Wikipedia article on Border Collies

[rossie]

Earlier today, I got into a discussion on another board about what does and does not constitute a “hybrid dog” with the other poster trying to tell me that her mutt was a hybrid and yours truly pointing out that hybrids refer to offspring whose parents are of different species. Well, in the course of this discussion I was referred to Wikipedia that, of course, says that mutts are hybrids (*sigh* I will try to get this changed.)

 

Anyway, my interest in Wikipedia misinformation piqued, the next thing I looked up in Wikipedia was their article on Border Collies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_Collie

 

The article isn’t half-bad, but I was wondering if people in this community might be interested in editing it further, providing more references and strengthening the language about what these dogs require day-in and day-out.

 

In particular, I was thinking about the fact that the Katz movie is supposed to be released in the coming year and I know I’m not the only one who is worried about a “101 Dalmatians” effect--lots of dogs being produced and going to homes that aren't equipped to deal with them. Wikipedia is a pretty easy way to educate people about why these super-cool gorgeous dogs are too much for them to handle!

 

I’m happy to help, but I’m not nearly as expert as many posters here, so thought I would ask if others would check it out. Just an idea.

[Shetlander]

In particular, I was thinking about the fact that the Katz movie is supposed to be released in the coming year and I know I’m not the only one who is worried about a “101 Dalmatians” effect--lots of dogs being produced and going to homes that aren't equipped to deal with them.

 

I believe the movie is supposed to be released this summer. Since Katz made such a huge point of how hellish it was living with Devon/Orson that first year, I'm hoping that while people may find the movie "funny," they wouldn't then want to run out and get a their own neurotic, hyper, difficult Border Collie. One can hope.

[Katelynn & Gang]

I'm hoping that while people may find the movie "funny," they wouldn't then want to run out and get a their own neurotic, hyper, difficult Border Collie.

 

We can only hope so. I'm sure rescues will still be bracing themselves for what is likely to come.

 

As for Wikipedia, maybe we could get some links on there to the USBCHA and ABCA.

 

Katelynn

[stockdogranch]

Wikipedia--hmmm...I am pretty out of touch with the real world, I guess (all I do is work dogs and take care of livestock), and if it were not for my college freshman composition students, I would have no idea of what wikipedia is. But, through these students, I see that this is apparently their number one source for any and all information. As for other segments of the general population, I have no idea. But if their article (which I have not yet read, as I have to get out and feed critters) were tweaked in the ways that you suggest, I can only think it would be a good thing!

Anna

[Rosanne]

rossie, maybe you could link them to somewhere on wikipedia where it must say that definitions are provided pretty much by the populace at large, and suggest they try merriam-webster if they want a REAL definition www.m-w.com

 

Although on second glance, their definition is: 1 : an offspring of two animals or plants of different races, breeds, varieties, species, or genera

 

So perhaps that IS an accepted descriptor of a mutt. . . but it's not a biologically correct term.

 

I remember being surprised by wikipedia's general grasp of the whole Breed BC/Working BC split. At least they mention it!

[SoloRiver]

The reason the Wikipedia entry for Border Collies is somewhat clueful is that a few folks took it upon themselves to make it so. Unfortunately, since then it's been monkeyed around with (for example, the links to USBCHA and ABCA were removed). It could use a revisit.

[Rosanne]

I have heard that because of some upset celebrities, they are going to start requiring credentials of some sort to edit wikipedia info. Hopefully they are not idiots and only think that AKC experience = credentials. If they read their own entry they should see that and represent both sides.

 

Hopefully they will do something like require you to email somebody with verified credentials and then give you a log-in name/password so you can then edit it. Who knows, though. I heard something about it on TV, and since I never outright trust anything I read on the 'net, I didn't pay much attention. I use wikipedia for basic stuff - stuff that's too long or new of a phrase to be in the dictionary; but usually I just want basic ideas. I think that will probably be true for many people who read the BC entry, in which case it is definitely a good idea for working BC people (who, I understand, are still the MAJORITY in this country) to contribute a good chunk of material.

[Katelynn & Gang]

Hopefully they are not idiots and only think that AKC experience = credentials.

 

Ahh. Probably but we could put up a fight that NASDA, AIBC and ABCA where the founders of the breed in the USA and still are the protectors (well ABCA still is anyway) of the breed, WAY before AKC came into the picture.

 

Katelynn

[Bill Fosher]

Is hybrid corn the result of crossing two species? I think not -- just two highly selected strains of Zea mays.

[Jim2000]

wickipedia is not the best place to get information. many people take it as gospel and fail to realize that wicki can be edited and added to by users, so a lot of misinformation gets passed along as credible information.

[wildairbc]

Ahh. Probably but we could put up a fight that NASDA, AIBC and ABCA where the founders of the breeder in the USA and still are the protectors (well ABCA still is anyway) of the breed, WAY before AKC came into the picture.

 

Katelynn

 

 

Actually, the Boder Collie was placed in the AKC's Miscellaneous Class in 1955. They were bred for, and participated in, AKC obedience trials ever since, as well as tracking and agility later on, WELL BEFORE they gained universal recognition in 1995 and began competing in the breed ring.

 

As I recall, the ABCA is the youngest of the other registries mentioned (appearing in the 1980s), and none are nearly as old as the AKC. If the ABCA is the "protector" of BCs in America, I look forward to seeing them do something about the thousands of BCs they register every year that are produced by backyard breeders and outright puppy mills.

 

Does the ABCA COE encourage breeders to provide a spay/neuter contract for puppies going to pet homes? Or those that just aren't "top workers"? Since their focus is just the one breed, do they fund any rescues? Hold breeder education seminars? Do they have any official position (as the ISDS does) on health testing breeding dogs? Not requirements, per se, just recommendations? Do they have inspectors that oversee the quality of breeder's facilities? I mean, how many ABCA Border Collie breeders can there be?

[Journey]

Actually, the Boder Collie was placed in the AKC's Miscellaneous Class in 1955. They were bred for, and participated in, AKC obedience trials ever since, as well as tracking and agility later on, WELL BEFORE they gained universal recognition in 1995 and began competing in the breed ring.

 

Not true. It wasn't until the 80's that people began to breed their "obedience dogs" for the ring.

 

As I recall, the ABCA is the youngest of the other registries mentioned (appearing in the 1980s), and none are nearly as old as the AKC. If the ABCA is the "protector" of BCs in America, I look forward to seeing them do something about the thousands of BCs they register every year that are produced by backyard breeders and outright puppy mills.

 

Correct. Where do you get your information? How do you know there are "thousands produced by back yard breeders"? ABCA does more for the working Border Collie than does ACK does for any breed. Funny, they are either both registries or they are not, which is it? This is about when people stand up and say "they're just a registry" so why does ABCA need to "do" anything? Does ACK?

 

Does the ABCA COE encourage breeders to provide a spay/neuter contract for puppies going to pet homes? Or those that just aren't "top workers"? Since their focus is just the one breed, do they fund any rescues? Hold breeder education seminars? Do they have any official position (as the ISDS does) on health testing breeding dogs? Not requirements, per se, just recommendations? Do they have inspectors that oversee the quality of breeder's facilities? I mean, how many ABCA Border Collie breeders can there be?

 

Maybe you should have read up on the ABCA. Yes, they do fund rescues, as do the breeders and owners. When was the last time you donated to Rescue? They do have an official position on health testing all the dogs that run at the Nationals, which is more than ACK does. Why they would need "inspections or inspectors" is beyond me. After all, they only register Border Collies, not hundreds of thousands of dogs that may or may not be what they are said to be. You're one of the Border Collies breeders right? Would your kennel pass inspection? Do show breeders breed w/o health clearances, w/o knowing if the dog has ability to do anything other that gait around the ring, breed dogs under 18 months? The answer is yes and I find it very hilarious that you want "working bred Border Collies" under this microscope when we all know that show bred ones would not be able to stand up to your expectations at all.

 

Karen

[Eileen Stein]

The ABCA was chronologically the third of the border collie registries in the US, founded in 1982. The AKC did not recognize the breed and begin registering border collies until 1995. Though AKC permitted border collies to compete in their obedience and tracking events before that time (by classing them as Miscellaneous), they did not register border collies and took no responsibility for the breed's welfare. Thus, Katelynn's statement seems pretty accurate to me.

 

Apparently Wildair feels the ABCA is not protecting the breed as well as the AKC, but that could be because she is ignorant of what the ABCA does (for example, the ABCA does indeed have recommendations for the health testing of breeding dogs, which can be found here, they require eye testing of all dogs who run in the national finals, and they were a major contributor to the identification of the CEA gene and resulting DNA test), or because she has an exaggerated idea of what the AKC offers in this regard. In any case, these perennial jabs don't seem particularly relevant to this thread.

 

I just read the Wikipedia entry on the border collie, and thought it was pretty poor. Poorly organized, very haphazard, inaccurate in many respects, containing obvious biases, and strangely dominated by a treatise on NCL. I would be willing to put some effort toward editing it, but it seems futile if any ignoramus can come along and change it back again tomorrow. Is that the case?

[wildairbc]

I was not comparing the ABCA with the AKC regarding thier respective "protection" of the Border Collie. It was stated that the ABCA is there to "protect" the Border Collie, so I was asking how. I was just asking. I don't know. I don't see it.

 

I would also suggest that perhaps you do some reading on the AKC, which has long since given up calling itself "just a registry". The AKC sponsors the Canine Health Foundation, has a legislation department to help fight anti-dog legislation which is rempant across the country, has a scholarship and intern program for Juniors, funds the "Take the Lead" program which provides financil support to member of the "fancy'" in times of personal crisis and yes, inspects kennels that use the registry for accurate record keeping as well as good husbandry. Among many other things.

 

If you think that the ABCA does not have breeders using their registry that have inaccurate breeding records and substandard care, then you are living in a dreamworld. If the ABCA is promoting "protection" of the breed, I just want to know exactly what that means. I know it doesn't mean that every dog registered have proven working ability. I know that it doesn't mean breeder education to cut down on the huge numbers of border collies being cranked out with ABCA registration and sold to anyone with the cash.

 

It is one thing to say that you "promote breeding Border Collies for working ability alone". It is another to show what you intend to do to make that happen.

 

And yes, the AKC has to oversee breeders of over 150 breeds. Surely, with just one breed to look after, the ABCA could do more. If it is "just a registry", then why is it said that it is "protecting" the Border Collie. Philosophy is cold company to thousands of unwanted Border Coolies whose breeders don't give a lick what happens to them once the check is in hand. Who, exactly, is doing anything aobut that, if not the ABCA? Or don't you think that 20,000 BCs a year is excessive, afterall? That number would put Border Collies at about number 13 in registrations in the AKC. Instead, AKC registered Border Collies are at #56, a level down from last year.

 

So really, whose dogs are having the greater influence in the grand design? So, who would you say has the greatest responsibilty to clean up thier own act? Or is it just too convenient to blame the AKC, a non-profit organization without individual memberships that represents all purebred dogs? Surely, just ONE BREED would make it ever so much easier to do what is right. To educate-not to hate the AKC-but to cherish the breed and do right by it, whatever your idea of right is. Does hating the AKC make the breed better? Is that all you can come up with?

[Katelynn & Gang]

I would also suggest that perhaps you do some reading on the AKC, which has long since given up calling itself "just a registry".

 

We are all very aware of this. That whole “lets register puppy mill puppies to make up for loss of registration fees” proved that.

 

If you think that the ABCA does not have breeders using their registry that have inaccurate breeding records and substandard care, then you are living in a dreamworld.

 

No, we would never “believe” that. We have all witnessed breeders being suspended and expelled from the ABCA for such embarrassing and dirty practices (just as we‘ve witnessed dogs being deregistered for becoming AKC Champions). I am sure we will witness many more in years to come too.

 

It is one thing to say that you "promote breeding Border Collies for working ability alone". It is another to show what you intend to do to make that happen.

 

Well! Considering dogs within the ABCA being bred to the highest “standard” of ABCA standards are "still" working sheep in the same manner (over the same trial fields) in which the very first Border Collies did, I'd say they done a pretty good job! I mean, compared to other “registries” whose Border Collies are bred to their “highest” standard of breeding are not working sheep at all (or in a manner you could call "Border Collie").

 

If what you mean by "intending" is stopping puppy mills and back yard breeders, we both know that is a never ending fight for any breed (ABCA or not).

 

Philosophy is cold company to thousands of unwanted Border Coolies whose breeders don't give a lick what happens to them once the check is in hand.

 

Yes, it is. Just as it is for all the AKC's 149 other breeds with thousands upon thousands of unwated dogs sitting in shelters or in rescues.

 

Or don't you think that 20,000 BCs a year is excessive, afterall? That number would put Border Collies at about number 13 in registrations in the AKC. Instead, AKC registered Border Collies are at #56, a level down from last year.

 

I think it'd throw the Border Collie well above number 13 in registrations which is the reason for the AKC agreeing to leave its books up to ABCA dogs forever (thanks for brining that up, that needed to be pointed out for people reading). Just think of the money they'd make if we weren't so resistant!

 

As for a level down from last year! TG! I also noticed there weren't many Championships put on their Border Collies either.

 

So really, whose dogs are having the greater influence in the grand design?

 

I hope and pray that it's the trial dogs of today, as that is what influenced the grand design in the first place!

 

So, who would you say has the greatest responsibilty to clean up thier own act?

 

When did puppy mills and back yard breeds become just ONE (1) registries problem? If I recall correctly, the AKC accepts and registers Border Collies just as much as ABCA.

 

For the record, while I am thinking about it. Most back yard breeders or puppy millsregister their dogs with the AKC because its easy and means more money (just surf the web a bit)!

 

Give us something more to work with then "Well ABCA registers a lot of back yard and puppy mill puppies!" We both know that back yard breeders and puppy mill breeders are even across the board for every breed, more so the desired ones like the "Border Collie."

 

Find something more wrong with our dogs and us then accusing us of hiding bad breeders that we all know every breed has.

 

We've given you valid points as to why we don't like AKC or conformation (CL, TNS and loss of inherited working traits that make a Border Collie a Border Collie).

 

Now please, give us the same respect and give “valid” reasons (or reason) to why you have such a problem with our working registry?

 

Katelynn

[Bill Fosher]

Wildair --

 

Here's a few examples of how the ABCA protects the working Border collie:

 

-- It funded the research that led to the availability of the DNA test for CEA status.

 

-- It is funding further research into the genetic components of hip dysplasia and epilepsy. (Research that will probably also benefit many other breeds of dogs, incidentally.)

 

-- It is a major sponsor of the annual USBCHA sheepdog and cattledog finals.

 

-- It has promotional money available every year that can be used to help put on training clinics, health clinics, local trials etc. -- anything that helps preserve and promote the working Border collie.

 

-- It vigorously investigates and disciplines breeders who falsify records or who refuse to cooperate with investigations.

 

There are a few examples for you.

[Journey]

I would also suggest that perhaps you do some reading on the AKC, which has long since given up calling itself "just a registry". The AKC sponsors the Canine Health Foundation, has a legislation department to help fight anti-dog legislation which is rempant across the country, has a scholarship and intern program for Juniors, funds the "Take the Lead" program which provides financil support to member of the "fancy'" in times of personal crisis and yes, inspects kennels that use the registry for accurate record keeping as well as good husbandry. Among many other things.

 

Bonnie,

 

Everyone knows that it's the "Parent Clubs" that contribute to CHF - not just ACK. Did ACK contribute to the research funding for CEA, CL, TNS? ABCA too has helped in legislative matters when needed. They have funds available to help, promote, educate - as Bill pointed out in his post. Take the lead is a special program and it is not funded solely by ACK. They need to inspect kennels, they register them, as ABCA does follow up on problem breeders. Instead of fining them (as ACK does) they expel them when problems are found with DNA and papers.

 

Karen

[Eileen Stein]

Even though Wildair seems to be hijacking this thread (with what sounds strangely like a comparison of ABCA and AKC to me), I would be glad to respond except that I am busy working on a draft of the ABCA's opposition to California's AB1634. Maybe later.

 

BTW, returning to the subject of the thread, the Wikipedia article has been improved since my earlier critical post. Whether it will stay that way is anybody's guess.

[wildairbc]

Thank you, Bill, for answering the question. I do remember not too many years ago that there was a lot of denial about HD and epilepsy in Border Collies. How about deafness? Is that on the radar yet? I am aware of the ABCAs contributions to the research on CEA. You may also want to know that teh KC in the UK raised a huge fund for that research.

Please be clear that AKC breeders are GLAD that BCs have gone down a step in registrations. No one wants their breed in the top ten.

Indeed, their ARE puppy mills for nearly every breed with a market. That was not my point. My point is that the AKC has to cover those 150+ breeds-not just one. So it seems like it would be extremely easy to deal with the BYBs and PMs of just one breed, in comparison. ;o}

I know you will correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't it just in recent years that the ABCA suspended a couple of breeders and that for false registrations-not breeding or husbandry practices.

I guess this does seem like a comparison, Eileen. I was asking questions about the ABCA, but folks always have to get nasty about the AKC, which very few of you seem to have any in depth knowledge of. No one is going to argue that the AKC does not have it's flaws, but even in the last few months, since elections, things are beginnning to change. In fact, it is a little weird the way the AKC has sort of mirrored the nation as a whole in the last several years. But the tide seems to be turning for the better for both now. We are working on it all of the time.

If you read the Secretary's page of the AKC Gazette each month, you will notice that the AKC seems to suspend more breeders for registration fraud/poor husbandry/cruelty convictions in any given month than the ABCA has so far in it's history. Yes, of course, the AKC covers a lot more territory. It just seems that, porportionately, the ABCA is unconcerned with doing anything about the BC puppy millers out there. If that is not TRUE, then there's your head's up-that is how it SEEMS.

BTW, that's great that the ABCA registers those few top trial dogs-but what about the other 19,500? What are they doing to hurt or help the breed? The fact that they are NOT AKC registered and therefore NOT pushing the AKC registrations into the top twenty, does not lessen the fact that they EXIST and as far as the general population of puppy buyers knows, the BC IS a top twenty breed after all. So, go ahead and puke. The ABCA breeders are putting them there.

Of course when I write on here, I know you will all disagree. But perhaps you will think also. Who really is the enemy of your "beloved" breed?

[Eileen Stein]

Ah, finished with my ABCA legislative advocacy for the day. Now, where were we?

 

Thank you, Bill, for answering the question. I do remember not too many years ago that there was a lot of denial about HD and epilepsy in Border Collies.

 

Well, there's a nice, unsubstantiated slam. Where, when and by whom was this denial? Since you weren't aware of the ABCA's breeding recommendations, perhaps you are mistaken in attributing (by implication) this "denial" to the ABCA.

 

How about deafness? Is that on the radar yet?

 

We are very familiar with the available data about deafness, thanks.

 

I am aware of the ABCAs contributions to the research on CEA. You may also want to know that teh KC in the UK raised a huge fund for that research.

 

I believe they did contribute to some CEA researchers, although not the ones who ultimately found the gene, I believe. The ABCA has much less in the way of resources, but we do try very hard to place them to maximum advantage. The AKC did nothing, right?

 

Please be clear that AKC breeders are GLAD that BCs have gone down a step in registrations. No one wants their breed in the top ten.

 

Then why not stop breeding? It wouldn't solve the problem, but it would be doing your bit.

 

Indeed, their ARE puppy mills for nearly every breed with a market. That was not my point. My point is that the AKC has to cover those 150+ breeds-not just one. So it seems like it would be extremely easy to deal with the BYBs and PMs of just one breed, in comparison. ;o}

 

I assume this is a joke. The AKC is not opposed to back yard breeders and puppy mills. They advocate outreach to what they are pleased to call "the commercial sector," so as to increase their registration revenues. You will never see that from the ABCA. The AKC does nothing with regard to back yard breeders. They did little or nothing to inspect high-volume breeders, or to support health research, until bad publicity forced them into it in the 1990s. That was well after they had established their posh headquarters on Madison Avenue, to say nothing of their facility in North Carolina, their lush salaries, pension benefits, expense accounts and other perks, which still come first. The ABCA operates out of a couple of rented rooms on a member's farm. We have no employees, and only two or three staff. We exist primarily to serve farmers and ranchers, not "The Fancy." Our financial resources are minuscule compared to AKC's multimillion-dollar operation. But we care deeply about border collies, and work harder than the AKC could possibly imagine on their behalf.

 

Of course when I write on here, I know you will all disagree. But perhaps you will think also. Who really is the enemy of your "beloved" breed?

 

Gee, thanks for the heads-up. Why, it would never occur to us to give any thought at all to these issues if it weren't for your selfless wake-up call!

 

Seriously and sincerely, Bonnie, I have looked at the TNS pedigrees and I know you must be feeling awful about your Jane and her litter, and Tia. I genuinely sympathize. Misfortunes affecting our dogs can be heartbreaking, as we all know. But I think you're taking out your frustration in the wrong place. It doesn't bother me much, because I know I'm doing the best I can for my breed, but it is unjustified.

[wildairbc]

Hi Eileen,

Thanks for your thoughts on Jane-she is quite the little pistol!

It is my great good fortune to have had this tragic litter happen just as Alan was wrapping up research on TNS, so all of my dogs are now tested and going forward will be so much simpler. If only all traits selected for were single gene pairs.

I have no frustration whatsoever, therefore. It was extremely sad as the four puppies had to be PTS as their conditions deteriorated, but their breeder (who was not I) gave them as much joy every day of their little lives as she possibly could. She is the one who had the real pain-my pain was that I was too far away to be much help or comfort.

However, that litter was integral to the research, so their lives were not in vain. Sometimes breeding throws you a hard one. The measure is not in how you feel or even react. It is in how you go on.

The three healthy puppies are doing very well and the two in show/sport homes are already winning and making great strides in their training!

I am very proud of them and their breeder, so thanks for bringing them up. I never outright brag unless forced to. That felt like forcing!

[Katelynn & Gang]

How about deafness? Is that on the radar yet?

 

Oh yes, we know about deafness!

 

The great thing is though, our dogs are used on large scale fields (with hills and dips, wind and rain, snow and sleet) with whistles as commands. So we usually know if there is a problem or not and the “on going” breeding of a deaf dog would never occur because a deaf dog cannot be successful at what makes it worth breeding.

 

I am aware of the ABCAs contributions to the research on CEA. You may also want to know that teh KC in the UK raised a huge fund for that research.

 

I thought we were discussing AKC and not the KC in the UK. Must have missed something but long as we are on that track, did AKC contribute anything? I mean, with all the funding they have (millions of dollars worth) and with caring so much about ever breed (We love dogs!), they must have contributed something anything but I must have missed were it reads that they did.

 

Please be clear that AKC breeders are GLAD that BCs have gone down a step in registrations. No one wants their breed in the top ten.

 

Glad you took that one on yourself with being only one AKC conformation Border Collie breeder and speaking for the whole lot of you. Maybe AKC conformation breeders are glad but I am sure AKCs pocket books would privately disagree.

 

Indeed, their ARE puppy mills for nearly every breed with a market. That was not my point. My point is that the AKC has to cover those 150+ breeds-not just one. So it seems like it would be extremely easy to deal with the BYBs and PMs of just one breed, in comparison. ;o}

 

With more breeds comes more funding. The AKC should be making more of a dent in puppy milling, back yard breeding and animal cruelty then any other registry in America, especially because they by far have the most inflectional! I do not find this to be a smiling matter, do you disagree?

 

TBC

[Katelynn & Gang]

I know you will correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't it just in recent years that the ABCA suspended a couple of breeders and that for false registrations-not breeding or husbandry practices.

 

How do you know? You are not far from some of the expelled breeders, drop in and have a visit and you then tell me what you think.

 

If you read the Secretary's page of the AKC Gazette each month, you will notice that the AKC seems to suspend more breeders for registration fraud/poor husbandry/cruelty convictions in any given month than the ABCA has so far in it's history.

 

Considering the funding difference once again. . . . .

 

It just seems that, porportionately, the ABCA is unconcerned with doing anything about the BC puppy millers out there.

 

Have you looked at the list of breeders they’ve expelled? Or know anything about it for that matter?

 

BTW, that's great that the ABCA registers those few top trial dogs-but what about the other 19,500

?

 

And out of the millions of dogs the AKC registers, who many are Champions? Or even more then back yard pets or puppy machines? Give me numbers, please!

 

The fact that they are NOT AKC registered and therefore NOT pushing the AKC registrations into the top twenty, does not lessen the fact that they EXIST and as far as the general population of puppy buyers knows, the BC IS a top twenty breed after all.

 

We’ve known they are well into the top twenty, just as AKC does. They are not in the AKC’s top twenty which is why AKC was ever wishful and so kindly left their stud books open.

 

As for the ABCA putting them there? Who on this board new what a Border Collie was before the AKC recognized them? Please chime in!

 

Of course when I write on here, I know you will all disagree. But perhaps you will think also.

 

Yes of coarse we’ll disagree. We are not going to sit back and let you give out what we believe to be incorrect information on a public board without our two cents being added (same as what you are doing, am I correct?).

 

BTW I think you are doing a wonderful job brining up anything and everything the AKC is doing wrong and giving us every opportunity to prove why it is. Thank you for this opportunity.

 

Who really is the enemy of your "beloved" breed?

 

Well I am still yet to see a “good” ABCA breeder bred two dogs together and get puppies that had to be destroyed at a very young and untimely age due to a odd and very rare mutation.

 

I must have missed the forced bragging because I found nothing worth bragging about being written. Are you glad TNS has been found in your lines and has killed puppies produced from your dogs? The publicity you are getting must be outrageous, like the fifteen seconds of fame everyone always talks about!

 

Katelynn

[wildairbc]

Katelyn,

I know you are just a kid, so I neither take you seriously or hold it against you.

I do hope that one day, you will choose your idols more carefully.

[Eileen Stein]

Wildair, your post disparages another poster while containing no substantive content whatsoever. Please confine your posts to the topic, and not the personal characteristics of other posters.