Support for UScA policy of not accepting GSDCA-WDA scorebooks?

10759 Views 43 Replies 11 Participants Last post by Lacey Vessell, Dec 9, 2011

Pam Nicolaides Rizkallah

Discussion Starter · Dec 2, 2011

I am curious how much support, from people who are in the schutzhund sport, of the UScA policy to not accept scorebooks or titles issued from the GSDCA-WDA? If you do or do not support, what is your rationale as to how your view benefits to the sport and potential solutions?

Save

41 - 44 of 44 Posts

Bob Scott

· #41 · Dec 9, 2011

Lacey Vessell said:
Bob there is a rule - it's called the JA Ammendment (Johannes Grewe Ammendment ).....

UScA now makes a member sign a card when they renew or join that they will not belong to a competing GSD organization..why they just don't write GSDCA-WDA is bs...but it is a rule. I for one (definitely not a top competitor) will not pay to have my rights taken away....to each their own. You can no longer see top competitors competing in both organizations....they have to choose (only because UScA's rule) between one or the other organization.

Oh and on that renewal card there are a few others rights that you must also waiver....

Thanks for that info Lacey. How can the top guns then compete in the different National/World events? That seems like it will destroy one or the other organization in this country...or both.

I belonged to both WDA and UScA at one time but it's been 3-4 yrs since either one now. Never at a high level though.

Save

Mario Fernandez

· #42 · Dec 9, 2011

Bob:

I think from 1989-2003, USCA and WDA had their own separate teams. Then the WUSV said only one team per country. So the USCA and WDA would each host their own Nationals and each year the team members per team would alternate for example, WDA would have 3 members on the team and USCA would have two and the alternateant for the six dog team.

This year the WUSV has ordered all counties that have more than one GSD organization to host a unification trial in which, I believe the top 6 dogs will represent their country at the WUSV. In June of this year, in KY their was USA first unification trial. So if I remember right the top 10 placements at the WDA and the top ten dogs for USCA competed in the Unification trial.

Save

Bob Scott

· #43 · Dec 9, 2011

Thanks Mario. It still boils down to the best of the best then....politics aside. :-D

Save

Lacey Vessell

· #44 · Dec 9, 2011

Mario, I agree with your statement that it hurts those that just want to train and trial their dogs...I was one of those people. I really don't see the big deal in higher level competitors utilizing both organizations to obtain their goals - as I would think that we would want THE BEST DOGS and HANDLERS representing the US of A. As long as ALL competitors have the same opportunity = they can all trial in UScA and WDA qualifier if they so choose - no big deal to me. Why hurt many...to spite a few?

What is really sad...in both the UScA and WDA in my opinion is winning the National Events for both organizations does not mean what it meant before when it comes to the World team - because of the "politics" between the organizations and having to hold a joint qualifier - yes I do know that this was a requirement handed down from WUSV but I also think that the WUSV stepped in because two organizations in our country (and another) could not work things out between themselves - how sad is that? So in the end, those of us "little people" that are not independently wealthy or don't have sponsors have little hope of ever competing at such a level even if we qualify. The cost incurred by those that enter the trials (is it 2-3 trials now?) required prior to be considered for the UScA side of the house for the World Qualifier Team is very expensive in travel costs..even more so when you consider the time away from work, time away from family and other dogs.

I don't know about your financial institution or cell phone company...but mine don't require me to sign a form saying that I will not use any other phone company or credit card company but theirs if they did....I would not be using their services.

See less See more

Save

41 - 44 of 44 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.

Top Contributors this Month