15 replies to this topic

[gibble1]

Some of the items we're working on at the NEBGF: 1)Advanced seminars-discussing the availability of these in the Northeast, especially as it relates to a large number of judges currently not qualified to officiate at licensed trials-exploring the possibility of a webinar type forum where folks could call in to participate rather than physically attend. 2)Exploring options on the AKC Grand Champion Title. The BAC has approved development of a grand champion title and format and AKC is working out the details for implementation. We are seeking to ensure that our field champion only trial may be an appropriate venue instead of our Federaiton Championship. Working with AKC delegates, National Beagle Club, and AKC performance events. 3) Purina sponsorship, looking to upgrade Purina contract or explore other avenues of dog food sponsorship. 4) Carl is looking into upgrades of the NEBGF web page, results reporting protocol, and other functional applications.

Anyone have additional ideas?

[DJC]

I thought at the NEBGF meeting we as a federation were not in support of the AKC Grand Champion Program and there was not interest?

How about finding a way for clubs that are not able to send a delegate to the meeting to be able to vote on certain (already known) topics a few days prior so every club gets to be represented atleast at some level?

How about determing a way to provide information from the NEBGF to share at the club level, such as meeting minutes/highlight to review from previous meeting, meeting agenda for upcoming meeting including known items up for vote, and possibly a communication from the board 1 or 2 times throughout the year.

What setting a committee to find ways to get more involvement from each association and club across the federation, as it seems PBGA clubs and members are more active.

[trial153]

DJC, on 13 July 2011 - 02:11 PM, said:

I thought at the NEBGF meeting we as a federation were not in support of the AKC Grand Champion Program and there was not interest?

How about finding a way for clubs that are not able to send a delegate to the meeting to be able to vote on certain (already known) topics a few days prior so every club gets to be represented atleast at some level?

How about determing a way to provide information from the NEBGF to share at the club level, such as meeting minutes/highlight to review from previous meeting, meeting agenda for upcoming meeting including known items up for vote, and possibly a communication from the board 1 or 2 times throughout the year.

What setting a committee to find ways to get more involvement from each association and club across the federation, as it seems PBGA clubs and members are more active.

Some good ideas Dan.

With the location of the Northeast Run off, it is even more important to find a way that that includes all the clubs that want to vote and participle in the direction that that Federation takes. How about proxy votes being set up, were a delegate can represent several clubs and vote on there behalf.

Communication is sorely lacking from the federation. If I asked 5 members at my club what if any benefits the club receives by belonging to federation they would look at me blankly. A couple might know we pay a per capita when we qualify the lic trial. Other then that they wouldn't have any comment. The communication is zero. How about something as simple as a letter or invite for a club representative to attend the trial and annual meeting. That letter can state the location and trial info also.

While we are on the meeting subject. Why is it that in 2011 we are still hung up on trying to accomplish a year worth of work in a two hour meeting? Am I the only person that recognizes that this is antiquated at best and worthless at worst? Communications are better then ever and yet we haven't adapted or used any to our further our common interests.

[trial153]

Dont even start me on the Grand Champion crap...nothing but a way for the AKC to get the more money out of more trials. What next when that's not enough? A Grander FC? If we wanted to increase quality we wound need to cut back on the number of trials period. The clubs in general are spread way to thin and it is mostly because of the two lic trials. Multiply trials every weekend, and then qualifying trials on top of that and you can see why less work getting done at club if all the effort is given to holding trials? Any wonder that 1/2 the clubs you go to have a poor rabbit supply?

Do way with two LIC AKC trials and scrap the GFC idea. Lets do more work that directly helps out clubs and associations and it will carry over to the federation.

Without strong healthy clubs we will never have strong association and federation.

[Windbeam2]

Before we go adding trials or titles, how about coordinating a feasible trial schedule amongst associations? The current set up is not helping the clubs, associations or Federation. Allowing 4 trials, 4 hrs apart to hold a license trial on the same weekend or allowing a member club to run against the Nationals does not better the breed.

Like Jimmy said, how do we explain these things to our clubs when it comes time to pay the per capita fee's?

I'm all for change but feel there are way too many issues that need resolution before we move forward.

[trial153]

Windbeam2, on 13 July 2011 - 03:28 PM, said:

I'm all for change but feel there are way too many issues that need resolution before we move forward.

Bill, your 100% correct. WE need increased communication in order to work during the year to resolve issues rather then hoping to get it done at the annual meeting.
A typical beagle club/ federation/ assocation line at the meetings "lets look into it".

Here is a different approach that seems to work...lets look into things before the meeting, do our home work and then make solid recommendations that are in position to be enacted...instead of the lets look into ..and not hear about till we read the minutes next year.

[gibble1]

I hear you folks on communication. Will see what we can do. We'll try and get an e-mail/hard copy letter out to all of the clubs in the next month or two. We will also look into a pre-agenda for next year and "off-site" voting options. If I recall correctly, there is a ballot option for mail-in voting in the Constitution and By-Laws.

Grand Champion Title...Yes, Dan Carr, et al. we did vote that the NEBGF would not be in favor of the Grand Champion Title. We expressed that at the Beagle Advisory Committee. Delegates were heard loud and clear. With that being said, if the Grand Champion Title would become a reality, do we want our Federation's options to participate to be limited? Not committing to participate, one way or another, but limited. It's kinda like the two trial thing...you don't have to have two trials and you don't have to like it, but if it's something your club, Associations, or Federation can benefit from you might want to keep your options opened.

You folks have any thoughts on the Advanced Seminar thing we're working on? (Could do the same type of virtual meeting for a Federation meeting as well).

[Windbeam2]

John, I think the Virtual Meeting is great idea. That's a win win for most of us.

Bill

[DJC]

I was merely pointing out that if we as a federation were against the idea and did not support it then why would it be high on our priority list to pursue? I think there are more internal issues we should place above it as previously mentioned.

I'm not against the idea of a webinar advanced seminar. Wondering about having one at the federation championship and each association championship (or rotation) that would give judges 3-5 options a year to attend. I don't THINK its a huge concearn among IBGA judges. Also considering judges basically get gas money if that for judging judges judge because they want to. If its offered numerous times in the federation and judges choose not to attend then how much do they want to judge? JMO

[Dan Lang]

....Webinar...how much is that going to cost and who's going to pay for that..I know I am not up on the latest and greatest stuff out there, but it sounds expensive.

How about this idea for the advnaced course or regular senminar for that matter. I understand that the AKC is cash strapped and has cut it's field reps. I know it is expensive to send some one out of the area to do one of these courses. Could the federations ask for volunteers to work for the AKC and hold these training sessions. If we had one or two folks from each state that the NEBGF represents volunteer to hold these classes that would take the burden off the AKC. The AKC could then, train the trainer. These folks would then coordinate with the federation and AKC to hold a class in their areas. It would probably amount to a class or two a year in each area. I would like to be the first volunteer trainer !.....

[DJC]

Great idea Dan!

I don't think the webinar would be that costly, you could lmost do it with "skype" or similar application

[gibble1]

Dan: If you recall, George Pirman and Wayne Price used to do the judging seminars years ago. They were not AKC employees, per se. I think the idea of using local "contractors" has been floated to the people in charge at AKC (not the faces we see) and they are adamant that anyone that is explaining AKC policy has to be an AKC employee.

Webinar is sort of like watching a slide show on your computer, maybe some video clips, while you're also on a phone teleconference with all of the other participants. The idea has been floated to Doug Ljungren and his reply was that AKC has a standing work group that is looking to update/electronify as many programs as feasible. If the seminar can be done economically by webinar they will identify it as such and start working on it.

[Rob Kane]

John,
George Pirman would be a great person to do the webinar.

[Dan Lang]

....page 56 ....Better Beagling..AUGUST.......5 judge seminar scheduled .........can we make this any easier.??.

[trial153]

Dan Lang, on 26 July 2011 - 07:30 AM, said:

....page 56 ....Better Beagling..AUGUST.......5 judge seminar scheduled .........can we make this any easier.??.

Yes Dan, we can send a cab to their house and take them, while we are at it provide refreshments along the way.

The "advance seminar" stuff been going or for years, with extension given ect ect...If you were/are motivated to take a judging seminar advanced or otherwise I think you could have found one by now. At what point does the hand holding stop?

[Joe Kaschak]

trial153, on 27 July 2011 - 10:16 AM, said:

Yes Dan, we can send a cab to their house and take them, while we are at it provide refreshments along the way.

The "advance seminar" stuff been going or for years, with extension given ect ect...If you were/are motivated to take a judging seminar advanced or otherwise I think you could have found one by now. At what point does the hand holding stop?

I have to agree with Dan Carr. With the amount of money to be made judging trials(being funny), if a person wants to judge, he or she will make every effort possible to attend a seminar. Judging is not a job but a commitment to a sport that you are passionette about I like Dan Lang's suggestion as well and am willing to volunteer next. Al West would be another that could be asked. He is knowledgeable in the sport and has expieeance putting on seminars ( he has done quite a few flooring seminars for Home Depot).