in the spirit of keeping it civil.
the cloak and dagger situation couldn't be more closer to the truth.
how far off the mark is the club run compared to others under the nzgta ?
I know of no other that operates under the control of one person ?
Section 1. The VHDTA was formed in 2003 by the Convener.
Note: No change to VHDTA Objects or Test Regulations may be made without prior approval of the Convener until such time she deems this
clause unnecessary for the preservation of the values of the VHDTA.
is this position even valid to be affiliated with the nzgta and the nzkc.
makes a mockery of the whole process that if the convenors position was to protect the integrity of the club and working versatiles as a whole and to stop membership fragmenting off to form similar clubs, she along with a past president were the only ones to actually do that, and thus the vddnz was born..... and full credit for the committee in that club for smelling a rat and acting on it, how many members of the vhdta knew they were providing testing support for another club for instance ?
I do not believe the country needs another testing ass, it needs to tidy up the one we have already.
if it was to operate correctly then spring and autum tests would have to run each year regardless of how many dogs show up.
the results and scores would be kept and recorded by the nzgta, and as such the nzkc would be able to add them to the pedigree.
this would incur a levy to both nzkc and to nzgta, the same way field trials operate.
the convenor role needs to be removed and the club needs to move forward, make it more open and transparent.
in my own opinion moving into HPR trials can only be done if the education and testing is done first to get the dogs up to a workable standard.... even the spaniel club are starting to use hunt tests days to get people into the sport.
Bookmarks