Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: White on Kelpie Pups

  1. #21
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,561

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Minibulls mum View Post
    It does make one wonder where on earth common sense went to, when registries were set up to keep track of pedigrees and to better breeds it all seems not to have worked too well over time.

    All they have really done is ruin most of the breeds as far as their original skills are concerned, it may be that a dumbed down Collie or Kelpie is better for suburban life but that is not what they were meant for to start with so can hardly be an improvement.
    Another example of an interesting comment made by someone who has signed up to support a registry and its code of ethics.
    A pessimist sees the glass as half empty;
    An optimist sees the glass as half full;
    A realist just finishes the damn thing and refills it.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Inner West Sydney
    Posts
    164

    Default

    My kelpie has one random white hair on his back and a few white hairs on the back of his hind legs near his bum. Otherwise, he's completely dipped in chocolate fondue. His pedigree paper shows that his ancestors were all purebred kelpies - all black or chocolate. Maybe a tiny bit of white is acceptable?

    EDIT: Just to add, when I went up to pick up Milo, his great grandmother had a white strip down her chest. That was the only kelpie that had white on it... The other kelpies there were either solid chocolate or black.
    Last edited by Kaer; 04-03-2011 at 07:54 PM.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Queensland
    Posts
    423

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anne View Post
    Another example of an interesting comment made by someone who has signed up to support a registry and its code of ethics.
    Was it wrong Anne, or do you think that all breeds have indeed been improved health and ability wise since registries started.

    I do stick to the code for the registered dogs I breed, since I was told many years ago by a person from the CCC(Q) as it was then, that if I kept my different dogs SEPARATED, and this does not mean you keep one dog in one corner and another over in another corner, (a point you missed getting in another thread) it means keep you LINES separate, I have done just that and get quite a lot of flack over it from those who just do not get it that it is not breaking any rules to keep the dogs I had before we ever joined the CCC(Q) or indeed anything we, or any other person may choose to breed without ANKC papers.

    I have always offered to make available DNA stored for many years from my breedings to those who want to question my lines, the offer still stands.

    Anyone at any time who wants to put money where their mouth is may go ahead and go back over many generations of my pure bred dogs through DNA profiles stored, so snide remarks do not mean much to me. I did not do all that storing of generations of DNA for nothing.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,561

    Default

    ANKC;
    3. A member shall display good sportsmanship and conduct at all times so as to reflect credit upon themselves, the ANKC and the member’s Member Body
    and the CCCQ;
    t. I accept the following:
    i. The objective of the CCC(Q) is to promote in every way the standing and improvement of purebred dogs in the wider Queensland community.
    ii As a consequence, membership of the CCC(Q) confers certain responsibilities and is consideredto be a privilege and not a right.
    iii As a member it is incumbent on me to also abide by the following requirements:
    • Conduct myself politely and with integrity at CCC(Q) approved events;
    • Conduct myself in a sportsmanlike manner at such events and in any related activities or
    communications;
    • Respect the reputations of other members, including judges, at CCC(Q) approved events and in dealings in wider forums, including chat lists on the internet and in other communications
    I am not disputing anything to do with your dogs, and as I have stated before, I am not interested in DNA talk or your records personally. I don't care about your breeding program.

    My concerns raised are PURELY to do with your conduct as a registered member of a canine body and your ability to follow the code of ethics of those bodies. You take every available opportunity to make negative and damaging comments about purebred dogs and breeding programs.

    If you have such little faith in these organisations, why be a member?

    The topic of problems in breeding and in purebred dogs is a subject can be discussed in a thread of its own. But still, as a registered breeder, you might be cutting a fine line if you engaged in debate that reflects your obvious negative views.
    Last edited by Anne; 04-04-2011 at 09:39 AM.
    A pessimist sees the glass as half empty;
    An optimist sees the glass as half full;
    A realist just finishes the damn thing and refills it.

  5. #25

    Default

    I don't normally take part in these conversations.

    I don't think that's right Anne. I'd rather see someone telling it how it is than speiling off lies in an effort to make a group look good who aren't doing what they set out to do in the first place. Makes no sense to me at all. Isn't reform best coming from within the ranks?

  6. #26
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,561

    Default

    It isn't about speiling off lies Angelanbatty. It is about the balance between being seen to be following a code of ethics that you agree to when joining such organisations. There are many ways to create a culture of change, and all can be done with complete and total honesty.

    Minibull's mum breeds cross bred dogs and is a registered breeder with the CCCQ.

    Minibulls mum often makes negative remarks about purebred dogs in general and breeders in general.

    Both the above points puts Minibulls Mum in a position where it brings doubt and possibly disrepute to purebred dog breeding and to the orgs they (Minibulls Mum) are a member of.

    I am not a fan of the the current registries. I am not a fan of many practices that exist in the current purebred dog world. I am not a member of any of these organisations though.

    However, my qualms in this thread and with Minibulls Mum is the ethics of belonging to an association when you don't believe what they stand for.
    Last edited by Anne; 04-04-2011 at 10:34 AM.
    A pessimist sees the glass as half empty;
    An optimist sees the glass as half full;
    A realist just finishes the damn thing and refills it.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Queensland
    Posts
    423

    Default

    I often mention that there are many decent people doing their best to better their breeds.

    So please do not make comments that appear as if I am at all against all ANKC breeders.

    I am not.


    The ANKC is very much a needed body but is letting down all breeds and decent breeders in allowing unfit dogs to be bred, in not following a far harsher code than is current regarding this.

    In this day and age trying to make out that they are above reproach and somehow better than all other registries is pathetic and will no longer cut it.

    First worry about faults from within, weather I or the bloke next door has crossbred pups has nothing to do with unhealthy ANKC registered dogs being allowed to continue to be bred, it has nothing to do with what health tests are available not being mandatory in all breeds registered with the ANKC, it has nothing to do with allowing exagerated traits being bred into dogs when these do harm to the dog's over all health and in no way improve his performance.

    If both the ANKC and breeders do not improve on current trends the entire organisation is finnished, in this, the age of internet too many are able to tell of what is really happening, and those who cannot realise we need to stop trying to blame others and pick up our act as registered breeders are the ones who will pull the whole thing down.

    Not me, not BYB, not crossbreeders, but those who will not pick up their act and get into doing so much better that BYB and cross breeders have genuine competition.

    The OP might as well go drag one of those pups out from under the house unless they are prepared to find and pay a fortune for a very reputable breeder, the average registered breeder cannot offer much better odds against genetic problems than that BYB,yet many still want twice the price for a bit of unsubstanstiated paper, no guarantee either.
    .
    I am for far stricter rules Anne. Not for others but for all of us in the ANKC

  8. #28
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,561

    Default

    Thanks Minibulls Mum, I appreciate you taking the time to explain your position.

    I can actually understand exactly where you are coming from and can see that perhaps I have been a little harsh or only seeing your comments from a black and white perspective. I apologise for my doggedness on the issue.

    Personally I am always of two minds on the possible way forward on the issues. One part of me acknowledges that we need to ensure there is evidence of defined breeding practices that highlight quality and healthy breeding but the act of following such defined breeding idealogy is what created the issues in the first place. If that makes any sense.

    The act of defining a breed by looks and health, by using pedigrees and through peer judging, is what created the initial problems.

    Restrictions on outcrossing, a focus on the lesser importance of conformation and the current way of determining 'dogs that conform to the ideals' are just the tip though.
    A pessimist sees the glass as half empty;
    An optimist sees the glass as half full;
    A realist just finishes the damn thing and refills it.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Queensland
    Posts
    423

    Default

    Thank you Anne , What you have said is exactly right and well put,also we need to realise testing alone will not get us healthy dogs if we do not also choose phenotypes that lean toward a sustainable 'form'
    If I seem harsh at times it is because I love Neapolitan Mastiffs and they are an extreme example of utter stupidity in human interferance with nature, wonderful dogs with ruined health over all because of what has been done to them and you get people actually defending it instead of realising the mistakes made in the past and working toward helping the breed.
    I am quite convinced that to critise can be constructive,and may well help to bring benificial change to all.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •