Re: [pyrnet] GPCA

[Jack & Charlotte Perry <pyreau@erols.com>]

Linda,
    Jack said the same thing about people being able to say they belong to the
GPCA.  Still, I wonder if  allowing more people in and having them sign that
they will abide by the code of ethics might end up educating a lot more
breeders and would-be breeders.  If they turned out to be puppy-millers they
can always be charged for violations under the code of ethics or the
constitution.
    Perhaps a much larger membership could generate more regional activities.
Look how many more regional clubs have sprouted up in the last ten years.
    BTW, Linda is another one of the long-time GPCA members who has been very
active with Pyrs as livestock guardian dogs for a long time.  Why is it that
people who have and breed livestock guardian Pyrs think that the GPCA is not
involved with guardian dogs?
    Charlotte (enjoying a free day...no entry at the show we were suposed to go
to today.) BTW, as I was brushing my hairless dog for tomorrow's show I tried
all my brushes.  I'm not sure that I don't prefer the Safari pin brush over the
PSI.  It has thinner pins that don't seem to catch the hair as much.

Linda Weisser wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jack & Charlotte Perry <pyreau@erols.com>
>
> Hopefully, the current idea about associate memberships will be approved by
> the AKC.  That would definately solve the problem of open membership and
> would
> allow everyone to join..  In the past, it was the AKC which would not allow
> any
> sort of non-voting membership.>>
>
> Thanks Charlotte for the promotion of the really good and hard work done by
> the regionals.  The value of the regional club to the breed and to the
> owner wanting to learn and to contribute cannot be over emphasized.
>
> As far as the proposal for an associate membership goes I do have some
> confusion.  What benefit would associate members get beyond what a non
> member would get by simply subscribing to the Bulletin?
>
> As somebody (David?) pointed out the GPCA really does "nothing" visible
> during the year except the Bulletin.  And mail ballots which would not be
> sent to associates anyway.  Most things, meetings, seminars etc take place
> in conjunction with the National.  And all of those activities (including
> the annual meeting) are open to attendance by non club members.  So, my
> "problem" with the associate proposal is what it actually accomplishes for
> the club or for the member other than creating a whole new ream of
> paperwork and separate data.   As someone pointed out, this will still
> allow those people to say "Member--GPCA" without qualifying it.
>
> Linda
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@pyrnet.org with
>         unsubscribe pyrnet-l
> as the BODY of the message.  The SUBJECT is ignored.