[ SHOWGSD-L ] Re: To the Board? Question concerning the upcoming vote and dogs entering...
- From: Jen proud <proudk911@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "marhaven@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <marhaven@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 03:07:02 -0500
Since this seems an appropriate time to bring it up, I have some questions I
feel many are asking and would appreciate some input on them:
Concerning the areas that are already going to be voted on, are they
1) going to be all lumped into one issue- white, blue, liver, nose color &
longcoat decisions all put into one single vote? Or-
2) going to be voted on as individual issues: a separate vote for each issue-
one for white, one for long coat, etc
And just my thoughts on why the vote isn't in the current issues for kicking
the whites out:
the separatists are the ones asking for the standard change, working their
process. While breeds who are a DQ for color (amongst other faults depending
on breed) are NOT eligible for FSS inclusion, a breed whose color is faulted,
but acceptable, are eligible. Has anyone ever given thought to that the whites
would have easier separation by removing the DQ to get into the FSS program
*while keeping their AKC papers*? I do know (told years ago) that the
reasoning people wouldn't give up their AKC registrations (despite the dogs in
question also being UKC registered as WSs with many also having club
registrations as WSs) was that they didn't have any guarantee of ever "getting
them back", so to say, if the WS never gained AKC recognition as its own breed.
That it is completely impossible currently for the whites who are AKC GSD
registered to go into FSS being conformation DQs, I would suppose the idea is
to make it less than completely impossible to gain FSS acceptance if they are
not a conformational DQ? Really the only other viable option is to give up
being AKC GSDs altogether and just register as UKC WSs and with the AWSA system
(which I would imagine is still functional) and be happy with that as many
breeds were for a very long time only having either their own registries or
being a UKC only breed. Then, after a minimum of 3 generations, they would
then be eligible for those dogs to enter FSS as WSs using their UKC or AWSA (or
FCI for that matter) papers and seek recognition that way. (And- it wouldn't be
a difficult process as since the 90s, about every new AKC breed was a UKC only
breed first!)
While I'm not much concerned with the white politics these days, I do happen to
think that if the whites were to be separated/recognized as a result of being
voted out to become a separate breed a minimum of 5 years after the whites were
made allowable in the conformation ring (for FSS eligibility), that the AKC
would separate out ALL and EVERY white coated GSD into the new WS breed or
Swiss White Shepherd/Berger Blanc Suisse or whatever designation is chosen...
People won't have a choice where their whites end up within AKC- if whites were
voted out of the GSD breed and to be another, well- all whites would go! It
would NOT be like the choice that was available for 13 years in the UKC. I
don't believe AKC would even allow the choice even if the PC members voted for
it to be an option... Which, incidentally, is no longer available in UKC - the
stud books closed on the individual registrations (except FCI imports only with
WS registration) from any GSD registry aka AKC starting January 1, 2013. (So
sad all the now untappable white bloodlines all over the US so far as being UKC
WSs. Only a small percentage of AKC GSD registered whites are UKC registered at
all, with only a portion of those being registered as White Shepherds instead
of GSDs with a white coat). So, now, no one doesn't have the choice as how to
register their AKC white GSDs with UKC- it's as a GSD with a white coat or
nothing-- unless you're holding UKC litter registration in your hand for a WS
puppy! Which kind of blows me away, as there were a number of people who were
members or showed at AWSA events with their AKC registered white GSDs- and who
were not UKC registered at all. So today, if any of these people desired to
register their dogs with UKC and show in conformation (or anything else UKC),
their only option is to register as a white GSD even if they show in the other
orgs as white shepherds and are "breed separatists". That just seems a little
too separatist for me when it will come to a genetic bottleneck by not
including qualifying dogs in the breed for their genetic worth (variation).
Lastly, I think (since we all know I have many opinions ;) as well as many
others I have polled that it would be an imperative idea to separate each
area/item of the standard to be voted on. For instance, many are worried of
what will happen if they are all lumped into one. Like the long coat? Yes to
the bunch. Like the blue? Yes to the bunch. Y'all see where I'm going with
that. Their opinions were that If each were to be on its own vote, then say
that someone who liked long coats could vote yes just for that one item, since
they hate whites and think GSDs should only show wearing black pigment. Or
those who like whites and coats but not blues or livers. The standard portion
on the nose is written just fine for the white coats to be included... The nose
leather change is strictly to include the blues and livers since they don't
have any black pigment, unlike a white which does- and even when the nose
fades, it should still be predominantly black. And, though none I polled
personally said yes to everything, perhaps there are those who would feel
wholly good about voting yes to a one lump vote, but the preference for a
separate vote item is far and away the majority so people can actually vote
their conscience! (And I'm sure there must be people who like blue and liver
but not white [which I suppose would make sense as a white with anything but
those striking high-contrast black points would just be weird] who would prefer
to vote just that way as well...)
For those on the list who count, we humbly pray the board would consider
dividing these standard issues into separate individual votes so that we, the
members, might vote our true and full opinions on this matter at hand.
Thank you for listening,
A humble steward of the GSD
Jen P & her Pack
JayDee's Proud-Haus Shepherds/Proud K911
www.jaydeesphs.com
Committed to the Total Dog you can be Proud of!!!
AKC Breeder of Merit
============================================================================
POST is Copyrighted 2014. 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:
