Page 12 - The Sample Voice 02-13

Basic HTML Version

12
THE AGILITY VOICE | JULY 2012
January 2013 for formal
recommendation, effective from
1January 2014 at the earliest.
However, judges would be
encouraged to continue using the
existing course time matrix in the
meantime. The office was requested
to issue a press release to highlight the
matter and it was stated that the
document would be made available on
the Kennel Club website. The Council
requested the Judges
Working Party
to continue with its research, but
asked that both methods of calculating
a course time be recorded in order to
review a better comparison of the
findings for its next meeting.
Large Dog Olympia
Semi-Finals
8. Following the Council
s request to
review the matter at its January
meeting, the Chairman reported that
finalists had been consulted as to
whether it would be fairer to take a
smaller number of dogs from the
Novice and Senior Olympia quarter
finals held at Stoneleigh, rather than
36 currently taken. This would allow
each handler a minimum of two runs
at Olympia. It was concluded that the
majority were content to continue
with the current format and, therefore,
no further action was considered
necessary.
ITEM 4. AGILITY
STRATEGIC DIRECTION
9. The Chairman began by welcoming Mr
S Croxford to the meeting to provide
an update on progress. Prior to any
discussion, the Chairman highlighted
that the purpose of the strategy was
for the Kennel Club to be more
inclusive and to adapt its services for
the future. The Council acknowledged
that the majority of the feedback
provided at its last meeting in January
had been addressed and incorporated
into the annex. However, concerns
were still raised with regard to private
organisations holding licensed agility
shows as a business and the negative
impact they could have on local shows
run by registered societies. It was
accepted that the Kennel Club could
not prevent growing trends and that
market forces would ultimately decide,
but it was emphasised that by
adapting current practices competitors
would be safeguarded.
10. The Council acknowledged these
concerns, but since it had already
discussed at length the various issues
raised surrounding the strategy at its
previous meeting, constructive
feedback to the annex of the H
Regulations was welcomed. A
discussion ensued and a number of
beneficial comments and suggestions
were noted to revise some of the new
regulations accordingly. It was noted
that the amended H Regulations
would be referred to the Activities
Sub-Committee for further
consideration before the General
Committee would make its final
decision in July 2012. It was clarified
that subject to General Committee
approval and the completion of
necessary IT administration,
organisations or individuals would be
able to apply for Listed Status in late
summer/early autumn this year.
11. By the end of the discussion, the
majority were content with the
developments taking place in agility.
Mr Croxford thanked the Council for
inviting him to the meeting and
thanked the agility community for all
its continued support and constructive
feedback.
ITEM 5. FIVE YEAR
STRATEGY
12. The Council was asked whether it
wanted to suggest any additional
matters to be considered at a later date
for the next term of office. The
following points would be added to
the five year strategy in addition to
those already listed on the agenda:
To address the issue of sub-standard
judging. The office informed the
meeting that this matter was currently
being reviewed by the Judges
Working Party and that a report would
be produced for the Council
s next
meeting.
To address standards of agility
equipment. Concerns were raised that
some manufacturers provided sub-
standard agility equipment, particularly
the contact obstacles which could be
potentially unsafe for dogs. It was
stated that judges and show organisers
had discretion to remove obstacles
they deemed unsafe. Whilst
regulations only stipulated
measurements, manufacturers were
obligated to meet those specifications
and to produce safe equipment.
ITEM 6. PROPOSALS
FROM SOCIETIES /
PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS
Proposed Amendment of
Regulation H(1)9.e.
(Management)
13. Miss Olden, on behalf of Mr Glover, a
private individual, proposed an
amendment to the above regulation.
Mr Jordan seconded the proposal. The
Council supported the amendment
since it clarified an existing regulation
regarding the number of individual
runs a person may judge on one day.
Apart from a minor amendment, the
Council agreed to recommend an
amendment to Regulation H(1)9.e. as
follows:
FROM
The maximum number of dogs a
person may judge on one day is 450
(Deletions underlined)
TO
The maximum number of individual
runs a person shall judge on one day is
450, excluding unforeseen
eventualities such as re-runs
(Amendments underlined)
ITEM 7. DISCUSSION
ITEMS
Use of Table in Agility
Competitions - Ms H McLean
14. Ms McLean requested the Council
discuss the use and relevance of the
table in agility competitions. It was felt
that the table posed a health and
safety risk because it was seldom used
in competitions and, therefore, many
dogs had little experience of
negotiating the obstacle. The Council
opposed removing the obstacle from
the regulations due to its unpopularity,
stating that there were other obstacles
that were also rarely used, and it did
not want to encourage removing other
traditional agility equipment from the
regulations. The Council sympathised
with Ms McLean
s personal experience
when her dog was injured attempting
to negotiate the obstacle. The Council
encouraged clubs to train on the
obstacle should it appear in future
competitions and confirmed that
concerns regarding the positioning of
the table were already addressed in
the judges
training programme.