How much would the attendance drop if drug testing was made mandatory that all top dogs be tested and if tested positive they would lose their placing.

Before you can test you have to have a drug policy that gets everyone on the same page about what is considered in bounds and what is out of bounds. I think virtually every hunter who attends the Masters is willing to play by the rules as long as they know what the rules are. Most don't want to give up the stuff that helps with swelling and mild soreness. We are going to get something passed at the Masters this year. Hopefully it will be a topic of interest among the hunters. One day maybe we can get to a point of giving them nothing but feed, water, and fox tracks. That day is still off in the distance but there are a lot of hunters who want to get there. Most will play by the rules as long as they know what the rules are.

HES JUST SCARED THAT HE AINT GONNA GET TO BEAT UP ON THIS CROWD LIKE HES BEEN DOIN. AND IF I WERE A BETTIN MAN ID SAY HES GOT GOOD REASON.

Attendance would drop (or increase) about the same amount as it would at the All-American and/or National if such a policy was implemented. Let's hope it is.

Chris, wondering what would show up in the drug screen process. I hear some people say you couldn't be able to use dex. Which this is the only thing I use. I say if the man needs the needle let him have it. If it passes I sure there are ways to get around it. To me it doesn't matter. Happy Hunting

This is some thing that gets kicked a round
a lot LETS SAY THAT SOME WOULD DROP OUT
SO THAT THE Attendance MIGHT BE LOW
DO YOU NOT THINK THAT MORE MIGHT SHOW UP
IF IF DRUG TESTING COMES TO PASS
I DOUNT KNOW WHAT DO YA'LL THINK


GOD BLESS AND GOOD HUNTING

attendance would drop about as much as baseball or football, next to none, the hunters would adapt and continue to participate.....

I would still take part, we need a drug testing policy.....just my thoughts.

My only question about a Drug Policy is who is going to stop people from giving the winning dog something to tarnish the title and the owner? I don't see every kennel in the US having a security system to keep the dogs safe from the real cheaters. A guy would have to sleep with his dogs to keep someone from giving them something. Matt

WOW look at the excuse already! Someone done that to my dogs there is no way I would ever do that! WHATEVER!

Hey, Matt do you really think that someone would dope a dog on purpose . Just to tarnish his name and the hunt(masters, top gun)etc. If that's the case, I would be watching people. Like a hawk. I wouldn't be able too trust anybody around my hounds.

Watch for an update on this tonight.

Knowing that there is always going to be the possibility that someone else did something to the winning hound to cause trouble for the hounds owner, I am thinking we need to hold off on any fines or severe penalties for someone who has a hound test positive for a banned substance.

What I am advocating for is if a hound tests popsitive, to simply disqualify the hound from the hunt and withhold the winnings and Championships. To me, even if someone else gave your hound a dose of anabolic steroids and some banamine and you (the owner) did nothing wrong, the hound still won the hunt under the influence of a banned substance. I don't think we can allow a hound to take home a title and some prize money if the win was tainted by exposure to a banned substance. This is something that everyone will have to agree to if they want to participate in the hunt. You just have to accept that someone might screw you out of a win by doing something to your hound. It would be a criminal act if someone administered a drug to someone elses hound. The person could do some time in jail assuming they make it out of the pen alive.

It would be assumed that the owner is innocent of any wrongdoing unless there was strong evidence (eye witness) that the owner was the person who administered the substance.
You would have to be really, really, stupid to give your hound a banned substance when you know it will be tested if it wins the hunt. As long as we automatically DQ the hound and nobody gets any benefit from using the banned substances, then no owner is ever going to use any. Any hound that tests positive will most likely be the result of a criminal dosing someone elses hound. The owner would have no incentive to do it because he will have already signed away his right to protest the disqualification. There would be no chance of an angry member winning a lawsuit against the Masters after having agreed to the rules of the game before he entered the hound.
There would be a great chance of winning a lawsuit agaist the person who harmed the members hound and caused him to be disqualified. Those are the folks who should be worried. The guys out there (if they are out there) who would try to drug another mans hound and get away with it.

I am new to the sport of fox hunting but have coon hunted all my life and have placed or won a my share of hunts big an small so im not new to the hound world.But I am hooked on these running dogs like a drug.It is nice listening to dogs knowing I aint got to walk to a tree a mile away.That being said ive never heard off giving dogs drugs and as u know cheating is terriable at coon hunts.I hunt once to twice a week all nite long and its hard on my dogs so instead of shooting them up I know as a houndsman I need a better class off dog to run with the big boys.I like to win but I let the dogs do it for me.Thanks an GOD bless.joshua k fowler

What I am saying fellows is this. There are people out there that are so jealous that they would do it. I am not talking about your hard core drugs like banamine that might make a dog finish a hunt. I am talking the anti flammatory meds and meds for swelling that some people want to see gone. That my only concern. And if you hold the winnings from the owner even if you believe they did nothing wrong will tarnish the owner, because people will convict that person wether they did anything or not. I was just voicing one of my concerns. If I would have been able to go to the Masters and listen to the meeting I would still have the same concerns. No matter what the masters decide to do is fine with me, I will play by the rules. I just want this to be thought through before jumping into something that can't be inforced and fair for all. Matt

Here is my question Mr. Howell who is going to pay for this drug test is it going to be the hunt or the hunters, who's going to pay for the vet to be there to draw the blood from the dogs , who's going to pay for the lab work for it all to be done right , oh yea and then what wait for another 3 weeks to get the lab work back to crown your champion. Now if the top 7 tested postive do you get the next seven dogs and test, by then its to late there blood is clean and they get the reward but they was being given the same thing as the top 10 dogs so now where does that leave us ,back at the start YOU CANNOT DRUG TEST JUST A SELECT FEW YOU WOULD HAVE TO TEST EVERY DOG AFTER THE HUNT DOWN THE THE LAST PLACE HOUND TO MAKE SURE YOU WOULD INDEED HAVE DRUG FREE DOGS IN THE TOP TEN. In theory this is a great idea, but in reality it dosent make any sense and is to expensive your hunt entrys would drop and your entry fee would rise.

Mr Howell what worries me is you keep bringing up law suits. Best not get into anything that it takes the court system to get you out of.

Fear of lawsuits is one reason given by some folks who don't want to go forward with the drug policy. Anybody can sue anybody for any thing. We have to address it.