Chat Transcript - NAFA Leadership Chat January 10, 2005

Kris_PickeringI think that we are on our own best behavior - Dale was unexpectedly called into a work emergency
Sam.FordI think we have several BOD members with us and so that all can know them, can we begin by the BOD members saying hellp
Sam.FordOk hello
scottNETLOL.....Hi all
scottNETJust spoke with Lee, he will be on within a few minutes
Sam.FordKris, Scott, are here. Lee will be joining later. and I am here. Sam
robinhow shall we start?
Sam.FordSo who wants to "send your questions succintly to the room"?
ViperSBTQUESTION - What came of the agenda item regarding recognition of McNabs?
Sam.FordThose are Dale's words not mine
Kris_PickeringIt was carried over to the 1/15 meeting but as a motion to recognize the AHBA as a registry
ViperSBTSo all breeds in the AHBA would be recognized?
Kris_PickeringIf that motion carried. The research showed that would amount to three new breeds, in toto.
valpearsoncaliforniaIs no one going to ask what three breeds?
Kris_PickeringMcNab and two others. I'd have to check on the two others.
ViperSBTAHBA registers on merit not parentage, correct?
scottNETI have that information in my files, but do not have it where I am currently logged on
Karen.O.GatewayLink to AHBA breed list
Kris_Pickeringthanks, Karen
Lee_HeightonHello everyone, my apologies for being a little late
ViperSBTWhat is the reasoning to add this registry? Why not others?
scottNETThe motion was sent to recognize the McNabs. Since NAFA recognizes registries and not breeds, we asked the submitter to provide a registry that recognized McNabs. The motion that was submitted was to recognize the AHBA. The BOD is evaluating whether it fits the criteria to be a recognized registry
BoogerWho is doing the homework on the AHBA?
Lee_HeightonAll the members of the BoD have been exchanging information about the AHBA so that it can be discussed at the meeting
BoogerSO no one person is looking into it in detail to make a proposal?
BoogerEveryone is just gathering their own information?
BoogerWhat criteria will be used to determine if it is a good idea or not?
Lee_HeightonI didn't say that. I said we we're exchanging information with each other. Good communication is always the best research
BoogerWho is spearheading it?
scottNETThe proposal has already been made. The links to gather the information concerning the AHBA has been circulated to all BOD members so that we can all be familiar with the information in order to make an informed decision
Boogercoordinating it?
BoogerWhat will the criteria be?
Lee_HeightonIt has been assigned to the Standing Rules committee
BoogerIs anyone from that committee present tonight?
Kris_PickeringYes, I am on that committee.
valpearsoncaliforniaKris, I think it is pretty hard to tell a BC from a BC mix from a McNabb... Is that a concern for anyone? Especially regarding Multi Racing?
BoogerCan you speak to the criteria that your committee is using to determine if recognizing the AHBA is in the best interest of the sport?
Kris_PickeringThe focus is on comparing the characteristics and breeds in AHBA with those set down in the other registries NAFA currently recognizes. The problem you identify, Val, obtains with many breeds. We depend on honesty and good faith with all breed submissions. If you have thoughts on this, we welcome them - that's why we're trying to get info and mtg agendas out and published
BoogerBut this is not the same type of registry as the Kennel Clubs NAFA recognizes
BoogerYou said three breeds, but I think the list might be bigger
BoogerAppenzeller Sennenhund Catalonian Sheepdog Entlebucher Sennenhund Lapphund McNab Norwegian Buhund Picardy Shepherd Polish Lowland Sheepdog
BoogerSome are already recognized breeds, just with different names, how will you control that?
BoogerSeems like a huge waste of time and resources for a single breed to be added to the already massive list of recognized breeds.
BoogerAnd the McNab is registerable on merit, not parentage/lineage.... As our all dogs in the AHBA
Lee_HeightonYou may have the cart before the horse. First we will need to see if the registry is approved by the BoD.
MargeHendersonI have some McNab experience and they do look similar to bc's to some but they are quite different in their work.
BoogerBeing only a couple of days away from your decision, has this been discussed?
MargeHendersonROM is no easy feat and I think they admitted 3 last year
BoogerLee, should we wait until after the BOD approves this to make statements about it?
scottNETThat was the discussion that led to tabling the motion to this meeting so that more information could be obtained about the registry
BoogerWas any vote taken on it at the last call?
Lee_HeightonNo. You're input is very welcome. You aren't making a statement as much as asking if the BoD has already made a decision
Lee_HeightonWe haven't
scottNETno vote was taken, the motion was tabled
BoogerI am asking what process the BOD is using to make their decision
BoogerSometime motions are tabled after votes failed, just wondering...
scottNETThe BOD felt that we did not have enough information to take a vote.
BoogerI guess I knwo I'll I will know until next week
Ellen_FurFunMay I ask if I am missing something? Is there a problem I am missing with this? Would recognizing (or not) a McNab be a "big deal" for some reason I am missing? Or is it the the actual registry that is the problem for folks?
BoogerFor me anyway...
Kris_PickeringMay I ask who you are, Booger? I don't recognize the name.
MelAgreed Ellen - I believe it is the Registry being recognized which should be of concern
scottNETLN. Any changes to the rules have long lasting effects. Recognizing a registry means that NAFA will recognize any breed added to the registry in the future. Ensuring they use a proper method of recognizing a breed becomes very important
walter.davisfor multibreed racing
BoogerGreat point Scott, I feel better knowing the BOD is taking that into consideration.
valpearsoncaliforniaI have concerns about a registry that does not operate on bloodlines. A McNabb might look different working sheep, but it runs flyball just like everyone else
Ellen_FurFunok, thanks....just trying to get a feel for the issue
scottNETThat was the whole reason the motion was tabled. We did not want to rush into any decision
Heather_CleverCaninesWhy aren't the McNab's registered with the UKC?
OrangeCrushJaneThey are a breed that developed in No. Cal
OrangeCrushJanenot the UK
Heather_CleverCaninesThe UKC is the United Kennel Club. It's an American registry.
OrangeCrushJaneoops sorry
OrangeCrushJaneis that the one that recognized the Labradoodle?
Heather_CleverCaninesNo, they do not recognize the Labradoodle. They have a process for recognizing new breeds.
Stephanie_secondwindIs there any estimate on when the "unofficial regional championship" page -- -- will be updated to reflect the new rules about earning regional championship points? (It would be helpful for those of us who are still a little unclear on some of the finer details.) I know Dale was working on it, but just wondering if there is an update or estimate?
Lee_HeightonDale hasn't given us a time frame yet, but he is working on it
robinQuestion. Out of curiosity, I noticed that Judy Hagan has been named named Acting co-RD for Region 3 on the website. Was that approved by the board? or just named temporarily? Also, I was under the impression that the naming of the new RD(s) for Region 3 was supposed to be this weekend. Has the decision been finalized already?
Stephanie_secondwindOK, thank you ::smile
Sam.FordJudy is acting Co RD in Region 3 and the BOD will voice their opinions this coming weekend.
Sam.FordNO final approval has taken place.
OrangeCrushJaneAre all RD's "acting"
OrangeCrushJanepending approval
Jo_SkidzDon't the NAFA rules specify that Acting RDs are ONLY acting for specific tournaments, not just for some unspecified general length of time?
scottNETThe ED has the power to appoint an acting RD for a region pending BOD approval at their next meeting
OrangeCrushJaneI was under the impression, from the last minutes posted, that all RD's would be "reappointed".....if that's true....are they all currenlt "acting" awaiting approval of the BOD
Jo_SkidzSo that's different from an Acting RD at a tournament that's assigned by the "real" RD with ED approval?
MargeHendersonSam,Other than Reg 3 which RD re-appointments are you going to put before the board on the Jan 15 meeting?
JYDog55who are the other candidates being considered for region 3?
Sam.FordMarge that list is still being worked on but there are several regions that will be presented.
Bill_KAOSSam, what are the criteria for selection of regional directors, how long are their terms and have you considered election by members instead of appointment?
Sam.FordCriteria isn't define in the rules and there is no term specified.
MargeHendersonSam, In what order will they be considered. reg order with 1 first or some other order?
Sam.FordElection is something that has come up on occasion but RDs are appointed by the ED to represent his office and there is not a way to elect them.
MargeHendersonSeems like all 17 couldn't be done in one meeting
OrangeCrushJaneSam...maybe you didn't see my question....... are all current RD's "acting" waiting for BOD approval??? if so....shouldn't the web page be changed to reflect they are all "acting"
Sam.FordMarge you are correct that all 17 at once isn't workable. I am aware of problems and vacancies that will need to be filled. No set order is planned.
MargeHendersonWe, the flyball public want a voice in this process Sam
Sam.FordThe answer Jane is No. All are not going to be presented for approval. The RDs continue to serve and are already approved. I am reviewing and working with specific issues and with vacanies.
Sam.FordThanks Marge but that isn't within the rules if you are talking about voting. If you are talking about coming to me with issues and ideas, I am open for that.
Jo_SkidzJYDog55 asked who the other candidates are for Region 3 -- I think a lot of us are curious about this ...
Lee_HeightonSam, I hate to disagree but that point has not been addressed by a BoD vote. It is the opinion of at least a few of the BoD members that all RD's will need to be approved.
Sam.FordSeveral names have been given to me and I don't think it is proper for me to discuss any one in particular. Personnel mattes are not open for general discussions. Privately I am available but certainly I will not publically discuss people pros or cons.
Kris_PickeringYes, I was just typing the same thing.
Bill_KAOSSo there aren't precise terms for RD's... then how often are the appointments reviewed and what things do you consider in selecting someone to represent your office?
BoogerGood to see our BOD all on the same page
Kris_PickeringI believe that they are re-submitted with the ED's term ends and that the criteria to some extent are stated in Rules 1.6 and 2e for RDs and judges.
MargeHendersonLee, that's the way I read it too
MargeHendersonSam, no one is asking you to discuss personell. We just want to understand the process
MargeHendersonWill you review all RD's?
robinActually, I'm just curious to know why one was appointed "acting" when the vote is the following weekend and may or may not be approved by the BOD. What was the rush? I'm not saying I like or dislike Judy as a choice, but am curious about why naming it on the website when it hasn't been approved by the BOD.
Sam.FordYes in Time Marge all will be reviewed.
robinquestion about the lights. has anything been changed since Dale's tournament as far specs go on the prototype?i.e. changing the color of the "third" light? When do you think the production of them will commence?
Lee_HeightonI am sure we will be receiving more information about your questions during the Technology Committee report on Saturday. We are supposed to have the final product at the end of March
Bill_KAOSBack to the subject of RDs. I'm confused Kris in light of your response. Sam earlier replied to my question that the criteria for RDs is not defined in the rules. All I really want to know from Sam is what kind of things does he consider in the selection process.
Kris_PickeringI was writing as to my view, which may not be Sam's. I think the job of the RD and the criteria I'd apply in reviewing his nominations are guided by the job the RD is assigned - that's stated in Rule 1.6. And I think the discretion and judgment called for by the assigned duties are also really well addressed in Rule 2e. It's just what I've looked at in thinking about this.
Sam.FordSome of the criteria for an RD is knowledge of rules, experience with flyball and tournaments in general. Attitude and the ability to work with the flyball community and the ED. These are some of the things that I consider.
Bill_KAOSThanks Kris. What's your view Sam?
MargeHendersonSam, Just to make sure I have this straight, after the rd review all rd's will be sent to the board for approval? All at once or a few at a time?
JYDog55Could someone answer Robins earlier question
Jo_SkidzSam, how will you judge "ability to work with the flyball community?"
Sam.FordI am undergoing a review of all RDs whether they require a reapproval seems to be up for question.
Sam.FordI intend to review whether or not they require reapproval.
MargeHendersonNot in my interpretation of the rules
robinwhich question was that again jydog55?
Bill_KAOSI think the ED should have some discretion here. That's why I'd look to know what his thinking is? What is he considering in the RD selection process?
JYDog55about the rush to update the web page with the RD before approval
robinoh yes, that one.
Margaret_BITPUnder that interpretation RD's could serve with no member of the current board having a say, they could serve forever, Sam.
Margaret_BITPWith only the approval of some board from the distant past.
walter.davisand the day to day, week by week, approval of the ED
Sam.FordYes Margaret that is correct
valpearsoncaliforniaCould we change topics for a moment? I have a rule clarification.
robinI guess what people want to know is why the rush to name an "acting" RD with one week before the vote when there is already an RD in place. Like I said before, I'm not bashing anyone, but am curious on why it was done and the timing of it.
Bill_KAOSGood question Robin.
Sam.FordI think getting information out so that it can generate commitments is a good thing. Posting Acting is a way to get this done. Also there are RD activities that must go on ahead of tournaments and if that persons name is out there work can continue.
Sam.FordPrior to this names were presented without notice sometimes and I think getting information out is a good thing.
Jo_SkidzYet you won't discuss "personnel' and tell us who else might be under consideration?
robinfine if that person is accepted, but if he/she are not? Will they still go as "acting"?
OrangeCrushJanecould be a personal embarassement to have their "acting" retracted.....
Sam.FordIf the BOD doesn't approve someone, it is back into the process again until and RD is appointed and approved.
MargeHendersonThat could be embarassing to the acting
Sam.FordAnytime you step forward there can be a price to pay. Thankfully there are some willing to take on this burden.
robinCouldn't the names be added to the agenda prior to the meeting? instead of being named? This way you can get positive or negative feedback for you choice as YOUR representative.
JYDog55Jan was already RD why need to add another with one week to go?
valpearsoncaliforniaReady for a new question? Can anyone clarify whether a team's best time from a season, even if it was earned out of region, is counted in determining the regional championships?
JYDog55back to RD please
Margaret_BITPI don't think they are finished with RD's
valpearsoncaliforniaOk, happy to wait
Melmy apologies - by all means - back to RDs . . .
Jo_SkidzSo, what about Robin's comment suggesting that proposed names be added to the agenda for positive and negative feedback prior to the meeting -- this should help in YOUR selection, Sam -- and it's just what you say you want from people: feedback and input.
MargeHendersonSo Sam why don't you put "acting next to all the rd's?
MargeHendersonWhy just a few?
MargeHendersonYou have said that all will be reviewed
Jo_SkidzAnd, as Robin also asked, why add Judy when Region 3 already has an official RD?
Sam.FordBecause IMHO they aren't all acting.
Margaret_BITPThat should be done for all the RD's, get feedback from the people.
MargeHendersonDon't you want the feed back then
Karen.O.GatewayWith all due respect Margaret, the ED is always there for feedback. RD changes can be made at any time during the year...pending board approval
Sam.FordMargaret as I said earlies I am available for comments and have spent time communicating with many of you in the last few months. I have even traveled to tournaments just to be available and listen. So I am always ready to hear from you.
Sam.FordHere is the number. Just like the last chat. Mynumber is 800 683- 8703 ext. 122 and I'll pay for the call
Margaret_BITPI am talking about when they are proposed to the board, so the board knows how people feel.
Sam.FordThe reason they aren't on the agenda is purely a personal issue that has kept me from being able to communicate lately.
Sam.FordNow we can go on to the next question.
Jo_SkidzBut you haven't answered all the RD questions!
Jo_SkidzWhat about posting Judy as "acting RD" when there's already an RD in Region 3? That's been asked four times now.
JYDog55thank you!
Sam.FordThe acting RD was to be added weeks ago but just got posted. It has worked and information and comments are being received.
Jo_SkidzSo she was posted as "acting RD" in order to solicit input from your constituents? Have others been so posted as well?
MargeHendersonDoes that answer your question skidz?
IndylouiseBut that still doens't make any sense...if there was already an RD listed...why did there have to be an "acting" RD also?
Bill_KAOSAre we waiting for Sam to respond?
Chuck.GriepI'm not , think he said what he wanted to say.
Sam.FordIf you are asking why a Co Rd. That idea came from Region 3 flyballers. Why get information out.
Jo_SkidzWell, but of course we could have lived without a co-RD for one more week. We've basically lived with an RD at all for about five years ...
Jo_SkidzOkay, I'll shut up now.
IndylouiseWere there anyother people that were considered for "acting" RD or how was this decided?
Ellen_FurFunI'm waiting for a new topic, offense intended....but....the horse appears dead to me..........
Ellen_FurFunand buried.........
Sam.FordSeveal names were suggested and submitted and I made a choice based upon the input and information at hand.
JYDog55why were they not put out there for input too?
Bill_KAOSApparently the horse has new life? :^)
JYDog55Sorry there are alot of people on here tonight from reg 3 that are concerned
Traci_HVSam, did you actually speak to these people who were suggested to see who they were and what they were about before you made you final decision?
Sam.FordI will be more than happy to speak to you about Region 3 issues. Please call me so we can talk about the issues and decisions.
Jo_SkidzWe can't all call you at once -- so here we are.
IndylouiseJust hope that the concerns are heard and considered!
JYDog55Ok I will, should I talk to other board members too
Ellen_FurFunQUESTION: Has there been any new info regarding who will be permitted to speak on behalf of the BOD re: BSL in Ontario?
Sam.FordYou certainly can talk to them. They are listed as well.
Ellen_FurFunQUESTION: Any idea when notes will be available for the teleconference?
Ellen_FurFunQUESTION: Will the new website format discussed recently be going into affect any time soon?
Lee_HeightonEllen, we have been recognized but they won't advise who actually is allowed to speak until a later date. We will post any new information to the site as soon as it is available
Ellen_FurFunfigured i'd throw some questions out there....answer whenever anybody gets the chance
Lee_HeightonThe minutes for the teleconference should be approved after this weekend.
Ellen_FurFunoh, and affect=effect
Lee_HeightonDale will have to respond at a later date about the website. That's one question I can't answer right now :-)
Ellen_FurFunthanks lee....
Ellen_FurFunOh, one more....QUESTION: Does there appear to be a light at the end of the tunnel for the discipline issues that are still out there? (I hope)
Lee_HeightonEllen, we are addressing several Disciplinary issues that were carried over from last year but I hope to have them all resolved before the end of the month.
Ellen_FurFunThat is excellent news...........make room for the new ones (tongue in cheek)....LOL anything going to be written into the rules regarding "legacy" weekends?
Sam.FordThere is going to be a written policy submitted to the BOD for their consideration at the meeting this weekend.
Bill_KAOSWhat is a "legacy" weekend?
Sam.Ford"Legacy" weekend was a term used to describe an unwritten rule allowing a team to claim a weekend for a tournament date based upon their prior use of that date.
Sam.FordUse a weekend for a tournament 2 years in a row and you were given a "right" to that weekend for the next year
Kris_PickeringWe're trying to work with prior policy and set it down in a written rule everyone can understand and reference. The ED and his staff are coordinating with the Rules Comm. on getting this hashed out.
JungleJaneis that going to stay the same? The 2 yr Rule?
Kris_PickeringIt is open - what do you think on it?
JungleJaneI think that is fair.
Margaret_BITPHow many legacy weekends can one team have?
Josh_CoolRunningsI think 2 would be fair for the amount of weekends
Kris_Pickeringthat;s another facet of this Margaret, and again, I'd like to know what people think is fair?
Kris_Pickeringthanks, Josh. It does seem there needs to be some limit on it or it could discourage new teams from getting involved in hosting.
BarbaraFAXWhat are you considering using as the *date* for the weekends ?? Numbered weekends, or referencing proximity to holidays ??
Josh_CoolRunningsif there was no limit, new teams could not host easily here
Melthe legacy needs to expire though if the weekend isn't used
JYDog55I think 2 would be good
Melin my opinion, of course
BarbaraFAXyes, it should expire if not used. A club can't lock it up and not use it
Kris_Pickeringgood point, Mel. As for your ?? Barbara, Sam has been looking at that with the sanctioing taff, I think.
Kris_Pickeringstaff, sorry
BarbaraFAXthanks Kris
Sam.FordWe have been reviewing the numbering of weekends and what effect that would have on floating holidays.
Sam.FordWe pulled up the last five years as a study to see the effect.
Sam.FordSeems numbering may be the best option
BarbaraFAXIt can play havoc every few years, but it mostly works in other venues. I don't see how you can make a *rule* without specifying HOW the weekends are selected to be *legacy*
Ellen_FurFunhmm..would a team be able to give their dates to another team of their choosing? just comes to mind...say in terms of another team the host spot (lead role) for a year...and what issues does anyone see arising out of that?
BarbaraFAXI think they should be able to give it away once and get it back the next year
BarbaraFAXmultiple times and they no longer *own* the date
Melgood point Ellen - there have been situations where co-hosting has not necessarily been a good experience, so who would claim the weekend?
Sam.FordNowe don't see handing out weekends between teams works.
kimi think the original club should get it back
Sam.FordWe also think that only one team may have the right to the weekend.
JungleJaneMel> LOL
Ellen_FurFunactually, i don't think co-hosting is recognized by nafa...
BarbaraFAXthe original club should get it back
Ellen_FurFunis it?
BarbaraFAXyes it is, I HOPE since we are planning one is in the situation of limited tournaments
Sam.FordCo hosting counts in some things but not in every case
Ellen_FurFunjust wondering if the team that "owns" the weekend has the choice to give it to a particular club
JungleJaneus too
Sam.FordThe Legacy Team could pass and then it would be up to the first request received after that.
BarbaraFAXSam, can you explain *not every case* ??
Sam.FordCo hosting counts for "hosting a tournament". But it may not count as having a legacy.
JungleJaneI think co hosting plays an important roll in flyball, it helps teams "work together", and I think that is important as a team racing together.
BarbaraFAXoh, thanks....
Sam.FordIn the past only one team reserved the weekend. Taht team was the one listed first.
Bill_KAOSClubs usually plan to host a tournament several months to a year away. Is there a time limit within which the so-called "legacy" club would have to decide (give notice)..if it isn't going to use its usual date?
Sam.FordBut with any unwritten rule there exist exception all along the history of flyball. That is what we are working to weed through.
Kris_PickeringBill, I agree with that thought - it concerns me too.
Sam.FordWe want a clear policy that can be understood and followed into the future.
Sam.FordBill yes. There would be a time that you must sanction your tournament to reserve the weekend
Karen.O.GatewayI think a 'legacy' club should have their date sanctioned at least 6 months before the tournament.
Sam.FordIf you don't sanction by a certain time then it is an open weekend.
Bill_KAOSSam, What are you considering in that respect?
Ellen_FurFunI also think that is fair
JungleJaneKaren> that seems fair to me
Sam.FordWe are planning 25 weeks ahead.
Ellen_FurFuneven though it could affect my team negatively...we are notoriously last minute....LOL
Kris_Pickeringgood use of affect, there
Ellen_FurFunLOL kris..why thanks
BarbaraFAXproviding the sanctioning is done (by NAFA) and posted more than two months before the event date...
Karen.O.GatewayReady for a new but related questions?
JungleJanespeaking of sanctioning, I must say things are excellent now, speeding right along.
Karen.O.GatewayQUESTION: Has any consideration been given to a change in the '300 mile' rule?
Kris_PickeringNot that I know of. Do you think it's a problem?
Karen.O.GatewayIt seems that there are many frustrations in the heavily populated flyball areas that clubs are unable to sanction tournaments, yet cannot get into tournaments
keltykaiMore populous regions coul dhandle more than one limited tournament
Josh_CoolRunningsthe only problem with that is teams would have to enter both
Karen.O.GatewayIf you look at some areas, clubs who never meet cannot hold tournaments on the same weekend... Example NY and Ontario
Karen.O.GatewayI'm not suggesting we eliminate it. Rather change it.
Josh_CoolRunningsdifferent regions as well
Karen.O.GatewayPerhaps to read 'within 250 miles outside of the region.....and keep the within 300 miles for in-region tournaments
Josh_CoolRunningsI would agree it needs to be adjusted...prehaps allowing tournaments in different regions even if they are within that 300 mile
scottNETNot to throw out a stock statement, but a proposal sent to the BOD will be read and considered
Karen.O.GatewayThank you will be presented
Ellen_FurFuni think that may be a hind
Ellen_FurFunLOL....or hind...
BarbaraFAX50 miles isn't enough of an adjustment there
Karen.O.GatewayHow many then?
BarbaraFAXPerhaps consideration should be -- limited tourneys have a LOT less mileage between them, and unlimited may need to stay the 300 miles ??
Lee_HeightonWith the number of tournaments that are available to almost everyone right now. Why not just make it an in region rule.
BarbaraFAXI just didn't see 50 miles affecting the outcome
keltykaiswitch to kilometres
Lee_HeightonI do disagree that we have different rules for limited and unlimited tournaments. Too confusing.
Kris_PickeringIt seems like there are two factors that are a problem - how it works with limited tournaments and why it applies at all to out-of-region tourneys.
Ellen_FurFunwell...actually does still affect some areas.....
Kris_PickeringIs that fair?
Ellen_FurFunregion 9 and 15, for instance...and 13 for that matter
Lee_HeightonEllen, how so.
Ellen_FurFunas you may have noticed...region 15's tourneys have dropped in number considerably
Ellen_FurFunif we are able to finally get clubs hosting again....
Ellen_FurFunsome tourneys in region 9 and 13 may make it difficult to get a tourney off the ground
scottNETguess I'm not following you LN
Lee_HeightonHow does legacy affect clubs deciding not to host tournaments "in region".
Ellen_FurFunnot legacy...maybe i am tired....i suppose it is the 300 mile thing
Ellen_FurFunclubs may opt to go to a closer tourney in another region.....
Ellen_FurFunscott, if you will NSL.....when it was 9
Ellen_FurFunmany teams went to nst instead of the tourneys in new england...that was part of our region then
scottNEThate to do this, but I do need to go. Thanks to everyone who came
Ellen_FurFunnite scott
JungleJanenight scott
Josh_CoolRunningsNIght Scott
Sam.FordI am out also. Thanks all.
Ellen_FurFunnite sam
Karen.O.Gatewaynite Sam
JungleJanenight Sam
Kris_Pickeringgood night, Sam
Lee_HeightonGood night Sam
Ellen_FurFunmy comments were not against changing the rule...just bringing up some issues that occured in the past
Lee_HeightonOops, too late
Karen.O.GatewayWhere was NSL Ellen?
kimEllen is correct there are problems there
Ellen_FurFunin same as our region
Karen.O.GatewaySo are you saying that if the 300 mile rule became within region only, people wouldn;t come to some tournametns
kimthere are teams in region 9 that will go to region 15 tourneys because it is closer
Ellen_FurFunbut there are still tourneys closer...and more preferable...say NETB...than some in our own region, that may affect a newer team's entries
kimfor teams that aren't in the running for regionals many opt for closer distance
Ellen_FurFunyes, karen...i know it seems weird...but let's face it....some teams may not be in contention for champs.....
Karen.O.GatewayOk, what if there were a milage limit for out of region tournaments too?
Ellen_FurFunso it doesn't reallly seem to matter for them...but it does...because it may affect entries for the hosting club...more specifically, a new club
Karen.O.Gatewayas there is now.
kimand some teams in region 15 are having problems finding a place to host so can't really get their normal dates
Ellen_FurFuni think it may be beneficial karen...i wish it could be cut and dry, but often it isn't
kimso making the 300 mile distance less or non-existent could help them
Karen.O.GatewayWould help the new teams?
Ellen_FurFunactually, kim and i are seeing it different ways, i think
kimhelp all the teams that host plus allow newer teams to run in region
kimbut we do agree their is a problem
kimand i am region 9 so phooey on ellen
Ellen_FurFunLOL...phooey on yourself
Karen.O.GatewayI'm not following. Is the problem that 300 miles restricts the clubs that can host tournaments? Or is the problem that some clubs would rather drive a shorter distance, than race in-region?
kimboth are issues
Ellen_FurFuni see it as the latter.....
Ellen_FurFunbut there is a case for the first
Ellen_FurFunwhich, i suppose, is the problem...LOL
Karen.O.GatewayIn which case the only rule to fix that problem is to force clubs to race in -region]
keltykaikim, ellen said there were fleas at your tournament
jayne.mcquillenWe sometimes do that, we will drive 2.5 hours to region 4 tourney in ILvs 5 hours to a tourney in Minneapolis. But on the other hand if we had to rely on filling our tournament with only teams from our region we wouldn't be able to put one on
kimfor me my team stays in region and will drive 4-5 hours for a tourney when on the same weekend in region 15 there is a tourney less than 2 hours away
Ellen_FurFunwhich i also don't really like...
kimdont like what fleas
Ellen_FurFundon't like the idea of forcing teams to run in region
Ellen_FurFunif they are unable to "compete" if you will......then people would opt to run flyball in-region
BarbaraFAXokay guys... try this...what incentive does a club have for scheduling a tourney *against* another one close enough to draw the same clubs as entries ??
Ellen_FurFunwhich is accomplished by the distance limit
Ellen_FurFundoesn't really can't run in another tourney
Karen.O.Gatewayhmmm doesn't sound very profitable to NAFA
Kris_PickeringIn other words, Barbara, let the market place decide and take the limit off altogether?
keltykaiHow is communication in your regions
Ellen_FurFunjust can't have a tourney that competes for entries
Ellen_FurFunwhich i think was prolly what was behind the limit in the first place
Kris_PickeringDoes anyone know the genesis of the 300 mile rule? I don't.
BarbaraFAXalmost... to me, it seems absolutely STUPID to use a weekend that a nearby club is using, so why do it ??
BarbaraFAXin our region, the communication is EXCELLENT
kimcommunication is fine for the most part but when you don't have many options for places to hold a tourney plus not many dates, you are screwed
Karen.O.GatewayKris, my best guess is that it was created so that tournaments were not competing for entries at a time when flyball was much less popular
jayne.mcquillenWe aren't a team on the hunt for regional points, so what would it matter? We do seem to have a lot of cross over between the regions, but hey, I didn't make the regions. Region 4 covers an IMMENSE amount of territory, from like TN to KS and even up to WI. For many teams on the outskirts of a region non-regional tourneys are their only chance to play at all.
BarbaraFAXthat is it needs to become a cooperative effort among clubs so tourneys can happen and be profitable
kimthen you also have to take into account that some teams have members in 4 states
Ellen_FurFuni understand that, but am only saying it could be an issue for a club who is trying to finally put on a tourney, and not have the entries to sustain it....
Ellen_FurFunlord knows i really don't care about region when i play....i actually opt for the best venue (according to me)
kimwe sort of have this quandry now where my team will have to make a decision
Kris_Pickeringsure, and if it didn't exist in some form, the legacy weekend concept would drop out too.
Karen.O.GatewayEllen, does the 300 mile rule help those clubs trying to put on a tourney now?
Karen.O.Gatewaythat wasn't rhetorical by the way
Ellen_FurFunwell, i can only say it HAS in the past.....
Karen.O.GatewayOk, how about another way to override the 300 mile limit.
BarbaraFAXnot necessarily.. there can still be some limits and legacy weekends may still have a place..
Ellen_FurFunbut because we are dropping tourneys so rapidly in our region, it isn't an easy thing to gauge right now
BarbaraFAXwhat is going on there Ellen ??
jayne.mcquillenFor instance, a team from KS is thinking about hosting a tourney in Wichita KS, (4) and here in Iowa (3) we are ~5 hrs away, but teams in Milwaukee, WI (4) are ~ 10 hrs away but in their region (4).
keltykaithe 300 mile rule has been waived on consent
Ellen_FurFunthe problem is, if the tourneys pick up.....but are forced to compete with closer tourneys out of region, we may never get them off the ground
Karen.O.GatewayRight Pete, maybe we need a way for NAFA to override in cases that a host team doesn't want to allow another club to sanction....but they really should.
Karen.O.GatewayHmmm, how about the ED may grant permission if the tournament is within 300 miles of a sanctioned limited tournament?
Karen.O.GatewayEllen, they will always be competing with out of region tournaments
Ellen_FurFunnot if a tourney is kept from being within a certain radius
Karen.O.Gatewaylike 300 miles
Karen.O.Gatewayor maybe 250 miles
Ellen_FurFunlike i said....i have no BIG problems with lifting the limit....but i do see where it could be a problem
Ellen_FurFunbecause it has in the past
Lee_HeightonWell everyone. I am running on too little sleep and really need to crash. Thank you to everyone who participated and I look forward to talking to you next month. Till then.
Ellen_FurFunnite lee...
BarbaraFAXnite Lee
JungleJanethanks lee..night
Ellen_FurFuni do want to thank the BOD for staying up
Josh_CoolRunningsNight Lee
Ellen_FurFunthey went beyond the call
Ellen_FurFunevery one of them
BarbaraFAXit's still early for some
Kris_PickeringI also need to go - am still at work. Thank you all for being here.