NSTRA registration...

Post by **slistoe** » Wed May 04, 2011 7:49 pm

ezzy333 wrote:I think Ray said it exactly right and a heck of a lot better than I did. When someone has a game and sets the rules why should one of the players change the rules.

Ezzy

Because this is AMERICA! (I want everyone to play MY way

)

Redfishkilla · Post by **Redfishkilla** » Wed May 04, 2011 8:03 pm

I guess I'll just accept the rules even though no one can give me a good reason for them. As for this talk about mutts, a mutt can’t (or shouldn’t be able to) get a PAL....FYI.

The dog on my aviator was bought before I was interested in trials, before I knew anything about registries, and before I really got into dogs. She's not a mutt. The night I bought her I asked the gentlemen if this dog was registered he said I could register her if I paid for it but I didn't. It wasn't a big deal at the time, I've learn. His name is Mike Brock who is a well site geologist that was described as a drifter by his former boss that I tracked down here in town. His boss said he moved 3 years ago and could help me find him. There are 5 Mike Brocks in Amarillo, I've visited them all. I looked for Mr. Brock for 3 years with no luck.

Post by **kninebirddog** » Wed May 04, 2011 8:52 pm

We have given you THE REASON you just choose not to accept it

We can't help that you purchased an unregistered dog pure bred or not so please don't make it our problem.

For me if a breeder tells me I can have a register pup if I want to pay for it..Sorry that is pure laziness as it is only about 22 dollar plus 2 dollars a pup to register a litter from registered parents AKC can even be done on line not much to ask when electing to allow dogs to procreate. So how is that NSTRAs fault How is that AKC's fault? Why should they accommodate you because you elected to not get a registered pup

and we are the snobs? how about at least we aren't are ones that expect rules to be change /bent to accommodate them so they don't have to play by the rules set forth that everybody else plays by.

Wow I think I just jumped off the fence...all the way.

After much posting and thought..even though on one hand I could see where the entries to some regions could help ..It is pretty selfish of a person to expect an entire organization to lower their standards to accommodate what amounts to a tiny handful of people who want to play a game making up their own rules

and the Rules are Dogs are to be AKC (not ILP PAL ) FDSB CKC registered or NSTRA registered or registrable in NSTRA which means that the AKC is the real registration FDSB and or CKC registered to play in NSTRA and from what Scott posted earlier it may also include UKC but that is still to be determined.

So Sorry if THE RULEs are not good enough for you as they are for everyone else.

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Wed May 04, 2011 9:28 pm

I just wonder how UKC and NSTRA will get along. UKC is not the organization it used to be when it was all about coonhounds. They are looking for a jumpstart for their field program and NSTRA could provide it, but I wonder how those APBT folks are going to take not being the center of attention.

CowboyBirdDogs · Post by **CowboyBirdDogs** » Wed May 04, 2011 9:59 pm

Firemedic wrote:
ElectricShorthairs wrote:They're causing no harm to their precious bloodlines. NSTRA winnings don't even show up on beloved AKC pedigrees as far as I know.

What's the reasoning for being such a smart "bleep"? Are you even a member of the organization?

Yes I am member. The reason for my sarcasm is that people are implying that a PAL dog being successful will hurt the sales of breeders who have worked hard on their bloodlines. When the funny thing is that the dog winning can't breed. It's not taking away from breedings at all. And not all of these PAL dogs are coming from shelters.I don't see what it hurts if they put limitations on it, make it to where each person can only compete with 1 PAL dog and they can only quailfy for Regionals and that's it.

Post by **kninebirddog** » Wed May 04, 2011 10:54 pm

ElectricShorthairs wrote:
Firemedic wrote:
ElectricShorthairs wrote:They're causing no harm to their precious bloodlines. NSTRA winnings don't even show up on beloved AKC pedigrees as far as I know.

What's the reasoning for being such a smart "bleep"? Are you even a member of the organization?
Yes I am member. The reason for my sarcasm is that people are implying that a PAL dog being successful will hurt the sales of breeders who have worked hard on their bloodlines. When the funny thing is that the dog winning can't breed. It's not taking away from breedings at all. And not all of these PAL dogs are coming from shelters. I had 2 buddies breed their dogs and I got the pick of the litter. I was younger and I didn't even know what a field trial was. The sire had papers, the owner of the dam lost theirs, at the time I didn't care. Seems that all these breeders and trainers don't want anymore competition than they already have, especially from "mutts" as some people like to call them. In my mind a mutt is a dog that is a mixed bred dog, however some obviously more knowledgeable and intelligent people deem any dog that is not AKC registered to be a mutt. I don't see what it hurts if they put limitations on it, make it to where each person can only compete with 1 PAL dog and they can only quailfy for Regionals and that's it. We'll let all these high and mighty, big time pedigreed dogs go to the Championships. And I have a dog that's on each side of the fence on this, 1 PAL and 1 AKC registered dog. So I'm not just biased to PAL's side on this cause it's all I have.

Thing about regionals is that is part of the Dog of the Year trial

and We do have to remember ILP PAL is an AKC created deal so that unregistered dogs can pay to play at AKC basic events FDSB and no other organization Not even any of the AKC breed clubs recognizes it for their Field trials or Shows So have to ask yourself if the AKC Breed clubs won't recognize the AKC ILP PAL for those dogs to run in the AKC Field trials why should other organizations all those same dogs to run in their field trials?

I would think after much review and debate that instead of asking an organization to change their standards to accommodate a few dogs that maybe starting a new organization where unregistered dogs can run might be a great idea and maybe well needed.

CowboyBirdDogs · Post by **CowboyBirdDogs** » Wed May 04, 2011 11:15 pm

Aside from BDC, does such trial exist?

Post by **kninebirddog** » Wed May 04, 2011 11:37 pm

ElectricShorthairs wrote:Aside from BDC, does such trial exist?

I know the Az pointing dog club holds their own trials they are not national but like I said it may something for people to group together and create a new organization create rules and by laws and guidelines figure out how you would want it judged scored or what ever.

Redfishkilla · Post by **Redfishkilla** » Thu May 05, 2011 5:06 am

"I would think after much review and debate that instead of asking an organization to change their standards to accommodate a few dogs that maybe starting a new organization where unregistered dogs can run might be a great idea and maybe well needed."

We're having a money trial with a NSTRA format up here on May 21st. The first place will walk away with 1200 bucks. It will be Lewis class so some of the folks in the middle will get some money too. Any dog can run. So far, the feedback we are getting has been great. Come on up here Electric, you can actually win something.

Knine, I'm a member of NSTRA, I can propose rule changes. It's my right as a member. Also, this is the place to debate things like this, if that bothers you don't spend all your time on here. The best excuse for the rule is AKC doesn't so why should NSTRA? Or it might hurt registries? It won't. I respectfully disagree with those explanations.

jasonw99 · Post by **jasonw99** » Thu May 05, 2011 6:06 am

the reason u can't run them is the same reason u can't run a lab a poodle a flusher. they don't qualify. to think the ruled are going to change is wishful thinking. if they were to change I wouldn't participate and nstra would be a joke. it would be more like the events like tournament shooting.

I tell u what. next time my dig has puppies I will give you one for free with papers.

how's that sound?

Post by **slistoe** » Thu May 05, 2011 6:52 am

I believe the VHDF will not require your dog to be registered anywhere - but I'm not positive on it.

CowboyBirdDogs · Post by **CowboyBirdDogs** » Thu May 05, 2011 6:56 am

jasonw99 wrote:the reason u can't run them is the same reason u can't run a lab a poodle a flusher. they don't qualify. to think the ruled are going to change is wishful thinking. if they were to change I wouldn't participate and nstra would be a joke. it would be more like the events like tournament shooting.

I tell u what. next time my dig has puppies I will give you one for free with papers.

how's that sound?

Who is this offer to?

CowboyBirdDogs · Post by **CowboyBirdDogs** » Thu May 05, 2011 7:09 am

Like I said, I understand both sides. Both sides of the fence have some valid points, some of the non-PAL points that have been brought up don't really hold water but others do. It is some consolation that I can run her as a bye dog. But I'd like to see the rules changed to where PAL dogs can compete in a limited way. That's all I'm saying, I love the NSTRA game and the people, and I'm new to this and I'm not trying to make waves. It's just frustrating when you see dogs compete and you have one that you know could hang with the best of them.

Redfishkilla · Post by **Redfishkilla** » Thu May 05, 2011 7:29 am

"how's that sound?"

No thanks.

Post by **kninebirddog** » Thu May 05, 2011 7:35 am

Redfishkilla wrote:"I would think after much review and debate that instead of asking an organization to change their standards to accommodate a few dogs that maybe starting a new organization where unregistered dogs can run might be a great idea and maybe well needed."

We're having a money trial with a NSTRA format up here on May 21st. The first place will walk away with 1200 bucks. It will be Lewis class so some of the folks in the middle will get some money too. Any dog can run. So far, the feedback we are getting has been great. Come on up here Electric, you can actually win something.

Knine, I'm a member of NSTRA, I can propose rule changes. It's my right as a member. Also, this is the place to debate things like this, if that bothers you don't spend all your time on here. The best excuse for the rule is AKC doesn't so why should NSTRA? Or it might hurt registries? It won't. I respectfully disagree with those explanations.

Propose away...I am a member also and it is my right as a member to understand the rules and guidelines and accept the rules as outline by NSTRA
and what YOU keep failing to grasp That ILP is for dogs that breeders were to lazy or cheap to do the right thing or for rescue dog or for dogs that appear to be pure bred that maybe are and maybe aren't with out those papers one can only say the APPEAR to be a purebred dog...
NSTRA is for Registered Pure bred dogs ILP PAL is NOT accepted because there is NO dam or Sire on that paper and there fore is not considered to be a registered dog in the eyes of every registry including the very registry that sells them. it is just a Paper for AKC special events. NSTRA is not an AKC special event.

Ever wonder why FDSB and NSTRA don't offer PAL ILP's same reason they don't accept them to run their trials and Why do you just want NSTRA to lower their standards Why not propose that AKC accept those very ILP PALS in their Own Field trials ?
Oh wait more then likely it is because your aren't interested in Those trials , so you are only going to ask one organization that you want to play in to lower their standards to accommodate you.
Face it You have a UNregistered and Unregisterable dog because YOU failed to go to a breeder that cared enough about doing the right thing Also Thank you for posting who you bought your dog from as I hope if anyone reads this and that person has another litter that they turn and RUN and go to a responsible breeder who cares enough about the Breed to do simple things like register their litter, as that person is the very Type of person that Every breed club looks down and tells people to avoid because they do not care about the breed only about their own pocketbook.

So it sounds like you have a venue to run your dog..That is Awesome go run your unregistered dog in that format and use NSTRA as an excuse to go get a registered pup to enter

So believe it or not I had at ONE Time sent in a proposal for the very same thing with some very strict guidelines more to help some new person get their foot wet and I did this for some friends and after having some talks with other members I quickly opened my eyes to as to why in the long run it would do more harm to the integrity of what NSTRA has worked hard to build up and why My feet swung to the other side of the fence on the side of NSTRA and do understand and accept why NSTRA will continue to say no to AKC's PAL ILP as NSTRA and FDSB do not offer those papers and they are not going to accept them.

RayGubernat · Post by **RayGubernat** » Thu May 05, 2011 8:11 am

Electric and redfishkilla -

When you got your respective dogs, you didn't care if they had papers or not. That is fine, but it is a decision you made. You now know that decision has negative consequences and is difficult or impossible to correct. You made a mistake that cannot be fixed or undone. That is unfortunate, but it happens to all of us. That is a life lesson.

You now know that regardless of whether the dog is bred from two national champions or two dogs in the street... if it ain't got papers...its a mutt. Case closed.

You are welcome to compete ...just not with an unregistered dog. Hunt your dogs and enjoy them. They don't care if they are pedigreed or not. That piece of paper won't help them find a bird.

My first dog came from my uncle's kennels and it did not have papers. He was a relocated KY/TN rebel who resisted dealing with pedigrees until he couldn't hardly give away dogs without one. I had no problem getting one of his dogs because I knew the lineage first hand from having hunted over them... up to three generations of them... which was(and still is) a sight better than a piece of paper in my view.

However, future dogs that did not come from his(or his brothers' kennels in KY) were bought with papers. If the dogs parents did not have papers, I walked away because I had no idea of what I was getting. When, many years later, I decided to get involved in competitions there was no issue.

I am quite sure that in the future, if you acquire a dog wth the intention of competing, one of the first questions you will ask will be: "How is the dog registered?"
One of the first things you will want to see is the litter registration.

RayG

scott townsend · Post by **scott townsend** » Thu May 05, 2011 8:21 am

Redfishkilla wrote:Knine, let me first state I am not arguing with you specifically but the line of thinking you are expressing. I understand what you are saying in regards to selective breeding and it being ONE of the associations’s stated goals. But I will say once again that allowing PAL dogs does not cause people to breed in a nonselective or uncontrolled way. It would not cause people to be cruel to an animal. If you disagree, I would like to hear why. I would also like to know why they allow registered dogs with less than perfect hips to participate.

Electric, I thought this was a no brainer as well, and besides for the selective breeding argument, which I feel doesn’t hold water, I have not heard one valid reason for this decision and I called every officer. One officer even told me he voted against allowing them because that’s the way everyone else voted!!!! I told him that wasn’t a good way to decide how to vote.

Cy, let me throw a different twist into some of the reasoning behind not allowing them. This is from stricly a business standpoint, NSTRA has to, like any other org, generate an income to remain fuctional. To allow PAL dog to particpate would take a membership vote, a membership vote costs the org a couple thousand dollars every time it goes out. So from that standpoint alone, it just does not make good business sense to spend a couple thousand to allow a handful of dogs to run anly to recoop the money a few dollars at a time. Keep in mind that only a few dollars of your entry fees come back to the org. The rest pays for your birds, judges,planter etc. As far as you talking with all the officers I don't ever recall talking with anyone about this PAL matter.Also it is not the officers you have to convince. When a rule change is submitted it goes to the BOD. Those are the folks you need to sway. You can submit the rec all your life, it will get fowarded to the BOD it takes them all of about 30 seconds to vote on it. As soon as the issue hit the floor it was ruled on and voted down without 20 seconds of discussion. Bottom line it ain't gonna happen.You will NEVER get this past the BOD. For several different reasons but it starts with financally it just does not work.

scott townsend · Post by **scott townsend** » Thu May 05, 2011 8:23 am

Well said Ray.

CowboyBirdDogs · Post by **CowboyBirdDogs** » Thu May 05, 2011 8:38 am

I understand what you're all saying. NSTRA is trying to build up it's integrity in the bird dog world and this would undermine that. I can settle with her being a bye dog, I could always keep her own scores myself and see how she would place. Like I said, I was in high school when I got her and didn't even know what a trial was. It's a tough pill to swallow but there is no point in me banging my head on a brick wall about it, now I know. Maybe the only way it would work is if they allowed PAL dogs to fill up braces in a trial that they cant get filled? I was told last weekend that when a trial has 32 dogs NSTRA makes money and 24 they lose money. Would that go over very well? I know I'm extremely new to all this so bear with me as I learn the ins an outs of it all.

Ruffshooter · Post by **Ruffshooter** » Thu May 05, 2011 8:47 am

Side Bar: How will the merging of or integration of NSTRA effect the Pointing dog trial format of UKC?
Do you think they will still Keep the existing format and add the NSTRA format?

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Thu May 05, 2011 9:01 am

Ruffshooter wrote:Side Bar: How will the merging of or integration of NSTRA effect the Pointing dog trial format of UKC?
Do you think they will still Keep the existing format and add the NSTRA format?

That's what I'm wondering UKC pointing breed events are virtually non-existant. NSTRA would bring a lot of street cred to the table.

V-John · Post by **V-John** » Thu May 05, 2011 9:06 am

Here are a couple of questions related to this thread. (And these are geniune, not trying to start an arguement)

1. Why does the AKC allow PAL dogs to participate in agility and other various trials? Don't those promote breeding? I'm not big on agility and other sorts of various trials, but don't they breed "X" litters because of the success of the dam or sire in said trials?
2. Can you in NSTRA, run an unregistered dog, but not take points (or placements) if that dog does well?
3. I totally understand keeping the registeries intergity. Because if you allow some of these "mutts" then that will encourage crossbreeding and such, and decimate the intergity of the registery. Then you will have all sorts of crosses out there, and this will denigrate the pure-breeds.
4. I have a dog in for rescue, that I think could do ok in a trial. He's very much a purebred vizsla but with no papers.. Arlettes seen a video on him. But he won't ever be able to compete in a trial, and I'm ok with that. I hope his new home at least hunts him. But this thought comes to mind. If you could somehow DNA dogs to prove that they are pure, just unpapered, would then you guys be ok with them competing? Is this a possibility?
5. Firemedic. Cracked me up.

V-John · Post by **V-John** » Thu May 05, 2011 9:07 am

Cajun Casey wrote:
Ruffshooter wrote:Side Bar: How will the merging of or integration of NSTRA effect the Pointing dog trial format of UKC?
Do you think they will still Keep the existing format and add the NSTRA format?
That's what I'm wondering UKC pointing breed events are virtually non-existant. NSTRA would bring a lot of street cred to the table.

Would they differienate (sp) the different titles on dogs? A NSTRA title or a UKC title? Would you be able to tell if you just look at the title?

Redfishkilla · Post by **Redfishkilla** » Thu May 05, 2011 9:19 am

Scott,
I hadn't thought about the money to change a rule issue. Perhaps we could address that by making PALs pay a large fee, I'd be fine with that. I would guess that when NSTRA voted to allow handicap folks to ride a 4-wheeler rather than walk that that rule change didn’t pay for itself. I’ve only seen one guy on one in all my time trialing. That rule was changed to make the association more inclusive, just like allowing PALs would make the club more inclusive. I do have a dog in the fight but I’d still and will still advocate this position even after my dog is gone. When I’m sitting in the blind while they plant birds I don’t care where the dog I’m running against came from. They oughta let the so called pointing labs run if they want, what would it hurt?

I understand that this rule will not change and the BOD will vote it down every time. That still won't stop me from proposing the change, I feel its right and in the club's interest. I’m young and dumb but it’s the same reason I would starve in the gutter before I took a dollar I didn’t earn. Hardheadedness?.....yeah I guess so.

When I was calling officers I called during or right after they had elected new officers. I realized I wasn't getting anywhere and quit calling. The only reason I got (and I got only one reason) was the betterment of the breed though selective breeding, I kindly mentioned PALs couldn't breed. Thank you all for taking the time to discuss this issue. From what I’ve learned from this thread I’m going to tweak my proposal a bit. Once again, thanks for all the responses and I hope I didn’t upset anyone too much.

Chukar12 · Post by **Chukar12** » Thu May 05, 2011 9:24 am

1. Why does the AKC allow PAL dogs to participate in agility and other various trials? Don't those promote breeding? I'm not big on agility and other sorts of various trials, but don't they breed "X" litters because of the success of the dam or sire in said trials?

Probably because most AKC field trial venues are breed specific in addition to the other arguments posted, and I don't believe the agility deals are tied as closely to specific breed clubs.

If you could somehow DNA dogs to prove that they are pure, just unpapered, would then you guys be ok with them competing? Is this a possibility?

Readily accessible DNA testing is not considered accurate for breed specification. Even the web-sites advertising it will tell you that they cannot be certain. Markers can be identified but data is subjective, if for no other reason that in every "purebred" ancestory there is a cross somewhere. It is accurate if all dogs in a given lineage are DNA'd and profiles can be matched.

V-John · Post by **V-John** » Thu May 05, 2011 9:31 am

Chukar12 wrote:
1. Why does the AKC allow PAL dogs to participate in agility and other various trials? Don't those promote breeding? I'm not big on agility and other sorts of various trials, but don't they breed "X" litters because of the success of the dam or sire in said trials?
Probably because most AKC field trial venues are breed specific in addition to the other arguments posted, and I don't believe the agility deals are tied as closely to specific breed clubs.

If you could somehow DNA dogs to prove that they are pure, just unpapered, would then you guys be ok with them competing? Is this a possibility?
Readily accessible DNA testing is not considered accurate for breed specification. Even the web-sites advertising it will tell you that they cannot be certain. Markers can be identified but data is subjective, if for no other reason that in every "purebred" ancestory there is a cross somewhere. It is accurate if all dogs in a given lineage are DNA'd and profiles can be matched.

Thanks Chukar.

But if it's not considered accurate, for breed specification, then why require it in AKC and AF championships? Are they doing it to start having all the dogs in a linage be DNA'd?

If somehow, in a vacuum, DNA becomes accurate enough to be able to tell the parentage of a particular dog, would that be suffient to allow PAL dogs to participate in trials?

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Thu May 05, 2011 9:35 am

Chukar12 wrote:
1. Why does the AKC allow PAL dogs to participate in agility and other various trials? Don't those promote breeding? I'm not big on agility and other sorts of various trials, but don't they breed "X" litters because of the success of the dam or sire in said trials?
Probably because most AKC field trial venues are breed specific in addition to the other arguments posted, and I don't believe the agility deals are tied as closely to specific breed clubs.

If you could somehow DNA dogs to prove that they are pure, just unpapered, would then you guys be ok with them competing? Is this a possibility?
Readily accessible DNA testing is not considered accurate for breed specification. Even the web-sites advertising it will tell you that they cannot be certain. Markers can be identified but data is subjective, if for no other reason that in every "purebred" ancestory there is a cross somewhere. It is accurate if all dogs in a given lineage are DNA'd and profiles can be matched.

Many breed clubs hold restricted agility matches, but the majority are held by all breed training and agility clubs. Some take place during conformation/performance clusters (HUSH) and some are stand alone events.

On the DNA issue, I think most people misunderstand what registeries use DNA profiling for. It is used solely to establish parentage, it has nothing to do with breed or purity of breed. If it had to do with purity of breed, half the Border collies out there would be booted.

Chukar12 · Post by **Chukar12** » Thu May 05, 2011 9:44 am

V-John,

Yes they are responding to allegations of cheating and requiring DNA from dogs for their championship placements is a way to "clean up" the questions in the long run.

Joe

V-John · Post by **V-John** » Thu May 05, 2011 9:47 am

Cajun Casey wrote: On the DNA issue, I think most people misunderstand what registeries use DNA profiling for. It is used solely to establish parentage, it has nothing to do with breed or purity of breed. If it had to do with purity of breed, half the Border collies out there would be booted.

Ok, so let's take this rescue guy I have in now.

He's a vizsla, but with no papers.

If I could verify that his parents are vizslas via DNA, then is that enough for you guys to allow to compete?
Believe me I understand going back farther than parents, but....
Or am I misunderstanding the term "parentage"?

Seems this way, you could protect the integrity of "purebreed registers" and still allow others to compete. Especially given that they are neutered...

Just talkin' here, not trying to argue.

V-John · Post by **V-John** » Thu May 05, 2011 9:49 am

Chukar12 wrote:V-John,

Yes they are responding to allegations of cheating and requiring DNA from dogs for their championship placements is a way to "clean up" the questions in the long run.

Joe

Joe,

Thanks. That's what I had figured and understand the reasoning.

It's certainly a good start.

Chukar12 · Post by **Chukar12** » Thu May 05, 2011 10:24 am

In my opinion, breed clubs make up the AKC and breed clubs are not exclusively built designed or funded by those interested only in field sports, it is about the breed and if we accept that and understand that breed purity is a driving factor it is reasonable to understand why a red setter owner doesn't care to compete against a half setter/pointer mix in their club trial and barbeque. The field dog stud book has been established for I dunno a hundred years or more on the premise that showcases the best in purebred pointing dogs for competitive judgment and breeding purposes, if you don't like that then I believe they suggest that you change the channel.

Now, fast forward to NSTRA established in 1978. They are competing with the organizations above for customers. You will find that dog people are inexplicably knowledgeable about bloodlines and dogs. They easily rival the guy who calls the local sports radio talk show host every afternoon to discuss the collective on base percentage of the 1968 New York Mets. These are the people that dedicate their money and time to spend most of their free moments with like minded people. That passion is largely based on not only the venue but the performance of a particular breed in the venue. Like it or not, the mindset of dog people, and there is some scientific basis to this, are not turned on by the thought of a cross between Nolan's Last Bullet and their Crow's Little Joe Female.

I don't run NSTRA but I go watch when it’s close because I like the dogs and people and from purely a long term business point of view, I think they can ill-afford to lose their purebred dog crowd. Relaxing their registration requirements would probably do just that. BDC was mentioned, the objectives of that organization are clear as well. Hunting dogs and hunters that kill lots of birds quickly, style is irrelevant by any written standards, training is more relaxed and they leave beauty in the eye of the beholder. They too throw great events but their objectives, history and culture are less inclined to be breed specific. I hope this diatribe has cured your insomnia.

Post by **slistoe** » Thu May 05, 2011 10:26 am

V-John wrote:
If I could verify that his parents are vizslas via DNA,

If you had access to the parents for DNA parentage then you would have access to the parents for registration and there would be no need to speculate on the what ifs of the applicability of the DNA.

Ruffshooter · Post by **Ruffshooter** » Thu May 05, 2011 10:52 am

[quote="Cajun Casey"
That's what I'm wondering UKC pointing breed events are virtually non-existant. NSTRA would bring a lot of street cred to the table.[/quote]

I know there are Epanguel, Oh what ever, French Brittany trials (wild and liberated) a few a year. Breed specific.

Rick

V-John · Post by **V-John** » Thu May 05, 2011 10:53 am

slistoe wrote:
V-John wrote:
If I could verify that his parents are vizslas via DNA,
If you had access to the parents for DNA parentage then you would have access to the parents for registration and there would be no need to speculate on the what ifs of the applicability of the DNA.

I understand that, but you cannot tell parentage of the dog from the DNA of the dog itself?

I mean, you hear about these DNA tests that people that own mixed breeds send in. Then they can tell, well this dog is 43% chow and 10% terrier etc.etc.

Why can't you do that with a dog with no papers? Send in said test on a dog and state that the dog has to come back at least X (100% or whatever is the norm) Percentage Vizsla (or whatever breed you have) and it can be run under PAL rules in trials.

Is it because these sorts of DNA tests aren't accurate?

Chukar12 · Post by **Chukar12** » Thu May 05, 2011 11:02 am

Is it because these sorts of DNA tests aren't accurate?

Yep, here is an example from a company's website. They all have discaimers.

Can the Canine Heritage™ XL Breed Test be used to determine if my dog is a purebred?
The Canine Heritage™ XL Breed Test is not designed for use as a purebred or paternity verification test and is not an established legal tool. A kennel or breed club certifies a dog's breed based on pedigree documentation. If necessary, kennel and breed clubs use legally recognized DNA paternity testing to verify relationship. These tests use a different type of DNA analysis than the Canine Heritage™ XL Breed Test. For a fee, MMI Genomics, Inc. offers canine DNA paternity testing that will provide legally defensible verification of both sire and dam of a particular offspring. To learn more about paternity testing, please click here

scott townsend · Post by **scott townsend** » Thu May 05, 2011 11:11 am

slistoe wrote:There was no reasonable grounds why the PAL/ILP system came into place in the first place in the registries. Any further consideration of extending the folly is...... folly.

First time I have actually thought about this and these are my thoughts on the situation. NSTRA desperately needs someone/anyone to stick titles on pedigrees for them (unless they were to start duplicating an already complicated and fractured registration system that exists in US - the country that took the concept of take my ball and play my own game to a whole new level). The UKC is a profit mongering organization that will jump at anyone and anything to add more registrations to their pile. They have no concept, history or direction of field events for upland dogs and will jump at any and everything that comes calling. Might be a good deal for NSTRA to make up the rules as they go and call the shots for the other comers to the registry. If NSTRA was genuinely concerned with maintaining an image among the hunting community they would be better off to ally with NAVHDA who is already in the business of evaluating dogs for hunting purposes in a non-competitve environment and could likely do with branching out to a competitive venue - NSTRA being a scored competition would follow nicely from the background of NAVHDA and add greater dimension to the organization.

slistoe, NSTRA is in desperate need of nothing. Its has functioned fine for 30 some years so its image should not be suffering too much. Like any other venue out there we strive to grow and improve. You call the UKC profit mongering.LOL What dog registry out there is not in it to make a profit.Kinda hard to stay in business without profit. They register somewhere around 260000 sporting dogs a year, I don't think they can be classified as mongers, but perhaps you know more about them then I do.
There were a few registries that wanted the NSTRA registry, UKC, so far, has had the most to offer for both the member and the organization. I don't care to get into the details of what was offered and so forth on a public forum, nor with those that are not even members, but it looks like so far the BOD were impressed by the UKC folks.

Post by **slistoe** » Thu May 05, 2011 1:12 pm

scott townsend wrote:
slistoe wrote:There was no reasonable grounds why the PAL/ILP system came into place in the first place in the registries. Any further consideration of extending the folly is...... folly.

First time I have actually thought about this and these are my thoughts on the situation. NSTRA desperately needs someone/anyone to stick titles on pedigrees for them (unless they were to start duplicating an already complicated and fractured registration system that exists in US - the country that took the concept of take my ball and play my own game to a whole new level). The UKC is a profit mongering organization that will jump at anyone and anything to add more registrations to their pile. They have no concept, history or direction of field events for upland dogs and will jump at any and everything that comes calling. Might be a good deal for NSTRA to make up the rules as they go and call the shots for the other comers to the registry. If NSTRA was genuinely concerned with maintaining an image among the hunting community they would be better off to ally with NAVHDA who is already in the business of evaluating dogs for hunting purposes in a non-competitve environment and could likely do with branching out to a competitive venue - NSTRA being a scored competition would follow nicely from the background of NAVHDA and add greater dimension to the organization.
slistoe, NSTRA is in desperate need of nothing. Its has functioned fine for 30 some years so its image should not be suffering too much. Like any other venue out there we strive to grow and improve. You call the UKC profit mongering.LOL What dog registry out there is not in it to make a profit.Kinda hard to stay in business without profit. They register somewhere around 260000 sporting dogs a year, I don't think they can be classified as mongers, but perhaps you know more about them then I do.
There were a few registries that wanted the NSTRA registry, UKC, so far, has had the most to offer for both the member and the organization. I don't care to get into the details of what was offered and so forth on a public forum, nor with those that are not even members, but it looks like so far the BOD were impressed by the UKC folks.

Desperate was too strong a word for you?
The UKC is a privately owned, for profit organization. AKC and NAVHDA are both not-for-profit organizations.
It is my impression that outside of the coonhounds the only folks utilizing the UKC to any extent are the disenfranchised who wanted to make a home somewhere for a semblance of legitimacy. UKC hit a home run with HRC and NSTRA should fit in well - Wayne should be rubbing his hands with glee.
A few registries? Were you considering the Continental Kennel Club? That would fit well with redfishkilla.

Post by **kninebirddog** » Thu May 05, 2011 1:35 pm

So I guess you look at American field the same.way?

scott townsend · Post by **scott townsend** » Thu May 05, 2011 1:36 pm

slistoe wrote:
scott townsend wrote:
slistoe wrote:There was no reasonable grounds why the PAL/ILP system came into place in the first place in the registries. Any further consideration of extending the folly is...... folly.

First time I have actually thought about this and these are my thoughts on the situation. NSTRA desperately needs someone/anyone to stick titles on pedigrees for them (unless they were to start duplicating an already complicated and fractured registration system that exists in US - the country that took the concept of take my ball and play my own game to a whole new level). The UKC is a profit mongering organization that will jump at anyone and anything to add more registrations to their pile. They have no concept, history or direction of field events for upland dogs and will jump at any and everything that comes calling. Might be a good deal for NSTRA to make up the rules as they go and call the shots for the other comers to the registry. If NSTRA was genuinely concerned with maintaining an image among the hunting community they would be better off to ally with NAVHDA who is already in the business of evaluating dogs for hunting purposes in a non-competitve environment and could likely do with branching out to a competitive venue - NSTRA being a scored competition would follow nicely from the background of NAVHDA and add greater dimension to the organization.
slistoe, NSTRA is in desperate need of nothing. Its has functioned fine for 30 some years so its image should not be suffering too much. Like any other venue out there we strive to grow and improve. You call the UKC profit mongering.LOL What dog registry out there is not in it to make a profit.Kinda hard to stay in business without profit. They register somewhere around 260000 sporting dogs a year, I don't think they can be classified as mongers, but perhaps you know more about them then I do.
There were a few registries that wanted the NSTRA registry, UKC, so far, has had the most to offer for both the member and the organization. I don't care to get into the details of what was offered and so forth on a public forum, nor with those that are not even members, but it looks like so far the BOD were impressed by the UKC folks.
Desperate was too strong a word for you?
The UKC is a privately owned, for profit organization. AKC and NAVHDA are both not-for-profit organizations.
It is my impression that outside of the coonhounds the only folks utilizing the UKC to any extent are the disenfranchised who wanted to make a home somewhere for a semblance of legitimacy. UKC hit a home run with HRC and NSTRA should fit in well - Wayne should be rubbing his hands with glee.
A few registries? Were you considering the Continental Kennel Club? That would fit well with redfishkilla.

Listoe
Per usual you ramblings are based solely on your misguided, ill informed,self serving opinon of IF THEY AINT PLAYING MY GAME IT AINT WORTH PLAYING.
One thing about you , you never let the facts get in they way of a good lie.

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Thu May 05, 2011 3:16 pm

UKC is the landing site for the American Pit Bull Terrier when they eent mainstream from ADBA.

One reason I can see for disallowing ILP/PAL and Canine Partner registered dogs is the possibility of a champion dog being put under PAL and run again for a repeat. Strictly an ego trip, but it could ruin things for other competitors.

Post by **kninebirddog** » Thu May 05, 2011 3:27 pm

Cajun Casey wrote:UKC is the landing site for the American Pit Bull Terrier when they eent mainstream from ADBA.

One reason I can see for disallowing ILP/PAL and Canine Partner registered dogs is the possibility of a champion dog being put under PAL and run again for a repeat. Strictly an ego trip, but it could ruin things for other competitors.

So why isn't there an ILP PAL dog being run in the AKC National Pointing dog Trial being run in Idaho right now That piece of paper is an AKC not for profit piece of paper so that they can not make money off if it when those dogs are handled in those special events that AKC allowed :roll:

AKC made it up so those that get one for their dogs Play the AKC games that AKC will allow on them If NSTRA wanted to recognize unpapered dogs then they would have their own ILP PAL program Facts are they do not want unregistered dogs of questionable backgrounds even if they look like a purebred dog because that is Not what NSTRA or other breed clubs or field trial formats care to have run...

So if you want to play in Field trials AKC AF NSTRA or others ..then step up to the plate and get a registered dog and play just like everyone else has to do to participate.

Cajun Casey · Post by **Cajun Casey** » Thu May 05, 2011 3:35 pm

kninebirddog wrote:
Cajun Casey wrote:UKC is the landing site for the American Pit Bull Terrier when they eent mainstream from ADBA.

One reason I can see for disallowing ILP/PAL and Canine Partner registered dogs is the possibility of a champion dog being put under PAL and run again for a repeat. Strictly an ego trip, but it could ruin things for other competitors.
So why isn't there an ILP PAL dog being run in the AKC National Pointing dog Trial being run in Idaho right now That piece of paper is an AKC not for profit piece of paper so that they can not make money off if it when those dogs are handled in those special events that AKC allowed :roll:

AKC made it up so those that get one for their dogs Play the AKC games that AKC will allow on them If NSTRA wanted to recognize unpapered dogs then they would have their own ILP PAL program Facts are they do not want unregistered dogs of questionable backgrounds even if they look like a purebred dog because that is Not what NSTRA or other breed clubs or field trial formats care to have run...

So if you want to play in Field trials AKC AF NSTRA or others ..then step up to the plate and get a registered dog and play just like everyone else has to do to participate.

I am not sure why you quoted me in that redundant diatribe, but I think you need to look again at what I wrote, specifically the word "disallowed." Thank you.

Post by **kninebirddog** » Thu May 05, 2011 3:50 pm

Excuse me I forgot your like to find big words to use them over and over :roll:

Post by **slistoe** » Thu May 05, 2011 4:13 pm

kninebirddog wrote:So I guess you look at American field the same.way?

The AF is a private for profit organization but they have a very well defined sense of who they are and what they are about - witness the split with NSTRA. They are not running around trying to be all things to everyone.

Post by **slistoe** » Thu May 05, 2011 4:21 pm

scott townsend wrote:
slistoe wrote: 1. Desperate was too strong a word for you?
2.The UKC is a privately owned, for profit organization. AKC and NAVHDA are both not-for-profit organizations.
3.It is my impression that outside of the coonhounds the only folks utilizing the UKC to any extent are the disenfranchised who wanted to make a home somewhere for a semblance of legitimacy.4. UKC hit a home run with HRC and NSTRA should fit in well - 5.Wayne should be rubbing his hands with glee.
6.A few registries? 7. Were you considering the Continental Kennel Club? 8.That would fit well with redfishkilla.
Listoe
Per usual you ramblings are based solely on your misguided, ill informed,self serving opinon of IF THEY AINT PLAYING MY GAME IT AINT WORTH PLAYING.
One thing about you , you never let the facts get in they way of a good lie.

You really want my opinion - EVERY GAME IS WORTH PLAYING. Everything that folks do with their dogs brings something to the table. Objective people look at what those things are and reconcile the place each holds. Emotionally connected people are blind and irrational in their observations and discussions.

Just to simplify things for you I have numbered the lines - all you need to do is give a number. NUMBER ______ IS A LIE.

shags · Post by **shags** » Thu May 05, 2011 4:33 pm

Y'all know that UKC has an LP registration that allows dogs in ALL UKC performance events? If NSTRA plays with UKC how will that affect NSTRA's current rule?

UKC Limited Privilege Registration is offered by UKC to encourage all dog owners to be active and enjoy time with their dogs. This program accepts Mix Bred dogs (also known as American Mixed Bred dogs, or AMB), purebred dogs of unknown or incomplete pedigrees, purebred dogs registered with registries the UKC does not acknowledge, and purebred dogs with disqualifying faults. Dogs enrolled in the LP Program must be spayed or neutered and, if accepted, are eligible to compete in all Performance Events for which the breed is eligible; however, they are not eligible for conformation events. LP listed purebred dogs of the Gun Dog Group are eligible for Hunting Retriever events

Post by **kninebirddog** » Thu May 05, 2011 4:37 pm

The same as it affects AkC Field trials

Dogs enrolled in the LP Program must be spayed or neutered and, if accepted, are eligible to compete in all Performance Events for which the breed is eligible; however,

Key part here in NSTRA it is "Not Accepted"

snips · Post by **snips** » Thu May 05, 2011 4:44 pm

My Gosh! You guys go get a purebred dog and enter some trials! :roll: :roll:

shags · Post by **shags** » Thu May 05, 2011 4:49 pm

If UKC becomes the governing body, then the subordinate organization would have to go along with their rules, right? Just like with AKC, a parent club can't decide to allow ILP/PAL to enter its trials, and they can't deny entry of a qualified* AKC registered dog at events other than NCs.
*meaning qualified as to age appropriate, or performance qualifications like ltd stakes

It would be hard to imagine a dog not being accepted as a UKC LP - unless there was a problem with the spay/neuter requirement.

jasonw99 · Post by **jasonw99** » Thu May 05, 2011 5:32 pm

a few points.
1 ukc is not the governing body of nstra. they are a registry.

2. it doesn't say an lp dog can participate in a nstra event. it specifically calls out retreiving stake. or whatever they called it. it was not a nstra event.