ragdoll breeders. - Page 5

#41 (**permalink**) 23-03-2008, 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anele Jessica

Dont be silly, Alan, thats not what she meant!

Are you sure???

lizward · #42 (**permalink**) 23-03-2008, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anele Jessica

I guess - what she meant was that some people breeding from cats which were sold as pets only - without breeding rights and may be not of breeding quality.

Yes this COULD happen but there are plenty of other ways to become a BYB!

Liz

SavannahKitten · #43 (**permalink**) 23-03-2008, 11:10 PM

Quote:

You rest your caseand that is

An earlier post that Alan made said that I do not love my cats and get rid of them once they have 'served their purpose' (a point that I argued above). Clare had stirred up trouble (in this thread) by asking whether I had read the posts about retiring breeding cats in another thread (in the dog forum). The reason they were talking about retiring cats in a dog forum is because Alan used me as an example of someone who doesn't care about my animals and simply uses them as .. what was it.. money machines? The argument that Clare was keen for me to see was a dog lover who wouldn't dream of rehoming her dogs after they had had litters. Clare was keen for me to see that this person - and Alan - found me morally reprehensible because I find pet homes for some of my ex-queens rather than keeping them all to myself.

Quote:

i like the way you compare a cat to a watch, a living breathing animal to an inanimate object, that says everything really! i rest my case!

I'm sure once you have calmed down you will remove that post too.

I was trying to bring it down to a level that you might understand, Alan. I think you know that full well. Everyone understands the guy in the dirty mac with a 'Rolex' in the pub is either selling fakes, or is selling stolen goods. I used that as an analogy so you could understand what an unregistered cat is to registered breeders.

I'm hoping other people will read that and understand it too.

Perhaps a mod could split this off into a BYB thread again.

And Alan - let Clare fight her own battles. I don't know what you think is in it for you.

Quote:

I assumed the thread was removed because you accused Clare of theft. O well, clearly I got that wrong, sorry.

You assumed that Alan's post was removed because he... or I? ... accused Clare of theft?

Let's just be absolutely clear. If someone with a 'pedigree' Ragdoll bred by Clare went to Trading Standards, she would be prosecuted. To be able to sell a pedigree cat, it has to have a pedigree. Since she does not supply paperwork for her cats, they are not pedigree cats and cannot be sold as such.

Quote:

Just because someone breeds unregistered cats does not mean they do not adhere to an ethical code!

Yes it does. They might have their own aribtrary 'ethical code' but they do not stand and fall by it. They might change their mind tomorrow about what is ethical and what is not. They don't have rules written in stone as registered breeders do.

Quote:

Why do you keep implying that Clare has lied? Lying would be selling unregistered cats as registered, eg. with a false pedigree.

Why do you not understand that she knew these cats were unregistered? This means she knew that someone had lied to get the cat originally. She does not sell cats with a pedigree, yet she sells them as 'pedigree cats' and she bought her cats knowing that someone down the line had lied and obtained a pet cat for the purpose of breeding.

BYBs are in an extremely dodgy position, legally.

Anele Jessica · #44 (**permalink**) 23-03-2008, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ajshep1984

Are you sure???

I am, Alan.

SavannahKitten · #45 (**permalink**) 23-03-2008, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Sorry but that simply does not follow. It is entirely possible that the original breeder chose to sell cats she had bred herself as unregistered. I can think of several possible scenarios where this could happen. Some suggestions:

1. The breed registration policy may have changed so that cats on the full or supplementary registers produce kittens that can only go on the reference register - this happens in the development of new breeds. it may well have happened with Bengals at some point.

2. The breeder may have been in a situation where she was not sure who the parents of the kittens were eg. two mums sharing litters very early on so that the breeder was not sure which litter was which, or perhaps a young entire boy living in the house who might have mated with the queen just before she went in with the stud cat.

3. The breeder might have attended a show without realising that her cat was pregnant, found out later that the cat was indeed pregnant, and not wanted to be banned from the show scene for six months which is the standard GCCF penalty for showing a pregnant cat.

4. The breeder may have had a diagnosis of ringworm in the house which would mean that she could not sell any kittens. Selling them as unregistered, the GCCF would not know about them.

Obviously some of these scenarios are more serious that others. 1 and 2 are genuine reasons for selling unregistered kittens (though one would hope that a breeder would learn from her mistakes so that scenario 2 didn't happen more than once!), 3 isa technical offence but in my opinion very understandable - the GCCF draconian penalty is to blame there. 4 is a very serious one because ringworm is contagious and it is grossly unfair to put someone else at risk. On the other hand it is possible to envisage a scenario where the ringworm is declared up front to a personal friend who has no other animals and is entirely willing to take griseofulvin for a few weeks in order to get a nice cat for nothing.

Liz

So Liz. In all four scenarios, under which circumstances would it be ok to breed one of the unregistered kittens?

Anele Jessica · #46 (**permalink**) 23-03-2008, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SavannahKitten

An earlier post that Alan made said that I do not love my cats and get rid of them once they have 'served their purpose' (a point that I argued above). Clare had stirred up trouble (in this thread) by asking whether I had read the posts about retiring breeding cats in another thread (in the dog forum). The reason they were talking about retiring cats in a dog forum is because Alan used me as an example of someone who doesn't care about my animals and simply uses them as .. what was it.. money machines? The argument that Clare was keen for me to see was a dog lover who wouldn't dream of rehoming her dogs after they had had litters. Clare was keen for me to see that this person - and Alan - found me morally reprehensible because I find pet homes for some of my ex-queens rather than keeping them all to myself.

I'm sure once you have calmed down you will remove that post too.

I was trying to bring it down to a level that you might understand, Alan. I think you know that full well. Everyone understands the guy in the dirty mac with a 'Rolex' in the pub is either selling fakes, or is selling stolen goods. I used that as an analogy so you could understand what an unregistered cat is to registered breeders.

I'm hoping other people will read that and understand it too.

Perhaps a mod could split this off into a BYB thread again.

And Alan - let Clare fight her own battles. I don't know what you think is in it for you.

You assumed that Alan's post was removed because he... or I? ... accused Clare of theft?

Let's just be absolutely clear. If someone with a 'pedigree' Ragdoll bred by Clare went to Trading Standards, she would be prosecuted. To be able to sell a pedigree cat, it has to have a pedigree. Since she does not supply paperwork for her cats, they are not pedigree cats and cannot be sold as such.

Yes it does. They might have their own aribtrary 'ethical code' but they do not stand and fall by it. They might change their mind tomorrow about what is ethical and what is not. They don't have rules written in stone as registered breeders do.

Why do you not understand that she knew these cats were unregistered? This means she knew that someone had lied to get the cat originally. She does not sell cats with a pedigree, yet she sells them as 'pedigree cats' and she bought her cats knowing that someone down the line had lied and obtained a pet cat for the purpose of breeding.

BYBs are in an extremely dodgy position, legally.

BRILLIANT!!!!

SavannahKitten · #47 (**permalink**) 23-03-2008, 11:18 PM

Quote:

BRILLIANT!!!!

I thank you

*bows* *bows* *bows*

And where is Clare in all this?

lizward · #48 (**permalink**) 23-03-2008, 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SavannahKitten

I was trying to bring it down to a level that you might understand, Alan. I think you know that full well. Everyone understands the guy in the dirty mac with a 'Rolex' in the pub is either selling fakes, or is selling stolen goods. I used that as an analogy so you could understand what an unregistered cat is to registered breeders.

Sorry but I really don't see why you keep on with the "fakes or stolen goods" analogy. it is entirely possible that the unreigstered kittens are NEITHER fakes NOR the result of what you call theft.

Quote:

You assumed that Alan's post was removed because he... or I? ... accused Clare of theft?

YOU! Have you forgotten what you said?

Quote:

Let's just be absolutely clear. If someone with a 'pedigree' Ragdoll bred by Clare went to Trading Standards, she would be prosecuted.

Under what grounds?

Quote:

To be able to sell a pedigree cat, it has to have a pedigree.

Not if it is clearly described as "no papers"!

Quote:

Since she does not supply paperwork for her cats, they are not pedigree cats and cannot be sold as such.

That is certainly a GCCF rule, but if Clare is not a GCCF breeder then i don't see that it applies in this case.

Quote:

Yes it does. They might have their own aribtrary 'ethical code' but they do not stand and fall by it. They might change their mind tomorrow about what is ethical and what is not. They don't have rules written in stone as registered breeders do.

if you mean the rules are not imposed from outside then you are correct. That does not mean they have no ethical code. Do you only have an ethical code because it is imposed on you? Surely not!

Quote:

Why do you not understand that she knew these cats were unregistered? This means she knew that someone had lied to get the cat originally.

No, that does not follow. I have listed four scenarios whereby a registered breeder might have a good reason to sell unregistered cats. I am sure you can think of others. We do not know why the cats Clare purchased were unregistered.

Quote:

She does not sell cats with a pedigree, yet she sells them as 'pedigree cats'

IF she claims they are pedigree and does not make it very clear that no papers are available then she could be in trouble. If she makes it clear that there are no papers then really there is nothing anyone can do. Besides, you and I both know that the piece of paper does not guarantee the parentage of the kitten!

Quote:

and she bought her cats knowing that someone down the line had lied and obtained a pet cat for the purpose of breeding.

Why do you keep saying this when you simply do not know the circumstances?

liz

#49 (**permalink**) 23-03-2008, 11:21 PM

Registered breeders have rules set in stone??? if so why..
1.is there a registered breeder advertising both registered and non registered cats on a internet site?
2.my friend took her unregistered cat to a gccf breeder to use her stud cat(a very successful show cat)and charged her £100.
3.breeders register kittens under false mothers names??
Why would anyone go to trading standards because i didnt supply papers? if they wanted papers they would buy registered.

#50 (**permalink**) 23-03-2008, 11:22 PM

I clearly state when advertising pedigree but no papers.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Contact Us - Terms of use - Top
Pet Forum \| Dog Forum \| Cat Forum \| Small Animals Forum \| Bird Forum \| Horse and Equestrian Forum \| Reptile Forum \| Poultry Forum \| Fish Forum PetForums is part of the Pet Media group of websites including \| Pets4Homes \| PetsLocally