This is probably one of the most difficult blog posts I’ve written. I believe the topic and the specific incident need to be brought up because it appears flyball’s good name could be damaged if what I’ve heard and read is true. I am concerned because I believe flyballers everywhere, regardless of which organization they play with, want flyball to support and adhere to sound ethical principles.
I’ve written about ethics, integrity and personal character before, but I believe my previous posts about those issues pale in comparison to the specifics of this post.
This post is about the ethical and humane treatment of our canine companions; and, not just while they are playing flyball with us. Even when we are off the flyball field, how we treat our animal family is important to me and I believe there is no room for mistreatment. I am happy to see that many communities share this belief and in some areas of the country thanks to those who have the tenacity to push for better legislation, there are more and more stringent laws and ordinances against animal neglect or abuse.
I do not want to see this topic at the forefront (of) or associated with flyball in any way but I am compelled to take that risk by informing you, the flyball public, about a recent incident I became aware of. I have no direct knowledge of what occurred; only what I read and have heard from others.
My desire is that readers of this blog will take the time to do their own research and come to their own conclusions, and that this post will spark a fire under some of flyball’s leadership to take action or to let concerned flyballers know that action is being taken.
The incident was published in a local newspaper this month and it described the trial of a person convicted of some type of neglect or abuse that resulted in the person’s dog dying while the person was away at a flyball tournament. I was unable to read the entire article, but it was pointed out to me that the dog was left completely alone and unattended at home while the person was away the entire weekend which resulted in the death.
Personally, I find this appalling and I believe the person should not be allowed to play flyball any longer. However, I have been told that the person is still playing at tournaments even though some folks in leadership positions are aware of the situation. I have not been able to confirm nor deny that anything has been done to remedy this situation.
I believe leadership has the responsibility ‘to lead’. I believe they owe it to all flyball participants to take action and do the right thing. If I had the ‘power’ and based strictly on my limited information and research thus far, I would ban the person from my flyball organization.
What would you do if you had the power?
v/r,
Linda
28 comments ↓
Well, I found the article about this happening if anyone else wants to read it.
Neglect is a horrible thing, whether of children or pets. And when one dies from it, it is even worse. But, that said, I don’t think a person’s actions outside of flyball should effect their eligibility to compete.
I do, however, think that the team she is running with should do something. They can easily choose not to allow her to run with the team any more, and I think they should. But I don’t think NAFA leadership should get involved.
Hi Crystal,
From my limited research the person plays or has played in both organizations and I was told that the person was playing at a tourney this past weekend. I agree with you about the club or team doing something. What if the club or team doesn’t want to take action?
My reference to leadership includes club owners, team captains, RDs, organizational reps, head judges, directors, officers, etc.
To be honest, I don’t think anyone above the station of club owner or team captain should get involved. It would be a messy boat. Would people convicted of crimes no longer be able to play our sport? Or just crimes having to do with animals? For what amount of time should they be banned? Then, bring up, well, what if they don’t get convicted, but do something neglectful or abusive (like leave their dog in a hot car on a hot day). What about something someone thinks is neglectful, like deciding to wait and see if a limp goes away instead of going right to the vet? Or what if they have a conviction for neglecting horses? Should that result in a ban? It would have to be added to our rule book, along with an entire disciplinary process, increasing work load for our BOD, and increasing costs.
I would hope that teams would object to this. If they don’t, I don’t think leadership higher up should do anything.
I think that NAFA should not allow fat/obese dogs to play flyball. Fat affects the joints, the organs and breathing. I feel that a dog’s life is in jeopardy when it is allowed to play such a strenuous game. I’ll be sure to point them out at the next flyball tournament and ask the judge to remove the dog since it’s life is in jeopardy. Many articles have been written about canine obesity and how it has skyrocketed.
Oh and by the way, the court case that you are talking about is under appeal which means it starts all over again. There are many horrible things that can happen by mistake. For instance, a rescue transport blew a tire, rolled the vehicle and the rescue dog was thrown from the car. I can’t believe people allow loose dogs in their vehicles. The dog is missing, possibly dead due to injuries received when it became a flying projectile. Should that person be allowed to drive another rescue dog when they seem to be so careless? Shouldn’t they be charged with animal cruelty?
Were any of you at the court during the trial? I’m not particularly religious but “let him who is without sin cast the first stone.”
Do you have any knowledge of the person that the article was written about? I can truthfully say that it was tragic for the dog AND the person.
Just another bunch of gossipmongers who are miserable and unhappy that live to make everyone around them miserable.
“Just another bunch of gossipmongers who are miserable and unhappy that live to make everyone around them miserable.”
Kay, I am very sorry that you believe trying to protect the reputation of our sport is gossipmongering. I do not believe this in any way is gossip.
“Do you have any knowledge of the person that the article was written about? I can truthfully say that it was tragic for the dog AND the person.”
I was given additional information from a flyballer who lives and plays in the area. I was told this person and their team do not believe the person in the article should be allowed to continue to play.
These issues are very tough to address, I agree. But, if I knew personally of animal neglect or abuse, I would do something.
v/r, Linda
@ Crystal – There’s no way this woman’s flyball team is going to get involved – they can’t afford to loose all the height dogs she brings to the table (all of her dogs are about a 1/4 of the club). Plus, they shady anyway, as they knowingly run a mix breed as a purebred.
@Kay – it’s under appeal because she was CONVINCED of neglect. If the article is to be believed, she left Friday night with no plans on coming back until Sunday? Would you leave your dog unattended for 2 days?!
Was anyone else disturbed by this article thinking she only has 5 dogs? Seriously? She has… what, 15?
Gossipmongers do the whispering amongst themselves and write anonymously. Ahem…
Does anyone know anything about the dog?
Instead of acting like children, why not be an adult and ask the party what happened.
Are you jealous because you don’t have “15″ dogs? Or have a dog that a team wants? This is becoming quite messy and I don’t usually stoop to the newest low.
I’m just asking you to speak to her instead of all this behind the back bullcrap.
All things aren’t as they seem.
Did these two lines really just follow one another? “Instead of acting like children, why not be an adult and ask the party what happened.
Are you jealous because you don’t have “15? dogs? Or have a dog that a team wants”
Well hello pot, you sure look black today.
I’m not sure this could be considered behind ones back, seeing as it is a public blog.
Of course I’m writing anonymously. This happened over a year ago and no one with any power has said or done anything. I thought maybe they were waiting to see what the court outcome was, but clearly that’s not the case now. Maybe it’s a childish dream, but I think that those who abuse or neglect animals shouldn’t be allowed to own them anymore. Or at least, have those around them aware of their destructive tendencies. Hopefully, my friends would give me an intervention if I started to mentally deteriorate, not watch idly while I acquire more dogs after one has already died in my care.
What really needs to be known about the dog? It was aggressive? Couldn’t be handled? That’s not really an excuse. She failed to arrange proper care for her dog. If the dog could only be handled by herself, maybe she should have forgone the tournament and taken care of her dog instead.
It’s tragic that the AC was turned off and the dog overheated. Totally the landlords fault, right? Too bad whomever was suppose to let the dog out Saturday morning, afternoon, or night didn’t notify her in time to go back to the shop and take care of the dog and turn the AC on. Oh right…. She wasn’t planning on coming back to let him out until Sunday. Hrm.
See, that’s the problem I have with this whole situation. Mistakes happen, tragedies occur – but neglect is a conscious choice to not do something. Like not letting your dog out for 48 hours or refilling a water bowl.
No Kay. I’m not jealous because I don’t have “15″ dogs. I’m alarmed because the court only thinks she has 5 dogs, and she clearly owns more. She wouldn’t neglect to tell the court that, would she? Naw.
As sad as the whole situation is, I doubt any leadership can or will do anything about it. I’m personally very happy someone has said something about it. At least it doesn’t have to be the region’s dirty little secret anymore.
Here’s a sad fact for all of us: If Flyball wasn’t mentioned in the article, would there be a post decrying the neglect? Demanding leadership ‘do something’ to protect the reputation of the sport? Is that what we’re really worried about here… the reputation of a dog sport?
As to a team not wanting to lose the height dogs she provides- no number of 3.7 second dogs or 7″ height dogs would convince me to run with someone who neglected their dog to the point of death. I play flyball for fun and enjoyment for me and my dogs, and being around people like that is not included in my dose of fun.
All I have to go on is the news articles I have found about the event. From those articles, I understand the facts to be that this person left on Friday, planning to return on Sunday, leaving a dog unattended the entire time she was gone. The dog died while she was gone. While I know the news can often skew facts, giving only part of the picture, in this case, when a person posts asking opinions in this manner of what flyball should do, I have to treat this information as fact, until informed otherwise by a more reliable source.
“Here’s a sad fact for all of us: If Flyball wasn’t mentioned in the article, would there be a post decrying the neglect? Demanding leadership ‘do something’ to protect the reputation of the sport? Is that what we’re really worried about here… the reputation of a dog sport?”
If flyball was not mentioned in the article, many of us would not know there was a relationship between the person in the article and our sport; true. Still, those around the person and who play flyball in the area may have known and that in my opinion is when someone in a leadership position could have and should have done something.
If this person was in my club or on my team and I knew of the charges I may have excused the person from flyball until uncovering the truth. Most definitely after the conviction I would have banned the person from my group.
Protecting the reputation? Yes. Even though there are other issues surrounding the person’s behavior and/or lifestyle that can and should still be addressed, the courts already addressed the main part with a conviction. I value the good name of flyball and its participants no matter where I am located or with whom I play. Allowing the person to continue to play does not, in my opinion, support sound ethical principles. Personally, and as a whole, I adamently do not want flyball to be associated with animal abuse or neglect.
v/r,
Linda
The whole point is not ONE person had enough balls to talk to her or her team at the tournament. That’s why I said gossipmongers, talk behind someone’s back.
Be an adult and talk to her or the team owner/captain.
A known troublemaker (yes me spreading gossip) from Alaska starts more crap, where sled dogs are mistreated and killed quite frequently “on accident” training or running in the Iditarod. Let’s ban Alaska while we’re at it.
There’ll be no more from me. I don’t hang with people that don’t know how to act like a grown ups.
Let me know when you’ve talked to her or her team instead of waiting till AFTER the weekend to chat about it on FB, then we’ll talk again.
Kay, I am sorry but you are terribly misguided in your comments about trouble maker in Alaska and your other accusations. I approved your comment to be posted but only because everyone has a right to speak their mind. However, I will set the record straight since you appear to be on a riduculous tangent that is completely off-base.
I, myself, was advised of the newspaper article by a concerned flyballer who plays in FL. The person further explained to me that no one in leadership locally has done anything, that others in the local flyball community are concerned and that the local flyball leadership is well aware of the issue (i.e., several club owners, at least one judge, etc.). In addition, I was told by not only this person, but I also received a private email about my blog post and both these flyballers said everyone appears to be ‘afraid’ to do anything! What? Afraid of what or whom…I am not sure.
If others are afraid, then someone in leadership should have the tennis-balls to step up and to do the right thing or to tell their local flyballers what the truth really is if the article is false or whatever.
Yet, you have the tennis-balls to call such concerned flyballers ‘trouble-makers’? What is wrong with you that you have that mindset.
To further complicate their local-FL flyball atmosphere, I was told that the ED recently made a visit to the area and there was a big drama. I have no idea if this was related to the issue at hand, but it appears strange on the surface.
And, on top of that a member of the BoD along with an RD in another area was advised of the article and the person’s conviction. I do not know what if anything these ‘leaders’ are doing about it?
To my knowledge, no one, not one of these person’s in leadership has come forward to advise anyone of anything locally and the person who was convicted continues to play.
So, I took it on because I care about flyball and flyballers and their dogs and flyball’s reputation. What is your reason for taking this topic on and calling people names and doing nothing to actually help the situation?
To the readers of this blog post, I sincerely apologize for the tone of my comments immediately above, but I am pretty much sick and tired of people who have attitudes like Kay’s. Flyball is better than what is demonstrated by attitudes such as this.
v/r,
Linda
Alright so I’ll answer one last time. I had never heard of the troublemaker from Alaska till the beginning of the week. That’s why I said (me spreading gossip)
I would have no idea why anyone would be afraid to raise their concerns to the person/team/RD. There have been other problems (other than the current issue) brought up to the RD and to my knowledge they aren’t missing from flyball. I don’t know why there are any problems with a judge. Who says that?
There was an ED down here in March and there was NO drama that I’m aware of. The person DID speak with them and gave her account of what happened.
It’s not right to blah blah blah it on a list and not talk to the actual party(s). Has no one figured that out yet? I apologize for going off task. I got/am angry because of that reason.
Kay I think you know full well why people would be afraid to talk to the team or the person responsible. You just don’t ask someone something like that because it is tactless and liable to get you hurt.
I know that some people locally do not think that the death of the dog was this person’s fault. I think it was and so does the court. If you have information that excuses her, why haven’t you told us or the court?
I know her initial excuses as published by the newspaper was that the dog was aggressive and had to live at her shop and that the landlord turned off the A/C. Whether that meant dog aggressive or human aggressive I do not know but either way it should not have been kept at a pet store where members of the public and their dogs came to regularly.
Her second excuse also made no sense. She said that she believed it was the landlord because he had been known to turn off the A/C in the past. This obviously was not enough to hold up in court but if it were true and this was something she was aware of, why would she leave a dog in danger like that? Why didn’t she leave a note on the thermostat reminding them not to turn it off because of the dog? I’m sure she had the landlord’s phone number, she could have called to remind him.
The fact of the matter is the whole thing was just irresponsible on her part. The dog died because of her. There was no necropsy done, the dog could have died of a heart attack but the scene at the shop was more than enough to convict her of abuse because of the conditions the dog was living in. Not enough food or water, living in its own filth for the weekend. Even if the dog had lived this would have been abusive. The only difference is that since the dog died it came to light. How many times did she leave the dog like that before? You stick up for this person but would you leave your dog like that?
“Even though there are other issues surrounding the person’s behavior and/or lifestyle that can and should still be addressed, the courts already addressed the main part with a conviction.” @ Linda, ok, you’re right. I’ll just focus on Flyball here.
So what is leadership going to do now?
And I’m sorry Linda, but I’m going to have to disagree with you over this one.
As upset as I am about this whole situation, I’m not sure the punishment in Flyball should be more severe than what the courts have given her. And I’m ok with withholding action/judgement pending a court case. She given 30 days of jail time, and a year of probation as her sentence. So, I think if any leadership is going to do something, they should have her sit out for a year as originally given by the court (as that would complete her sentence). But I have to ask – which venue would you like for leadership to take action in? U-Fli, or NAFA? She does race in both. And as much as you’ve begrudged NAFA recently, U-Fli hasn’t done anything either.
And Crystal is right, this can be a slippery slope. I still would like to see some sort of disciplinary action against her though. Or bare minimum, some sort of acknowledgement.
Oh Kettle Kay. I think you’ve illustrated perfectly why this has been kept so mum up until this point. You seriously want to intimidate and bully someone because they have concerns over animal neglect? You really want to call them out because of where (you think) they’re from? Did this person kill sled dogs themselves? No? Then wtf was the point of that argument?
Btw, talking about animal neglect isn’t (or at least shouldn’t be) gossip – saying ‘so-and-so’s dog is too fat or too old – is gossip. Just some perspective.
I know this is a very emotionally charged topic but I would like to remind you all to be civil. I will not allow personal attacks on the blog and some of the comments here have gotten to that point. I have allowed it up to this point because I trust Linda’s judgment and other parts of the comments were relevant and important to the discussion. However, from this point forward I will delete all comments that I deem inappropriate.
I must also remind everyone of the comment policy of the blog about posting comments anonymously. You can post anonymous comments but you must use a valid email address. No one can see your email address but the moderators of the blog.
Disclaimer – My comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect my team, my role as a judge, or NAFA. Where I do discuss NAFA’s view, it is a direct quote from an email correspondence.
That being said….
Wow has this blown up over the last week! I hope this doesn’t bleed into our next tournament down here and I’m sure everyone will be able to play nice in November.
I will go on the record that I did bring it up to leadership within NAFA because a competitor did come to me about it before the tournament and then again during. As a judge I went to NAFA to get direction to answer questions because I knew this was a highly charged topic and I figured people would ask.
The direction I received was that NAFA didn’t think:
“our current process would allow us to do anything even if someone did file a disciplinary charge. Perhaps people might be thinking of the AKC routinely suspending individuals who are convicted of animal cruelty charges. I don’t think we have a corresponding option in our current disciplinary code unless the action actually occurs at a flyball tournament.”
What occurred with this dog and its owner is horrible. No one except those DIRECTLY involved will ever know the truth. Was it poor judgement? Maybe. I don’t think it was intentional, just not well thought out. She has been convicted by the courts and, pending appeal, will serve her sentence.
Not sure what talking with her or the team would do. She told her story in court. Don’t see how that would change. Obviously people disagree with the court’s decision, but in the end that doesn’t matter. She was convicted and punishment was meted out.
Personally,my concerns are more along the number of dogs she told the court she owned. Unless something has drastically changed, her own website, the NAFA CRN database, and our own experience show this to be potentially untrue. I brought the question up to the tournament director this weekend when I thought she had more dogs there than the 5 she claims to currently own. It was later brought to my attention that I miscounted the dogs at the tournament. I think I was the original “gossip monger” that Kay speaks of (though not the one posting here). That’s ok because I’m a big boy and I can take it
I still love Kay, value her opinions and enjoy running both with and against her. We are both passionate individuals and we don’t always agree on things. It really wouldn’t be as much fun if we did.
Whether this competitor owns more than 5 dogs or not though is a matter outside of Flyball for the courts. As long as she isn’t running more than 5 in Flyball, there is nothing NAFA can or SHOULD do. If people see her with 5 dogs one weekend and then 3 others on another weekend, I think that will probably raise questions. At that point it COULD become a matter within Flyball as it’s a violation of a court order which is occurring at a tournament. I’m sure people are watching that and it’s very easy to prove, so I hope what she has told the courts is the truth. We don’t need any more pain to come out of this than already has.
To clear another note, when the ED came down to FL in March it was for a completely different issue. There was no drama and while it was a difficult situation, it was handled in a way that has made the region stronger.
This is a sad situation where no one will really know what happened except the parties directly involved. I hope the tragedy that occurred and the emotions and opinions associated with it don’t wreak havoc on other peoples’ relationships or fracture the region. That would compound an already horrible tragedy.
I agree, let’s all get back on topic. I think this person should have some kind of disciplinary action taken against her by U-Fli and NAFA. I agree that it can be difficult to draw the line between something that is relevant to flyball and warrants discipline and something that is not. That’s why I think these things should be taken on a case-by-case basis and a disciplinary committee should determine the following.
1. Would allowing this person to continue competing endanger his/her teammates or opponents?
2. Would allowing this person to continue competing endanger his/her teammates or opponents dogs?
3. Would allowing this person to continue competing endanger his/her self or his/her dogs?
4. Does the severity or nature of the action in which the committee is addressing warrant disciplinary action?
Number 4 is of course subjective but could be put to a vote. I think if the answer to ANY of these questions is “Yes” the person should be suspended or banned from competition.
In this case the answer to numbers 1 and 2 is probably no, however the answer to number three is yes. This person through their actions or inaction as it were, has proved that they value competition over the welfare of their animals and should not be allowed to compete.
I also feel that if a person is self destructing like I believe this person is then the stress and pressure of competition is harmful to them and they should be suspended to allow them time to re-group and put themselves in order.
At the end of the day, there is nothing in the rules or by-laws that allows for that type of action within the NAFA organization. I don’t compete in other flyball venues so I don’t know what they can or can’t do.
If you want to see something like this happen, then propose a rule change, run for election, or start your own organization that has such rules in it. Other than that, there’s nothing a disciplinary committee can do, even if they wanted to. They need to abide by the governing legislation. Otherwise it could become very scary. We could throw people out and ban them for anything someone get a bug in their craw about. For instance, as Kay suggested, having fat dogs.
In fact, running obese dogs meets more of your criteria for banishment than this issue. Should we ban all people that run fat dogs because they obviously value competition over their dog’s health?
I know, let’s take it a step further. Let’s ban fat people (myself included). I don’t control my weight and I intentionally put myself at risk for diabetes, heart disease, and certain types of cancer, and other “self destructive” or deadly diseases. My lack of an exercise regime shows how self-destructive my Since I am fat, I can’t move as fast and pose dangers to my teammates, opponents and their dogs. heaven forbid someone run into me because I can’t get out of the way in time. That’s just negligent if you ask me.
So banishment for all fat people and fat dogs.
Now who makes the “case be case” decision? And how do we determine what “fat” is? Once we banish all fat people, let’s go after anyone who doesn’t have blond hair and blue eyes, or a 4.5 second dog, or anyone else who doesn’t agree with our views/beliefs. Remind you of any other mistakes that were made in history?
Of course I’m being silly and poking fun at myself, but it goes to show that when we start working outside the established rules and bylaws of an organization, it can become dangerous very quickly.
No matter how much you want it to happen, as NAFA stands now there’s nothing they can do. If you want action taken, then be part of your own solution and get involved. Anything other than that is just wasted air and keystrokes.
BTW, while I may not agree with how she cares for her dogs, and regardless of my feelings on the court ruling, I will defend her ability to run in NAFA as, under our rules and regulations, she’s done nothing wrong. If that ever changes it’s a different story, but until then, she has just as much right to play Flyball as Anonymous, Kay, Gossip Monger, or myself.
Question – if she was a convicted murderer who served her time would we be having this same discussion? Anyone pull rap sheets on competitors lately? That might lead to a thinning of teams
Since we want to ban her from Flyball for egregious acts against the dogs we all love, shouldn’t we also have her business license pulled? After all, she interacts with dogs there too. And maybe she shouldn’t be allowed within 200 yards of dog parks or training facilities. Even though there are no rules on the books to do any of that, maybe we should do it in this case and set a precedent.
Than again….maybe not. Let’s just go play with our dogs and stop trying to pile more trouble on someone else.
There are sections in NAFA Rules, Corporate Policies & Procedures that provide an avenue for which leadership may take action.
In fact, regardless of the written rules, the ED can take action, even if it is unwritten, subject to the BoD approval, as has been done on numerous occasions, is specifically provided for in the rules and continues to occur as a matter of course.
Animal abuse and neglect! Let me say it louder…animal abuse and neglect! Are you really hearing this. Please stop and think what is going on and what is in the rules.
Rob B. quoted an email response he received from NAFA stating there is nothing they can do about it. Why in the world would they not want to follow their own rules?
v/r,
Linda
To flyballgossipmonger, regarding U-FLI or NAFA, I believe my research indicated the person participated in only 1 U-FLI tournament; but, I could be wrong. I believe both organizations should do something.
Do we really want a small group of people (or one person) deciding the fate of a participant without falling back on any rules or guidelines currently in place? Just because it was done in the past doesn’t make it right.
Again, I do not support what was done to this dog. There was no excuse to leave a dog unattended for 2 days. None at all. We leave one of our dogs at home who can’t play flyball and she’s alone for 2-3 days at a time. Difference being that we have a pet sitter come check on her.
My point is that this is how governments gain too much control and people lose their rights. A case like this is a no-brainer. Should NAFA do something even though there is no rule against it? Most people would agree they should. And then you set the precedent. Then that same group of people can make another decision about someone’s future that may not be so clear cut. This is a much bigger issue than banning/suspending one person for actions most agree would support it.
Just remember, everyone agreed with Hitler and his crew at first too. That didn’t turn out so well and it was because there weren’t enough checks and balances in place to keep a small group of people from running amok.
I feel a lot like Kay, among others commenting here, is assuming everyone involved in this discussion is from the same area, and did, in fact, have a chance to talk to this person at the recent tournament. Now, personally, I will not be flying across the country to confront this person. However, as part of the flyball community and a reader of this blog, I feel that I have the right to leave a comment as to what I believe should happen in response to this incident, given the facts as I currently see them.
Linda, I think all of us will agree that animal abuse and neglect are horrible. Some people are arguing the fact of this happening or not. Thats not me. I am saying that, without a rule in the book about it, I don’t believe NAFA or U-Fli should take any action. And, in fact, I don’t feel that there should be a rule in the books about this.
I fully believe that individual clubs should be in charge of self-policing those people they choose to have run with them, either on their Regular or Open teams. I think the majority of the teams that compete would take action about animal abuse or neglect.
However, I am not about to submit myself for a background check by NAFA next time I go to register a dog for a CRN or go to a tournament. And, without running full background checks on every individual competing, there is no way to make a fair rule about this.
Crystal & Rob B. (or anyone else reading this),
Have you researched the rules and truly found nothing to address this?
How do you interpret the following excerpts copied below from the Corporate Policies & Procedures, Chapter 5, Section 5.1 Code of Ethics:
“Participants shall……never conduct themselves in a manner that would bring discredit to Flyball.”
“…shall be carried out by such methods that keep in the best interest of the dog and Flyball.”
“Abuse…of a dog is not in the best interest of Flyball.”
“Misconduct shall include…inhumane treatment of a dog…or any other behavior..that would leave a spectator or exhibitor with an
unfavorable opinion of Flyball.”
Some may argue these statements only apply during a tournament or in the ring; however, there is no such statement in the Rules or Corp. Policies that specifically state that distinction.
The argument could also be made that it applies in or out of the ring, during or not during a tournament, while a participant is playing in a tournament and the dog is not in the ring, on the tournament grounds by a flyballer who is not participating in the tournament, etc.
Linda
If a person’s been convicted of animal cruelty they should not be a person in good standing to play flyball, in my opinion.
I’m not saying charged, but an actual conviction should be disqualifying.
I found somethings misspoken in one of my earlier comments and I corrected it.
Also, I forgot to include the information about Executive Director’s authority. It is in the By Laws, Article VI, Section 4: “The Executive Director has the power to suspend or place on probation individuals or Clubs from all NAFA benefits and privileges for infraction of NAFA® Rules of Racing or Corporate Policies and Procedures…”
And, I sent an inquiry to U-FLI asking for confirmation of their Rules. I will let folks know what I receive back.
Leave a Comment