Clarification on WDA members participating in USA events? - Page 13

It seems to be an "issue" only to NON- MEMBERS. They, of course, can discuss it.

Sportsfriends.  A 29 year USCA member, my renewal for this year was returned.  I challenged the JA clause on U.S. Constitution compliance. I was given a nebulous reason which did not address the Constitutional issue.  My 29 year "marriage" to USCA included service at the club, region, and national levels. But evidently any history of loyalty to USCA no longer counts.  I never held any intention of joining WDA because I believe "the parent club" lacks integrity.  I have no bad feelings for WDA.  My SV membership is into its 30th year and I am quite content to participate in local USCA events, gladly paying the surcharge. To those who believe in the infallibility of USCA leadership, remember that loyalty is a two way street and integrity always trumps power politics.                                                                     

But I am a member, and it's still an issue.  Rather than insults, care to address anything i've asked?

It's still an issue with me and I'm still a member at least until 1/1/2012. I'll bet good money I trial and title more than you do Nia so that argument won't work with me about titling like you tried to pull with Randy. I've been a member of USA off an on since 1991 or so and this is my 7th year as a consecutive year member this time so it's not like I just fell off the turnip truck. I've never been a member of WDA but at the moment I'm training with a WDA club who was formerly a USA club. It never has been a about USA verus WDA for me it was about dictating what club I can belong too if I wanted to remain a member of USA. The who is the better custodian for the GSD is not my fight but I and many more got caught in the middle of it. The SV doesn't allow other GSD organization membership argument doesn't hold water either because when I wake up every morning I'm in Virginia not Bavaria.


Keith

As I said before, I think the JA amendment makes sense but only with regards to executive officers and directors because for them, there is a conflict of interest.  I'm not sure how there is a conflict of interest when it comes to the the regular membership.  Also wasn't a major catalyst for the amendment, at least as far as the timing,  was WDA deciding only their titles would be affixed to AKC pedigrees, not UScA titles?

As to the claim that there are people who didn't sign the loyalty card and were allowed to remain members, I'm here to tell you I know a number of people who tried that and their checks were returned to them and they were told they had to check the box if they wanted their membership renewed.  So I'm pretty sure if it's in fact true that there are people who were allowed to not check the box, it was a mistake. 

It was not the WDAs call about titles on pedigrees. It was the AKC that reached out to their breed clubs. Those breed clubs then reached out and made arrangements with their working breed clubs (WDA, AWMA, UDC) And those titles are now recognized on AKC pedigrees. The JA was done right about the time the AKC clubs reached out to the working clubs. The reason why USCA was not considered was the open hostility to WDA-GSDCA and the fact that USCA is a direct competitor with the AKC for registrations.

The American Rottweiler Club will be using the DVG for their go to organization. ARC and the USRC have almost as much animosity towards each other as the USA and WDA hence the decision to go with DVG.


Keith

I don't think there's much of a personality conflict between the organizations. The people I know on both boards speak well of each other. This was especially evident at the recent WUSV Universal. When you look at the GSD community most of the people in one club know and are friends with those in the other.

What you will see is the influence of the parent organization. USCA has no relationship with the AKC, the WDA does through the GSDCA. Naturally when the AKC went to include titles, they went to their member organization, the GSDCA, who went to their member organization, the GSDCA-WDA. Personalities really were not involved.

Actually, that was at the time  WDAs very existence was being threatened by it's own parent,  GSDCA, who was actively supporting the AKC WDS program.  Had WDS been successful, WDA would have lost it's legitimacy because they would have had no way to contract SV judges, so of course they were talking with the only other organization that could save it's butt (UScA), had WDS been successful.

There are always two sides to every story.  We can rehash this til the cows come home if you want.  I don't really see the point,  I don't think presenting each sides POV will do any good, but if you want to, we can.  The thing is both sides think they are right and neither side is interested in the others POV.
 
I am reminded of the Doctor Seuss story The Zax:


 

The American Rottweiler Club will be using the DVG for their go to organization.

Go to for what? DVG can't get titles on AKC pedigrees.