I read Eric's post opposing merger. I respect Eric and his time in this industry and his application to his program. I respect the fact Eric was instrumental in establishing many things we enjoy today such as the registry and breed association. BUT, it was clear in his post that he in fact left AOBA 10 years ago and has not been active nor involved nor looking at what AOBA and ARI have been doing since he left. This simply indicates he has been very focused on his business and farm as most of us are. I do not know about you but I neither have the time nor ability to get alpacas registered federally registered as livestock bringing many benefits to alpaca owners small or large. This is simply one area where your organizations are working on your behalf in ways we cannot. Monthly leadership meetings with committee heads, ARI, and affiliates has put working together and promoting all farms discerning how each can participate and help the individual farm have been occurring for a few years now. Seeing ARI get into marketing and promotion was interesting and well done however is a distraction from their key role. Merger will help refocus ARI on the registration of alpacas, strengthening registration by increasing markers, seeking methods to improve the EPD system so that it develops as an effective breeding tool, and improving the marketing efforts of AOBA through a new single organization. I look forward to being a single member of the alpaca industry with the ability to move ahead in one voice for all owner benefits. I thank Eric for sharing with us many of the obstacles that have been overcome to get alpacas where they are in the United States and now look forward to the next evolution with its challenges and solutions strengthening the alpaca industry in the United States.
---In AlpacaTalk@yahoogroups.com, <lfrank@...> wrote:
I received the following post with accurate information from a longtime
educator that should be considered before casting your vote on merger:
____________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________
WHY MERGING AOBA & ARI IS NOT A GOOD IDEA FOR MOST ALPACA OWNERS
My name is Eric Hoffman. I've been involved with camelids since 1977. A
number of concerned small breeders have contacted me to say that they feel
they have no voice in the proposed ARI/AOBA merger. I do not have a crystal
ball to tell the future, but I do know enough to be certain that merging ARI
to AOBA to create an entirely new entity will not strengthen the registry,
and share their concern that it may in fact destroy it. As one of the
founders of the alpaca industry in North America I'm saddened, but not
surprised to see the idea of merging ARI and AOBA once again being
championed, primarily by the kind of thinking and some of the same people
who tried it before.
The AOBA/ARI merger we are being asked to vote on has all the earmarks of
other "master strokes" (grandiose proposals for radical change within the
alpaca community) that have occurred in the past. None of them have turned
out as advertised. Past actions that come to mind include: in 2003 severing
the Alpaca Registry contract run by the well-functioning ILR in favor of
moving it to a business in Virginia that had no experience in running
registries. This disaster cast us all into a nightmare of compromised
records and registrations that took years to unravel. The result was
inaccurate certificates being issued, and lag times up to 20 months to
receive a certificate. It was also expensive to fix. At about the same time
(2002) uproar was created throughout the community by the filing of a
lawsuit to change the show rules that had been approved by a majority vote
of AOBA members. Fighting the suit paralyzed the AOBA BOD. The suit got
nowhere in court. In his conclusion, presiding District Judge Hiatt said:
"The court has reviewed the motion and finds it to be entirely without
merit. Nothing has been presented that would be a valid reason for
reconsideration." The judge also noted that there were "overheated
assertions." Most of the people who brought this suit are still active in
the alpaca community, and some are active in the merger issue.
Further back, in 1998, there was the much applauded registry closure
initiative launched by a small group of breeders. Their stated intent was to
end imports entirely. Many alpaca owners who voted for it were surprised to
learn after the initiative passed that a small importation grace period
existed. This window of opportunity allowed well-financed breeders to
stockpile animals and set up lucrative breeding programs in a captive
market, while the less well-heeled watched and wondered how nearly 3000
alpacas were being allowed into the country. This was almost the same
number of animals that had entered the country over the previous four-year
period under the ARI screening program. After all, the membership had just
voted to end the competition of imported animals. Closure also negated the
possibility of US breeders utilizing 98 % of the world's alpaca genetics,
which remain outside our boarders.
The fact that a carefully constructed but inaccurate registry history has
been emailed to merger voters is a telltale sign to me and other former
board members that the design for this merger of AOBA and ARI involves, not
only the BODs, but the same people who have designed "master strokes" in the
past. (If you are new to alpacas check your sources!) The latest is the
proposed ARI/AOBA merger. I hope the preceding abbreviated record
illustrates to you why I, and others who have been around awhile feel that
the chances of this merger benefiting ARI or saving AOBA are slim to none.
I'm the author of the Alpaca Registry ARI (which began March l989), the
founding two-term President of AOBA, former President of ARI 1998-1999 and
longtime (6 year) board member first with ARSC, which became ARI. I wrote
the ARI Screening Manual with Murray Fowler DVM, Brad Smith DVM & D.
Schieferstein creating an objective evaluation for conformation, phenotype
characteristics & fiber quality that has been used around the world, and is
still in use today. As a screener I've evaluated over 15,000 alpacas for
all the major alpaca registries in the world including ARI. I served for 2
years as the Co-chair of the ALSA/AOBA Show Committee at the onset of alpaca
shows in the US. I edited the Alpaca Registry Journal (1994-2001), a peer
reviewed scientific publication that was sent at no cost, to all owners of
registered alpacas. I'm the primary author of The Complete Alpaca Book,
co-author with Murray Fowler, DVM of The Alpaca Book and co-author with
Sherry Edensmith and Pat Long DVM of The Alpaca Evaluation: a guide for
owners and breeders, handbook & DVD. My camelid herd includes alpacas, two
stalwart pack llamas and guanacos. All of this is just to let you know that
I have been around a long time and have done my best to improve the
industry. For me this push for merger is, as Yogi Berra would say: "Déjà vu,
all over again."
I did not renew my membership in AOBA about ten years ago. I could no longer
see how the organization I'd helped create, helped me as an individual
alpaca breeder. There were still some good board members who conducted
themselves admirably in trying solving problems and improving things, but
the overall climate had changed. There was more instability and rancor.
Demonizing people with differing opinions became common place. Among those
dominating the Internet there was a marked intolerance towards contrary
viewpoints, which stifled a free exchange of ideas. Around 2005 I started to
see breeders quit the business because of the change in social climate and
lack of responsiveness to their concerns. After severing ties with AOBA I
continued to successfully sell alpacas, and continued to enjoy making
presentations to breeders around the world. My focus, for more than 24
years, remains on creating healthy alpacas with outstanding fiber.
ARI can help me achieve that goal by remaining an unassailable repository
for genetic information. The alpaca registry tracks lineages through DNA
technology, a constantly evolving science that, if properly applied, has the
potential to improve alpacas by identifying and eliminating genetic diseases
and developing a more desirable fiber. The registry has a fee system to
support its existence and the potential to expand its services providing it
does not become bogged down in activities unrelated to running a science
based registry. The registry has a fee system and should be able to pay its
way.
The Alpaca Research Foundation (ARF) does an excellent job maintaining its
independence, and operating professionally to fund important research grants
that serve all alpaca owners. It can pay its way.
ARI and AOBA have always had different functions. The Registry is about
applied science. AOBA is about marketing, shows, and education. Of the
three national organizations AOBA is having the hardest time covering its
costs.
ARI has used DNA markers to separate the alpaca and llama gene pools in the
US for 24 years. I think joining it with the marketing and show interests
of AOBA would compromise the integrity of ARI. I believe AOBA is looking at
ARI as a "cash cow" (cash alpaca?) to prop up its falling income.
Already I see areas of concern for the future integrity of ARI as a
repository for genetic information. For example there is some controversy
about the inclusion of EPDs into the registry. They look like science, but
the reality is this is a subjective evaluation because the owner collects
the fiber samples that are submitted, not a neutral third party as was done
with the fiber samples collected during the screening process.
ARI's acceptance of advertising for particular animals demonstrates a move
away from science into marketing and erodes the initial intent of the
registry to be a neutral repository for genetic information that is
transparent and accessible to all owners. If unchecked embracing glitz,
hype and questionable claims of superiority in front and center ads on the
ARI website will drive the same wedge between breeders that has existed in
the show arena. This is directly in opposition to the egalitarian design
and intent of the registry. What's next?
I believe AOBA's problems have been caused by a myriad of reasons involving
our overall economy, plus problems within the organization that have been
festering for years that involve dissatisfaction with shows and outreach.
Costly AOBA seminars and fees price these resources beyond the reach of many
breeders. Some regional organizations can now duplicate many of AOBA's
services at a comparable price. AOBA has had a 42% drop in membership
since 2008 according to BOD member Scott Miller [in a 11-2-13 posting].
Before discussing postings by Scott Miller and other AOBA merger proponents
I'd like to thank Scott for his polite and thorough answers to Julie
Skinner's questions, proving once again a civil exchange is the best way to
solve problems. Of course without asking questions, as Julie has done, we
couldn't have received answers.
It seems however there is a price to be paid for challenging the merger.
Julie has been notified that although she was nominated, and she filled out
the required paperwork, she was not accepted as a candidate, thus silencing
her opinions in the general debate and removing the possibility of her
becoming a part of the ARI board. I've served with Julie, she is a
knowledgeable person who has worked for the benefit of alpacas and their
owners. I'd like to know why she was not allowed to run and let the voters
decide whether her ideas are constructive. The issue is not what Julie
Skinner believes or does not believe, it is whether or not the democratic
process is allowed to take place in the alpaca community.
In answer to Julie Skinner's questions on 11-2-13, Scott offers the efforts
he and AOBA have put forth to explain why AOBA should be absorbed into ARI
which will give birth to an entirely new organization. Though Scott doesn't
directly say it we are being asked to believe that from this union the
emerging organization will be functional, efficient and address the needs of
all breeders. What guarantees are there that a new form of governance will
work well, or at all, especially considering the history recited above? My
experience of witnessing other "master strokes" and serving on BODs in
periods of comprehensive change is that things often develop a life of their
own and the desired outcome is not predictable. Part of what is being
proposed is ARI will absorb AOBA's debts and liabilities. What does this
mean? In reading other posts I see a desire to keep the traditional formula
alive: shows, education other activities. What seems to be missing, or not
clearly articulated is the new vision to fit today's reality. Is the merger
an attempt "save" what no longer works? For example, show ribbons don't pay
the hay bill for most forms of livestock, including today's alpacas.
Would it be better to involve those interested in saving AOBA in reforming
its programs rather than saddle ARI with them and make and entirely new
organizations whose bylaws are yet to be seen? Miller is convincing in
explaining that AOBA's BOD has worked hard. The sad part is the hard work
and spending hasn't remedied AOBA's downward trajectory. Kudos for the
dedication and hard work, but how would ARI or the proposed ARI/AOBA new
organization (whose by-laws are yet to be seen) change this trajectory?
And, are the risks to the Registry worth gamble that comes with a new
organization?
I'd like to visit the subject of show judges. In his response to Julie
Skinner Scott says: "AOBA has the best show system in the world
the best
judges in the world and best training program in the world." I hope Scott
is right. I know a lot of effort has gone into developing a judging system
in the US and I am proud to have contributed to it in the formative years. I
was an advocate for developing competitions in the different colors to both
broaden the gene pool's representation and show off the color diversity.
I've been involved with evaluating alpacas in various countries and formats
for 20 years. There are many variables. The most dedicated culture I've
worked with in terms of alpaca evaluation is Germany. Their dedication,
penchant for detail, willingness to study and require formal testing to
attain mastery is very impressive. I've watched judges work in Australia,
New Zealand, Canada, South America, Europe and the US. I believe worldwide
there are many good judges and some are from AOBA. To me "best" involves
more than knowledge and training. An area of concern about judges usually
isn't that they don't know the animal. The rubs are in the area of conflict
of interest and how it is defined and lack of consistency.
For the most part judges, around the world, come from the ranks of breeders.
I believe the activities of judges as broker/sellers, fixtures in seminars
on farms who compete regularly in shows, and judges who advertise and
promote a particular source herd name as superior then go about judging
animals from this herd against animals from other source herds are reasons
that can cause doubt in owners.
There are judges who do not use their status as a marketing tool. This is
the profile I like most. Though I believe in general judges try to do the
best they can, the fact remains there have been some problems in all judging
systems, usually to do with ethical issues and consistency. Participating
in an alpaca show can be fun, but at the end of the day awards are given
based on the subjective opinion of the judge. In my view more work is needed
in the area of conflict of interest and judges who perhaps instituting time
limits to the amount of time a person judges.
We all know shows have been a central focus for AOBA. The idea is if you get
a ribbon it will help you market your animals and have an advantage over
your fellow breeders. Judges become the gatekeepers in such a system of who
wins and who loses. However, in my experience, if a true assessment of an
animal's phenotypic characteristics, structure and fiber is the goal, a
veterinary soundness exam, phenotypic checklist and fiber testing with
recorded results will produce a more accurate record of value. In the all
important area of fiber quality I have read papers that have compared the
results of judges (in alpacas & other fiber producing species) compared to
OFDA approved and other scientific testing and testing is more accurate.
AOBA's road to prominence was paved by money from ARI: As an organization
AOBA was able to create a more public presence because about 60%
($1,879,800) of the $3,133,000 collected in screening fees for imported
animals in the 1990's ($500 per head x 6,266 screened alpacas from South
America, Australia and New Zealand). The $1,879,800 was for the most part
transferred to AOBA in the form of grants. When imports were banned these
funding sources disappeared. Sadly, AOBA's funding sources have been hit
hard times: membership has dropped precipitously, participation in shows and
attendance of seminars has fallen.
In the proposed merger, who gets the funds generated by the remaining income
streams? (ARI registration fees for example?) If there is not enough revenue
to cover expenses for ARI and AOBA, who will decide what will be jettisoned?
Will the registry's founding principles of equal representation and access
that contributed so greatly to high compliance by breeders be abandoned, as
promotional advertising becomes a part of the registry?
Even after the alpaca market began to falter people were still enticed into
buying animals at prices they could never duplicate. People buying on time
payment contracts found they were imitating what happened in the housing
market. They were under water. In the early years of the alpaca business
there were no time payments. It will take time and a great deal of energy
to create a new business model that is economically sound. We still have a
wonderful animal to work with.
The successful product-oriented farms I know of here and overseas are often
only minimally attached to any organizations. Their focus is getting their
products to market. The truth is, for an organization promoting alpacas to
be credible they will need to include what Australians call hobby-farmers
who own animals for enjoyment, not for necessary income. Perhaps AOBA needs
to provide more improved education and support in the areas small breeders
need to address everyday concerns. Information needs to be developed that
promotes sales of all kinds of alpacas and how to best manage all aspects of
a farm to achieve a profit. Another approach might be to shrink AOBA as an
independent entity and divest some of their responsibilities to regional
organizations. I'm all for diversity. This would address the problem of
centralizing all power and allow different approaches and viewpoints to go
forward. It might also be less expensive, cutting travel costs. We're in a
new circumstance. A rethink is needed.
Good luck.
Eric Hoffman
www.bonnydoonalpacas.org
____________________________________________________________________________
____
Lona Nelsen Frank
ALPACAS of Tualatin Valley, llc Since 1988
Beaverton, Oregon 97007
503-649-2128 or cell 503-936-7722
www.AlpacaTV.com
