Page 10 - The Sample Voice 02-13

Basic HTML Version

10
THE AGILITY VOICE | JULY 2012
MINUTES OF THE
KENNEL CLUB
AGILITY LIAISON
COUNCIL MEETING
HELD ON 7th JUNE 2012
PRESENT:
Mr D Ray
Midlands
Mr R Jordan
Midlands
Mr I Mallabar North East
Mrs J Nero
North East
Mrs P Baltes North West
Mr M Hallam North West
Mr R McAleese Northern Ireland
Mrs M Kelly Scotland
Mr J Gilbert
South East and East Anglia
Mr T Griffin South and South West
Miss L Olden South and South West
Mr M Shaw
Wales
IN ATTENDANCE:
Mr S Croxford Activities Sub-
Committee & General
Committee Member
(Item 4 only)
Miss D Deuchar Manager Working Dog
Activities Team
Miss J Nosalik Specialist - WTOA
IN THE CHAIR: Mr D Ray
The Chairman welcomed the Council
members to the final meeting of the
current term of office.
ITEM 1. APOLOGIES
FOR ABSENCE
1. Apologies had been received from Mr
S Chandler, representing South East
and East Anglia.
ITEM 2. APPROVAL OF
THE MINUTES
2. The minutes of the meeting held on 19
January 2012 were signed by the
Chairman as an accurate record.
ITEM 3. MATTERS
ARISING
Results of Recommendations
3. The Council noted the following
matters which had been approved by
the General Committee at its meeting
on 17 April 2012:
i. Amendment to Regulation
H(1)(A)7. (Progression)
ii. Amendment to Regulation
H(1)(A)8. (Points Progression)
iii. Amendment to Regulation
H(1)(A)9.f. (Grade 6 (Senior))
Championship Class and G7
4. Mr Gilbert, on behalf of the Grading
Review Working Party, proposed two
possible amendments to Regulation
H(1)(A)9.h. regarding Championship
Class eligibility. Mr Jordan seconded
the proposals. A discussion took place
which included acknowledgement for
a need to give more value to standard
Grade 7 classes by extending criteria
to be eligible for the Championship
Class. However, the regions were split
by opinion whether there should be
one standard agility win at Grade 7 or
two top three places gained in Grade 7
standard agility classes. Concerns
were raised whether this could have a
detrimental effect on small and
medium classes as they were
numerically smaller, but it was
reiterated that dogs currently eligible
for the Championship Class would not
be affected. Many were of the view
that the recent changes to the grading
system as well as the work
surrounding the matter on course
times would prevent quick
progression to Grade 7. As a result,
the Council did not support either
proposal, but agreed to review the
implementation of the aforementioned
changes at a later date prior to further
consideration.
Calculating Accurate Course
Times
5. The Chairman reminded the meeting
that the purpose of addressing the
above matter was to ensure judges set
a realistic time criteria for their course
designs and to be in line with the
majority of the rest of the world. A
discussion took place to determine
firstly whether the agility community
was in favour of regulating the need to
calculate course times and secondly,
which method should be adopted in
order to sustain consistency in judging
procedures. The majority agreed to
enforce the calculation of course
times, however, it was requested that
there should be guidance, a leeway to
cover any contributing factors such as
weather or design difficulty, and
uniformity in the method chosen.
6. The Council discussed the two
methods of calculating a course time,
stating that the majority of the rest of
the world measured the dogs
anticipated optimum route. The office
explained the matrix for the method of
calculating a course time; by
measuring a straight line from centre
to centre between obstacles, but
research was not yet ready for
publication as information was still
being collated. It was reiterated that
the Judges
Working Party
s intention
was to revise the existing course time
matrix as a guideline reference for
judges. Agility Accredited Trainers
were responsible for educating future
agility judges and the Working Party
was of the view that the only accurate
way of calculating a course was by
measuring straight line centre to
centre. The Council did however
stress, that it was not made aware that
the research was being conducted
using a different method than the
dogs
anticipated optimum path. It was
the Council
s decision to propose a
regulation to make the measuring of
courses mandatory and it was
acknowledged that the suggested new
method would be more consistent and
accurate as far as distance
measurement was concerned.
However, the majority still favoured
the existing method as it calculated
the actual length based on the dogs
anticipated optimum route and this
would also standardise the Kennel
Club
s method with the FCI and the
majority of other countries
Kennel
Clubs.
7. The Council were in favour of
regulating the calculation of course
times and requested the proposal to
be referred to its next meeting in