LIFT THE BAN ON NERO'S PROGENY - Page 2

Pedigree Database

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by Loner on 05 October 2004 - 16:10

How can you agree with the Ban Totally VomInsel? Why ban the puppies? For all we know, yhey might not be for the show ring,admittedly, some of them might be but why take it out on the Off spring when they have nothing to do with the situation. As you said, it is the fault of the Breeder/Owner, Hiself and the dog in question is at fault NOT the Progeny. Loner

by M. King on 05 October 2004 - 16:10

I am sorry too bout the ban but can I ask what was the operation that was done on Nero? I am curious. M

by Loner on 05 October 2004 - 16:10

So I understand and anyone please correct me if they know any different. The operation M.King was done on his front to alter the angulations e.t.c to make him more acceptable as a show dog. Loner

by fox on 05 October 2004 - 16:10

i do not agree with the ban, i have seen some beautifully nero progeny campino von der piste trophe being one favourite, its wrong to affect the up and coming youngsters, nero was a great asset to this breed and the characters on his progeny are incredible, its a huge loss, but not if the progeny can carry on

by VomInsel on 05 October 2004 - 17:10

Without the operation he would not have been VA. Yes he has good progeny out their but this is a situation where the SV had to make an important decision and they make the right one. The owner, dog and progeny should be ban. This kind of cheating and desception by breeders must stop. Breeder must consider not only Phonotype but also genotype. Until breeders understand the relevance of these factors on the breeder we will continue to look at individual dogs and not the Whole;the GSD breed. This ban will let owners stand up to breeders who cheat. Some may say this would be a difference in degree but this is liking knowingly breeding a Va dog with hemophilia, some of the progeny may have it and some are carriers. This ban is a stand against poor practices by breeders and owners. These are the controversial descision that I think is needed in the USA in order to better control and regulated the breed in the USA. Descision must be made because they are right not because it will make people happy.

by Hunter on 05 October 2004 - 17:10

Lets all be honest here. The ban on Nero is certainly a great loss to the GSD community. It only continues the saga of all the health related issues that have surrounded Lasso in the past. If Nero has a genetic defect he should NEVER have been used for breeding in the first place. If his owners were deceitful in trying to cover this up they should be banned from breeding and participating in the GSD world in any way, shape, or form in the future, and face litigation that would force them to make restitution to those they have hurt, both emotionally and financially. That being said, the fact still remains that genetic problems are just that, they are passed on in some way to future generations, whether they are evident early on in his progeny is not the point, the risk of these problems showing up in the future is too great to ignor. The SV has acted responsibly in their decision to exclude him or any of his progeny from future breeding. It's a shame for the innocent owners of his progeny who have so many emotional and financial attachments invested but that’s the way it goes. The future health of the breed MUST come before everything else. It is time for this "line" to be eliminated. Anyone who argues against this does not have a logical or ethical leg to stand on. (No pun intended) Why would you want to fight and petition to overturn this ruling? IT IS NOT ETHICAL! WHERE IS THE LOGIC? PLEASE EXPLAIN!

by VomInsel on 05 October 2004 - 17:10

HUNTER I couldn't have said it better. Great points I agree a 100%. It is surprising to me that so many people don't see the logics and ethics behind this descision. Many of these people are breeders I am sure. I have to wonder about some of these breeders and the future of this great breed.

Brittany

by Brittany on 05 October 2004 - 18:10

Hunter is right. I also think the owners of Nero has alot of explaining to do, especially to the owners of his progeny. As what Hunter said... It should be the owners that should be banned as well.

by Martin on 05 October 2004 - 18:10

"I also think the owners of Nero has alot of explaining to do, especially to the owners of his progeny" ___________________ They might have a few legal sues coming their way

by D.H. on 05 October 2004 - 18:10

The interesting situation here is that the pups that are already SV papered and are already registered with kennel clubs outside of Germany can still be used for breeding in these countries. More intersting still is what will happen several years from now, when Nero offspring - maybe even several generations later - will appear back in Germany...





 


Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top