Date   
Design Contests!

Kim Davis
 

Both have closed for entries as of last night, July 15th.

Thank you for the entries we've received and we look forward to selecting this year's Junior Pin and CanAm Event T-shirt designs!

Thank you.
Kim Davis
NAFA Marketing

CanAm Classic 2019 Registration is open!

Emma Mak
 

If you are paying in USD please consider choosing the ACH option. This method does not use PayPal and ensures your payment is credited to YOUR entry without fail. 

 
When you choose ACH as a payment method you will receive an emailed invoice from NAFA with a link to pay electronically from your checking account. This is an automated process powered by Quickbooks which allows your secure payment to be applied to your entry immediately and automatically. 
Invoicing you for your entry fees is significantly faster, easier and less stressful for Karen.
 
Consider sponsoring a division for as little as $25 this year. More information can be found here NAFA CanAm Classic - Division Sponsors

Get your entries in for this year's CanAm T-Shirt Design Contest!

Kim Davis
 

The competition is still open, so send in your designs to marketing@....

Closing for entries is Midnight, July 15th.

 

Visit http://www.nafacanam.com/logocontest.html for details!

 

Thank you and good luck!

 

Junior Handlers, don't forget! The deadline to turn in your pin design is Monday, July 15th!

Kim Davis
 

The competition is still open! Send in your design to  marketing@...

Designs must include "2020 NAFA Junior Participant". The overall pin size will be 1" - 1.5" wide/tall.

The competition closes at Midnight, July 15th, 2019!

Visit http://www.flyball.org/jrpincontest.html for additional details and previous pins.


Thank you,

NAFA

 

Plaque spelling for Regions 12-21

Annie Taylor
 

Good Morning- 

I needed one member of the following teams to contact me to confirm spelling of dogs and handler's names.
Thank you!

Annie

Region 12:


Region 13:

Region 14:

Region 15:


Region 16:

Region 18:

Region 19:



Region 20:



Region 21:






Thank you!

Andrea L. "Annie" Taylor
North American Flyball Association, Inc. (R) Awards and Scoring
Fuller's Mesquite Moxie "Moxie Princess" BC Onyx, TFWC
Tattle   Evil~Rotten  BS FM, TFP II
Stormfront's Advanced Warning "Siren"  FDCH-S, TFE I
Stormfront's Boy with a Golden Ticket "Charlie"  Crazy rescue puppy 
And my Angels Thoroughly enjoying life at the bridge
Stormfront's Too Cool For You ! "Ice"  aka - Piggy FDCH-S, TF-III 11/27/09~1/13/12
OT's Unbridled Twitch  "Twitterpate" FM, TFFC  5/24/08~ 5/29/13
Lacey Jane BC FG40K, TFPI (Best Black, White, Brown Dog Ever!)     8/4/2000~ 6/3/2013
Ruckus Border/Border FG60K, TFFC-I   7/18/2001~1/17/2018

Plaque spelling neededfor Regions 1-11

Annie Taylor
 

Good Morning- 

I needed one member of the following teams to contact me to confirm spelling of dogs and handler's names.
Thank you!

Annie

Region 1:

Fur in a Blur (681) 

Region 2:

Back Draft (603)  Double Impact (247)  Instant Replay (155)  Just Practicing (1010)  K-9 Thunder (55)
Some Ruff Competition (46)  The Ball Snatchers (816)

Region 3:
Animal Inn (2) 
E-Z-Goin' (822) 
Happy Hurdlers (30) 
High Velocity (574) 
Power UN-leashed (1068) 

Region 4:
BC Boomerangs (142) 
Canine Dirt Diggers (85) 
Harmony Flyball (975) 
Mostly Harmless (937)
Harmony Flyball (975)

Region 5:
Canines in Action (375) 
K-9 Kommotion (89) 
Lone Star Ruffnecks (406) 
Run Dogs Run (1044)
Texas Twisters (642)

Region 7:

Animal House (891) 
Cascade Comets (215)
Jet City Jumpers (219) 
Run Free (801)
The Flying Squad (575) 
Unorthodogs (761)

Region 8:




Region 9:



 
Region 10:


Region 11:




Thank you!

Andrea L. "Annie" Taylor
North American Flyball Association, Inc. (R) Awards and Scoring
Fuller's Mesquite Moxie "Moxie Princess" BC Onyx, TFWC
Tattle   Evil~Rotten  BS FM, TFP II
Stormfront's Advanced Warning "Siren"  FDCH-S, TFE I
Stormfront's Boy with a Golden Ticket "Charlie"  Crazy rescue puppy 
And my Angels Thoroughly enjoying life at the bridge
Stormfront's Too Cool For You ! "Ice"  aka - Piggy FDCH-S, TF-III 11/27/09~1/13/12
OT's Unbridled Twitch  "Twitterpate" FM, TFFC  5/24/08~ 5/29/13
Lacey Jane BC FG40K, TFPI (Best Black, White, Brown Dog Ever!)     8/4/2000~ 6/3/2013
Ruckus Border/Border FG60K, TFFC-I   7/18/2001~1/17/2018

World Cup of Flyball 2020! Message from Neil Flood

Emma Mak
 

World Cup of Flyball 2020!

The FCI has recently announced that the 2nd World Cup of Flyball is set to take place in Lommel, Belgium on May 23rd and 24th, 2020. As a proud supporter of the FCI and the Flyball World Cup, NAFA is opening up applications for teams to represent Canada and the United States at this event. The FCI has granted NAFA a total of 8 teams to send, 4 from Canada, and 4 from the US, in addition to a spot for Fur Fun which gets an automatic invite as defending champion.

NAFA would love to have a larger representation at next year’s World Cup of Flyball. If your club would like to attend, please go to this link:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeMkmCvPHc5ZsBNacYu5MKA985giQaxTe2H15UupWcdufsCuQ/viewform?vc=0&c=0&w=1&fbclid=IwAR0rq_C7x1oAYq51wKJwt_qCQG7izu96ra7QUk5jZAzUsfk3PhzkN0liFws

Applications are open to any and all clubs in good standing with NAFA. In order to provide teams that wish to attend the World Cup as much time as possible to plan, applications are due August 15th, 2019. Based on their resumes, a selection committee will evaluate applicants and select up to 4 from each country with final selections of clubs provided by September 1st, 2019.

If you have general questions please email: nflood51@...
Clubs will be responsible for their own travel and accommodation costs. NAFA is looking to support clubs with uniform and entry fee assistance. If you have questions about planning considerations and opinions, don’t hesitate to reach out and I can coordinate questions with Breanne Long of Fur Fun, who was heavily involved in their planning in 2018. I can post common Q & A online as well.

Thanks,

Neil Flood

Graphic Designers! Get your entries in for this year's CanAm T-Shirt Design Contest!

Kim Davis
 

Here's your chance to design the artwork for this year’s CanAm event t-shirts!

Competition is open, so send in your designs to marketing@....

Closing for entries is July 15th.

 

Visit http://www.nafacanam.com/logocontest.html for details!

 

Thank you and good luck!

 

Junior Participant Pin Design contest is open until July 15th!

Kim Davis
 

This design contest is open to all junior competitors, ages 5-17 years of age!

 

The competition is open now! So send your entries* to marketing@...

 

Designs must include "2020 NAFA Junior Participant". The overall pin size will be 1" - 1.5" wide/tall.

 

The competition closes at Midnight, July 15th, 2019!

 

Visit http://www.flyball.org/jrpincontest.html for additional details and previous pins.

 

Thank you!

North American Flyball Association

 

*NAFA reserves the right to alter any designs submitted.

Minutes from the April and May teleconferences have been posted.

Kim Davis
 

On April 22, 2019,  April 29, 2019 and May 6, 2019 the NAFA Board of Directors held a series of teleconferences to discuss the implementation of mandatory withers measuring.  The transcripts from those teleconferences can be found here

 

http://www.flyball.org/news_board.shtml

 

Thank you.


Virus-free. www.avast.com

Scooter Rental for the CanAm Flyball Classic!

Kim Davis
 

Enjoy the CanAm Flyball Classic in comfort and reserve your scooter today and have it waiting for you!

 

Delivery on Thursday, Oct. 10th in the AM, and pickup late on Sunday, Oct. 13th.

 

All for only $150, all sizes.

 

Any questions, call 317-855-3158, 765-610-4375.

 

Visit http://lifestylescootersinc.com/canam-flyball-classic.html to fill out a reservation form.

 

Thank you.


Q & A Regarding Changes to Measuring from Neil Flood

Emma Mak
 

I appreciate everyone’s patience while I put together this Q & A since the announcement on Wednesday. In addition to the Q & A, I’ve added some philosophies and perspectives to try and help shed some light on some of the why behind the decisions. I do not wish for the below to be entirely representative of every board members opinion. There are a number of cases where there simply was not unanimous agreement. I will do my best to call out what is my opinion, and what was more consensus based. If you disagree with my perspective or logic, and want direct feedback, my email is below. Additionally if you want direct opinions of specific board members, their contact information is available on our website, and I am sure they are happy to answer you. When possible I’ve tried to tag people who raised questions, so they see the replies. 
A little background before I dive into the withers vs ulna decision. As a board we discussed the measuring methodologies on the table, but we started with a discussion of the problems that existed. Two themes stood out:
1)  the optionality of measuring was a real problem
2)  forcing competitors to police themselves was unfair and problematic.
We looked at the dog sport landscape, and to the best of our knowledge, we are the only sport that didn’t require measuring. Most of us had all received the feedback regarding the unfairness of certain dogs heights, and the fact that people were disenfranchised with racing teams who never measured. It created an unfair racing environment. Compounding the problem was putting the onus on competitors and judges to have to call dogs to be measured should they not agree with the height. It puts an unnecessary wedge between competitors. Before deciding on a measuring method, the board members agreed that measuring could not be optional. They also agreed that competitors would no longer be able to “challenge” another team’s height dog measurement(s). 
 
We then began to dig in to a measuring methodology. I don’t think there is anyone on the Board of Directors that will make the argument that measuring a dog at the withers, with a proper stance, is the easiest measuring method. I was personally quite impressed with the FCI ulna measuring device. While all ulna measuring devices still have a level of subjectivity involved, it has few variables involved in doing the measuring. With that in mind, there was concern if measuring the ulna was philosophically the correct way to determine a dogs jumping height. With that in mind, we decided to look and see if the data between ulna length and withers height was close enough to choose the simpler measuring method. 
 
We were very lucky, and appreciative, to gather a large data set at CanAm that allowed us to compare the two. What we learned from the data made things incredibly difficult. If the data came back and showed a tight enough correlation, allowing us to keep the jump heights the same, or close,  while introducing a simpler method, we would have switched. We didn’t have a set percentage in mind we needed to meet, and I feel like that “magic” number varied amongst board members. What the data revealed was that we could do no better than keep 45% the same with some very concerning percentages of dogs going both up and down more than an inch. Changing or tweaking the formula became an exercise in determining comfort level in how many went up an inch or two, and how many went down. Personally, that was disappointing, but I didn’t want to change to an easier method if it wasn’t the right thing to do. It just didn’t sit right that two dogs of the same withers height could jump 2” different heights. A majority of board members also did not wish to change, but it was not unanimous. The decision was made to stay with measuring withers and begin the difficult tasks of the next steps.
 
 
Now, let’s dive into some Q & A, or at least themes of questions asked. 
 
Q) Why didn’t this go to a delegate vote (from @Joanne Fryia and @Jennifer Rohling)?
A) The answer to this one can be placed squarely on me, as some board members did raise this question. I have said, on more than one occasion to the board, that delegate votes shouldn’t be used to answer a question just because it’s hard. We were all elected to the board by the membership, and our job is to think and act in the best interest of the membership. That’s why we were elected. I feel delegate votes should be used in cases where we have incomplete understanding of things. In this case we all spent countless hours discussing and analyzing the information. 
In the most recent example, the Board put in trial rules for open, which at the time weren’t too popular. After a trial period, we needed to know what people thought (i.e. we had incomplete information) so we put it to a delegate vote. The membership chimed in and the rules were put in permanently, and also applied to the other classes. In the case of ulna vs withers, I challenged the board to make a decision that they feel is in the best interest of the organization. They have already poured countless amount of hours into looking at the problem, and I feel they were qualified to make that decision. I don’t feel I was elected to conduct surveys when we have the information to make a decision. I have no issue if you personally feel differently, but that is the rationale behind why that decision occurred.
 
Q) Why are there no names associated with the vote on withers vs ulna?
A) Actually this was just a clerical mistake. We have a new secretary this year, and they weren’t aware votes were supposed to be public. We will get it updated. In the meantime below are the votes. Additionally when the topic came to vote, in my role as ED I required a ¾ majority vote in order to make a change. Here are the votes (listed alphabetically by last name):
 For change to ulna
Kathy Haney
Lynda Mantler
Aaron Robbins
 Against change to ulna
Dirk Elber
Dana Hanson
John Hendriks
Leerie Jenkins
Emma Mak
Because the vote was not tied, the Chairman, Steve Corona, does not vote.
 
Q) Why was there no talk of breed at all when considering whether height changes for moving from withers to ulna measurement are acceptable?  Is it not SAFER to move to the ulna so that dogs such as, for example, Corgis would jump lower?
 
A) We can’t release the raw data with the breeds, as it’s of utmost importance that competitors that volunteered for the CanAm Measurement Study have their anonymity preserved.  But to give you an idea of how breed doesn’t really factor into the issue, please see the attached document which details the changes up and down for one of the options presented. For the CanAm study we focused on dogs that would most likely be height dogs in NAFA (17” and below at withers).  Short legged dogs such as corgis and miniature pinschers do not appear on the report at all (i.e. they didn’t change up or down from withers’ measurement).  To further illustrate that it’s not breeds with extremely short legs skewing the data, and that large discrepancies are very likely to be seen with large dogs too, you can see from U-Fli’s height report that there are multiple whippets and border collies that would set 9,10,11 inch jumps in U-Fli, based on ulna measurement. 
 
Q) Are we looking at alternative measuring methods than the wicket?
A) Yes, absolutely. We’ve decided to commit to measuring at the withers, we didn’t decide the wicket is the method we need to use, although to be practical,  it will have to do for the short term. We are looking at alternatives, and frankly we may have to develop something in-house. We are open to ideas. Some of you have already provided ideas and we’ve begun to look into them.  Please let any of us know if you have concepts or ideas to make the measuring process itself easier for the dog and handler
 
Q) Are we looking at different allowable methods for measuring (i.e. on a table)?
A) Absolutely. We already have a proposal to discuss regarding using a table, or something similar. We think it’s a great idea. If you have other ideas, again, please let us know.
 
Q)  “So one bad measure from a CMJ and that’s it. No second chance ?!?” (@Monique Cadman Cole)?
A) No. This is something we already discussed, but in our release this detail wasn’t called out. The board already agreed that the only person that could request a dog be re-measured, would be the owner. So if you get measured by a CMJ, you, and only you, will have the ability to go back for a follow up measurement. Final details are still being worked out, but the point is no one can ask you to re-measure but you. Anyone can have a bad day, and we want owners/handlers with some recourse if things don’t go well.  Keep in mind that the CMJs won’t just be measuring in the morning before the first day of racing.  Our intention is for them to be available a lot during a racing weekend to give opportunities for a calm environment and an opportunity for you to bring your dog for measuring when they are calm and ready.
 
Q) You said you didn’t choose the ulna measurement because it would impact too many dogs, but you are also exploring -6” below the withers. Can you please explain the logic? (Paraphrased from numerous people, including @Janice Ridley, @Jen Giacci)
A) Excellent question. I brought up this idea. I will preface this one though, and say it’s being discussed, currently has a lot of support on the board, but  has not been agreed on unanimously. If you have feedback, please email me. I will gather and share info with the board. Here is my logic on this topic. We have been operating in a model whereby dogs could have been racing a long time, and having never seen a wicket. In addition to making measuring mandatory starting October 2020, we also took steps to remove ambiguity from our stance, and what is acceptable and what is not - this started about 24 months back. My feeling was that there is a very real chance that some dogs that have never seen the wicket might currently be jumping lower than what they measure when the time comes. My intention is not to force people to run higher and leave them feeling disenfranchised. Therefore, I put it out to the board to consider lowering heights to -6” from the withers, as the ultimate goal is NOT for people to get measured then have to run higher. 
 
Q) Following up on that, what about lowering the minimum height to 6”, and what about the maximum?
A) These topics are out there but haven’t been thoroughly discussed. A concern is that all the host clubs would need to have their equipment redone. We certainly don’t wish to impose a financial burden on them. We need more information from clubs that host events, or provide equipment for events, on the actual impact of this change.
 
Q (or comments really) NAFA doesn’t seem to be listening to it’s members, or it doesn’t care what they think.
A) While there may not be agreement with some of things NAFA has done, suggesting they don’t listen or don’t care is incredibly far from the truth. There isn’t a single member on that board that doesn’t care. The only reason they are on the board is because they care. You don’t spend 1/3 to 1/2 your vacation time in a given year dedicated to an organization whose members you don’t care about. We also most certainly listen. Every year I’ve either been on the board, or functioned as ED, I’ve listened to people upset about the jump heights dogs were running. I’ve listen to people [rightfully] complain about the challenge process to height dogs. I’ve listened to people very concerned about ensuring height dogs are valued. I’ve also listened to people wanting a different measuring method. When we looked at a new measuring method, I very much cared that a minimum of 10% of the people’s dogs would jump higher, and I didn’t like that. I also cared that if we adjusted the formula to ensure they didn’t jump higher, there would be a significant portion of existing height dog owners that felt completely devalued. I have no problem discussing or disagreeing on what we do, and why we do it, which I think is healthy, but please be cautious when insinuating that the 10 people who are working incredibly hard for this organization don’t care and don’t listen. 
 
Q) Is this system devaluing tournament judges (from @Lyndsy Dvorak and others)?
A) Perhaps this is a difference in perspective, but I feel it’s the complete opposite. I have done flyball for over 20 years, and never has a standalone measurement from a tournament judge been unchallengeable beyond the event in which the measurement occurred. What we are putting forward will mean that if you get a measurement from a tournament judge, that measurement will be good for 6 months, and no one can “challenge” that measurement. That’s far more authority than has ever existed before. If a competitor doesn’t like it, they are free to remeasure their dog at subsequent events, but they are also free to run under that measurement for 6 months. 
If that dogs gets measured by a CMJ and it’s different, then we (NAFA) need to ensure our judges are aligned and enforcing the same stance. That’s a problem that exists now. In fact it exists in organizations that measure the ulna too. There are examples of two judges measuring the ulna for different jump heights. The solution is to circle back on education and training. 
 
The CMJ program is in no way meant to devalue tournament judges.  NAFA values ALL judges, as they are crucial to making our events run smoothly and to foster a fair environment for competitors.  The reason for changes to the measuring system are BOTH to address the concerns of competitors feeling some dogs have not been jumping the right heights AND to prove to competitors that have doubts, that NAFA judges are getting the measurements right.  It is impossible to see exact withers’ height, just by looking at a dog.  We want to put suspicions to rest, and also create as much consistency as possible for measuring technique.  The relationship between CMJs and tournament judges will not be an antagonistic one, but rather a mentoring one (when needed), and one of cooperation.  CMJs can also learn from tournament judges as, where the CMJ is not familiar with the region’s dogs, tournament judges can pass on that knowledge. We’re also looking to have CMJs work throughout a racing weekend with competitors to allow for a calm environment for dogs to be measured.  If there is a discrepancy between the measurements done by a tournament judge and a CMJ, the ultimate decision will be with the CMJ, but both will be encouraged to look at possible reasons for the discrepancy and work together to get the measurement right.  The CMJ program would not be something unique to NAFA.  Something like it is used for AKC and USDAA Agility.
 
 
Q) CMJ related question from @Kelly Robins-Walt?
1) What were the qualifications you went by in choosing your CMJ’s?
2) Where is NAFA getting the money to pay for the travel costs of the CMJ’s?
3) How is this “new” system simpler and easier on the dogs/competitors?
A) All good questions raised by Kelly.
 
1) When the original group of 4 judges were selected, the board, as a whole, huddled up and tried to find 4 measuring judges that 
-      We felt extremely confident in their ability to measure to the standard we had outlined based on direct observation
-      Were geographically dispersed enough to cover our map. We have one in each in the northwest, northeast, southwest and southeast.
-      Were confident in their ability to measure such that we could put them in any situation and they would not be intimidated. 
2) This item is extremely important. The solution will have to be fiscally responsible. The Board is flushing this out. I won’t speak for them too much, but it seems likely the pool of CMJs will be expanded. The concept is very similar to the VMO in AKC agility (in fact we discussed with a former AKC agility director). The program of CMJs will certainly go through some rework now that measuring will be required.
 
3) I will split hairs a little, but we are looking to make it as simple and easy as possible while looking to our goal of a level playing field. It certainly will not be “simpler” than no measuring. Having a dog measure every single event, would be an unacceptable burden. We are saying that a tournament judge’s measurement will be good for 6 months. In some, or many regions that can be the bulk or all of a racing season. That’s not too bad. We want the CMJ to be used for finality, with some guardrails around it to avoid perceived biases and conflicts of interest.
 
Q) Will dogs of a certain age be grandfathered in from required measuring? 
A) This was discussed. There was concern that creating exception groups could leave lingering problems. I am personally not opposed to re-opening the discussion, but that’s a personal opinion. I don’t know if that is shared with enough of the board to go forward. I can see both sides of this argument. If you have more insight feedback, please email me and I will share opinions and/or ideas with the board.
 
Q) Will extremely short dogs be waived away from measuring?
A) I personally hadn’t considered that, but I am happy to take that to the committee or judges. There is certainly a component of common sense, balanced with equality in measuring. Ultimately we are asking a judge to sign off that he certifies the measurement (or jump height) is accurate. I don’t know their feelings on that, so I would want to consult.
 
Q)  Won’t mandatory measuring create crazy long lines, especially at the first events after this becomes a requirement, say at CanAm 2020?
A) It only makes sense to have a transition period before the go live date for the mandatory measurement requirement to avoid long line ups.  Definitely there will at least be a set time period beforehand where you can measure by a tournament judge and have it valid as of October 1, 2020.   In fact, if you have a measurement done by a tournament judge and it’s in the database since the wording around stance has been tightened up, there’s a good possibility that will be adequate.
 
Some final thoughts to wrap up. First, if you have questions, please send them my way.  I will do my best to answer what I can, and while there may be items we may not align on philosophically, I will do what I can to answer the why behind opinions or perspectives.  While the opinions may differ, knowing how we reached a decision, I feel can lead to better understanding.
 
Lastly, there will be a big election in the fall, with 4 spots up (3 board, and the Executive Director position), and at a minimum 2 new people will be elected. If you feel passionately about the organization like all the board members do, and want to see changes, considering running. It’s not important that you agree with everyone, and it’s better to get different perspectives and ideas. 
 
I hope you found this helpful and I was able to provide a better understanding of what is going on. 
 
Sincerely, 
 
Neil Flood
Executive Director, North American Flyball Association

Announcement from Neil Flood Regarding Changes to Measuring Methodology

Emma Mak
 

NAFA has been considering various changes to the measuring methodology used to determine jump height. We appreciate your patience as we worked on this – obviously it is a very contentious issue and one that needed to be very carefully considered.

During CanAm 2018, withers and ulna measurements (using FCI measuring device) were collected from 207 volunteer dogs anonymously. Two NAFA competitors with PhDs, Curtis Smith and Katie Weihbrecht, volunteered their time to analyze the data. Dr. Smith and Dr. Weihbrecht found that the collected data, for both types of measurement, were representative samples. Through linear regression analysis, a linear relationship between the two types of measuring was found. The data was presented to the board, along with several options for a measuring system, with different starting ulna lengths, and interval sizes. The BOD and Executive Director wish to thank Dr. Smith and Dr. Weihbrecht for the excellent analysis and options provided to the board. This analysis is available here:
http://www.flyball.org/measuring/MeasuringDataCanAm2018.pdf

The NAFA Board considered the options provided on phone calls, and during the April board meeting. It was noted that, although a linear correlation was identified between ulna length and withers’ height, the dogs represented by points either side of that line were concerning. As shown in the sample, there are dogs currently jumping 7”,8”,9”,10” jumps in NAFA that have very similar ulna lengths. Because of this, each option provided a trade-off between minimizing the number of dogs that would need to jump a higher height against decreasing jump heights to the extent that smaller dogs are devalued. In conclusion, a majority of the board decided that moving to ulna measurement would impact too many dogs in an undesired manner. NAFA wants to encourage all breeds and sizes of dogs to participate in flyball, and so having dogs small in stature set the jump heights is something the board wishes to preserve in the sport. It’s an important part of the NAFA brand.

Since the decision at the board meeting, focus has shifted to looking at other means of improving the measuring system. Today we are announcing an overall plan of action as we finalize details before the September meeting. We’ve heard what competitors want, and the goals are to even the playing field for measuring, with a cost-effective plan, and an eye to making the measuring process as easy as possible for participants and height dogs. Rule changes reflecting these changes will be presented to the board at the September meeting where they will be voted on, and will be included in the October 1st, 2019 issue of the NAFA Rule Book.

NAFA is a strong proponent of fair racing, and in that vein, we will be implementing required measuring for the Regular and Multibreed classes beginning October 1, 2020 (FY 2021). NAFA’s Open Division will continue to offer handlers the opportunity to set jumps at the height of their choice, without measuring. NAFA has been unique in the dog sport world for not requiring measuring; NAFA’s policies of self-policing have been contentious for years and it’s time for something new.

Dogs running as height dogs will be required to be measured by a tournament judge (or have been measured within six months of the event date), and again periodically, until ultimately each height dog is measured by a Certified Measuring Judge (CMJ) with a set timeframe. We want to promote measuring consistency and the CMJ program provides that. Once a measurement is obtained from an assigned CMJ, it’s one and done, the measurement is good for the life of the dog, and cannot be challenged. To meet these requirements, we plan to expand and adapt the CMJ program. We are also considering: 
• Means of making the actual measuring easier, including considering devices other than the wicket for measuring withers 
• Expanding opportunities for people to practice measuring with a NAFA judge 
• Changing the criteria for Performance teams, to give the ability to switch to Performance, should a team’s height dog measure higher than what they have been accustomed to running. We believe it’s important for clubs to be able to adequately prepare for any changes mandatory measuring will bring

Finally, NAFA is lending a lot of discussion to lowering the jump heights to -6” from the withers (instead of -5”). We acknowledge that, with no requirement for measuring, many dogs may have never been under the wicket. Our intention is to make this as smooth a transition as possible. We would like people to continue to enjoy racing NAFA Flyball in a competitive and fair environment. While measuring will not be officially required until October 1st, 2020, if the Board elects to lower the measuring height to -6” from the withers, that change could occur as early as this October. As mentioned this has not been officially decided, and if you have opinions or thoughts on the matter I would encourage you to provide feedback to the Board which can be beneficial in their discussion on the matter.

I sincerely appreciate incredible amount of work the Board of Directors have put into this matter. It certainly is not a simple or easy issue to resolve, and I have observed first hand how much time and effort they have put into this issue.

Sincerely,

Neil Flood

CanAm Flyball Classic Judges Announcement from Neil Flood

Emma Mak
 

As we start to get ready for another fantastic CanAm Flyball Classic, this October 11th, 12th and 13th, I wanted to take the opportunity to announce our judges. Before I announce them, I want to thank all our past judges. We ask a lot of these folks, and they do a truly exceptional job in the ring. I know I speak for all the CanAm organizers, both past and present, that we are incredibly appreciative and proud of the job they have all done. In many ways, they can be the face of CanAm as competitors interact with one of our judges in each race. So a huge thank you to all of them!

This year, Jonathan Bescher has again agreed to help organize and lead the judges. It’s a large undertaking coordinating all the ring assignments, breaks, backup judges and championship changes. So Thank you Jon!!
Here are the judges Jon is tasked with leading:

Nancy Denier, OR (Region 7)
Josh Watson, ON (Region 2)
Cindy Henderson, MA (Region 13)
Randy Kenzie, BC (Region 7)
Carle Lee Detweiler, MD (Region 15)
Randy Garvin, MO (Region 21)
and our Championship Ring judge will be Chris Carr (Region 15)

Please help me in congratulating all of them! Very excited for another great event.

Sincerely,
Neil Flood
NAFA Executive Director

Executive Director Announcement Regarding Mat Time During NAFA Sanctioned Events

Emma Mak
 

 

Recently I have had a lot of requests for allowing mat time during NAFA sanctioned events. This is an ED exception that is approved on a case by case basis. The following are some guidelines for what is looked at when allowing this exception, so clubs can consider if it’s something they would like to offer at their tournaments:
1. This is only intended for smaller events for which natural breaks would occur anyway. I do not want to the schedule to be created with the intention of forcing the mat time into the schedule, creating a long day for everyone. I would like to prevent paying tournament competitors having to unnecessarily wait for racing because of mat time. However, if breaks are necessary anyway, in order to give teams/dogs proper rest, then allowing mat time isn’t a problem.
2. Final permission will only be given after schedule has been set, and with consultation with the RD.
3. As with mat time outside of the racing day, the host club is liable for any damage to the EJS during this time.
4. No more than two dogs may be run in succession while using EJS.
5. This opportunity must be made available to all dogs and handlers - i.e. it cannot be exclusively offered to certain teams or clubs. Everyone should get an opportunity to sign up and participate.
6. Dogs that participate may not be listed on a timesheet for the on-going event.
If your club would like to offer mat time during an upcoming event, please reach out to your RD, and they can work with me to get it approved.
Thanks,
Neil Flood

Junior Participant Pin Design contest is open!

Kim Davis
 

How would you like to design the next NAFA Junior Participant Pin?

 

This design contest is open to all junior competitors, ages 5-17 years of age!

 

The competition is open now! So send your entries* to marketing@...

 

Designs must include "2020 NAFA Junior Participant". The overall pin size will be 1" - 1.5" wide/tall.

 

The competition closes at Midnight, July 15th, 2019!

 

Visit http://www.flyball.org/jrpincontest.html for additional details and previous pins.

 

Thank you!

North American Flyball Association

 

*NAFA reserves the right to alter any designs submitted.

 


Virus-free. www.avast.com

CanAm T-Shirt Design Contest is open!

Kim Davis
 

Here's your chance to design the artwork for this year’s CanAm event t-shirts!

Competition is open, so send in your designs to marketing@....

Closing for entries is July 15th.

 

Visit http://www.nafacanam.com/logocontest.html for details!

 

Thank you and good luck!

 


Virus-free. www.avast.com

Plaque spelling confirmation still needed

Annie Taylor
 

I still need plaque spelling confirmation from the following teams.

Region 1:
Canine Express (10)
SWAT "Speed With AttiTude" (633)

Region 2:
Bee Town Stingers (1043) 
Border Patrol (21) 
On The Fly (318) 
Pretty Darn Quick (854) 
Rocket Relay (164)

Region 3:
Balls Out (400) 
BOTC (31) 
Happy Hurdlers (30)
Nose to Nose (759) 
Power UN-leashed (1068)

Region 4:

BC Boomerangs (142)
Ruff Position (459)

Region 6:

Blazin' K9's (804) 

Region 7:
Total Anarchy (418)

Region 8:

Diamonds in the Ruff (470)
Fli Ballers (941) 
High Octane Flyball (1021)

Region 9:
Go Dog Go (493) 
Heads or Tails (814) 
K-9 Kamikazes (357) 
New River Rapids (805)

Region 11:
Barkaholics (883)
Tampa Bay Barkaneers (741) 
Warped Speed (959)

Region 12:
Northern Power Paws (475) 
Synergetic Surge (685)

Region 13:

2 Fast Fur U (763) 
Fast Attack (309)

Region 14:
 

Music City Road Dogs (578)

Region 15:

Corporal Punishment (535)
Kinetic

Revolution Flyball (461)
Scallywags (751)
TGIF (768)

Region 16:
Hot Rod Hounds (536) 
INXS (557) 
Pacific Pups (904)
Silver Streaks (411) 


 



Andrea L. "Annie" Taylor
North American Flyball Association, Inc. (R) Awards and Scoring
Fuller's Mesquite Moxie "Moxie Princess" BC Onyx, TFWC
Tattle   Evil~Rotten  BS FM, TFP II
Stormfront's Advanced Warning "Siren"  FDCH-S, TFE I
Stormfront's Boy with a Golden Ticket "Charlie"  Crazy rescue puppy 
And my Angels Thoroughly enjoying life at the bridge
Stormfront's Too Cool For You ! "Ice"  aka - Piggy FDCH-S, TF-III 11/27/09~1/13/12
OT's Unbridled Twitch  "Twitterpate" FM, TFFC  5/24/08~ 5/29/13
Lacey Jane BC FG40K, TFPI (Best Black, White, Brown Dog Ever!)     8/4/2000~ 6/3/2013
Ruckus Border/Border FG60K, TFFC-I   7/18/2001~1/17/2018

Plaque spelling confirmation needed Regions 12-21

Annie Taylor
 

Good Morning-

I need one member of each team to contact me to confirm spelling of handler's and dog's names for this quarters plaques.

Thank you!
Annie


Region 12:
Northern Power Paws (475)  Synergetic Surge (685)

Region 13:
2 Fast Fur U (763) 
Flyball MAINEiacs (639)

Region 14:
Birmingham Bandits (335) 
Chattanooga Chomp (634) 
Dixie Flyers (906)
Music City Road Dogs (578) 
Smashville Speedsters (1066)

Region 15:
Corporal Punishment (535) 
Happily Evfur After (797) 
Obsessed K-9's (549)
Revolution Flyball (461)
Scallywags (751) 
TGIF (768) 


Region 16:
Hot Rod Hounds (536) 
INXS (557) 
Pacific Pups (904)
Pawdemonium (255) 
Silver Streaks (411)
SoCal Frequent Flyers (923) 

Region 18:
Alaska Dogs Gone Wild (695)

Region 19:
Agents of Chaos (842) 
Bad Company (1014) 
LAUNCH (765) 
RUFF (401)

Region 21:

Omaha Speedracers (299) 



Andrea L. "Annie" Taylor
North American Flyball Association, Inc. (R) Awards and Scoring
Fuller's Mesquite Moxie "Moxie Princess" BC Onyx, TFWC
Tattle   Evil~Rotten  BS FM, TFP II
Stormfront's Advanced Warning "Siren"  FDCH-S, TFE I
Stormfront's Boy with a Golden Ticket "Charlie"  Crazy rescue puppy 
And my Angels Thoroughly enjoying life at the bridge
Stormfront's Too Cool For You ! "Ice"  aka - Piggy FDCH-S, TF-III 11/27/09~1/13/12
OT's Unbridled Twitch  "Twitterpate" FM, TFFC  5/24/08~ 5/29/13
Lacey Jane BC FG40K, TFPI (Best Black, White, Brown Dog Ever!)     8/4/2000~ 6/3/2013
Ruckus Border/Border FG60K, TFFC-I   7/18/2001~1/17/2018

Plaque Spelling Confirmations needed for Region1-11

Annie Taylor
 

Good Morning-

I need one member of each team to contact me to confirm spelling of handler's and dog's names for this quarters plaques.

Thank you!
Annie


Region 1:
Canine Express (10)

Region 2:
Bee Town Stingers (1043) 
Border Patrol (21) 
On The Fly (318) 
Pretty Darn Quick (854) 
Rocket Relay (164)

Spring Loaded (490)


Region 3:
Animal Inn (2) 
Balls Out (400)
BOTC (31) 
Happy Hurdlers (30)
Makin' Trax (36) 
Nose to Nose (759) 
Power UN-leashed (1068)
Stack Attack (817) 
TCOTC High Spirits (47)


Region 4:

BC Boomerangs (142)
Ruff Position (459)

Region 5:
Alamo Racing Canines (343) 
Barkworthy (885)
K-9 Kommotion (89) 
Lone Star Ruffnecks (406)
Run Dogs Run (1044) 
RUSH! (1035)
Special  Fources (841) 
Superdog Flyball (783)
TimeShift Flyball Club (1048)

Region 6:
Blazin' K9's (804) 
Crazy Train (757)

Region 7:

Animal House (891) 
Cascade Comets (215)
Engage (1084) 
Fierce Flyers Flyball Club (932)
Ruffin' Tuff (1041) 
Run Free (801)
Stumptown Racers (903) 
Total Anarchy (418) 
Unorthodogs (761)

Region 8:

Breakaway Flyball (1011) 
Diamonds in the Ruff (470)
Ruff Riders (78)

Region 9:

Go Dog Go (493) 
Heads or Tails (814) 
K-9 Kamikazes (357) 
New River Rapids (805) 
Pawmetto Pack (480)


Region 11:
All Revd Up (901) 
Barkaholics (883)
Celtic Mayhem (1025) 
Tampa Bay Barkaneers (741) 
Warped Speed (959) 



 


Andrea L. "Annie" Taylor
North American Flyball Association, Inc. (R) Awards and Scoring
Fuller's Mesquite Moxie "Moxie Princess" BC Onyx, TFWC
Tattle   Evil~Rotten  BS FM, TFP II
Stormfront's Advanced Warning "Siren"  FDCH-S, TFE I
Stormfront's Boy with a Golden Ticket "Charlie"  Crazy rescue puppy 
And my Angels Thoroughly enjoying life at the bridge
Stormfront's Too Cool For You ! "Ice"  aka - Piggy FDCH-S, TF-III 11/27/09~1/13/12
OT's Unbridled Twitch  "Twitterpate" FM, TFFC  5/24/08~ 5/29/13
Lacey Jane BC FG40K, TFPI (Best Black, White, Brown Dog Ever!)     8/4/2000~ 6/3/2013
Ruckus Border/Border FG60K, TFFC-I   7/18/2001~1/17/2018