poor breeding thread

[Guest destructo]

Can someone please retell the Swafford story?

 

I've googled, but I find only that the abcbordercollie site is now defunct.

 

What did these people do? Who stopped them, and how?

[Bill Fosher]

My understanding is that Swafford knowingly falsified breeding records to conceal the fact that a litter was the result of a very close mating -- siblings or son to dam or such. When his records were proved false by DNA, he was stripped of registry priviledges by the ABCA.

 

Essentially, no one stopped him. We all presume that his breeding practices have not changed one iota. What will have changed is where (and whether) he registers the pups.

[PennyT]

Destructo wishes to "take challenge to a point that every border collie has to work a sheep to be worth anything. Frankly, the number of BCs that will ever see a sheep is small now and will in all likelyhood get smaller and smaller and smaller in both number and especially as a percentage of the breed."

 

The above is neither an argument nor even a justification. The breed standard of the border collie is the quality of livestock work, not appearance or skill at agility trials.

 

The documented use of livestock working skill as the measure of a herding dog's worth, in other words as the standard, is at least a thousand years old. Sydney Moorhouse's The British Sheepdog contains this reference about value from "Ancient Welsh Laws codified by Hywel Dda (Howell the Good) about 920 A.D....If it be of a shepherd (herdsman's) dog...it is of the value of an ox of current price. And should it be doubted being so; let its owner swear, with a neighbor above his door, and another below his door, to its going before the cattle in the morning, and guarding the hindmost ones at close of day."

 

Good border collies are now more essential than ever to anyone who raises livestock, not less so. The reasons for this are that human help is harder and harder to get and that a substantial percentage of livestock production is from smaller producers. Anyone who sells to local word of mouth markets and to ethnic markets knows this and that demand can actually be fairly hard to keep up with. When I lived in Montana, most family farms and ranches were supported by someone having a town job as well; the same thing is true in southern Mississippi.

 

When Destructo talks about backyard livestock raising disparagingly, I gather she heartily embraces the notion that only large scale livestock production and gigantic feedlots are worthwhile.

 

Destructo says that because people who actually want various livestock working skills have shaped the border collie as a breed, it is okay for others to shape the breed to suit the nonworking dog market.

 

The name Destructo suits her well. I urge Destructo to raise Chows.

[kelpiegirl]

I guess it all depends on what you term "crap". Temperament issues don't appear at birth. So, it would be things like cleft palates, missing limbs etc. If there are large physical issues, and it is decided to put the dog down, then yes, do it. But, drowning, though it may appear painless, is NOT an acceptable method to euthanize ANY age animal. PERIOD. When euth is done with a sedative FIRST, and THEN the euth fluid is administered, this is a very HUMANE method, and one in which the dog falls asleep first. There *may* be a heaving of breath, and moving of limbs, which the animal is not aware of. Unlike drowning, when that animal sure as HECK knows what is going on- it is unable to breathe. Most folks drown animals in bags, with something heavy in the bag- makes it nice so you don't see the struggle. This is all very morose for me to talk about but, I cannot see where in this day and age, anyone would promote drowning. As for being with the dog, I have never met, or worked for a vet that didn't allow the owner to be there.

Julie

 

"So what's worse, to sell sub par dogs for $ or to drown them near birth when problems are discovered. The entire dog breeding industry is about manipulating gene pools, so certain crosses will always produce puppies that are undersireable and others that are.

 

The PROBLEMS are when those crap pups are allowed to live and breed and end up in shelters.... because a breeder who doesn't have the guts to drown a bad dog probably doesn't have the breed's best interest in mind and thus will take the $ from an ignorant buyer and pass along all the problems... especially the problem of selling to idiots.

 

If you really think a Vet can put an animal down in a manner more humane than drowning, I'd like you to observe both methods and then re-evaluate. Lethal injections with dogs are often very violent and traumatic for the animal and viewers. Most of the humane societies in my area do not allow you to be with your animal as they put them down for that reason.

 

A drowning isn't something you'd do for fun by any means, it too is sad, but it is quick and efficient and unlike an IV poison, works 100% of the time.

 

The "aw the puppy is so cute, but it has a heart defect and a bowel blockage that needs $4,000 surgery, so please donate money to us or we'll drop our dog off at a rescue and someone else can raise $$$ for this dog that should just be put down."

 

No dogs are bred naturally, they are either bred for a purpose or carelessly bred by idiots.

 

There are so many people out there who just think that only ugly animals are ok to kill, but we need to save the cute ones.... and who like their prime rib as long as they don't know how a living cow becomes a cut of meat in the grocery store nor how a live chicken becomes a nugget.

 

Flooding the market with defective dogs is not needed. They never solve any problems, they just exacerbate them. If you could flip a switch now and kill all unhoused and unwanted dogs, you'd actually be doing the dog world a favor.

 

Love your mutts and rescue dogs all you want. But understand that we don't need more of them. "

[juliepoudrier]

Folks,

ISTM that Destructo is simply trolling. It's obvious that s/he hasn't read the welcome thread or gone to the USBCC site to see what's up between the registries or even read any past threads here where the questions s/he's asking (although in this case I think that s/he doesn't really want answers but is just trying to stir the pot). Everything s/he brings up has already been asked and answered any number of times, and certainly in these threads. I think responding just plays into the hands of our newest troll.

 

J.

[laurie etc]

I agree Julie - whoever this "destructo" is sure had a lot of time on his hands in the middle of the night...isn't that when trolls come out to play?

:mad:

[Eileen Stein]

 

As far as that whole EDUCATE thing goes, why not start here by educating the rest of us on what all this stuff is, who is who, why they exist, etc. >>

 

That information is readily available here, without even resorting to Google. Many of "the rest of us" learned it that way. But to learn you have to be interested in learning. You seem to be more in "teaching" mode.

 

None of your arguments are novel. All have been put forth many times on the Boards (although usually not by the same person all at once) and have been refuted many times. Again, the search function might prove helpful to you. The only exception I can think of is your assertion that dogs should be killed more readily and abundantly than they are. To that I would say that (1) no one on these Boards advocates breeding "problem" dogs, and (2) if people choose to rescue or adopt "problem" dogs without breeding them, why are they not as entitled to do so as you are to select a dog or dogs of your choosing?

 

 

I've googled, but I find only that the abcbordercollie site is now defunct. >>

 

Swafford was expelled from the American Border Collie Association registry for multiple instances of falsifying the parentage of dogs on his registration applications (as demonstrated by DNA testing), and for breeding practices and kennel facilities not conducive to providing accurate registration documents. He can no longer register dogs with the ABCA, but he continues to operate a puppy mill, whose website you should have no difficulty in finding.

 

>

 

On what is your certainty based?

[Jodi]

Destructo -

 

"Frankly, I think the sheep aspect of the breed is near death. It used to be that you got Border Collies because you had sheep, but now people get sheep because they have Border Collies. But the popularity of BCs now mean that sheep are out of reach for the majority of BC owners."

 

"Even you ranchers and rancher wannabes (back yard ranchers?) have to appreciate that you and your descendents have changed the BCs to fit your needs. BCs for big sheep, BCs for small sheep, BCs for cattle, BCs for ducks, geese, lamas, etc."

 

"Frankly, I'm pretty sure there are a lot of different breeders of all types who use the trials and shows and competitions to "prove" that the dogs they have and want to breed are worthy. Just like the only reason any registry exists is to provide the same stamp of approval."

 

There are some interesting thoughts among some of your posts, and ones I would even be willing to go to task with you on, however, I would like to know a little bit about your background with the breed. I don't believe you posted an introduction, unless I just missed it. So, where are you from? How did you get involved with the breed? What's your experience with them? Have you ever run a dog in a herding trial? Have you done any conformation showing? Agility? Flyball? Do you own any dogs now? If so, where did you get them from and, more importantly, what about the breeder impressed you? In other words, what experience do you have that backs up your claims?

 

Jodi

[DeltaBluez Tess]

<< I'm sure I could get a Bordernese dog to satisfy a herding test and even make it competitive or even a champion. >>

 

 

OK you still have time to qualify for the USBCHA Sheepdog natioanls Finals this yr. Last date to get points in July 31, 2006. You also have to be a member of the USBCHA.

 

Are you game?

 

Diane

[Bill Fosher]

Julie,

 

Thanks for mentioning the fact that drowning is not considered a humane form of euthanasia. As far as I know, there are two options accepted by the veterinary profession: gunshot and overdose of anethesia.

[concrete]

I have to say that destructo's comments are the most entertaining I've read on here in a long time. Much better than George.

 

Kevin

[Caroline]

Your post speaks volumes. If the many folks on here that do and have all that you are asking about take the time to respond, you might learn something if you open your mind.

Caroline

[SoloRiver]

Wow. It's always entertaining to be in the presence of someone so willfully obtuse (not to mention 6'1" and "built" as he felt the need to inform us). No thanks. Not interested in playing that game. I've got dogs to work.

[Eileen Stein]

Hi all,

 

This morning, based on the tone of his posts, I put destructo on "No Post" temporarily and emailed him saying that he would need to provide me with his name, address and telephone number if he wished to continue posting. He asked why. I said "Because the Boards have recently been the target of a slash and trash blitz by people from another list posting with false identities, because I have reason to believe the one bit of information you supplied about yourself is not true, and because people often post more responsibly when they are not wholly anonymous."

 

His reply was, I thought, disproportionately nasty. A sample:

 

OMG! I wonder if this destructo person even has border collies. I'll bet he doesn't! We have reason to believe that he's actually a jealous yellow lab person!

 

[link to photos deleted]

 

Those are my Border Collies, thank you very much. And that little "stanford" thing at the beginning of the address.... well, that means that I must be smarter than you because I belong to an elitist organization. They even gave me a little piece of paper that told me I was better than you. When I date women, I show them my papers to prove that I am good breeding stock. Do you have Stanford papers? I think we'll have to call you something else since you don't. How about Barbie? You obviously are vapid and empty headed since you don't have Stanford papers. But then again, you probably aren't beautiful either, not that Stanford selects based on beauty or anything, it just happens that way... so perhaps we should title you Miss Piggy! That's it! She has a good farm background, but she's sophisticated and quite the city lady. She's been bred for food for centuries, but hey, she over came that and is no quite the celebrity. But she hasn't lost that down to earth, wallow in the mud, salt pork of the earth quality to her.

 

Your hostility isn't working too well Eileen. You are just coming off as paranoid and close minded and frankly condescending and unhelpful. I'm not your enemy. I don't belong to the "other list" and no one has sent me to your site on some attack wish. I'm probably the ideal person you're trying to convert... but it seems that you'd rather preach to the choir.

 

If you want to be civil, stop playing stupid games. If you can't handle me, who is trying to read up on all the stupid shit people have done with my breed of choice in the last 14 years before I purchase another BC and perhaps even start my own breeding program, why do you even bother with a website?

 

You could be of service, but instead you're acting like a spoiled brat.

 

I expect destructo will continue to re-subscribe, but I will delete him and his posts as rapidly as possible, until he provides me with his name, address and telephone number.

 

I'm sorry for the nuisance.

[WWBC]

Thank you

[Jodi]

Eileen -

 

If it becomes too much trouble (I see we already have a "Destructo4" registered...), let him post. It's quite entertaining. Here you've got a tried and true brain surgeon (hey, he's from Stanford, don't you know...) talking about the future of the breed, what kind of dogs we have and have been breeding, and the purpose of sheepdog trials ... meanwhile he's never worked a dog on stock in his life.

 

It's kind of like the bull storming into the china shop and doing a sermon on how to make fine china out of plastic and watercolors.

 

(being very sneaky and leaving my name off the post...)

[Miztiki]

Send him to me. I have nothing better to do. I'll chew him up and spit him out! We can call eachother names and see who cries first.

 

Lord help me, these pain meds are EFFECTIVE.

[fooshuman]

I got a dollar on Miztiki to win! She already proved she is one tough cookie!! Tough break kiddo luckily you got the Boy to help you along

[Pearse]

Am I the only one who's a little troubled by this? I don't see Destructo as a "troll". He may be confrontational, possibly obnoxious, but the first is not necessarily a bad thing, and the second could well be just to provoke a response, and if not is hardly unique among regular posters.

 

I don't generally approve of posting private correspondence to the web, regardless of the content. An online flame war is one thing. Email is a two person exchange and ought to remain that.

 

I have no problem with requiring everyone to register with their real name, email address, and phone number as long as it's everyone. Besides, now that you (and everyone else now) has his real name, and photograph, academic credentials etc from the link published, it's clear he's not trying to hide his identity, so what's the justification for banning him?

 

Action like this will inhibit anyone with anything thought provoking or controverisal from posting turning this forum into a mutual admiration society preaching to the choir. The only way to sharpen one's arguments supporting ideals one espouses is by constantly having to defend them. Unless the guy descends into ad hominem attacks on individuals, let him rant. And yes his email reply to Eileen was rude but, in my opinion, it was largely hypebole and sarcasm designed to further his argument.

 

In the end, this is a moderated forum, USBCC owned and operated. They pay the bills and set the rules, but if real debate is to take place here, some unpleasantness needs to be tolerated.

[Tassie]

Eileen - just want to say I'm sorry you have to put up with that sort of nastiness. Makes me admire even more the quiet and effective way you moderate these boards. Thank you.

[Miztiki]

Ha! Thanks for the vote of confidence but I think you'd lose your dollar! I can stand up for myself, disagree with people, voice my opinion, etc., but I'm really no good at chewing people up and spitting them out.

[Eileen Stein]

>

 

I suppose whether he's a troll or not depends on your definition. I thought that some of the things he said had potential for discussion (though the "flight of ideas" character of his posts made it difficult to address them), but that most of what he said was grandiose, self-consciously inflammatory, short on substance, long on attitude and, well, trollish.

 

>

 

I suppose I don't generally approve of it either. However, I don't want to keep board members in the dark about my moderating decisions, so when I deleted the group of posts he put up as destructo2 earlier this evening, I concluded that quoting his email was necessary to explain the actions I was taking. It is not as if he and I had an ongoing private correspondence which I betrayed by making it public.

 

>

 

My policy has been to permit anonymity except in rare cases when, in my judgment, it's necessary for me to ascertain privately whether someone is "a real person" or not. As far as I can recall, I've only done that in the past when someone is flaming or posting negatively about someone else (e.g., a breeder), and I probably would not have done it in this case had we not had the recent unpleasantness with Maggie, Cathy, "George," et al. But when I do feel the need to ask for this information, I expect it to be provided if the person wants to continue to post.

 

>

 

I actually have not pursued the link to try to obtain information about him. If he will not tell me directly who he is, he will not be posting here.

 

>

 

I'm surprised and sorry that you think so. I have always drawn a distinction between the subject matter of posts and their tone. I welcome posts which take issue with my own views and those of others on the Boards, and am only too happy to engage in discussion with those posters. It would be pretty easy to come up with many recent examples of people who have posted views at least as controversial as destructo's, and more coherent, who have been welcomed and had their views debated at length. Can you really say that destructo raised any issue that has not been fully discussed here in the past?

 

OTOH, I think that the tone of postings is important, and that unpleasant, obnoxious and contemptuous posts create an atmosphere that is detrimental to the Boards. It makes people uncomfortable, and destroys the sense of community that I would like to cultivate. I'm sure there are people who think I myself am rude and obnoxious, and tolerate rude and obnoxious posts, just as there are people who think I'm too repressive and intolerant of ballsy, slash-and-trash style posts. All I can say is that it's my job as moderator to make the judgments and draw the line, and I don't find it easy, and I do the best I can.

 

>

 

Well, yes. I'm for that. I don't shrink from arguing to defend the ideals I espouse. I guess I thought that was the last thing anyone would ever accuse me of.

 

>

 

Pearse, I respect you and value your opinion, as you know, but as moderator it is my call as to how much unpleasantness needs to be tolerated.

[sandra s.]

I think you did the right thing here.

I only read the first bunch of posts (before he was "reborn" as destructo2), but my reaction was pretty much the same. Many of the things he said seemed interesting and worthy of discussion, but the tone of his posts still left me hoping someone would take the time and kick his butt .

 

There are already enough nasty dog forums on the web. This one is more friendly and respectful and IMO that's something worth keeping. After all, it makes people feel safe to ask questions, and that is a great thing for their dogs.

[AK dog doc]

I STRONGLY second the notion that the tone of communication is important. We were not reared by trolls - or at least, most of us weren't. There is such a thing as good breeding in people as well as in dogs, and it has little to do with one's pedigree, socio-economic staus or education. It has to do with good manners, self control, and basic human respect and decency. I don't care where Destructo got his degree, how many he has, or how intelligent and accomplished he is (or believes he is) on paper. His behavior reflects badly on whoever reared him, and further on his own choices about how to behave (assuming he is over 21, his behavior can no longer be blamed on anyone else. As an adult, he is responsible for his own actions.) I would say that Eileen's restraint and sense of reason do in fact prove her superior breeding, and would do so even if she had never graduated high school.

 

There are rules, written and unwritten, governing social interaction, both in person and via these boards. I don't think anyone expects a newbie to automatically understand the unwritten rules the minute they arrive here, but they should be able to understand the written ones, and if they are corrected for transgressing on the unwritten ones, they ought to be able to understand those as well. If they are unwilling to abide by the rules of the community, I think it unreasonable to expect to be allowed to continue as a member of that community.

 

I don't think the problem is that Destructo proposed things that he thought we don't want to talk about, or that he wanted to confront issues, or even that he made a variety of unfounded, unsupported and incorrect contentions as if they were the gospel truth and without apparant regard for those he might injure or insult by those contentions. I think the problem is that, when asked to abide by the rules of this community, he resorted to sarcasm, insult, rudeness and personal attack. Whether this is done publically or privately, it is inappropriate and uncalled-for, and, if I understand this community correctly, not acceptable behavior here.

 

If Destructo does in fact choose to abide by the rules, and continues as a member of this community, perhaps we can hear how many hundreds of animals he has euthanatised (and that IS the correct term, since we're striving for precision here) via barbiturate overdose, and how many via drowning, and which measures he has used to support the contention that drug overdose is violent and inhumane as compared to drowning.

[blackacre]

Shades of Jim Varnon, back from the dead, whom I must admit I always found highly entertaining, no matter what guise he assumed.

For god sake's destructo, tell Eileen your real name,

Andrea

PS Pearse, will you marry me?