ILR Show Division

PERFORMANCE COMMITTEE Minutes
January 31, 2009
 

Meeting called to order at 8:05 EST

Members attending Karen Baum , Deb Garvin, Jim Krowka, Tami Lash, Brian Patterson, Tom Rothering

AGENDA ITEM 1 – Budget Worksheet – PC:

Committee members seemed unclear as to what specific financial responsibilities should be attached to the performance committee or even other committees other than the cost of conference calls. It was suggested that the show division costs and income primarily involve fees paid to the Show Division and to show management and that costs to operate involve office and clerical expenses. Even certificates for achievement in performance realistically have nothing to do with the cost of operating a performance committee or a performance budget. This would fall under office operating expenses to be offset by membership costs and the cost to participate in shows.

It was also suggested that the finance committee be questioned about what specifically they want from committees or mean by expenses for the committees, and also what anticipated income will be for the SD from individual shows based on participation levels. The ILR-SD-PC did send in their PC Budget as requested with some questions pertaining to the above.

AGENDA ITEM 2 – Finalize the minutes from 1-25-09 meeting: 

Discussion involved Jim's request to re-visit 10 task requirement for all courses and the refusal obstacle situation based on conversations and concerns by a judge and experienced show person who felt 10 obstacles [per class] and unlimited refusals would unduly compromise the length of some of the larger shows with many entries per class . After discussion the motion was made and seconded to keep the 3 refusal rule for Open, Novice and Advanced courses but to allow all youth to finish the course and be judged regardless of refusals. Youth and novice courses would have 8 tasks;  Open and Advanced would have 10 tasks.  Motion approved unanimously.

Consensus favored leaving it up to the discretion of show management and/or judges to allow competitors to continue and finish the course without being judged if the refusal limit is reached and if course design allows.

AGENDA ITEM 3 – CompanionPR Tasks and PerformanceRules:

As per Tom's suggestions discussion began on names such as:

Instead of courses call them Challenges.  

Instead of obstacles call them Tasks.

Discussion moved through each of the performance trials, Trail, Freestyle and Companion. Many different tasks were reviewed and discussed. Jim noted that in our lists it would be a good idea to note those that were primarily for advanced VS those that could be modified in difficulty level to accommodate novice and advanced courses.   

It was agreed that these lists of obstacles would be kept updated by Tom (Freestyle), Brian (Trail) and Debi (Companion) and that the rest of the group would submit ideas over the next week to 2 weeks hoping to get some degree of completion to this. Consensus favored keeping these lists flexible and open ended to accommodate new ideas as they emerge as well as suggestions and approval from other committees.  

Committee consensus favored lists of recommended tasks for each trial (course) with no mandatory tasks (obstacles). Show management would have the discretion which ones to use.

Committee consensus favored adding a rule that not more than two divisions could offer the same type of task. For example, a ramp task could not be offered in all three divisions Freestyle, Companion/PR and Pack/Trail.

Meeting time involved considerable discussion of specific tasks within each division.  

AGENDA ITEM 4 – Karen's idea – offer an optional class(es) for the public.

(Guidelines: The intent to expose the Public to the joys of working with llamas/alpacas. Animals must be previously entered in the show. Scores will reflect animal/new handler interaction and negotiation of task.)

Discussion and consensus favored recommending this to show management to offer as an optional class. It was discussed that we recommend shows to give awards to all participants in these classes. This activity falls under the category of marketing and publicity and more directly involves local show management. Guidelines for these could be established by this committee.

Committee consensus agreed on sharing suggested rules w/Youth Committee, Rules Committee, and in some cases Judge's Committee, before finalizing, and those committees relating to us when their discussion topics revolve around Performance.

AGENDA ITEM 5 – Other ILR member suggestions:

To suggest that shows to offer a small discount for people entering all three performance classes, Obstacle/PR/Pack.

Offer a Novice handler class to try and get new people involved – maybe even Youth & Open.

Committee consensus agreed these would be good ideas but tabled the discussion of guidelines for these until the next meeting.

Tabled topics:

Pack class requirements

Performance Course Guides and Gauges

Performance Scoring

Next Meeting date February 15 2009, 8pm ET

Meeting adjourned at 10 PM ET.

Respectfully submitted for approval,

Jim Krowka  
Secretary
ILR Show Division Performance Committee