BUA- The British Utonagan Discussions

Alady?? Alady?? where for art thou Alady??

Now this thread that SHE started has turned around and bitten her on her backside she has no words to defend herself. Unless of course you were to go on to her OWN forum where it is full of bleating sheep

I am sorry for my delay in responding , firstly I was advised Legally not to, and secondly 4 times I have tried and my computetr has crashed and as it takes about an hour to read all relevant posts and answer you all Im afraid I didnt have the time, I had my life and my dogs to attend to.

Anyway here goes

This is correct, as I said we didnt go down that line, it was suggested to me through a GSD breeder and I only spoke to her regarding said dog, I never saw it as the owner didnt want to get healths done so it was a no go.

I am perfectly aware these dogs are not fully mature until 3 years old actually, if you knew the breed you would agree, myself I have worked with animals for 29 years, horses, rehabs, rehomes, grooming, showing, gun dogs, training, and the list goes on, I have worked with Akita, Rottie, Collies, terriers in a rehab and behavioural capacity, I used to keep the dogs from the kennels to assess and do a bit of rehab in the days dogs got 7 days or PTS for a local kennels, I worked with rehab and untrainable horses for over 8 years, I have my animal husbandry certs, and a lot of experience, another has had huskies, and does rehome and rescue, another has had dogs all her days large breed, one is a qualified behaviourist, 2 are vets, one is a long standing GSD breeder and KC judge, one is a Beardie breeder and KC judge, and thats off teh top of my head so YES I would say we are perfectly qualified to assess a dogs temperament.

You can tell in a pup the general characteristics cant you? Wether it is bold, confident. outgoing, takes a telling off, how intelligent it is, how suseptable to training, how they are in the litter, what they are like meeting strange dogs and people.

You can also easily tell in a dog wether it has a breed characteristic (in our case the breeds used) wether it has not been trained properly, wether it is in fact nervous, aggresive, confident, outgoing. You can assess by watching a dog with its owner wether it is the dog or the owner, you can assess in set up situations the nature of a dog and the training of a dog. We have criteria that needs to be matched based on the breeds used, the temperament we expect and any dogs or litters that do not conform are not used.

And that is not going to happen, for your information though the BUA produces 2 - 3 litters a year, the pups that are picked to be run on, that conform to the breed standard and have clear health tests mainly stay with the breeder or another BUA committee member or Accredited breeder, these pups are closely monitered and we give vouchers out to encourage the remaining pet owners to have all health tests done regardless of wether the dog is to be bred or not.

"These people" are far from egotistical, they are simply doing something emotive that you obviously dont agree with. How dare you say I dont love my dogs. The only disgusting thing about this thread is the behaviour and nasty comments thrown out by posters on this supposedly monitered and administrated forum!

I would invite you to post on our forum that you see our members and interested parties as "full of adoring suckers.....erm.... I mean fans" I am sure you will find they all have a very open mind and actually are adults and can manage to research and ask questions and they are all perfectly happy with our breed, and the way forward.

Liz you do not KNOW anything about alady??, there are breeders who have studied wolves, and in our opinion and many others we are producing a wolfalike dog, it is funny how in one thread they are nothing like wolves yet in another we are accused of having wolf in them , If they are advertised as wolfalike, then the prospective buyer must also agree as they too know what wolves look like do they not? Also all enquirers are fully informed re the BU future, what is in them what to expect...

Pilgrim you obviously dont know very much with regards to wolves, it is infact fairly common to have a black wolf with a white chest. also a lot of wolves are born black with white feet, and as they mature you will see the coat change through to white then back to grizzled.

All dogs are registered with the Parents details eg Full GSD KC reg and also KC number and also health test results, no one has the wool over their eyes it is all made perfectly known to any one enquiring. And wherever the pups are sold as long as they are sold to a loving genuine home is pretty irrelevant.

Moonstone Thankyou for coming onto BUAs forum and asking your questions openly, as I said on there all details are always forthcoming to the owners, as well as the nature of the founding dogs, what to expect, and where the dogs stand as a breed at the moment.

The name is given to all the founding stock and progeny as we need to do this to have all the health results collated correctly, all dogs have what they are eg: Mal x GSD with parents listed as they are with KC numbers and the founder is also regi British Utonagan all pups are British Utonagan, this so we can be listed with the BVA for Hips, elbows and eyes.

NOT one pup is sold without it, and all parties are made fully aware of what this entails prior to this.

Breed register with all health tests on the KC database. And yes we do think they look like wolves or we wouldnt be creatiing a wolfalike breed.

It says in the advert British Utonagan, google it. The only misrepresentation is in this forum.

Our breed shows are as well attended as any of my other pedigree dogs breed shows, the dogs are competing against there own breed, they are judged by independant judges, they are awarded in the same manner as any KC show, they are not members only and they have won more than a few rossettes, we have ran breed shows for years with a points system in place, we award merits at our champ shows and we use mainly KC independant judges, so YES our dogs are well deserved Top lines in the breed. You should maybe attend one and see for yourself before you cast assumptions.

No dog registered with BUA has a false pedigree, they have all been DNA profiled, they have all been health tested, and any breeds brought in have been too, you can research the Utes on BUAs database, you can research the outside breeds on the GSD pedigreebank or the KC database its fairly simple.

Again We dont lie never have and never will. We have the truth printed in Black and white and it is us who are working hard to put it available to all concernede in teh breed

The only ignorance shown here is from people who have researched this breed far less than those of us actually involved with it, I am trying to answer questions courtiesly for the sake of the few who are actually genuinely interested, meanwhile I need to trawl through very vindictive and childish comments that have actually no relevance nor proof to back them up!

As I have said on more than one occasion, all puppy buyers KNOW exactly what they are getting before they do.

I have already answered this above with regards breed name and health tests.

Please do Louise we have already.

I have answered this also but take note when you quote all these posts together how negative and childish you all sound.

And Kate, we have been speaking to 2 eye specialists, Dawn you will find the names of which on the bottom of the eye screens.

And on a side note regarding that. Dawn I have to tell you that whoever furnished you with my litter screen and Kiannas has stolen them from a password protecded account, neither of these screens had been online yet as the microchip nos and addresses where not removed for DPA security, I have informed the police about my concerns regarding my home address and dogs microchip numbers being given to you and we are awaiting conformation from a host on the IP of the perpatrator, I would advise you to pm the details and at least show willing to rectify this wrong!

Back to the post...Kate we are dealing with a very mild form of folds, possible MRD not definate, and this form of dysplasia is non progressive, I have been in serious talks with the specialists they have even shown me pictures of the difference of what we are dealing with and TRD and serious dysplasia, NO COMPARISON, this was all thrashed out when we all had a meeting with him with regards how to deal with the problem

We are dealing with the mildest form, no affect to the dogs, and non progressive, whatever the reason for the folds in our dogs it is not moving the same as MRD would. The screen for my "repeat maying" 9 pups 6 clear... 6 clear Dawn!

Most dogs used are clear, in the main pups to be clear in 3 years any pups with folds not to be bred.... so by 2013 we wont be using any folds and this will have been cleared out. All these things, and decisions agreed by the eye specialists, the BVA also are working alongside BUA with reports being sent and BUA are sending these to AHT along with swabs, so we seem to have it all covered without your misleading input. We like to go on professional advise. FYI we did ask initially if we should pull them out and the answer was NO this because it is not serious it can be bred away from and the dogs are very good in all other respect.

I have no problem answering any questions and I have no problem with the fact some folks dont agree with us, but just because you dont agree doesnt mean that we are wrong, and clutching at strwas to slate our dogs and owners is pretty low, I would be happy if these threads remained impersonal and factual debate, instead of the usual schoolchild nonsense, I dont have time for that.

Sorry to go slightly away from the subject - Lanie, I just read this bit above; is it possible that someone who has legitimate access to your files (e.g. a group or committee member) has given them out? Perhaps not, if you are saying you already have IP identification?

HI Linda, no its not a possibility, there was only one member who had it, I didnt even yet, this is why we are treating the matter so seriously.

No it wasnt Alady, sorry, but it is now. You should be more careful about giving copies of things to people who host them on a site with public access. They were freely available until I mentioned it, seems they now have protected their account, bit late though, Im sure you know who you gave copies to, and Im sure if possible the host will confirm when they protected their account.

With regards to breeding from carriers/affected dogs i guess breeding from them stands the same as many other tests; PLL for example?
The AHT advise carriers and affected are not drawn out of a breeding programme for alot of the eyes tests, not sure about others! we go through them with our PLL eye tests, and the same is advised, do not take them out of a breeding programme.
and problems can still be bred out although, i wouldnt use an affected in a programme, i personally would use a carrier and a carrier put to a clear can not produce affected just carriers, pups should be tested at 4weeks, and any carriers should only go back to clears. carriers to carriers should never be done imo, same as affected to carrier, or affected to clear.. and defo not effected to affected! Although people do still do affected to clear..i just wouldnt ever use an affected dog, it feels some what wrong.

So its not actually about the status of the dog (unless of course their affected) that matters its more about how there used! Yes? No? I got it wrong?

Actually Dawn It was, and yes the host will be confirming, are you saying it was you yourself that took them.... these eye tests all go out in the open once personal details are removed, and if you insist on keeping a hold of mine then yes I will take it further. Nothing to be proud of stealing

Thanks that is true AFFECTED dogs should not always be pulled out and by breeding you can find carriers and clears, pups actually are better tested at 16weeks, but we do ours between 6 - 8 weeks as a litter to ensure they are all screened.

Nope, Im saying she did NOT have a protected account and I dont give a monkeys what you say, she only protected AFTER I was pointed to them, and mentioned them on here. Have you seen me show them to anyone? Perhaps I just pointed everyone to the PUBLIC account until she protected it? Do you really think she will tell you? Well she should, I am 110% telling the absolute honest truth, perhaps Sandra could tell you the same and then admit she only protected the account after I mentioned it, a bit of truth and honesty will never go amiss.

Oh and when you dont protect your account, its "open" for public viewing, wouldnt be stealing in any case. Dont forget, Ive successfully prosecuted two people for copyright infringement, I know all about stealing stuff from the net Alady.

Pups can be tested at 4weeks and plus for PLL - I was just using an example!!
I would not breed from an affected dog with anything, its seems wrong and not right! I would keep something else from the litter - If they were all affected then i would bloody worry and spay/neauter the parent that wasnt clear as one parent should ALWAYS be clear..

Infact talking of which, we got PLL results back today from a clear/carrier mating!! and had bad news
Just waiting to hear back from one of the litter mates now, who sent her swabs off before us! The rest are neautered so no real bother....
The mum to them pups is likely to be spayed now...shame but its not what we want, there are plenty of cresteds out there that are clear....

http://www.dogsey.com/showthread.php?t=125730&page=153, post 1523, by yourself
"The Ute thread. I had copies of Alady's litter screening certs with 3 of 4 affected pups emailed me, then got told regardless of this she has repeated the mating. I was also sent a copy of a "Neral" bitch who also had a single grey dysplastic lesion on her eye."

Sandra did have it locked and protected , and has now only changed her password, so really what you are saying now is you broke in with the use of her password??? and pointed people in that direction,. whereas earlier you post it was emailed to you?

We are honest Dawn hence the certs are all put in the open ONCE the personal details are removed! You stole it.

I am sorry for your bad news and agree the responsible road should be followed if there are pleanty clear and non carriers your breed has no need to use either especially for this condition. The part in bold WE DO!! ANd also the screen in question was actually a litter of 6 and also born early hence 2 not making it, all logged at the vet too.

2 of these pups clear at a year one not who wont be used, he is pet only and is nuetered.

and I did mention the repeat mating produced 1/3rd clear which is what I had expected and the specialists are very pleased as I am with the results, this 2nd mating has given me 6 clear in a line that is well worth keeping.

Oh I DID have some mailed to me, Id already seen them though, but I dont care what you say Sandra did NOT protect her account until AFTER I mentioned it, sorry, if she says otherwise she is lying.

You cannot "steal" something if its in the public domain, only if it is copyrighted. As I said, I know my way around this, done it twice (3 times actually, settled "amicably" once) got the t shirt and collected the pay outs! There is NO data protection as it wasnt stolen and used illegally, even if people lifted them, it was still in the public domain in a PUBLIC account. There is no copyright as it wasnt copyright protected and because she wasnt smart enough to protect her account, loads of people have seen it, still if you have nothing to hide, cant see your problem?

Those eye certs were found by a simple google search for "pocoloco eye screen" simples!

Im flattered you even think I might be able to access a protected account of any description though.

Sandra is actually standing over my shoulder reading your replies, and assures me otherwise, but I suppose the proof will be forthcoming from the host and also the police will decide wether I have a matter or not.

I have nothing to hide Dawn except where my dogs are kennelled and who knows where they are, FOR THEIR SAFETY! I would ask anyone who beleives you over me to in fact google pocoloco eye screen and see for themselves, as I said NO certs are made public with personal details on THIS is all I have a problem with, and the fact that YOU have got MY details. Also Kainna is not a Pocoloco dog and these details most certainly have not been put anywhere other than Sandras account so therefore you have all her personal details too, if you are well versed in internet law you will know that they where password protected and that you have done wrong by receiving or copying these screens, and if you have infact passed these on in infringement of DPA.

Couldnt care less where Sandra is, and Im sure she is telling you otherwise, but she is lying.

You go for your life Loraine, whatever you like. What a wally putting stuff like that in a PUBLIC PB account, why on earth would anyone do that when they were not meant for anyone to see, MADNESS! Backfired though. Still, as I said, you do as you see fit my dear, and that other question I asked, how do you know I have showed anyone else? I may have just given them the URL, or told them to search google, as I did. Must be more careful in future.

Yes I am sure we will, but it generally is pretty saddening that someone would behave in this manner towards folks who have spent 3 years talking breeders into putting all health results in the open for the public, it is the very deed you have just done that puts them off...

All our health results are freely available we have nothing to hide.....it is beyond me why someone who professes to believe in honesty is behaving the way you have, but hey what do I know. I would appreciate my personal details to remain so and I have taken this very seriously Dawn.

Thanks for answering that. Glad to hear it

Hi Dawn,

I'm afraid you're way out on this one. It doesn't have to be copyrighted to be protected, there is a huge legal difference between public domain and being available to the public to view. Take the recent hoo hah about mp3s. Just because someone puts one on their server free for everyone, doesn't mean that it isn't protected by law.

It's actually illegal to take information (this includes storing, copying, printing etc.) from anybody's site let alone reproduce it without the owner's permission, irrespective of whether it's protected or not.

Of course, simply pointing other people to a site is not illegal in any way. Not siding with anyone on this, I don't know enough facts to comment, but I thought I should point this out.

Great, if you are correct, then I still have done nothing wrong have I! Wouldnt know about MP3's.:?

Point is, it wasnt anyones "site" at all, see it was a PUBLIC photobucket account, so my point stands. SHould of been protected, it wasnt, Sandra's problem not mine, and one more time, who said I "reproduced" it? Who said I "passed them on?" It was there for all to find.

So your whole problem is that I may have your address? Are you serious? Do me a favour Loraine, take it from me, your dogs will never ever be in danger from me, I wouldnt want one if they were the last dogs on this earth, so you address is perfectly safe. Cant say who else may have it though, as I said Sandra was silly enough to upload personal information into a public photobucket account (cant understand why the hell she would do that) with no password protection, cached items from that account are STILL available, my problem? dont think so!!

http://s686.photobucket.com/albums/vv224/sandra4534/?action=view&current=TivaandKiayana016-1.jpg

What kind of dogs are they?? are they Utes?? Wolfy looking?? LOL where about

What, you mean youy could see the pic Louise? I mean, no hacking required, are you serious?

See Alady, Sandra, the pic was from when the account was PUBLIC, cached pictures. If that album was always private, there would be NO cached images at all, would there? At least none you could view without signing in first. Ill await my apology.