Another Attempt to Take Over the AWDF - Page 13

Good luck Momo!

Actually this reminds me of something I was planning on researching.  Can guest AWDF members hold BH/VT only trials?  Or would they need to have an FH or RH in addition, to offer the BH/VT at the trial?  For example can AHBA host something like this now that they are guest members, assuming they get the proper judges, etc?

Actually this reminds me of something I was planning on researching.  Can guest AWDF members hold BH/VT only trials?  Or would they need to have an FH or RH in addition, to offer the BH/VT at the trial?  For example can AHBA host something like this now that they are guest members, assuming they get the proper judges, etc?

Anyone familiar with this process?

Actually this reminds me of something I was planning on researching.  Can guest AWDF members hold BH/VT only trials?  Or would they need to have an FH or RH in addition, to offer the BH/VT at the trial?  For example can AHBA host something like this now that they are guest members, assuming they get the proper judges, etc?

No insights? Please someone chime in

I don´t know about the rules for guest members of AWDF, but IF they are allowed to hold trials at all, there is no reason why they shouldn´t be allowed to hold a " BH only " trial.

In UScA a club can hold as many events without IPO titles as they want to host. . It can have RH, Bh, FH, and so on. Once a year a club must have a trial with a certain # of IPO attempts. If a club does not have a trial with IPO entrys in a year they return to affiliate status. I think this is a good rule as I would not want to work with an inactive group. I think the AWDF has the same requirements. 

In UScA a club can hold as many events without IPO titles as they want to host. . It can have RH, Bh, FH, and so on. Once a year a club must have a trial with a certain # of IPO attempts. If a club does not have a trial with IPO entrys in a year they return to affiliate status. I think this is a good rule as I would not want to work with an inactive group. I think the AWDF has the same requirements. 

This is exactly why I asked about the specifics of the rules.  While having a requirement of offering at least one IPO trial a year certainly makes sense for a USCA club, it makes no sense for a club like the American Herding Dog Association whos goal is to offer FCI and french style herding trials.  I hope this rule is exclusive to USCA because AHBA's members have no interest in offering bite-work related trials.  From what I understand their goal was to offer FCI based trials and titles not currently offered in the USA.  A once a year bite-work related trial requirement would give them a perception issue to deal with among thier members, some of which were opposed to joining AWDF in the first place. Also I think they would have great difficulty getting entrants among their members even if soley to meet the requirements of the rules to the letter.

Does anyone here know for sure?

RB this, FH that, USca/AWDF kiss my ass....y'all dog trainers or bureaucrats, gives me a thumping migraine just reading all this shit.

hey, it is the ''bureaucrats'' who will make prong collars, remote collars, bite training with kisses, and pure bred dog breeding outlawed. We need to be organized to repond to these threats. We need to unite with the LE k9 world. Or we can type on the internet

The are no rules in the AWDF for hosting events. There are MANY Organizations within AWDF that have never held a event.