ILR Show Division
PERFORMANCE COMMITTEE Minutes
March 7, 2009
Meeting called to order at 8:05 EST
Members attending Deb Garvin, Jim Krowka, Tami Lash, Tom
Rothering, Patti Morgan (could stay only for first hour of
meeting)
Agenda Item 1
Approve minutes
of
2-15-09 meeting -
Minutes unanimously approved.
Agenda Item 2
ILR-SD-Structure from the GB
At a late moment Tami had received an email from Father Ryan,
forwarded to the Performance committee. This was a request for
our committee to give him a mission statement and
responsibilities. Our committee understood these were already
covered in the document titled: ILR-SD-Structure-A1 sent out to
us by ILR President Mark Smith. Tami sent a response to Father
Ryan as to that effect, copied to the PC. His response was that
this was a proto-type and committees could edit or change these
to better reflect both mission and responsibilities.
The committee agreed to prioritize this in email meeting
discussion.
Agenda Item 3
Reminder to sign all email replies to facilitate
organizing members comments and discussion. It was agreed that
if colors were used each member’s responses could be identified
better within the body of the email documents. Colors to be
used-Debi – Pink , Jim – Blue, Karen – Red
Patti - Black, Tami - Purple, Tom – Green
Agenda Item 4
Reply to mini llama group
Reply to Niki K
Performance concerns
– Maryan Baker
Committee agreed these letters and concerns had been either
resolved or answered to the best of the Performance committees’
ability.
Karen's suggestion sent through Tami, was to keep a file of dated documents and/or emails as
they come into our group from ILR-SD members with member
concerns. Each one of us needs to share these concerns as they
come in and Jim is going to keep these files. Even if we receive
a phone call, we can suggest to these folks to please email the
ILR-PC and even the GB. However we have all experienced in the
past when we have suggested the same, and not everyone is
willing to do this, for a variety of reasons. We will trust each
other to then bring this to our PC in the manner of an email and
if in the future we need to address this further with the
individual, we can contact them personally for verification. The
committee agreed this would be good policy.
Karen's suggestion
and committee agreed, when it comes to major changes to seek ILR
member input.
Karen's suggestion
and committee agreed, once we have our scoring set to our
approval, these documents will be sent to both the JC and the YC
before finalizing and sending into the GB.
Agenda Item 4
Showmanship concern from our group?
The performance committee has not been involved with the ILR-SD
Showmanship classes, so we will ask members to share that they
recommend the PC become involved, when we receive member
concerns.
Agenda Item 5
Patti time to comment on Texas Shows/Youth Group
Patti reflected on Youth Scholarships with the Texas groups and
how decisions we make can effect these awards. We have agreed as
a committee that when we make changes in the future, we will try
to make sure these will still accommodate these youth awards.
Specifically was the concern with Levels of Achievement not
allowing for final class placings. Since this has also been a
concern shared with me by a member, it would be good, and our
group agrees, when we come to them, that we still allow for the
way for show management to place out these classes.
Agenda Item 6
Jim timed pack removal concern.
This was based on a 60 sec for novice, 45 second for advanced
limit on pack removal as part of one task in the trail/pack
class at the recent show in Oregon. Jim’s concern was that this
could lead to sloppiness, the use of quick to get on and off yet
less trail suitable pack systems, and cause a resultant safety
issue and message to those with little knowledge of packing.
Patti was able to shed some light on this issue. Jim also noted
that pack removal should be unnecessary as a task in advanced
divisions and perhaps not in novice either. All agreed this was
a boring part of any trail course and noted it might be better
included in level of achievement trials. The committee agreed
we did not need to have any further discussion concerning this
at this time even though the safety concerns were not fully
satisfied.
Agenda Item 7
Debi's Suggestions – novice handler – letter on youth, youth
earning points on llama.
The committee consensus, with Karen as the only member
disagreeing in previous email discussion, was that youth could
show in advanced adult classes or show in youth classes but not
in both. The issue of multiple youth showing the same llama was
agreed was not a specific concern of this committee at this
time. We realized this conflicted with youth committee
concerns. It was agreed that in the event that Show Management
does allow youth to show the same animal in the open classes,
our PC requests at those shows that the Open, Advanced and
Novice classes be run first, before any of the Youth Classes.
Agenda Item 8
Budget
- Amend our budget to include the development of instruction
materials as they are developed. A beginning range of $200 was
agreed to add in.
Agenda Item 9
Can ILR post performance photos, course design and instruction
on ILR website.
The committee favors whatever use the ILR website can be as a
resource to highlight achievement and learning.
Agenda Item 10
Rename Novice or ask the youth to rename?
The committee did not consider renaming the novice class for
adult divisions a necessity or priority.
Agenda Item 11
Down pasterns in pack classes.
Discussion involved those llamas who might physically be
compromised by participating in classes such as trail/pack for
which a sound structure would be necessary. The committee
agreed to table the down in pasterns issue, as we all had
differing recollections concerning this issue and did not feel
it was the need for our PC at the present time to address this
issue.
Agenda Item 12
Adding pack weight verbiage
to the division description: Exhibitor discretion to add weight
to packs for animals 36 months and older. In that event the
weight should not exceed 40 lbs for full grown llamas, and 10
pounds for mini llamas and alpacas.
Agenda Item 13
Scoring and performance champions.
The committee agreed that the top three Performance classes will
be tabulated for the Performance Champions.
For instance if a show offers driving, obstacle driving, along
with freestyleOB, CompanionPR, and Trail/Pack all animals are
equally eligible for the Performance Champion, and the top 3
placements given per animal will be the classes used in
tabulation for the Performance Champion.
There had been concern about awarding novice performance
champions, due to the inference of the word “champion” as being
the best of the best. Jim noted it might be better to rename
the award “high point novice award”.
Discussion noted this issue may be regionally specific with some
Novice Performance classes being the largest entered and
supported. We also realize all performance animals, regardless
of novice or advanced, generally pay more to exhibit at a show
and in our 'give back more mode' we feel it is important to
award these animals. The group consensus favored allowing shows
to give Novice Performance Champions. This aligns with the ILR
UAP already in place.
The group also agreed that once a novice animal earns 35 points
per class, they be moved up to the advanced division.
Additionally, the overall Performance Champion award certificate
could not be earned with a combination of Novice Performance
Championships and Advanced Performance Championships. However,
when shows offer open classes only and do not divide novice and
advanced, sometimes these novice animals are so named the
overall Performance Champion at that show. Those Championships
should count.
The committee agreed for now to keep the performance scoring at
10 points, with each task beginning with 10 points and
deductions made from there.
The committee agreed to begin work here with the recommendations
shared with us by Jim under his definitions and guidelines. Tami
will also be sharing
some sheets created to help apprentices in this process.
NOTE:
Since this phone meeting the following recommendations and
concerns were sent to the GB for review and/or approval:
Performance Committee Proposals for the upcoming GB Meeting on
3-18-09:
1.
As requested the following is a mission statement and
list of responsibilities prepared by the Performance
Committee for GB approval:
Performance Committee
Mission Statement: To explore the spectrum of relationship that can be
achieved between human and llama by providing a fun, exciting
and challenging forum of trials and activities that highlight
and promote the versatility and intelligence of llamas and
alpacas, and which encourages and rewards participation,
camaraderie and achievement for humans and lama of all ages.
Responsibilities: To establish rules, guidelines and classes for
the performance division of ILR; develop an awards system;
provide educational materials to the exhibitors and judges and
coordinate with the youth, rules, and judges committee for
consistency.
2.
Budget – For the development of instruction materials as
they are needed for judges and members, a beginning range of
$200 is being requested by the performance committee to add in.
3.
Performance Rules – In the event that Show Management
does allow youth to show the same animal in the open classes,
the PC requests at those shows that the Open, Advanced and
Novice classes be run first, before any of the Youth Classes.
4.
Trail/Pack Tasks – We would like the additional verbiage
to be added:
"Exhibitor discretion to add weight to packs for animals 36
months and older. In that event the weight should not exceed 40
lbs for full grown llamas, and 10 pounds for mini llamas and
alpacas."
5.
The performance committee agreed to and would like to recommend
the following for the awarding of the Performance Champions:
Performance Champions can be offered at ILR shows for:
Open/Advanced
Novice
The top three Performance scores will be tabulated
for the Performance Champions.
For instance if a show offers pleasure driving, obstacle
driving, along with freestyle OB, Companion PR, and Trail/Pack
all animals are equally eligible for the Performance Champion,
and the top 3 placements (or scores) given per animal will be
the classes used in tabulation of Performance Champion.
6.
The past couple days have resulted in more showmanship
concerns from members:
1) Showmanship …… is about the handler and llama not just
another halter class, we already have them.
2) ………WHAT do they mean? I think it (showmanship) should be
treated as a special class because it is! It is not just
another halter class...........there are lots of things that
people should do in showmanship that they don't do. It shows an
additional level of expertise in showing an animal to it's best
advantage.
3) One member shared concern that the other show
association’s new showmanship rules are very similar to what the
ILR-HC have implemented. They are very upset with that standard
and do not feel this is right in how a showmanship class should
be run.
If we can implement policy in this area to be inclusive of more
options, future response to these concerns can be addressed to
our whole committee. Since Showmanship is covered in other
Livestock Associations under Performance and due to a varying
degree of concerns it seems appropriate for ILR-SD shows to have
the flexibility to be able to offer one of two types of point
earning Showmanship options:
Showmanship as it currently is defined under the ILR-SD-HC
or
Showmanship at Halter: Where the ability of the handler is
judged in respect to their relationship with their animal.
Giving judges the freedom to run this class like a Showmanship
class, differing from halter classes, with options of pattern
work and a change of pace.
Next Meeting Date
Thursday, April 9 @
8:00 p.m. EST.
Meeting adjourned
10:15pm ET
Respectfully submitted for approval,
Jim Krowka
Secretary
ILR Show Division Performance Committee