New National Dog Organisation.

[klink]

Would the current members' of the present dog councils support a new dog organisation ?

If it were national, with all the titles etc and shows. An organisation managed (finacially by a business people) with suitable controls and transperances. This is possible. There need not be only one dog organisation in Australia.

Just have a quiet think about it .In a recent survey 78% of those canvassed at shows said yes.

[Keshwar]

Would the current members' of the present dog councils support a new dog organisation ?

If it were national, with all the titles etc and shows. An organisation managed (finacially by a business people) with suitable controls and transperances. This is possible. There need not be only one dog organisation in Australia.

Just have a quiet think about it .In a recent survey 78% of those canvassed at shows said yes.

Isn't this what MDBA are doing?

No I don't feel the need for another National body.

I do think the ANKC could do with some improvement tho'.

[SwaY]

No I don't feel the need for another National body.

I do think the ANKC could do with some improvement tho'.

I agree.

[Bjelkier]

No I don't feel the need for another National body.

I do think the ANKC could do with some improvement tho'.

I agree.

So do I

Edited June 21, 2011 by Bjelkier

[poodlefan]

I'd not support it without a lot more information.

Even then, I'd rather see improvements made to the organisation we have than one set up in 'opposition'.

It has every chance of becoming like that scene from Life of Brian with the Judean People's Front, the People's Front of Judea etc.

"Divide and conquer" is an adage that needs to be kept in mind. Splitting the dog fancy into factions wouldn't profit those who support pedigreed dogs.

[conztruct]

Would the current members' of the present dog councils support a new dog organisation ?

If it were national, with all the titles etc and shows. An organisation managed (finacially by a business people) with suitable controls and transperances. This is possible. There need not be only one dog organisation in Australia.

Just have a quiet think about it .In a recent survey 78% of those canvassed at shows said yes.

I would need more information in relation to this before making a decision. If the improvements or aspects of the "new" organisation were of value to the dog world and not yet present in the current organisations, why not improve the current organisations instead of creating a whole new one in addition. I think it would add another layer of complexity which I would not be in favour of.

[klink]

Would the current members' of the present dog councils support a new dog organisation ?

If it were national, with all the titles etc and shows. An organisation managed (finacially by a business people) with suitable controls and transperances. This is possible. There need not be only one dog organisation in Australia.

Just have a quiet think about it .In a recent survey 78% of those canvassed at shows said yes.

I would need more information in relation to this before making a decision. If the improvements or aspects of the "new" organisation were of value to the dog world and not yet present in the current organisations, why not improve the current organisations instead of creating a whole new one in addition. I think it would add another layer of complexity which I would not be in favour of.

I agree with your ideas' re improving our current organisations , a comment that I have heard for many years and to date not a great deal has happened.It is nigh impossible to get the dog fraternity to unite for each other on any issue unless it affects them, thus no changes. Changes that are meaningful to us all will come with some pain, but if the goal is to improve a faltering system this is pain we must wear. The main problem as I see it is that the members' etc of the various councils shuffle about but it is the system that stays. What we need in all of these organisations is DOG people , not just SHOW people.

[conztruct]

Would the current members' of the present dog councils support a new dog organisation ?

If it were national, with all the titles etc and shows. An organisation managed (finacially by a business people) with suitable controls and transperances. This is possible. There need not be only one dog organisation in Australia.

Just have a quiet think about it .In a recent survey 78% of those canvassed at shows said yes.

I would need more information in relation to this before making a decision. If the improvements or aspects of the "new" organisation were of value to the dog world and not yet present in the current organisations, why not improve the current organisations instead of creating a whole new one in addition. I think it would add another layer of complexity which I would not be in favour of.

I agree with your ideas' re improving our current organisations , a comment that I have heard for many years and to date not a great deal has happened.It is nigh impossible to get the dog fraternity to unite for each other on any issue unless it affects them, thus no changes. Changes that are meaningful to us all will come with some pain, but if the goal is to improve a faltering system this is pain we must wear. The main problem as I see it is that the members' etc of the various councils shuffle about but it is the system that stays. What we need in all of these organisations is DOG people , not just SHOW people.

Absolutely klink. If a system isn't working as well as it could or should, the solution to the problem is to improve the system....while it might seem easier just to create another organisation to achieve the desired result it's just going to fragment the operations, create confusion and more bureaucracy and cost...and in the end it actually doesn't do anything to fix the original problem. No system is perfect and in my experience I've found canine councils to be a bit change resistant but you have to just keep chipping away.

ETA: I'm guilty of it myself - if I have a whinge about the way something happens or is done, that's usually the end of it. But if I don't bother to provide the feedback and suggestion backed up by the merits to the canine councils - how are they supposed to get their crystal ball out and guess. If you provide suggestions and they don't listen, that's a different story and I'd bet money that it's happened. A very wise person once gave me a few pieces of advice "what's your 50% - meaning what can I do about this" and "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem". It goes back to what I said about chipping away - if you've got a point of view and some suggestions we need to communicate them and "sell" it to the councils so they are at least considering them and required to provide some commentary or make a decision. It won't always go our way but unfortunately, that's life.

Edited June 21, 2011 by conztruct

[yarracully]

I could be wrong but I thought the FCI would only accept one registry for purebreed dogs per country. This currently held by the ANKC. If this is true then any new organisation would have an issue with people importing and exporting dogs.

So while a new registry is theoretically possible, if only one is accepted, then you could pretty well rule out imported dogs as well, I guess, any breeders that might plan to export as they will want to stay with an FCI accepted registry or they will lose value on their import/export.

[Dellcara]

I could be wrong but I thought the FCI would only accept one registry for purebreed dogs per country. This currently held by the ANKC. If this is true then any new organisation would have an issue with people importing and exporting dogs.

So while a new registry is theoretically possible, if only one is accepted, then you could pretty well rule out imported dogs as well, I guess, any breeders that might plan to export as they will want to stay with an FCI accepted registry or they will lose value on their import/export.

correct .... and then like in the US where some Breeds have their own Club & Breed Register, you end up with the

additonal expenses of having to dual register everything if you want to be part of the "global" dogworld.

[jerojath]

Would the current members' of the present dog councils support a new dog organisation ?

If it were national, with all the titles etc and shows. An organisation managed (finacially by a business people) with suitable controls and transperances. This is possible. There need not be only one dog organisation in Australia.

Just have a quiet think about it .In a recent survey 78% of those canvassed at shows said yes.

I honestly don't think we have a substantial enough population within the hobby to support two 'councils', and while

I feel the one we have has done a lot wrong, I also believe it has also got too much right to scrap it entirely for a 'new' organization.

Right now, at this point, No... I would not support such a proposal.

[Jumabaar]

I would join a group that intended to lobby the ANKC/Dogs NSW for the changes that I as a member want.

I think that would assist me more than having a new registry.

But ultimately I DO plan on becoming more involved in breed/all breed clubs this year, and hope to attend a few Dogs NSW meetings (Sorry but during the day for General meetings is just silly!) but that is because I am not studying full time so have the time to do so.

Edited June 22, 2011 by ~Woofen~

[GRD]

I would join a group that intended to lobby the ANKC/Dogs NSW for the changes that I as a member want.

I think that would assist me more than having a new registry.

But ultimately I DO plan on becoming more involved in breed/all breed clubs this year, and hope to attend a few Dogs NSW meetings (Sorry but during the day for General meetings is just silly!) but that is because I am not studying full time so have the time to do so.

Why join a lobby group?

You can personally write to your State/Territory organisation with your suggestions/recommendations. If 20 people did this independently, it would have more influence on them that one letter from a lobby group with 20 signatures on it.

The closing date for agenda items for the ANKC board meeting is 12 August, if you have something you wish to be on that agenda you need to get it in to your member body for their July meeting (ie NOW).

[StarLapyz]

I would join a group that intended to lobby the ANKC/Dogs NSW for the changes that I as a member want.

I think that would assist me more than having a new registry.

But ultimately I DO plan on becoming more involved in breed/all breed clubs this year, and hope to attend a few Dogs NSW meetings (Sorry but during the day for General meetings is just silly!) but that is because I am not studying full time so have the time to do so.

Agree with this, much better to change what is already there instead of reinventing the wheel. I don't think there is much benefit to splitting up the dog community into even smaller groups either.

[espinay2]

I would join a group that intended to lobby the ANKC/Dogs NSW for the changes that I as a member want.

I think that would assist me more than having a new registry.

Agree. I would much rather have some kind of organisation that would provide support and lobby for my interests rather than another registry.

[mita]

I could be wrong but I thought the FCI would only accept one registry for purebreed dogs per country. This currently held by the ANKC. If this is true then any new organisation would have an issue with people importing and exporting dogs.

So while a new registry is theoretically possible, if only one is accepted, then you could pretty well rule out imported dogs as well, I guess, any breeders that might plan to export as they will want to stay with an FCI accepted registry or they will lose value on their import/export.

Couldn't agree more. My breed of interest benefits by a high level of interchange among other countries. Going along with that is an international health monitoring committee.

Sounds trite....but I think it's good to become involved in an organisation, in order to lobby for change. Also the various breed clubs provide a source for generating ideas.