# SV letter to USCA



## Annie Wildmoser (Nov 18, 2012)

Interesting stuff:

http://www.germanshepherddog.com/documents/2013-WUSV_WDA.pdf


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

So funny - can you spell HYPOCRITE !!!??? 

The SV places a lifetime ban on anyone in Germany who joins RSV2000 because it's a competing GSD organization, but somehow this is different. They need to clean up the shit in their own backyard before they worry about anyone else's backyard. Do as I say and not as I do, right?!

The difference is the situation is almost reversed. The SV is a behemouth that serves the show dog not the working line breeder and not the working line dog. 

RSV2000 is designed to improve and protect the working line GSD.

The answer is a no brainer to me.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

susan tuck said:


> So funny - can you spell HYPOCRITE !!!???
> 
> The SV places a lifetime ban on anyone in Germany who joins RSV2000 because it's a competing GSD organization, but somehow this is different. They need to clean up the shit in their own backyard before they worry about anyone else's backyard. Do as I say and not as I do, right?!
> 
> ...


Too late to edit, but I wanted to re-state what I said in the other thread. I have no problem with WDA members being allowed to trial at UScA trials, but what I have a big problem with is not being able to charge them an additional fee as non UScA members, that's unfair and ridiculous, especially since putting on a trial is a very expensive venture. 

Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.....

Take a look at the WDA list of upcoming trials for the remainder of this year. 13 trials - not in one region...13 trials for the nation!!!! There's a reason they put on so few trials as compared to UScA.

As long as you're asking yourself questions, ask yourself why GSDCA is unwilling to add their initials to the WDA scorebook.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

duplicate deleted sorry


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

So Sue your only problem is about the money?


----------



## Dave Colborn (Mar 25, 2009)

Drop IPO. Do PSA. Bam. done.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Within the context of entering UScA trials, yes that is my issue.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

susan tuck said:


> Within the context of entering UScA trials, yes that is my issue.


Larger issues are with the SV. I believe for many years now they have been more of a hindrance than a help when it comes to working line GSDs, I do not think they have the best interests of the working line GSD at heart, I think it's time to go. If this latest thing is what it takes to tip UScA over the edge, and away from SV, then I say GOOD.


----------



## Howard Gaines III (Dec 26, 2007)

Never been attacked by a holla hoop or streamers of plastic bottles!!![-(


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Susan said;
"Take a look at the WDA list of upcoming trials for the remainder of this year. 13 trials - not in one region...13 trials for the nation!!!! There's a reason they put on so few trials as compared to UScA."


I believe they are down to just 3-4 judges now and all of them are former UScA judges that left with the big split a number of yrs ago if I recall correctly.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie (Jun 8, 2008)

I've always had a soft spot for the WDA. Seems like if memory serves me, it wasn't easy getting it implemented and show crowd was more tolerant than embracing. Theirs is a loose association. I don't see what UScA has to gain by rejecting WDA.


T


----------



## Jim Engel (Nov 14, 2007)

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> I've always had a soft spot for the WDA. Seems like if memory serves me, it wasn't easy getting it implemented and show crowd was more tolerant than embracing. Theirs is a loose association. I don't see what UScA has to gain by rejecting WDA.
> 
> 
> T


http://www.angelplace.net/usca/USCA&WDA.htm

Those who should know are saying this thing was not written by
Henke, that he was just dumb enough to be duped into signing it.....


----------



## Keith Jenkins (Jun 6, 2007)

In a letter sent out by Dan Yee:

Jim Alloway (USCA President) flew to Germany to meet with Dr. Wolfgang Henke (WUSV/SV President) this morning to discuss Dr. Henke's recent letter to USCA. The meeting concluded with a clear confirmation to Mr. Alloway that GSDCA and WDA are considered a WUSV member and are entitled to all rights and privileges as any other WUSV Member Club. Mr. Alloway agreed to comply with the WUSV Constitution and to advise his membership of this information as soon as he returns to the U.S.

End of story and speculation. Whether you like the outcome or not unless the UScA withdraws from the WUSV they are bound by the decision.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

I thought the SV letter was crystal clear and sure the hell didn't require an emergency trip to Germany :-(
Why the hell is Yee making announcements about a meeting between Alloway and Henke? I sure hope that UScA asks for membership input (poll or vote) My vote is leave the WUSV and go RSV2000


----------



## Mario Fernandez (Jun 21, 2008)

Because Yee has Henke on speed dial .... GSDCA is only hosting the 2013 WUSV CH this year.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXzctO4VW-M

It is what it is. Let the elected officials of each organization deal with.


----------



## Stefan Schaub (Sep 12, 2010)

Mario Fernandez said:


> Because Yee has Henke on speed dial .... GSDCA is only hosting the 2013 WUSV CH this year.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXzctO4VW-M
> 
> It is what it is. Let the elected officials of each organization deal with.


WDA or USCA who cares,it is all the same. But why must someone fly to germany to talk about the issues, we live in 2013, we have have Skype,face time and more to talk with people face to face!!! But it is nicer to make a trip and for sure the members pay for that and no one ask if that is right. 

short trip to germany plus hotel for a night come close to 1500 to 2000 $.
membership fee is 100$ that makes 15 to 20 membership fees out of the window.

but maybe i am wrong and he is different and payed it by him self


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Stefan,

I'm sure asking if a trip to Germany was needed when, like you say there are several cheaper options available. It sure sounds like Dan Yee had all the details of the Alloway/Henke meeting before Jim had even got to the Airport for the flight back. I wonder if the wife got to go along on the European vacation too? :-(


----------



## Mark Sheplak (Oct 28, 2011)

Thomas Barriano said:


> I thought the SV letter was crystal clear and sure the hell didn't require an emergency trip to Germany :-(
> Why the hell is Yee making announcements about a meeting between Alloway and Henke? I sure hope that UScA asks for membership input (poll or vote) My vote is leave the WUSV and go RSV2000


No show line dogs allowed in RSV2000. You would unfortunately lose the vote. If RSV2000 gains a foothold in the US, it won't be via UScA.


----------



## Kat Hunsecker (Oct 23, 2009)

The letter was Crystl clear.... I didn't get the trip either!!!
Germany is not THAT beautiful in March....LOL
And everything else could have bee dealt with on other media...
Agree wasted Trip /wasted money! 

and changing to another Organisation...?!?
What will be the difference?!? They probably have their own/different /same things to bicker about.... everywhere the same....
We'll see what the change in Leadwership brings... I hope it will be good!


----------



## Stefan Schaub (Sep 12, 2010)

Mark Sheplak said:


> No show line dogs allowed in RSV2000. You would unfortunately lose the vote. If RSV2000 gains a foothold in the US, it won't be via UScA.


I have in both organizations SV/RSV2000 dogs out of my breed with breed survey.does that make one better than the other one. NO!!! When RSV started i thought it would be better, thay missed the moment to make a strong statement.make a real breed selection and the left over goes into the breed. RSV koerung is even slow and pressureless thann a sv koerung.wish they would do one like the DMC.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

I am not a member of the orgs. in question.
One would think any means of communication would suffice over a emergency trip to Germany.

I hope the membership of the USCA club is able to find out how that trip was financed, and if it was financed through the club funds, that they would also be able to find out what the expenses of that trip came out to, since it does not appear to have been necessary at all, to the layman.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie (Jun 8, 2008)

Joby Becker said:


> I am not a member of the orgs. in question.
> One would think any means of communication would suffice over a emergency trip to Germany.
> 
> I hope the membership of the USCA club is able to find out how that trip was financed, and if it was financed through the club funds, that they would also be able to find out what the expenses of that trip came out to, since it does not appear to have been necessary at all, to the layman.


 
I don't have a dog in this hunt either and can't believe the emergency trip. Seems like grandstanding drama. You would have thought it was a nuclear summit or somethng.


T


----------



## Frank Phillips (Jan 8, 2008)

Preliminary results of the meeting...

The WUSV confirmed that they view the GSDCA and WDA as the same organization. They understand that legally and actually they are seperate organizations but they view as the same and they would like USCA to also. They want the GSD orgs to work together and both to stop fighting each other.

USCA can and will charge an extra fee for entry from non-members

WDA is only allowed to enter club level trials for IPO events. USCA membership is required for entry into Championships (Regional and National)


a USCA club can still refuse entry from anyone for any reason to their club trials (this was put in place as a lot of club fields are on private property and WUSV have no objections)

USCA members would get priority entry into USCA events, even if it meant turning away a non-member to make room for a USCA member. Even if a USCA member enters late.

Non members entering must be a member of an AWDF org, GSDCA or WDA to enter USCA events.

WDA scorebooks and Judges will be accepted. 

Just having a WDA scorebook does NOT equal GSDCA membership. A person must be a member of GSDCA, WDA or both.

USCA asked WUSV for clearification on this matter and until the letter (which also was not clear or correct) and the meeting it was not communicated clearly. Since the meeting it is now clear what the WUSV wanted and where all orgs stand.

The WUSV verbally relaxed the 10th deadline 

This has to be all hashed out and voted on in the EB but I believe it will all be worked out shortly.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Thank you, Frank!
:smile:


----------



## Annie Wildmoser (Nov 18, 2012)

I see Frank posted a synopsis, here is the letter as copied from United Schutzhund Clubs of America Facebook page:

"There were a couple of typographical errors in the last letter from Jim Alloway and he has asked that this correction be posted here.

March 12, 2013
Valued Member:
USCA / WDA
SV Visit

This past week I had the privilege of meeting both Mr. Wolfgang Henke and Mr. Clemens Lux in Augsburg at the SV office. Both were welcoming, polite, cordial, and positive about resolving past and future issues.

The objectives of the trip were two-fold: (1) clarity on a few of the issues and possible interpretations of the letter we received (2) begin a relationship with them built on trust and mutual understanding and, with face-to-face interaction, assure them that USCA has no intentions of constitutional violations.

Both men were bright, articulate, witty, and well informed. Very quickly Mr. Henke described his primary considerations when making decisions - the future breeding of German Shepherd Dog and German Shepherd Dogs around the world. I'm aware that many of you took insult to the letter that we received on March 1, 2013 - they expressed that their intent was not to insult / disrespect / or show anger - they just wanted a problem resolved. They were both very clear that the present issues were not the result of hasty judgment or recent development, but rather a history of miscommunication. They did not want to order USCA around or degrade / demean our relationship . . . they simply wanted quick resolution.

I was assured that our position in the WUSV is secure and not in jeopardy so long as we do not violate the constitution. I was also assured that the WUSV has no plans to try to eliminate one club and that both clubs are valued with equal importance to the WUSV/SV.

Results of the meeting:

* The WUSV confirmed that they view the GSDCA and WDA as the same organization. They understand that legally they are separate organizations but they view as the same and they would like USCA to also. They want the GSD organizations to work together and both to stop fighting with each other. Other countries with a similar situation have been working cooperatively since 2010 (or earlier), when the provision in the WUSV Constitution was first ratified.
* Each organization is to accept the scorebooks, titles, and ratings from the other.
* Each organization is to allow entry into club events so long as the bearer of the scorebook is a member of USCA, GSDCA, or WDA.
* USCA will accept all WDA judges' titles and ratings. WDA will reciprocate.
* Each organization may charge a reasonable fee to enter one another's events so long as that fee is "reasonable and not intended to punish or discourage participation." We are working with the WDA to establish this fee. USCA's fee will be the same for all non-members and USCA will drop any / all scorebook certification fees / processes.
* Because each organization still sends 10 dogs to the Qualification Trial, each organization may limit participation at championships to members only as this is part of the qualification process and a member benefit.
* Clubs may not deny trial entry to any individual based on club affiliation.
* Each organization may reserve spots to their organization's members in the event of a full trial. Example (if a WDA club hosting a trial has only 1 spot open, they may hold that spot for a WDA member and vice versa).

I am proud . . . very proud, to be the president of this fine organization. I want the best for our German Shepherd Dogs, the sport of IPO, and the United Schutzhund Clubs of America. I've asked the board and now ask each of you to do your best to embrace members of other organizations. We have been "fighting" for years and I believe that for so many reasons it is time to just stop. Our country, our breed, our sport is so small comparatively, that cooperation will yield great results. We won't all get along . . . that is life. But we all do this for the love of our breed and sport. I have faith that the members of this great organization can put differences aside and focus on the cake, not the crumbs. Be gracious hosts. Be facilitators. Help. Educate. Learn. Grow. As one member of the EB said, "let's build bridges, not tear them down."

Let's now focus our efforts on USCA . . . not the "fight." Let's innovate, let's get creative with new / fresh ideas about how to improve USCA. Let's focus our energies on things that truly matter . . . programs, youth, training, events, judging, education, breeding, sponsorship, organizational synergy, growth, processes . . . let's make big strides in the years to come!

As always, if there is anything I can do for any of you, please let me know. I appreciate your membership, your support, and all that you do for USCA.

Yours in the sport,

Jim Alloway
United Schutzhund Clubs of America"


----------



## Robley Smith (Apr 20, 2012)

A lot of people commented on one version posted up on the UScA facebook, saying that they couldnt be barred for having memberships in other organizations. They asked, "oh so I can join WDA now"? Turns out it was a typo and they meant couldn't be barred from trials not membership in UScA, but I don't get it what is the big WDA draw?


----------



## Jim Engel (Nov 14, 2007)

The only problem with all this new found devotion to "the breed" is that they are talking past each other, that is, about entirely different breeds.

I think Mr. Alloway finessed the current situation, handled it well.

But the underlying differences remain irreconcilable, 
and the BBSV remains as a mill stone around the neck of USCA
and real German Shepherds everywhere.


----------



## Jim Engel (Nov 14, 2007)

That should probably more correctly be BZSV

Banane Zurück Schaferhund Vereine


----------



## Keith Jenkins (Jun 6, 2007)

Robley Smith said:


> A lot of people commented on one version posted up on the UScA facebook, saying that they couldnt be barred for having memberships in other organizations. They asked, "oh so I can join WDA now"? Turns out it was a typo and they meant couldn't be barred from trials not membership in UScA, but I don't get it what is the big WDA draw?


Let's say someone has been a tried and true UScA diehard member for years then they find themselves in a position where they no longer have access to UScA clubs and/or events such as moving to a new area. Only place to train is a WDA club that requires WDA membership to join, which most any club requires regardless of affiliation. 

So you are forced to leave the UScA just so you can train.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

If there was ever any reason for the JA in the past? It certainly has outlived it's purpose now. The SV has said that any combination of GSDCA and/or WDA membership is the same and that UScA has to recognize any and all score books, titles and judges. The trip to Germany changed nothing about the original Henke Letter and was IMO a waste of time and money.
Now we have the UScA leaders trying to spin the slap in the face into we're all on the same page and mutual respect Blah blah blah.
It would be nice if UScA finally went with one member one vote. Ask for a membership vote to see if the RSV2000 would be a better fit for Working GSD's Instead the show line breeders still have undue influence :-(


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

I see much that was clarified by the trip, that was not outlined in the original letter, so I'm glad he went to Germany.:

The date of compliance was relaxed

Only UScA members can enter championship level trials.

UScA can hold entry spots open in trials for it's own members.

UScA still has the right to bar someone from a trial (for cause) whether they are a member or not.

UScA can charge an additional fee to people who enter trials but are not members of UScA.

I'm sure going forward now that the WUSV has clarified it's position, we will all be able to play together nicely!


----------



## Eric Read (Aug 14, 2006)

I think this is the most important part of the letter and the part most of you should be paying attention to.

"Let's now focus our efforts on USCA . . . not the "fight." Let's innovate, let's get creative with new / fresh ideas about how to improve USCA. Let's focus our energies on things that truly matter . . . programs, youth, training, events, judging, education, breeding, sponsorship, organizational synergy, growth, processes . . . let's make big strides in the years to come!"


and this part 

" I've asked the board and now ask each of you to do your best to embrace members of other organizations. We have been "fighting" for years and I believe that for so many reasons it is time to just stop. Our country, our breed, our sport is so small comparatively, that cooperation will yield great results. We won't all get along . . . that is life. But we all do this for the love of our breed and sport. I have faith that the members of this great organization can put differences aside and focus on the cake, not the crumbs. Be gracious hosts. Be facilitators. Help. Educate. Learn. Grow. As one member of the EB said, "let's build bridges, not tear them down."


----------



## Keith Jenkins (Jun 6, 2007)

It does not say bar someone for cause. It merely states that clubs hold the right to deny entry as most are held on private property. So no cause has to be shown.

UScA has charged extra for non-member for a couple of years now. This clarifies UScA will have a set amount and won't allow breaking it off in a WDA member's ass with some bullshit fee. 

Actually it didn't say Championship events it only included the joint WUSV qualification trial. This is something that is going to have to be worked on some more IMO. It stated that entry to events could not be denied *soley* on which membership someone held. This is that little loophole depending on who reads it.


----------



## Keith Jenkins (Jun 6, 2007)

Eric Read said:


> I think this is the most important part of the letter and the part most of you should be paying attention to.
> 
> "Let's now focus our efforts on USCA . . . not the "fight." Let's innovate, let's get creative with new / fresh ideas about how to improve USCA. Let's focus our energies on things that truly matter . . . programs, youth, training, events, judging, education, breeding, sponsorship, organizational synergy, growth, processes . . . let's make big strides in the years to come!"
> 
> ...



Great letter but it's going to take more than a letter to rebuild those bridges and mend those fences.


----------



## Eric Read (Aug 14, 2006)

For some, i'm sure it will. Those are the ones I think he refers to as, "focusing on the crumbs and instead of the cake" or something like that. Can't really do much about them.

I was part of a dual club a few years ago, nobody cared who was what, nobody even asked. We trialed with USA members and WDA members and hosted those from other clubs as well. Never asked nor cared who was what. Come out and train your dogs, trial when you're ready. It's was the same helpers doing the same work, under the same rules whether it was USA or WDA. Why should I care what is on your membership card?

I really only care if the handler is a decent person or an asshole and if their dog is capable and taken care of.


----------



## Keith Jenkins (Jun 6, 2007)

Look I've seen the can't we all get along speech, let by-gones be by-gones, bury the hatchet and we're extending the olive branch so many times I've lost count...so I'm a bit wary these days when I see it.


----------



## Stefan Schaub (Sep 12, 2010)

To write a letter is just fine but than show it with action.first action and sign of a new direction would be "not to charge extra money from not usca members".


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Stefan Schaub said:


> To write a letter is just fine but than show it with action.first action and sign of a new direction would be "not to charge extra money from not usca members".


That, as history shows us, will NEVER happen. UScA is never going to choose the well being of the sport or breed over money. The only time UScA has ever left money on the table is when they are forced to. And even after they are forced to they will soon figure out another way to get that money back plus a little extra. 

And don't say I'm bashing unless you can show evidence to the contrary.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Christopher Smith said:


> That, as history shows us, will NEVER happen. UScA is never going to choose the well being of the sport or breed over money. The only time UScA has ever left money on the table is when they are forced to. And even after they are forced to they will soon figure out another way to get that money back plus a little extra.
> 
> And don't say I'm bashing unless you can show evidence to the contrary.



+1


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Keith Jenkins said:


> It does not say bar someone for cause. It merely states that clubs hold the right to deny entry as most are held on private property. So no cause has to be shown.
> 
> UScA has charged extra for non-member for a couple of years now. This clarifies UScA will have a set amount and won't allow breaking it off in a WDA member's ass with some bullshit fee.
> 
> Actually it didn't say Championship events it only included the joint WUSV qualification trial. This is something that is going to have to be worked on some more IMO. It stated that entry to events could not be denied *soley* on which membership someone held. This is that little loophole depending on who reads it.


http://www.facebook.com/pages/United-Schutzhund-Clubs-of-America/120022411379624?fref=ts

" Clubs may not deny trial entry to any individual based on club affiliation."

Threfore they must show cause other than club affiliation.

" Because each organization still sends 10 dogs to the Qualification Trial, each organization may limit participation at championships to members only as this is part of the qualification process and a member benefit."

It doesn't say Qualification Trial ONLY, it says "championships", which includes regionals, and nationals.

I'm aware UScA has always charged additional for non-members, but in the original letter from the SV it said UScA could no longer do this, however this was also changed subsequent to the Jim's trip to Germany, so UScA can continue to charge for non-members.

Those of you who think UScA does nothing for schutzhund should really only support and trial with the organizations you feel supports the sport. Speak with your trial dollars, support the organization that you think is doing a better job and only enter their trials.


----------



## Jim Engel (Nov 14, 2007)

In general my current attitude is to recognize that USCA is like 
other large, long term organizations, such as the United States
of America, the Catholic Church and so forth, with some serious
corruption, bad management and oppressive policies such as
slavery and condoning sexual abuse of children.

USCA has certainly gone through such a period, and in spite
of the corruption and double and triple dipping on expense
accounts in the last administration, they were accumulating
a lot of cash for the Lyle Memorial field of dreams.

Schutzhund is becoming impossibly expensive for ordinary
younger family people, and working to resolve this should
be a high priority. But the show dog programs are like an internal
cancer sucking resources and money.

Resolution of these problems should be the highest priority, but
real reform would mean breaking free from SV show breeder
control.

Otherwise Schutzhund in America will continue to wither.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

I love how people talk about how they want to foster good will amongst the membership of the two clubs but then piss and moan and whine and cry about mean ole' big, bad UScA......yeah, you're really doing your part to foster good will, aren't ya? Your attitudes sure aren't making me feel all warm and fuzzy inside, let alone want to deal with some of you.


----------



## Keith Jenkins (Jun 6, 2007)

susan tuck said:


> http://www.facebook.com/pages/United-Schutzhund-Clubs-of-America/120022411379624?fref=ts
> 
> " Clubs may not deny trial entry to any individual based on club affiliation."
> 
> ...



The updated email that was sent out as a correction stated:

" Clubs may not deny entry into their events based *soley*" on club affiliation." Which means it will stay the same as it is now, clubs have the right to refuse entry at club level. 


UScA hasn't always charged extra for non-members. This is only a two year old policy.

*E-Ballot #1-11(Change Administrative Fee for Trial Entries)*

I will speak and am speaking with my dollars. God as my witness as long as the UScA atmosphere remains as is they have seen the last of my membership and trials fees. Futhermore I will not compete at any other AWDF club that utilizes UScA judges. I will continue to trial DVG, WDA and any AWDF club that uses any judges other than UScA.


----------



## Jim Engel (Nov 14, 2007)

My impression is that Keith Jenkins is correct, any local club can
refuse any entry for any reason whatsoever, they just are not
required to do so. ( I would guess that if it looked like race,
religious belief or sexual orientation it probably would violate
federal law.)

It seems to me that a modest fee for those outside of USCA is
not inappropriate to the extent that it reflects real administrative
cost.

I am not backing down from what I say here:

http://www.angelplace.net/usca/USCA&WDA.htm

but I think USCA could have handled the situation better than
it did in the infamous Johanas amendment, probably just not
allowing members of other organizations to hold USCA or local
club offices.

I see the SV as the bad guys here,they have created these
two competing organizations primarily to have control by playing
one against the other, and they certainly have the drill down pat.

But that aside, universal access to all trials is going to make the
sport a lot more accessible and comfortable for the inexperienced
trainer.


----------



## Faisal Khan (Apr 16, 2009)

Ladies and dudes, focus on training please and leave the politicking to the elected officials. The time spent on keyboards would be better spent tracking and what not. Peace.


----------



## Keith Jenkins (Jun 6, 2007)

I find time to do both!...


----------



## Faisal Khan (Apr 16, 2009)

Keith Jenkins said:


> I find time to do both!...


I already like your day job.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

I don't have a day job I'm retired.
Nothing to do all day but train dogs and play on the Internet ;-)


----------



## Faisal Khan (Apr 16, 2009)

Thomas Barriano said:


> I don't have a day job I'm retired.
> Nothing to do all day but train dogs and play on the Internet ;-)


That explains everything!


----------



## Jim Engel (Nov 14, 2007)

"Ladies and dudes, focus on training please and leave the politicking to the elected officials."

This is incredibly bad advice. For my reasons, start with paragraph 3 in this chapter:

http://www.angelplace.net/Book/Ch18.pdf


----------



## Faisal Khan (Apr 16, 2009)

Jim Engel said:


> "Ladies and dudes, focus on training please and leave the politicking to the elected officials."
> 
> This is incredibly bad advice. For my reasons, start with paragraph 3 in this chapter:
> 
> http://www.angelplace.net/Book/Ch18.pdf


Man, you really believe all that jazz?

I see a commonality, majority of arguments are coming from folks who have nothing better to do i.e. no responsibilities no day jobs, they are bored. Am I correct?


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

susan tuck said:


> ... sure aren't making me feel all warm and fuzzy inside, let alone want to deal with some of you.


a couple drinks will help accomplish those things, at least the first part anyhow.\\/...


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Faisal Khan said:


> That explains everything!


Faisal,

You mean like how I can train and title more then one dog in one sport? Maybe when you're my age and retired you'll also be amused by the people with their first sport dog passing on their vast "knowledge" to the rest of the dog world. I don't know how we managed without it all these years.


----------



## Stefan Schaub (Sep 12, 2010)

Stefan Schaub said:


> WDA or USCA who cares,it is all the same. But why must someone fly to germany to talk about the issues, we live in 2013, we have have Skype,face time and more to talk with people face to face!!! But it is nicer to make a trip and for sure the members pay for that and no one ask if that is right.
> 
> short trip to germany plus hotel for a night come close to 1500 to 2000 $.
> membership fee is 100$ that makes 15 to 20 membership fees out of the window.
> ...


i have get call today from Jim Alloway.he told me that someone have send him my post here and he want only tell me that the trip was only $400 for usca. that is nice to let me know.so it is only 4 time membership.i told him that i still think that Skype or facetime would also work for that.the letter from sv was clear.

i think people should see how it is. See it like a Franchise where you get something and you must play by there rules. do it or leave it.


----------



## Jane Jean (Sep 18, 2009)

I believe Jim went there to clear the air, show some presence, get the real facts, which an email or skype couldn't accomplish. 
$400 in the grand scheme is a drop in the bucket. The Field of dream$ fund must have some reserves built up.


----------



## Keith Jenkins (Jun 6, 2007)

Yeah if the current UScA ballot passes non-members will be paying an additional 25.00 *filing* fee instead of the current 15.00.

UScA will always find a way to suck a dime from people.


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

I still think it was a wasted, unnecessary trip.
But at least it was a relatively cheap wasted trip ;-)


----------



## Skip Morgart (Dec 19, 2008)

Holy hell....I had let my UScA membership lapse, but I have to renew it now for the trial coming up....A HUNDRED BUCKS A YEAR NOW!!! WOW! (Not exactly related to this topic, I know).


----------



## Katie Finlay (Jan 31, 2010)

Skip Morgart said:


> Holy hell....I had let my UScA membership lapse, but I have to renew it now for the trial coming up....A HUNDRED BUCKS A YEAR NOW!!! WOW! (Not exactly related to this topic, I know).


It's been $100 for a while now. Part of the reason I joined WDA. I'm a WDA member AND an AWMA member for $20 cheaper than one UScA membership. It felt like a bargain, haha.


----------



## Sue DiCero (Sep 2, 2006)

Stefan Schaub said:


> i have get call today from Jim Alloway.he told me that someone have send him my post here and he want only tell me that the trip was only $400 for usca. that is nice to let me know.so it is only 4 time membership.i told him that i still think that Skype or facetime would also work for that.the letter from sv was clear.
> 
> i think people should see how it is. See it like a Franchise where you get something and you must play by there rules. do it or leave it.


I want that ticket agent . Last minute fares are $1000 plus and booked two months ago to ATL to BUD is $1200 via agent. Lowest we have seen in 10 years was 750; because we joked that the dog ticket was higher than Gabor's.......


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Sue DiCero said:


> I want that ticket agent . Last minute fares are $1000 plus and booked two months ago to ATL to BUD is $1200 via agent. Lowest we have seen in 10 years was 750; because we joked that the dog ticket was higher than Gabor's.......


HI Sue

I believe Jim said the ticket only cost UScA $400 not that the ticket only cost $400. I don't think anyone is going to get a RT ticket to Germany for $400? Maybe Jim paid for part himself or had some frequent flyer miles?


----------



## Stefan Schaub (Sep 12, 2010)

Sue DiCero said:


> I want that ticket agent . Last minute fares are $1000 plus and booked two months ago to ATL to BUD is $1200 via agent. Lowest we have seen in 10 years was 750; because we joked that the dog ticket was higher than Gabor's.......


hi Sue
That is what i told him.have bock a ticket for Lajos in a few weeks and paid $1200. J.A told me he have a friend who works for Delta and so it was cheap::-({|=

may be someone will see in future the full expenses.after i told him that i think the trip was not necessary he told me that they want met him because they do not know him.have some people here from DC for training and my phone is conected to my sound sytem so they have follow the conversation and thought it was kind funny.


----------



## Sue DiCero (Sep 2, 2006)

Thomas,

That make sense. Buddy passes that are for use for Delta employees...


----------



## Steve Burger (Jan 2, 2009)

My roundtrip fare from Seattle to Frankfurt in 2008 was $500 (Delta). Of course I considered myself lucky on that one.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Steve Burger said:


> My roundtrip fare from Seattle to Frankfurt in 2008 was $500 (Delta). Of course I considered myself lucky on that one.


It's interesting about the cost of tickets. Every once in a while, when I have had to make last minute flight arrangements, I've purchased tickets for basically a song. More than once in a last minute crunch, I have purchased a first class ticket for less than half the price of a coach ticket, even though the cost for a last minute coach ticket on the same flight was prohibitive. Weird, because most of the time, last minute tickets cost an arm and a leg, so I can't explain it when these "good deals" happen to crop up, but I don't look a gift horse in the mouth.


----------

