Clarification on WDA members participating in USA events? - Page 2

wouldn't it all be a lot easier if we could just trial under qualified judges and earn our titles and have them recognize them?

I used to trial at WDA and USA clubs and at one point we were dual members.  I have NEVER seen anything happen at one groups trial that didn't happen at another.  In fact I can remember 2 trials that were under sv judges at a WDA club's trial and those were some of the sharpest pencils i've seen at a club trial.  Every time I was in a trial or gone to watch the judges and trials were the same.  this notion that one is somehow "better" or the judging is different is pretty fucking stupid.

I think the problem lies in the people that are in WDA or USA for that matter, but WDA seems to have a higher percentage, of people that buy their dogs titled and never trial them here themselves.  Those are mostly the dogs that I see can't do shit.  And there are those that buy titled dogs and actively work them here and some do well, some not so well, but then i've seen a lot of dogs do not so well and still pass at all sorts of trials.

NON-USCA members must pay a surcharge in addition to the entry fees at USCA events. I have a question for those who are not USCA members. WHY do you want to enter USCA events? Why not just support only WDA trials, if you cannot support USCA by being a member? I am just curious.

This is an easy one.

Events are few and far between. A few years ago it was simple, well, as simple as simple can be in a complex system. I was a member of USA, WDA, and the SV. I could go anywhere and enter any event.

Things changed. I still want to go to all the events. The problem became; just how do you accomplish that? USA changed the rules. OK, not the first time rules were changed, I just want to show my dog. I'm happy to support both US organizations. What do I have to do?

Fortunately the organizations worked in harmony to create, bend, or whatever you want to call it, the rules of participation around the JA. USA didn't have sense enough to change their mistake, but, they did have enough sense to mitigate by writing a set of rules around the JA.

They saved me a bunch of money too. I don't have to USA register my dogs to participate, I don't have to pay the membership dues. 10 dogs at 35.00, = 350.00 plus the 100.00 membership. I can do what I want with my dogs. Give the money to the other organizations and have enough left over to do an event. Woo hoo.

Why don't I join? Would love to be a member again. It doesn't make sense though. I couldn't be a member of the organization that has the other half of the events. Why limit myself to only USA events when there are only one or two in my travel area? The rules created make my USA membership just not practical.

Yep, exactly Randy.

Very elastic. I don't get it, but different strokes for different folks.

 
Politics, are a wonderful thing.

well, this clears it up somewhat. thanks to those who answered.

I was a dual member. USA bumped me, not my choice. but I think that has been discussed before. 

events are so scarce in my area that one needs to take advantage of whatever is there. the only thing I'm needing right now is a lifetime survey and it looks like the closest I can find this year is a 12 hr. drive.


If I can come up with another dog that has some potential, I think I'm going to co-own with my grandson, with him being WDA and me UScA.

i hope that will cover the bases.


Rik 

A lot of people don't get it. I'm one of them too. I just want to continue to show my dog where ever I can. Someone came along and made it more difficult. I just have to see what the new rules are and work within what's been changed. No different than anything else, IRS rules, corporate rules, contract rules, dog rules. They all change, you just have to change with them.

Fortunately USA seems to be doing OK through it all. They took some hits, made some changes, but they appear to be happy and content with the results. At least that's the party line.

Did anything change? Was there a plan to change anything? I don't think so. The WDA and USA still have the same dogs, they still have the same standards, share the same judges, same, same, same. The recent Universal was a combination of WDA and USA teams. Same again. No difference, just a much more complex system that's tough for even people that have been in it for years to navigate and a shift of where the money goes.

Bob, I think any objective person would agree with you

My point is that if I felt an organization was as "wrong" as many claim USCA is and has been, and I had so little respect for the organization (as has also been expressed by WDA members), I would want nothing to do with that organization .  But, I suppose  the comment " one needs to take advantage of whatever is there.'  says it all.  It is a matter of "taking advantage."  Some call it "pimping."   Just another reason why I wouldn't bother with that organization.   But, as I said, different strokes for different folks.   I may never "get" it.   And, that's fine, too.
   USCA simply needs to surcharge non-members (which it already does) and perhaps should consider increasing the amount of the surcharge.  

Perhaps, USCA should fill in that co-ownership "hole, " too.    

Is there some reason that WDA members cannot simply form more clubs?   There was a "rash' of new WDA clubs when JA first went into effect.   Oddly, USCA not only continued to add new clubs, but some of those erstwhile WDA clubs left WDA and returned to USCA.   I believe one that left with loud trumpeting in your area, Rik, is among those that , quietly, returned to USCA.