The following dogs 'may' jump 4" lower than indicated for their wither height if their breed is listed below:   Am. Staffordshire Terrier (16"), Australian Terrier (12"), Basset Hound (8"), Bulldog (12"), Bull Terrier (12"), Cairn Terrier (8"), Cardigan & Pembroke Welsh Corgi (8"), Clumber Spaniel (12"), Dachshund (8"), French Bulldog (8"), Miniature Bull Terrier (8"), Petite Basset Griffon Vendeen (12"), Pug (8"), Scottish Terrier (8"), Shar-Pei (16"), Staffordshire Bull Terrier (12"), West Highland White Terrier (8").

Note: The numbers in parentheses indicate the minimum Standard Division jump height these breeds may jump. If a dog measures 11 or under, he is eligible to jump 8. If this dog is one of the breeds listed on the Jump Height Exemption List, he must jump 8, not 4 in the Standard Division. If this same dog is a Veteran, handled by a Veteran, Junior Handler or Disabled Handler, he may jump 4 in the Veterans or Junior Handler Divisions.

Please note that all large dogs (over 20) formerly listed on the Jump Height Exemption List are now eligible to compete in the 20+ height. These dogs will NOT receive an additional reduction in their jump heights. For example: a German Shepherd Dog measuring 21 at the withers will now be eligible to jump in the 20+ height in the Standard Division. He will NOT receive a jump height exemption to jump 16. He may jump 16 only if he is a veteran, or is handled by a veteran, junior handler or disabled handler.

A handler may enter a dog in Standard Division classes at a jump height higher than the minimum height the dog is required to jump. A dog jumping at a higher jump height will be scored and have the course time of the jump height class in which the dog participates.

A handler may not enter a dog in the Veteran or Junior Handler Division at a jump height higher than the lowest height the dog is eligible for.  However, a veteran handler, a disabled handler, junior handler or a handler of a veteran dog who wishes a dog to jump at a higher height than the dog is eligible for in the Veteran or Junior Handler division may choose to enter the dog in the Standard Division at the higher jump height, with all guidelines and course times of the Standard Division applying.

 Committee Comments:  After reviewing the jump height poll results from the Aussie Times and speaking with other ASCA members nation wide, the committee felt the membership overwhelming expressed their preference to change the ASCA wither heights requirements in accordance with Option #3 on the January-February 2003 Aussie Times Agility Handlers Poll.

Approved: Pam Kaye, Sue Graham, Marj Vincent, Annelise Allan, Judy Boone, Allison Bryant, Jean Janotta, Lynn Fickett and Shelly Malan

Board voting: Approve:  Unanimous. Motion is approved.

00:19 BUDGETS - AD BUDGET 
Motion by Warren Second by Gray:
I move to accept the following Advertisement Budget:
 
AS Annual - 1 time - color  full page   $1000.00
Stock Dogs - 6 times - black/white 1/2 page   $540.00
Puppies USA - 1 time - color 1/4 page            $575.00
Dogs USA - 1 time - color 1/4 page             $575.00
Dog World / Sept issue - 1 time - color 1/2 page     $638.00
Dog Fancy - 8 times - black/white 1/4 page          $2896.00

TOTAL = $6223.50
Comments:
Plus bonus from Fancy Publications from last year's ads approximately $200.00 (they owe us 2 months free) The total budget will come in around $6000.00.
Dog Fancy has a much bigger circulation then Dog World for the same rates.
The September, Dog World, issue is important because it is focusing on Aussies. Nancy is still trying to get them to use info from our Nationals.
Dog Fancy; circulation 290,000
Dog World; circulation 90,000

Fancy Publications (Dog World, Dog Fancy, Puppies USA, & Dogs USA; we currently advertise in them) is publishing a book of dog breeds and they want information and photos of Aussies. ASCA will get credit for the information and be listed as a source. Lola forwarded the questionnaire to me but I do not feel I am qualified to fill it out. I think an ASCA person needs to fill it out and select the photos. ASCA will receive a copy of the book after it is published as a thank you. They need the information and pictures by Feb. 15, 2003. I think this is excellent "P.R" opportunity for ASCA. Linda Gray has taken care of answering the questions.

Linda Gray will also take care of the AS Annual advertisements.  I had Vicki and Dirk Ryke make an ad for Puppies USA and will ask them to take care of some of the others too.  An article was submitted to the Stockdog Magazine along with Finals pictures.

We are trying to target Aussies owners who would like to play with their Aussies and have no clue there is an ASCA. In order to beef up some of our ads in the publications we wanted to target so they will get noticed we have dropped publications that we felt the readers already know about ASCA. We also get links to our web site from some of these publications.  This is an increase in our advertisement budget from last year of $1000. Hopefully this will be offset by bringing in more ASCA participation from those who will be just learning about us. KW

Board voting: Approve:  Unanimous. Motion is approved.

93:17 STOCK DOG RULES - Ch. 11, Sec. 9. 
Motion by Warren
I move to accept the following SDC recommendation:

MOTION BY:  Sharon Simmons  SECOND BY:  Joan Holmes

Change CH 11 Sec. 9 to read as follows:
SECTION 9 - PROCEDURES FOR FINALS COURSE DIRECTOR AND FINALS JUDGES
1.  The Course Director will have two Assistants to assist during the Finals; one Assistant will be a member of the ASCA Board of Directors, the second Assistant will come from the Stockdog Committee.  The purpose of the two Assistants will be to assist the Course Director with any decisions  concerning changes, interpretations of the rules, questions or complaints
 during the Finals, therefore the Assistants must be well versed in the Stockdog Rules. The Assistant Course Directors will also be charged with making decisions independently should the Course Director be unavailable.

 a. The Course Director and the two Assistant's to the Course Director will meet alone with Judges at the Pre-Finals Meeting and will assign a "Senior Judge" and any judging assignments, such as calling attempts, that may be necessary. The Course Director and the Assistants will review Finals and trial rules with all Judges - specifically attempts, run away lines, daylighting, and calling time.

 b.  The Course Director and the two Assistants must be available at all times during the trial to field questions or complaints.

 c. The Course Director, Assistant Course Director and all Judges must be present at the Handlers
 meeting to address the contestants.

 d. HANDLER'S MEETING:  At the handler's meeting the Senior Judge and/or the CD will address the following:
         1. judge placements
         2. procedure # 7 below should be read (finals runs should be exemplary to protect our
             Stockdog program
         3. questions from contestants will be fielded by all Judges

2. Judges should be strategically seated in order to get the best vantage of the entire arena.  This includes take pen, handler's lines, and obstacles. Judges must be placed apart from spectators and each other (it will be the host clubs responsibility to see that appropriate seating is made available by roping off designated "Judges areas" and placing table/chairs in appropriate places surrounding the working arena).

 3. Judges will score and total score sheets separately from each other the idea is to have four (4) "individual scores".

 4. After scoring and totaling score sheet for each run Judges will hand score sheet to designated person who will deliver it to appropriate individuals for calculation and posting of scores.  This will take place without consultation between any of the other Finals Judges.

 5. No Judge will consult with or visit with spectators or contestants during Final runs.  If Judges are approached they will direct the person or persons to the CD who is responsible for handling comments, questions, or complaints during the trial.

 6. Any of the four Judges may call the handler's lines and attempts for any of the obstacles.

 7. Time and/or warning can and will be called by any of the four Judges for violations of ASCA Stockdog Rules, lack of progress, gripping, or abuse of stock.  Judges will respect each other's calls.

 8. RERUNS:    A majority of the Finals Judges must agree if a Rerun is to be awarded to a contestant.  In the case of a tie, the "Senior Judge" will make the final call.  If a decision is made to award a Rerun to a contestant, it will be run at the end of the class.

 Comments:  First, I feel that the heading better describes what is enclosed in this section of the rules, I have also organized what is included into the section slightly different than the old version.  Second, the Course Director needs more "Official" help during the Finals and this rewrite will allow this now to be official and who shall be appointed to assist the Course Director.

APPROVE: Schvaneveldt, Mahoney, Robinson, Simmons,  Kelly, Vest, Holmes, Moe  DISAPPROVE: Walker, Myrick, Baker, Harris, Davies  ABSTAIN:  none  NON-VOTING:  none

Board voting:  Approve:  None. Disapprove:  Unanimous. Motion is disapproved.  Kathy Warren will report to Stock Dog Committee with reasons.

99:10 TRACKING COMMITTEE - Section 11 - 1st line 

Motion by Gray.

I move to accept the following recommendation from the tracking committee. Linda

Celeste Kelly offered the Motion; Audrey Wartman seconded it.

The ASCA Tracking Committee now has voted unanimously to recommend this wording change to the ASCA Tracking Regulations, Chapter 1, Section 11 ("Training on the Grounds"), 1st line.  Please present this recommendation to the ASCA BOD:

   The Section in question currently is worded:

        "There shall be no drilling nor intensive or abusive training of dogs on the grounds or premises at a Sanctioned Tracking Test/TD or TDX."

   The recommended wording change is to insert the phrase "practice tracks," so that the amended sentence would be worded:

         "There shall be no practice tracks nor intensive or abusive training of dogs on the grounds or premises at a Sanctioned Tracking Test/TD or TDX."

  The purpose of this wording change is to adjust the rule to become relevant specifically to the sport of Tracking.  

There were "Yes" votes from Celeste Kelly, Jane Palmer, Anne Hershey, Ralph Swingle, Deborah St. Jacques, Wally O'Brien, Paula Diggins, and Audrey Wartman.

Board voting:  Approve:  Unanimous. Motion is approved.

99:10 TRACKING COMMITTEE -Chap. 1 Section 7 - 1^st sentence

Motion by Gray.

I move to accept the following from the Tracking Committee:

The motion was offered by Celeste Kelly and seconded by Ralph Swingle.

 We now have a unanimous vote on a recommended wording change for ASCA Tracking Regulations, Chapter 1, Section 7, first sentence.  
Please submit the Tracking Committee's recommendation to the ASCA BOD.

The present wording is:

      "No dog belonging wholly or in part to a judge or to any member of  such a person's immediate family...."

  The ASCA Tracking Committee recommends that the word "officiating" be inserted, so that the regulation will be worded:

      "No dog belonging wholly or in part to an officiating judge or to any member of such a person's immediate family...."

   The proposed wording clarifies the intent of this rule: to exclude from testing a dog belonging to a judge officiating at the Tracking Test in question, but not to exclude dogs belonging to any and all judges.  

 All eight members of the Tracking Committee voted, "Yes:"  Celeste Kelly, Ralph Swingle, Jane Palmer, Anne Hershey, Deb St. Jacques, Audrey Wartman, Wally O'Brien, and Paul Diggins.  This is the original motion offered by Celeste Kelly:

Board voting:  Approve:  Unanimous. Motion is approved.

99:10 TRACKING COMMITTEE - Chapter l, Section 10 (Boundaries of show grounds)

Motion by Gray.

I move to accept the following from the Tracking Committee:

This recommendation was moved by Celeste Kelly and seconded by Audrey Wartman.  

This wording change for the ASCA Tracking Regulations, Chapter 1, Section 10,  now has been unanimously approved by the ASCA Tracking Committee.  Please send this recommendation to the ASCA BOD:

  The regulation presently is worded:

"The limits are the boundaries of the grounds.  Premises constitutes a larger area, its' boundaries not well defined.  It consists of the land, buildings and all parking areas adjacent to and a continuation of the show grounds where a Tracking Test/TD or TDX test are held...."

  The committee recommends that the words, "tracking grounds," be substituted for "show grounds," and that the words "Tracking Test" be substituted for "Tracking Test/TD or TDX test," so that the regulation would be worded as follows:

"The limits are the boundaries of the tracking grounds.  Premises constitutes a larger area, its' boundaries not well defined.  It consists of the land, buildings, and parking areas adjacent to and a continuation of the tracking grounds where the Tracking Test is being held.

   The purpose of this recommended wording change is to clarify that the Tracking Test grounds are the  grounds specifically referred to in the regulation.  

   All 8 committee members voted in favor: Celeste Kelly, Audrey Wartman, Ralph Swingle, Jane Palmer, Anne Hershey, Wally O'Brien, Deb St. Jacques, and Paul Diggins.  

Board voting: Approve:  Unanimous. Motion is approved.

99:10  TRACKING COMMITTEE - Section 18 -  3rd line
Motion by Gray ASCA Tracking Motion   Section 18   3rd line
I move the following recommendation from the Tracking Committee be approved.

Moved by Celeste Kelly and seconded by Audrey Wartman

The following correction to ASCA Tracking Rules and Regulations, Chapter 1, Section 18, (entitled, "Drawing for Entries and Alternates List), first paragraph, third line, has been recommended unanimously by the members of the ASCA Tracking Committee:

The line presently is worded:

       "... determine with dogs will participate in the test."

The correction recommended is to replace "with" by the word, "which," so that the amended line would be worded:

      "...determine which dogs will participate in the test."

The purpose of the recommended word replacement is to correct a typo, which makes nonsense of the sentence.

Votes in favor were offered by Celeste Kelly, Audrey Wartman, Jane Palmer, Ralph Swingle, Deborah St. Jacques, Wally O'Brien, Anne Hershey, and Paula Diggins.

Board voting: Approve:  Aufox, Gray, DeChant, Warren, Berryessa, Davenport, and Walter & Hollen.
Disapprove:  Hellmeister. Motion is approved.

99:10  TRACKING COMMITTEE - Chapter 1, section 2, 2^nd Paragraph (Tracking and Tracking Dog X Test)
Motion by Gray.
I move to approve the following recommendation from the Tracking Committee.
 
Moved by Celeste Kelly and seconded by Audrey Wartman
The ASCA Tracking Committee has voted unanimously to recommend the substitution of this  wording in ASCA Tracking Rules and Regulations, Chapter 1, Section 2 ("Tracking and Tracking Dog Excellent Tests"), paragraph 2, first sentence:

At present, the sentence is worded:

         "If a Tracking test is to be held within seven (7) days following an Affiliate Club's show..."

The committee recommends that the phrase, "before or after," be substituted for "following" in this sentence.

The amended sentence would be worded:

"If a Tracking Test is to be held within seven (7) days before or after an Affiliate Club's show..."

The purpose of this recommended wording change is to adjust the regulation to reflect what actually occurs when Tracking Tests are planned in conjunction with affiliate club shows or National Specialty Shows.  Tracking Tests sometimes are held on the weekend preceding the official opening date of the show.

These ASCA Tracking Committee members voted, "Yes:"   Celeste Kelly, Audrey Wartman, Anne Hershey, Wally O'Brien, Deborah St. Jacques, Ralph Swingle Paula Diggins, and Jane Palmer.

Board voting:  Approve:  Aufox, Gray, Hollen, DeChant, Berryessa, Warren, and Walter & Hellmeister.  Non-Voting:  Davenport. Motion is approved.

 97:15  COMMITTEE PROCEDURES - Voting Procedures
Motion by Gray, seconded by Walter.
I move to add the following under the current VOTING PROCEDURE section
of the Committee Procedures with the following:

   VOTING PROCEDURE for E-MAIL COMMITTEES (on a list)

 1.    Any committee member may raise issues for discussion.  All issues received via e-mail from the General Membership, Judges, Non-members, Directors or Committee members must be e-mailed to the Chairperson who will:

 a.    Immediately distribute issue(s) to the committee list members (which includes the Board Liaison).

 b.    Set and send a one week deadline from the post date the committee chair received the e-mail to the committee list for receipt of comments back from committee list members.

 c.    At the deadline, the Chair sets a 3 day deadline from the e-mail date asking for a motion with a second from committee list.  If a motion and second is not received, the issue is dead.

 d.  If a motion and second is received, the chair shall set a one week deadline from the post date of the e-mail containing the motion and second and e-mail to the committee list for further discussion.

 e.    At the end of the one week discussion period, the Chair will call for a vote and set a 3 day deadline for voting.

 f.    At the end of the 3 day voting period the Chair will tabulate the votes and send the results to the committee list. The Chair will, if needed, explain in writing, the committees recommendation to the Board.

 g. The Board Liaison will then forward the recommendation of the committee to the Executive Secretary for distribution to the Board for discussion, comment, questions and voting.
      1.  If the board has comments, they must be made before the call for  the vote.  Comments/questions will be sent back to the committee by the Liaison for their answers, input or action and returned to the Board via the Liaison during the Board's comment period.
      2.  Comments from the Board made after the call for the vote will not be entertained as per Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised.

 h.  Material to be included with the recommendation include:
     1.   A motion with a second;
     2.   Results of the vote.
     3.   If asked, the committee will forward all comments or comments of those who disapproved to the Board Liaison for distribution to the Board. Only comments will be sent, no names are necessary.

  i.    Conditions affecting voting:
       1.    No vote will be taken if the motion does not have a second.
       2.    No votes will be counted after the deadline is reached.
       3.    List members can vote once the motion and second are sent by the Chair to the floor for discussion.
       4.    When all committee list members have voted before the vote deadline, the chair can forward all passed recommendations to the Liaison for Board consideration.
       5.    A simple majority of votes received is necessary to pass a motion.

 j.    When publishing voting results for the committee and the Board, members names and how they voted must be listed. When publishing votes in the Aussie Times, only the final count will be published.

 k.  Whether an issue is dead or a recommendation from the committee is approved by the Board, the committee will compose an e-mail thanking whoever sent it in for their concern.  Board Liaison will approve it before it is sent.
 2.  If committees feel the above schedule is too rigid, they may choose to set up their own e-mail voting procedures.

Board voting:  Approve:  Gray & Warren.  Disapprove:  Aufox, Berryessa, Davenport, Hollen, DeChant, Walter & Hellmeister.  Motion is disapproved.

99:10  TRACKING COMMITTEE -  4 by 9 printing of the Tracking Rules and Regs.
Motion by Gray.
I move to approve the below recommendation from the Tracking Committee.

Celeste Kelly offered the original motion.  It was seconded by Ralph Swingle.

The ASCA Tracking Committee recommends unanimously that the business office print the Tracking Rules and Regulations in the 4x9 format in 12 point Helvetica print, starting with the next printing.

There was no disagreement among committee members that this "jacket pocket" size and shape is desirable for Tracking Judges to carry with them in the tracking fields.  The original concern that there would be additional cost to this special printing was satisfied when committee member Celeste Kelly contacted the ASCA Business Office and was assured that there would be no additional cost or other problem associated with printing the regulations in this size and shape.

These committee members voted "Yes:"   Celeste Kelly, Ralph Swingle, Audrey Wartman, Jane Palmer, Wally O'Brien, Deborah St. Jacques, Anne Hershey, and Paula Diggins.

Notes:           "having to pull out those big flopping sheets in the rain does not work. In the rain, they are the only paper I'm carrying, everything else is Mylar.   I think the 4 by 9 should just be the standard, because the committee, tracklayers, whoever wants to carry them in the field can easily stuff them in a pocket and keep them dry;  as Jane said also, it makes it easy to fit into your glove box: "  Celeste

          "have judged many tracking test in the rain and snow--the BIG plastic bags with the 8 1/2 x 11 - still are a big bag to carry around. I have found that the 4 X 9 still will fit into a 'dry' pocket inside a rain coat or what-ever and is still much more mobile. The last  4 x 9 sized ASCA Tracking R & Rs  that I have is dated June,  1996 - so ---and I have a Stockdog and Obedience books from the same dates. So-- by our recommendations - we get the 4 x 9 size printed again. "  Ralph

Lola in the office says the price is the same for both 8x11 and 4x9.  She also said that it was okay to have the tracking rules and regs one size, and the other regs a different size.  March 31, 03

Board voting:  Approve:  DeChant. Disapprove:  Aufox, Hollen, Berryessa, Davenport, Warren, and Walter & Hellmeister. Abstain:  Gray. Motion is disapproved.

 99:10  TRACKING COMMITTEE - Chapter 1, section 18, 7th paragraph
Motion by Gray.
I move to approve the following recommendation from the Tracking Committee.

Moved by Celeste Kelly, seconded by Audrey Wartman

The following recommendation for wording change in the ASCA Tracking Rules and  Regulations, Chapter 1, section 18, 7th paragraph, fourth sentence, has been voted upon unanimously by the ASCA Tracking Committee:

The sentence  in question presently is worded:

 "Those who opt to decline shall have their entry fees (and certification ) returned."

The agreed-upon wording change is to add the language:  "after the test has been completed, at the discretion of the Test Secretary within 7 days of the test,"  at the end of the sentence.

The revised sentence would be worded:

"Those who opt to decline shall have their entry fees (and certification) returned after the test has been completed, at the discretion of the Test Secretary within 7 days of the test."

The purpose of this recommendation is to bring the ASCA regulations into conformity with commonly accepted procedure for Tracking Test Secretaries, which is to  postpone the burden of extra paper work for these very busy secretaries until after the work of the actual Test has subsided.

"Yes," votes from Celeste Kelly, Audrey Wartman, Ralph Swingle, Wally O'Brien, Deborah St. Jacques, Paula Diggins, Jane Palmer, and Anne Hershey.

Board voting: Approve:  Aufox, Gray, DeChant, and Warren & Hollen. Disapprove:  Berryessa, Walter & Hellmeister. Non-Voting:  Davenport. Motion is approved.

 97:14  DNA COMMITTEE - Popular Dams
Motion by Gray.
I move to approve the following policy from the DNA Committee.

Motion by Joan, second by Laura

I move ASCA initiate a DNA policy for the profiling of ASCA registered DAMS, who have whelped 2 or more litters in their lifetime.  All DAMS who have whelped 2 or more litters must be profiled by ASCA's designated testing lab and certified either DNA-CP or DNA-VP.  This profiling must be completed and recorded with the ASCA Business Office prior to the issuance of litter registration papers for their 3rd [or subsequent] litter.

This policy to become effective January 1, 2004

Comments:  Dams who have been bred more than two times signify a more serious breeder, and consequently these dams can have a significant impact on the registry.  Requiring DNA status on them will give some measure of security against breeding errors and help to ensure the integrity of the registry.

Votes for yes: Chris, Laura, C.A. , Kelli, Marilyn, Joan, Jaime and George. Non-voting: Kim, Sally, Susan

Board voting: Approve:  Aufox, Gray, DeChant, Berryessa, Warren, and Walter & Hellmeister.
Disapprove:  Hollen. Non-Voting:  Davenport. Motion is approved.

Approved:

Nancy Garcia as a Member of the Tracking Committee