NOT ONE PERSON HERE HAS CONTACTED OR ADDRESSED ME DIRECTLY TO FIND OUT THE TRUTH before attacking me or after I offered to clarify the situation or correct their “misunderstandings”. NOT ONE!
I haven't yet seen a single person who misunderstood anything about your dogs or your breeding program. Everything that has been said about you has been based on either information provided on your own website, publicly verifiable information about your dogs, or web postings you yourself have made.
Second, I had a lengthy personal exchange with you before making any public statements, so it is yet another lie to say that "not one person" has addressed you directly.
The point of the posts are in fact, to humiliate and abuse another human being. It is not now nor has it ever been about discovery of truth for any of these people, but trashing out a breeder who breeds or has a connection to a type of dog that they dislike or find personally offensive.
Another falsehood. The point of these posts is to help people learn to find dogs that fit the GRCA's definition of a carefully-bred dog. The point is to help people find dogs who fit the breed standard (be it English or American) and who have the best possible shot at a long, healthy life.
Has our society devolved so low that people do not understand that this behavior is horrible, terroristic, and cruel?
First we're bigots, and now we're terrorists? I mean, c'mon. What's cruel is ignoring tools that can prevent the suffering of innocent dogs and then lying and blustering when you're called out about it.
In addition, why is it that no one has the courage to disagree or stand up against these bullies? Why does no one say, “Hold on, let’s just ask the person in question before we smear their name and make a serious attempt to damage their reputation, business and their lives.” No moral courage. Seriously, what is wrong with people? Is it the temporary high of feeling better than someone, anyone for just a moment? Or, even worse, is the desire to exercise the closet sociopath that is hidden within so strong? Furthermore, the moderators on this site who are allowing this to occur should be held morally and legally responsible. Vicious slander should not be ignored, which is implied agreement with the despicable behavior.
There's no slander (or libel) if the statement is true. Your breeding program fails to match the ethics set out by the GRCA, and you're being called out publicly for that failure, all based on information you yourself provide on your website and information that is publicly available about your dogs. Unfortunately, it all appears to be true, and you haven't actually shown that any of the claims made here are untrue. Not a single one! What have people lied about? You market and breed for a color extreme (against both common sense and the breed club's recommendations). You participate in breeding mixes (against breed club recommendations for myriad reasons relating to health and suffering of dogs). You sell through brokers (not indicative of somebody who cares about where their dogs end up and against the GRCA CoE). Your dogs aren't all properly cleared at the time they're bred (and nowhere in your lengthy post did you offer a single piece of updated health information).
I have a long history with the American Golden retriever, and though I love and have enjoyed the breed, I am currently focused on the English Type Retriever. This is a personal preference, and I should not have to apologize or be terrorized because of it.
We have a couple of breeders of English types on the board, and we have lots of English type owners. Nobody gives them a hard time. What do you think the difference is between them and you? In fact, those poor breeders of English type dogs in the US have to go through tons of headaches in order to make sure they're not associated with breeders like you. They also don't make false claims about the health of their type. In fact, some wonderful, ethical English type breeders recently had a discussion here on the forum about the prevalence of icthyosis and the relative merits of the current testing available.
For the millionth time, you're not being singled out for breeding English type dogs. We love English type dogs and ethical breeders of that type. You're being singled out for failing to fit the definition of a good or ethical breeder. You're being singled out for making baseless claims about the health of English type dogs relative to American. You're being singled out for making misleading (and occasionally outright false) claims about your dogs' titles, qualifications, and clearances.
I did not name any of these imported dogs, and should not be slandered for the spelling of the dog’s name once translated.
I remember the exchange about the spelling, and I don't see any slander that occurred over it. Once the dog was correctly identified, people amended their statements.
The dogs in my program now were imported with health testing, which were completely redone in the US, exactly as I have represented. This can be verified by anyone with 5 minutes and a link to the OFA website. I have offered on multiple occasions, and I will happily send links to said health testing to anyone unsure how to find it.
Why don't you spend time correcting any inaccurate statements about your dogs, then? You took the time to call us terrorists twice in your lengthy post, but you didn't take the five minutes to correct or update any clearance information.
In most of those that do test, you can almost always find serious poor testing results in many of the close relatives, siblings, cousins, etc. In a breed with such a high incidence of hip dysplasia, and other serious health issues, this is a problem. No one ever talks about this, supports or challenges each other to improve. Breeders are terrified to communicate openly for fear of public humiliation.
Here we have an entire forum of breeders and enthusiasts discussing clearances, programs, hopes, fears, health, and plans. Just as we easily found with your dogs and their relatives, there are going to failed test results when tests are done. That's the point of the tests. People need to be more open, sure, but good breeders already are. And good breeders come and clear up any misunderstandings because they don't have anything to hide. They don't make overblown accusations of libel and laughably absurd claims of terrorism.
In contrast, my every experience with the quality doodle breeders today has been the opposite. They have been open, honest, helpful, and care more for the correct development of their breed than supporting their overblown egos.
Really? Because my experience with doodle breeders is that they generally don't do clearances, and the statistics in the OFA database will tell you that those that do are using lower grade hips than Poodle or Golden breeders. And a basic knowledge of husbandry and genetics would tell you that outcrossing strains as far apart as Goldens and Poodles would tend to produce a wider range of hip sockets and therefore a slightly
higher percentage of dysplastic dogs overall. If you then bred the crosses back to each other, you could start to control for hips, but that's not what you're participating in.
I am available anytime, and am happy to respond with facts, and documentation.
Then why not do it here? If you feel you've been slandered, why not set the facts straight? For example, you state that EX is "the most titled" English style dog living in the US today. You also told me two years ago that you were working on his American title. What's the basis for the first claim? And is the second really true? If so, what AKC shows has he been entered in and how has he done? Let's hear this honesty.
If you have facts and documentation that contradict any claims made about you on GRF, please let us know. If there have been misunderstandings or inaccuracies, people are generally quite willing to apologize and let the record be set straight. We care more about truth and dogs than about defending any mistakes. But you haven't contradicted a single claim that has been made about your breeding program. If I'm wrong about anything, I'll happily apologize and retract what I said. But let's see the proof first, eh?
