Part II

Our Understanding of ESSR Function and Procedures

Compiled by Tina M. Barber and Karen Ursel
January 2, 2006

Background

1. When Gaby purchased her breeding pair, she registered both dogs with the ISSR as per our rules.

2. Her first litter (born in September 2003) was properly registered within the ISSR. However, after receiving her puppy papers, Gaby had a problem with our application and charges. So she just issued her "own" papers for the pups. Her second litter, born in 2004, was never registered in the ISSR. Another breeding, between her stud and a Beauty/Artus daughter was also never registered in the ISSR.

January-June 2005

3. In February 2005 Tina and Gaby discussed these problems and Tina agreed to let her collect the data in Europe and then just forward the information to us for entry into the TCCP database free of charge! (In other words, the ISSR would take on the burden of any charges that TCCP chose to bill us for this service, however we expected Gaby to present the data in a program format that could be easily merged into the TCCP.)

Tina realized that other European breeders would not want to pay the litter registration fees, as well as the individual $50 per dog fees for each pup produced and registered plus what ever fees they had to pay over there! This system would take the burden off of their shoulders and make it easier for them to comply.

4. Gaby was to collect and document data (like the ISSR does here) and then send it to the TCCP for database entry. Thus, the "ESSR" would become an official entity (division) of the ISSR, Inc. as the ISSR's data collection arm (branch) for dogs born in Europe, not a registry, per se.

5. Since three litters had already been born in Europe as of Gaby's visit here in Feb. 2005, Tina, Gaby, Lisa, Karen and Barbara (TCCP) started investigating computer programs that would provide an easy way of merging this data properly.

a. Karen and Barbara discussed at length the information that Gaby needed to provide on each dog for the TCCP database as well as what kind of information we would need to provide to the SKG should the SSDCA and the ISSR decide to move forward.

b. Via several emails between Barbara Betcher of the TCCP and Karen, Barbara provided Gaby with a very easy way for her to forward ESSR data on a regular basis via an Excel spreadsheet that would list the information that was necessary for ISSR database entry--at no cost to Gaby or her members. However as of this notice (January 2006), no such data has ever been received.

c. Details as to future data entry for dogs that were born here but would like SKG papers were never finalized.

6. In March 2005 some of our members noticed that Gaby had a male pictured on her website that was from the USA, who, although not ISSR registered, was listed as an upcoming stud. This created a huge brouhaha with SSDCA members and breeders demanding that Tina explain how Gaby could be using this dog if he was not properly registered? Gaby promised Tina that he would not be used and she would remove the picture.

July-December 2005

In July and August prior to Homecoming, others again noticed the picture and further complaints and questions ensued. When questioned by Tina again, Gaby responded that he would be registered with the ESSR. At this point, Gaby was telling people that if "a" dog (even an ADS, sliver dog, whatever) passed "her" (SKG) requirements, it would get ESSR papers.

At some point prior to 9/23 Gaby had informed Katy (our newsletter editor) that she was planning the following upcoming litter:

"VID Shanaya [Scarlett (Artus grand-daughter)/Duke] Merlyn [Velvet (Artus great grand-daughter)/Toro (Orbit grandson)] regular litter non- NB Winter 2005"

which she retracted on 9/25.

Tina explained to Gaby (again) after Homecoming that he could not be registered in the ESSR because he could not be registered in the ISSR as he was from an accidental breeding where neither parent had had their hips tested and the bitch was many months under the minimum breeding age. Finally, the picture was removed.

7. Upon finally getting the chance to review the SSC rules, our members started to complain that Gaby was writing her "own" rules and blaming everything on the SKG.

For example:

--only the equivalent of "A" and "B" (Excellent and Good OFA ratings) could be bred.

--to obtain breeding papers, a Shiloh would have to pass the equivalent of a Schutzhund test.

--to breed our dogs, we would have to be members of the Swiss Shiloh Chapter at a fee of $95 year.

After much discussion, on the ShilohVIB list, the SSDCA board met on 9/14/05 and formed a committee to investigate inconsistencies that our breeders had been complaining about since Homecoming.

8. Although Karen and Barbara have tried to help Gaby merge a data program, we have thus far not received any ESSR data on any of the puppies born in Europe, including the most recent litter between Phantom and Chance. However, there are questions as to whether or not this group is working within the set parameters of the ISSR as had been originally agreed upon!

For example, if a dog is not an approved NB/does not meet the ISSR requirements, then how can such a dog receive ESSR papers? Certain processing requirements were waived, but the rules must still apply!

9. Despite the facts that:

a). None of the ESSR data has yet been merged into the ISSR database

b). None of the co-own breeding rules have been agreed upon

c). None of our SSDCA, Inc. members have had a chance to study and approve/reject the SSC chapter rules


In conclusion, if the ESSR is just the  European data collection branch for the ISSR, Inc., then the ISSR Rules must be respected, and data collected should be submitted in a timely fashion.

If the SKG rejects our request, another country may not, and, in the event that this happened, none of the ESSR dogs would be included after recognition was achieved, unless they were legally a part of the ISSR database that is submitted to the chosen country.

On Dec. 27th, Tina finally had a chance to view a copy of the "official" ESSR "paper" that Gaby has been issuing when she sells her puppies. 

a.  The first thing that Tina noticed was the pyramid symbol that had replaced the fish!

For those who may have forgotten, this was a huge bone of contention between Tina and Gary Allison who started the first "splinter" group.  Please read Tina's reaction in 1997.  She also details it in her book and has never changed her stand!

b. There has been continued confusion (in Gaby's mind) between the SSDCA and ISSR functions. The logo she chose belongs to our club, not the ISSR! If the ESSR is to be a division of the ISSR, shouldn't it use the registry logo instead of a desecrated version of the club logo?

c. Dogs that are listed on this form are not even placed in the right sire and dam spots, nor do they have the proper registration numbers.  For example, Starlight Melody is listed as being UK # 158-4041 and in reality that is her sire's Universal Kennel registration number. His true AKC number  is DL562298/04.   Upon investigating the submitted papers, various other major inconsistencies were found, any one of which would totally discredit our entire organization!

This is symbolic of extremely lax data collection and processing, something that is totally abhorred by the TCCP and completely rejected by the ISSR!

Please review the rest of the Phantom documentation.
 

Part I: SSC Chronology | The Gaby Story