|
|
|
|
|
Classified: Bred female
|
USCA. new admens, whats it really about? (29 replies)
|
|
so. the admendments have been voted on and passed. i was against it, and so where a lot of others. i have heard that there were some good points made on behalf of the "one club" ruling. too bad we didnt hear about them before the meeting.
my questions are.........
1- what was said at the meeting to persuade people to vote for it?
2, why didnt we hear more about the supports and their reasons before the GBM?
3 what was it really about? dogs, breeding standards, politics, WUSV teams, fear of the "other" organization, money (or the loss of it)?
4- why havent we heard from those who supported it before and since it has passed?
something is rotten in the state of USCA.
john
|
|
|
|
|
i am a nobody and know nothing, but.......... i did hear some conversation. since wda is affiliated with gsdca, it would seem some people fear that the fate of the workingdog might be the same as the american lines. i'm not agreeing or disagreeing. i do understand the concern, but not sure if they have found a reasonable answer that won't develop into more problems.
pjp |
|
|
|
|
| Dictator way of marketing |
|
|
|
|
The GSDCA-WDA does promote the AKC standard of the german shepherd dog.There is no question about it just go to there web site it,s in print.
jletcher18:
Those are all good questions now lets see if we can get them answered.
|
|
|
|
|
| Maybe you did not hear the reasons from those supporting it, because the purely emotional, "knee-jerk" reaction that "they can't tell me what to do" and 'this is just about the team" made it appear that it would be a waste of time and effort to attempt to actually discuss the issue. |
|
|
|
|
There were many fine points made that day. First let me tell those who think that "one member-one vote" is good... you don't vote your president in (electoral college does that), you don't vote for laws (your elected senators and reps do that)... so the GBM is your elected representatives, your law makers. Second at the GBM you get debate, you get the chance to add admendments or to change the wording or change the process of the proposed bylaw/admendment/rule. You could never do these things in a timely manner with 1-1. It is your duty to elect and send a representative to the GBM that works in your/clubs best interest... those clubs that don't send a rep for the one time a year event, then you have no voice in the matter, you chose not to be heard. Everyone even those not affiliated with the club has the right to let their EB or RD know their opinions. These are your "elected" voices... if you don't like their position then elect someone else. This is the "American Way". One member - one vote is not American, it is AKC!!!
The USA has been working their butts off trying to work out a deal with the WDA and GSDCA, only to be stabbed in the back again and again. I am tired of the USA trying to work with people that don't want to give back the same effort. USA is the premier german shepherd and schutzhund organization in the United States. I for one will not let USA be back doored and pushed aside without a fight. I say get on board or get out of the way! I belive in the preservation of the German Shepherd Dog and it's working heritage, and their is only one club in the US that belives in that at this time, that is USA. |
|
|
|
|
"made it appear that it would be a waste of time and effort to attempt to actually discuss the issue. "
Absoulutely, why on earth discuss it? What a waste of time.
I've read a couple of comments about people who protested, not pulling, and have to ask. Why should they? They worked hard all year, why would anyone even suggest that they should sacrifice years of work because of a vote that had JUST happened.
There is an element in USA that seems to be putting out the message that you are either 100 percent for us or 100 percent the enemy. An element that feels that they know best and everyone should just follow them blindly.
That might not be the message that they intend to put out but I think it is certainly the one that a lot of people are receiving.
|
|
|
|
|
Nia, you and I have been friends and will continue to be friends no matter what our idealogy is. But as bright and articulate as you are - that was unfair to post.
You and I have talked many times, and Lyle's letter was not on point with anything direct that would threaten USA to the point the wagons had to be circled and you were either a Hatfield of McCoy. USA is no more going to be kicked out of WUSV than is GSDCA.
It was posted somewhere that Pia gave a good speach for the amendment. Then I see that Pia sold a dog to Johannes which he competed with at the national. Ok, maybe that was coincidence. But still I would like to hear what Pia had to say.
When membership in GSDCA or WDA obviously is not a cost to USA, meaning there is no financial loss to USA to people with dual memberships - these people are paying a supporting both clubs by definition - there goes the reason that USA wants more membership fees. The already have them.
There is nothing disclosed that USA will dissolve if people belong to other clubs in addition to USA, that there is any problem with their WUSV membership. Sure the Laike suggestion from last year's WUSV newsletter that eventually WUSV would like clubs to combine - but there is certainly nothing in writing on that or any WUSV amendments that mandate that.
This USA amendment does not preclude people from PARTICPATING in GSDCA or WDA trials or shows up to the National WUSV Qualifier, (though now I posted that, I guess that amendment will be coming :) It is directly aimed at excluding people with dual memberships who particpate at the WUSV Team Qualifying level. That's all it affects other than trying to halt membership fee income of the dual members to WDA - even less belong to GSDCA.
So as it appears to me, we are supposed to donate for example as I have done, money to put USA shows and trials I have competed in to put them in the black, trophies, judges releases, airfares, portapotties, advertising, other fund raising items, donations to send teams both personal and to the organziations, but yet be restricted to what clubs I belong to all for the sake of controlling top level competitors. While I do appreciate their abilities, I really don't think the grass roots are in this just to support a team.
As none of these organizations pay my bills, mortgages and its pretty obcvious a portion of my income goes to them, I am hard pressed to undertand the "oh, by the way, keep sending us money, but we are going to tell you how to spend your other money" . This goes the same way for people like Yvette who donated countless hours.
The other part of trying to stop other clubs from receiving income is that its just poor sportsmanship. People don't win (meaning lose) usually because they are not the best. With sportsmanship, you become the best by working hard to be the best. You don't have to shoot the competition to be the best. The I am the Best but by the way I am the Only One doing this just does not fly in importance or standing. And this isn't even shooting the competition direct, this is shooting your own members if they don't only date USA. Like I said in another post, when I dated, it was very creepy when a guy got so possessive, showed lack of self confidence. And this does not lose its creepiness just because its an dog organization.
I am not a champion of any of the organziation - they all do some things right and they really scew up on others. From a business perspective you shake your head in disbeleif much of the time. But it is unpatently unfair when any organization does not explain itself. Its the "your jus |
|
|
|
|
| Sticking my neck out here......isn't it UScA who just told all members we must be either all the way for them or all the way against them? |
|
|
|
|
continued:
I am not a champion of any of the organziation - they all do some things right and they really scew up on others. From a business perspective you shake your head in disbeleif much of the time. But it is unpatently unfair when any organization does not explain itself. Its the "your just little people, shut up and send the money, you wouldn't understand, let the all knowing run this".
Also, and I am no fan of American GSD's, but 80% of the dogs involved in GSDCA are performance dogs - and if anyone would bother to look, they are agility, tracking, herding, obedience and their rallys. There are a ton of German line dogs in these, some with even SchH titles. There also is an influx of German lines even into the show dogs - they are not stupid people. Furthermore, the WDA shows and trials do go by the WUSV standard or the judges could not judge here and give out SV titles, Koerungs etc.
Furthermore, and this goes for the SV and the RSV2000 - no one has ever been restricted by any organziation from breeding better dogs. You are free with ANY organization to do so including the AKC. No one says, hey wait a minute, you are breeding better than the guidelines, you are in time out, stop, boy you are in big trouble now.
So back to the point - before everyone makes their decision to stay or go, it would be the high road to really disclose exactly and specifically what threat any of the other organziations are to the existence of USA that would make this a life or death situation for people to cut off income to the other clubs while still sending money, and all the other time donations others make to USA? Why can't this be public knowledge? What is so threatening to USA's existence? If GSDCA has some secret mission and is going to cause the demise of USA, it needs to be laid out and disclosed. If not, then its pretty obvious this whole thing was to control about 10 handlers and dogs that go to the WUSV. |
|
|
|
|
Kim:
In your post you have just issued the problem brewing in the GSDCA-WDA The WDA goes by the SV standard and the GSDCA goes by the AKC standard. Now after the WDA.s usefullness at the 2013 WUSV trial who do you think is going to win out in this argument Dad or the kid? it,s really that simple.
You are right I would like to have it spelled out much better from USA since I,m still a member till April 2010 |
|
|
|
|
The USA has been working their butts off trying to work out a deal with the WDA and GSDCA, only to be stabbed in the back again and again. I am tired of the USA trying to work with people that don't want to give back the same effort. USA is the premier german shepherd and schutzhund organization in the United States. I for one will not let USA be back doored and pushed aside without a fight. I say get on board or get out of the way! I belive in the preservation of the German Shepherd Dog and it's working heritage, and their is only one club in the US that belives in that at this time, that is USA.
A deal on what specifically? If its other than below, please enlighten everyone.
First, supposedly, and either side of USA and WDA are giving out different stories, Danny Spreitler when he thought WDA might be cut loose from GSDCA and would lose its abilitiy to host any SV venue, may or may not have approached USA about combining which was not an easy task - USA states he did just that, Spreitler states he was talking about the North American Working Dog Alliance. And even if they combined, GSDCA would have just made a committee to replace WDA and continued on with fielding a WUSV team especially now that AKC will probably allow Schutzhund. So where would that have gotten anybody?
GSDCA has never been in any discussions with USA regarding combining.
The real discussion that took place for sure was about succession on the team if a dog gets injured or pulled and who sends what reserves and when those reserves take what vacated spot.
Any discussion between any of the organziation about merging, combining etc. would have had to be done by board approval . Not seeing that in anyone's minutes. So were all acting without board approval? Or if by executive board approval, where have any boards approved discussions?
So no one has tried to work out a deal to "preserve the breed as a working dog", breed to the WUSV standard to my knowledge.
If USA was totally being altruistic about "the breed" - then they should tell everyone to join GSDCA, vote and put in breeding standards, vote to recognize the FCI standard only and put a stop to what is being held out as so offensive. But it still would not stop AKC from registering dogs that had parents with FCI recognized registries. And everyone seems to forget that FCI is not about to not recognize AKC as the United States registry - its about more than just GSD's - there is a lot of commerce in other breeds world wide - look at the big picture - there's alot more dogs than just GSD's in this whole equation. Really don't think FCI is going to tell USA they are the recognized breed registry, not AKC, and oh by the way, all other breeds be damned AKC is out.
You can print your own money (meaning start your own registry), but that does not make it legal tender or have any value. The Emporer's New Clothes syndrome doesn't really help anyone. |
|
|
|
|
Bob -
There is no problem brewing between GSDCA and WDA regarding two differnt breed standards - honestly, they are only a few centimeters off once analyzed. Its their judgeing style and preferences, I don't think GSDCA even breeds to their own standard - its much like all the over sized dogs in Germany and even here - people look the other way. Ken Downing actually analyzed it and there are not much in differences. Again, whatever standard there is at any club - NO ONE IS PRECLUDED FROM BREEDING A BETTER DOG TO THE FCI STANDARD! There is freedom of choice!
And herein lies a good reason for everyone to belong to as many GSD organizations as possible - you learn alot and work through any misconceptions and go the route you like. What club you belong to and what people think your beleifs are is akin to racial profiling - people have preconceived notions/fears about that club and imediately you are labeled with certain misconceptions.
Like American type GSD's or not - GSDCA members feel very proud of their membership in WUSV - they were one of the first non-european members. Honestly, they have no clue how far away they have gotten from the world standards, but I am seeing things slowly coming around - why because I belong to ALL GSD organizations that can guide the way of the breed. The fanciers cannot carry the club anymore and new people and at least 80% are participating in performance venues offered by AKC - I can actually see more people with GSDCA converting to our type of dogs once they are really exposed to the WUSV venue. You should see some of the postings about the NASS on the GSDCA chat board- a bunch are really impressed. especially about the dogs' temerments and pigment - you have to show people what is good and if its really good they will see it. Just think once they see real working dogs - they are not blind.
Anyway, I don't see them ever dumping their WUSV membership. To comply with WUSV they will always have to comport either through a WDA like committee or WDA to WUSV standards with Koerungs, hips and elbows, SchH etc. Its never been any GSDCA member's thought to get rid of WDA - sure, some GSDCA members have been royally hacked off at the new regime in WDA and there has been political posturing to take their toys and go home, but beleive me, they would have had their own sandbox in place had they severed themselves from WDA. It has never been about breeding standards, its just been people pissed off at each other regarding control.
As it stands now, IF AKC votes to recognize Schutzhund it all stays the same because any AKC breed club wanting to do it merely has to pick an exisiting expert organization to over see it for that club. Obviously, GSDCA will choose WDA. But that does not preclude any other breed club from choosing AWDF, USA, or DVG.
Both USA and GSDCA have the right to be in WUSV. They both have their ups and downs, pros and cons. I don't want to see the demise for either of them or even of WDA no more than I want to eat one flavor of ice cream, or wear the same clothes everyday. I am not a for a WALMART take over of the mom and pop stores. I think both USA and GSDCA and WDA need to exist as well as AWDF and DVG and all the other clubs people choose to belong to. The fight over the team members needs to end - its affects a very small part of the club membership but yet the whole membership has to pay for it. |
|
|
|
|
| Pia DID NOT sell Johannes a dog. Period. Ukon was bought, owned and trained by Patty Bartley, who impressively competed with him in Georgia at the USA Nationals a couple of years ago. PATTY sold Ukon to Johannes. Pia had nothing to do with it. :-) |
|
|
|
|
From an outsider looking in...
I haven't read everything about the amendment changes so I'm sure I'm not really understanding everything. But here's a thought: What if you turn it around and look at it this way:
*WDA members can't belong to UScA.*
For whatever reason you want to give it...they're not good enough (isn't this the source of the midnight trials and Santa Claus judges?). Or they don't have UScA's best interests at heart. Whatever reason makes you happy.
If the whole deal was all about the world team politics, why didn't they just pass something saying if you qualify for the world team through WDA, you are banned for life from competing on the world team for UScA?
For some reason, I'm thinking that the agility world had done this years ago. |
|
|
|
|
That sounds a little better, but its still a dog she bred, her kennel name, correct? You can see how people can get the impression of a conflict especially since this new amendment is all about alleged conflicts. And for the record, I like Johannes, this is not about personalities. I just don't like the amendment attributed to him as it stands without any compelling reason how paying dues to another organziation while paying dues to USA is going to cause the demise of USA unless I belong to only to USA.
|
|
|
|
|
I say get on board or get out of the way! I belive in the preservation of the German Shepherd Dog and it's working heritage, and their is only one club in the US that belives in that at this time, that is USA.
Just as there is only one true religion in this world? Give me a break. Many who are not USCA membesr care and feel just as strongly that the GSD remains a working dog and that we breed to the FCI standard.
When USCA has a breeder code of ethics and kicks out all breeders who breed a dog(bitch) that hasn't been titled or breed surveyed, then and only then, will I say USCA is the only club truly working for the dogs.
There is just as much corruption in USCA as in the GSDCA and the WDA, if not more. In fact I have seen more to support and encourage correct breeding from the WDA than USCA.
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
|
|
|
|
|
I say get on board or get out of the way! I belive in the preservation of the German Shepherd Dog and it's working heritage, and their is only one club in the US that belives in that at this time, that is USA.
Just as there is only one true religion in this world? Give me a break. Many who are not USCA membesr care and feel just as strongly that the GSD remains a working dog and that we breed to the FCI standard.
When USCA has a breeder code of ethics and kicks out all breeders who breed a dog(bitch) that hasn't been titled or breed surveyed, then and only then, will I say USCA is the only club truly working for the dogs.
There is just as much corruption in USCA as in the GSDCA and the WDA, if not more. In fact I have seen more to support and encourage correct breeding from the WDA than USCA.
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
|
|
|
|
|
I say get on board or get out of the way! I belive in the preservation of the German Shepherd Dog and it's working heritage, and their is only one club in the US that belives in that at this time, that is USA.
Just as there is only one true religion in this world? Give me a break. Many who are not USCA membesr care and feel just as strongly that the GSD remains a working dog and that we breed to the FCI standard.
When USCA has a breeder code of ethics and kicks out all breeders who breed a dog(bitch) that hasn't been titled or breed surveyed, then and only then, will I say USCA is the only club truly working for the dogs.
There is just as much corruption in USCA as in the GSDCA and the WDA, if not more. In fact I have seen more to support and encourage correct breeding from the WDA than USCA.
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
|
|
|
|
|
| There will not be a Code of Ethics in the UScA, it has been written, proposed and been turned down allready in it's developement.- just as a side note... |
|
|
|
|
GSD:
Oh code of ethics? all one needs to do is go to the 2009 NASS site and see who is the #3 breeders showing I believe it is mittlewest, the same that just got repremanded for cheating on coloring dogs so the code of ethics thing just took a good beating there.
Neither orginization will hurt the money folks to the point they can,t show. |
|
|
|
|
Bob - there were several dogs bred by Julie Martinez there at NASS 2009, however they were not owned by the owner of the Mittelwest Kennel, Julie Martinez. Even if she co-owned them, they would be able to show as unless a co-owner is not in good standing also, the dog can be shown. That is the current rule WDA could suspend on. Dogs sold, though bearing the Kennel name Mittelwest were not included in the suspension as those people and dogs had nothing to do with the suspension.
I agree that cheating is more than is found out or charges brought out on, but in this case unless ownership records were forged with AKC, then these dogs showed legitimatly. Julie's suspension runs for a good deal of time from what I have heard and she was also fined a very healthy sum of money.
Problem with these organziations is that it is hard to monitor everyone as everyone pretty much a volunteer basis on these shows and trials. There are not funds to produce and send stewards ala AKC to all of these events. The honor system is only about as good as the individuals concept of right and wrong - which normally is based on will he get caught. :)
I wish clubs had the money to send a monitor to all - but that will never fly. |
|
|
|
|
If people read the USA bylaws, they would find that the contents of the proposed "Code of Ethics" were already covered.
I stand by my previous post--edited to correct a typo changing a "K" to the " " " that was intended. |
|
|
|
|
@ Mystere:
Wow, I must have missed the 5 page Code of Ethics (including breeders COE) in the bylaws of the USCA if really everything is covered in the bylaws that was covered in the original proposed Code of Ethics- before it got cut down to half a page and then to nothing -none excistent.
|
|
|
|
|
kESSY,
I saw the proposed Code of Ethics, and YES, if you bothered to read the USA bylaws, it was unnecessary. Further, the document I was sent by the GEC Chair was NOT five pages at all. It was one page, so apparently the committee itself cut it down. Frankly, the idea of a five page "Code of Ethics" is ridiculous, IMO.
The so-called "Code of Ethics" was simply a document "some" wanted to have to circumvent the BOI and , once again, have "someone else" address any problems, rather then stepping up and filing BOI charges themselves. |
|
|
|
|
Ok , that explaines it, if you just saw the one page doc. It wasn't at all meant to circumvent the BOI. The original one was meant to clarify/specify what was in the Bylaws.- since this was one of the concerns from some members of the UScA.
But perhaps it was too specific?
I don't know why it was percived to circumvent the BOI since the BOI is supposed to handle the inquiries and determin actions taken. How could you circumvent the BOI with a Code of ethics? Isn't a code of Ethics there to uphold members to adhear to a certain standard? Why is this so wrong?
So the question remains, why the Commitee had to/ chose to(?) cut down the COE... |
|
|
|
|
The new rule is purely petty political bullshit, grred, overgrown egos, and preduduices going back many years. I don't believe for one second that it has anything to do with maintaining the SV breed standard.
I don't like being told whose birthday party I can play at and whose I can't just because I like being a Girl Scout and a Campfire Girl at the same time.
The only people who benefit from this ridiculous new rule are the Europeans. At least 2-3 times as many dogs will be heading over the Atlantic for titles and breed surveys now, expensive or not.
And a lot of people who supported their belief in the SV standards, titled, showed and had their dogs breed surveyed when the dog was ready and there was an event within a day or so drive... regardless of which parent organization the host club was affiliated with... won't now. No. I did NOT say they wouldn't breed their dogs.
SS
|
|
|
|
|
You can't cricumvent it, not while maintaining any semblance of due process. That was one of the problems with the proposed COE.
Were you not ON the committee? I thought so from your initial post on the subject, but your last one makes it appear that you were not on the committee that drafted the COE. Perhaps you should address your query to someone who was on the committee. |
|
|
|
|
Yes, I was and still am on the commitee. But i still don't understand why the COE could circumvent the BOI, If according to you it was allready found (what was proposed) in the bylaws. A Code of Ethics has to be backed by the BOI or it is worthless.
Why wouldn't the UScA not benefit from a COE?
And I still haven't quite understood, why we had to cut it down so much. But open to compromises we did.
We wanted to put a code of ethics in place, because in this day and age it is important. And I still feel we should. Especially with the current problems, with BSL and other anti dog legislations.
We were hopeing to find a version that benefits the Schutzhund world as well as the GSD. |
|
|
|
|
Kessy,
This is my last post on this subject, as it is waay OT. Did you participate in the conference call involving the committee members, the chair of the committee, the BOI chair and myself during the summer? If so, then you received your answers then. |
|
|
You must be logged in to reply to posts
Classified: Bred female
|
|
|
|
|
Search Website
Login
Messagelist
Post Reply