Having talked to several people on the GSPCA board about this over the last couple of years I've come to the conclusion that we are simply outnumbered by "show only" crowd.

They are afraid that allowing blacks into the ring with full/equal status will create some serious problems for the existing powerhouses of "show breeding".

Unfortunately even though we have a HUGE number of GSP's in the country the GSPCA membership is very small and there are far fewer "pure performanc" people than there is "pure show" people.

That being the case it will probably be a very long time before this is rectified.

My personal feeling is that black absolutely should be allowed in the ring with equal status or else it should not be allowed at all.  I can think of NO logical reason for the status quo.

Charlie and Pixie I agree with both of you and continue to vote to allow black into the standard.  Part of the problem is the voting method.  It doesn't just require a simple majority which I believe they have gotten in the past.  It requires a 2/3s and when people don't vote at all this makes the 2/3s goal hard to achieve.  I am just glad they allow the black/white GSPs in other performance events.  I would hate to see a group of wonderful dogs excluded because of color.  Hmmm, sounds kind of racist.  Well, I will keep voting for the black color everytime I get a chance and maybe someday it will pass.  I will also continue to ask those adamant against the black color why not.  So far, I have not heard a valid reason to not allow black.  It seems to mostly be a preference or prejudice.  Things change, but they also certainly stay the same too.

The flipside of that though is that if the breed standard could be changed simply by the whim of a majority vote it would be all but meaningless. 

Edited by Moderator

It was Thomas Jefferson that said, " Anything worth having, is worth fighting for."  So, hopefully we will see this issue on the ballot again, and soon.  Each time the vote has come up over the last few years it has inched closer to that super majority.  I believe it was 57% year before and this year it was 60%.  It has to reach 66% to pass.  I will be interested to see the exact numbers (# of yes, # of no, and # of did not vote) when they are published.

OK -- several keep noting that "Show Breeders" are the folks voting down the black vote.  My belief is that there are enough field guys (defined by folks you'll find at field trials more often than at shows) that are against allowing black into the GSPCA breed standard to "tip" the scale.  Some "field folks" DO care and DO vote against black.  I know several guys that only field trial that are adamant that they do not want the GSPCA standard changed to allow black, and they voted against it.

That said, there DEFINITELY are a number of very respected "Show People" (defined by folks you'll find at shows more often than at field trials) that are dead set against allowing black in.  There is no doubt in my mind that many, maybe most, of those opposed to allowing black are Show Breeders that do not do field -- but they are not alone!

In my mind there are enough in both "sides" against black that together they accumulate the "one third minoirty plus 1" to defeat a GSPCA standard change (this time around totaling about 40% together).  I do not have proof of numbers, but my suspcion is that if EVERY field trialer were to vote "yes" to allow black, it would pass - my belief is that there are enough field folks voting no to tip the scales towards defeat when they are combined with the Show Breeders against allowing Black.  Ask around, you might be suprised.

Note:  I'm being very clear -- this is an opinion of mine -- there are no statistics I'm aware of for anyone to prove how many "Field" vs how many "Show" people are voting against black -- only guesses -- so those thinking it is strictly show people are making that assumption on guesses as much as any other is on this subject.

Dave

Interesting point Bev -- I've always assumed that the 66 2/3% is based on those that cast ballots, not on the total possible voting population.  I know that the GSPCA Secretary is planning to post to GSP-L on the procedure, actual values, and how these things are calculated; she is driving back from Denver and probably got back home yesterday evening, so it may be a few days before she posts.

Dave

Yep on 66.67%.  That means the "opposed side" just needs 1/3 plus one more person (e.g. 33.33% plus one) to defeat a change in the standard.

Dave

Here is what the bylaws say:

Article VIII. Amendments

SECTION 2. The Constitution and By-Laws, the Breed Conformation Standard and the Field Championship or Amateur Field Championship requirements may be amended or changed at any time provided a copy of the proposed amendment has been mailed by the Secretary to each member accompanied by a ballot on which he may indicate his choice for or against the action to be taken. The notice shall specify a date not less than thirty (30) days after the mailing by which date the ballots must be returned to the Secretary, or to the professional agency designated by the Board as provided in Article V, Section 2 of these By-Laws, to be counted. The favorable vote of two-thirds (2/3's) of the members in good standing, whose valid ballots are returned within the time limit, shall be required to effect any such amendment and a favorable vote of a majority of the members in good standing, whose valid ballots are returned within the time limit, shall be required to effect any such change in the Field Championship or Amateur Field Championship requirements.

If I am reading this right, 2/3s of the members who are 1) in good standing and 2) who vote.  So, I think this means that the super majority has to be 2/3s of those voting.  Therefore those that don't vote, don't play as big a role in this as I thought they might.  Still the language is confusing.  Had to read it several times to get it to sink into my thick skull.