Multiple Owner Entry Conflict After Casts Are Called Out

Full Circle

October 12, 2016

Source: Allen Gingerich

This month’s article features three separate topics, all of which are related to multiple ownership.

Multiple Owner Entry Conflict After Casts Are Called Out

Q: After casts were called out at a Hunting Beagle event last weekend, it turns out that an owner had two dogs drawn to the same cast. This was a simple mistake and not done intentionally; however, it did bring up a few related questions, as listed below.

A: This does happen where it gets missed, and it’s a good one to address in-depth. Here’s the questions asked as they relate to multiple owner entries and/or if it is found after casts are drawn, followed by the response.

1) Is it the owner’s responsibility to advise the entry takers to split up his multiple entries?

It is not the owner’s responsibility to request that his multiple entries be split up. This is one of the event official’s responsibilities to make sure any multiple entries are split up. This is one of things entry-takers should be looking for when checking the dog’s Easy Entry Card or Registration Certificate. And they make sure that all owners, as listed a dog’s Easy Entry Card or Registration Certificate, are listed on the entry sticky.

2) May the casts be redrawn or may the owner involved decide to leave as is and not request a redraw? If the draw needs to be redone, would that include all entries? Just the category effected? Some other method?

The owner’s opinion should play no part in resolving the matter other than point it out to the event official, if needed. Instead, the event official should make every effort to correct the issue and draw one of the two dogs to a different cast. There’s no reason to redraw every cast in the hunt. Neither is it necessary to go the extremes of redrawing every dog in the category. Some may disagree with this, but it would be unreasonable to make everyone in the category fill out new entry stickies when there’s a reasonable and fair alternative method to resolve this issue.

So now this issue has come to light. The first thing the official should do is hold all casts, of the category involved, who have not yet left the grounds. If several casts have already left the grounds, that’s okay, don’t worry about it. Request the scorecards of all the casts still available on the grounds.

Now you have whatever number of scorecards that were available to you to work with. Let’s add one more thing to the equation, for further suggestive purposes. One of those scorecards has a three-dog cast. We would suggest to not automatically put your problem dog on that three-dog scorecard. Instead, take all the scorecards that were available to you and use a fair method to pull a dog from one of those casts to switch with the problem dog.

What’s a fair method to use? There are several different, fair ways you could do it. Here’s one that I might suggest. Let’s say you have three cards to work with. Announce that the last dog on the card is the one that you’re going to be using. Next, take those three cards, turn them over and shuffle them up a bit. Then have someone pick one of the cards for you. The card that was picked will have the bottom dog switching casts with your second owner entry on the problem scorecard.

What if the card that was picked in your random scorecard selection turns out to be the three-dog cast? That’s okay. You would still take the bottom dog off of that three-dog scorecard and switch the two dogs, resulting in that card still being a three-dog cast after the switch has been made.

The bottom line is, inadvertent mistakes like this do happen. If it happens, we should try to fix it when we can. The only way we could not fix it is if all other casts had already left the grounds, and there are no scorecards available anymore to switch the problem dog. In that case, it may be in the club’s best interest to give the owner the option to withdraw one of the dogs and give him his entry fee back. In the end, there should be no good reason for anyone to make it a bigger issue than necessary.

Finally, there’s one more item as it relates to multiple entries, and that is, drawing entries to scorecards. I’ve always encouraged officials to stay away from marking entry stickies on the back side. Not because there’s much wrong with doing so, but rather to eliminate the perceptions some will come up with when they see entry stickies marked up. How many times have you heard someone accuse the official of stacking cards? I have more times than I can count. Often times, when you ask why they think that is, it’s “… he had his buddy’s entry stickies marked on the back!” Furthermore, when officials use the drawing method as outlined in the rulebook, there’s zero need to mark any one entry slip on the back side.

You’ll start with three separate entry pools for each division. 1) Judge and or Judge/Guide Entries. 2) Guide Entries. 3) All Remaining Entries.

1) Stick all your judge entries to the cards first. Yes, go ahead and stick them. It matters nothing that you can see who it is because the remaining entries will be drawn in a blind draw.

2) Next, draw a guide entry to each card that needs one still. These guide entry stickies should be shuffled and drawn to the scorecard with the backside up. Once every card now has a hunting guide entry on it, flip the entries over. But before you stick any one of them you’ll need to check each one to make sure you don’t have any multiple owner entries on the same card. Whenever there’s a chance of that happening, it’s good to have already decided on a fair way to split multiple owner entries and make it clear how you will be resolve it, in the event it draws out that way. Again, there’s no need to pick up every guide entry, re-shuffle, re-draw, and repeat the same process in hopes that it will turn out different next time. One fair method and suggestion, and one that I generally use for this reason, is to use the bottom entry on the last scorecard in your row of cards and switch that entry with your multiple owner/problem entry. After everything looks good now, in terms of no multiple owner entries on the same card, stick these entries to the cards.

3) The third of this three-step process is to draw your remaining entries to the scorecards. Again, you’ll use the same exact method as you did in step 2.

One more item I’ll add to this topic is the use of blank entry stickies to determine any three-dog casts, if needed. It’s yet another tool that will eliminate any misconceptions and accusations when it comes to drawing casts. To take it even one step further, stick the blank(s) to the scorecard just like a regular entry. This way you’re eliminating any potential assumptions that you treated your friend John (the judge or guide entry) any special favors. If you end up with multiple blanks on the same card, you would treat it and resolve it just like a multiple owner conflict.

Owner Entries Exceed Number of Casts

Q: Recently, there was a topic that surfaced at a club meeting that generated some questions as to a rule or UKC policy for it. In the event where one individual is listed as the owner or co-owner of more dogs, how do you go about splitting them up when there are not enough casts to split all of them? Most specifically, does/may the owner play a role in deciding what multiple dogs should be drawn out together?

A: I would suggest to first let the owner know that it’s not possible to split up all of his entries. I would think that most clubs would allow the owner the courtesy or option to withdraw an entry, if he so chooses. Otherwise, the owner should play no further role when it comes to deciding which cast, or which of his two hounds will draw out together. They must all be drawn in a blind random draw method.

Let’s say an owner has five dogs entered, but you only have four casts. You might create a fourth entry pool, as noted in the previous topic above, with his five entries only. Draw one to each card and add the last one to any one of them. Of course, this should be done with the entry stickies upside down so no one sees who’s where until after drawing them to the card and you flip them over. Again, this can be done without marking the back of the entry stickies.

Dual Ownerships for Drawing Purposes Only

Several years ago, UKC implemented a new policy regarding multiple ownership that now allows for up to four owners on one dog. Prior to that, no more than two owners were allowed on any dog’s Registration Certificate. Technically, a dog could have had more than two owners, but only two were allowed on the dog’s official ownership record. Beyond that any additional owners were simply a partnership between the dog’s recorded owners and the additional non-listed partners. Any such additional non-listed owners could not be considered when it came splitting multiple owner entries at a UKC licensed event.

Under the current policy, we’re seeing a lot more dogs with more than two owners. Some of which are known to not actually be true owners of the dog but are officially named as such for the purpose of having certain hounds to not draw each other in competition. In other words, so that they fall under the “multiple-owner rule” where these dogs will be split up when it comes to the scorecard draw.

Quite frankly, such practice manipulates the draw, fair competition, the name of good sportsmanship, year-long series events, as well as the integrity of the sport. Competition should be about the luck of the draw without any such manipulation. It obviously makes good sense that an owner will not have their own dogs draw each other. It should also be noted that UKC does not have any qualms with dual ownerships between immediate family members, for the reason of not drawing each other. Beyond that, competitors using this practice as a way around the rules to keep from drawing certain hounds is - simply put - unethical.