Removal Of Titles Gained

[Tapferhund]

Echo you beat me to it

Good news isn't it everyone!

Thanks GSDCA !!!

[Staranais]

8th September

In a telephone conversation between Bruce Knight (GSDCA President) and Hugh Gent (ANKC President) regarding the issue of Removal of Titles from Certificate of Registration, Hugh has confirmed that it was an “administrative error” that brought about this whole saga.

The GSDCA has been given an assurance, during this conversation, that this issue is no longer on the table and that it is business as usual.

Thanks to the efforts of the breed clubs who became involved, and the many individual members who submitted protest, it seems that this issue has now been resolved.

Great news for all concerned.

I hope that the AnKC stick to this story! Thanks very much Bruce Knight!

[Echo]

8th September

In a telephone conversation between Bruce Knight (GSDCA President) and Hugh Gent (ANKC President) regarding the issue of Removal of Titles from Certificate of Registration, Hugh has confirmed that it was an “administrative error” that brought about this whole saga.

The GSDCA has been given an assurance, during this conversation, that this issue is no longer on the table and that it is business as usual.

Echo ..... can the above be quoted along with a request that it be affirmed in writing by the ANKC?

I don't see why not.

This information is not confidential and was passed on to GSDCV, who subsequently passed it on to all of its different branch managers, presumably so that we would all know what has resulted. It's great that they are keeping their members informed.

All members of ANKC affiliates deserve to be advised . It would be nice if a formal statement was placed on each state website, advising of the ANKC stance on this issue..

[MonElite]

[Erny]

I've written to ANKC (with a CC to DogsVic) asking for written confirmation that neither are entertaining any notion of removal of ANY working dog titles from dog pedigrees. I've also asked that they reconsider their negative stance towards Schutzhund and take necessary steps for its acceptance and permit.

[TrinaJ]

After the teleconference the state rottweiler clubs had last week, it was decided that along with the letters each of the individual clubs and their members had written the NRC(A) would also write a letter on behlaf of all members - this draft letter was read out to all on the teleconference and it was mentioned that titles 'front and rear' of the pedigree should be included in this letter so that future tiles cannot be taken away.

The NRC(A), like the GSDCV have also offered their assistance relating to any ideas that concern rottweilers.

Emails from the FCI and IFR (international friends of the rottweiler) are being sourced to support this and will also be sent with the letter.

There were a few other issues that are relevant to the rottweiler standard that the ADRK need to address so that will also be included in the letter (nothing anyone here really needs to know about).

Sorry I've taken a while to post this, we were away for the weekend (Thur-Mon).

Even though they 'SAY' it was an admin error we still need to make sure they understand the importance of what is on a pedigree and why we will not tolerate them being altered.

[Miss Danni]

Hi all,

I have heard today that despite Hugh Gent apologising and saying that the whole mess was an administrative error, the topic has now been listed for discussion at the October ANKC conference. Clearly this is not dead and buried like we all thought.

What a bunch of liars! Did they think that they could trick us and get it in "formally" behind out backs?

Time to jump up and down again everyone!

[Erny]

Hi all,

I have heard today that despite Hugh Gent apologising and saying that the whole mess was an administrative error, the topic has now been listed for discussion at the October ANKC conference. Clearly this is not dead and buried like we all thought.

What a bunch of liars! Did they think that they could trick us and get it in "formally" behind out backs?

Time to jump up and down again everyone!

Thank you Miss Danni. I also notice that I've not had a response to my emails (to ANKC and also to Dogs Victoria) asking for confirmation of the conversation content between Hugh Gent and the GSDCA.

[TrinaJ]

I think it woudl be up for discussion because the GSDCA and the NRC(A) have both asked for it to be tabled. Both National bodies have written to hugh Gent regarding the matter. It 'may' have been an admin error 'this time' but what about the next time, this issue needs to be sorted once and for all and put to bed.

Here is a copy of the NRC(A) letter to Hugh Gent...

10 September 2010

Mr H Gent

President

Australian National Kennel Council

PO Box 309

CARINA QLD 4152

By email: [email protected]

Dear Mr Gent

REMOVAL OF FCI RECOGNISED TITLES

At a specially convened meeting of the National Rottweiler Council (Australia) held on 7 September 2010 it was unanimously decided by Delegates of all NRC(A) member clubs to write to the ANKC to voice our objection to the ANKC’s directive to its affiliates recently posted on the Dogs Victoria website, which stated:

That “Schutzhund titles obtained in other countries by dogs imported into Australia will not be added to the ANKC database at the time of re-registration. Schutzhund titles such as SCH and IPO previously added to the ANKC database will be removed. SCH, IPO & other similar titles are a form of attack training and the ANKC does not recognise these titles or discipline.”

We note that this directive has since been removed from the Dogs Victoria website.

The ANKC’s actions cast aside the historic efforts of generations of breeders who have worked diligently to improve the health and temperament of not only the Rottweiler but other working breeds.

The NRC(A) has been directed by its member clubs to demand that the ANKC at its forthcoming Conference give a written undertaking that the ANKC and its affiliates will not under any circumstances interfere with the registration certificates/pedigrees of dogs imported into Australia and further, that the ANKC or its affiliates will not alter or delete in any way the registration certificates/pedigrees of dogs that are on the ANKC database.

The NRC(A) is deeply disturbed that the ANKC and its affiliates continue to describe international working activities such as IPO, Schutzhund, VPG and BH, in the words of the ANKC, as “forms of attack training.” The inference of the ANKC and its affiliates is that this type of activity creates a safety risk to the public and that the dogs trained in such activity are a danger. This inference can only lead to the view that the ANKC and its affiliates in effect are saying that other canine organizations throughout the World are socially irresponsible and have scant regard for their fellow citizens.

The NRC(A) would like to offer assistance to the ANKC regarding this issue as this by far affects the majority of our members as the second largest National Breed Council in Australia. We have consulted and continue to work with the German Shepherd Dog Council of Australia Inc regarding this matter and rest assured we do not accept the current decision of the ANKC.

Yours sincerely

John MacDonald

President

National Rottweiler Council (Australia)

cc: Ms Tracey Barry

Administrator, ANKC

Email: administrator

[Dracdog]

I don't know much about this sport but an earlier post said that all working breeds in Europe need these titles befor they can be shown. I cannot understand this as people I have known who have imported Champion Border Collies, Collies and the like from European countries, France & Italy mainly don't have these titles on their papers either from the ANKC or or the Originals.

I have not read every post on this one so please don't shoot me down but has anyone followed the standard proceedures and written to their State bodies or have they been totally overshot and everything been sent to FCI & ANKC direct.

[Staranais]

I don't know much about this sport but an earlier post said that all working breeds in Europe need these titles befor they can be shown. I cannot understand this as people I have known who have imported Champion Border Collies, Collies and the like from European countries, France & Italy mainly don't have these titles on their papers either from the ANKC or or the Originals.

Schutz/IPO is mostly for the working breeds that are traditionally used in "police" type work, e.g. GSD, malinois, rottie, dobe, bouvier, etc. It is not usually done by border collies, they are working dogs too of course, but they a different type of working dog with a different temperament & skill set.

[Echo]

I think it woudl be up for discussion because the GSDCA and the NRC(A) have both asked for it to be tabled. Both National bodies have written to hugh Gent regarding the matter. It 'may' have been an admin error 'this time' but what about the next time, this issue needs to be sorted once and for all and put to bed.

Here is a copy of the NRC(A) letter to Hugh Gent...

10 September 2010

Mr H Gent

President

Australian National Kennel Council

PO Box 309

CARINA QLD 4152

By email: [email protected]

Dear Mr Gent

REMOVAL OF FCI RECOGNISED TITLES

At a specially convened meeting of the National Rottweiler Council (Australia) held on 7 September 2010 it was unanimously decided by Delegates of all NRC(A) member clubs to write to the ANKC to voice our objection to the ANKC’s directive to its affiliates recently posted on the Dogs Victoria website, which stated:

That “Schutzhund titles obtained in other countries by dogs imported into Australia will not be added to the ANKC database at the time of re-registration. Schutzhund titles such as SCH and IPO previously added to the ANKC database will be removed. SCH, IPO & other similar titles are a form of attack training and the ANKC does not recognise these titles or discipline.”

We note that this directive has since been removed from the Dogs Victoria website.

The ANKC’s actions cast aside the historic efforts of generations of breeders who have worked diligently to improve the health and temperament of not only the Rottweiler but other working breeds.

The NRC(A) has been directed by its member clubs to demand that the ANKC at its forthcoming Conference give a written undertaking that the ANKC and its affiliates will not under any circumstances interfere with the registration certificates/pedigrees of dogs imported into Australia and further, that the ANKC or its affiliates will not alter or delete in any way the registration certificates/pedigrees of dogs that are on the ANKC database.

The NRC(A) is deeply disturbed that the ANKC and its affiliates continue to describe international working activities such as IPO, Schutzhund, VPG and BH, in the words of the ANKC, as “forms of attack training.” The inference of the ANKC and its affiliates is that this type of activity creates a safety risk to the public and that the dogs trained in such activity are a danger. This inference can only lead to the view that the ANKC and its affiliates in effect are saying that other canine organizations throughout the World are socially irresponsible and have scant regard for their fellow citizens.

The NRC(A) would like to offer assistance to the ANKC regarding this issue as this by far affects the majority of our members as the second largest National Breed Council in Australia. We have consulted and continue to work with the German Shepherd Dog Council of Australia Inc regarding this matter and rest assured we do not accept the current decision of the ANKC.

Yours sincerely

John MacDonald

President

National Rottweiler Council (Australia)

cc: Ms Tracey Barry

Administrator, ANKC

Email: administrator

TrinaJ,

thanks for posting this.

Did the NRC(A) receive any reply?

Julie

[Tapferhund]

I think we all might be jumping the gun here ...and we should wait until after that ANKC meeting ???

The item in question was already on the ANKC's agenda for discussion for the October meeting prior to all the fuss and Hugh Gents subsequent letters assuring us the item is dead and buried. So maybe they just have to "go through the actions" , raise the item at that meeting so it can be rescinded ???

[Julie R]

I think we all might be jumping the gun here ...and we should wait until after that ANKC meeting ???

The item in question was already on the ANKC's agenda for discussion for the October meeting prior to all the fuss and Hugh Gents subsequent letters assuring us the item is dead and buried. So maybe they just have to "go through the actions" , raise the item at that meeting so it can be rescinded ???

Could someone please enlighten me re the removal of titles, does it protect an imported dog coming into Victoria if the titles are removed, I have heard that dogs that have done Schutz training would be classed as a dangerous dog in Victoria and would have to be desexed. is this correct?

Pam

[Aidan]

Could someone please enlighten me re the removal of titles, does it protect an imported dog coming into Victoria if the titles are removed, I have heard that dogs that have done Schutz training would be classed as a dangerous dog in Victoria and would have to be desexed. is this correct?

Pam

It would need to be tested in court, but I am almost certain that it would not protect titled dogs coming into Victoria. In fact, I can see this leading to legal issues for ANKC. If a dog bites a person and the prosecution discovered on FCI records that the dog was titled in SchH, the owner might be able to claim ignorance and that ANKC concealed information that, by law (not for any other reason), should have had the dog declared dangerous and subject to those restrictions earlier.

Which would put the ANKC in an interesting position of either copping the liability, or defending SchH as not being "attack training"!

[TrinaJ]

TrinaJ,

thanks for posting this.

Did the NRC(A) receive any reply?

Julie

Not that I am aware of yet, no reply has been posted on our website....

[rotts4ever]

TrinaJ,

thanks for posting this.

Did the NRC(A) receive any reply?

Julie

Not that I am aware of yet, no reply has been posted on our website....

I'm thinking that replies to letters will probably be sent after discussions at the meeting.

I sent a letter from me and also we sent a club letter through Dogs NSW and we received reply from DNSW confirming receipt and that the letters had been sent to ANKC to be tabled at the meeting

Cheers

[Erny]

TrinaJ,

thanks for posting this.

Did the NRC(A) receive any reply?

Julie

Not that I am aware of yet, no reply has been posted on our website....

I'm thinking that replies to letters will probably be sent after discussions at the meeting.

I sent a letter from me and also we sent a club letter through Dogs NSW and we received reply from DNSW confirming receipt and that the letters had been sent to ANKC to be tabled at the meeting

Cheers

Which indicates that it being "an administrative error" and a non-event, is not actually the case. Else wise, why would it be on the agenda for discussion? Why can't they respond with a "no we can't confirm the contents of that conversation and no it is not off the agenda as a possibility" or something along those lines?

[rotts4ever]

Which indicates that it being "an administrative error" and a non-event, is not actually the case. Else wise, why would it be on the agenda for discussion? Why can't they respond with a "no we can't confirm the contents of that conversation and no it is not off the agenda as a possibility" or something along those lines?

Hi Erny

As letters have been sent and an agenda already set they can't just take it off the agenda. The letters received have to be tabled at the meeting. So this doesn't happen again this needs to be discussed and finalised now. If they come up with this was an admin error then that, I presume, is what will be discussed and then letters would be answered with the out come.

Most letters Tabled are along the lines of wanting to make sure this doesn't happen again and asking for an undertaking from the ANKC as such.

Cheers Lee

[Erny]

Thanks for the explanation, Rotts4ever. I hope you're right that that's all there is to it and I do hope it will be completely taken off the table after the discussion.

Cheers

Erny

PS And I do hope the ANKC can have something positive to say about how they are going to change their poorly founded view of Schutzhund training and stop seeing it as attack training and open their eyes to see it for the disciplined and finely tuned training regime that it is comprised of.

Edited September 29, 2010 by Erny