|
|
Post by jamshundred on Nov 7, 2017 19:39:23 GMT
I see that ADCA is trying to find two Directors to replace one more new vacancy and an old one that has been open since at least June.
Hans, did they have the election in your region yet? Is the winner somewhat pre-determined? Seems to me to be kind of a rigged set-up. They are having the election at the farm of the current Director? How is that fair to those who are running for the job? How is that different from the brouhaha that was generated over Sally Coad having a meeting at her farm? Jus askin'.
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Nov 7, 2017 23:50:01 GMT
Directors or anyone else can hold free meetings at their farms... How is that a problem?
S.C. was charging and pocketing an entry fee for the meeting. That's a major problem for a director to do that.
|
|
|
|
Post by lakeportfarms on Nov 8, 2017 10:04:26 GMT
The election hasn't been held as of yet. We received a ballot in the mail to return by mail or send with somebody as a proxy. I did have a few people call me to ask if I would run a while back, but I'm precluded because I'm a member of PDCA now and register with Legacy (who isn't recognized by ADCA but I guess that still counts). One region member messaged me a few days ago and asked if I was going, they wanted to know if I'd take their proxy because the return address was the directors' home address for the proxy. They were voting for the other person running and didn't think it was appropriate to have the vote go to the current director who was running.
Oh well, I've pretty much given up on the ADCA at this point. I never get anybody contacting me saying that they were referred to us by the ADCA, or saw our name on the ADCA membership list, or anything else. The most common complaint I hear is that it is seems awfully expensive to own them, with all of the testing that is required, plus membership dues, etc... The phrase "killing the goose that laid the golden egg" comes to mind when it comes to new owners once they find out all of the costs with registering with the ADCA. Most of the current ADCA members aren't interested in anything other than polled anyway. They should just call it the "American Polled Dexter Cattle Association" at this point in time. Actually they should just call it the "American Small Angus/Dexter Cattle Association", although I've seen some Dexters out there larger than many Lowline Angus, and they don't look much if any different. I firmly believe that it was the sneaking in of Lowline Angus bulls initially that spurred the bull genotype requirement (although it still has merit). But the female genotype requirement was, in my opinion, for sure driven by the ability to use cows to skirt the bull genotype requirement, and to provide "proof" that the Angus looking Dexter was a heritage animal and purebred.
Kirk, as far as the difference, the "meeting" Sally had was just a meeting, not an election. And the cost was free to those in the region, it was only for members outside the region where there was a cost. If I drove 10 hours to go visit because I'm not in the region, it would cost me to attend. I don't really see where that was a problem if I thought there was a lot that I could have learned by attending. Those of us who have large farms are pressed for time, and individual visits take a lot of time, with no assurance that somebody is going to purchase from you. I've had more than a few "users" visit over the years, chewing up hours and hours of my time, asking for lists of where I got the fencing materials, how did I set up my portable water system again?, etc....who only go to another farm and purchase the cheaper Dexter where they don't get the information that they get from me. One even had us hold individual young animals, without a deposit, claiming they have some money coming soon and in a few months they have had some setback that prevents them from buying. Then I see that they purchased the cheaper Dexter that popped up on Craigslist. I know who they are, many are in our region. I'm sure Sally has had more than her share, and this is a way for her to share her knowledge, yet those (outside her region) benefit greatly and it's worth the cost. Why not combine the two?
|
|
|
|
Post by teatpuller11 on Nov 8, 2017 16:41:09 GMT
wasn't there something like this made public about the Oregon director holding the meeting at a wide spot in the road way out in the country with nothing around, and no one showed up, and the ballots were sent to her and she got to open them--had to have the members' name included in the envelope so the ADCA knew it was a valid member, and it was her daughter that was running? Didn't they have to rehold the election with the stuff going to the secretary (still not professional, but at least a small improvement)? I guess they are slow learners, or more amateur than normal.
|
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Nov 12, 2017 1:55:00 GMT
ADCA is just a group of Dexter cattle breeders who slog through their daily farm chores and try to keep good pedigree records for our cattle.
Some members occasionally get stuck with the obligation to help run the organization. They aren't perfect and they aren't professionals... They're just hard-working farmers who volunteer to help the organization for a few years. Yes, they occasionally make mistakes. But that's why they have an excellent written set of rules and they help each other follow the rules.
If someone makes a mistake, somebody else points out the mistake..... The best of those who make a mistake say "oops, sorry" and they help correct the mistake.
It works the same way in all the best member-managed breed associations.
PS. I held my first membership in a breed association in 1971.
|
|
|
|
Post by teatpuller11 on Nov 12, 2017 16:21:43 GMT
Nah, Cascade. I think a lot of it is little people who want power, or figure they'll have the inside track on sales. That they are ignorant is just gravy. |
|
|
|
Post by lakeportfarms on Nov 15, 2017 13:54:37 GMT
ADCA is just a group of Dexter cattle breeders who slog through their daily farm chores and try to keep good pedigree records for our cattle. Some members occasionally get stuck with the obligation to help run the organization. They aren't perfect and they aren't professionals... They're just hard-working farmers who volunteer to help the organization for a few years. Yes, they occasionally make mistakes. But that's why they have an excellent written set of rules and they help each other follow the rules. If someone makes a mistake, somebody else points out the mistake..... The best of those who make a mistake say "oops, sorry" and they help correct the mistake. It works the same way in all the best member-managed breed associations. PS. I held my first membership in a breed association in 1971. Wait Kirk, so now you're saying that it was a "mistake" to hold the election/meeting at the farm of the current regional director, who was one of two candidates for another term as regional director? in your first post you "didn't see a problem" with it. I tend to agree with Teatpuller on this one; it's an inside track to referrals/sales. As expected, the current director was elected to another term. I think, out of the 12 years that we've owned registered Dexters, it's been the same director for all but a couple of these years , although we weren't ADCA members for 3 of the first years. |
|
|
|
Post by cascade on Nov 15, 2017 20:29:44 GMT
No, I'm not saying it was a mistake to hold an election meeting at a nominee's house... I can't find anything in the rules that says it's a mistake. The voting is by secret ballot. The location of the vote doesn't matter, because you can mail your ballot in. Usually only a tiny percentage of total voters even attend the meetings, the vast majority of folks mail votes in. The last few elections I attended were all decided by the mailed-in votes.
In general, I'm saying that directors and officers are just normal folks who sometimes make mistakes, and the best of them say "whoops" and they correct their mistake.
I don't see a mistake in this case.
|
|
|
|
Post by lakeportfarms on Nov 16, 2017 14:23:02 GMT
No, I'm not saying it was a mistake to hold an election meeting at a nominee's house... I can't find anything in the rules that says it's a mistake. The voting is by secret ballot. The location of the vote doesn't matter, because you can mail your ballot in. Usually only a tiny percentage of total voters even attend the meetings, the vast majority of folks mail votes in. The last few elections I attended were all decided by the mailed-in votes. In general, I'm saying that directors and officers are just normal folks who sometimes make mistakes, and the best of them say "whoops" and they correct their mistake. I don't see a mistake in this case. Secret ballot? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! So secret that the ballot required my name, ADCA membership number, and the return address was the home address of the current director. And on the very same form there was a check box for either the current director, running again, or the challenger. So the paper had my name, ADCA membership number, and my choice for director, and is floating around there somewhere. Secret ballot....hahahahaha. I didn't attend the meeting obviously, but I assume the ballots were opened and counted during the meeting, along with the votes of the attendees, and the results were then announced. So lets say there is an inquiry for Dexters to the ADCA through their website, and it originates within 25 miles of my farm. The inquiry is forwarded to the regional director, and do you really think that the person making the inquiry is going to be given my name as a Dexter breeder? I have over 100 Dexters....so I'd think that we'd at least get a mention. It hasn't happened yet, and do you really think that knowing that I voted for the other director it will ever happen? Tell me again what the ADCA does for me? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2017 19:30:46 GMT
"Tell me again what the ADCA does for me?" they are your banker. You just are not allowed to make withdraws  |
|
|
|
Post by teatpuller11 on Nov 17, 2017 16:39:03 GMT
I think it's disgusting how they are hoarding so much money and not using it for the benefit of the members. They could: 1. subsidize some of the testing costs, especially for chondro and pha, and guarantee privacy by having someone independent manage results. 2. pay for university grants for research into lines that have good milk proteins or tenderness genes. 3. support a phd student looking for dna reasons for the extremes of dwarfism 4. hire a professional recognized geneticist on an on-call basis for advice on technical issues. 5. hire someone with genuine bylaw experience to help write up bylaws that include proper at-arms-length procedures for elections, and supportable standards and methods for determining ancestry. and and and
|
|
|
|
Post by lakeportfarms on Nov 17, 2017 18:04:49 GMT
A very simple change that they could make would be to extend the number of years before late registration fees apply. This would encourage a more critical assessment of the quality of the Dexter based on physical characteristics and temperament, rather than test results like color, polled status, milk protein, etc... As it stands, once those tests have been run, there are sunk costs within the first year that the breeder feels that they have to recover by the sale of the Dexter due to those testing costs, rather than beefing it if the physical and temperament characteristics don't measure up.
However, I saw a blurb in the minutes of one of the recent meetings, that it had been proposed and was rejected.
|
|
|
|
Post by lhaggard on Nov 18, 2017 4:31:22 GMT
At it's Board Meeting on November 12th, PDCA extended the length of time for late fees to incur to 3 years for both heifers and bulls. And, after 3 years, if the animal is DNA'd and PV'd, late fees will be waived. The Board felt that the benefit to the members outweighed the loss of revenue to the Association. Now PDCA members can take their time evaluating their animals without incurring late fees.
|
|
|
|
Post by lakeportfarms on Nov 18, 2017 12:38:15 GMT
At it's Board Meeting on November 12th, PDCA extended the length of time for late fees to incur to 3 years for both heifers and bulls. And, after 3 years, if the animal is DNA'd and PV'd, late fees will be waived. The Board felt that the benefit to the members outweighed the loss of revenue to the Association. Now PDCA members can take their time evaluating their animals without incurring late fees. Wow! That is impressive. The PDCA has really been listening to Dexter owners, and requiring that the animal is genotyped and PV'd to both parents is a very sensible policy and very fair to request of the owner for the extended time to register without late fees. In the long run, I think the policy will lead to additional memberships and registrations with the PDCA, at the expense of the ADCA, who shot down the request despite their large fund balance. And in the long run, good for the Dexter breed too! Congratulations on making so much progress in just a few short months since the new leadership was elected! |
|
|
|
Post by teatpuller11 on Nov 18, 2017 16:08:00 GMT
PDCA, but for cows you are likely to have calves on the ground at 2, that means if you don't register until 3, there could be two calves out there with no papers. There's a good chance the cow could have been sold 'eligible to be registered', and suddenly the new owner is in a fix. Are you sure you don't want to reconsider? How about 18 moinths instead for cows and two years for bulls?
|
|
|
|
Post by bruff64 on Nov 18, 2017 23:46:16 GMT
Good enough for me. I just joined the PDCA. I want to give them a shot, I like what I see so far.
|
|
|
|
Post by lakeportfarms on Nov 19, 2017 3:41:36 GMT
PDCA, but for cows you are likely to have calves on the ground at 2, that means if you don't register until 3, there could be two calves out there with no papers. There's a good chance the cow could have been sold 'eligible to be registered', and suddenly the new owner is in a fix. Are you sure you don't want to reconsider? How about 18 moinths instead for cows and two years for bulls? One of the primary reasons for the later registration is to evaluate the udder and mothering ability of the heifer. If she does a good job and looks good, then she deserves to be registered prior to three years. That can be determined at a bit over 2 years of age. As far as the bull goes, three years gives the ability to evaluate the calves he produces as well. Two years is reasonable, but three years is consistent with the cows. I plan to combine it with the Legacy "Basic Registration" for $10 which is to immediately register with Legacy, and send in tail hairs. I'll keep a spare set of tail hairs myself, which we presently do anyway. So tail hairs in two locations, and the Legacy basic registration functions as a birth record. When the time comes to test, I'll either send in the spare hairs to UCDavis, or request that Legacy do so along with the payment for testing. That way anybody could request that the testing would be performed and registered, even if something would happen to both of us, and the herd dispersed without losing some nice Dexters from registration. |
|
|
|
Post by jamshundred on Nov 20, 2017 14:48:27 GMT
This morning I am working on a registration and went to look up some confirming information. This entry had nothing to do with what I was looking for but popped up due to similarity.
The ADCA registry is a MESS ! Due to their punitive pettiness after the split in many, many, ways. . . . they have made a jolly mess of just about everything. Because I do so much research and pedigree work I reference pedigrees daily and the ADCA registry is AWFUl. The truth is, people who had no knowledge or experience of registering made decisions that have made a gigantic mess of things. For future researchers. . .. . it is a treasure trove of mis-information and dual and triple entries that make NO sense.
Beyond the registration complaints. . . . . the biggest complaint that EVERY SINGLE MEMBER of ADCA should be voicing and attempting to rectify is their loss of rights. ADCA is quite simply an OLIGARCHY form of governance. The members had their voices and their rights removed when the new bylaws were implemented and replaced the old ones in Delaware. . .. ILLEGALLY . .. . . . as the members had NO say and no vote in the new filings which removed their rights.
EVERY DEXTER cattle owner in AMERICA in general, and ADCA members in particular needs to carefully consider that ADCA has . . . .in effect. . .. . . taken over their DEXTER business. ADCA, as the largest and most powerful registry sets rules and standards for the breed and for the owners and thus for their personal business interests. And with the current bylaws. . .. . .YOU. . . . . . .have . .. . .. .NO .. . . . say. None whatsoever.
EVERY owner in America needs to (1) drop their membership in ADCA until this situation is reversed. . . . .and (2) dilute the power and control of ADCA by registering PDCA and Legacy. ( With Legacy you get a contemporary registry as well as the ONLY ...........HISTORICAL . . .. . . . registry, database, and Dexter archive in the world, so for the small fee. . ..and for the future historical reference for your breeding and Dexter. . . .. you should add your animals to Legacy. Then, for political purposes you should break the control ADCA continues to try to consolidate by also registering PDCA.
Just understand this. . .. . . . . . . ADCA has power. .. ... . and ADCA wields the power. An example is the OHIO Dexter breeders group they are trying to "take over" now with both money enticement and coercion.
If YOU wish to have any voice in this breed, you need to stop giving ADCA the power over the breed. NOW ! ! !
|
|
