National Pygmy Goat Association - Home
 
 
 

What's New?

June 2019 BOD Minutes

Show Rules Updated

Code Of Ethics Updated

The National Pygmy Goat Association

 

 
 

National Pygmy Goat Association
Board of Directors Meeting
June 6 & &, 2019
Boise, ID

Please send your comments to NPGA President Lynda Gredin and she will distribute them to the Directors and to the Webmaster for posting.


This is what I sent to my regional directors: The enthusiast membership doesn't sound like a terrible idea but I dont like the requirement that a voting member has verifiable NPGA registered animal under 10 years of age. Who is going to verify that the person has an animal that qualifies and why should we be caring that the person has an animal to qualify for voting? Half of our judges dont have animals so this will disqualify any of them from voting. I think the disadvantages have been grossly overlooked. I am a member of the Kinder Goat Association and have voting rights but do not own a Kinder goat.

I wanted to add that this agenda needs to be totally reworked because to say there are no disadvantages and all advantages is wrong!

Advantages: Allows more members to join that do not own goats or participate in shows that wants to support the NPGA

Disadvantages: None

Financial Implications: More fees with additional members.

I dont agree with this at all!! I think it will take away members!! This is going to eliminate about half our judges from voting and some of the founding members that still exist. No one that wants to be a part of a club should have their voting rights revoked.

Shanna Breeding


This is all crazy. It sounds good if we were a multimillion dollar organization. NPGA doesn't have the members nor the money. They say $4000 and external hard drive $99. How much for tech support to set it up with our data? And why should NPGA provide herd data for the membership? Again this isn't like a big cattle ranch where all the cows wear monitoring chips so they know when they chew cud, when they rest, how long they graze, etc. These are mostly pets. DAH.

That $4000 to $5000 is just the tip of the iceberg for cost. Trust me this organization doesn't have enough money to do this. Just want you to know this is pie in the sky and most of this stuff would have no value to NPGA.

Just to be clear It's too much money and I'm against spending it.

Fran Bishop


I'm not involved in NPGA as much as I have been in the past especially with the political side. I was recently made aware of the Agenda item about granting Lifetime License's to a handful of judges who are either sick or have completed 25 years of service. I very much oppose this proposal. I have been a pharmacist for over 25 years and I am required to submit 20 hours of Continuing Education each year. Not even every 4 years. Everyone who holds a license to practice anything needs a knowledge refresher course every now and then whether if be about human health or pygmy goat structure. I do not think it is a hardship for any judge to complete the required ConEd every 4 years especially since there is now the opportunity to complete it remotely.

With that being said I believe that every NPGA judge needs a refresher course from time to time especially those who no longer breed goats. So the agenda item is missing the Disadvantage --- "a judge earning a Lifetime Certificate will be exempt from the required Judge's Continuing Education which in turn may lead to not keeping abreast of breed standard changes, scorecard changes, rule changes, etc."

Again I am opposed to this proposal and especially opposed to you picking and choosing those who will be exempt from Con-ED. The same rules should apply to everyone.

Regards, Chris Rowley


Breed Standard Committee Report and Proposal

I AM NOT in favor of terming RANDOM WHITE markings as undesirable when they are outside of the optional markings that are accepted.  I truly think the NPGA needs to get away from faulting RANDOM WHITE markings entirely so long as they do not totally obscure the required breed markings for breeding animals.  But that is a discussion for another time perhaps.

White on a leg or a belly band that is over the hips or shoulders is COSMETIC.  I know some spectacular does were sold off to pet homes and potentially great bucks were wethered, only to disappear into obscurity forever just because they had too much white. I can easily see a new breeder selling a spectacular doeling to a pet home saying they have too much white and should not be used for breeding and keeping a lesser quality animal all because of a MARKING that the NPGA says is undesirable.  And yet, breeders who like belly bands continue to try to breed for it.  ANY goat with a white markings, and obviously many who do not have white themselves, carry the gene for random white and can very easily pass it to any of their kid to appear anywhere on the body.  It is called RANDOM for a reason.  New breeders and some experienced breeders will see this move to make some random white markings undesirable to mean the NPGA is FURTHER restricting what is merely a cosmetic fault.

One of the goals of the NPGA is to promote the pygmy goat.  We mostly promote them as desirable pets.  And we all know we can sell those loudly mismarked kids all day long.  Many of us secretly love them.  No other goat breed registry faults random white.  The Nigerian Dwarf industry, with its allowable loud colors with many sporting lots of random white eclipses Pygmy goats in desirability in that respect.  The NPGA is losing that battle all over our saying that a white splash outside of the belly is “BAD”.

As the pygmy breed and their gene pool become more and more homogenized we SHOULD NOT be faulting fine animals based on RANDOM white markings.  Find fault with faults that affect the life and health of a goat, not a random marking.

 More study needs to be made regarding those seemingly random darker or lighter markings on some goats.  Such as the patch of darker caramel on a medium or a patch of brown on the body of a gray agouti.  Are these “birth marks”?  A fluke or genetic?  They are not the same as random white.

 I am in agreement that non-pygmy breed markings such as the face markings found on Alpines needs to be strongly prohibited to the point of disqualification.

Ad Hoc Technological Advancement

No, just no. I see this as an offshoot of wanting online registations. And it is serious OVERKILL, with features the NPGA would not use for decades, if we EVER decide we have use for them. We do not need to track our animals from pasture to pasture and then to market, we do not need to offer members a place to track weights. We are not talking herds of 100s or 1000s like some cattle ranchers. The NPGA does not make use of EPDs, Expected Progeny Differences, since ours is not a market breed (we would have to gather data for 10-20 years to see how it might apply). Granted it could be nice to know which bucks reliably make easy to birth size kids that grow well. We do not DNA test for parentage. We do not need an invoicing system. I do not think the NPGA should allow access or entrust our membership database or our herdbook to an outside company. And for some of the other services (show listings, herdbook, breeders listing, printed certificates, mailing list to members, etc.), we already offer those quite effectively. Our organization does not need to go “big time”. As an example The American Angus Association has 25,000 members and registered 332,421 head in 2017 alone. The NPGA has about 1220 members, and has registered 128,483 animals TOTAL to date since the 1970s.

If we decided to go with something like this, who would be responsible for integrating it and maintaining it with our website or databases? How would we pay for their services? What would the lead time be for our tiny organization if the system developed a problem? As an example the ADGA spent 10s of 1000s to update/upgrade their online presence. It took 3 YEARS longer than expected and still has its issues. There turn around for new registrations is WEEKS. I know we probably should not compare ourselves to the ADGA but why mess with something that works better than almost any other animal registry?

Agenda Items

E. Not sure about what this means. Would new members simply be given the information to find the FaceBook page or signed up automatically? I WOULD NOT be in favor of someone signing me up for anything on FB automatically. But the info could be included in whatever new member packet is distributed.  It could even be posted on our website.

F. No. Seriously when you log onto the herdbook your herdbook subscription expiration date AND your membership expiration date are given. When your subscription will expire within 30 days the warning is given in red. Sending out a postcard to remind that you herdbook is about to expire is ridiculous. The NPGA is not set up to prorate either the membership dues nor the herdbook subscription to allow members to sync. If you want to pay both at the same time, do so.  It will simply extend each for one "period".  I can tell you if you allow your membership to expire you will be denied access to the herdbook until you renew. But your herdbook subscription is still valid and will automatically resume when your membership is paid.

H: No. Requiring voting members to own pygmies, registered or not, to vote is just WRONG. I am a member of the Pygora Breeders Association, have never owned a Pygora, will never own one and yet I am considered a valued member of that organization and allowed a vote.

I. Wow, have we gotten to be so concerned about appearances? Used to be that almost always a judge stayed at an exhibitor’s, often the show chair’s house, was even picked up at the airport by an exhibitor, was driven to the show by an exhibitor, fed dinner by an exhibitor and yet no one thought there was cheating going on. Our club recently tried to arrange a show at a member’s house with the stipulation that the judges would stay with her to save cost and as the nearest hotel was 45 minutes away. Do we really think cheating is going on? And what about when judge’s share a room? Clubs are not made of money, shows are not paying like they once did. For heaven’s sake, let’s act like adults.

Q. I do think starred reasons should stay. A judge candidate should be able to cite the most important reasons (weightiest, having the most points) for placing a goat. But I may not be understanding this.

S and T I do not see that any real changes to the rules be made. If putting them under a separate section helps, then fine.

Respectfully, Maggie Leman NPGA member and pygmy goat breeder since 1991


My name is Alia Rodgers and I am a junior member of the NPGA. I am a junior in high school, I live in California and am a part of region 2. It has come to my attention that a possible rule has been brought up so that directors must reside in their region for 8 months out of the year. Being a student myself, I feel that this motion makes kids choose between leaving for college and the NPGA. I would love to become a director one day, but if I get into a college I love out of region, I think all students should have the opportunity to pursue that education without forfeiting this incredible leadership role. The youth is the future of this organization, and education is the future for them so I believe that you should support both and allow kids to attend the college the choose. And if you have concerns about the work we will able to do, with the technology we have access to we can work from our colleges. All members should have the opportunity to become a director, not just the ones who chose a school close to home.

Thank you for your consideration,

Alia Rodgers


I just read the Breed Standards Committee report.

First I would like to thank the committee for all of their work and effort on behalf of the breed.

Second, I would like to submit my agreement with the comments submitted previously by Maggie Leman.

Quoting: “I AM NOT in favor of terming RANDOM WHITE markings as undesirable when they are outside of the optional markings that are accepted. I truly think the NPGA needs to get away from faulting RANDOM WHITE markings entirely so long as they do not totally obscure the required breed markings for breeding animals. White on a leg or a belly band that is over the hips or shoulders is COSMETIC. I know some spectacular does were sold off to pet homes and potentially great bucks were wethered, only to disappear into obscurity forever just because they had too much white. I can easily see a new breeder selling a spectacular doeling to a pet home saying they have too much white and should not be used for breeding and keeping a lesser quality animal all because of a MARKING that the NPGA says is undesirable. And yet, breeders who like belly bands continue to try to breed for it. ANY goat with a white markings, and obviously many who do not have white themselves, carry the gene for random white and can very easily pass it to any of their kid to appear anywhere on the body. It is called RANDOM for a reason. New breeders and some experienced breeders will see this move to make some random white markings undesirable to mean the NPGA is FURTHER restricting what is merely a cosmetic fault.

One of the goals of the NPGA is to promote the pygmy goat. We mostly promote them as desirable pets. And we all know we can sell those loudly mismarked kids all day long. Many of us secretly love them. No other goat breed registry faults random white. The Nigerian Dwarf industry, with its allowable loud colors with many sporting lots of random white eclipses Pygmy goats in desirability in that respect. The NPGA is losing that battle all over our saying that a white splash outside of the belly is “BAD”.

As the pygmy breed and their gene pool become more and more homogenized we SHOULD NOT be faulting fine animals based on RANDOM white markings. Find fault with faults that affect the life and health of a goat, not a random marking.”

Amen,

Hal Anderson


 

 

Copyright 2003-2017 © The National Pygmy Goat Association | Webmaster | Central Office