|
|
|
|||||||
| _Administration Questions connected with Wolfdog.org, database and other technical matters.... |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| _Administration Questions connected with Wolfdog.org, database and other technical matters.... |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
23-01-2010, 15:39
|
#1 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,061
|
I'm against of moving the dogs wih ED problems of the list, in Holland as Mijke already mentioned ED is not nescessary yet for breeding.
That is the reason why I didn't do the test yet, If my dog would be selected as a stud dog (which I now think he is to young for), than I can still make the x-ray if the female is x-rayed. For now I don't have any problems, so for his health I don't have to make the pictures, and of course I know you cannot believe somebody on his/her words. So why not just put the results in the list, so that every breeder can select the right male/female for his/her dog, I don't think the average wolfdog visitor is THAT stupid that he cannot make a choice for himself. So I am AGAINST of removing the dogs without he ED results. Last edited by jmvdwiel; 23-01-2010 at 19:18. |
|
|
|
23-01-2010, 18:47
|
#2 | ||
|
Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Rio Grande do Sul
Posts: 1,334
  |
Quote:
 Quote:
Would be more fair if start to require the ED results for the new stud dogs, dogs born from half of 2008 ahead.
__________________
|
||
|
|
|
|
23-01-2010, 19:19
|
#3 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,061
|
I don't think you need anaesthesia for the elbows (with a normal dog
 )
|
|
|
|
|
25-01-2010, 17:01
|
#4 |
|
Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 111
 |
AmeriCani Kennels
Please add me too!
|
|
|
|
|
26-01-2010, 18:31
|
#5 |
|
Distinguished Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Verona
Posts: 4,419
|
Hallo, nice to meet everyone!
Let's actualize the list: dany bonfiglioli hayla riko06 star sunnyna betti piccolino anastasia laila edha jal molisanodream starjumper erica&amy elisaP i piccy Antarctica arf woland77 aly87 matteo&martina valentina frafairy na mogwai divina maya ciao69 bricicca1 arnaldo it venerusoangelo giobi 81 tatanka1094 luca pisculli marco zach chiara.giardini m.greta Lyudmila Encheva roby e gaio sirius zattilio littlewolf fede86 denial odisseo sciamalaia robykut MariNoor amaguk ezibaby gilda ste chepi ciao69 riko06 mat littlewolf hadankama ovogibba wolflinx germans ornella vassel laila martab navarre Mikael Runningwolf z Peronoòwki michaelundinaeicchorn mijke Nebulosa Rona Americani whereas Jmvdwiel is "against of removing the dogs without ED results", but I guess not against including dogs WITH ED results, whatever the result is. Is it correct? Are we in 78 or 79? |
|
|
|
|
26-01-2010, 18:46
|
#6 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Mestre
Posts: 2,300
|
I think we should include dogs with any results of ED in the list and not to exclude people who do not have the results yet.
I think it is better to know that hiding, since it is not an official list of a specific club . If I'm wrong or if you do not agree please say your opinion .. |
|
|
|
|
26-01-2010, 19:48
|
#7 |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: D 72213-Altensteig-Wart
Posts: 365
|
I think it's important to publish all results and announce dogs in the list, which have a breeding license in their country.
It's my decision and my responsibility to take a male with bad results to my female. (surely it shouldn't be) If all results are published without evaluating, mybe people will send more results to the database. Like Ina and other breeders, I want to know as much as possible about the dogs and the next of kin. Greetings Bille |
|
|
|
|
26-01-2010, 18:55
|
#8 | |
|
Scandinavian Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 1,089
|
Quote:
It is to be 77-1 I think Very best regards / Mikael
__________________
_________________________________________________ *Hronec, Rasty, Zilja * Kennel, Wolfdog of Sweden* http://kennelwolfdogofsweden.vpsite.se/Home.html
 Last edited by Mikael; 26-01-2010 at 19:59. Reason: Sorry I meant post nr 3 not 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
26-01-2010, 19:11
|
#9 | |
|
Distinguished Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Verona
Posts: 4,419
|
Quote:
But in this moment we have to consider that dogs without ED results are included, whereas dogs with not positive ED results are excluded. I believe that the FIRST STEP to be taken is to include all dogs with or without ED results, and not to discriminate dogs with "not perfect" ED results, as explained in the petition. (this is MY personal point of view, not the point of view of all the petitioners) Only afterwards, we can think about new rules to be applied. The point is that the actual situation is clearly unfair and discriminatory, and needs to be changed immediately. Agreeing on the "new rules" to be applied is much more complicated, and requires reasonings to be shared...this is my thought but I am more than willing to consider different proposals |
|
|
|
|
|
26-01-2010, 22:00
|
#10 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,061
|
Yes you are totally correct
 But you can call me Judith whereas Jmvdwiel is "against of removing the dogs without ED results", but I guess not against including dogs WITH ED results, whatever the result is. Is it correct? |
|
|
|
|
26-01-2010, 23:32
|
#11 |
|
Distinguished Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Verona
Posts: 4,419
|
thank you Judith and Mikael
|
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
