March 2003 Secretarys Report
This report details the day to day activities of the ASCA Board of Directors and includes issues brought before the ASCA Board and communications done by mail, fax, e-mail and/or phone.
March 1 - 31, 2003
99:10 TRACKING COMMITTEE - Judge Applicants
Motion by Gray.
The Tracking Committee passed these requirements last fall - unanimously. For whatever reason, they did not get sent to the Board by the Chair at time. Some members want this sent to us for approval, the current chair has reservations about sending it. They still have 1 and 10 to debate/agree to. One involves who is capable of judging an ASCA Tracking Test (i.e. AKC judges only, UKC, Schutzhund, etc.). I don't know what 10 is about.
Because Committee procedures say the motion comes to the board after approval in the committee, I am submitting it for Board approval.
I move to accept the following requirements as a partial list for ASCA Tracking Judge Applicants.
Requirements for ASCA Tracking Judge Applicants
2. Serve as a tracklayer on at least 5 tracks.
3. Send in 3 of your own completed maps of tracks that you have layed at a tracking event. These must each be signed by two judges, and dated.
4. Fill out an application form.
5. Send in 2 recommendations from experienced tracking people or tracking judges.
6. Must have been in the sport of tracking for 5 years.
7. Apprentice at a minimum of 1 ASCA TD and get the signature of both judges in attendance.
8. Send in a resume.
9. Open book test on the tracking regulations (50 questions)
Committee: Approved unanimously.
Board voting: Approve: DeChant, Aufox, Hollen, Gray & Walter. Disapprove: Hellmeister & Berryessa. Abstain: Warren & Davenport. Motion is approved.
99:10 TRACKING COMMITTEE - Ch. 3, Sec. 6
Motion by Gray
I move to accept the below motion made by the ASCA Tracking Committee.
Subject: [ASCA Tracking Committee] MOTION--START ARTICLE -TD
This is Ralph's motion, Audrey's 2nd with an effective date of July 1, 2003, and the location in the Tracking Regulations mentioned:
"That we have an article at the start flag for the Tracking Test / TD. This article shall be- CLOTH, (such as, but not limited to, a Bandana, a Sock, a Headband - etc) and close to the same size as the ending article, a Leather Glove or Wallet for the Tracking Test / TD.
If this motion is approved, it will be added to Chapter 3, Section 6 Start
After the first sentence - add, "An article shall be dropped at the start (first) flag. This article shall be Cloth, (such as, but not limited to, a Bandana, a Sock) and close to the same size as the ending article, a Leather Glove or Wallet."
Also-- In Chapter 2, Section 6 - Articles---
In the first paragraph, last line - 'same size as a (add) Leather Glove or Wallet.
Comment: Adding this Leather in this section, should cover the rest of the article sections as they all refer to the criteria of this Chapter 2, Section 6 - Articles.
Voting: Eight out of nine committee members voted "Yes": Audrey Wartman, Anne Hershey, Wally O'Brien, Celeste Kelly, Deb St. Jacques, Ralph Swingle, Jane Palmer, and Paula Diggins. Non-voting: Chris Reedy
Board voting: Approve: Hellmeister, DeChant, Aufox, Hollen, Warren, Gray, Davenport & Walter. Disapprove: Berryessa. Motion is approved.
97:14 DNA COMMITTEE - Profile Discrepancy Policy
Motion by Gray.
I move to accept the following motion from the DNA and Genetics Committee.
Motion by C.A, second George.
Motion: DNA Profile Discrepancy Policy
If a dog or litter has been profiled by ASCA's DNA program and the owner presents evidence that ASCA's result differs from the results provided by another registry's program or from a profile prepared by a lab contracted by the owner, ASCA shall:
--contact its lab to review the case
--if ASCA's lab feels it needs to do further testing, ASCA shall authorize it to do so
If additional dogs which are not already part of ASCA's program must be screened in the attempt to resolve the discrepancy, it is the owner's responsibility to submit samples and pay the appropriate fees. The ASCA Business Office shall advise the owner that blood samples are
Preferred in such a case to minimize potential for contamination, but the option of which type of sample to submit is the owner's.
If ASCA's lab finds its original result was correct, either through review or subsequent testing, the owner will be advised by the ASCA Business Office that he/she should contact a third lab and have the dogs involved profiled by them. The ASCA Business Office may, as a courtesy, provide the names of other qualified, independent labs to the owner. All arrangements with the
independent lab and expenses for testing are the responsibility of the owner. If the independent lab's results confirm the results of the lab or registry which differed from ASCA's, the owner may submit documentation to ASCA demonstrating that ASCA's lab is in error. Documentation should include clear evidence that the dogs tested by the third party lab were
the same dogs profiled by ASCA. At that time ASCA will:
--review the new findings with its lab to determine how the error was made --make any necessary corrections to the registry and post those corrections in one issue of the Aussie Times and on the website for a period of 3 months
--upon presentation of receipts by the owner from the independent lab and if applicable, a veterinarian, reimburse the owner for acceptable additional testing cost.
"Acceptable costs" are fees paid to the third party lab for materials or services connected with the testing and veterinary fees for drawing blood samples for the testing.
Rationale: While our current lab is highly qualified and consistently provides accurate results, errors are possible in any operation. If such errors occur, it is important to the integrity of ASCA's registry that those errors be addressed, both with the lab and in making any necessary
corrections to the registry.
Thus far such inconstancies between our program and those of other registries have not been due to error by our lab. However, we should acknowledge that such errors can happen and provide a mechanism for dealing with them. If the error is shown to be ours, we should take
responsibility for correcting it and for the expense of the additional outside testing.
This will promote increased confidence by members and others using our program that our primary goal is to maintain an accurate registry.
Yes: CA, Joan, Laura, Marilyn, Jamie, Kelli, Chris, George. Non-voting: Sally, Susan, Kim
Board voting: Approve: Hollen. Disapprove: Aufox, Warren, Hellmeister, DeChant, Davenport, Berryessa & Walter. Abstain: Gray. Motion fails.
98:02 MVA - Breeder Judge - Revised Motion
Motion by Warren.
I move to accept the following MVA recommendation to change the first and second sentence in 5a to define which Breeders judges are eligible to judge the conformation evaluation.
Comment: The only changes made to this rule are the first two sentences.
Replace Most Versatile Rules 5. A with the following
5. CONFORMATION EVALUATION (See Appendix A)
A. The MVA evaluator must be an ASCA breeder judge, a senior breeder judge is preferred but is not mandatory. An ASCA provisional breeder judge cannot be an MVA evaluator. The MVA Evaluator will be allowed to show prior or subsequent to the day of the MVA evaluation. Further, any dog(s) owned by the evaluator may compete in any and all venues, other than
MVA, on the same day that the evaluations are performed, provided the handler is someone other than that valuator. Members of the evaluator's immediate family may handle the dog. If the evaluator is judging other classes or venues in addition to the MVA evaluation at the cluster, the ASCA rules pertaining to that judging shall take precedence.
PURPOSE: Clarification of original intent in language.
Board voting: Approve: Unanimous. Motion is approved.
98:02 MVA - Ch. 1, Para. 5D.
Motion by Warren:
I move to accept the following recommended wording to the MVA Rules:
Motion by Monica Barger was seconded by Anne Shope.
Change: Chapter 1 paragraph 5D of the MVA rules to read: Only Australian Shepherds with full registration privileges will be allowed to compete in MVA. No LEP registered dogs will be allowed in MVA. This class is open to spayed and neutered animals as well as intact animals.
Comment: Only the first and second sentence is the change. The rest is the same. Though the committee does not necessarily agree that LEPs should be denied the right to compete in MVA the wording is to clarify the Board's position on this.
EXPLANATION FOR THE MOTION: This Motion was made to clarify the MVA rules and regulations insofar as which Australian Shepherds are eligible to compete. The present ASCA Board has reiterated to this Committee that Australian Shepherds with an LEP registration number are not allowed in MVA competition due to limited registration privileges which disallow participation in conformation. The present language in the MVA rules and regulations was vague in this regard and thus is being made clear in fairness to competitors and show entry clerks & secretaries.
YES VOTES: Monica Barger, Anne Shope, Beth MacLehose, Lori Acierto, Chris Davies, Terry Thomascik, Renee Reschenthaler, Susan Paulsen, Jan Wesen NO VOTES: Pete Dolan, Andrea Hoffmann ABSTENTIONS: Sandy Case NON VOTING: None
Board voting: Approve: Aufox, Davenport, Hellmeister, Hollen, Warren, Berryessa, DeChant & Walter. Abstain: Gray. Motion is approved.
Subject: Re: ASCA Attorney File
Motion by Aufox, seconded by Warren.
I move that ASCA retain Chuck Carnese as its Attorney for the amount of $12,000.00 for the year of 2003.
Board voting: Approve: Aufox, Davenport, Hellmeister, Hollen, Warren, Gray, DeChant &
Walter. Abstain: Berryessa. Motion is approved.
98:11 OBEDIENCE RULES - Tracking Number
Motion by Hellmeister.
I move to accept the following recommendation of the Obedience committee:
The Obedience Committee recommends to the Board of Directors the following changes to the Obedience Rules, effective June 1, 2003
Motion by Link, second Case
Chapter 1, Section 1, Subsection 1.10, ADD to the last sentence "and have a ASCA tracking number" making the last sentence read "Other breeds entered in obedience trials sanctioned by ASCA Affiliate Clubs must abide by ASCA Rules and Regulations and have an ASCA tracking number."
Chapter 1, Section 7 - Registered Dogs Only: DELETE THIS SECTION AND REPLACE with: "As used in these Regulations, the word "dog" refers to either sex. All Australian Shepherds must have an individual registration or LEP number from ASCA to be eligible for ASCA's year end Merit and Finals programs. All dogs not so registered must have a tracking number issued by ASCA to compete in any class at ASCA sanctioned Obedience Trials."
Chapter 1, Section 8 - Unregistered Dogs: DELETE THIS SECTION. REPLACE WITH: "All dogs six (6) months and older must have an individual ASCA registration or LEP number or an ASCA tracking number to compete in ASCA sanctioned Obedience Trials. A dog will be allowed to be shown at the trial where the handler applies for an ASCA tracking number. The handler will be issued a receipt by the Registration table valid for sixty (60) days to allow the Business Office time to issue the tracking number. Photo copies or originals of registration or tracking number papers must be presented to the Registration Table upon request when entering ASCA sanctioned Obedience Trials.
Chapter 1, Section 9 - Dogs that May Not Compete: ADD the following sentence at the beginning of this section: "No dog without an ASCA individual registration or LEP number or ASCA tracking number may compete in any ASCA Obedience Trial."
Comments: The Obedience Committee has worked very hard to put our Trials on par with any other registry. No other registry allows obedience entrant to compete without being subject to ALL of their rules. The above changes will prevent using our Trials as practice rings. It will make sure that our Trials stand alone on their own merits.
Approved: Link, Case, White, Burlingame, Waller, Cox, Munson, Swatko, Bohren, Willems, not voting Mann
Board voting: Approve: Aufox, Hellmeister, Hollen, Warren, Gray, DeChant, Walter. Disapprove: Berryessa & Davenport. Motion is approved.
98:11 OBEDIENCE RULES - Nationals (Bitches in season)
Motion by Hellmeister.
I move to accept the following recommendation of the Obedience Committee:
Motion by Link, second White
The Obedience Committee recommends the following addition to the Obedience Rules, effective June 1, 2003:
Chapter 1, Section 13 Disturbances. Add to this section the following:
"Bitches in season may compete only at the Nationals Obedience Trial and Obedience Finals. They are to compete last after all other judging is finished with the exception of run-offs each day, in a ring not to be used again for Obedience. This includes sits and downs which shall be held separately. A bitch in season could be competing back to back in both rings in Open and Utility. Bitches in season must be crated (not placed in an exercise pen) at least 50' away from the obedience rings prior to and during the competition, except while competing.
Comments: This addition is to bring the Obedience rules in line with Agility and Herding which allow bitches in season to compete at the Nationals.
Approved Link, White, Waller, Willems, Swatko, Cox, Munson Burlingame, Bohren, Cox, not voting Mann
Board voting: Approve: Hellmeister, Aufox, Hollen, Warren, Gray, DeChant & Davenport.
Disapprove: Berryessa & Walter. Motion is approved.
93:17 STOCK DOG RULES - CH. 11, Sec. 9 - Finals - Reruns
Motion by Warren:
I move to accept the following SDC recommendation:
MOTION BY: Sharon Simmons SECOND BY: Maxine Schvaneveldt
MOTION: CH 11, SEC. 9 - PROCEDURES FOR FINALS JUDGES
Add #7, to read as follows:
7. 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.
APPROVE: Schvaneveldt, Mahoney, Myrick, Robinson, Simmons, Baker, Kelly, Vest, Davies, Holmes, Moe DISAPPROVE: Harris ABSTAIN: none NON-VOTING: Walker
COMMENTS:
1. I can see where it would be practical for the judges to confer in a situation when the contestant asks for the rerun. But what is the process for giving a rerun to a contestant when one of the judges thinks it should be stopped and a rerun given when the judges are sitting apart from each other? How does the judge get the word to the other judges while still
judging the run? If he stops the run to confer with the other judges, that will change the run anyway. What is the difference in calling time on a run and calling for a rerun? What happened to respecting EACH judges right to call what he sees? Any judge can call a contestant out, but it takes a forum for a rerun?
This is not consistent.
2. We need this rule in place so everyone understands how a rerun will be handled.
3. This will alleviate any question on the award of reruns, and when the rerun will occur
4. After the run is over if one of the judges feels a rerun is deserved than the consulting can take place and a decision can be made. This procedure could be discussed in the judges meeting prior to the beginning of the finals runs.
Board voting: Approve: Unanimous. Motion is approved.
80:33 NATIONALS PROCEDURE - Finals Large Animal Vet
Motion by Warren.
I move to accept the following SDC recommendation:
MOTION: Sharon Simmons SECOND BY: Sue Kelly and Bob Myrick
MOTION: To add to the National Specialty Guidelines the following:
Add to CH. 12.6 the letter a. that reads as follows:
a. The Host Club must have a Small and Large Animal Veterinarian on call and the phone numbers available at all times during the Nationals and Finals events.
APPROVE: Schvaneveldt, Mahoney, Myrick, Robinson, Simmons, Baker, Kelly, Vest, Davies, Holmes, Harris, Walker, Moe DISAPPROVE: none ABSTAIN: none NON-VOTING: none
COMMENTS: In the event of emergencies the Host Club needs to have these veterinarians available and numbers handy to call and get help to the animals as soon as possible.
Board voting: Approve: Unanimous. Motion is approved.
Approved:
Craig Bohren as a Member of the Tracking Committee
Melissa Borde as a Member of the Junior Committee
ASCA BUSINESS OFFICE MONTHLY REPORT MARCH 2003
REGISTRY MEMBERSHIP SHOW/STOCK
Ind. Registrations 565 New-Single 104 Sanc. Received 62
Non Breeding 43 New - Dual 18 Sanc. Processed 54
Litters 266 New-Foreign 1 Sanc. Pending 8
Transfer 21 New-Canadian 1 Results Received 43
Lease 10 Renew-Single 349 Results Processed 39
LEP 14 Renew-Dual 80 Results Pending 4
Duplicates 13 Renew-Foreign 16 S&T Subscriptions 6
Hardships 5 Renew-Canadian 15 Certificates 754
Pedigrees 18 Junior Times 15
New Kennels 6 Affil. New 0
Renew Kennels 11 Affil Renew 6
New Service 467
Judges Apps 4 Lifetime 2
E-Mail Requests 2739
DNA Kits Mailed 22
DNA Tests Done 77
Shows Held:
# of Con/Obed 23
# of Stock 5
# of Ranch 1
# of Agility 9
# of Tracking 0