Unlike the PF and BYBs, ethical breeders do not make vast sums of money from breeding. By the time all the health tests, good food and vitamins, vets fees etc are taken into account then I very much doubt that several thousand pounds put by just IN CASE a dog is returned to you many many years later is possible. Perhaps if a breeder cut back on the tests, gave cheap food and avoided vets then it may be possible, but ETHICAL breeders do not do this. Instead they love their dogs and do what they can at that moment in time for that dog.

In my (non breeder ) eyes Pedlee did exactly what I would expect from an ethical breeder, she did WHAT she could at that moment in time.
Unless of course you think that ethical breeders should put their prices up to cover all eventualities, but surely that would send more people to the cheaper PFs, to people that couldn't give a damn about their dogs.

Sorry, Sillysue - I know of many breeders who would not *consider* breeding unless they have a substantial sum of money put by - both for complications arising from the pregnancy and birth, and/or with the puppies - and also in case of dogs returning to them.  I'm sorry to hear you don't know such breeders.  I can assure you they exist.

The point is a bit bigger than Pedlee and what has happened in this situation.  The point is about endorsing breeders who are unable to take back dogs.  Generally, I'm uneasy with this because all those dogs are going to end up a burden on rescue.  As I said, Pedlee may well have done all she could.  To applaud her and endorse what has happened is not a good idea though, since the precedent which is set is not one I'd want to be endorsing.

> I know of many breeders who would not *consider* breeding unless they have a substantial sum of money put by

How much?
Just curious as to what you consider suffient to cover all possible crises.

> To applaud her

I do :)

> and endorse what has happened

Endorse?

Let us not forget that this situation is not down to Pedlee who has tried her utmost to see this dog housed safely with caring people when a few weeks down the line a litter sold then she could well have taken the dog back herself. It is down to irresponsible owners who rehomed this dog to someone unsuitable wthout contacting the breeder that could well have been before this litter.Irresponsible owners who were prepared to leave the dog in council care unless the breeder had stepped in. If those irresponsible owners had contacted rescue instead without involving the breeder then rescue would be bearing all the costs for this. Instead as a last resort due to timing the breeder has stepped up further than the two previous owners and paid more than financially for this dog to end up safe not destroyed. Yet this is not the actions of a responsible breeder.

The point is a bit bigger than Pedlee and what has happened in this situation. The point is about endorsing breeders who are unable to take back dogs. Generally, I'm uneasy with this because all those dogs are going to end up a burden on rescue. As I said, Pedlee may well have done all she could. To applaud her and endorse what has happened is not a good idea though, since the precedent which is set is not one I'd want to be endorsing.

Double standards come to mind here.

You wouldn't endorse a breeder who has done absolutely everything they can, at a time when they are really under both financial and time pressure.   And yet you support in a practical way, every puppy farmer and BYB who has ever bred a dog or puppy that comes into your rescue, fully knowing that even if they could be traced they would never take the dog back or even want to know about it.

As someone who sees the results of irresonsible and uncaring breeding on a daily basis, I would have thought you would appreciate the lengths Pedlee has gone to trying to ensure that this dog did not end up in rescue.     Don't forget, this dog needed help with no warning, had there been more time,  a different solution might have been found.    Had the original owners honoured the contract with the breeder,  this mess could have been avoided.

As for not ever breeding unless a few thousand pounds are there in reserve, how do you know this is not the case here?     You can run through that much very quickly  if you run into trouble with a bitch and new pups, and suddenly find yourself with a very reduced cushion.     We have no idea how much has been spent on trying to ensure this dog is safe, but it will have been more than a few hundred pounds - at a time when there is already so much expense.

Just how many Thousand Pounds do you prescribe that breeders should keep in reserve exactly?   Just remember, if the situation arises that requires the money be spent on dogs or pups, then you cannot both spend it and keep it.

The planet where perfectionists live their perfect lives, where everything is black or white and no body does anything wrong must be a very boring and lonely place.
I am so glad I live on a planet with other mere mortals who struggle through life trying very hard to survive and do their best for those around them, occasionally making mistakes, picking up the pieces for others mistakes or lack of thought and in general doing what they can, when they can for others whether human or animal.

Sometimes unprecedented things happen, what if say you had a litter of 10 and a few years down the line 8 came back all at once, how the heck could you foresee that and I'm pretty sure if you do things right you could easily excess 5k in a few weeks, it seems to me that some enjoy neigh saying and setting impossible goals. Thanks heavens pedlee has recieved mostly positive support.

Lol but you will be accused for being extreme !

However I still wait for Rabids answer on the money :-)

I would also add to this debate so you have a breeding programme and you end up with multiple dogs ( some people we know own alot of dogs ) so suddenly your life takes a horrible turn for the worst where you are unable to look after your dogs.

What would you do ?

I'm not sure how much more clear I can be:  SH*T HAPPENS AND WE ARE NOT IN CONTROL OF IT.  BUT YOU CAN MAKE PROVISIONS AND HAVE MONEY PUT ASIDE FOR THE UNEXPECTED.  YES, SOMETIMES THAT WON'T BE ENOUGH EITHER.

Good god. 

As for how much money, well that very much depends, doesn't it??  If you've bred 3 litters of chihuahuas (with 2 pups in each litter) over the last 10 years, then you're not going to need as much money/as much provision put aside as someone who has bred 5 litters (with 8-10 pups in each litter) of labradors.  If you breed a litter every year, you're going to need more money put aside than if you breed a litter once in 10 years.  Arguably if you breed a 'difficult' breed of dog which needs careful socialisation, you might be called upon as a breeder more often than if you breed a small and very easy-going breed.  If you have a large network of doggie family and friends who can help out at short notice, you're going to be less in need of a lot of money for kennelling - because you have other things in place.  If you have several kennels in your garden, you're not going to be so much in need of money for emergency kennelling.  And so on.  It's all relative and there are many factors to consider.  It should be very, very, very rare that all this falls through.  Admittedly, sometimes it might.

I really cannot believe the arrogance of some of the posters here, who act as if it is their god-given right to breed puppies - come what may - and only to help out when called upon, if it's 'convenient' to them, or if they happen not to have spent the money they should have aside for dogs on moving house or on rearing yet another litter.  It is really quite staggering.  No wonder breeders have such a bad name amongst rescues.

>yet you support in a practical way, every puppy farmer and BYB who has ever bred a dog or puppy that comes into your rescue, fully knowing that even if they could be traced they would never take the dog back or even want to know about it.

I really don't know what you're talking about Dill.  Firstly, I don't work for a rescue and never have, and never said I have - I said I have friends who are involved in rescue.  No idea what all this stuff is about 'my' so-called rescue.  Secondly, helping dogs in need is not 'supporting' puppy farming.  BYBs simply don't care what happens to the dogs they breed once they have their money for the puppy:  They can live, they can die, they can go to rescues, they can be PTS.  None of that is going to have any effect on their breeding practices.  It is a simple case of supply and demand:  When buyers continue to buy BYB puppies, then BYBs will continue to breed them.  It has absolutely nothing to do with what happens to those dogs subsequently.  (Are you suggesting that BYBs are so caring of their stock, that they wouldn't breed puppies if the puppies were PTS instead of going into rescue??  As if!)  Saying that 'rescues' 'support' BYBs is very twisted view indeed, and not one which is going to get much support here, I'd warrant. 

I'm pretty disgusted by a lot of the opinions on this thread.  Quite clearly there are many so-called breeders here who fancy themselves as 'responsible breeders' yet don't have enough provisions in place to meet the needs of the dogs they have bred.  Quite clearly those breeders feel threatened because they would very much like to continue thinking of themselves as 'responsible', despite bringing more dogs into the world than they can be responsible for.  Quite clearly that is behind the defence of Pedlee.  Were this a forum with fewer breeders on it, there would be a very different response to this situation. 

People don't work for rescue they are involved and are volunteers  because they realise sh@t happens and they love the breed enough to get involved :-)

Rabid you have been told 3 times now. Pedlee has paid tge money herself.

Just an aside - funny thing with hobbyhorses the more passionate they become the more they take away the ability to think straight.

Some people really would cause a fight in an empty house!

I have loads of resources (plus some) but if I had cancer and was in chemo or in ITU after a car crash, my husband wouldn't be able to cope with a phone call about a returned dog. In fact no one would be at home to take that call....GET REAL!
As you say s**t happens to people and dogs.

Ps..the last thing I "feel" about this thread is "threatened"  :-)

LJS some very good and pertainent points made.
As for s.... happening yes it does  and in my case at the moment it has and no matter what we were able to put aside it is not enough and we are trying to manage . Thank goodness I dont breed because i would have had to use the dog fund and heaven help me then if I had a dog returned.

To me I'm begining to feel that there is a ulterior motive in these antagonistic posts. Anti breeder, pro rescue everyone have a cross breed.

Exactly :-) I hope nobody would ever be in that situation but money would never cope with that sort of thing .

Quite clearly there are many so-called breeders here who fancy themselves as 'responsible breeders' yet don't have enough provisions in place to meet the needs of the dogs they have bred.

Surely a responsible breeder is one who health tests and tries to breed in a manner to keep the lines of their breed pure and without inherited faults, for future generations, or is a responsible breeder to be judged only on their savings?

So in other words BYBs and PFs who breed passing on many faults and diseases with irresponsible mating know their pups/dogs will be accepted willingly into a rescue centre but any pups/dogs with an excellent pedigree and very careful mating will not - something is very wrong here.

> Anti breeder, pro rescue everyone have a cross breed

Well the definition of rabid is - Extremely zealous or enthusiastic; fanatical

> It should be very, very, very rare that all this falls through. Admittedly, sometimes it might.
>

Excellent!  We agree!  :)  Now, what is it you are arguing about?

>

I've read this thread through several times.   I've made a couple of pretty calm and level comments.   I've sat on my hands several times.   I have composed and deleted several comments - but now I HAVE HAD ENOUGH!   Frankly Rabid (appropriate nom de plume, methinks) your arrogant attitude is just completely and utterly over the top.  

As HG pointed out so gently, we, the members of this forum do commit ourselves to being responsible for the puppies we breed for the whole duration of their lives - be it long or short.    And Pedlee has done that.    The good breeders amongst us have commiserated with her predicament, and agree that she has managed a distressing situation well.   It's sad that rescues are so arrogant that they refuse to make contact with breeders - or even breed rescues.  If through the efforts of people like you and your friends, Rabid, good breeders were to stop - from whence would your dogs come from?

You say you are disgusted with some of the opinions voiced in this thread - let me tell you, you are not alone - your opinions are not to my taste.   I would suggest that instead of the breeders leaving this forum, it is people like you who should review their position.   It is called CHAMPDOGS - not RSPCA Supporters.

Here here lokis mom, this is not the first nor second time o have found comments offensive from said poster, I for one would think that if o had a problem like this I would now think twice about asking for help.

> Surely a responsible breeder is one who health tests and tries to breed in a manner to keep the lines of their breed pure and without inherited faults, for future generations, or is a responsible breeder to be judged only on their savings?
>
>

Without decent breeders you would have nothing but dogs with no health screening, temperament screening, or compliance to any breed standard, not something I would wish to own.  As a breeder I selfishly wish to own typical healthy dogs of excellent temperaments, and pass such onto others.  This in the main means I have dogs that remain halt into old age,w ith rarely a need for the vet, so my not being able to Insure the number I keep does not become an issue, I can make reasonable contingencies for emergencies.

Also we seem to absolve OWNERS of their responsibilities, in this case two of them.

I am one of those breeders who believes that to justify my breeding activities I do not want any of my breeding ever taking away resources from any dogs that do not have an owner or breeder that cares enough to make provision.

I do my best, and if need be if I needed help from breed rescue I would expect to recompense them (as the OP has done/is going to do) if at all possible, I also feel obliged to make a contribution from puppy soles to rescue and also our breeds health research fund, as I believe I am one of the breeds custodians in this country.

It does make me wild that there are others breeding and homing puppies badly which then come into rescue within the year, and they cannot be made to take any responsibility, and that includes the owners, who decide an older dog is too expensive/inconvenient to keep.

Good breedres contribute to their breeds, BYB's and PF's exploit them

I refer you (all) again to the post which newcomers are referred to on this very forum, should they want to breed:

'Should I breed from my pet bitch?': http://www.champdogsforum.co.uk/board/topic/89071.html

"A responsible breeder also has a lifetime responsibility to the puppies they produce. This means being prepared to take back one of their puppies (however old he/she might be) for rehoming should the need arise (unfortunately people's circumstances do change), even if the timing is not convenient for the breeder. Responsible breeders do not "pass the buck" to Breed Rescue or to general Rescue Societies."

Please do tell me how your views are compatible with this water-tight, no exceptions allowed, statement to which others are held.  Thanks.

She's obviously so perfect that her sh*t don't stink!

Finally! Owners get off far to easy, only today I have had to put a post out for a dog coming into breed rescue at 5 years old, cos you've guessed it they've had a baby and the husband has said the dog has to go. Its about time owners were held account for their actions.

How many more times rabid, pedlee has paid out and will continue to pay out to the rescue, how is this any different to paying for kennels.

>Responsible breeders do not "pass the buck" to Breed Rescue or to general Rescue Societies.

How is paying for the dog's upkeep "passing the buck"?

Maybe it would suit Rabid's agenda far better if Pedlee (and all of us wicked greedy breeders) were to take back each and every dog suddenly unwanted by its owner until we reach satuaration point by which time, the RSPCA would race to the rescue complete with TV cameras to show just how terrible breeders are!

As earlier we have agreed the article needs amending.

Are you a breeder and do you have any input into rescue ?

Also would you again answer my question as it speaks volumes where somebody stays silent :-)

I would never entertain commenting on anything unless I had conviction in my responses or the balls to admit I was wrong.

Were this a forum with fewer breeders on it, there would be a very different response to this situation.

Rabid, so far (God willing) I am the responsible breeder that you describe, I have plenty of finances and room to provide for any returned dog, I have plenty of family back up if I'm not available and if that should fail I have people in my breed who I can rely on as they certainly ask me to help them. :-D  So I am your perfect breeder?

So being the perfect breeder why is it that I am very happy with everything that Pedlee has done? Why do I see her as caring and as someone who has done her best...... I don't personally know Pedlee and I'm not a poster who will just agree with people because they have been on the board for a while, I always try to be balanced.

It seems the only thing that you don't agree with is that she has not paid to kennel 'her' dog but after much trying in foster homes has financed the dog to go into a breed rescue. TBH Rabid, putting a dog in a boarding kennel for me would be worse, most dogs hate the kennels, they don't get attention, love and understanding, it's 2 meals a day and a quick walk then left alone all day, bored, this poor boy probably would be scared (as they are velcro dogs) and listening to other dogs howling and barking. Not a good move IMO...........Infact that would bring me to tears.

Instead he is atm in a breed rescue with people who know the breed and will no doubt give him much more attention and vet people who are really interested in the breed.  I doubt very much in a breed rescue that he is spending all day in a kennel alone and scared and hopefully they are open to reaching a lot more fosterers too.

My standards are high, and yes at this time I can say hopefully I would never need to go down this route, but......

I don't understand where your compassion is for a breeder who has tried. I can see perfectly clearly that she has tried, I can understand why she has had to do this - why don't you?  You have to see things from every point of view, otherwise you see nothing at all............

And yet again, I repeat (!):  This is not about Pedlee, but something bigger than this one situation.  It is about a precedent and what the post people are referred to says!

>How many more times rabid, pedlee has paid out and will continue to pay out to the rescue, how is this any different to paying for kennels.

I've tried very hard to find where Pedlee says she will pay for him in rescue kennels, but I'm afraid I can't find that post.  Perhaps it is there, but since there are 5 pages to trawl through, I can't see it...

LJS, I don't know what the question is which you keep saying I haven't answered.  If you could repeat the question, perhaps I could answer it...

Rabid - if Pedlee had put the dog into kennels and not paid for him to go to rescue would you have considered her to have fulfilled her obligation as a responsible breeder?

By being in a breed specific rescue - a paid for place - would you not think that the dog stands the best chance of getting a suitable rehome and  that is in the best interest of the dog to be found the best home possible?

Do you not think that Pedlee also has to do her best for the dogs that are already in her household - her adult dogs, the new litter and the dam? If taking the dog into her home meant that her other dogs were put at risk would you think it was a responsible thing to do? I know from previous threads Pedlee has not had the easiest of times with her female dog of the same breed and maybe during an unsettling time - new house, new litter - maybe having the returned dog in her house wouldn't be a good idea at all - as well as bearing responsibility for the dogs she has bred she also has to consider thet dogs that are already with her.

There never is a totally black and white solution to every problem and we have to do the best we can with the tools we have at the time - in my book that doesn't make one irresponsible.

I do not breed and never have done and never will but I do know that nobody can ever cover all eventualities however much we believe we have everything covered.

I actually find it quite sad that someone who has done the very best they can in difficult circumstances should be attacked in such a manner :-(

What Rabid seems to be completely ignorant of, is the amount of money raised and donated to breed rescues by responsible breeders on a regular basis and as part of their interest in the breed, also the amount of money raised and donated for health matters.

Eg.  Bedlington breeders discovered that the breed (along with others and several crossbreeds) had a problem with copper in the liver.     There is now a DNA test to help breed away from the copper problem, but work - and fundraising, continues, because the problem is more complicated than was originally suspected.    The research, and subsequent development of the test was instigated and financed by breeders and owners - How much does this all cost?    I've no idea, but the answer is likely to be well over six figures, since there has been more than one  DNA test so far.  And the work goes on.

At the same time, these same breeders also organised the breed welfare and rescue we have today.   

And yet, if a Bedlington goes into a general rescue, they refuse to deal with Bedlington Rescue who usually have a list of vetted, loving and experienced homes waiting.      Because all breeders are evil of course!

> I'd just say 'yes, he's mine, I bred him too' and go and pick him up

Rabid, would you like 'and yes it is OK to lie to rescue kennels and steal someone else's dog' put in the 'ethical breeders guide' ??

Rabid - see http://www.champdogsforum.co.uk/board/topic/139992pg2.html - that is a start.   There is also post from someone else who says that were she not 300 miles away, she would have been able to help.

I have asked probabley three times now so here it goes yet again........

Ok you have sidelined the money that is going to be your contigency for your ethical breeder scenario.

Then one day you get a phonecall that a family member is in real trouble would you ignore your family or help ?

And yet again, I repeat (!):  This is not about Pedlee, but something bigger than this one situation.  It is about a precedent and what the post people are referred to says!

Ok, so your views are not just based on what has happened to Pedlee (sorry Pedlee your names doing the rounds on this thread {{hug}} )  It's your overall view on what a breeder should do?

Well, on that I do agree with you, yes we should and yes, we do all set out to be that perfect breeder, of course that is what we do.

What I and others are trying to get across is, life doesn't always work out that way, believe me we breeders are often critical on how others do things we all think we do it the best ;-) you probably have the most critical and judgmental people on the board being a large number of breeders here, we're not going to applaud something we think is not worthy of the name breeder.

But we all know and realise crap happens, we're human. We plan and work hard to make that perfect litter, we vet and our pups go on to be what we hope are lifelong homes, our babies grow up and become someone else's family, they are supposed to love and cherish them, they are supposed to be responsible for their dog.  Very often they are not........... 

We do our best with the life and finances we have, long after a pup has been given to their 'forever' home, things have changed, it will not always be perfect........... but life is never perfect, IMO you cannot berate people for no longer having that picture perfect life.

The idea and the want is always there, I think we will all agree with that :-) but it is not always going to work out for many, many reasons.

Well Rabid, not being a breeder I don't have an ulterior motive in support of peddle, but I do have to wonder the motive behind your attack on pedlee ???

What do you expect from people , what more could this person have done , she has forked out money, she has housed the dog with people who can help, she has acted responsibly ,  your constant criticism makes one wonder if you just have a problem with breeders , and this gives you a soap box to jump on ?

I think the response this thread has received is neither biased or based on ulterior motives, it's simply down to most people living in reality, and knowing not everything can be planned for.

My understanding of the phrase 'passing the buck' is that someone evades responsibility, effectively leaving others to pick up the pieces as well as the bill. I feel this to be somewhat different from the conscientious breeder who might once in a blue moon find themselves in a position where they need to work with others in the breed, including breed rescue, to resolve a situation. However, as shown in this case, the breeder has been totally hands on and committed to finding and ensuring a decent solution, using whatever resources they are able to.

There is no such thing as a perfect, fail proof system, despite best efforts misjudgements and miscalculations are made and yes these can and should be a  learning curve for everyone. However, what really matters is what people do - this breeder stepped up to the plate, the buck was not passed.

At the very least, I feel it worth pointing out that the CD piece on breeders may be read/interpreted differently. 

I think very few of you who are arguing with Rabid have actually read what Rabid has written. This is not an attack on Pedlee, but it is being pointed out to you that supporting and praising her for what she has done goes contrary to your own guidelines on ethical breeding.

> refer you (all) again to the post which newcomers are referred to on this very forum, should they want to breed:
>
> 'Should I breed from my pet bitch?': http://www.champdogsforum.co.uk/board/topic/89071.html
>
> "A responsible breeder also has a lifetime responsibility to the puppies they produce. This means being prepared to take back one of their puppies (however old he/she might be) for rehoming should the need arise (unfortunately people's circumstances do change), even if the timing is not convenient for the breeder. Responsible breeders do not "pass the buck" to Breed Rescue or to general Rescue Societies."
>
> Please do tell me how your views are compatible with this water-tight, no exceptions allowed, statement to which others are held.  Thanks.

Again, this is not directed at Pedlee at all, but a lot of others posting on this thread, and I wholeartedly agree with this statement of Rabid's

"I really cannot believe the arrogance of some of the posters here, who act as if it is their god-given right to breed puppies - come what may - and only to help out when called upon, if it's 'convenient' to them, or if they happen not to have spent the money they should have aside for dogs on moving house or on rearing yet another litter.  It is really quite staggering.  No wonder breeders have such a bad name amongst rescues."

> I think very few of you who are arguing with Rabid have actually read what Rabid has written

Please don't insult us. There is nothing wrong with my reading ability :)

> Responsible breeders do not "pass the buck" to Breed Rescue or to general Rescue Societies

Pedlee did not 'pass the buck' - passing the buck would have been saying to the council 'that is not my dog' which, in law, she could have said as it is NOT her dog. Pedlee had ensured that her puppies were traceable by microchipping them before they left with HER name and address - had she not done that she would never have known that the dog was in the pound - then the buck would have been passed well and truly to rescue by the irresponsible owner NOT Pedlee.

and only to help out when called upon, if it's 'convenient' to them,or if they happen not to have spent the money they should have aside for dogs on moving house or on rearing yet another litter.

I cannot believe these comments, I am at a loss for words after everything that has been said over these pages. I don't think I can read any more, my blood pressure will not allow it - so I am off.

Zan, as you agree with Rabid, and he/she refuses to answer the question, perhaps you could explain in what way Pedlee has 'passed the buck'. Thank you. :-)

> so I am off

Me too :)

I wonder why Rabid and Zan frequent CD when they obviously have such a hatred of breeders who, apparently, make up the majority of members here !

Simples.... To troll!

> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

Again, this is not directed at Pedlee at all, but a lot of others posting on this thread, and I wholeartedly agree with this statement of Rabid's<br /><br />"I really cannot believe the arrogance of some of the posters here, who act as if it is their god-given right to breed puppies - come what may - and only to help out when called upon, if it's 'convenient' to them, or if they happen not to have spent the money they should have aside for dogs on moving house or on rearing yet another litter.  It is really quite staggering.  No wonder breeders have such a bad name amongst rescues."

I too cannot believe the arrogance of some of the posters on here but  it's certainly not the ones you condemn Zan.

Zan, with luck

You will never lose your household income or your home. 

You will never have to move home with little notice and/or no choice in where you go or when.  

You will never find yourself in hospital as an emergency and very lucky to be alive.  

You will never have to care for a close family member 24/7 with no outside help and the consequent loss of income.

But if you do find yourself in any of these predicaments, hopefully there will be people who will help, or at least listen - and not spend their time criticising you for the way you cope, or don't, as the case may be.

Jeangenie-- in this topic here http://www.champdogsforum.co.uk/board/topic/89071.html  the definition of passing the buck is passing the dog on to breed rescue

Quote:"Responsible breeders do not "pass the buck" to Breed Rescue or to general Rescue Societies."

Pedlee's dog is now in breed rescue. She may or may not be intending to pay their costs, but I can't find a statement from her anywhere that she is going to. I can find her saying that she can't afford boarding kennels, so I assume she cannot afford to pay the rescue's kenneling costs either.
I think both Rabid and I have been trying to widen the debate to all ethical breeders, and the statement in the above CHAMPDOGS topic, and have never intended a sustained attack on Pedlee.

I cannot believe these comments, I am at a loss for words after everything that has been said over these pages. I don't think I can read any more, my blood pressure will not allow it - so I am off.

Brick.........wall..........bang.......head, we're all wasting our breathe! When people don't want to listen, they don't listen, (tunnel vision) no doubt the same phrase will be thrown at the board too. :-D

If the whole point is to point out that the wording needs changing on the Should I breed thread, well pointed out, as HG said posts back.

I think we shall just have to agree to differ and leave it at that. :-)