GSDCA Lawsuit - Letter of Clarification from the AKC - Page 2

What happened to the GSDCA Working Dog Committee page on their website?  It looks like they either took it down or moved it.  Does anyone have the current webpage link that shows whom is currently serving on the new GSDCA Working Dog Committee?

Sitasmom: Our club here in Bowling Green almost always hosted multiple events. We typically had a trial and a show but we advertised them as separate events and most often had two or more judges.  A typical year we would have a show and trial in the spring and a show and trial in the fall.  When it was convenient and possible we would bring in a Working Judge who was also a Conformation Judge.

Dog 1:  I can't say the Exhibit B is bogus. It is a document presented as proof in a lawsuit as a claim made under oath. Admittedly though,  I can't understand how they can claim to expect to hold "hundreds" of events  in 2015, as they assert on page 7 of the lawsuit, when they show such a limited number planned for 3 mos. and 23 days (almost 1/3rd of the year 2013).  Hundreds, even to most minimally educated folks, would be seen as the plural form or multiple of 100.  Given that,  does it not seem probable that the lowest number which would qualify as  a multiple of 100 would be 200. When I do the math it seems to indicate that they anticipate holding about 4 Events Each and Every Weekend throughout 2015. That would  give them 208 for the year.

Obviously, if WDA had ever held "hundreds" of events in any year, there would not have been so much bleating over entering USCA trials.   The fact is WDA never had "hundreds" of events, even combining shows and trials.  There may be serious repercussions for such blatantly untruthful statements in the documents filed with the court. 

The July 21 hearing was not what I would call "cancelled."  That would mean that the litigation is over.  The hearing was postponed indefinitely or to a date to be determined. 

 Gee, did WDA really intend to say that it was created "to compete with USCA"?

I see WDA also acknowledged GSDCA and USCA are the sole the WUSV members representing the United States.

Jurisdiction and Venue - Paragraph 19

gsd2407,

Good observation. Similar statement is on the WDA website where they acknowledge their WUSV authority is granted to the WDA through the GSDCA. 

This is where I see the WDA case coming apart at the seams. The GSDCA holds the WUSV license and allows the WDA use through an agreement. Seems if you relied on an organization that holds the license that allows you to exist, you would think it would be in your organizatiions best interest not to do a couple of the things the WDA has done recently.

Specifically if your events are no longer making money, fix it. If you can't fix it,, suck it up. When your events are not profitable and you stick your hand out and demand the club by which you exist pay for it,,,,you're a liability. When you make an agreement whereby you have access to the WUSV to facilitate communication, respect the agreement and communicate. When you overstep and take action to gain the license from the other party,,,,you become a liability. Both are very vaild reasons for the GSDCA to rid themselves of the WDA.

WDA clubs are now required to hold at least one event per year, and some clubs hold 2 or 3 events a year. Its quite possible for the number of events to increase to much higher number in 2015.

 I agree.  WDA's admissions in its  own pleadings would appear to sink  WDA's boat with respect to the WUSV issues.  That is undoubtedly why WDA's concern is with a determination that GSDCA cannot "terminate" the relationship unilaterally (despite WDA's prior apparent attempt to  in effect do precisely that via bylaw changes).  Yee (finally) figured out that he has driven WDA into an iceberg, and he is not the "Unsinkable Molly Brown."    Brent, I must agree with you:  WDA/Yee should have simply "sucked it up," absorbed the forseeable  losses from the  WUSV Championship , and moved on.   In the general scheme of things, it was not  such an immense amount as to launch a titanic  battle with GSDCA. 

Without any prejudicial qualification or I wish it weren't true BS, everyone with a brain larger than a twit knew that the WDA was a puppet in and for of the GSDCA. I don't believe I have ever known anyone in the dogsport who could count to ten using both hand and feet and their zipper who actually thought the WDA was a credentialed member of the WUSV. Irrespective of the messages from one side or the other, or should I say propaganda,  flying around,  there never was any credible evidence of any WUSV membership in this country of any clubs other than the GSDCA and the USchHCA.  

It will be interesting to see how President Henke and Herr Lux deal with this consternation as we move forward. Rumor has it that WDA President Yee and SV President Henke are very close friends, and if so, will we see the SV President make a power-play to promote, accommodate. cover for, or save his friend from sure oblivion in the dogsport or will we see him acknowledge and honor the long respected, obligatory and formal relationships that are and have been the WUSV. Secretary  Lux and President Henke are both faced with the significant burden of calling a spade, a spade. The reality that only the GSDCA and USchCA are and have ever been the real members of the World Union of German Shepherd Dog Clubs in the United States is undeniable and even irrefutable by  even by the most myopic dogsport homer. The WDA has been existing only and exclusively in this country through and as a result of its affiliation with the GSDCA. This unquestioned reality must weigh heavily on the hearts and minds of President Henke and Secretary Lux as they conjure up a way to deal with the rebellious boys in the states.  

 I cannot help but see several analogues to the sinking of the Titanic.  Didn't the muscians on the Titanic keep playing until the very end--literally going down with the ship?  

Even if all of the remaining WDA clubs held two events in 2015, it would NOT be "hundreds" of events.  Certainly, it was never 'hundreds" of events in any prior years.   USCA, otoh, did have 200+ events each year.   But, play on  Euterpe!

After doing some additional reading of the Amended Lawsuit document I found the following points interesting.

35. GSDCA formed WDA so that WDA could host WUSV/SV-style events (through) WDA's affiliation with GSDCA) that the AKC prohibited GSDCA from hosting.

36. Since its inception, WDA has engaged only in WUSV/SV-style programs, activities, and events for the German Shepherd Dog, and GSDCA has refrained from competing with WDA with regard to WUSV/SV-style events, activities, and programs, based on the original intent for which GSDCA formed WDA and based on AKC's prohibition that GSDCA shall refrain from directly participating in events that involve "bite work."

37. Since 1982, GSDCA and WDA have had a contract implied-in-fact, supported by nearly 32 years of a consistent past-practice, that WDA alone shall host and in engage in the WUSV/SV-style events, programs, and activities, and GSDCA shall not compete with WDA with regard to WUSV/SV-style events, programs, and activities, so long as AKC continued to prohibit GSDCA's involvement in bite work or WUSV/SV-style events (the "WUSV/SV-Style Events Contract").

While this may have been true at one time, once the AKC changed their policies and began recognizing the “Working Dog Sport” and Schutzhund titles, the landscape changed for the GSDCA.  This change in policy now allowed the GSDCA to host events themselves that contained bite work and/or protection work.  With a quick search on Google I found at least 2 GSDCA Show Bills that included Working Dog Sport Trials that were held by GSDCA not WDA clubs.  Here are links to the online Show Bills.

http://www.slideshare.net/Fordlovers/the-german-shepherd-dog-club-of-america-inc (Judged by Wendell Nope)

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/17835214/German-Shepherd-Dog-Club-of-America-AKC-WORKING-DOG-SPORT-EVENT (Judged by Dr. David Landau)

Bottom line if the WDA is trying to imply that the GSDCA has never been allowed and has never hosted Schutzhund/IPO trials than they have not been aware of the history of the GSDCA, because GSDCA clubs can and have hosted these types of events.  If anyone has past issues of the German Shepherd Dog in Review magazines, you can do your own research to see when and where these types of events were held by GSDCA clubs.