GSDCA sieger show - Page 10

The GSDCA Sieger is not subject to AKC approval.

The judges have been selected, they are first tier SV judges.  Names will be announced as soon as SV approval is received by the GSDCA.

 

bzcz,

Dog1 can speak for himself. Right now I'm busy with more important matters for a couple days. Right now I can tell you're not up to speed on all the information although you spit out a piece here or there. It's apparrant you don't have the total picture. When I get some time, I'll put together the list of documents you need to review to form and education opinion and discuss details with facts at hand. I'll be happy to provide the documents for you. I think it will help provide a tota; picture and you can discuss all your points with information to reference. We may not agree, but at least we will be looking at theh same sheets of music.

Dog1 while your at it,  put together all those different SV breed standards for the GSD so we can look at those too.

I'll be waiting (but I won't be holding my breath)

 

 

<sigh>  Kim, WHAT does that have to do with what AKC allows to be registered (which is what my post was about)?  

From GCK: "Can a state statute be invoked to override an organization's bylaws?"

Absolutely! An organization's bylaws can not violate statutes of the state the organization was incorporated in, nor can the bylaws violate federal law.

The courts will have to decide what applies and where in this instance.

"keith.........please tell me all about that "paperwork error"working females class at USA SS 2014..........blatent payoffs going on and amazingly public too!"

I have no idea what you're talking about...wasn't there.

Sitasmom is correct...shameful....

bzcz,

You made a statement a few days ago; “I have seen nothing about WDA ending their relationship with GSDCA. Do you have any proof of this?”

Here are some facts for you to consider;

First the WDA bylaws Article IV section 1 and section 4 require GSDCA representation on the WDA board of directors. In the Jan. 2014 WDA meeting there were bylaw amendments discussed that excluded the GSDCA from the WDA. If you want one piece of evidence as proof. I hope you would agree that removing an organization from your organization in violation of your own bylaws is proof.

Here’s a link to the bylaws: http://www.gsdca-wda.org/documents/pdf/bylaws.pdf

Second is the circumventing of the GSDCA in the WUSV events. The letter to the WDA pretty much sums up the GSDCA opinion. I have copied and pasted a portion of it below.

“The purpose of this letter is to provide you an opportunity to resolve our dispute without litigation. We are aware of no less than two incidents where you unilaterally contacted the WUSV specifically without our prior knowledge or notice in violation of the terms of the Agreement between the WDA and GSDCA (the “Agreement”). First, you arranged and promoted the WUSV North American Sieger Show last year. Obviously this show was sanctioned by the WUSV, who provided to you its approval. Thus, the WDA used our license to promote one of the largest shows in North America without even discussing this event with us. We discovered that you ran the show only after the show had occurred and only from other members of the WDA. Second, you have stated to your board and other members that that the WUSV informed you that you could continue to hold events and it would process your paper work without any authorization from the GSDCA. Obviously you could not make such statements without a prior l contact with the WUSV and for obvious reasons we were ont informed of such contact.”

“Your conduct has also shown a desire to attempt to separate the WDA's association with the GSDCA and to obtain the license that the GSDCA holds with the WUSV. You have violated your own bylaws in 2014 by not appointing one of the two persons selected by the GSDCA to your board of directors. Furthermore, you dismissed the other duly appointed GSDCA General Director in violation of your bylaws at the January 2014 WDA board of directors meeting. You have also gone way out of your way to attempt to make the GSDCA look as if it did not want to promote a first class show last year even though we have spent more on the world trials than any other organization has ever done and was complemented by all participants. You also had two reading of a Bylaw change removing the WDA from the GSDCA and we understand that you have a plan to send the change to the members for their approval. These actions, combined with your unilateral contact with the WUSV, shows a pattern of action that you and the WDA have violated the terms and the spirit of the Agreement with the GSDCA and that it has no desire to comply with the terms of the Agreement and more importantly a pattern of trying to have the WUSV reassign our license to the WDA. These actions clearly violate the terms and spirit of the Agreement. We obviously will not sit by idily while you attempt to reduce our presence in the working dog world and further attempt to have our license with the WUSV reassigned to the WDA.”

To totally appreciate what’s going on between the WDA/GSDCA/and the GSD Community, here’s a list of information you will find helpful to comprehend the situation.

Henke letter to USCA regarding WUSV relationship over the scorebook issue.
WDA Jan. Treasurer’s report
WDA financials from 2011 to 2013
GSDCA letter to WDA from Samuel Israel
54 page Colorado WDA lawsuit including attachments
Jan. 2014 WDA proposed bylaw changes.
GSDCA president message to members 2/14/14
WDA event numbers and participation history.

This is what’s written, what you can only know by being involved is the atmosphere throughout the GSD Community the WDA has created over the past few years through the conduct of the Board and management of the NASS.

I think the proof that there ending there relationship with WDA is there having there own Sieger Show 1 week prior to WDA Sieger Show

Dog1 you have just rehashed what has already been beaten to death on this forum.  GSDCA says that WDA did this, this and this. 

I asked, what has WDA done to remove itself from GSDCA.  The best you have is that they talked about this or that at some meeting which you weren't even at.  So the best you have is third hand knowledge of.....hmmmmm nothing since nothing has been done.  Is there a bylaw change that removes GSDCA?

What has WDA done?  You said that they removed the GSDCA general directors, who were they?  Where in the WDA minutes does it say they were removed?

You point out the treasurers report, yet again.  Because we need more stuff on your list and God forbid that we let facts get in the way of all our whning on the internet.  We've already established that GSDCA has NEVER been directly involved with the NASS and has NEVER had their logo on the event.  So using it as an issue now is more than a little disengenous. 

GSDCA makes lots of allegations.  Here is a tidbit for you.  If GSDCA's case is SO STRONG against WDA then why:

1) Did they lose out in Colorado for the injunction?

2) Why are they already on their THIRD law firm to handle the case for them?

There is no doubt that the GSDCA/WDA relationship is broken,  It was broken on the GSDCA side.  I was there, I know what was said and I know what was promised. I have no doubt that I and my records will be subpeonad for this lovely little court battle. 

GSDCA under Fasano is ticked at WDA and they are out to destroy them.  That is the fact.  Fasano promised things he didn't deliver on and he made himself look like a fool to the WUSV who then threatened him with Sanctions.  So he then lied to get himself out of it.

Enough of this round and round bullshit because everyone is afraid to say the truth.  You talk a lot of the party line rhetoric, nice to know they have foot soldiers willing to do their dirty work.