Bullinger Thread Disappeared? - Page 2

bullinger record speaks for it s self,enought said and if some one will not post name or email, don t say anything about any breeder because to me its gossip,plain and simple........i do not know anyone from bullinger but with there show record speaks for its self then that all i need to know,,,,,,,,,rick

I myself do not think that threads like the original Bullinger one should be permitted on this list. However, if the mods deleted that one than they should not allow any others to stand where lesser known breeders are trashed either. Rules are rules, we all need to be reminded of them for time to time. However, apply those rules equally acrossed the board to all, not just those who are well known in the breed. It's just not fair.

As has been stated up above, the original thread was NOT deleted. it is still there under: Home of Kevin vom Murrtal - Sudden Downsizing ? I do agree that anonymous attacks on breeders should not be allowed. I just don't know how Oli could accomplish this with a limited amount of time available to him. When it comes to one-liners attacking a well known and reputable kennel people need to remember Carl Sagan's: "Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence" to have any credibility. MC

MC, the thread is still on the board, but it has been locked from any further comments since yesterday AM. I'll give you it is not easy to moderate a board like this one. If there were more mods, it probably could be done. Leaving it to the descretion of the posters does not work well.

I have been to Tracy's place and it is nothing but first class. Yes, some dogs are in crates but they are rotated from many different areas INCLUDING LIVING IN HER HOME. I have nothing but respect for this GREAT breeder! Debby

Same here and Tracey is aware of this and these bashers are invaders with no credibility.....

Blitzen, following the rules was tried before when there more than just Oli moderating. Everyone whined and cried on how were they going to get information about a breeder, the censorship, etc, etc. (even though you could just as easily EMAIL the poster). So darned if you do, darned if you don't. Angela

CKC tattoo numbering system: First 3 letters are the Kennel's designated letters. Bullinger is GXV. The following number is the number of the puppy born that year and the last letter is the letter the CKC designates for a particular year. Looking at the NASS catalogue, one fines a dog in the 9-12 males, Opus von Bullinger, tattoo number GXV 112R, born 12.25.2005. This means that this puppy, born on Christmas Day in 05 was puppy number 112 born to Bullinger in 2005. Assuming that no more puppies were born before Jan 1st, and giving a generous estimate of 5 puppies per litter, this means that Bullinger had at least 22 litters in 2005!! Even if they kept 12, how could they find and keep track for homes for 100 puppies? I assume that this represents a typical year.

Does anyone have a number above which they might consider a breeder to be a "puppy mill?" In a livestock operation, you would have to have more than 100 head breeding female animals to meet those goals.

This is a case of a well-planned, perfectly executed marketing strategy being highly successful. People only believe what they want to believe.