• District 1: Scott Rodriguez showbunraizer@yahoo.com
• District 2: Rachel Roehe Rachel@backyardbunnybarn.com
• District 3: Mark Carson mjsrcarson@huxcomm.net
• District 4: Janet Smith hollandlady1@hotmail.com
• District 5: Lisa Braun ljbraun@yahoo.com
• District 6: Cindy Pail ivypatch@comcast.net
• District 7: Barry Hustins bkdwarf@gwi.net
• District 8: Brenda Dumas dumabroobunnies@yahoo.com
• District 9: Henry Sabetti Henry.Sabetti@verizon.net

Please do not feel that you cannot make a difference. You can. District Directors can rightly ignore one email as just a random opinion. But if they get a number of emails, they should feel compelled to represent that idea to the board.

As they say in the commercials, "call before midnight tonight." Don't put it off. Email your director today. I did. Here's my letter:

Hello Henry,

I have noticed that more and more, it takes a 4.00 Holland to be competitive. At Convention, there were two or three JUNIOR does that weighed 4.00, as I recall. I believe the BOB was a 4.00 rabbit. I know when I took the bsb class at Convention, it was with a 4.00 rabbit. The last BOB I won, was with a 4.00 rabbit.

But we are supposed to be a dwarf breed. I believe we're losing the "massive rabbit in a small package" to just mass. Too often, it takes being 4.00 to compete.

Many times I hear breeders saying that they have this super rabbit - has everything they want in a Holland. But then they add, "but he'll never compete because he's small." Does that even make sense in a dwarf breed? Or, they might say, it will take a special judge to find this rabbit. I would say it would take a well trained judge to do so.

I would like to see the question put before the membership about changing the wording in our standard to "massive for the size of the animal" where it says "massive." As it stands now, some judges are interpreting this to mean, bigger is better as long as it doesn't go over 4.00. I even heard a judge announce that to the exhibitors one time.

It makes no sense to have 4.00 as best and then 4.01 as DQ. It's like saying a 99 is an A but 100 is fail. As we approach a limit, it should be less desirable, not more desirable, in my opinion.

I also feel that the wording change must be accompanied by judge training on the subject for it to be effective. Just as with our legal system where it doesn't so much matter if the law is on the books but rather whether the law is actively enforced, a wording change would only be effective if accompanied by judge training (such as a volunteer from HLRSC presenting at the judges' conference at convention, writing a part of the column for judges in the DR, etc.)

To sum up, I believe we need to re-establish the Holland lop as a massive rabbit in a small package. I believe the wording in the standard should be changed to reflect that idea more strongly, and I feel that the change would have to be accompanied by judge education to be effective.

Thanks for your time in reading my concerns. I hope that you find there is enough support for this idea to present it to the board for consideration.

Sincerely,

Laurie Stroupe
District 9 HLRSC Member

Feel free to lift any ideas from this letter that you wish.

Laurie Stroupe
The Nature Trail Rabbitry “Home Of Grand Champions”
Precious Pet Rabbits
Affordable Web Site Design

¶ 10:25 AM