Schutzhund USA proposed bylaw Change - Page 10

I was there and yes it did pass in it's original form.  As of now, you are "not allowed" to have membership with USCA and WDA concurrently.  You "will be allowed" to retain a current membership with WDA until it expires at which time you "are not allowed" to renew it and maintain USCA member status.  Members of other AWDF affiliate clubs "will be allowed" to compete at USCA "CLUB" trials without USCA membership but participation at the Regional and National level will require enlistment.

As a non GSD owner but USCA member, I attended with interest to witness the gall of USCA to basically take away one's personal liberties regarding where one trains and with whom they do it.  As a long time member of USCA, I absolutely disagree with the decision of the "voting few".  This country was based on freedom of choice and if my memory serves me correct, we were colonized by Pilgrims who made a "choice" to leave their homeland to avoid religious persecution and start anew.  NO ONE has the right to take these liberties from you.

Here's a novel idea, instead of trying to eliminate the competition by force and intimidation, why not strive to make your product better so Schutzhund enthusiasts will CHOOSE by their own free will to join you.

I use this forum to express my opinion as only predetermined delegates were allowed to speak at today's proceedings.  I can fully understand the policy of "delegates only" contributing to the final vote, but members in good standing not even being allowed to speak was truly uncalled for and rude.  The way that people were spoken to on more than one occasion by members of the Executive Board was in my opinion, abuse of authority.  Having served honorably in the U.S. military, I volunteered to protect the rights of individuals to free speech and assembly.  I take exception to the denial of my rights as well as those of others who are not only citizens of our great country but also members (so far) of this organization.

I wonder how close the vote was.  And yes one would hope/think that such an important and hot-button issue would have been by ballot incase of challenge or recount.  What to do now with those twenty plus years of membership  :(

My understanding is that one vote made the difference.

The vote was not that close.  I believe the "NO" votes were in the high teens and while the "YES" votes were being counted, I left.  I think the afternoon session was attended by 46? voting delegates (don't quote me).

Here's a question......what happens when 2 members of a household own GSD's "together"....(both names on pedigree ownership)..and 1 is a member of UScA, and the other of WDA???  Will the dog be able to compete in any UScA event???...

Divorce is mandatory, dogs must be split in half.  The vote to see if they will be split top and bottom or front and back had to be shelved for another day.  Demonstrations were available but people kept throwing up.

Phil...yeah, thats hysterical......
Putting aside the above humor.....honestly.....what happens in the scenario of "co-owned" dogs?!

Good question, but while I was still in attendance, it was not addressed.  Oh, I forgot, I was not allowed to speak.  They did however, allow me bathroom privileges.  My coffee filled bladder was very thankful.  Yeah, yeah, I know,,,,,too much information.

Sounds like to me it's time to clean house at USA

Phil...thank you for being there....