[ SHOWGSD-L ] Re: The VOTE - how important is the outcome for wGSDs?
- From: Zoa Rockenstein <zrockenstein@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "rightdogphoto@xxxxxxxxx" <rightdogphoto@xxxxxxxxx>, "campaignersgsd@xxxxxxxxx" <campaignersgsd@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 11:21:46 -0800 (PST)
I do not know the answer to Joan's question and do not want to speculate too
much. My hunch, from discussing this with a couple of Board members, is that
the removal of the DQ is all about money. GSDCA membership has been marketed
to the white gsd people very heavily, through social media for the last couple
of years. We have all seen that happen. One Board member has said he thinks
there are thousands of potential new members out there, with white dogs, who
can bail us out of our current financial woes. Really???
What happened to the findings and recommendations that Van and Sam gave us in
their financial report published in the Review a while back? They sounded
pretty good to me.
So, that is my understanding of the conformation removal-of-the-DQ issue. Of
course, if the PC sincerely wanted to embrace these people (along with their
history and DNA arguments), they would not be relegated to the "serious fault"
category. In fact, color would be completely removed from any kind of fault
category. And that is where the logical progression of these arguments would
take us if we vote to remove the DQ for whites. It would open the door to the
pandas, and piebalds, and everyone else now in the "serious fault" category for
color because of their DNA, etc.
I had a very good discussion with Frank at the MW Futurity about the proposed
removal of the DQ issue in competition for the performance Victor/Victrix
awards. (That is the proposal we just voted on and rejected.) He said that
the DQ was left off the Premium in Colorado by accident, and an entrant made an
issue of it. A conscious decision was made to omit it from the Premium this
year and to bring to issue before the Membership for a vote. That, in a
nutshell, is my understanding of how the performance issue went down in answer
to Ruth's question.
Dr. Zoa Rockenstein
www.riverrockgermanshepherds.com
Generations of Dually-Titled Champions
and Protective Companions for a Changing World
>________________________________
> From: Ruth Scheubler <rightdogphoto@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 12:36 PM
>Subject: [ SHOWGSD-L ] Re: The VOTE - how important is the outcome for wGSDs?
>
>It seems to me this was initiated by someone deciding to remove the No DQ
>clause from the premium list and it snowballed from there. So does anyone know
>who removed it or why?
>Ruth
>
>From: Joan Fox <campaignersgsd@xxxxxxxxx>
>
>Sent: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 05:04:53 -0000 (UTC)
>Subject: [ SHOWGSD-L ] Re: The VOTE - how important is the outcome for wGSDs?
>
>I asked a question in the beginning and am asking again.
>How and why did the whole white question and the breed standard change get put
>on the front burner?
>
>
============================================================================
POST is Copyrighted 2012. All material remains the property of the original
author and of GSD Communication, Inc. NO REPRODUCTIONS or FORWARDS of any kind
are permitted without prior permission of the original author AND of the
Showgsd-l Management. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Each Author is responsible for the content of his/her post. This group and its
administrators are not responsible for the comments or opinions expressed in
any post.
ALL PERSONS ARE ON NOTICE THAT THE FORWARDING, REPRODUCTION OR USE IN ANY
MANNER OF ANY MATERIAL WHICH APPEARS ON SHOWGSD-L WITHOUT THE EXPRESS
PERMISSION OF ALL PARTIES TO THE POST AND THE LIST MANAGEMENT IS EXPRESSLY
FORBIDDEN, AND IS A VIOLATION OF LAW. VIOLATORS OF THIS PROHIBITION WILL BE
PROSECUTED.
For assistance, please contact the List Management at admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
VISIT OUR WEBSITE - http://showgsd.org
SUBSCRIPTION:http://showgsd.org/mail.html
NATIONAL BLOG - http://gsdnational.blogspot.com/
============================================================================
Other related posts:
