AKC

[Swampman]

And since you've already stated you don't care about the falsification of anyone else's dogs, just your own...which category do you fall into?

Please refresh my memory, when did I state this?

I hate having to explain crap because people are looking for insult instead of reading the words for what they are, but I'll try this again:

Agreed, so I'll say again,

I asked AKC to ban him for life from ever registering a dog with AKC again, nothing more, nothing less.

He basically admitted to me that he does not know who the sire is

What are you gonna do with that?

I don't know what to do with that, but that is why I stated I wanted him banned nothing more. nothing less, I don't know how the sire issue could be resolved, but it doesn't diminish the fact that he forged the papers.

it's Swampman's word against the breeder that it went down that way. Maybe Swampman told the guy "Go ahead and sign my name," and then forgot all about it until it came back to bite him. I'm not saying that's the case, but it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility

This isn't directed at me?

As for the statute of limitations, the legal avenues may be closed because of statute of limitations against the forgerer, but the AKC is an organization that make their own rules and enforce them accordingly.

I guess I'm old fashioned and believe right is right and wrong is wrong no matter how you try to twist it around.

Swamp

[mobeagle]

I think if nothing else happens here there is something the AKC should take away from this and that is to put a statue of limitations into their by-laws. If this were crystal clear there would be nothing to argue about. If the letter he recieved would have said we are sorry to inform you that this matter has passed the statue of limitations as written in the by-laws 203.44 etc.... this would have been laid to rest some time ago. When you have no written policy for this type of matter you leave yourself wide open for criticism like what has taken place on this thread.


Bev you're obviously a big supporter of the AKC and I appreciate the fire you defend them with....but there are reasons proffesionals have large company policy manuals and thats to leave very little to OPEN debate. There should be a written policy on this and IF there is it should have been printed on the return letter he recieved. He may have not liked it but a written policy is what it is like it or not you choose to use them.

[S.R.Patch]

This thing of "thousands of hounds" affected has bothered me.
I'd have to go back through me e-mails, but I don't think Digger was bred, seems he was unsuitable in some way. That leaves only Frosty, the second and only other in the litter. I bet we're talking less than a 100 hounds, cause in 2001, we started "saving the Yates breeding" and the "pure patch drive". hummm, I'll bet AKC knows the number

It's not about AKC, it's that this is dropped and doesn't leave a "mark", then it's back to business as usual...

[Bev]

mobeagle, I'm a big defender of fairness, reason, and 2 sides to every story. It's not so much a matter of defending AKC as it is my dislike for people wanting other people to burn because they got screwed - and it doesn't matter if the right people burn, just as long as somebody burns. I have a son who paid dearly for the crime of another because the state couldn't prosecute who they really wanted, so now his quality of life is forever compromised for it. I can't get with that kind of knuckle-dragging, torch waving, witch burning mentality. So I tend to jump in front of the recipients of that behavior - no matter who it is. It's easy to blast, defame, and threaten to take down a person or organization when they aren't here to defend themselves. You're right about them stating a simple reason as to why they won't pursue it, but the fact it's a form letter tells me this stuff happens frequently. Perhaps they will clarify their stance in the future. I'm sure there are reasons none of us have considered.

it's Swampman's word against the breeder that it went down that way. Maybe Swampman told the guy "Go ahead and sign my name," and then forgot all about it until it came back to bite him. I'm not saying that's the case, but it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility

This isn't directed at me?

Okay, I can see where you thought me using your situation as an example, might make you think I really meant you. I didn't. Let me rephrase for you:

"it's Swampman's word against the breeder that it went down that way. Maybe AKC suspects Swampman told the guy "Go ahead and sign my name," and then forgot all about it until it came back to bite him. I'm not saying that's the case, but it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility for someone to do that.

I think I clarified that by "I'm not saying that's the case" but I think that part got by you.

I'm not too good to apologize when I'm wrong, and I owe you an apology. That's what I get for trying to read a long thread too quickly. It was Tsa la gi who stated,

You are correct their are probably other instanceses of this sort.Am I concerned about that Hell no I`m concerned about my problem

Don't know about you, but as far as your integrity and character comment, that falls in the "not so much" category.

I've stated my opinion and it differs with some. That's what discussion is for. Because we might not agree doesn't mean ill will on my part, or excusing AKC, or the breeder. It's just my take on the probable outcome of this, so I'm done with it. I feel badly for you that you won't get satisfaction, I really do. And I understand your frustration, but since that one breeding a long time ago, I'm going to assume everyone has kept proper paperwork, so if everyone's happy with the dogs they have, let time wash that one deviation away. It's not good, but it's not cancer, either. Enjoy your dogs. Nobody's guaranteed another tomorrow.

[Swampman]

Bev,
My point in wanting him banned is without banning, I fear he will go to other sites and start selling again and odds are if done once, there is a good probability that he will do it again if he hasn't done this since or even before already.

IMO, banning would protect future beaglers and the integrity of the AKC and the beagle breed.
I really did feel that the AKC was the standard in registered dogs, but with their response, well I am very dissapointed in them and do not hold them in such high esteem anymore.

Sorry to hear about your son.

Swamp

[davidc5936]

I have dogs with the subject breeding in the pedigree. Do I like it? No. Have I moved on about it? Yes. A man I respect highly once told me that "Holding a resentment was like drinking poison and waiting for the other person to die."

[mobeagle]

[quote="Bev"]mobeagle, I'm a big defender of fairness, reason, and 2 sides to every story. It's not so much a matter of defending AKC as it is my dislike for people wanting other people to burn because they got screwed - and it doesn't matter if the right people burn, just as long as somebody burns.



Bev if you're a defender of fairness and reason you should be in favor of this guy getting a ban. I dont see where someone is asking for ANYONE to get burned just the individual who forged another mans name and that is a reasonable request. He hasnt taken a radical stance on this just a simple request that a man who has forged a signature get banned. Nothing more nothing less and thats a pretty simple request. I'm guessing the guy has documents proving he owned the hound during that time and could get written statements from other hunters confirming it. I dont believe anyones asking that every dog since be taken out of the registry just that one man recieve punishment for an actual CRIME.

[Bev]

I'm not faulting Swampman for trying, but the police work needed to come a long time ago.

[Kenny VanHoose]

I can see Bev that the ones that are angry can only see their side of it and not heard a word you said.

[mobeagle]

I can see Bev that the ones that are angry can only see their side of it and not heard a word you said.

Or maybe they heard it all and still didnt agree with it???? Did you consider that? I dont have a dog in this fight. I have one hound registered on my place and he's horn registered.

My final thoughts on this are simple. Dont do anything let it die it'll do nothing but diminish the meaning of being AKC registered.

Everyone keep making excuses as to why nothing should be done. People used to fight for what was right now they lay down and cry.

[bucks better beagles]

If this had never been brought up, you all would have registered dogs. Now what do you have? Will you carry on the breed or just stop?

[cojax]

mobeagle and swamp i agree 100% with both of you on your post im glad there is still some people that will fight for what is morally and ethically right. The akc sits back and collects money for their registry and then when a discrepancy is brought to their attention their answer is it was 13 years ago....give me a brake. While it doesn't effect the way the dogs hunt or run it does effect everything we as responsible breeders try to accomplish. I know for a fact that chuck did not register the litter of pups from his dog in question even though at this point he could have and nobody would have been none the wiser. He could have sold those pups for the going akc price and probably would be okay, and yes their is a difference between the akc price and the grade dog price right Bev or kenny vanhoose. WONDER WHY THAT IS------SWAMPMAN PUT BEST..... but he didn't he found them all homes to hunters that didn't care if they were registered or not (integrity). Now while i am not out for blood i would like the akc to do what is right and punish the responsible party after all they make the rules and enforce them (or so i thought) based on their core principles. When i pay money to them for pups $20 or a transfer $20 i do that knowing or thinking that they are going to check the logs and send me my registration certificate (they even put a gold seal on the pedigree for an extra $27 certifying the pedigree) and if they were made aware of a discrepancy, me as a certified dog toting gold embossed certificate carrying pedigree owner, that is a member of their club ,would like to be made aware of the discrepancy and the action they took to correct it. I realize they cant go back and fix it but it would be a lot harder to sell akc registered hounds if you were not a member thanks cojax

[Salzer mtn]

I have a question for the ones that say's that akc should step up and do what is right. Are you going to continue to register your dogs with akc ? The reason i ask is because normally when a person does you wrong you don't have any more dealings with them. Is a organization any different ?

[Tsa la gi]

This topic was posted by me Oct,5,2010. Check your Patch pedigree`s. I knew about it about mid Sept. We were posting pic`s of our hounds and some one wanted to see a pedigree,I posted Kojacks and was notified that there might be a problem with it.I was asked not to say anything until we received verification from AKC.
It was asked why was something not done about this 13 yrs ago? I presume it was because no one had put a pedigree on public display. Also I think the only person to be notified of a litter registration is the person doing and signing the documents.
Any one wanting to read all replies to this topic can go to searching for information click on Re check your patch pedigree`s posted by Lr Patch, click on the link Hammerenpatch put on. There are 10 pages of replies and also copies of ten documents.

The 1997 document is Forged. MOLLYCODEL and make excuses for this guy if you want Right is Right and Wrong is Wrong.
AKC knows this is a Forged Document and have decided to do nothing about it. As far as tarnishing AKC They did it to their self. I don`t agree with some of the replies that some have put on here as well as some have not agreed with mine.
I just wish I had some of the wisdom of some folks on here and the ability to see both sides but I guess just don`t have that broad vision window. You know I know it`s wrong but what the heck let it slide.

[mobeagle]

I have a question for the ones that say's that akc should step up and do what is right. Are you going to continue to register your dogs with akc ? The reason i ask is because normally when a person does you wrong you don't have any more dealings with them. Is a organization any different ?

I'd say if they done the right thing no one would even blink at continuing to use them. Its not the AKCs fault someone forged a document however it is their problem when they refuse to take action when a problem has been brought to their attention.