Past Motions

Motions that have been voted on by the Board of Directors in the past month will be posted to this page by approximately the last day of each month. Feedback on any motion should be directed to [email protected] for distribution to the Board..
 
As rule changes are approved, the Executive Secretary will make those changes to the rulebooks posted on the website, with the effective date noted, in order for the membership to see what changes will be in effect in the upcoming competitive season.
 
Please refer to past Secretary’s Reports for information on motions older than 30 days.

Members,

The following motion has been voted on this month by the ASCA Board. Results are below.

RA.18.05 Change to Rally Rules 1.5.4 Additional C Class Entry

Approve: Boone

Oppose: Busquets, Creelman, Gann, Gray, King, Roberts, Silveira, Vest

Abstain: 0

Non-Voting: 0

Motion fails.

Comment from Busquets: This is not the intended purpose of the class. Also, it adds to the rule an element that would favor some people and not others, and it could potentially add work to the people taking entries and the trial secretary.

Comment from Creelman: I think that there is too much imbalance with rule variables like this. It does not form a level playing field to all.

Comment from Gann: I don’t believe this motion affords all members and affiliates the same opportunity to compete in the new C class.

Comment from Silveira: I would like the Committee to rework this subject in an effort to develop an answer to the problem that will not be problematic for ASCA as a whole.  I believe allowing a few Members a greater opportunity to earn titles that all Members do not have access to can and will lead to issues detrimental to the Program.

Comment from Vest: The dissenting comments convinced me that this motion would not serve the entire Membership equally.

 

Motion by Busquets.

I move to approve this motion from the Rally Committee.

 

Committee Recommendation:

Motion RC 18.21 Additional C Class entry at same trial with initial entry

Motion by Heidi Iverson

Second by Karen Souza

I move to allow a dog to be entered in a C class at the same trial in which it is entered in another class.

 

Clubs have asked that dogs be allowed to enter an additional C class when entered in another class. This could show potential benefits to both clubs and some exhibitors.  Trials which do not fill may see additional entries resulting in higher revenue. Exhibitors could potentially earn titles quicker. Clubs whose trials typically fill during the pre-entry period may opt to not allow the additional C class entries to avoid having exhibitors locked out of their A or B entries or single C entry. The handlers at these trials will see no benefit.

 

Current Wording:

No current wording.

 

Proposed Wording:

Rule 1.5.4 Entry of C Class in Addition to Another Class

  1. Allowing additional C class entries shall be the option of each individual club.
  2. Notification of the option of the additional C class entry must be clearly stated in the premium, including the process for submitting the additional entry and the wait list or day of show process the club has selected.
  3. The maximum number of runs must be listed in the premium and indicated on the sanctioning form.
  4. All additional C class entries shall be handled as day of show entries and accepted only if the trial does not fill with A & B class entries and single C class entries at the end of the pre-entry or day of show entry period.
  5. To qualify for an additional C class entry, the dog must have earned the next higher class title. Example – to enter Novice C, the dog must have already earned the Advanced title. To enter Advanced, the dog must have earned their Excellent title, etc.
  6. A wait list may be kept for those entered in another class to be added after close in the order received. If there are openings the day of the trial, spots may be filled from the wait list up to the published entry limit. If no wait list, or the wait list is shorter than available positions, then spots may be filled on the day of the trial on a first come first served basis.
  7. A dog may be entered in one (1) additional C class in any trial in which they are already entered in either an A or B class or another C class if the club has offered the option.
  8. The C class entered may not be the same class as the A or B class or single C class entered (for example, a dog entered in Masters & Excellent could only be entered in Novice C or Advanced C, and a dog entered in Excellent C can only be entered in Advanced C or Novice C).
  9. Rules under 1.18 and 1.19 for High in Trial, High Combined and High in Trial Junior remain unchanged. C class entries will remain ineligible for these awards.
  10. If additional C class entries are available by a club, the order of runs must be Masters, Excellent, Advanced and Novice.
  11. Additional C class entries cannot be offered at Nationals or any Nationals Pre-Trial.

 

Comments/Rationale: This will benefit clubs by resulting in possible higher revenues, and handlers may achieve titles on their dogs in fewer trials. This ability to enter an additional C class will not be available to all exhibitors. This rule change will only benefit those in areas where trials do not fill. Clubs that wish to offer additional C class entries must add this option to the sanctioning form and publish their rules for entering in the premium. Trial secretaries will be responsible for assuring the entries are appropriate and that club rules are followed. Every effort has been made to assure that the scores from the additional class entered will have no impact on the merit list standings. However, a delay in submission of trial results could allow scores to be added to the merit list, to which the dog is not entitled because of titles earned, but scores not yet recorded.

 

Affected: Clubs may see increased entries, thus increased revenue. Handlers who show at clubs who do offer the additional entry will be able to achieve titles quicker. Trial secretaries will be tasked with additional day of show entries, if clubs offer the additional C class option. Clubs who offer this additional entry must develop rules and a process for accepting the gate / day of show entries. The process must be included in premiums along with run limits. The business office will need to change the sanctioning paperwork so that clubs can indicate they are accepting the additional C class entry, and the maximum number of runs per trial. The business office must verify that the premium includes the additional class entry process and run limits.

 

Note: The ASCA Office Manager has verified that the additional qualifying score will have no impact on the current computer system that tracks and issues titles. The merit list points process has also been verified and addressed to the extent possible if all trial paperwork is submitted per ASCA requirements.

 

Effective Date: June 1, 2019

 

Results of Committee Vote:

Approve: 8

Oppose: 4

Abstain: 2

Non-Voting: 1

Comment from Heidi Iverson: I have issues regarding the sentence ‘Handlers who show at clubs who do offer the additional entry will be able to achieve titles quicker.’ I disagree with the above sentence, as it gives the impression that this proposal is good for some, but unfair to others. The reality is that the ability to achieve titles can NEVER be totally fair to all competitors. In some areas a team can find multiple trials within a small radius, thereby making it possible to compete multiple times without the necessity of paying for motels, taking off work, etc. If these teams don’t get the desired X score in one trial, they can try again a couple of weeks later. In other areas the above is simply not possible. In many  less populated areas,  there are only 2 or 3 trials per year that do not require motel stays and long travel. If the X is not immediately achieved, competitors must wait many months before they can try again. Not only do they have fewer opportunities to achieve their X, but they also lose the ability to compete in the limited number of trials if they want to enter a C class. This proposal will, to a small extent, provide more fairness to all competitors. Populated areas usually offer more trials, which fill more quickly, and those clubs may choose not to offer this C option. Competitors in small clubs who virtually never fill, and have few trials, will have the opportunity to get their X scores in a more timely manner.

Comment from Karen Souza: I support this motion because I feel it is a tool to build the ASCA Rally program. It allows trials that do not fill to benefit from additional entries. It may also encourage affiliates with trials that regularly fill to offer more trials in order to benefit from this rule change. The additional entry would only be allowed if there is room on the day of the trial, after all other entries have been accepted. It cannot bump a team entered in A, B or C only. I have personally been at trials that have had low entries. I have spoken to judges and competitors at these trials. All were in favor of allowing additional C entries.  The committee worked diligently to protect each affiliate’s choice to offer this option and to allow it to decide how and when the additional C entries would be accepted. Whatever the choice, the entry would not be final until all other entries have closed. We have stipulated that a title in the level above the additional C entry must have been previously earned to ensure Merit lists will not be affected. We have also conferred with the National ASCA office to troubleshoot any computer/paperwork problems.

Comment from Sandy Walroth: For those affiliates where the trials fill, nothing needs to change. However, for those who are seeing low entries, they may be struggling to stay afloat. The additional “C” class entries may help to increase entries and bring in additional revenue and could possibly be the difference between losing money and turning a profit. I only see that as a positive for both the affiliate and ASCA. If an affiliate ceases to hold trials because they are losing money, or folds altogether, that will only hurt ASCA and its Rally program. Additional “C” entries may help exhibitors earn their “X” and/or “C” titles faster but will not affect the speed at which they earn the base titles. Also, as the exhibitor may only enter an additional “C” class at a lower level than they are showing in the “A” or “B” class, it won’t affect their eligibility for the Merit or Finals lists, so there will be no advantage to them over those where the additional entries are not offered. (As an FYI, I have no personal gain with this change. As I don’t currently own or show an Aussie, Merits and/or Finals are not an issue for me. Also, most of the trials I attend fill, so the chance of additional “C” entries being an option probably doesn’t exist.)

Dissent from Jan Wesen: This seems good on the surface, but maybe more thought should go into how to make it work for all of ASCA. Areas that do not fill this would help the entries,  however places that fill and Nationals and pre-trials will limit who gets into the trials.

Dissent from Karen Black: I am voting against this motion as I feel it is not in the best interest of ASCA and the ASCA Rally program to allow some exhibitors an advantage of doubling up on titles while others do not have that advantage. The motion was originally proposed as a way to add entries in areas where the entries are low as a means to help the affiliates financially at their rally trials. However, the overall negative impact of this motion if it passed reaches far beyond the good it might do for a few affiliates. Additionally, I’m not convinced it will add enough entries at the smaller trials to have the benefit originally proposed. We do not have empirical data to support that it will do what it was originally proposed to do. Once provisions were added to avoid exhibitors having an advantage in the merit standings, the window of availability to add a C class has been reduced to exhibitors at the highest levels or exhibitors who already only show in C classes. I agree we need to find a way to help the smaller areas increase their entry numbers, but I think it should be done in a way that doesn’t negatively impact exhibitors.  Perhaps look at adding optional titling classes, educating the public, promoting the events outside the usual group of exhibitors, etc.

Dissent from Corinne Shanks: As rally chair, I believe I represent the interests of all ASCA members, as well as non-members who support the ASCA rally program. I do not believe this motion is the correct answer, as not all ASCA members, and others, will see a benefit if this rule is implemented. Some affiliates will choose to implement the additional C class entry, but other affiliates will not be able to implement without cutting the number of trials in half (one per day where they have 2 per day now) or hiring an additional judge for the time past 8 hours. I sympathize with those who do not have frequent local trials, and those that incur travel expenses to achieve titles for their dogs, as I too must travel a minimum of 3 hours to attend a rally trial. I have none that do not require a hotel stay. Being able to enter the additional C class to work toward X titles at the same time as earning RTCH points will require entering fewer shows than those who can work on either RTCH points or the X titles. I believe the answer to low entries should be addressed by promoting ASCA rally at local training clubs. Affiliates that do promote heavily see a high percentage of other breed entries, thus filling their trials. The ability to enter an additional C class will never be an option that is available to all ASCA members.

Comment from Joan Skinner: Although I would like to be able to enter the C Class plus another, this is complicating the Entry process for the clubs way too much. However, I don’t feel strongly either way and though I’ve followed the arguments on both sides I am not comfortable voting either way.

Comment from Claudia Yearsley: I just don’t feel as if I understand the ramifications well enough to vote one way or the other.

Members,
 
The following motion has been voted on this month by the ASCA Board. Results are below.
​​

RA.18.03 Change to Rally Rules 15.7.2 ASCA Rally Judges Seminar

Approve: Unanimous

Motion carries.

Motion by Busquets

I move to approve the new online education requirements for Rally judges.

Committee recommendation:

Ballot – RC Motion 18.14 – Rally Judges Seminar / Continuing Education

Motion by Corinne Shanks

Second by Karen Black

I move to require all ASCA Rally judges to complete the on-line education seminar every 2 years. Credit will no longer be given for attendance at Nationals live seminars.

Current wording:

15.7.2 ASCA Rally Judges Seminar

All ASCA Rally Judges will be required to participate in the ASCA Rally Judges Education Seminar online or in person at least every two years. A notice will be sent by the Business Office to all ASCA Rally Judges during the first week of January in odd-numbered years (i.e. 2017, 2019, etc.). All sections in the Supplemental Packet must be answered correctly to receive credit for participating in the seminar. The completed Supplemental Packet must be returned to the Business Office within 60 days of the distribution date of the notice from the Business Office. The seminar may be watched repeatedly, and Supplemental Packet resubmitted repeatedly until all questions are answered correctly. In mid-February of odd numbered years, the Business Office will contact any judge who has not returned his/her Supplemental Packet to assure that the exam was received. Judges not returning the completed Supplemental Packet by the deadline will be removed from the approved ASCA Judges Directory and will need to reapply if they choose to judge ASCA Rally again in the future. Judges who participate in the Judges Seminar at ASCA Nationals in the fall of an even-numbered year (i.e. 2016, 2018, etc.), will receive credit for completing their 2-year continuing education provided they submit a completed Supplemental Packet with all questions answered correctly to the Business Office within 60 days of the live seminar. New ASCA Rally judges who completed their application process in the last quarter of an even-numbered year (i.e. 2016, 2018, etc.) will receive credit for completing their 2-year continuing education during their application process.

Proposed wording:

15.7.2 ASCA Rally Judges Seminar

All ASCA Rally Judges will be required to participate in the ASCA Rally Judges Education Seminar online or in person at least every two years. A notice will be sent by the Business Office to all ASCA Rally Judges during the first week of January in odd-numbered years (i.e. 2017, 2019, etc.). All sections in the Supplemental Packet must be answered correctly to receive credit for participating every two years. A notice will be sent by the Business Office to all ASCA Rally Judges during the first week of January in odd-numbered years (i.e. 2017, 2019, etc.). All sections in the Supplemental Packet must be answered correctly to receive credit for participating in the seminar. The completed Supplemental Packet must be returned to the Business Office within 60 days of the distribution date of the notice from the Business Office. The seminar may be watched repeatedly, and Supplemental Packet resubmitted repeatedly until all questions are answered correctly. In mid-February of odd numbered years, the Business Office will contact any judge who has not returned his/her Supplemental Packet to assure that the exam was received. Judges not returning the completed Supplemental Packet by the deadline will be removed from the approved ASCA Judges Directory and will need to reapply if they choose to judge ASCA Rally again in the future. Judges who participate in the Judges Seminar at ASCA Nationals in the fall of an even-numbered year (i.e. 2016, 2018, etc.) will received credit for completing their 2 – year continuing education provided they submit a completed Supplemental Packet with all questions answered correctly to the Business Office within 60 days of the live seminar. New ASCA Rally judges who completed their application process in the last quarter of an even-numbered year (i.e. 2016, 2018, etc.) will receive credit for completing their 2-year continuing education during their application process.

Comments/rationale: Currently our rules require attendance at a live seminar at Nationals, or completion of the on-line seminar, once every 2 years. The problem is that our seminars do not always cover what is presented in the on-line seminar. Based on course reviews and comments from judges that do not seem to understand the rules, and the number of illegal courses submitted by judges, it is felt that the on-line seminars could provide much more comprehensive, and pertinent, information to all judges.

Obedience now requires all judges to complete the on-line education. Their live seminars are on various topics appropriate to the time and speakers available. I am proposing the same for Rally education. All judges will be required to complete the on-line training every other year, as outlined in the rule book.

Who is affected: Judges that currently attend the live seminar at Nationals will now be required to complete the on-line education. The majority of judges already complete the on-line education.

Business Office notified: 6/17/18

Effective date: June 1, 2019

Results of Committee vote:

Approve: 10

Oppose: 0

Abstain: 2

Not-voting: 2

​​Members,
 
The following motion has been voted on this month by the ASCA Board. Results are below.

RA.18.04 Change to Rally Rules 15.1.3 Rally Judge Application Process

Approve: Unanimous

Motion carries.

Motion by Busquets

I move to approve the re-sequence of the Rally Judges Application Process.

Committee recommendation:

RC Motion 18.15 – Rally Judge Application Process

Motion by Corinne Shanks

Second by Karen Black

I move to re-sequence the Rally Judge Application Process.

Current wording:

15.1.3 Application Process

a. Applicants must be at least 21 years old.

b. Submit an application to the ASCA Business office. Upon verification of qualifications, the applicant will be sent an Open Book test and a request for a complete set of Rally courses (one for each level).

c. Pass with 100% the ASCA Rally Open Book Test. The test may be retaken until all questions have been answered correctly.

d. Submit a complete set of courses (one for each level) and have them approved. A completed ASCA Rally Course Checklist (available on the ASCA Website) must be submitted with the courses.

e. Complete the Judges Education Seminar, available free online, or submit proof of attendance at a live Judges Education Seminar within the preceding 12 months. To get the link for the online seminar please contact the ASCA Business Office or the ASCA Rally Committee Chair.

f. Once all steps above are completed within the time frame outlined in 15.1.4, the ASCA Business Office will forward the applicant’s information to the Board of Directors for approval.

Proposed wording:

15.1.3 Application Process

a. Applicants must be at least 21 years old.

b. Submit an application to the ASCA Business office.

c.  Upon verification of qualifications, the applicant will complete the Judges Education Seminar, available free online or submit proof of attendance at a live Judges Education Seminar within the preceding 12 months.  To get the link for the online seminar please contact the ASCA Business Office or the ASCA Rally Committee Chair.

d. Upon completion of the Judges Education Seminar, the applicant will be sent an Open Book test and a request for a complete set of Rally courses (one for each level), with completed Rally Course Checklist.

e. Pass with 100% the ASCA Rally Open Book Test. The test may be retaken until all questions have been answered correctly.

f. Submit a complete set of courses (one for each level) and have them approved. A completed ASCA Rally Course Design Checklist (available on the ASCA Website) must be submitted with the courses.

g. Once all steps above are completed within the time frame outlined in 15.1.4, the ASCA Business Office will forward the applicant’s information to the Board of Directors for approval.

Comments/rationale: The current process requires the applicant to take the test, and complete a full set of rally maps, prior to completion of the judges’ education. Information in the education first would provide information pertinent to the test, and for completion of their map set.

Who is affected: The process has not been changed for the applicant, so they will only benefit from this change. The ASCA Business office will need to re-sequence the order in which steps are sent to the applicant.

Business Office notified: 6/17/18

Effective date: Immediately upon approval by the Board of Directors

Results of Committee vote:

Approve: 11

Oppose: 0

Abstain: 1

Not-voting: 2