Thank you Rebecca -- this was very helpful.

I do understand the stringent contract and rules an individual is obligated to 
when they choose to adopt, and it sounds even more stringent for retired 
greys, but ultimately isn't that a contract between an individual and adoption 
group? If the group thinks a person is using their adopted dog inappropriately, 
why would they go after the SCA and not the individual?

Also, isn't this a somewhat limited problem to deal with? If it came up once 
and was dealt with, why would a society-level position need to be created? 
Also, how many kingdom groups are made up solely of retired racing 
greyhounds? From our point of view, I believe less than 5% of dogs 
participating in our kingdom's coursing activities are retired racing 
greyhounds, so very few of us would be obligated to follow any NGA or 
adoption group rules out here.

Why do the greyhound adoption groups not let you course an adopted 
greyhound? And, if that is the case, why are adopted greyhounds being 
coursed in the SCA?

As far as a state gambling commission inquiry goes, I think it makes more 
sense for the BoD to handle it with an appropriate legal team, rather than a 
Houndmaster/mistress. I suspect a charge of illegal gambling would be pretty 
serious and potentially detrimental to the society.

Christiaen


--- In [email protected], <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Christiaen, don't worry about making yourself unpopular.  These are good 
questions.  Let me see if I can answer them.
> 
> You asked "First: how do the greyhound adoption groups, the AKC and the 
NGA have any 
> jurisdiction of what we do with our private pets in a private club?"  They 
don't, however, some adoption groups require those who adopt to sign a 
waiver stating they will NEVER course their hounds.  If they do, the hounds 
can be removed from their care.  In addition, the NGA is very concerned that 
no one else course the dogs for gambling purposes.  We don't, but we do 
course the dogs.  Someone may "perceive" that someone is gambling.  I have 
been asked by gentles if wagering occurs.  Which it does not.  This is also 
why Coursing at Gulf Wars is NOT a War Point.   There are no winners or 
losers during coursing.  Plus the AKC has their own coursing groups.  To get, 
what I believe is called, field points, coursing occurs.  There might be the 
perception that this is what is occuring with our animals.  We are simply 
covering our tails.   The Society-level hound position is to work as a liason 
between them.  Believe me, she has already worked as a liason between 
some of these groups and that is why the local Kingdom Houndspeople have 
not had to deal with them up to this point.  
> 
> You asked "Second: if a Kingdom choses to have a position titled 
Houndmaster or 
> Mistress, how would that affect whether I (or anyone) could speak with the 
> above groups? If there were a serious problem, wouldn't that be a legal/
> seneschal/BoD sort of area anyway?"  This is now why we must have 
WRITTEN authority from the Crown.  It gives us standing to deal with any 
problems.  Most Seneschal's have no idea about the hounds.  It would have to 
go to the BOD, from what I understand - if there is a legal issue.  Having the 
society position, allows some of the footwork to be done before the BOD gets 
involved and hopefully smoothed out.  
> 
> You asked "Finally, what interest would a state gambling commission have 
in us and our 
> coursing activities if no money is being bet? I'm pretty sure in California 
> it is 
> illegal to bet money on anything, period. If that were happening in our 
group, 
> again, wouldn't this be a legal/seneschal/BoD issue?"  Believe me, state 
gambling commission's sniff out any area they think gambling might be 
occuring, even when it is not.  However, I am aware of at least one time that 
some spectators, who were not associated with us at all, were making some 
side bets.  They were quietly spoken to.  Once again the Society position is as 
a liason.  And once again, I know she has had to deal with this issue.
> 
> You asked, "And -- just because I am curious, I'll play devil's advocate: our 
kingdom allows 
> a type of "betting" -- I think they use little trinkets and beads (not money) 
> and 
> bet on period card games. This breaks no CA laws. If that group were to do 
a 
> similar activity at a coursing event: ie: bet little trinkets on the best 
> crash or 
> most valiant courser, etc., what sort of laws/issues would be faced?"  I do 
know that we have given out FAKE fur skins and or plaques to the best 
courser in the past.  This was a purely unofficial opinion.  No times were 
taken.  As long as it is not money, I don't think there is a problem.
> 
> BTW, Mistress Elizabeth was not the first Society Houndsmistress.  Master 
Gordon was before her.
> 
> YIS, THL Rebecca with the Greyhound
> 
> 
> If you want to hear the patter of little feet, I'll put shoes on my dogs





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
In low income neighborhoods, 84% do not own computers.
At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital Divide!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/S.QlOD/3MnJAA/Zx0JAA/PJ_qlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SCA_Coursing/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to