johno

thanks for that information wings. so the reality is that 2006 first prize was only half what the organisers expected, i.e 10000. how is it possible to expect 2007 first prize to be 20000 when 2006 was only 10000. what information has been used to calculate expected 2007 first prize. i am of the opinion that 10000 would be the maximum expectation of any reasonably based calculation.

see the shu presidents lanarkshire fed club have burst the one fed rule for someone else. the former lanarkshire member who is a member of the midland fed has managed to break the one fed rule twice in one go. the midland fed spurred on by this same member enforced the one fed rule under the protection and ratification of the shu. so we now have two members of the presidents club breaking the one fed rule. the shu president and the midland member. this stinks in my opinion and has opened the door for a free for all.

i have just spent 30 minutes browsing the scottish one loft online site at scottishpigeontrust. there is no mention of the first prize paid in 2006. i believe this was only 10000 pounds and not what others have posted. nowhere on the site does the cost of entry appear. there is no information about last years race, prizes pools etc. it seems as if the organisers do not want to provide any publicity material. i do not recall any appropriate publicity in the fancy press last year. may i thank the peson who posted the website address. i would advise anyone who is thinking of entering to check it out for themseles. be informed then make your choice.

regardless of my past entries or future intentions i can only write what i feel. i have answered a question put to me if this in some way causes you to feel i am rather negative this is your choice.

i will be competing in the rpra one loft race. the scottish set up has not impressed me over the last few years. no information no feed back, no publicity. the web site showing two different expected first prize amounts is a true reflection on the slapstick hap hazard approach that has been and would appear to continue to be taken. not for me I fear.

sorry just looked at the site. home page states expected first prize 10000 pounds. the terms and conditions page states expected fiorst prize 20000 pounds. why does this not surprise me

is that 20000 total guaranteed all prizes. what is the guaranteed first prize.

has anyone any idea what is happening with the scottish race this year. information seems to be kept under lock and key. the web site appears to have been closed down and it looks as though the set up has been abandoned. does anyone know what is going on.

Rockinrick I feel the first part of your post is ridiculous and cannot be put forward as any part of a reasoned discussion on the subject. You then go on to admit openly that you know nothing about the situation. This however does not stop you from posing an opinion. I have great difficulty in understanding your position. Why should readers give you any credence as opposed to other posters on the subject who have a much more in depth knowledge of the situation. They hold views that are completely opposite to yours.Your full posting is unfortunately based purely on your suppositions rather than dealing with reality.

everyone is entitled to a second third fourth ...chance. I do not think many would disagree with that sentiment. I think it is the fact that some individuals do not have the humility to take the sensible step back. It seems a bit rich that someone in a situation as is being discussed feels the need to appear to feel comfortable sitting in judgement of other peoples opinion. This I think is the crux of the current situation. This also comes across as the height of hypocracy. This is only an opinion and is not meant to be an attack so please do not take it as such.

the situation at present clearly highlights that some individuals, including the current shu president are willing to go to any length to attempt to maintain what they see as a divine right to rule / dictate. i believe that the delegates will be disgusted by this action and example and firmly remove the current president and leave him where he should be left. what a poor poor example to be set by an individual who has publicly attempted to dictate to others what they should and should not be doing. his letters in the bhw are far from advocating freedom of choice. the dual members of lanarkshire in the past were not given any choice. the twelve month period for sorting out your membership only applies to new members so should not affect the current acrobatics being undertaken by the president of the shu. what a poor example.

the one fed rule was upheld last year. midland fed situation

the rule has been upheld at the shu. if it was not an shu rule how have lanarkshire and the midland managed to enforce it at the shu. some people are dancing in and out of the rules to suit their own contrived set up. poor show from a supposedly top official. what kind of example is this to be giving.

forgot to mention Ken has given and gifted hundreds of pigeons to new starts,and fundraisng events all over the UK. no charge. this is not the action of someone looking for self gain. it looks as though some of the posts are poorly thought out and that there is a good degree of malicious intent within them. i believe anyone who does not personally know Ken will gather through the other postings what the real picture is.

the place to enquire would be the shu. they as the guardians of the systems should have records of the set up. who owns what and how much they cost. it is good the Ken has highlighted the fact that the systems are strewn accross scotland. here there and everywhere. maybe the answer is blowing in the wind. this highlights the complete lack of management of the situation. why does this not surprise me. i am not jealous

extremely poor show when the current president of the shu refuses to accept that his fed do not want him to represent them anymore. anyone else attempting what he is would be hauled in front of the fed and probably the shu. it is clear that the person involved thinks he has some sort of divine right to continue as president. the unfortunate thing is that he has the support of the old team of past presidents. i hate to think what they will cajole by way of retribution towards lanarkshire if they succeed in manipulating the current president back into office for 2007. who has the say in waht happens. delegates will be pressured into re electing the current president. whose rules are being abused? who has the final say past officials or the membership?

i would think the system belongs to the makers. if they belonged to the shu surely they would have appeared in the accounts at some point. if the shu own them they should still be shown in the balance sheet.

why are the people involved so desperate to hold onto a position. this in itself is worrying. this is the second time. the same gang tried to elect a person who was not a delegate as president of the shu a couple of years back. the proposer and seconder were and still are the senior officials in scottish pigeon racing. is this what the doomen really want?

some people seem to think they are above what the members decide. this is a sure sign of an ego gone mad. anything goes if you think you are the boss. a terrible example and a poor reflection on the pigeon fancy up here.

wrong result in lanarkshire manouevered in to west of scotland.

just heard top official failed to get right result at own federation agm. as own federation has a one fed only rule for members set up new parnership in own federation under family members name. joined in partnership with member of another federation. lives 30 miles away from new fed radius. unlikely ever to be at new partnership loft. all done to manipulate a situation which was not falling the way they wanted. rule acrobatics. as an official heavily involved in policy and rule making more aware than most of the actions being undertaken. is this hypocracy or does anything go now?

the rpra has no authority to involve itself in matters concerning the shu and vice versa. as i have previously posted why not put all the issues in front of an independant mediator and take their opinion. i mean all the issues not just the fife situation.

much more than ets to the scottish question. the whole of glasgow south lanarkshire forth and clyde all moved. they were not moving over ets. the rpra are dealing with everyone using and applying the same rules consistantly and fairly accross the board. open and fair sound policy by the rpra.

i see in todays bhw the secretary of the cumbria region of the rpra clearly put the ongoing debate about scottish members of the rpra to bed. short and sweet. clear and concise. rules applied the same way right across the board. well done. funny that we see the shu setting a precedent and then when it suits wanting other treatment. why is this not surprising to us.

and so too many others