USCA Gen board meeting. News please. - Page 5

 Bob,

I am not sure you wish to hear my take on the real issues here. In any case, the real issues are childish, for the most part. It is about two groups (and if the truth were known, really about a few individuals) trying to get a leg up. At least as long as I have been associated with USCA, they have been the ones, in my opinion, to make the trouble. Frankly, as someone else wrote above, all too often the sport becomes ONLY about the officers and a few competing at high level. In fact, it should be about the people who make up the organizations, and that means the grass roots people. But USCA has shown over and again their disdain for almost all the membership. They do not want real representative governing because then the few who have ulterior motives could not get where they want to go. It is certainly NOT about the breed, even though they make up a lot of propaganda to suggest that it is. They have done little to help the average Joe and Josephine who want to participate. 

For me personally, there is another issue and I read it here also in other people's posts. It is NOT the place of USCA to tell anyone what groups they can and cannot belong to. Again, MAKE THE ORGANIZATION so excellent that one would never consider going elsewhere or spending a dime at another organizations' events. But that is never done. Instead, USCA tries to force people to swallow their rule about only play with us or you can't play. How stupid! Making this rule, all by itself, is an anathema to anyone who is an American. I will associate with whatever groups or people I choose, and NOT allow a group like USCA to tell me who I can play with. Are other groups any better than USCA? I think there are several who may be. Why? Because they have made real improvements, do not participate in the back stabbing and BS that we so often have seen with USCA, and leave the members to work with their dogs and do the most they can to help provide for that.

As I said before, people are fickle and perhaps most who object won't take a stand, but at least some have, if only on principle. As for those who waffle, so be it. 

OGBS and Hodie - first let me say there are tons of good dogs out there that are rescues - you have big hearts and a lot of courage to do what you do.  I am sending you each a PM .

Along the lines of what this is all about - no one has ever shown any proof or in board minutes that anyone from either organizations have tried to merge, been in discussions to merge or had any board approval to even enter into any discussions.  All those saying talks were significant and moving forward - if that is even the truth, did so without board approvral - unless someone wants to show the written minutes otherwise.  So, people just need to take "we were going to merge and got burned" with a grain of salt.  Push and demand to see in writing where that was sanctioned. 

Also along the lines of what this is all about, and I tend to echo Wallace's opinion its about team control because after researching, it all points that direction but also in discussions today, it was voiced to me that USA is positioning itself to join RSV2000 and bascially be done with SV/WUSV.  I have no idea if this is true.  But on the surface, with the constant buzzword of FCI and AWDF being used rather than WUSV, it rings like a possibility.  I am sure that if a group like USA would do this, it would be with the thought of having an FCI registry.  However, though Raiser can do that in Germany, I would surmise from the AKC/FCI agreement that it could not happen in the United States. 

http://www.fci.be/nomenclatures_detail.asp?file=group2&lang=en  The AKC agreement signed early this year is on this page to the right and down.

The minutes and other really interesting stuff is at the "Circulars" tab - the newest is at the bottom of the list. That is where I found the minutes from last year in Lucerne. Go to page 3 and the top of page 4 as it regards to AWDF and their concerns of not being able to particpate if the agreement with AKC was signed.  This was October of last year.  So this has all been brewing for some time.  Based on what was said to me today, IF the above scenario would play out, there is certainly more reason than just a right to field and FCI team, and a need to stay in good standing with the FCI in order to try to follow the same path as Raiser's club.  But again while FCI has given RSV recognition via VDH.  The same would have to happen here through AKC and that would never happen. (?) 

There is a pony in the proverbial pile somewhere that eventually will surface explaining either logically or illogically why USA made the decision to be exclusionary.

I WAS a member of WDA for a few years...until they began to require signing that one would not sue WDA, no matter what idiocy it might do to you to give valid grounds for legal action, and screwed over the magazine editor who had produced the only few issues that were not just a couple steps above ye olde mimeo-machined broadsides from long ago yester-century. That is when I checked out. I just never saw any reason to re-join and still don't.

WOW!! Thank you for the kind words--they would probably swell my head, were it not for the anti-inflammatories I am taking for my knees that are still feeling the effect from the nationals. :-)

Ah schucks I did not think anyone remembered the magazine political intrigue, thanks Nia for the atta girl..  It was not a pleasant time in my life with all the BS with WDA over that .  Don't think that is not in the back of my mind as I am forced to chose what clubs I will remain with. Once bitten, twice shy?  And that is the point, no organziation is perfect and you are never guaranteed what you put in is what you get out of it.  Not that you expect a return, but you at least don't want a screw job. Most members of all are there to trial and show and enjoy the camraderie.  Its a shame all the intrigue gets in the way.  Lots of times I wish I could go back to the first year I was in this, all stars in my eyes and dumber than a box of rocks and just thrilled to have a dog.  Hate the Tower of Babel with the organziations, but still thrilled to have my dogs.

Hey Kim: the magazine was better than it ever was.....

Just for the record, Please don't use me as a "poster child" for a "tar and feather" campaign against USA.

Over the last few tumultuous days, after hours on the phone with numerous individuals, some facts about this controversial by-law change (USA vs. WDA) are finally coming to light. Finally, the motivation behind it is starting to make sense. Yes, I get the fact that USA is committed to protecting the working heritage of the GSD in the US. But this effort was marred by poor communication – most of the underlying facts never came to light in a timely fashion.

Nobody likes being issued an ultimatum under any circumstances. Such tactics are likely to anger a bunch of people, regardless of the nobility of the cause. I think it was tad naive to assume that everyone would to just “fall in line” and “do the right thing”.

This effort was not well executed. The by-law change was proposed at first with no real explanation of motives, and then, the handful of “statements” from line officers did not adequately address the matters at hand. At my day job, I am a chemical engineer and I lead multi-million dollar projects for my company and I can tell you first hand – you cannot NOT communicate. Poor communication can doom an otherwise good project.

I do not personally believe this is the best solution because I value the freedom of choice. For me personally, the right decision was to disassociate myself from such a group that manages by ultimatum. Although this course of action makes a bold statement, sadly it would also hurt my friends, my fellow volunteers, on the committees on which I serve.

My phone has been ringing and my inbox is full. People I don’t even know are contacting me expressing their remorse at my departure. The time has come for me to put my personal feelings aside and recall the reasons that I serve: Kathy, Jen, Nate, Jeff, Rifky, Katja, and too many others to name. My service may be to USA, but my loyalty and my heart belong to my FRIENDS, and I’m going to hurt them if I do leave. For the sake of the team, I will not let them down.

Yvette Woodward
USA member for 10 years, and counting

I'm staying with USA also, been a member for 17 years and could not be happier!!!!!

Yvette,
While I do not understand the reasons behind this by law change... I wish to understand it.
I for now stayed, since I feel we do hold kinda an important position, though it is difficult to be heared at times....
To see you leave indeed made me very sad! your passion for the breed and all the projects, dispite all the troubles we encountered! People like you, gave it all sense again, trying to fight for what we think is right.

I am in a bad position right now. I do not agree with this bylaw change as it is. But If all leave, who can provide objections and open disscussion? As you said communication is the key, and it is not happening.
Missunderstandings over and over about the simplest things. Like in the other thread about the COE. ( Sadned me, that some thought, it was to circumvent the BOI)
Now I am geographically challenged, again. I want to play and maybe compete with my dogs in the Schutzhund world. I love beeing involved in th UScA since i think we did/ and are working on some good things (too, through your input Yvette)
But Do i find myself forced to make a decition between two organisations, just because geographially challenges and the feud between two organisations? I want to play dogs! But how can I play in my home area when there is no UScA club, but possibly  a different Organisation I can't play with, when staying in the UScA?

I hope communication gets opened and they come to a better solution. I do not want to be forced to make a decition just becuase of a Kindergarden like behavior! There must be a different solution for this!
And i hope we can find it!
Thank you Yvette for not letting us down and continue to contribute, I think it means a lot.  I do by speaking up we can make a difference. But we have to see what the future holds.