Re: [pyrnet] GPCA

["sandy white" <swhite2@houston.rr.com>]

Charlotte,

I know it was probably a hypothetical question, but no, I don't think you
should sponsor people who are not doing what is best for the breed.  In my
opinion, your judgment on this is sound.  I accept that these people may be
incorrigible, beyond any convincing or behavior modifying.

But what I would like to see happen is a GPCA sponsored venue to educate pyr
owners and potential owners who have not had the benefit of long,
association with reputable practices.

At fairs, festivals, and grocery store parking lots, people see the big
litters and conclude that it is an easy cash crop.  Education and
information to counter that is important. I would like to see an outreach
that emphasized spay/neuter, hip and shoulder testing prior to breeding,
breeding only 2 heats out of 3, and that this is a dog that blows its coat.
Some people will agree with and find it to their benefit to be more
responsible breeders and pet owners.  Some will decide to do the early
spay/neuter if only to prevent competition at their favorite fair or
festival from rival breeders. Stock guard dogs are most attentive if they
are spayed/neutered.  Ranchers and farmers understand the problems of
breeding faulty cows and goats.  I think they would understand it applies to
dogs, if educated about the types of problems.

What I would like to see is something along the lines of the saying about
catching more flies with honey than with vinegar.

As individuals, not as club members, we could each write our elected state
officials and ask for puppy lemon laws and stronger penalties for animal
cruelty.  Georgia has a proposed cruelty law, if you want to see a sample.

Last, the use of any company's brands or trademarks are controlled by that
organization.  Since GPCA fears the inappropriate use of its name in
advertising, the club should revise its rules to prohibit such use or to
require written permission, whatever is appropriate.

Sandy