICS NIGHT RAZOR LIGHTS, TRI-TRONICS, OLT SQUALLERS, INNOTEK & GARMIN 320 TRACKING SYSTEMS & PURINA DOG FEED, MUCK BOOTS DAN CHAPS
OUR RED FERN GONE BUT NOT FORGOTTEN CHAMPIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS...
R.I.P. UKC NITECH PKC 'PR' PLAIN ENGLISH'S HARDTIME HANK 5/10/04 - 6/23/14
R.I.P. UKC GRCH NITECH & AKC CGCH RANSOM'S BAM 7/23/05 - 01/06/14
R.I.P.2011-2013 PERFORMANCE SIRE
UKC NITECH GRCH PKC,AKC 'PR' MADDY GEES ROOFUS W/1-win towards GRAND!!! 8/21/2006-12/31/2012
R.I.P. UKC NKC AKC (TRIPLE) NITE CH CH 'PR' HAFA ADAI GIN "GINGER"
R.I.P. UKC CH 'PR' HALL'S BIG WHEEL
R.I.P. UKC NITE CH 'PR' DARK MTN CRANKIN' ROCK
R.I.P. UKC NITECH AKC 'PR' HARD WOOD PEPPER
R.I.P. CH 'PR' DARK HOLLOW TREE SLAMIN' BETTY
R.I.P. UKC GRCH PKC,AKC 'PR' WELL KEPT SECRET
R.I.P. UKC CH 'PR' MAGNIFICENT MAGGIE
R.I.P UKC GRNITECH 'PR' BROWNS GAULEY RIVER DAN
"THEY ARE IN OUR THOUGHT'S AT EVERY TREE"
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|