Search forum
Back to German Shepherd Dog
Liked top 20
ForumsGerman Shepherd Dog > Kennel Club Release Yet Another Statement (103 replies)
Kennel Club Release Yet Another Statement by Sue B on 16 February 2010 - 13:15 |
| Hi All, Typically the Kennel Club issue another statement immediately prior to a GSD Breed Council Meeting due to take place this Saturday 20th Feb 2010 and once again the tune has changed slightly. The KC hymn sheet now changes almost on a weekly basis. Talk about mixed messages !! Needles to say if they treat their dogs in the same manner the poor things must live a life of total confusion, dogs and mixed messages dont mix. The link to latest KC Statement can be found here: - http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/2942/23/5/3 Regards Sue |
Sue B by missbeeb on 16 February 2010 - 13:51 |
Well... you just have to love our KC, from them: To suggest that a dog does not have a health issue when it cannot walk properly because of poor hocks, is patently nonsense. The KC’s Fit for Function campaign states that ‘all dogs must be able to see, breathe, and walk freely and be free from pain, irritation or discomfort’. The fundamental ability to walk soundly is a basic quality of life issue for any animal. ...and yet, they deem it OK to REGISTER, SHOW & BREED from severely dysplastic dogs! Fit for function my ass! It's nothing more than a marketing slogan. |
missbeeb by hutch on 16 February 2010 - 13:59 |
| Blackmail, Lies and Hypocrisy! It's time this went into the General Public's Domain - the PDB and the Canine Press has a very limited audience - it's time for national exposure of the KC for what they are. - a very, very angry Shirley! |
hutch by peterlee on 16 February 2010 - 14:49 |
| Kennel Club statement:- ‘Q. Where does the KC stand on SV/WUSV events? A. The KC has worked with the GSD community to enable the annual British Sieger Show to everyone’s satisfaction. All requests of a similar nature will of course be considered. What is being asked is that, as a matter of simple courtesy, clubs should work with their UK governing body to gain support for the organising of any such events.’ Clause 9 of the Kennel Club’s proposed ‘undertaking:- ‘9. The Club confirms that it will act in good faith with the Kennel Club on all matters including confirmation that it will not, without the express permission of the Kennel Club, run any events under the rules or regulations of any organisation other than the Kennel Club.’ Spot the difference. What absolute bullshit. Why should any GSD club in the UK need the KC’s ‘express permission’ to run an event under WUSV rules? The Kennel Club is not my ‘governing body’. It is a private club which registers dogs. Nor is it the ‘governing body’ of any other GSD club except to the extent that such a club is stupid enough to sign clause 9 of the KC’s undertaking which then does indeed give de facto control to the Kennel Club. Clause 9 is about control not courtesy. |
by Lakota of Laurel Creek on 16 February 2010 - 14:56 |
| I stumbled on a video of GSD in a show ring walking like they were crippled...and wondered how on earth this is being bred into them and allowed? They actually looked like they were having trouble walking...it was terrible. |
Lakota of Laurel Creek by hutch on 16 February 2010 - 15:10 |
| Sticking to the thread..... This is from the OFT's website, I have added the highlights: Abuse of a dominant market position Chapter II of CA98 and Article 82 prohibit a business which holds a dominant position in a market from abusing that position. A dominant position in a market essentially means that a business is generally able to behave independently of competitive pressures, such as other competitors, in that market. Conduct which may be considered an abuse by a business in a dominant position includes: charging excessively high prices limiting production refusing to supply an existing long standing customer without good reason charging different prices to different customers where there is no difference in what is being supplied making a contract conditional on factors that have nothing to do with the subject of the contract. Surely there is something in this for us? Lakota - no-one denies that a GSD should be able to walk freely and without pain - this issue is about consumer abuse by the UK Kennel Club. |
by Penny on 16 February 2010 - 15:13 |
| Hi Lakota Can you tell me where you found the footage? How old the video was, it could have been one of the English type of Alsation we have here with very over angulated rear quarters, or it could have been the purposely distorted footage of a programme that went out in the UK called pedigree dogs exposed. Mo. |
by Lakota of Laurel Creek on 16 February 2010 - 15:40 |
| Hi Penny,I found this on u tube under german shepherd half dog half frog.Not sure how old video is,thanks |
by Penny on 16 February 2010 - 15:42 |
| Ahhh Yes, it was an outrage, put out there by numpties, but I know what you mean, not at all like the dogs that the true GSD folk have I can assure you. Mo thanks for the info though. |
by Penny on 16 February 2010 - 17:57 |
| At last - the Kennel Club have over-stepped the mark on their nonsense. Let all like minded GSD folk, who really care about the breed, stay very calm, and take them to the cleaners if they even dare to stop obedience competition. I urge you all to get on with your voting, and dont let this idle threat make you afraid of the KC Big Brother atittude. as I repeat AT LAST THE KENNEL CLUB WILL HAVE OVERSTEPPED THE MARK Read the part where the question asked will it affect obedience competitions - and put yourself in the shoes of the K.C. They would just have LOVED to be able to say "Yes, actually, it will" - but they havent. They have pithered about the answer to give none - so that they know they have perhaps worried a few and the rest of us cant immediately do something about it with their definate answer of Yes. They darn well know they cant do this.. see Hutch above, it speaks volumes, let them argue with the Office of Fair Trading, how many of us will lobby these people, I think they only need 2 to make a complaint for it to be investigated - imagine how many will lobby OFt throughout the UK. Perhaps we should start now, just in case, and we are then ready. If I Shop at Tesco, or Asda, and my neighbour steals from that store and was identified - then I sure as hell would have a good case with the OFT if I was also banned from using the store in the future...... same difference show / obedience - conformation / X breeds Lets Go - they have now proven to us all that they are struggling beyond belief with the fact that GSD folk are standing up to the KC`s dictatorial garbage - why would they keep making extra statements regarding this, why are they not sitting back on their laurals and waiting for all the Yes Please Sir votes to come in? Why? because they know they are on a very rocky road, and each press release has made it rockier - this one is the limit - who-ever at the KC organised it needs a huge pat on the back from us, it has shown without a doubt (see Hutch above) that they have overstepped the mark greatly and cannot carry out their threats without going against the civil law of the land. Well Done KC - True Colours and all that...... it will not make a scrap of difference to the voting from clubs that are "switched on" and the saying "Shooting in the foot" comes to mind. What it has also shown greatly is that everything I was suspicious of with their undertaking is totally true - they have no intention of having this document signed and leaving it at that, they have every intention of tightening the screw - they have already started, first the British Seiger and now the Obedience empty threat just to get people to sign- and all BEFORE the 31st March - they might even be employing more at Clarges Street, to cope with the demand of all their paperwork for new regulations for all that sign...... Mo |
by crossingate on 16 February 2010 - 18:04 |
| Blackmail by the Kennel Club - sign your rights away and we will CONSIDER allowing a restriction on registering non-standard colours - also health checks to be discussed for inclusion in the KC ABS - but nothing about restricting registration of puppies from animals that havent had any health checks or have bad hips. This is getting more ridiculous by the day! More blackmail regarding CC's not given due to a club not signing - I suppose those clubs that have signed the agreement would feel morally obliged to turn down the offer of a set of CC's that should have gone to someone else? I THINK NOT! Sally |
crossingate by missbeeb on 16 February 2010 - 18:13 |
I love their little statements, Mo! Everyone digs them in a little deeper and makes more Shepherd folk more determined. What complete pilchards they are; as I said on another thread a couple of weeks ago, I seriously doubt the legality of what they're doing. Their arrogance is quite embarrassing. Perhaps the Ob guys will develop an interest in Sch... ? The KC is closing many, many doors on itself, all without sufficient savvy to see the writing on the wall... 2010 should be a good year for us! |
by AmbiiGSD on 16 February 2010 - 18:14 |
| The OFT has no teeth... good dog they've just shown that against the banks and unfair bank charges, you really think they will take on the KC... they couldn't regulate the preverbial piss up in a brewery. The only way this can be dealt with is the National Press, it is about time the GSD Partnership or whoever the hell is running this ship...pointed it's sails to the nationals and started phoning, writing, anything to get them involved. long over-due! Take it PUBLIC!!! |
AmbiiGSD by Penny on 16 February 2010 - 18:58 |
| I do agree with every bit of press coverage that we can get with this - however, we have to delegate a GOOD speaker to speak for us, and all sing from the same hymn sheet. We need to think about what we want to talk about, as its easy to ramble on so many things... and we need to hammer the points that arre so wrong, that do the public out of good health checked pups and then it will become very apparent that the GSD folk are so far ahead of the KC they are left standing. The OFt has every tooth to deal with with little companies that thrive on bad practice. That is about the only way to decsribe the actions that are coming from the Kennel Club - and they CAN deal with it, and I am sure they WILL deal with it, I think its a must that the press know the full details of the main points of our problem, and that the press give it the coverage that it deserves. Lets talk speakers. This board is visited daily by KC officials, and also certain KC members who are taking it right back ot the lap of Clarges St, so we need to keep our counsel here now. Please email me mascani22@aol.com with any good lucid speakers and get their permission first full in the knowledge that they understand the details and they have as much passion about fairness as the rest of us do. I for one, am going to contact Joe Summerhill as my nominee - and I have another lady that is so used to public speaking and dogdom, she has appeared on TV favourably many times, (dont often rub shoulders with such folk, but hey) I have to ask his permission - and we can put our nominees together and come up with a professional front, able to speak to the press without babbling, and laughing in inappropriate places (I am sure we understand where that one came from) we will be speaking for the good of the dogs, and lets see what Fit For Life means - I am sure Hips and Elbows and Epilepsy come in to that some-where even if not demanded by the KC. Mo |
by Sue B on 16 February 2010 - 19:21 |
| Hi All, On the 8th of January in a thread topic titled "Kennel Club Press release", on making reference to the KC Undertaking I listed a number of items, Item 4 on this list was as just copied below:- 4. The point of law being that whilst still in the Process of Negotiations (i.e Our GSDP still considered themselves in the process of trying to resolve these issues with the KC via negotiative means. The KC alone decided to suspended all Negotiations and then without even an attempt at arranging for Mediation they proceeded to ACT UNREASONABLY by way of ABUSE OF A DOMINENT POSITION. I suggested we got a fighting fund going and many were forthcoming with their pledges, then some Solicitor sort came on the thread and called me mad, coupled with some other dampeners I gave up on that thread. I now see we have come full circle and as if for the first time the Abuse of a Dominent Position has appeared again. I agree with most of what you have all said on here but going around in circles dismissing one idea only for it to be resurrected again later is getting us nowhere. Hopefully the BC Meeting on Saturday will help us come to some sort of COLLECTIVE DECISION. Until then I now find it pointless for anyone to suggest anything on here as most ideas get dissed until someone else thinks of it again 5 weeks later. We really do need to learn to work together. Regards Sue |
by Jeevs on 16 February 2010 - 20:28 |
| The Kennel Club is a private club, not a business, the OFT would have no jurisdiction against them. |
by Sue B on 16 February 2010 - 21:19 |
| Jeeves, The European laws of Unfair Competition would though and in any lawsuit precedents set in any other case in law will still be relevant, private members club or not, it doesnt meant just because you have a business founded upon a Private Members club it makes you exempt from all laws. However, getting back to the reason I came here again I just had to point out how hillarious some of the Q & A;s are in this latest KC press release. For example the KC are not even able to give a direct answere to one of their own questions. Can anyone tell us what the KC reply is to the question below, it really needs either a Yes or No answere,. Even Yes you can ask though you may not get what you ask for, would be an appropriate answere but much to what we are now accustomed to, the KC are incapable of issuing any directive other than gobble guke, unless of course they are issuing DEMANDS. See below the KC Question that they fail to answere - after reading it could you please explain if the KC are saying a club can sign in future to regains its CC;s or not? See what I mean !!!! lol Q. If my club does not sign this year can it sign in future years to regain its CCs? A. The allocation for CCs is done on an annual basis and on the prevailing circumstances for each breed. After the deadline of 31st March the Committee will consider its options for unallocated Challenge Certificates. It may choose to reallocate the CCs to breed clubs in the existing rotation that have signed the Undertaking; it may choose to reallocate CCs to general canine societies; or it may choose not to allocate them at all meaning fewer opportunities for the breed at Championship level. There are more gems like this in the recent press release but at the moment I am still laughing too much to put them on here. Regards Sue |
by Sue B on 16 February 2010 - 22:51 |
| RAOTFL Numero 2, Q. “Unsound hocks have no known related health diseases” so why is the KC so exercised about this? A. To suggest that a dog does not have a health issue when it cannot walk properly because of poor hocks, is patently nonsense. The KC’s Fit for Function campaign states that ‘all dogs must be able to see, breathe, and walk freely and be free from pain, irritation or discomfort’. The fundamental ability to walk soundly is a basic quality of life issue for any animal. It has been said many times before on here that the KC are prepared to give CC;s out and Register progeny from anything that breathes and is able to walk into the ring. Sorry but I almost lost it when they almost confirmed this in their latest statement. Forget the Dysplastic Hips, dodgy temperament, goodness it could even be having an Epileptic fit in the ring, just as long as the dog can BREATHE, SEE and WALK FREELY and be free from pain (though how on earth you are supposed to assess that I will never know as most dogs have a high threshold for pain anyway, for example how would you assess if a dog was in pain from arthritis in his dysplastic hips? Most of the time I have pain in my arthritic spine but I dont limp or necessarily show the pain in any other noticeable , physical way. The whole KC issue is now reading more and more like a farse and if it wasnt for the fact that the issue in discussion here is the future Health and Welfare of our breed it would make a most hillarious Sit Com ever, and yes Bill Hardaways Taxi driver could have a speaking part. lol |
by Sue B on 16 February 2010 - 23:27 |
| RAOTFL Numero 3 Q. If my club signs the Undertaking and then the judge at our show awards an unsound dog, will the club be penalised? A. No – providing the show management has briefed the judge prior to its shows on their health and welfare responsibilities particularly in regard to soundness of conformation. In such circumstances, and as is the usual procedure, the club must report the matter to the Kennel Club within 7 days of the show to investigate the judge’s conduct. In these new KC directives / undertaking Judges who promote unsoundness in the hindquarters and the hocks are to be reported by the Breed clubs. Just who exactly on the Breed Club is supposed to do the reporting and assessing they fail to tell you, could be some committee member who has never judged a dog in their life deciding if the judge is assessing soundness correctly or not. Makes a mockery of the whole situation to me. How a Breed club is supposed to stop judges awarding top placings to a dog someone on that committee believes is unsound is beyond me. What are the committee supposed to do, all get in a scrum huddle to debate the issue as to whether the judge has promoted an unsound dog or not? What if only one member of the committee saw the dog going away because everybody else on the committee were just getting on with the job of running the show, this committee member is not a judge so they run to another committee member who is, is this 2nd committee member then supposed to go to the ring and ask the dog to walk away and back again so that they too can assess its soundness. How crazy is all this sounding to the rest of you, because its beyond comprehension to me, yet this is what the KC want your club committee;s to sign up to. So who exactly will be judging the judges in future? Everyone from the sound of it, KC assessors, club committee;s, the exhibitors, Jemima PDE and yes even Bill Hardaways taxi driver, in other words Uncle Tom Cobbly and all. Then remember Secretary;s of clubs that sign, at the end of every year you will have the pleasure of writing a full Report confiming and demonstrating compliance with the conditions in this Undertaking to submit to the Kennel Club. Whilst not forgetting of course that to Quote the KC undertaking, "Any evidence and reports of non compliance will be relevant factors when considering the Club's next CC allocation." In other words your report will not necessarily be believed. So you better hope that no exhibitor, committee member from any other club, KC assessor, any KC approved judge and oh yeh dare I forget to mention Bill hardaways Taxi driver, does not send any conflicting report in to the Kennel Club, or you might be joining those clubs that didnt sign sooner than you may otherwise have anticipated. Regards Sue |
by Penny on 17 February 2010 - 09:55 |
| Hi Jeevs, The Kennel Club is a business. IT TRADES - IT TAKES MONEY FROM CLIENTS Therefore,It is accountable under laws of the land. taxes are paid, and I am sure their bank account is a business account, not a club account, this makes them accountable. Why are you so negative about this point You must have a reason. Mo. |
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!