Proposed changes to Standing Recommendations & Rules:                                Initially presented to Subcommittee on Rules,        Marshall Simonds, Chair                                                                                                               Nelson Sills                                If you have an opinion on the proposed                 Robert Kennon                                changes give these people that opinion.               John Goettl                                                                                                              William Daley                                Submitted 9-6-2005        (proposed changes capitalized)                                Chapter 14, Section 2, Paragraph 3, Page 16, January 2005 - Change to read A dog is not eligible to be entered or to compete in any licensed member trial in any stake, DURING THE LIFETIME OF THAT DOG, if a judge of that stake or any member of THEIR family has owned, sold, held under lease, boarded,or trained the dog FOR COMPENSATION OF ANY TYPE, or handled the dog at ANY AKC LICENSED EVENT, or if a judge or any member of THEIR family holds a direct financial interest contingent upon the dog's            performance.                                ADD:            THE DOG & PROGENY THROUGH THE FIRST GENERATION REMOVED FROM THE  ORIGINAL DOG                       SHALL NOT BE ELIGIBLE TO ENTER ANY STAKE JUDGED BY ANY PREVIOUS OWNER, THEIR FAMILY,                   THE REGISTERED BREEDER OF THE LITTER  &/OR THE OWNER OF THE SIRE.                                Chapter 14 Section 2 - Add: A DOG CO-OWNED BY INDIVIDUALS WHO DO NOT MEET THE DEFINITION OF "FAMILY" PER THE STANDARD PROCEDURE (Chapter 14, Section 2, Paragraph 4,  Page 16, January 2005) SHALL NOT BE ELIGIBLE TO ENTER ANY AMATEUR ALL-AGE STAKE.  (While some co-ownership situations are not being questioned, there are enough instances     where the situation should be questioned.  This would end any unfair advantage created & the requirement to police these situations.)                                                                                     Standing Recommendations, Section 3, Page 33, January 2005 - Add: INDIVIDUALS &/or MEMBERS OF THEIR "FAMILY" ROUTINELY DERIVING A  PORTION OF THEIR INCOME FROM SERVICES RENDERED &/or CONNECTED TO FIELD TRIAL RETRIEVERS SHALL NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR STATUS AS AN AMATEUR TO EITHER HANDLE &/or JUDGE AT AN AKC LICENSED FIELD TRIAL. (For years the only issue discussed has been the relationship of client's judging the professional trainer where they have put a dog in training.  This would go beyond that discussion & in a somewhat different direction.  Anyone involved with the sport routinely making a portion of their living from activities related to the sport would be ineligible for AMATEUR classification.)                                                                                               The above suggested revisions to the Rules are the result of observations made while                                      gathering data.  THERE WILL BE MORE SUGGESTIONS, LATER.