NATIONAL GOLDEN RETRIEVER COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING Wednesday, 28 November 2001, commencing at 8.00 pm AEST via telephone link. The President welcomed all member clubs to the Annual General Meeting I. Attendance: Chair: Sandra Patterson Qld: Jean Stephens NSW: Julie Matthews Vic: Jane Fall Tas: John Wadsley (joined the meeting during discussion of Item 3.4) SA: Barbara Moore WA: Leonie Maley In Attendance: Claire Kaspura, Acting Secretary/ Treasurer, and Minutes Secretary. 2. Confirmation of the Minutes (AGM, 5 November 2000). MOVED by South Australia, seconded by Western Australia: that, subject to the inclusion of the amendments circulated to all member clubs, the Minutes of the last Annual General Meeting held on 5th November 2000, be confirmed as a true and correct record of the meeting. CARRIED 3. Business Arising from the Minutes: 3.I Breed Standard Extension: The President advised that a copy of the ANKC's response, together with the ANKC's legal advice, had been distributed to all member clubs prior to the AGM. The advice cleared the way for the next draft to be circulated. Further discussion of this item was deferred until Breed Extension Working Party report on its activities. 3.2 Hall of Fame: A draft document outlining possible criteria for the establishment of a Hall of Fame had also been circulated prior to the AGM. During the ensuing discussion Council delegates expressed reservations about any process associated with the election of people to a Hall of Fame. The President then sought delegates' advice on how to proceed with this matter. MOVED South Australia, seconded Victoria: that the question of establishing a Hall of Fame be put on hold for the time being. CARRIED 3.3 Register of Dogs Tested for Hereditary Conditions:
President requested an update from each state QLD: Already test hips, elbows, hearts, and eyes for stud dog list and sire and dam for every litter. No register as such, copies of all certificates go to the Club's Secretary. NSW: The Club has a register and has combined litter referral and hereditary diseases register - lists results for 450 dogs at the moment. VIC: No register as such. The Club requires certificates for hips and eyes for puppy referrals. SA: Similar to QLD - have started collating info now. Suggested we need to agree on a common software program. About to transfer data from Excel to a Breedmate program. Would be interested to know if anybody else has tried to do that. WA: WA has a register on voluntary basis. Had it for several years now, data stored on Excel program. 3.4 Register of Sire/Dams with Titled Progeny: Sample forms currently in use in NSW, Victoria and South Australia had been circulated with the Agenda. After a brief discussion: MOVED Victoria, seconded NSW: to adopt the NSW form subject to the addition of the Breeder's name and provision of space for the specification of titles. CARRIED 3.5 National Tattoo Identifiers Register: It was noted that the only Clubs with Tattoo registers were NSW, Qld and SA. All States were happy to look into combining all the Registers into one during the year. The Secretary provided clarification on the purpose of a National register, that is to ensure that each individual breeder's tattoo (eg TIP for Tiptree) is unique to that breeder nationally. All member clubs agreed to compile of list of tattoo identifiers where tattoos are used, to be forwarded to the Secretary, who is to maintain a national listing. The Secretary is to advise the member club when duplications are identified. John Wadsley, delegate for Tasmania, joined the meeting at this time. President welcomed the Tasmanian delegate to the meeting. 3.6 ANKC Survey - Restriction of Registration to Dogs Tested for Hip Dysplasia: The President advised that a YES vote to both questions had been recorded for each state and invited each state to comment on the survey outcome. QLD: Vic: Tas: SA: WA: Agreed wholeheartedly with the survey. Felt it should have gone further, but have to start somewhere. Although they recorded the biggest NO vote, the general consensus was that it had to be done and that it was a start. Good position to start from at this point. Supported I00%- bar the one person who voted against it. Supported fully also.
NSW: A good start and supported the concept. 3.7 Research into hereditary problems or health problems of golden retrievers: The President advised that this matter had been held over from the last AGM because of time limitations. Further discussion of the item was deferred until the discussion of Item 7.2. 4. Incoming and Outgoing Correspondence: MOVED by Western Australia, seconded South Australia: that the incoming and outgoing correspondence as circulated to all clubs be noted. Carried 5. President's Report: The President's Report was presented as follows: Another year has drawn to a close. It certainly does not seem like twelve months ago we all met in Melbourne. One of the frustrating issues for both the Breed Council and no doubt the member clubs, is one of communication and l would like to request all clubs to ensure that they submit answers to Council l correspondence within the required time frame. Some matters are more urgent than others, however, it is only with the cooperation of everybody that the Breed Council can successfully function within such a geographically large country such as ours. A big thank you to all those who have assisted me throughout the year. To Robyn Brown, for starting off 2001 as the Breed Council Secretary and to Claire Kaspura, thank you for taking on the role of Acting Secretary for the remainder of the year. The NBC has been very fortunate to have dedicated and reliable assistance which is so important to ensure the smooth running of your Council. Few realize and appreciate the hours of work involved in ensuring the Breed Council protocol is correctly followed and everything is undertaken according to the Constitution - as has always been the case. During 2001, the Breed Extension has proceeded a step closer to completion with advice received allowing us to proceed with the most recent draft. The ANKC Breed Survey, which required mandatory x- raying and scoring for hips for all breeding stock was published throughout Australia and was successful, returning a YES vote to both questions in every State. This requirement would not require major changes to the breeding practices of most ethical golden retriever breeders as hip scoring is more the norm rather than the exception these days. We have a very popular breed and with that comes unethical behaviour by some in an endeavour to cash in on the breed 's popularity. Whilst there are those who have argued against the necessity for the breed survey, we must be mindful of the future, the litigious society we live in and the public 's right to be assured when they buy a loving companion that every endeavour has been made to ensure them the soundest "friend'' possible, both physically and mentally. This will be what is required of us - the breeders - in the future years to come. It is our duty not to forget the "type and temperament " so important to the
golden maintaining its individuality, but in the long run, when it comes to the crunch, we, the breeders, must be seen to be doing the right thing by both the public and the veterinary profession, both of whom are amongst our major critics. My best wishes to all golden retriever owners for Christmas and may everybody's new year be full of health and happiness. Let us all try to put persona feelings behind us and move on to promote our wonderful breed. MOVED Tasmania, seconded NSW: that the President's report be accepted. CARRIED 6. Secretary/Treasurer's Report: The Acting Secretary/Treasurer reported as follows: I'll begin my report by covering some of the issues raised at the recent ANKC/NBC Conference. First, as mentioned in the notes previously circulated, the ANKC was exploring the possibilities of establishing a database for recording test results relating to hereditary conditions. During the discussion at the conference, the breed councils voted unanimously to ensure that the ANKC does not impose testing for hereditary problems on breeds without first consulting the relevant breed councils. At this time, no further advice on the ANKC's progress with the database is available. The NGRC might wish to be a bit proactive on this issue and talk to the ANKC about the possibilities for getting involved in the design and administration processes that might be adopted to run the database. Another issue of interest was the preservation of prefixes. The Breed Councils formally recommended that the ANKC reconsider its current policy whereby it is up to individual breeders (mainly overseas breeders) to pay $250 to protect their prefix. Breed Councils asked the ANKC to reconsider the policy and permit each breed council to submit a list of up to I0 prefixes that should be protected. The results of the ANKC survey had been forwarded to all member clubs in haste so that the information was available for this meeting. I hope that the mail has been received. I feel that I should put on record the President's and my own thoughts in relation to the conduct of the ANKC survey. In doing so, I wish to stress the importance of the breed council's processes being transparent at all times. It is, therefore, crucial that delegates take responsibility for ensuring that the messages coming to/from the breed council are communicated to their club members so that everyone knows what is happening at the national level and feels that they have been adequately consulted. On a couple of occasions we were unsure of our own roles in disseminating information on the background to the survey and, in some instances, defending the administration of the survey. I am pleased to report that the copyright issue seems to be resolved and I look forward to circulating the next draft of the extension. Finally, I would like to thank you all for giving me the opportunity to take on this job. I have enjoyed it so far, and am looking forward to continuing my work for the Breed Council in the new year. As Treasurer, I have recently circulated the financial report. Ross Adler, who was appointed auditor for the breed council last year on the basis of his work for the NSW Club, resigned
suddenly just prior to the end of the financial year. Because of the timing, I submitted the Breed Council 's books to the NSW club's new auditor, Vanya Neus, who was appropriately qualified and undertakes quite a lot of auditing work for dog clubs. I hope this arrangement is acceptable and I remain quite happy to take any instructions from you on this issue. The actual financial position is that the NGRC has approximately $1,200 in its account. You will note an increased expenditure due to the volume of photocopying relating to the copyright issue. I use my printer as photocopier and am distributing the costs between the NSW Club, and the NGRC with a personal contribution. Again the larger postage bill had occurred because of the increased need to correspond with member clubs and the ANKC. I am happy to address any quest ions. During the ensuing discussion, the Treasurer confirmed that the NGRC's money is kept in an interest bearing cheque account. It was then suggested that a date be set for the payment of subscriptions. It was agreed that the due date is to be 1 March 2002. MOVED NSW; seconded Tasmania: that the Acting Secretary's/Treasurer's report be accepted and that the Council endorses the Treasurer's actions in securing a new Auditor. CARRIED 7. Other Reports: 7.1 Breed Standard Extension Working Party: The Chair, Mrs Patterson, reported as follows: Since last year, the Working Party worked on a further draft copy of the Breed Extension document. The Breed Council, at the unanimous instruction of its member clubs, wrote to the ANKC to obtain assistance from them to help bring the Breed Extension to finalisation. It was felt best not to circulate the next draft whilst the matter was in the hand s of the ANKC. The ANKC moved at its October meeting to forward a copy of the advice it received from its legal representatives and this advice has subsequently been forwarded to all clubs prior to the AGM. It is gratifying to note the closing paragraph of the advice: "In view of the advice I have given above, I suggest that it would be appropriate to allow the NGRC to complete the development of its document to a point where it is content that it is in final form. Once that has occurred, a final comparison of its content with that of Mr Marshall's document should be undertaken to ensure that no passages from the latter have been reintroduced. On the assumption that they have not, the NGRC work can proceed to publication." In view of this, the next draft will shortly be circulated to Clubs for their comment and it is hoped that a final copy will at last be forthcoming. At this point, I would like to express my appreciation to the Breed Extension Working Party delegates for their continued support and to all golden retriever enthusiasts who have believed in and supported the concept of the National Golden Retriever Council Breed Extension.
During the ensuing discussion, the Chair indicated that the next draft would be circulated for member's comments shortly and that she hoped it would be a final draft. MOVED Tasmania, seconded South Australia: that the Breed Standard Extension Working Party report be accepted. CARRIED. 7.2 Hereditary Disease Working Party: The Chair, Mrs Moore's report was received as follows: You will note that I have headed this report "Hereditary Conditions Working Parry. This can be abbreviated to HC Working Party and avoids an impression held by some that it is only HD that is being looked into. It's difficult to report on a working party that is really still very much in its embryonic stage. I will, therefore, use this report to summarise HC activities in general. In relation to hip and elbow data, we do seem to have protected our right to have any authorised scoring centre accepted by the ANKC, rather than being dictated to by the AVA. This was confirmed at the ANKC's National Breed Council Conference in August. Also announced was a proposal regarding the ANKC's own "Hip and Elbow Dysplasia Scheme" which was due to be discussed at the ANKC's October Conference. The Breed Council Conference was also advised of 2 projects. One relating to using hip and elbow data to develop an "Estimated Breeding Value" for any one individual. The other project involves a website which would appear to provide an opportunity for various conditions to be recorded and reported on. As both these projects could potentially be of great value to our breed, with the approval of the National Golden Retriever Council, I would like to talk further with Bob Maver, and then provide more details to Breed Council Member Clubs. Sponsorship is being sought for these projects. As a number of the state controlling bodies impose a research levy on their member clubs, the time may be right for some lobbying to ensure funding is channeled towards these projects. It would seem that most Clubs are in fact working on recording HC data, but the consolidation of that data into a National base has not occurred. I would like to encourage states to continue with this. Whilst it's possible the ANKC's proposed scheme could overlap, a realistic time frame has not been presented. The results of the Breed Survey regarding Hip Dysplasia being designated as a problem in the breed, has now been announced. This means that all potential breeding stock born on or after 1 January 2002 will need to be x- rayed and scored at the appropriate age. It also means the vet performing the procedure will need to be able to positively identify the dog by tattoo or microchip. Does the ANKC advise the AVA of this? It is suggested the Breed Council follow this up to avoid confusion in the future. I will conclude with a plea that all member bodies provide me, through Claire, with
an update of who their representative is and where possible, an email contact address. During the ensuing discussion, Mr Wadsley advised that he is to represent the Tasmanian Golden Retriever Club on the HC Working Party. It was then noted that the NSW Delegate was authorized to agree to action to become involved in research activities subject to no cost to the Club. Mrs Moore advised that she had looked into the possibilities and noted that research was currently being conducted in the United Kingdom on hereditary cataract and MRD. All UK clubs are asked to contribute funding towards this research but it is somewhat controversial, as some believe that research money may be better spent on issue such as cancer. Mrs Moore then that suggested that the timing was not right for the NGRC to become involved in research projects that not everybody agrees to. MOVED Western Australia, seconded Queensland: to accept Mrs Moore's report, and further, to record its agreement to Mrs Moore pursuing the issues raised in her report. CARRIED 7.3 ANKC/National Breed Councils Conference: Delegate's Report and Minutes: 8. Notices of Motion: The Chair noted that the minutes and a report prepared by the NGRC's delegate, Claire Kaspura, had been circulated. There was no further discussion of the item. 8.1 MOVED By South Australia, seconded Victoria: That the National Golden Retriever Council write to all x- ray centers (ie Professor Wyburn, Dr Allan, AVA): Advising that in the interest of the breed, the Breed Council has set up a register to record all Australian golden retriever hip scores and in turn to produce a register of progeny tests for hip scores - similar to that produced in the United Kingdom. Requesting that these x- ray centers forward a copy of all golden retriever results to the Breed Council for inclusion on the register. The letter should advise that if there is any cost involved with this, please advise in order that this can be considered by the Breed Council. During discussion of the motion, it was noted that the response from the ANKC was that any registered specialist radiologist will be able to provide hip scores and read x- rays, so for as long as Professor Wyburn and Dr Allan in NSW are recognized specialists radiologists they will not be excluded from any hip scoring scheme. The issue of consent for the hips scores being forwarded to the NGRC would also need to be covered on the documentation. The motion was then put to a vote: For the motion: QLD, VIC, TAS, SA, WA. On the basis that the NSW delegate had been instructed to suggest that the motion be deferred until the ANKC's position was clarified, NSW abstained. CARRIED
8.2 MOVED by NSW, seconded by South Australia: that the NGRC Secretary be authorized to make contact with Dr Malcolm Willis to collect from him, on an annual basis, the progeny testing for hip scores, for Australia and New Zealand, until such time as the ANKC or other appropriate body assumes responsibility for compiling this data. For the motion: QLD, ViC, TAS, SA, WA, NSW. CARRIED 8.3 MOVED by NSW, seconded South Australia: that in relation to motion 9.2 above, the NGRC Secretary is also authorized to request from Dr Willis a full copy of his database. For the motion: QLD, VI C, TAS, WA, SA, NSW. CARRIED 8.4 MOVED by NSW, seconded by Tasmania: that the National Golden Retriever Council (NGRC) contact the German Shepherd and Rottweiller Breed Council s with a view to establishing what processes they use to verify that hereditary defect test results relate to the dog specified on the certification. NSW explained that the intention of this motion was basically in relation to getting vets to certify that they were actually testing the animal described on the form. The form needs to be configured so that it has information required for research purposes and analysis eg sire, dam, any other relevant details. Permanent identification to be certified by vet. For the motion: QLD, VIC, TAS, SA, WA, NSW. CARRIED 8.5 MOVED By NSW, seconded South Australia, that in relation to 9.4 above, follow up action be taken on the information received relating to the verification of test results. (This might involve having the vets who perform the test certify the dog's identity with the result and may only involve the redesign of test result forms.) For the motion: QLD, VIC, TAS, WA, NSW, SA. CARRIED. (SA requested further thought be given to whether the certification is thee original or whether certification is also to be on the copy of the original forwarded to NGRC.) 8.6 MOVED by NSW, seconded by South Australia: that failure to respond within a specified time on issues put to NGRC member clubs be deemed a "yes" vote. NSW delegate explained that the purpose of the motion was to overcome the Breed Council's difficulties where a response has not been received in timely fashion and leaves BC without direction on urgent issues. For the motion: QLD, Tas, SA, NSW. Against the motion: VIC and WA. CARRIED - with concerns noted and every effort is to be made to get vote from each member. During the ensuing discussion, it was noted that member clubs normally received at least 90 days notice before a response is required, and that the onus is on the
member to advice the Secretary that they wished to be involved in the decision making. 8.7 MOVED by NSW, seconded South Australia: that the National Golden Retriever Council recognizes the value of the ANKC/National Breed Councils' Conference as an avenue of communication between the ANKC/National Breed Councils and between Breed Council to Breed Council and also recognizes the importance of having representation at the Conference. For the motion: QLD, VIC, TAS, SA, WA, NSW. Carried 8.8 MOVED by NSW, seconded Tasmania: that where attendance at the ANKC/NBC Conference requires interstate travel, that the reasonable travelling expenses of the Breed Council's representative (ie the President or the Secretary) be met. Accommodation and other out of pocket expenses not included. For the motion: QLD, SA, Tas, WA, NSW. Against the motion: Vic. CARRIED 8.9 MOVED by NSW, seconded Tasmania: that Claire Kaspura be reimbursed for her travelling expenses ($198.00) to attend the 2001 ANKC/NBC Conference in Melbourne. For the motion: QLD, Tas, SA, WA, NSW. Against the motion: VIC (as there may be a motion already on the books that should be rescinded first before this one can go ahead). CARRIED After some discussion on due process in relation to a previous motion, NSW MOVED to rescind previous motion to allow the motion at 8.9 to stand on the basis that it was not a constitutional matter. However, it was generally agreed that the new motion would automatically override any previous motions. 8.10 MOVED by NSW, seconded Tasmania: that a sum of $50.00 per year be paid by each state club. This sum to go towards the travelling expenses of the Breed Council's representative (ie the President, or if unable to attend, the Secretary) to attend the ANKC National Breed Councils' Conference should interstate travel be necessary. For the motion: WA, Tas, NSW, SA. Against the motion: Qld, Vic. CARRIED 8.11 Agenda Items 9.11 and 9.13 dealt with together. MOVED by NSW, seconded South Australia: that Mrs Sandra Patterson and Ms Claire Kaspura be nominated for the positions of President and Secretary respectively. MOVED by South Australia, seconded by NSW: that the GRC of SA Inc nominates Mrs Sandra Patterson as President and Ms Claire Kaspura as Secretary for the National Golden Retriever Council. For the motion: QLD, SA, VIC, NSW, WA, TAS. CARRIED
8.12 MOVED BY South Australia, seconded Victoria: that each delegate come to the Annual General Meeting with their state's list of ten overseas prefixes that they would like protected. The list is to include justification for the protection. Following some discussion: MOVED by Tasmania, seconded NSW: that this matter be deferred until we receive some feedback from the ANKC based on the breed councils' request to the ANKC that their proposal be reconsidered. CARRIED The GRC of Victoria agreed to clarify the situation in relation to the preservation of prefixes with Mr Roger Bridgford. It was then RECOMMENDED that each club send a list of 10 prefixes to the NBC. Once these are received, the matter can be dealt with from there. Prefix list to be submitted by 1 MARCH to NBC Secretary. 8.13 MOVED by NSW, seconded Tasmania: that the Golden Retriever Club of NSW Inc's National Show be held on 1-2 May 2004. (A venue is to be advised at the Annual General Meeting.) 9. Any Other Business: NSW advised that the venue decided on is the Sydney International Equestrian Centre, Wallgrove Road, Horsley Park. For the motion. QLD, VI C, TAS, SA, WA, NSW. CARRIED 9.1 Approval of Judge: GRC of WA Inc National: The GRC of WA sought the NGRC's endorsement of their decision to appoint Mrs Heather Morss, United Kingdom, as the conformation judge at their National Show in August 2002. For the motion: QLD, VIC, TAS, SA, WA. Carried NSW abstained on the grounds that the delegate had not been instructed on this matter. 9.2 NGRC Web Site: The GRC of South Australia suggested that consideration be given to designing a Breed Council Web site which could be used for the distribution of agenda, tattoo register etc. After some discussion: RECOMMENDED that delegates discuss this issue within their clubs and that member clubs come back to the breed council with ideas of what they would like to see on the web site. The Breed Council is write to Mark Hodges to obtain his views regarding the concept and his assistance with developing the site. A deadline of 1st March was set for the clubs to submit their ideas to the NGRC's Secretary.
9.3 Vaccinations: The GRC of South Australia suggested that member clubs might like to explore the possibility of conducting research in this area. RECOMMENDED that delegates take this idea to their clubs for feedback via their Hereditary Conditions Working Party delegate. Thoughts to be forwarded to the NGRC's Secretary by 1st June 2002 9.4 Confirmation of the Minutes: The GRC of South Australia asked that clubs confirm their acceptance of the minutes by 28 February 2002 so that any follow up action can proceed. There being no further general business, the President thanked everybody for their participation and wished them all the best for Christmas and the New Year. The meeting closed at 9.20 pm.