Hi, Roseanne,
I honestly don't know what personal rights would be violated in
requireing testing in a private club environment. However, I think it
would depend on how this was couched. So much in the current Code and
Bylaws is not decipherable/enforceable that I'm not sure how integration
would work. At present, I still see restraint of trade issues.
My personal feeling is that requiring testing for some form of club
certification (such as "CKCKS-Health Tested") would be a better way to
go. Eventually, this would be the upper standard for which buyers would
reach in making purchases. At the other levels, for those who
wished.....for whatever reasons.....not to test for one thing or
another....would not get their dogs that certification, but would still
belong to the club. Buyers would have to beware of this; but ask
questions.....in some cases reasonable answers might be found.
There are many reasons why a breeder may or may not do testing in a
particular way. I happen to dislike OFA. I do xray, would love to have
true access to Pennhip, and have only recently started submitting xrays
to OFA simply to satisfy other breeders. I prefer that the cardiologist
who examines my dogs be the same one each year; often that isn't
posbbile. (I still do the heart clearances, but I don't buy them myself
when it is a different person ascultating each year). I have REAL
problems with the opthamologists; three times I have had differing
diagnosis with two different dogs. In other words, after the intial
misdiagnosis I would go to a long and elaborate diagnostic procedure and
have the bitch CERFED; only to find that on the next year's diagnosis by
a different opthamologist that I had to do this all over again. While
the $25.00 for the clearance at a clinic isn't a problem, it is very
problematic to keep RE-clearing the same bitch each year with her benign
anomaly. Lots of Cavaliers have lipid deposits or anomalies from such
things as high fevers; but it seems that a five minute exam won't be
enough to clear them each year.
It isn't as simple as it seems. However, if a cerfication was offered
(not a class at a show, but a club sponsered certification) which told
the public that the dog had been appropriately health cleared at least
at 2.5 years old, I think many would consider doing that.
As to how this relates to AKC dogs? I think that AKC dogs should be
treated exactly as any other "foreign registered" dog. Can anyone tell
me why this is not appropriate other than personal ire?
Best,
Suze
Rosanne Cleveland-King wrote:
> I think, Winnie, that it involves FORCING someone to do something. Maybe
> Suze can councel us on what I am trying to say!
> Rosanne
>
> =========================================================
> "Magic Commands":
> to stop receiving mail for awhile, click here and send the email:
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20NOMAIL
> to start it up gain click here:
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20MAIL
>
> E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] for assistance.
> Search the Archives... http://apple.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ckcs-l.html
>
> All e-mail sent through CKCS-L is Copyright 2002 by its original author.
>
>
--
Suze at Llawen Cavaliers
"...I have seen that in any great undertaking it is not enough for a man
to depend simply upon himself." -Isna Ia-wica
"Thought comes before speech" Luther Standing Bear
=========================================================
"Magic Commands":
to stop receiving mail for awhile, click here and send the email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20NOMAIL
to start it up gain click here:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20MAIL
E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] for assistance.
Search the Archives... http://apple.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ckcs-l.html
All e-mail sent through CKCS-L is Copyright 2002 by its original author.
