[Ninsanna]

Тема "Коллективных САС-выставок" и присуждения Чемпиона Филиппин на территории стран Европы волнует не только РКФ. Во время выставки "Европа-2012" в Бухаресте состоялось специальное заседание/обсуждение на Генеральной Ассамблее FCI.

Minutes of the General Assembly of the FCI European Section
on 8 October 2012 in Bucharest, Romania
“Collective CAC shows”
One of the topics of the annual report was the question of whether it was acceptable to have “collective CAC shows” for several countries in one place, i.e. that it is possible in one week to compete for the CAC of e.g. 8 countries without crossing any borders.
Mr Mravik, Slovakia, started this debate by expressing that it should only be possible to compete for the CAC of the country in which the show is held. If not, the value of the championship goes down.
Mr Wilberg, Norway, supported this point of view. Competing for 15 titles in 10 days does not help the dogs. Dog shows are for the dogs. Not for making money.
Mr Jakkel expressed that it is very important that we debate these things. When you are invited as a judge and you sit at some show dinner, people start asking questions. The board of the FCI cannot solve these matters alone. It is important to get the opinion of the national organisations.
Mr Skok, Croatia, stated that this discussion was started about 2 years ago by Croatia and that is now time to come back to true and honest cynology.
Mr Kuzelj, Bulgaria, defended the organisation of these “collective CAC shows”. He men-tioned that the FCI had decided to have in our “family” all countries. The countries are very different: Some are very small and have very little tradition for organising dog shows. Sev-eral of the new members of the “FCI family” cannot reach a high number of dogs and have not much money. For these organisations, organising several dog shows together would result in a better entry. In the case of the Black Sea Winner Show, it gives the national or-ganisations involved the possibility to invite the best international judges and this means that the small kennel clubs can survive. If we want to change this and thereby prevent the small kennel clubs from having successful shows, we should be careful.
Mr Mravik, Slovakia, did not agree and expressed that it did not make sense - and that it was possible to build up a dog show tradition without devaluing the national titles. Building up a country’s cynological traditions is not done by offering CACs and titles at a show held in an entirely different country.
Mr Onishchenko, Ukraine, stated that he could not see anything wrong with the Black Sea Winner Show. All shows have strong and weak sides. The Black Sea Winner Show has many nice dogs and it is not true that the dogs are of poor quality. The organisation of the show is excellent and the judges are of high quality. During a recession it is not possible to travel so often, and it is therefore popular to assemble the shows in one place. He ended his speech by stating that each country has its own right to decide how to obtain its champion title.

For the sake of good order, Mr Hindse pointed out that nobody has broken any rules by joining these “collective CAC shows”. The question is whether we should continue this way?
Mr Friedrich, Germany, stated that this item is for the FCI General Assembly worldwide. Not all have the same amount of information - and we do not know exactly what is going on.
This item should be debated as a structure discussion – and the FCI board should provide facts. Maybe it would then be possible to find a compromise that everybody can consent to.
Mrs Anttinen, Finland, pointed out that the dogs have the central role in this discussion. Is it in the dogs’ best interest to have this kind of shows? Is this what we want to be known for? Is it the image we want in the surrounding world?
Mr Litov, Bulgaria, made the discussion personal by remarking that this whole issue has been started by Mr Damir Skok, Croatia, when a dog show held in Montenegro had more entries than a dog show held in Croatia on the same day. He also expressed that it is the right of any kennel club to decide how to put their own national title in competition and that many other events, e.g. hunting trials, take place in the same way. It is a way to bring good dogs to countries without a long cynological tradition. He proposed to invite a supervisor from the FCI in order to demonstrate that the shows are run properly. Moreover, he was of the opinion that a discussion in the FCI was possible, but we should remember the competition from other organisations, e.g. the UCI.
Mr Skok, Croatia, replied that he was proud to be the one who had started this debate and that somebody had to do it.
Mr Jipping, Netherlands, supported Mr Friedrich’s proposal about making a structure discus-sion at the next FCI General Assembly.
Mr Hindse concluded this point by stating that it is necessary to take these kinds of discus-sions.