This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Justice K9 Gsd Fed SA on 20 June 2013 - 13:06
Dear Friends , please help in bringing justice and providing comments on the way forward in respect of the following concerning actions by the National Administrator , Sonia van Kraayenburg , of the GERMAN SHEPHERD DOG FEDERATION OF SA.
The Said person holds avery esteem position within the organisation and as such this person is not considered to be an ignorant individual regarding the RULES pertaining to the standards and breeding regulations pertaining to the German Shepherd Dog.
We sadly have a situation whereby the said individual mated a bitch , ie. CONIE de CESANO , that had failed the Hip Dysplasia grading and EXPORTED this bitch to India.
Disciplinary action was taken and the said person paid a ridiculous fine of R5000-00 and still holds the position of National Administrator.
At the onset , I stated that this person is not ignorant of the RULES regarding the breeding of german shepherds.
We have a situation whereby members have been banned by the Gsd Federation for expressing their concerns regarding a member of the Executive Committee and the opinions of this individual that was published in a National magazine.
I ask with tears in my eyes " IS THIS FAIR " WE HAVE THE NATIONAL ADMISTRATOR TRANSGRESSING THE BREED STANDARDS OF THE GERMAN SHEPHERD DOG AND STILL RETAINS HER POSITION AND MEMBERSHIP.
PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR COMMENTS AND ADVISE ON THE WAY FORWARD
SHOULD THIS PERSON BE BANNED PERMANENTLY AS SHE IS NOT AN IGNORRANT INDIVIDUAL
The Said person holds avery esteem position within the organisation and as such this person is not considered to be an ignorant individual regarding the RULES pertaining to the standards and breeding regulations pertaining to the German Shepherd Dog.
We sadly have a situation whereby the said individual mated a bitch , ie. CONIE de CESANO , that had failed the Hip Dysplasia grading and EXPORTED this bitch to India.
Disciplinary action was taken and the said person paid a ridiculous fine of R5000-00 and still holds the position of National Administrator.
At the onset , I stated that this person is not ignorant of the RULES regarding the breeding of german shepherds.
We have a situation whereby members have been banned by the Gsd Federation for expressing their concerns regarding a member of the Executive Committee and the opinions of this individual that was published in a National magazine.
I ask with tears in my eyes " IS THIS FAIR " WE HAVE THE NATIONAL ADMISTRATOR TRANSGRESSING THE BREED STANDARDS OF THE GERMAN SHEPHERD DOG AND STILL RETAINS HER POSITION AND MEMBERSHIP.
PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR COMMENTS AND ADVISE ON THE WAY FORWARD
SHOULD THIS PERSON BE BANNED PERMANENTLY AS SHE IS NOT AN IGNORRANT INDIVIDUAL
by Hundmutter on 21 June 2013 - 02:06
1 - is this National Administrator post a: paid, elected, or
voluntary position, ? - as this could make a real difference to
how you proceed / what you can do about it.
2 - what proof do you have, of the hip grade; the mating, and
any resulting litter (s) of puppies; the export abroad ?
3 - has the new owner in India any complaints ?
4 - if there has been Disciplinary Action resulting in a fine of
five thousand Rand, presume that action was taken by GSDFSA
and they now consider the matter closed. So if you wish to
take this forward, you may be fighting with the organisation,
rather than the individual. Have you looked at all the Federation's
Constitution, Rules etc, for a way to proceed eg through motion
of censure ?
JMO but I think these are all details you need to consider carefully
before you take this further. If you do go ahead, you want a better
founded case than just a moan & a rumour, in order to get rid of
this woman if that is what you are aiming at.
voluntary position, ? - as this could make a real difference to
how you proceed / what you can do about it.
2 - what proof do you have, of the hip grade; the mating, and
any resulting litter (s) of puppies; the export abroad ?
3 - has the new owner in India any complaints ?
4 - if there has been Disciplinary Action resulting in a fine of
five thousand Rand, presume that action was taken by GSDFSA
and they now consider the matter closed. So if you wish to
take this forward, you may be fighting with the organisation,
rather than the individual. Have you looked at all the Federation's
Constitution, Rules etc, for a way to proceed eg through motion
of censure ?
JMO but I think these are all details you need to consider carefully
before you take this further. If you do go ahead, you want a better
founded case than just a moan & a rumour, in order to get rid of
this woman if that is what you are aiming at.
by Dobermannman on 21 June 2013 - 08:06
Id be more inclined to support the removal if the person making the request was using a real name?
Thomas Barriano
Thomas Barriano
by Hundmutter on 21 June 2013 - 09:06
Well, yes, me too actually Thomas.
by NigerDeltaMann on 22 June 2013 - 03:06
This is tantamout to a judge caught shoplifting. If she had been fined, then, it means she actually committed the said offence, and from somebody her statue and standing before the gsd, . . . imagine, the chief custodian, who shepherds the breed in a country, then, she should either be banned from exporting dogs from SA or step down honourably, or be removed by gsdfederation. Given her action and the propensity of reproduction in the gsd, she would've secretly introduced a "wolf" amongst the gsds in India. Very rich but greedy n bad.
by Hundmutter on 22 June 2013 - 04:06
Maybe - but it still needs doing PROPERLY if it is to be done at all.
by Scientist on 22 June 2013 - 07:06
This matter happened nearly fifteen years ago. India has never had a compulsory HD scheme. Many good dogs that failed HD in for example Germany have been knowingly imported dogs into India. Also, there is no rule in the Federation that a person may not sell a dog that have failed the Hip scheme. Mrs van Kraayenburg also did not export the bitch referred to India herself, but helped a friend Judith Kunsman who was the actual exporter. It is for this that she was fined.
According to the Federation's rules, an offense is discarded after five years. You cannot continue to hold something against someone for ever, particularly a person that is doing as much for the organization and the GSD as Mrs van Kraayenburg.
Mr John Swartz (the writer of the original post above) and his friend Mr Mukesh Manuaur & Family keep bringing up this instance to get at the Federation. They are both banned for life from the Federation for numerous dishonisties.
Mr Swartz is banned for forgery and fraud and for stealing Federation property, Federation members may also not train with him.
Mr Mansaur is banned for misleading the public numerous times and for continued unethical breeding. He has been in the press many times for these action.
Mr Swartz and Mr Mansaur are just disgruntled individuals that have no say or support anywhere. Nothing they say or do will allow them back in the Federation.
The Federation is a democratic organization and any executive that does not have majority support will soon be voted out. Mrs van Kraayenburg has huge support and is highly respected, unlike Mr Swartz.
The Federation has just banned more people. Expect these persons to make many more claims such as the above under unanimous names.
According to the Federation's rules, an offense is discarded after five years. You cannot continue to hold something against someone for ever, particularly a person that is doing as much for the organization and the GSD as Mrs van Kraayenburg.
Mr John Swartz (the writer of the original post above) and his friend Mr Mukesh Manuaur & Family keep bringing up this instance to get at the Federation. They are both banned for life from the Federation for numerous dishonisties.
Mr Swartz is banned for forgery and fraud and for stealing Federation property, Federation members may also not train with him.
Mr Mansaur is banned for misleading the public numerous times and for continued unethical breeding. He has been in the press many times for these action.
Mr Swartz and Mr Mansaur are just disgruntled individuals that have no say or support anywhere. Nothing they say or do will allow them back in the Federation.
The Federation is a democratic organization and any executive that does not have majority support will soon be voted out. Mrs van Kraayenburg has huge support and is highly respected, unlike Mr Swartz.
The Federation has just banned more people. Expect these persons to make many more claims such as the above under unanimous names.
by Hundmutter on 22 June 2013 - 11:06
A-ha !!!
by kyto on 23 June 2013 - 10:06
busted 
by e c street on 02 July 2013 - 22:07
looks to me like one should not make judgemants without having all the facts. ecs
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top
