What Happened to the Lloyd Bennett Breeding Discussion Thread? - Page 2

 Yes Sunsilver, you are correct that many people do not stop and think and buy instead on impulse. I cannot tell you how often I am contacted for help, waste hours and hours of my time educating someone, only to have them go off half-cocked and buy a dog without knowing all the facts or considering all their options.

I have been toying for a while with an idea. It seems like a good time to share it. There is no easy, centralized site for people to go to to review DOCUMENTED abuses and complaints, be they breeder complaints or buyers, trainers or otherwise. There should be standards for how complaints are handled.

 I have long thought of setting up an independent board of arbitrators for people to present their case when they feel they have been treated unfairly. There are ways it could be done and done effectively and fairly with a small group of arbitrators, not unlike one sees in the rest of the world.

I am thinking about this and have already contacted a few people whom I feel would serve well in that capacity. In this way, with clear rules, and clear burden of proof requirements, cases would either be proven or unproven to the satisfaction of the board of arbitrators. We might even get breeders to sign on agreeing to have contracts that dealt with minimum standards.....We might even have a fact sheet as Preston mentions above and other useful items for buyers and breeders and all who are interested. It would not simply be a "he said, she said" type of complaint that would be entertained. There would be rigorous requirements for documentation and parties involved would have to agree to arbitration.

I wonder what you all think of such an idea.   I, for one, am sick of seeing all the abuses going on in the GSD world. It is high time those of us who say we care clean up our own breed. The organizations should do it, but won't. They do NOT enforce a thing. If we don't change this we are failing the breed, ourselves and are just hypocrites.

Hodie,

The concept is good but the standard/criteria for determining ethical/abuse would be very difficult to nail down and be fair. Like some breeders believe that everybody that doesn't abide by SV rules in America is unethical. Their opinion;yes, fact;NO! There are people that think the type of food you feed constitutes an ethical breeder. And I could go on and on; now when these people hear certain thing without full knowledge(And I was taught there is three sides to a story,your,mine, and somewhere in the middle the truth), you will see people labeled based on what individuals think is right, regardless of the facts. Not saying the info isn't needed but I know few people in the breed OBJECTIVE enough to let their brain override their passion.JMO

Hodie,

One last thing; when it comes to contracts its impossible to define ethical. Its all opinion and a lot of hypocrites. We have many breeders in America who have these incredibly high standards for what THEY think is fair in a contract to be an ethical breeder. Anything less and they label the breeder unethical....Yet many of these same breeders will buy from Germany where these same omissions are in the contracts, if a contract at all and that's fine. Well to me its hypocritical to hold American breeders to different standards than German breeders. So again I would see many discrepancies in the application of who is unethical or abusive in practice.JMO

 Gustav,

Your points are well taken, but we would not be dealing with many of the things you mention. Rather, we would be dealing with things like the two situations that arose recently here and were proven (and court judgments rendered) and then the threads deleted. For example, if someone switches pups and then tells the new owner to dye the feet so it can be shown and there is proof, that might be something worth taking on. Where a trainer returned a dog in emaciated condition, let another dog die, etc., this too might be a case. 

We would NOT define what is a fair contract, other than perhaps to suggest to a reader that a contract DEAL with certain issues and perhaps give some examples of how breeders do deal, differently, with the same issue. Not abiding by SV standards, as an example, would not be something that would likely be heard. The board would be for really serious issues and scams.

It might not work, and it sure would not work if no one would support it. But I believe there are people who can make unbiased judgments based on facts who would be fair and equitable. Just a thought.

Now I better get off this board as I have to do a lot of studying and have already wasted far too much time here today.

Thank you for your feedback.

Thank You Hodie for an excellent reply: I , too, was appauled when Im'd by several about   WHY WAS THE TREAD DELETED"   WHY cannot people tell the truth to save others from a bad experience of   four white feet on a pup and told to dye them....by a show breeder that is well known  and thinks she did not wrong...."

My answer"" WELCOME TO THE WORLD OF DOG BREEDERS"   Take a seat and go along for the ride...but when you get ready to buy a pup next.....call  those on this site  like Hodie named above.....do not buy a pup just by the ads glorious educational webpage that someone paid $1,000.00 from a websign Company to make the sale look like a million dollars,,and do research ,,,,,,,,,and by all means   take your time and exchange pictures and paperwork and have it checked and rechecked....contact AKC and OFA and SV listings and verify.....best of all ...Pick up your pup in person or go thru a trusted person to get your pup....or adult dog.. check tatoos and chips and their paperwork and their ears..too.....or the groin for the tatoo to match the paperwork....and if it has     4 white paws   run the other way......tipping of white is acceptable ....but socks is not...

corn is for  hogs    and                 SOCKS ARE FOR KITTENS

Speaknow, I think that there are certain taboos here.  One is the forthright presentation and discussion of the issue of "lethal cull".  Another is the trade secrety issue.  I once brought it up in the past and it was also removed. It is Oli's site, and he must have his own reasons for doing what he does or instructs or allows others to do on his behalf.  I can accept what he decides.

Hodie, I like your idea.  It is a novel concept and one that could create a lot of positive outcomes in addition to prevention of many problems and misunderstandings. I guess that one very big plus is that the negotiation of what constitutes "proof" is clear to both the buyer and the seller before the purchase is consummated.  This alone would prevent many understandings, since the sellor would be in agreement of the conditions of the contract, and the buyer would be fully informed of their rights, risks and obligations.  Just like having surgery when the patient must receive informed consent of the risks/benefits of the surgical procedure.

For any buyer to become informed of what vetting is a good idea, and what it will cost him for his choice of tests, and how risks can be minimized, is very good.

It could be a bit challenging to set up, and would require the sellor and buyer to agree to abide by its findings.  Even if it never became instituted as a mediation board, buyer information sheets and sample suggested contracts could be drawn up and made available for breedrs and buyers alike.  Good idea Hodie.

Speaknow, IMO the only thing worse than the occasionally necessary lethal culling (PTS) of very ill puppies or young GSDs is the ignorant, uninformed or selfish breeding practices that produce the lethally serious genetically based health issues such as HD, ED, EPI, hemophilia, hypothyroidism, mega-esophagus, aortic arch stenosis, DM, epilepsy, etc., etc.

Apparent taboo posting subjects for those who want to know, based on content analysis of prior posts with short half lives.  These posts will have a short life, but that's okay because no forum is comprehensive.  This one has so much good about the pedigrees and photos, it is okay if certain subjects are not deemed appropriate for posting comments.

1)trade secrets  ogf top breeders and breed wardens about what genetic combinations produce or reduce health in GSDs

2)culls, lethal due to genetic breeding errors, show culls sold to novice, uninformed, ignorant buyers who don't know the standard or GSD health issues 

3)unproved, undocumented allegations towards breeders and exhibitors 

4)SV misfeasance, unenforcement of standard and rules issues, rules that enhance or permit proliferation of genetic flaws, and lack of intellectual honesty in approaching, admitting and resolving significant genetic breed problems, or need for the SV to come out of denial on these issues and face reality, which would have a significant cost and loss of type for a period of time, maybe forever.  

Note:  it appears to be okay to post rude, crude, perverse, threatening or attacking comments as long as they are disguised in tricky or funny language as has been done by FM mike and CM roland.