Rottweileronline.net

Has anyone thought about your dog's pedigree of record? AKC holds the pedigrees. Only AKC titles will appear. IFR titles mean nothing on the pedigree. You might have a great almighty Sieger dog, but on the pedigree of record, it looks like a byb. So back to the tail, good or bad? Until AKC shows commonly champion out the tail, your dog will still show on the pedigree as a grade dog. This is the USA, IFR does not matter.

Bob,
I agree at the moment, hopefully this will change with AKC soon.

The response you quoted was to previous posts from others that they cannot sell puppies with tails....so initial response was breed to sell or breed to compete? I personally have been leaving tails on my pups and have had absolutely no problem placing them. It all comes down to educating the prospective buyer on tails.

As far as showing in AKC that's a different story. This is an AKC issue.

By the way great news my American bred AKC papered TAILED Rottie from your new stud dog Ives vom Hause Neubrand II just won last month Kyltall Jugendsiegern in Speicher, Germany under ADRK Judge Dieter Hoffman If I had docked this would not have been possible.

This is my guess on what is going to happen with USRC working clubs.

By the way. How many are there?

Do USRC clubs primarily hold shows or do they hold trials?

USRC trials will disappear as all USRC clubs who actually are working clubs will become DVG or SchH USA clubs. USRC trials will start to become an abnormality and then they will disappear. It will be just a show club.

When the dogs grandfathered are too old to show, entries at shows will go to less than half of current entries, most likely less.

I do not think I am that far off in my guess. ARC and RCC dropped it like a hot potatoe. They chose to quit before getting expelled as they see current Rottweiler climate and realize it is not feasible currently.

USRC took up the vacancy, commitments made on behalf of the club, members, breeders and members. With no input or consultation from any. And then they are told this is a great thing.

Only the people who are selling it would say it is great. Everyone else can see what the writing on the wall is.

At the last show we held, there were 76 entries. There were 2 tailed Rottweilers. The rest were docked.

Jane - once again you are publicly printing false and misleading information in an attempt to libel others. As I have repeatedly stated, I was not called from the meeting regarding the Canadian clubs at all. As the recording will prove, I was called regarding the error in the agenda on motions from reports and then was not called again until after the break.

2003 was our lowest membership point because renewals were not sent out in 2002. Orville did not send them out and when Paula took over Andreas instructed her not to send them. I took over as Membership Officer in fall of 2003. We put a flyer in the magazine and during 2004 I checked renewals against the membership list from 2002 and sent notices to all 2002 members who had not renewed. I then developed the e-mail renewal system in order to save money as we had a magazine which was costing us several thousand dollars per quarter. By 2004 membership was increasing again and has done since. The Regional Directors were also involved in contacting lapsed members. Yes, your work on the USRC magazine contributed, and I made sure to thank you for that contribution. This does not give you the right to ignore and belittle the contributions of others.

Liz

Warren won't lose any entries because the docked dogs can show. It won't be until dogs born before 2011 have completed their entire careers, which may be 2019, when there won't be any more docked dogs shown in USRC shows. That's quite a long time from now.

Jane,

As usual, need to clarify a few things that of course you incorrectly stated:

1. I never stated I was stepping down from anything.

2. I have *numerous* emails from you as well as forum posts on this forum stating that my AoR work is excellent, V1, how fast I got things to you, how much I helped you and your club members, etc. So which is it Jane? I would be happy to forward/post the pdf's of these numerous emails to the forum should anyone like to see them. Of course, anyone can simply search this forum and quickly see what I state is correct.

3. To date I have no Merit Award application received from Angela Craddock. I just went through the folder. I do not have a submission from her. I also did a comprehensive search of my mailbox to see if I received it email - I archive all USRC correspondence. I do not.

I did however just last evening correspond with Ms. Craddock regarding a scorebook submission. By all email headers involved, everyone responded in a timely manner.

4. As far as your Merit Award submissions I just received them a two weeks ago. I have other work that took priority - like making sure people had scorebooks for trials and processing paperwork for people that needed it for Nationals and other upcoming shows. Apparently you had supposedly submitted these awards back when Barb Smith was AoR - I am looking at your note telling me this, however, these Merit Award apps are clearly dated April 13, 2009. So apparently for at least 5 years (even though they are dated 5 weeks ago) you could have cared less about receiving these awards but now that you suddenly have God only knows what bone to pick with me you suddenly care about them again and want to blame me for not receiving something that was submitted 5 years ago supposedly?

And I suppose you've already forgotten how I busted my butt for your last few events for last minute scorebook submissions for your club members and entrants, that I expedited and overnighted to you so that you could have them in time for your events.

Typical.

As far as the Merit Award for Mr. Craddock:

I was just informed that Ms. Craddock was formerly Stevenson. Mr. Stevenson-Craddock's Merit Award application was processed and at my directive instructed to be printed in the USRC Magazine and placed on the USRC website. This was done nearly a year ago.

Sammy, now that is funny

Mimi

Scott McCracken and George Shumaker just before the great King Crab heist in Phoenix.

Wayne Simanovich

Yeah I was at that show the good old days is right very few of us left in this breed from those days

Wow Wayne, I can't get over how much you have changed since 91
It's funny I don't know how it happened but i haven't changed one bit since then.
I wonder what Bud would say about USRC today? I know he was a big Mentor for you and for a lot of us
& yes those were the good ole days of USRC, you can say that again!!!
We did have a lot of fun with our dogs & our USRC friends back then!!!!
& boy were our dogs tested, especially when you, Richard, and i am having brain freeze but the helper from PA who now lives in Arizonia were the helpers!

Mimi
PS Hey Bob, Mike & I are still left from those days way back when. There are not many originals left that can say USRC was great back then!

Mimi & Mike Prisco
Meisterhund Kennel-Living in our Home & in our Hearts:
USRC's '93RYS,'95 & '96 N/S Gina V.D. Teufelsbrucke SchH3,FH2,LBST,CGC
V-Brando Von Meisterhund,SchH3,IPO3,AD,FH,ABST,CGC, Sch N/Champ
AKC Pt'd Enzo Von Meisterhund, SchH3,IPO3,AD,CGC, CD, 2005 IFR World Team
AKC Pt'd Diva Von Meisterhund
AKC 3 Pt Major & BOW Schonhaus's Duece(Gino) Von Meisterhund

Scott McCracken is as real as it gets.

Wayne Simanovich

Wayne it is great to see you participating again. Could you please address the concerns and issues discussed in this thread? That would be an excellent way to clear up the confusion.

Ron you didn't really think he would waste his time talking to a lowly general member did you?

Why is it surprising Wayne knows the individual in question when no one active in the Rottweiler world has ever heard of him? These pictures look quite dated, before the time of digital.

USRC suspended me for 6 months today for comments I have made on this board concerning USRC. It really means nothing given USRC expelled our club with no notice and no warning. Also, it is not like there are very many USRC events on the west coast. Especially trials. Our club deserved the simple courtesy of being notified such an important topic was going to be discussed. What is stopping USRC from suspending other clubs with no notice, no warning? Think about that one.

Angela who was a valuable member of USRC (my opinion of course), and gave me permission to post this on her behalf as she is not on this board. She has quit USRC a couple of days ago. She has been a strong supporter of USRC for many years. She made it very clear she will never attend another USRC event. Samantha. Angela submitted her paperwork on the merit awards to you more than 18 months ago. It was not weeks ago. It was my applications for one gold and two silver that you received a few weeks ago. But then you did not mention you actually received my paperwork. For the record. One of the silvers and the gold was submitted when Barbara Smith was AOR. I submitted paperwork same time as Chuck Wilson did on Anja. Anja got listed. My paperwork apparently got lost so I had to resubmit.

Effective January 1, 2012. Any breeder who is a USRC member, who chooses to dock. Will be expelled if they choose to breed a litter and do not dock.

Such an important decision was made with no input from USRC breeders, general members or from clubs. It was a salesman tactic and individuals who voted at GBM obviously agreed with the ramifications they were bringing to the club.

And yes, tails are the way of the future. I personally like the tail but I am not a breeder so presently do not own a tailed Rottweiler as breeders who I have got my dogs from dock. Presently, given the power CKC and AKC have. It is not a logical decision. Just ask anyone. Do the numbers.



These are the titles Angela's dogs have and you can read above the questions she raises. She quit her USRC membership a few days ago.


Susan Peyton would have to leave tails on her puppies she breeds effective January 1, 2012 in order to remain a USRC member. These are the titles again on two of her dogs.


Susan is appalled at how USRC has treated Canadians. So is Angela. So am I. Actually, so are many.

And we can post pictures of people and dogs who have been very active in the past 5 years and don't have to go back 20 years to dig up a picture.

I wish USRC much success. It is not a club I believe in any more given current leadership. Actions shown towards me and my club this past year by USRC have been most unprofessional to say the least, vindictive and based on personal agenda.



With what was passed at GBM. Effective January 1, 2012. Any breeder who chooses to dock can quit USRC or else they will be expelled for noncompliance.

I find it totally incredible that an issue of such great importance was never presented to USRC breeders, USRC clubs or the general USRC membership.

The slate is now telling us it is a great thing for the club.

I somehow do not think it was a very wise decision.

Apparently, nor did American Rottweiler Club or Rottweiler Club of Canada. They sought input from their members.

IFR is just one tiny part.

USRC just changed the breed standard at GBM with no input from anyone but the slate. Plus the presentation of how the slate wished to present information when individuals voting may not have clearly understood what exactly they were voting on.

Ron makes an excellent comment. Perhaps Wayne can address publically some of the issues raised in Angela's email that she gave me permission to post.

My first order of business will be to get my SchH 3 female's scorebook transferred from USRC to GSSCC. The score book belongs to the dog. And has not association to the handler. I will still have the ability to trial even though USRC just suspended me. Obviously, it will not be at any USRC trials.

I do hope USRC corrects its mission statement on its website as USRC is most certainly not an international club, which is what it advertises itself to the general public to be. They just eliminated the international clubs with no warning, no notice.

Scott McCracken looks familiar, but it's ancient history. It definitely looks like a few good old boys having a drink together. Great fun, but what does it have to do with the USRC? Scott, do you still own a Rottweiler? If so, welcome back! We need more active Rottweiler owners, handlers, and breeders. You should talk your friend Wayne into getting into Rottweilers!

The parties who ran as a slate were Wayne, Liz, Laurie, Erika and Janay. The only member of "the slate" in attendance at the recent GBM was Wayne. The General Board of the USRC made the decisions at the board meeting as a majority.

Liz

The the way I understand it. All dogs after as of Jan 01, 2012 must have a tail in order to step into the ring, breed test or on the field. Yes. people have been given 14 years to get with the program & produce Rottweilers with tails if they want to be a part of IFR. If they have chosen not to comply then too bad for them is what IFR has basically said. Hence why RCC & ARC are not members.

Yes, after 2011 a docked tail will be a "DQ no matter what", as the USRC's breed standard will need to be changed in accordance with IFR. No more docked dogs in the Sieger ring, & they will not be able to pass a breed test (BST) as they will not meet the standard.
/quote]

Jane,

Again, to clear this up so there are no misconceptions, Yes docked dogs that are born before January 1, 2012 will be able to compete at any USRC shows. No, it will not be an automatic DQ for any dogs born before January 1, 2012. So we will see docked dogs competing at USRC shows until possibly 2019 or so.

USRC joined an organization that effectively will allow the political views and laws of a foreign country to dictate the decision of breeders/competitors/owners in the USA to own a tailed or docked dog if they wish to remain a member and/or show/trial in the USRC.

I suppose the US should join the EU and convert to the Euro to make the transition complete.

Hurry up stock up the bunker in the backyard the Germans are coming! LOL This is the kind of foresight that has caused GM and Chrysler to fail. We will build big vehicles with very little MPG because we are Americans and we do what we want. Instead of thinking outside the norm and build more efficient cars. We as Rottweiler owners must ban together with the rest of the world to fight not only BSL but to help guide the future of this magnificent breed. I lived in Italy for 4 years and have seen this kind of attitude. We cannot afford to think like this or we will always be one step behind. Do you think the ARC now regrets pulling out? I think so. Anytime you can have a say in the International Community it is worth its weight in gold.

I guess we have already headed that way since the gubbamint now owns large stock/control in banking and the auto industry. Not to mention we snubbed one world leader by meeting with that countries President before meeting with the Prime Minister who actually runs the country. The president is figure head like the queen of england.

When in history has a President of the US every bowed as a subordinate to another world leader? the current one has while in KSA!

I believe and always will believe of freedom of choice. That is what makes USA great. If you don't feel like that well there are plenty of other countries you can go to.
Also Steve how would you know how ARC feels? ARC stands on their own merit.
& believe you me if Germany's goverment didn't force them to have tails on their Rotts this wouldn't even be a discussion.
I have close friends there and they were made to do what their goverment says and they were not happy but since they do have to abide by their Goverment (and they are not at all as free as we are) and they sell Rottweilers all over the world then their tail dogs in their view is the "BEST" Now the niave people in our country think this is the best thing since white bread!
I remember when this first took place and in Washington State the ADRK Judges had cards made up and handed them out to the people at the show promoting the tails.
Great business sense
I threw mine in the garbage. I thought it was in poor taste.
This country are going the way of more and more rules and are losing it's freedom. It is getting ass backwards like critizing the Cal. runner up for her beliefs. Pretty sad if you ask me.

Mimi

Mimi & Mike Prisco
Meisterhund Kennel-Living in our Home & in our Hearts:
USRC's '93RYS,'95 & '96 N/S Gina V.D. Teufelsbrucke SchH3,FH2,LBST,CGC
V-Brando Von Meisterhund,SchH3,IPO3,AD,FH,ABST,CGC, Sch N/Champ
AKC Pt'd Enzo Von Meisterhund, SchH3,IPO3,AD,CGC, CD, 2005 IFR World Team
AKC Pt'd Diva Von Meisterhund

Exactly how much money has USRC contributed to BSL in say 2008?

I'm a member of the ARC and I have no regrets that they pulled out but I can't speak for the rest of the members.

You know there is talk of the ADRK pulling out of the IFR right?

& remember to Thank a Vet for all your freedoms
Mike fought in Vietnam for your freedoms and Liberties.
Some of you People should start being Thankful for what we have because it is our soldiers who fought & died to give them to you!'
No other country has the rights that we do!!! & slowly but surely it is being taken away from us.




Mimi & Mike Prisco
Meisterhund Kennel-Living in our Home & in our Hearts:
USRC's '93RYS,'95 & '96 N/S Gina V.D. Teufelsbrucke SchH3,FH2,LBST,CGC
V-Brando Von Meisterhund,SchH3,IPO3,AD,FH,ABST,CGC, Sch N/Champ
AKC Pt'd Enzo Von Meisterhund, SchH3,IPO3,AD,CGC, CD, 2005 IFR World Team
AKC Pt'd Diva Von Meisterhund
AKC Pt'd with a Major and BOW Schonhaus's Duece (Gino) Von Meisterhund

Make sure you tell Mike thank you from the Canuso's. I served in the Navy for 4 years, my brother in law is currently stationed in Fort Drum, NY. My sister in law was in the Air Force. Samantha's Dad was in the Air Force. My cousin is a colonel in the US Marines currently stationed at Camp Pendleton. So as you can see we have lots of military in our immediate family. I thank god everyday we have such a great country that gives us choices and that great people like mentioned fight everyday to keep us safe from harms way.

I am glad to hear that you appreciate your Brothers -in-Arms.
I am sorry to hear you had to fight for your country in war and your family.
It isn't pretty when you have to kill people & sacrific their lives so we can live in freedom & be blessed to live with all our choices in this Country.
These rights we have are being taken away each day including someday not being allowed to own the Rottweiler Very sad. Thank the Liberals for that......

Mimi & Mike Prisco
Meisterhund Kennel-Living in our Home & in our Hearts:
USRC's '93RYS,'95 & '96 N/S Gina V.D. Teufelsbrucke SchH3,FH2,LBST,CGC
V-Brando Von Meisterhund,SchH3,IPO3,AD,FH,ABST,CGC, Sch N/Champ
AKC Pt'd Enzo Von Meisterhund, SchH3,IPO3,AD,CGC, CD, 2005 IFR World Team
AKC Pt'd Diva Von Meisterhund
imi

Steve, read the last line of your post. Then think. The USRC is run like a dictatorship.The common member has not been ask for their opinion or even given a choice prior to GBM. Now the only choice members have is being forced on them. tailed or RESIGN. This all brought up by a President that this choice will never effect.

Hey Steve,
Can you please give us some examples of this? You keep saying it and I'm racking my brain trying to come up with something. You seem more up on the decision...what new powers will USRC have as far as a "voice" in the IFR?

Since bush got us in this mess 8yrs ago.

Steven Canuso wrote
"We as Rottweiler owners must ban together with the rest of the world to fight not only BSL but to help guide the future of this magnificent breed."

When exactly did the rottweiler owners ban together on this? This was done in a meeting when most were caught off guard. While you, and a few others were in the loop the majority of the club had no idea. Please explain how completely changing the standard, and requirements to enter a show were not important enough to run by the rest of the club? It does not matter what may or will happen, the USRC should not be forcing things especially major changes without considering the membership. We have a president involved in this that is not affected at all since you have to own a rottweiler to even be affected. He found time to post more pictures from the early 90's, hopefully he can post some answers to the questions that are throughout this thread.

The key word is MUST.

Hi Dana,

I am talking about a vote. Just like anyother member in the IFR. We now have a say in what goes on in the International community. Prior to the membership we had no say nor was the USRC recognized as a full member. Hope that clears it up for you.

Exactly what is the IFR preserving in the breed and what protections? Last I heard dog was still regularly on the menu in China yet they are a member and the IFR was worried about the tail?

The key word is "must"? I guess only when it involves certain topics and certain people affected!

Before we worry about having a say in the "International Community" how about this backroom USRC politics stops, and people like you start communicating with the membership. USRC should be improving itself and the problems here. You were a big part of this vote which I feel was not done properly. This appears to me as purely vindictive against Jane & the clubs in Canada. Why again do you feel this needed to be done when the majority of the membership had no idea, and still many have no idea that they will be regulated in the future?

Again, how is this about the dogs? Certainly not within the US...well I guess that is not right, it is about some peoples dogs, just not everyones. So much for this "transparency " I have heard EB members speak about!

I know but what do they vote on? I mean what issues does the IFR have control over? What have we not had a say in that now we do? Or is that still remaining to be seen....?

I am happy to hear of your family being in the service.
I also can go on and on about my many family members Joining the service.
But as you know there are other reasons to join the service.
I was speaking of those Servicemen & Women who fought for our Country. Who put their lives on the line & who came home in body bags, seen their friends being blown up in front of them, who killed people in sometimes ways you can only imagine, people who are complete strangers & sometimes innocent familys were killed as well.
All for our Freedom and the ability to live in a Democratic society. Those are the true Heros.
& God Bless anyone in your family who layed their life on the line for our Country!

& I do believe in the freedom of choose. I don't appreciate anyone taking that away from me, including a Hobby Club.

Mimi
Mimi & Mike Prisco
Meisterhund Kennel-Living in our Home & in our Hearts:
USRC's '93RYS,'95 & '96 N/S Gina V.D. Teufelsbrucke SchH3,FH2,LBST,CGC
V-Brando Von Meisterhund,SchH3,IPO3,AD,FH,ABST,CGC, Sch N/Champ
AKC Pt'd Enzo Von Meisterhund, SchH3,IPO3,AD,CGC, CD, 2005 IFR World Team
AKC Pt'd Diva Von Meisterhund
AKC Pt'd With a Major and BOW's Schonhaus's Duece (Gino) Von Meisterhund



Those are the true Hero's in my mind who gave us our Freedom and the ability the right to choose.

I am sure my last post will not remain up long on the USRC board before Wayne commands it to be removed so I am posting it here to have a record of what I said:

Wayne you posted while I was typing my other post. First of all I am not trying to pick a fight but let me assure you if I was you cannot intimidate me. You may be able to embarras women publically, take them out of a meeting and silence them from challenging you but that would not work on me.

Secondly I never said you do not know the facts. I am quite sure you know them well which is why you could have already answeredsome of my simple questions because surely you knew those answersbefore you led the organization to take this steep. I accuse your little parrot Steve of running his mouth without knowing the facts. I accused some others of voting prematurely without knowing the facts based soley on your recommendation.

I am not the first to say that you seem to act or not act with arrogance. That is the growing opinion. I disagree with your decision to ban the Canadian clubs. Some of your own staff have told me privately that the insurance matters could have been corrected. It is obvious that you and Jane have a mutual disdain for one another so you jumped at the opportunity to get rid of her. I also question the practicality of taking the USRC into the IFR. That is my opinion until I stand corrected. Perhaps your news brief will change my mind.

As for "picking your fights more wisely" perhaps you should take your own advice. It is my understanding that you have a history of not picking your fights wisely and landing the USRC in a lawsuit. You seem to have a problem with women standing up to you and you need to be more careful because the last one beat you. You keep messing with Jane you and the USRC might end up on the losing end again. Personally I wouldn't waste my time andmoney to sue the USRC but some are more zealous than me about their right to be a part of the USRC. I have heard that some people do not even serve on the board of leadership anymore because they recognize the real possiblity of you picking the wrong fight and dragging the USRC into your personal vendettas.

Since you seem to want to threaten me and attempt to intimidate me instead of professionally answering a member's questions, while you are addressing the membership on the IFR isue why don't you take the extra minute and asnwer a year's worth of questions about your breed of choice and tell us about your Rottweilers.

Some of your parrots keep ignorantly saying that if I really care then I should have been at the GBM. They fail to understand that my presence could not have made a difference. But I do wish I would have been there just to see the look on your face when Amanda took the seat of VP. Oh no...another woman that will stand up to you and this one has world cladd credetials in the Rottweiler world I should add!!! Have a nice day Wayne and I look forwrd to your report.

and as I responded :

Warren, you appear to lack some background in USRC history, or you have been unfortunately misinformed. Your comments regarding Wayne's relationships with strong women are untrue and offensive. The 'slate' that people are so fond of referring to was entirely composed of women with a long history of strong volunteer work for this organization. None of us are easily cowed and we have all had our disagreements with Wayne. We simply handled them profesionally without resorting to public insults and personal slurs.

Also. no lawsuit was filed aganst USRC during Wayne's terms in office. Jackie Goad was president when the Schweitzer lawsuit was filed and Andreas Mueller was president when the Fragapane lawsuit was filed.

Liz

and as you know:

lawsuits can be settled out of court and the Schweitzer suit went to court during Wayne's previous administration.

Liz I was asking questions that deserve an answer. Steve and now Wayne made it personal so defend them all you want. For a year now Wayne has arrogantly refused to answer numerous questions about his breed of choice and his personal Rottweilers! WHY? WHY? WHY?

Liz do you know what Rottweilers Wayne owns and has owned in the recent past prior to becoming presidnt of the USRC?

Liz when I called you about rejoining USRC, I ask you if things were any better in the organization.You said " well we have a leader who doesn't LEAD and if I knew then what I know now, there would be a different Membership Officer because I would not have ran" you also said you were going to resign after the GBM. Are you still going to resign? Or deny that you said this? Remember I'm not the only one you said this too.

I thought those on the slate only were going to be in position if each of the others on the slate were in office? Given that the Sec resigned pretty much after the elections, and the VP resigned, where is the committement to the promise we were given? Not to mention the rumors that swirled around that if the member only rule was rescinded he would resign. I guess it is like term limits for our politicians as those concerns only apply when they are not in office.

USRC is sadly continuing to thumb its nose at those who have supported it in years past. We first get this ridiculous charge towards non members, then without any discussion use the IFR to shut out those who do dock. Am I right to understand another arguement for banning docked dogs is for betterment of our breed? That this will lessen puppy millers? It amazes me to see some of these people act like they care, when they do nothing to those who have bred under age dogs, dysplastic dogs, bred dogs prior to OFA's, involved in owning a dog who was switch with another for an OFA! Yup, I can see exactly how much they care. When concerns were brought up over individuals in the past regarding hosting an event the answer was...well they do put on a big show! I guess that does not equal money at all now does it?

Lawsuits settled out of court are done for many reasons, it certainly does not mean that the administration that took over was at fault.

You have not given any time for answers. Bryan just returned a short time ago, he has twins, a wife and a job to catch up with. Wayne was out of town and recently had a computer crash. A report needs to be prepared and delivered rather than simply making a pile of off the cuff statements. I know this is the age of instant communication, but just as in dog training, patience is a virtue.

Wayne has owned many rottweilers, Remus, Cendy, Dino, Xenda. As recently as 2006 he registered a dog with USRC. I don't keep track of Wayne's dogs any more than I do of yours. Who are the dogs I've titled over the past 20 years?



As stated, I have had my disagreements with Wayne. The period after the EB meeting was particularly upsetting for me. I don't recall the quote about leaders, but it certainly sounds as if I thought Wayne would be an effective leader and I was not happy with his actions at that time, which is absolutely how I felt at that time. As to the statement that "if I knew now, etc.", I have said that publicly and I stand by it, however, you are taking it out of context. I am sick to death of the incessant negativity, the constant urge to tear everything apart rather than assist in building or attempt change in a positive manner. It's like living with a dog who chews up everything given to them.

And no, I NEVER said I was going to resign after this GBM. I have ALWAYS stated that I would NEVER resign mid-term again because I just ended up doing all the work with no voice. I have stated that I do not intend to run again.



The commitment was to run as a slate and not accept election if the slate was not elected as a whole. Again, I have repeatedly stated that I will not resign mid-term ever again - of course, knock wood, barring any unfortunate and unforeseen events. I'm sure you'll keep your fingers crossed for me. As for your delight in schadenfreude, karma will get you in the end.

Liz

Liz wrote


You will never get it then...I want to see things done right, and if they aren't then make them right as soon as you can. Not everything I understand appears clear at first as sometimes it does take time to realize an error or just misunderstanding. In situations like Jane then they are of utmost importance, yet other things that have sat still are not even dealt with. The same people get the pass, and those that raise the questions are the problem. Either is it turn the other cheek to certain individuals or do what it takes regardless of the process for others.

Karma...in the USRC that is equivalent to free pass IMO.

As mentioned previously, Victoria Rottweiler Club had been awarded 2010 USRC NW Regional Sieger Show and the VRC had set a tentative show date for the last part of May 2010. The Foothills Working Rottweiler Club had been awarded the 2009 NW Regioinal Sieger Show and also had a date set. Victoria Rottweiler Club had invited FCI Judge Alfredo Estrada Santiago from Mexico, several months ago, and he had accepted the assignment to judge 2010 USRC NW Regional Sieger Show. He just sent me this message and this is my response to him.



This was my response to the judge who had accepted our invitation to judge the USRC NW Regional Sieger Show scheduled to be held at our club in May 2010.



This is Alfredo's response:



It would have been nice if USRC had of given USRC clubs some indication they were being kicked out and it also would have been nice if the EB members involved in the situation had of bothered to check with the NW Regional Director to see if any events were planned for the clubs that were being expelled versus checking with the membership officer to see if the clubs had any events planned and membership officer giving the EB members in question the response that neither club being expelled had any USRC events planned. Just my opinion of course.

This entire situation of how the Canadian clubs were removed was handled most unprofessionally by USRC to say the least.

Jane

Is anyone surprised? NOTHING that happens in that club surprises me any more. I will be surprised if it lasts 2 more years.

Yes but now we have a voice in the international family of Rottweilers although nobody can tell me what important things we will have a voice in. It is a shame how the USRC handled this matter with the Canadian clubs!

I think the Canadians should feel lucky they do not have to deal with the USRC any more. I will not be renewing my waisted membership next year. As the USRC is not really a club. Just a money taking organization. That I have seen give nothing back to members. But rule us on how we are suppose to raise our dogs...

I'm curious! How does the USRC have a vote or a say in the IFR? According to the IFR rules, the only voting members have to be from FCI countries as well!

This is one of the reasons the ARC and CKC quit! They paid the same membership dues but were excluded from having a vote or a say in the international Rottweiler Community! Which doesn't make sense because the IFR, itself, isn't recognized by the FCI!

So, could you explain what is meant by your above statement?

Steve

TICK,TICK,TICK

I figured I would do this in capital letters since the USRC now has an international voice and they feel this is a big achievement.

I have told you repeatedly. No questions were asked of me regarding the Canadian clubs. Once again. Nobody called to ask me if there were any events planned in Canada. The meeting was recorded and the recording will bear this out.

You insist on making libelous statements which you know to be utterly untrue over and over.

The use of Sturgis is part of USRC's bylaws. Sturgis has been utilized since the inception of the club. Past officers and members have had parliamentarians at meetings, utilized Sturgis in their decisions and consulted parliamentarians. Another falsehood on your part.

Liz

Jane - perhaps you should check the website before complaining. Your statement about the SchH 3 club is also untrue. Your name was posted on the Saturday following receipt of the addition from Angeli.

Liz

Do I have to have access to the USRC forum to see any comments? Or is this public where one does not have to be a member?

Yourself and Wayne removed ability for me to have access to USRC board.

Accusers. Judge, jury, executioner on the BOI case filed against me.

I was warned not to mention USRC publically.

Give me a break. My club was removed. This is what hurt. Being suspended. Well. People know me. People are not stupid. It is the age of shared information.

Secrets can come up and bite one in the ass. Everything with certain EB members and the GBM was "secret". The club is only now starting to realize the fallout by allowing this and what is going to cost the club as a whole.

Thank you Liz.

Perhaps address this board and tell everyone why membership officer can answer questions that belong to a Regional Director and membership chooses to answer a Regional Director's business?

Please also address the issue as to why when you choose to answer on Regional Director's behalf why as an EB member you did not have a moral obligation to tell a fellow EB member the EB discussion that was taking place outside of EB (privately) and what was being sought?

I think these are most reasonable questions that I am asking.

Membership officer job description is to process applications. Not speak on behalf of a region and a Regional Director.

You are a membership officer. Not a Regional Director. Your function is memberships. Not clubs, not regional business. That business belongs to a Regional Director. Not the membership officer.

I do hope you follow through and resign as you stated you would. It would be most beneficial to the club when you step away and have no vote on EB.

It would be a very positive step for the organization.

You say you would not step down mid term as you would do all the work and have no voice on EB. Well, I probably put in more hours than any single person on EB on behalf of the club. Editor has not ever had a voice.

Membership officer can answer on behalf of RD. We just saw this happen.

Nothing is suprising at all given what has happened this past year. The club has lost pretty much all credibility and what is left is disappearing pretty quick.

I do hope the entire slate steps down. Perhaps at that point the club can restructure, try to rebuild, try to attract members they forced away. And this is addressing USA people. Not anyone in Canada.

GBM did not just kick out Candian clubs and all international association. They are saying USRC now is an international club.

Correction is required. USRC was an international club up until GBM. It is now strictly and completely a USA soil based club. USRC is a member of IFR only USRC has no voice, and on vote, as USRC does not belong to an FCI country and is not associated how it needs to be for FCI status. AKC only has this right as AKC is the Rottweiler national breed club of USA and AKC holds the breed registry of the Rottweiler.

URSR does not hold breed registry. All USRC can do is encourage people to double register a dog but the only registry in USA that counts when it comes to paperwork is AKC.

AKC holds the breed registry.

Steve Robinson asked Steven Canuso to explain his comments. I do hope President, membership officer, Mr. Canuso, or anyone else who voted can step in and correct what is stated above if it is not accurate information.

I have just been talking to Andreas about this. He didn't know about this tail issue. He does not visit boards. His only source of information is the magazine.

Since I quit making USRC magazine 18 months ago, there has been 1 magazine. No indication when there could be another.

Andreas is a past president and president of a USRC club in Arizona. We were talking about the fact that after January 1st, 2012, breeders (including judges) are forbidden to dock a litter to maintain USRC membership. If they choose to dock. They are expelled from USRC and will lose their judge's license. This is what Andreas just said to me a few minutes ago when I was talking to him on Skype.



I answered back it was a GB decision. Breed standard was changed as part of the President's report. Just like regional boundaries were redefined (against USRC bylaws) as when geographical area changes, boundaries are redefined as part of President's report.

No notification given to any USRC member, club, judge or breeder as to the change of breed standard or change of regional boundaries.

I heard many told President the meeting was Out of Order and he refused to listen. Secretary is supposed to govern a meeting but if Secretary knows no rules herself, how can she know when rules are not followed?

So, we just experienced what happens. And sure Secretary has never titled a dog to any level in schutzhund and maybe CD in AKC. Pam, did you ever trial or show a dog?

So, apparently she was elected for administrative capability as it was not in the show or working qualifications. No comment. I experienced Secreatary's knowledge on rules with the BOI filed against me by President and how EB was allowed to vote on something that was not even a rule.

It is Secretary's function to know USRC rules inside out. If a rule is not a rule, the Secretary should reject it versus letting discussion and vote take place on something that is not even a rule.

This just happened in my case.

It is difficult for one when accuser is president and his greatest cheerleader is "yah...yah...you are so great Wayne? People, isn't he great??? Wayne...you just are the best.... yah..yah...yah...Wayne. You just are so good Wayne. Good job!!! What did you say Wayne? OF COURSE I agree. Yes Wayne, yah, yah, yah. You are the best.

I heard Secretary said something similar during an EB phone conference. Ok.

Wow.

Lucky USRC.

I answered back to Andreas our Regional Director is a judge and an EB member so why is he complaining about not being notified even though he runs a USRC club and is a breeder judge? I said another breeder judge, active in a club, was not even included in discussions EB was having and she was an EB member as EB is selective on what EB members may be included in EB public, otherwise the slate takes it private.

No clubs were notified. General membership was not notified. No judges were notified.

USRC just changed breed standard for the Rottweiler as part of President's report. No input from any USRC member required. People actually voted in favour of this.

He said to me this is not possible. I said there is Liz and Wayne. I had to say nothing more.

Ramifications were not thought of, discussed or addressed. A sales pitch was presented and people bought the sales pitch, made a vote.

Only, apparently no vote was taken on the insurance issue, no ballot presented after great discussion. Not one single person appears to be able to state what the policy in question that was discussed even covered.

It has been asked several times.

If it were cut and dried. A real concern. It would be posted. End of story.

It was not professional. It was personal agenda. Vindictive. Secretative. Underhanded. Unprofessional.

This is the face USRC has just shown itself to be to the international Rottweiler world.

As Steve Robinson stated. USRC can hold a seat. Have a prescence. As USRC does not belong to an FCI country. it has no voice and no vote. It can send a representative of the club to attend a meeting, have no input, but sit and listen to everything that is discussed and agreed upon.

But surely people knew this who did any voting? Everyone knows this.

One last thing. To hold a USRC judge's license, the USRC judge must be an active judge, and I believe this entails being invited for one judging assignment in a 12-month period which means the judge has to be invited to judge a USRC event. What is the last event USRC President was invited to judge? I believe there is a thread on this topic on the last show he judged. Wasn't talking on a cell phone/blackberry while judging one of the complaints? There were many more but that one is pretty bad. What USRC club has invited him since to judge? Has any other country invited him to judge in their country? The time period is up. President is not within guidelines set by USRC rules unless he has been invited to judge at some USRC club during the past 12 months? Perhaps someone can correct me if this is not correct or point me to new rules if I am looking at an old rule book.

Jane, again, I did not know of the motion regarding Canada until after it occurred. Samantha called me with a question regarding the order of motions from reports. That was it. I next heard from our club representative after the vote was over. I don't know how much more clearly I can state it.

The SchH 3 club members are posted here: http://usrconline.org/schhclub.html and have been for years. It is publicly accessible and listed in the website menu.

Liz

Jane,
I Schutzhund titled my first Rottweiler in the late 80's, USA club. Did 2 BH's and a BST a couple years ago, have a couple offspring in training now. Been involved in SchH since late 80's took a break during college. Trained alot , hung out with people but didnt trial alot. Trialing doesnt make an honest good person, Is that your criteria for a good person? Thanks for the criticism Jane. But your wrong again. I have bred several V-1 rottweilers, Most Promising Puppies, and Canadian Champions, and Select USRC winners . You just dont know everything and get it wrong all the time.

PS. Go to the meetings. What was out of order..oh yes, things were brought up with possible out of orders but as it was looked up in Sturgis or talked about with Wayne, I pulled people aside during breaks to say you cant say or do this , didnt put them on the spot but you know it all without being there. I dont know it all. Im learning...and always learning, its a volunteer position Jane, dont drag me through the mud. People know me. You dont. End of story. You are so vindictive against the innocent and relentless. Most appreciated. Thats all I will say.

Pam are you saying that everything was in order at this past GBM?

Warren,

How much do make a year off puppies?

I just asked a relevant question and this is what you come back with. You learned quickly how to operate didn't you. Dodge legitimate questions by going on the attack. How much do you make a year off of your breedings or do you give all of your pups away. Do you decide where the line is drawn and how much you sell your pups for and how many litters you have is acceptable but anyone who does more than you is a villain? So what about the people who do less than you? Do they care more about the breed than you do? At our last show the judge made a point to tell everyone there how bad the mouth pigment has become on the dogs in this country and that breeders need to make it a priority in their breedings. I just thought I would share that with you and everyone else that cares so much for the breed so that none of us breed dogs with pink mouths! But then again if the dog has a nice head people will probably still buy the pups. Oh the tangled webs we weave.

Pam I notice that you do not only breed dogs but also two different types of horses. Maybe I could get into that too and really start making some money!

Pam are you kidding me. You also sale horse riding lessons, horsemanship, horse hotel for travellers, stud services, litters, dog boarding and basic obedience lessons! Did I miss anything that your LLC offers for sale? I need to take a page out of your book because you have got to be doing pretty god in the sales department. If you want to make this personal then go for it. I am up to the challenge.

Ive sold one horse in 25 years! Are you kidding me good try. Ive had 2 Draft horses for sale for 3 years...lol...its not a market...lol.....Now how much of that 60-90 thousand do you report to the IRS?

We did horse boarding the first year of my LLC. Its an old page that needs to be updated. No lessons. We choose privacy over public so no Im not a saleswoman but good try. Weve boarded 7-10 horse travelers in 7 years.

Thats so funny. Those of you who cant attend meetings always have something to say on a keyboard.

Yes warren we sell organic chicken eggs. A few dozen a week. a total of $3.00

Those of you who cannot answer simple questions that you should be able to answer go on the attack. You advertise that you do website work and you cannot keep your on updated. So you don't make any money off of horses. How about pups and stud services do you give those away or do you sell them for money. My taxes are reported and current current just wne through an expropriation suit where I had to enter all of that in court for a settlement with the city. So what else would you like to know.

Take a pill Pam. I simply asked a question about whether or not the meeting was in order and you chose not to answer and attack me. Did you learn that from Steve.

Liz wrote:
"I have told you repeatedly. No questions were asked of me regarding the Canadian clubs. Once again. Nobody called to ask me if there were any events planned in Canada. The meeting was recorded and the recording will bear this out."

Dee wrote:
I sat in the front row directly across from Samantha and Pam. I heard the calls Samantha made to Liz and I also recorded the minutes. The statements Liz made are correct and the recorded minutes have collectd that.

"You insist on making libelous statements which you know to be utterly untrue over and over."

"The use of Sturgis is part of USRC's bylaws. Sturgis has been utilized since the inception of the club. Past officers and members have had parliamentarians at meetings, utilized Sturgis in their decisions and consulted parliamentarians. Another falsehood on your part."

Dee wrote:
As a EB member I arranged for a Parlimentarian to attend the Texas GBM in 1992 and have also consulted with them in 2006 with results of the conversation sent to the EB.

Respectfully,

Dee Hernandez-Ydrogo

How many puppies do you sell a year? How much do you make? What do you report to the IRS? Are you "in order?

I took my pill. Yes, I learned it from Steve your right. What meetings have you attended? What meetings do you plan on attending? How do you know about "out of order? Where you there? Please give the name of the "out of order" notifier. What was specifically out of order to your book? What time was it out of order. I will check the tape for those who are "out of order.

My website is still correct. I choose to pick and choose if and when I want a horse boarder, I choose to pick and choose who I will give lessons too, the lessons I give are free of charge to a disabled girl, I choose to pick and choose who will stay at my house when traveling with horses. Its my farm, Its my life, I choose who enters my property, we like to deal with good people and not an abundance ..so my site is perfectly fine for my business thank you for caring and sharing. The horse I sold was $1200, sold her to my veterinarian. My other horse was offered for free to High Hurdles Farm in Sardinia, they specialize in teaching disabled children to ride and need large gentle horses for their program, we are in contact with the coordinator when a space is available and our horse is available to them for $0 and a tax write off. We are kind people Warren and Jane.
Thanks for the criticism after I asked you one question. How many pups do you sell - not sure why you got defensive over that????? Did you take a pill?

Now who would like my volunteer position? - who would like to step up to plate and get harassed - the behavior of our members to Exec board members and Committee members is appalling and disgusting?
I work full time run a business, a household and a farm and tend to EB business hours a day and late at nite. I do the best I can and I go to church on Sundays too.

Oh I just bred a litter since 3 years ago. Im holding back about 4-5 for the show. FYI.

Pam I did not ever say the meeting was out of ordr. Others have insiuated that things were out of order. I do not know because I was not there. Youwere there and I believe the secretary so I asked you if you believed the meeting was "in order". What was wrong with that question? All you had to say was to the best of my knowledge it was in order or "I don't know for sure" or "I believe some thigs were out of order". But instead you tried to launch a personal attack against me with a question that was irrelevant. I did not accuse, I asked.

As far as how many litters I breed or how many dogs I own it is not a secret. It is on my website. As for my taxes, whatever relevane that has or if it is any of your business, I answered that I just went through an expropriation suit with the city because they took our property to build a public school on it. In order to reach a settlemeent the court supoened my tax records for the past three years in an attempt to try to reduce my settlement but it backfired because it showed I reported my puppy sales. Do you have any other questions tht I can answer for you. Would you like for me to list the names of those in leadership positions that breed a comparable num,ber of litters? Not that I think anything is wrong with it but you seem to think it would make them a bad person. Would you also like to ask all of them about their personal taxes and reporting all earnings on pups, stud services,and training. I too have an LLC so you can be sure I keep my taxes in order but I would wonder about those who breed only a couple of litters a year if they report those earnings.

Regardless none of this matters. I have never caused a ruckus in all of these years with the leadership of the USRC. I disagree and had questions about the recent decision to ban the Canadian clubs and join the IFR. I asked some legitimate questions and immediately the leadership began to attack me. WHY? Do you think that is right Pam? Do you think the members have a fundamental right to ask questions and deserve to be treated respectfully and given honest answers? Why have I been so wrong to ask these questions? Why have I deserved to be attacked by some of our leaders, including you now? Why? Why? Why?

Pam to me what is appalling and disgusting is the way the EB treats the general membership in this club.The membership was promised transparency in their actions and would listen to the membership. In your opinion do you or anyone on the EB believe this has happened? To my knowledge there has been attempt to ask or listen to the general membership. Just a lot of you cover my back and I'll cover yours.

For someone who represents the lord you certainly do not act it.

Sammy,

The USRC is organized so members get involved with the member clubs. The EB is put in charge by those clubs. The members that are not involved and do not belong to any member clubs have the DAL's that represent them. I bet if you ask Chuck who served on the board in that position for many years how many phone calls he received regarding issues it would be minimal. The ARC is one member one vote. So there are choices available to people. This constant negative behavior towards the USRC and its President or EB are not necessary. I would recommend people that are unhappy to just join another club that fits their needs. These forums are a constant reminder that negativity and anger do not belong in the club or any other organization. We need to be positive and look at the good rather then the bad. Hope you have a nice day and the grandkids are well.

I'm not sure but I believe this is the new song to be sung at all future USRC GB meetings:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_v468ptuXw

Steve , nothing personal but the same can be se said about yourself being a USRC board member.I am not taking up for Warren.I can see the point in your comments but also in Warren's comments also.Why do people always go on the defensive side when 1 questions the decisions that the USRC board made ? There are questions I would like to see answered.The tail issue does not effect me due to all my dogs have tails.The question I would like answered is would you be able to use frozen semen after 2012 from a docked dog?
I have frozen semen on a dog that I plan on using but don't know when.
I am not looking for a debate just stating facts that if you look back at the topics you will see that USRC board members always get defensive.Liz is probably the person that tries to answer the questions the members ask in a neutral position.

Shame that as an EB member you cannot try to find ways to actually address the problems rather than this continued push it under the carpet and look the other way speech. Of course they did manage to take action against the Canadian clubs unfairly IMO. Odd that the two people involved the most have the biggest issues with the Canadian clubs??? USRC is lucky they have not taken action. It is no wonder why an EB member would recommend people to leave since then they would not have to deal with members asking legitiment questions.

If the USRC continues to ignore the bad it will continue to have many think negatively towards the club. We have EB members that enjoy rubbing elbows with & doing nothing to those that have done a variety of negative things towards our breed. They range from serious OFA violations to a long list filled with many other concerns. Until those kinds of issues are addressed it does not give off the impression that things are going to improve in the organization.

It has been just under a week since the USRC president found the time to post on here. Even extra time to find pictures from sometime in the late 80's or 90's & post. It would be a great help to hear his side so that maybe members like myself could reach a better understanding on each of these concerns.

Pet peeve of mine but you are a Secretary so should know proper grammer as you apparently were appointed based on your administrative capabilities.
Your = personal pronoun (possessive)
You're = second person personal pronoun (not possessive)

Next. Secretary is responsible for conducting the meeting. Not pulling people aside during breaks. Secretary should be able to point out proper procedure when the meeting is being conducted - not after the fact - privately. If people do not listen to you at the meeting, you deem the meeting out of order.

Who was Chairman for GBM? If Secretary could not fulfill the function, the duty should have gone to who meeting appointed as Chairman.

No one has mentioned who the chairman was. Who chaired the meeting?

I was told President and his slate were told the meeting was out of order right when President's report was presented.

You, as Secretary, allowed a meeting to proceed, when Secretary and President had both been told it was out of order. So, who was chairman and what did chairman have to say when told the meeting was out of order?

Lesley Fried was running as Secretary from the floor. Wayne had a discussion with her and she did not run. Lesley was USRC Secretary for many years and did a truly excellent job. Perhaps Wayne can address to this board what exactly was said so she did not run for Secretary position? I think the answer would be very educational to those people who do not know the answer. It would involve the time period when he was last President and left the club in such a state that the website had not been touched for over 2 years, no magazine and Andreas was elected unanimously (and was not even present when he ran as President) against Wayne. Perhaps another question would be to ask Wayne why exactly he was unable to attend when he ran against Andreas?

History does tend to repeat itself. The magazine had no schedule when Wayne was last president. I was a member and I do not recall receiving one during this period. Maybe my address got lost? One magazine has been made since May 2008. I resigned in February 2008 but kept doing all the work until June 2008 and then I had to ask a couple of times to please remove my name as a contact for USRC Magazine. Tomorrow is June 2009. When will the next magazine be received by USRC members? No one even asks this question anymore.

There is a handbook available on how to govern meetings. It can be bought at any bookstore. It covers items that would be out of order. We also had a delegate in place who is a lawyer.

Given USRC just stripped my club of ability to hold trials or USRC shows, I will not be attending any USRC meetings in the future.

Pam, I have attended 4 USRC AGM meetings since 2004. I was in New York in 2004 for GBM. I was also at the GBM in South Carolina. I also was at the GBM in California. I was also at the GBM in Oregon. And these are meetings from the past six years. I do not believe I have ever met you. Correct me if I am wrong. So I have attended 4 out of 6 GBM in person, in the past 6 years. I do not recall seeing you at any of these meetings.

What exactly are you trying to say?

It is good you titled some dogs in the 1990's. It is now 2009.

The meeting was out of order. As Secretary, you allowed a ballot to be voted on where the item voted on by EB is not even a rule in USRC rule book. You allowed discussion to occur. As Secretary, you allowed EB members who had brought BOI charges against me to participate in discussion, vote and decide sentence.

All prior Secretaries know USRC rules and the parties in question by previous Secretaries, would have been allowed no input, given they are who brought about the charges, nor would they have been permitted to vote.

It is Secretary's function to know and understand clearly USRC rules and how they are applied. As well as Rules or Order, Roberts Rule and Sturgious. You have failed to display ability in any of these critical factors by allowing what happened in my BOI.

As far as how the foreign clubs were expelled. Did you know of the proposal to expell clubs? Were you part of the discussions? If so, did you not have a moral duty to your fellow EB members, who were not part of the "slate" to advise them of the matters being brought forward.

Who typed the President's report? I find it difficult to believe President was able to change breed standard, expell clubs, gain support, all on his own.

Yes, it is a volunteer position. All positions are volunteer. So if excuses need to be made, or sympathy sought. Step down and let a volunteer assume the position who will not complain about being a volunteer. Then you will have more time to play with your horses and chickens or whatever.

And as far as your ability as Secretary. This one I thought was excellent. Secretary sends me an email asking me if she had sent me a letter of censure as apparently Secretary could not remember whether or not she had sent one when asked by EB. That one is going to be pretty hard to top. As you will recall, I answered back advising I had received no correspondence from you or USRC. I just thought when I got your email asking me this question.....oh boy. Lucky USRC to have such a Secretary in place.

I must have missed results. What dog have you titled to a SchH title or BST in the past 10 years? Ok, let's try a BH. When you were trialing, it was before my time apparently. I have only been in the breed 15 years.



I have never sold a puppy. I have never owned a male who has sired a litter and I have never whelped a litter. I have had SchH titled/ABST/CH dogs (male who was ABST, CH & BOB over Specials & the ABST female was multi V1, CH & Siegerin).

How many puppies have you sold? Were they all from titled parents? Did you train/handle any of the titled dogs to any of the titles?

As far as the volunteer position. Perhaps if they let the general membership know positions were available, and not look within a certain group of people to try and fill positions, I think the EB would become balanced. Individuals on it would be donating time for the betterment of the breed and the club. They would not be complaining about being a volunteer.

These people are never notified they could apply for the position. Hardly anyone I know who is a USRC member goes to USRC board. Hardly any go to USRC boards.

I did suggest more than a year ago that it would be beneficial if a blanket email was sent to all members with email addresses, just how shows & trial information is distributed to members, that a position is available on EB, what the duties require (time frame for commitment for the position) and qualifications to meet the duties required under the position.

Just an idea.

It would improve things quite a bit as it would eliminate all the "friends" on EB where EB members were representing the breed and the members they were elected to their EB positions to represent. Not based on who they are "friends" with.


Jane

I have said for along time now that an EBM should only be allowed to hold the postion for 2 years. They do play musical chairs and some are on the EB for an eternity. They are going to grow cobwebs while sitting at the EB Table
Seriously I don't know any organization that allows an EBM to stay on the Board for as long as they want. there should be a clean slate in sort of time frame. Not forever

Mimi


Mimi & Mike Prisco
Meisterhund Kennel-Living in our Home & in our Hearts:
USRC's '93RYS,'95 & '96 N/S Gina V.D. Teufelsbrucke SchH3,FH2,LBST,CGC
V-Brando Von Meisterhund,SchH3,IPO3,AD,FH,ABST,CGC, Sch N/Champ
AKC Pt'd Enzo Von Meisterhund, SchH3,IPO3,AD,CGC, CD, 2005 IFR World Team
AKC Pt'd Diva Von Meisterhund
AKC 3 Pt. Major & BOW Schonhaus's Duece (Gino) Von Meisterhund

Exactly! This helps protect the club as when the same people get elected time and time after again, they start losing a very important point.

They are elected to EB positions by clubs and clubs vote based on majority of general members who belong to the club.

Some EB members start thinking they are above general membership.

No input required.

We all just saw this at GBM.

Several on the slate are on this board.

Liz was contacted asking if any of the Canadian clubs had events planned. Membership officer answered on behalf of Regional Director.

Why was not a Regional Director asked what events were planned for a Region? Why was membership officer contacted with the question?

Who typed up President's report? Was it an EB member? Did this EB member not have a moral obligation to notify the entire EB of the presentation President was planning?

Proper rules were not followed at meeting. Who was chairman? Why was there no one present who could tell the President that it was out of order and if he continued with what he was pushing through that the entire meeting could be voted out of order and therefore any business conducted at the meeting to be invalid?

How did the breed standard for the Rottweiler get changed with no discussion or notification to USRC breeders, judges or general membership?

How did full member clubs get expelled with no warning and no notification?

Wayne posted his pictures from 20+ years ago. Perhaps he can answer some of these questions I just asked above.

It should be about the breed. It should be about the club. Growth of a club as clubs become stronger with membership. Membership starts falling, it is like businesses who fail to make money. They become bankrupt. Clubs become extinct and new organizations, professionally run, take over. It happens in all hobby club type of activities. Any volunteer organization.

It should not be based on personal agenda.

New people bring new ideas, new policies. Some are good, some are bad. But chances are, they will be discussed openly, they will be fair and there are not all these "secret" discussions which we have just seen EB has conducted this past year. New people bring fresh air. Old timers who are neutral, are beneficial but they are generally the people who no longer want to serve on the EB but are willing to answer questions as to procedure or on a specific item for clarification if their opinion is sought. It prevents an organization from becoming stagnent and holding onto something that worked 20 years ago.

Current treasurer cannot blame past treasurer for treasury status. It burnt out the last treasurer just trying to figure out the tangle that the person who was appointed treasurer with Wayne as president was elected.

We all just have so much time.

Some of us actually put focus on the breed and care about how to protect this wonderful breed and how to promote it.

USRC really should update its website. It is most certainly not an international club. They just kicked out their international clubs. So they could become an international club only they have no vote but can attend as a spectator? Makes perfect sense to me. People did allow this to happen.

Just like people present allow a meeting to continue when it was clearly pointed out by several people in attendance that the meeting was out of order.

This is what a monopoly is all about. Monopolies are illegal in Canada. I am pretty sure they are also illegal in USA. USRC EB is currently a monopoly with votes.

Jane

You've been told several times that this is untrue. The recording of the event shows that this is not true. You are a liar.

I have been on the EB since 2003. Erika resigned and then returned, as did Janay and Wayne. Bryan Vice and myself are probably the two who have served the longest - and I don't see any cobwebs on either of us. Thanks for trying to make me feel old Mimi I agree that board members can become entrenched and use that extended tenure to unduly influence others, however, it's important that there are enough people on the board who know when an issue comes up that we dealt with a similar issue 5-6 years ago. It's important to have that historical knowledge.

Liz

I sent this privately to Nason, I think I answered this question before, but for the record, I am in the same situation. I asked and was told that the dog would be grandfathered in and the breeding would be allowed.

Liz

someone asked about the president's breed of dogs,and that he registered a dog in 06? when I spoke to him last year, he did not own or possess a rottweiler? he stated that he was looking at a rott pup. he still doesn't have a rottie but yet he is president of a rottweiler organjiaation. it's all political BS, I wonder how many clubs and members will be left at the end of 09

I did call Mike. He said to thank you for saying that he is a very truthful person and he said that you are a liar. He is in Toronto and can be contacted at 443-324-9626.



Neither Sturgis specifically, nor any parliamentary procedure states that an individual who is a member of an organization, board or committee may not have a voice or a vote on an issue in which they have been involved. Please post the relevant quote from Sturgis, Roberts or Demeter's which upholds your belief.

As is quite clear from the vote posted on the forum, a copy of which you received, I voted to uphold the sanction against you for your misleading, untruthful posting patterns. I did not vote to uphold the sanction against you for your use of the USRC database to sell your personal magazine. I did not believe the BOI correctly interpreted our bylaws on that issue. At that time of the vote, the EB specifically voted that you would only be issued a warning letter in the hopes that you would discontinue this pattern of behavior.



As I have repeatedly stated, I was phoned because I prepared the agenda and the motions resulting from reports was incorrectly placed in two separate areas. Past copies of the minutes were found to verify the correct placement and the meeting proceeded. It was a typo which occurred because I copied last years agenda. Motions resulting from reports always come after reports. I was also called at the beginning of the meeting for the following reasons:

1. The recorder was not functioning properly. Dee Hernandez supplied a functional recorder.
2. A membership check on a GBM attendee. This person was a member.
3. The procedure for election of Regional Directors. I referred them to the rulebook.

Hi Liz,
I have to disagree with you.
I know Wayne asked Erika to come back on the board as well as Janay. He also called up Mike & I and promised things would change and will we please join back up.
Well we did and then saw that nothing had changed and resigned as fast as we joined up.
No, I think fresh blood would do this organization a world of good. Everyone is disposable and can be replace and new people would learn and have new ideas.
That is one of the problems and one of the reasons there should be a term limit and I am not saying just play Musical chairs. Those similiar issues not always are handled properly.
There are many people with Historical knowledge not just the same people that have been on the board for years and even if they don't they will learn if they have the passion to do so.
Leaving and coming back and go to different Positions still in my eye are the same people that have been on the board for years. They are the ones who decide and have the votes.
It should not be a constant.

& I am not referring to RD's. They do have a term limit and if they get voted in again I don't see a problem with that as long as they represent their region the right way. Bryan Vice is a good example IMO. He does a good Job.

Sorry I wasn't trying to make you feel old, I will trade your age with mine

Mimi & Mike Prisco
Meisterhund Kennel-Living in our Home & in our Hearts:
USRC's '93RYS,'95 & '96 N/S Gina V.D. Teufelsbrucke SchH3,FH2,LBST,CGC
V-Brando Von Meisterhund,SchH3,IPO3,AD,FH,ABST,CGC, Sch N/Champ
AKC Pt'd Enzo Von Meisterhund, SchH3,IPO3,AD,CGC, CD, 2005 IFR World Team
AKC Pt'd Diva Von Meisterhund
AKC 3 Pt. Major & BOW Schonhaus's Duece (Gino) Von Meisterhund

As do the EB members, every two years

No trades, Lili wouldn't take to a new mother very well

Liz

The people serious in the breed do not introduce their children as a defense.

It was a yes or no answer.

You did not answer.

It should not be that difficult. Please answer.

It is a one word answer required from you.

All have noticed you have failed to answer.

All of us have commitments, children, family, dogs, work, other commitments. We do not try to make people feel sorry for us just because we chose to donate for the position.

I have donated 40+ hours a week to USRC for 6 years. I stepped down in February 2008.

Question people could ask. During my time as a volunteer. When I made USRC 15 issues. Do I have children? Do I have a family? Do I have a husband....ok I posted his name.

I never once introduced my family or outside commitments to a dog club or tried to make an excuse in any capacity I have held in the club.

I was webmaster. Editor. I have served on schutzhund committee. Breed & BST committee. Foreign clubs committee. I have donated over 40+ hours each week for the past 6 years to the club.

My club was expelled. No notice. No warning.

My RD was not informed of proposed agenda when she is on EB.

Many EB members are on this board. Perhaps Wayne, Samantha, Pam, Stephen or Liz can answer the question.

Who knew what was contained in President's report? Was it a total surprise? If not. Why were not fellow EB members notified of proposal?

It is an executive board after all. But monopoly on an EB means the other EB members do not need to be included in any discussions as it is a done deal before anyone else on the EB, who is not part of the slate (monopoly) even learns of a proposal.

General membership has no value and general membership is what makes a club.

Current EB appears to have lost sight of this very important fact.

I was given a 6 month suspension and really it is quite stupid when you think about things. They just kicked out my club.

Liz. You are most unprofessional. As I said. That perch you are wobbling on. It is starting to get high winds.

You are going to lose your balance one of these days.

It was a yes or no answer I asked.

You answered....blah blah blah....introduced your child. I saw what you did. Perhaps if I point it out, others will also see.

It was a yes or no question.

You could make a response.

Try saying yes or no.

We will all know the question you are answering.

If you want to give explanation. As I stated. Explain why as membership officer, which I believe function is to process memberships, answers a question that belongs to a Regional Director.

It was none of your business. You answered on behalf of the RD and you gave a wrong answer.

We all can come up with excuses. I could come up with millions if I had to. So could anyone. We do not introduce to the picture....oh.......I have children.....people are so mean.......this is just so unfair.

So. Step down. No one would mind if you quit part way through a term.

So you say you will never do this again as you do the work and have no vote.

I have donated thousands and thousands of hours to USRC in the past six years.

I have never had a vote.

So step down. Do the work.

Join the general USRC membership.

No one has any sympathy for you whatsoever.

It appears the vote matters even when you have proven quite clearly this past year you are incapable of being impartial or professional.

You knew the rules very well.

You voted on my case.

Well. I just made everything public.

It will be a great thing when you are no longer an EB member for the club. As well as the treasurer who left that disaster of books who is current treasurer. Someone else who is always in the background. My guess she was running for president? Her club has been in provisional since 2000, maybe a bit earlier. President. Secretary. I can name a few more who are on the slate.

Everyone knows who is part of the slate.

I do hope you keep your word and step down.

It is time.

The club has experienced quite enough of your "help" and your "knowledge".

Things used to be cut and dried, up until a few years ago.

Perhaps you could instruct Secretary on proper rules of conduct as you are the "expert" after all.

To help the club, and the breed. No one would mind at all, other than the slate, if you stepped down mid term. Of this, I am pretty sure of.

Liz. You obviously are reading this thread. Please make a post. One word. Yes or no. We will all know exactly what you are answering. The question was asked.

Jane - as you obviously missed it, I was speaking to Mimi in that post, not you, nor was I using my child as a defense in any way. You are delusional. I answered your post earlier and the answer was no. The answer was also no from Mike.

Mike is on this board.

So you say Mike never made that phone call.

Perhaps Mike can give a response?

Liz. I may be delusional. You are most certainly most unprofessional. A detrament to the club. My opinion of course. I put you in the same classification as I do current president.

Have you ever heard the saying "birds of a feather flock together"?

It is a pretty accurate generalization.

More harm has been caused to the organization in the international world since your bonding, than I think has ever been caused in USRC history.

You have a hardship as membership officer. A child as an excuse. List a name so we should all feel sorry for you as you have a kid and none of us have anything going on in our lives.

There are qualified people who could assume your position and do the same quality of job. Plus. They would be higher qualified.

First you have to let people know the position is available.

I have no sympathy for you. You have shown your true colours this past year. Do I call you names?

I doubt you will see any that I have called you.

People are more than capable of seeing people for what they are.

Please address the question whether or not as accuser if you had input and if you voted. Please explain in your expert opinion why this would be in order. I am most interested.
So are many.

Liz. It is time for you to step down. You already have made the statement you are not happy that people do not have you on a pedestal just because you are a volunteer. Perhaps give up your position and let someone apply who is qualified, has the time, the heart, and will do best for the breed and the club.

Or tell us why you like having a voice on EB. Your family generally has had 3. And we are not talking many votes. Your husband and yourself were EB members (like the Canusos) and have a club.

3 votes in 1 house.

And they get rid of the vote who has questions only no one appears to be able to answer the questions.

Please tell us why exactly you want to be an EB member when you like to tell us your child's name?

Why did you introduce your child to this discussion?

No one else did. Now we all know one of the names of your children.

I am sure you will try and figure something out so your perch becomes a little bit more steady when it is in high winds.

You have proven quite effectively you are tied quite closely to President.

Does this help the club? Only the general members can answer such a question.

As an EB member, it would be appreciated if you could conduct yourself in a professional level and refrain from name calling.

I have been professional and have never called you any names, nor have I called anyone names or said a deragotory comment. I do not need to. People can see quite clearly what is what. I have simply stated where I feel shortfalls in a position and given basis for my opinions.

You are most unprofessional. Please do USRC a favour and resign as soon as possible. The club has experienced your help.

Has the club grown since the slate has been elected?

Let's try a growth of 5 new members since I resigned as editor.

5 should be an achievable number. It is the United States Rottweiler Club after all and we have all these people working all so hard trying to sell and promote the club.

So, has it increased?

This is a yes or no answer as well.

Mike can answer on your other questions. Several people he told of his phone call to you are on this board. They won't post. But, they will read.

You did not answer whether or not you voted on my BOI case and you were one my accusers. I believe this is against Roberts Rules and Sturgious and Parliimanentary Procedure. Is this not something you are studying?

It is a yes or no answer as well. No comment required.

3 questions, yes or no.

These are the questions in case you are having difficulty following:

1. Were you asked if any clubs being expelled had any events planned?
2. Were you aware of anything being presented as part of President's report (ie IFR)?
3. Did you vote on my BOI case when you were my accuser.

Just list the numbers. 1. 2. 3. A yes or no is all that is required beside each number.

It should not be difficult.


Jane

Liz,
I think you know what I mean referring to the Board, not RD"s.
IMO even though their position is up they should not be allowed to run aagain for a specific amount of time.
I can understand Comittee positions staying on if they are qualified.
Like BOI when you have knowledagble unbias people then they know the procedures on how to handle and Inquiry.
But MO the individual EBM should have a Term limit to hold that position. JMO



Mimi
Mimi & Mike Prisco
Meisterhund Kennel-Living in our Home & in our Hearts:
USRC's '93RYS,'95 & '96 N/S Gina V.D. Teufelsbrucke SchH3,FH2,LBST,CGC
V-Brando Von Meisterhund,SchH3,IPO3,AD,FH,ABST,CGC, Sch N/Champ
AKC Pt'd Enzo Von Meisterhund, SchH3,IPO3,AD,CGC, CD, 2005 IFR World Team
AKC Pt'd Diva Von Meisterhund
AKC 3 Pt. Major & BOW Schonhaus's Duece (Gino) Von Meisterhund

Mike is in Toronto as posted - his phone number was in the post at his request. He will return on Tuesday.

I have not used my child as an excuse, I was joking with Mimi whom I consider a friend. I'm also sure that absolutely no-one else read that into my post to Mimi. Everyone knows my kids, they go to the shows with me, people have watched them grow up in USRC. My sons were featured in a young helpers article at your suggestion, and someday, hopefully Lili will trial her own dog. This club is a sport, it should be a family oriented sport, and it is in our home. I have always encouraged my children in the sport and will continue to do so.

As to my position, I have made no excuses. I have simply stated that I will be stepping down due to the negativity. But, given your encouraging words, perhaps I will reconsider. I have always conducted myself professionally and your statement is libelous, as are many other statements you have published today.

Liz. In case you have lost sight of the fact. This is a Rottweiler board. There is a separate area where one can talk about children. You introduced your child on a GBM thread. No one knew your child's name until you chose to introduce your child.

You failed to answer the yes and no questions asked to you.

As I said.

Birds of a feather flock together.

I personally think this is pretty true. Seldom is it incorrect. Sometimes, the fence wobbler has to decide which side of the fence it is on.

It should be about the breed. BSL. Training. Encouraging growth in the organization. No matter the country. Memberships are encourage who believe in the working Rottweiler.

Numbers (membership) is what makes an organization strong.

USRC was an international club up until GBM. USRC is most certainly no longer an international club, and the reason they booted international clubs was for an international face, only USRC has no voice but can attend a meeting.

Perhaps someone can explain this as to me it lacks common sense. It was not a logical decision.

It was based on personal agenda.....get rid of Jane......so foreign clubs were expelled only suddenly we are supposed to be an international club?

What exactly am I missing as I am having difficulty following and I am a very logical person.

USRC publically made the decision it is not such a an international club. They just expelled their international clubs with no warning, no notice.

Did President do this all on his own? Doubtful to say the least.

USRC focuses on political.

Does current President have a Rottweiler in his house. When was the last time he was invited to judge? I do believe President is currently in violation of USRC rules as he failed to maintain status required to maintain judge's status. What club has invited him since the last disaster he judged where he wrote his own rules and failed to follow USRC rules?

Many club members are on this board.

Ok. When are you inviting President to your club?

Liz. Why doesn't your club invite Wayne to judge? You can hold a BST event with one dog and he would then meet his requirement.

They have tried to ban the Rottweilers where I live. I love the breed. I love high energy dogs. Some people like skydiving. I like working with a high drive Rottweiler and try to figure out how to get into the dog's head. We each get satisfaction from our different hobbies we do. I totally love dogs of strong temperament, and yes, I love the Rottweiler. I also can appreciate a dog of strong temperament with an alternate breed to the Rottweiler. I worked with someone today. They have a GSD puppy. 3 months old. Sold to a pet home. They have a super puppy and no clue what they own. I talked to this person today about BSL, the importance of having a well-trained working dog breed in today's society when they want to take away our right to own working breeds.

USRC is a lost cause. USRC just got rid of all Canadian members who worked dogs. Held shows. Put BST's on dogs.

So they can have a seat on IFR. Did no one realize USRC would have not voice and could be spectator only?

This is why AKC & CKC dropped its status.

Liz. You should perhaps stop thinking of the glory EB position gives you as you can vote for a club of what is it? 500 members?

Wouldn't it be better to have a voice on the breed as a whole? No matter what country.

Sometimes people should look at the big picture. This involves the international world. And specifically, local municipalities who are trying to ban this breed.

We each fight BSL in our own way. Yes, I have been a strong supporter of USRC in the past and recommended the club to everyone - all different countries. This changed GBM.

USRC is not an international club. It is a USA club and I am not sure how they addressed Alaska, Hawaii or Dominion Repbulic and what other areas are part of USRC but are not actual states? Is Bermuda one?

Obviously, I need to learn a little bit about geographics so I know what I am talking about.

So USRC is a local club, confined to USA soil so we can assume.

USRC does need to change the mission statement of the club in its first sentence as USRC states it is an international organization. It is not.

GBM just took care of this.

Rather, they can replace the fact they are an international organization with the wording "USRC has a seat, but no vote, at IFR meetings.

As webmasters, and given President is your buddy, perhaps you can find time in your busy life to update USRC website to the true status? All that needs to be changed is the first statement (mission statement) made by USRC stating it is an international organization.

It is not. USRC just got rid of the international voice it had. As part of the president's report.

Breed standard also got changed in the same report.

It would be better if clubs who had a voice jumped in. USRC just eliminated the voice of my club. Plus they suspended me.

I have no voice

People are educated. It is not difficult to see what happened.

And I cannot believe I am wasting time on discussing USRC matters. I have been suspended.

Happy posting everyone. Sorry!!! Ignore everything I have said.

I am not even a USRC member currently.

Jane

And with everything.

Decide what is your purpose.

So you believe in USRC. Try and talk some people into joining the club and tell them why they should pay the club some money for a membership and what they will get in return.

BSL is in all our back yards. Staring us flat in the face. Hook up with someone, if you do not belong with a club, show them what you know, start doing obedience together.

Find a local schutzhund club to join - DVD, USRC, GSSCC, USA. The people I met today. 3 new members. I told them we had no affiliation currently but would be GSSCC soon. They had absolutely no concept of what I was talking about. It was over their head. Two were GSD puppies, one was a 5 year old CH Rott where the owner wants to get into something now that she is not going to show him anymore.

I said with the 5 year old. Maybe she can get a SchH 1 title. Most likely not, given age of dog and novice handler but it will be a great road.

USRC maybe became international by joining IFR but in exchange they booted their only international affiliation by booting their international clubs, all to be "international".

No logic. No merit.

Personal agenda. Vendicitive. Mean. Witch hunt.

As a result, USRC is no longer an international organization. And they are now trying to support the fact the international clubs were expelled so USRC could have an international face only people forgot to ask if USRC would actually have a voice.

It is sad for USRC. Sad for the breed in that country. Very sad for USRC as a whole as USRC just voted to expell its international face.

New organizations will form.

The Rottweiler is in all countries. In a perfect world. All show judges would be recognized by each other. All breed tests would be recognized, but this would mean there could be only one test and there would be zero tolerance for any deviation to rules.

I heard President instructed the helper at Nationals to come from the bushes and not the blind. Rules state it must be from a blind.

Ok. President obviously is incapable of following USRC judging rules when he holds a USRC judge's license.

This is most likely why no club invites him period to judge.

Liz or Chuck could invite him, or Laurie, or Pam. Erika could possibly get her club to move from forming status which it has been since 2000, but she is a member of Laurie's club which is not even located in the same area. Janay possibly could hold a BST and invite Wayne to judge as I heard she likes taping BST's so they are done correctly. Perhaps she could hold a BST event at whatever club she belongs to? They are President's buddies. Perhaps they could invite him so he is not in violation of current USRC rules and he is president.

I just listed 6 on the slate who could plan a show or a BST and invite President to judge.

Judges just have to be invited to one event in a 12 month calendar period to keep within USRC rules.

All these clubs on the east coast. A lot who are also EB members.

So why are not your clubs inviting President to judge your show or BST? USRC judges do have a minimum number of judging assignments they must do to maintain their judge's license.

USRC President is currently in violation of USRC rules.

So what surprises us? I am sure a waiver will be presented now that this matter has been made problem and the slate will take care of putting in a ballot so he does not have to judge.

Wayne could perhaps tell us a club he has been invited to judge in the next few years?

I think everyone sees the writing on the wall pretty clear.

Just a thought.

I am very disappointed with how USRC has conducted itself this past year. Very unprofessional to say the least. Very sad.

I no longer believe in USRC such as the pedestal I held the club to. I believed it was a club that was professional, followed rules. Something to believe in. I just experienced this past year what USRC is all about.

So they booted my club. I am suspended.

I have owned some super dogs. Two have come in the #10 in USA, #1 in Canada. ABST, CH. SchH titled. My young female is the best female I have ever owned. I very much seriously doubt I will ever attend a BST with her and I can see right now she is an ABST dog. I can also see she is SchH 3 material. She will most likely never again trial at another USRC trial.

This will be my choice. Once my 6 month suspension is up by Liz, Wayne and cronies.

I just am done with all the political garbage Liz, Wayne and slate has shown what the club is all about.

Perhaps they can attract a new member with the same goal.

I am very sad as I donated so many hours to the club and time is precious to us all. We only get this one shot at life we call time. Sometimes. You walk away. This is the best choice and then you move forward in whatever direction that direction is.

I just feel that all the thousands of hours I donated to the club and for the breed was a total and complete waste of time. The only good thing was I was on the schutzhund committee when we got the working judge's rules in place.

But we just all saw USRC is incapable of even following simple procedure that all organizations must follow to hold a meeting in order.

It is very sad for USRC what has been allowed to happen, due to political reasons, who certain EB members are buddies with other EB members and they choose to exclude the EB as a whole as they are operating on personal agenda.

It is time for the slate. Wayne. Liz. Pam. Erika. Janay. Samantha. Stephen. Chuck. Dan. Brian. To step away.

There is no need to bring anything public with other EB members as the slate between them can decide action to take on any political issue and can decide how the club will proceed.

Clubs elected a slate. Clubs elected a monopoly. And it is not like it should be a surprise to anyone.

Let the rest of the people who truly care about the breed and the club, to try and regroup and rebuild after the great harm slate has caused to USRC as an organization and to the international world.

I just am so very sad as USRC is a club I strongly supported with my personal free time and is a club I believed in.

I do not support USRC such as it is under current leadership and the slate.

Liz. When you make an allegation. So you stated I am a liar. Prove it. I am pretty sure I can prove who tells truth and who tells falsehood.

It really is time for you to step down. You have helped the club quite enough. Many people (general members of course) hold the same opinion of me.

I do not count. I am currently suspended It really is time for you to step down and perhaps find another hobby more suitable such as cooking or something.

I would point out I have no financial gain in the Rottweiler world currently how things stand. I have been in the breed for 15 years and I am a schutzhund person. I am not a breeder. Never had a litter, most likely never will as the though of puppies gives me a stomach ache and I would classify that as high stress as I would feel responsible for any puppies I produced for life, no matter what, I can only have so many dogs and 4 is my max.

I choose not to breed. I have had CH/SchH3/ABST (Koreung) dogs.

With breedings comes respopnsibility when you have to take puppies back where they don't work out and then you have a mess to clean up to train and replace the puppy and this is what happens if a good dog is sold to an inexperienced home who does not have a schutzhund club to help them with their dog.

I have never produced a puppy from any male or female and I have had the top schutzhund dogs in Canada, plus they had their CH & ABST (Koerung) and 3 have probably made the top 10 schutzhund in USA the past 6 years.

I am not a breeder.

I do appreciate training. I do appreciate conformation. I do appreciate the responsibilities of being a breeder.

I believe strongly in working aspect of Rottweiler as I am a schutzhund person. Susan, who has won the highest level possible in USA and Canada in show with her dogs, and who is president of my club which I am training director of. She tells me I just see the bite. I tell her she just sees the show.

Both are equal value. The perfect Rottweiler is one who V rates in the work and V rates in the show.

susan is starting to think tails are normal. She will drop her USRC membership in 2010 when she is required to dock. Luka had 9 puppies. Susan is keeping one. The other 8 are going to show homes in USA. Several Susan will co-own. All are professional and proven show homes.

Susan has asked all to try and get a breed survey title on their puppies plus a schutzhund title and has recommended the dogs be sent to Andreas for the titles if the people just are not interested.

Susan is president of my club that just got booted. She is very influential in AKC as she has had #1 AKC dog. It was 7 years ago. His daughter has done pretty good and she has hardly shown her as she was busy getting the BH & SchH 1 & CDX on Luka. Susan likes show. She also appreciates value to the working aspect.

USRC just kicked me and Susan out only went one step further me by expelling me as I made comment concerning USRC and I received a letter from USRC stating I was not allowed to mention the club.

All the power to USRC.

A letter will not stop my opinion. Nor will suspension. I have joined GSSCC and have requested for my 3 scorebooks to be transferred to GSSCC.

I will never again hold a USRC score book.

I have never sired a litter. Never whelped a litter. Never sold one single puppy.

I have yet to make one single penny from my association with the Rottweiler or with USRC. Actually. If anyone wants to check my records. I have donated thousands and thousands of dollars to USRC. Plus thousands of my hours of free time and time is precious to us all.

I have no sympathy for people like Liz or Pam who try to make people think we should be grateful for them as they are volunteers.

So step down. There are higher qualified indiviudals, who are more than capabable of doing much better jobs, given both of your job performances for the club this past year. With both stepping down, the club could only move forwards.

Perhaps decide to spend the time with kids/horses/birds/goats.

Give someone qualified a chance at the breed to represent the breed on EB who is not in Wayne's pocket.

It would not be a bad thing at all if such a situation were to happen. Doubtful, but in a perfect world, this would happen.

The USRC has the IFR now.

What is it you guys want? Do you honesly think we are gonna ditch IFR and bring Canada back???

I think the EB needs to move on bylaw changes to make sure the next EB doesnt try to reverse course.Sack the IFR and bring Canada back

USRC is better off today than it was 5 weeks ago.

When the leadership of the USRC does not communicate with the clubs and all the members on issues that do affect everyone we are hardly better off. Unless you mean that it is more clear than ever that there is no respect for those who are not part of the click or in the know.

You are glad to be part of the IFR. What are they doing for us? The USRC turns its back on full member clubs who have not done anything wrong & were in good standing and this is ok? To me it only shows the lengths some will go to remove those that question them.

Anyone find it interesting that all these motions that go on during the year are so private, yet any motions discussed at the EB annual meeting all members can attend? This only caters to those yet again that take time off or have the convienience to attend.

Paul. As you have a comment. This is a simple question.

Please explain what USRC has gained since GBM. Explain what you mean with IFR.

Explain what you mean with Canada.

If you want to expand. If you are going to state what USRC has gained, and trust me I can think of nothing and I look at things logically and from all angles. Tell us all what USRC lost.

You should be able to write one sentence about each. It is pretty much a yes or no answer.

You called me very bad swear words on USRC board. The worst words I have ever seen in print. I captured your post and your profanity. What did USRC do about you? The thread was locked. Your comments were removed.

I captured that page the instant I saw it and it is a pdf file.

Should I bring a BOI against you? You violated all rules that are stated on USRC board before any time you sign in. As in, you were way overboard.

Your post was unacceptable, and no excuse is acceptable for your public comments.

So.....should I file a BOI against you. It would be an easy case to get you expelled from USRC. You violated USRC basic sportsmanship rule.

I am suspended. When I am reinstated. I can file against you and ask for you to be expelled due to your post. I captured it.

Word I heard is President also saw your post, phoned membership officer. Told her to remove it immediately.

Perhaps Liz can advise us if this was not the case?

You need to check with your buddies President, Canusos and Chuck and post back what they tell you to write.

If a case ever was to be brought against a member, you have an iron cast case for life time expulsion what you posted.

What did USRC do about the words you posted publically? I was in shock when I saw them. Many USRC members saw your post.

Are you allowed on USRC forum?

This is a yes or no answer. It is like a Liz question. Just answer yes or no. No explanation required.

Neither Sturgis specifically, nor any parliamentary procedure states that an individual who is a member of an organization, board or committee may not have a voice or a vote on an issue in which they have been involved. Please post the relevant quote from Sturgis, Roberts or Demeter's which upholds your belief.


Liz, this is incorrect.It states in the rules that anyone on the B.O.I.Committee has to recuss themself from any case involving their own club or club members. Or it did if this has not been changed.

Sammy, Jane was asking why I was allowed to vote on her BOI. I am not a member of the BOI. Members of the BOI may not hear charges against themselves, against a member of their local club, and may ask to be excused from any case without cause. If they do hear a case, they have the right to vote. This does not in anyway change the parliamentary requirement that members be allowed the right to vote - we are requiring that BOI members excuse themselves from the proceedings entirely. If they are attendant upon the proceedings they have the right to vote.

Liz

Liz I'm not trying to pick on you but if the B.O.I. Committee has to abide by this rule then why does the EB not have to honor it?

Because the bylaw applies only to the BOI. It does not apply to the EB.

Liz

It should apply to EB members as well in my opinion.Because a conflict of interest is just that a conflict of interest.

Jane:

When given a yes or no question I will respond with yes or no. I can't even pick a reasonable question out of the post above.

You appear to be complaining about the bylaw that the BOI found you in violation of. As you have been informed, in writing, via e-mail and in numerous forum posts, the EB did not support the BOI's findings. I'm not sure why you are arguing with this finding.

The chair (or presiding officer) of any meeting where parliamentary procedure is followed is the President, succeeded by the Vice-President. If neither the President or the Vice President is present the most senior officer presides until a temporary chair can be elected.

Sammy:

That would require a bylaw change. Currently that bylaw applies only to the BOI.

Liz

Liz.

Since you appear to be unable to answrer yes or no questions.

Let's try a broad based question. You are webmaster and an EB member. You removed Paul Johnson's post concerning me, or else someone on the EB.

The word I heard is Wayne gave you a call and told you to get rid of it immediately.

Why don't you comment on this issue as it directly relates to your USRC position and let us all know what action you have taken as webmaster and as an EB member.

I have no problem with you reposting the post on this board, and it was most offensive.

Perhaps address this issue as it is something that acdtually is part of your function and not an RD function and tell us all how you have addressed the situation.

Many saw Paul's post.

Committees are responsible for their funcitons. You are webmaster.

I answered directly any question ever put forth to the magazine and if I did not know the answer immediately, I put it before the magazine committee and never was I outvoted.

As you appear to be unable to answer a yes or no question and want to give excuses, if you want to write an excuse.

Start by addressing this Paul Johnson situation.

This is within your job description, or at least one would think so as when I was webmaster, I answered any question that concerned a website policy.

We all would like to read more. Some people thought the thread got locked and removed due to their posts.

You failed to post Paul Johnson used disgusting profanity. Against all USRC rules.

Instead. Certain posts were removed and the thread was locked.

If you cannot answer, perhaps Paul can better expand as he is on this board.



Ok. 3 questions were asked. List 1, 2 & 3. Yes or no beside each. We all know the questions asked.

Yes or no is not exactly difficult. It is a 50/50 ratio.

Why cannot you answer any question asked directly and instead try to get into discussions and give excuses.

They were yes and no questions I asked.

You do not have to list your excuses/explanations.

List yes and no in order and don't even list the numbers. We will all understand what question you are answering.