USA BOI findings - Page 10

Isn't the event in question a USA event? WDA rules (if you can find them) don't apply.

VERY Good point Luarel, Example http://gsdca-wda.org/results/05TRIALRESULTSaguadulce-aug11.htm 1 handler handled 11 dogs Should be corrected to 1 handler handled 11 entries with 6 dogs This is the problem with the rules. They need to be very specific so it leaves no room for personal interpretation. For example the rule should state that 1 handler may only have up to 3 entries per trial. Because the way it is written now it will allow 1 handler to enter 3 dogs per trial even if each dog is entered for and AD, BH, and SchH1. that's 9 entries/3 dogs. Confused yet. Uwe

I don't see a problem with 9 entries and 3 dogs. Anyone should be able to do BH and SchH1 on the same weekend if the dog is ready. And AD is something you can do any time if the dog is old enough. What is the problem with this if the rules allow it? So far as I know, the rules simply say that the BH and SchH1 cannot be done on the same day. Theoretically, a dog could do BH and AD on Friday, SchH 1 on Saturday and get the KKl and V rating on Sunday. And be sure this has happened many times.

THE AD DOES NOT COUNT IN A TRIAL. IT is not a title. It is a performance test and part of the requirements for a breed survey and that is all. Don't make it more complicated than it is. And yes, some people have, in the past, even in USA sponsored events, held a trial with another club and on one day of the weekend with one club sponsored trial done the BH. And then on the next day, with a different club as the sponsor, done the SchH1 (assuming the BH was passed the day before). According to the rules this is not legal and there is a minimum waiting period before one can trial for the next title. But the AD is not part of a trial. Read the rules. We give a Friday evening AD, a Saturday trial and a Sunday show and breed survey. Rarely we have had someone want to do both the AD and the trial, and it is almost always a silly thing to do because the dog is so tired. However, if one did it, it does not count as two dogs being handled by one handler at the trial because the trial portion is only that where the BH and Schutzhund titles are being earned (or the OB, or TR).

On page 4 of the revised USA rules (effective Jan 2004), it explains the waiting periods, several of which have been changed to remove the 2 week wait period. There is no waiting period between the B and the SchH1 (even under the prior rules), but they cannot be done on the same day. Saturday - Sunday is permissable.

LaPorte, Thanks, I believe you are correct about the USA waiting periods having been removed and the fact that BH and SchH may not be done on the same day.

It appears the EB has decided, how many different issues are there with this single event(s) E-Ballot #25-06 (Appeal of New England Regional Director Decision) Motion by John Oliver, seconded by Uwe Doose, to overturn the decision by the regional director to suspend O.G Wesconn Schutzhund Club for one year. I further move that O.G Wesconn be promptly reinstated as a full-member USA club. Background: The substantiation for my motion has been presented over and over again. The WDA paperwork for the trial in question shows that a mistake was made on the first page of the trial scoresheets, as evidenced in the documents submitted to us, and corrected on the second page, which is where the scores were placed. O.G. Wesconn Schutzhund Club and Wesconn Schaeferhunde Verein have two different checking accounts at two different banks, which shows evidence of two different clubs. Both clubs have a history of hosting many events under their respective names and parent organizations. Furthermore, it is evident that the paperwork for this trial was submitted to the WDA office and that there is not a WDA club named O.G. Wesconn Schutzhund Club, or even just O.G. Wesconn. Which further shows that the trial was held under the WDA club, Wesconn Schaeferhunde Verein, and had nothing to do with the USA club, O.G. Wesconn Schutzhund Club. The short of the matter is a mistake was made by John Henkel (the trial secretary in question) by not writing out the entire name Wesconn Schaeferhunde Verein on one out of two forms, and a further mistake was made by the SV as evidenced by the confusion of someone in their office at the SV. The regional director acted without thoroughly checking the facts as to whether or not these are two different clubs. This is certainly not grounds to suspend O.G. Wesconn under the 2004 rule which we passed. Vote: Yes–9, No–11, ABS–1. Motion failed 10/31/06.

NOW WHAT!

I'm wondering why there is still discussion on the "how many dogs per handler" issue - when it is clear that 2 trials were held the same weekend which is a *clear* violation of the rules. It would seem to me that if there is a lack of clarity regarding the first issue (too many dogs handled by one person) there isn't one related to the the second matter - or did I miss something?

Cledford, It is not a violation of rules to have two separate trials, on two different days. The issue regarding the club mentioned above was about other related issues. Again, neither is an AD considered part of the handler issue rule where one handler can only TRIAL 3 dogs (except in national events where the limit is two). I suspect this will be the end of it because at least twice there has been a motion to change the suspension of the club and it has failed both times. Unfortunately, many people are not satisfied that something sinister really happened here, and many people are not satisfied that a real violation did, in fact, happen. Most of us will not know, and even if we do, so what. It is this EB of USA that made the decision. USA likes to make a lot of rules, many of which are idiotic and only hurt the organization in the end.