Before submitting a contribution, please read the General Introduction
08 July 2011
REDUCED RATE FOR LIMITED PERIOD ONLY
DISPENSATION TO WAIVE THE PENALTY FEE FOR REGISTRATION OF LITTERS (4-12 MONTHS)
19 July 2011
Herewith a statement on the OFS situation:
(1) In terms of Article 19, I have, as President appointed Messrs Ken Hull and Colin Bohler to visit the
(2) The situation, as we understand it, with regard to Mr Dippenaar and the Free State SPCA is that Mr Dippenaar has instructed his lawyers to proceed with legal action. This, according to our legal advisor, results in the matter being sub-judice until a conclusion is reached.
G R EVA
24 July 2011
KUSA's statement on the Free State is interesting, especially the second part.
Against whom has Mr Dippenaar instituted legal action? On what grounds? I believe it is in the public interest to be told what's going on.
I am not a lawyer, but I think KUSA will benefit from going onto the Internet like I did and reading Glenn Penfold's briefing note on the sub judice rule. Penfold is an attorney in Webber Wentzel's (KUSA's very own lawyers) Johannesburg office.
Perhaps after Mr Eva has read the article about this outdated rule which no court can enforce he'll have the courage to tell us what's actually going on.
Waiting for Dippenaar's resignation
25 July 2011
Dogworld SA, why do you allow the likes of 'Waiting for Dippenaar's resignation' to spew his/her/it's drivel onto this forum? Making an appeal to Greg Eva's courage, nogal, to tell us what's going on (?) When he's really not supposed to go around chasing court cases, but to run a Kennel Union like he's been employed to do? And, this from some sleaze-bag who lacks the moral courage to sign his/her/it's filthy name?
The day SA Dog News decides to only publish the thoughts of those who who's real names are worn with pride, will be the day when you'll attract only about 30% of the mail you receive now.
26 July 2011
Sitting and reading the proposed new Provco Constitution – the latest offering from the "great minds" on how to make a better mousetrap - I was forcibly struck by the saying “fiddling while Rome burns”. It appears that the sycophants have yet again applied their puerile minds to the devious plan around their single preoccupation – the disempowerment of DOGSPC.
What’s wrong with levelling the playing fields you might say? True, except that it doesn’t matter how much you level them, it still requires the provinces to play by the rules, or face the consequences. But sadly it doesn’t work like that for certain provinces and KUSA does nothing to enforce compliance. How and when does KUSA intend to force the Free State and Northern Cape to have duly constituted meetings, submit minutes and present financial statements like other provinces are obliged to do. Please bear in mind that it is your and my money that prop up this province which has no regard for KUSA’s Constitution and no respect for KUSA’s authority. And the worst is that it is not held accountable by KUSA and its seat on Fedco is warm and secure.
At some point Article 12.1.2 of the KUSA Constitution was changed to require 67% of the full number of members of a Provco to adopt any matter to be placed on the Fedco Agenda. We must all have been asleep when this was done. I still maintain that it’s an idiotic provision, for which there is neither valid reason, nor justification. Needless to say, it’s now also being flaunted in the new Provco constitution just in case we forget that a simple majority is not good enough to put forward suggestions for the betterment of KUSA. No, sir, we have to go and round up two thirds of the province’s membership for any idea to be entertained by the high and mighty Fedco, regardless of the fact that any proposal can be voted down by a simple majority of Fedco members!
My club would love Baby Puppy Classes and a Grand Champion Award to be instituted. We have put together suitable proposals, but they cannot be tabled at Fedco unless 67% of DOGSPC’s clubs agree. I’m afraid that puts paid to encouraging any innovation through a large province like DOGSPC. In certain other provinces, which shall remain nameless, this problem is overcome by the cross-pollination of clubs and the holding of joint AGMs.
But the provision in the proposed new Provco constitution that really floored me is that, as soon as a province has 49 clubs, KUSA will immediately form another province. Another Potemkin village. For those who don’t know what that is, let Wikipedia explain: According to the myth, there were fake settlements purportedly erected at the direction of Russian minister Grigory Potyomkin to fool Empress Catherine II during her visit to Crimea in 1787. According to this story, Potyomkin, who led the Crimean military campaign, had hollow facades of villages constructed along the desolate banks of the Dnieper River in order to impress the monarch and her travel party with the value of her new conquests, thus enhancing his standing in the empress's eyes.
We already have one Potemkin village in the NAPC which is costing KUSA dearly. Do you, as a member of KUSA, think we can afford yet another province in Gauteng? Because folks, that's the only province that has more than 49 clubs. Do you think that with show levies at R13,50 per dog and registrations at R180 per puppy plus microchipping that you can afford another province – all doing the same thing? Read your Fedco report - KUSA is budgeting for a R62 000 LOSS in the next financial year!
Do you think the economy is going to improve that it will allow us to play catch-up? Do you know that the hardworking KUSA staff are not getting salary increases, not even cost-of-living adjustments? Look at your personal budgets and what you are paying for lights, water, petrol and tolls an tell me whether you think we can afford the luxury of another province.
The only way to stop this is to make sure that your club representative attends the next DOGSPC meeting.
Support your province.
26 July 2011
In response to Mr Pretorius’s post, I have read “Waiting for Dippernaar’s resignation” post repetitively in an attempt to find a single word or sentence therein that could be described as “drivel.” I cannot.
On interpretation of his/her post, I construe the emphasis of the post to be that Mr Eva is urged to become more transparent with members rather than remain secretive as to “what’s going on” As far as the “sub judice” rule is concerned, “Waiting for Dippenaar’s resignation” merely seeks to educate readers including Kusa as to the present rule of law, supporting his assertions with solid facts in the form of an article published by a highly respected attorney dealing with constitutional matters. Hardly drivel would you say!
The question that arises: Once Mr Eva’s two-man Commission of Enquiry has ultimately completed its work to gather information and, where possible to provide assistance in various matters to do with the OFS Provco (sic), will members be afforded the privilege of being advised what has been ascertained by the two gentlemen concerned? I wonder!
Will the sub judice rule continue to be utilized as, in my opinion, a stalling tactic?
What justifies Mr Pretorius’s vitriolic attack on Mr/Mrs Waiting for……………?? Merely the fact that he/she uses a pseudonym? Or perhaps that he/she questions Mr Eva’s lack of courage and transparency? Or that he/she questions Mr Eva’s knowledge of the law pertaining to the “sub judice” rule? Oh c’mon Mr Pretorius, get real and smell the roses.
I do agree that articles written under a pseudonym afford less authenticity to an article. I generally support Pretorius’s opinion in this regard, and have in the past encouraged contributors to use their own names in the interests of maintaining an authentic website, free from abuse. I however refrain from using abusive language in order to convey my opinion to readers.
However, there are the isolated occasions that contributors feel that should they divulge their true identity, it could have an adverse impetus on their article, hence justifying the use of a pseudonym in certain isolated instances.
Pretorius questions the editor of Dogworld for permitting the “sleaze bag” of spewing his/her/it’s drivel onto this forum (sic). He continues his vitriol by referring to the mysterious contributor as a sleaze bag, who lacks the moral courage to sign his/her/its filthy name. How abrasive and rude one can become in an attempt to enforce his opinions on readers!
Perhaps a brief lesson in the Constitution Act of South Africa could be of benefit to Mr Pretorius.
The Bill of Rights entitles citizens of South Africa the right of freedom of expression (subject to certain limitations), which includes freedom of the press and other media; freedom to receive and impart information and ideas. It is for this reason that the Dogworld editor permits Pretorius to spew his objectionable language across this website. Equally the editor permits the mystery writer his/her right to express his/her views. In neither case are the limitations applicable.
I think that the majority of readers would agree that they would in preference read what the mysterious individual had to say rather than the abusive concoction of nonsense written by Pretorius.
However that is the manner in which the Constitution was framed and enacted by an Act of Parliament permitting all their right of expression.
YOU ARE BOTH ENTITLED TO EXPRESS YOUR VIEWS, FOUL LANGUAGE AND ALL.
In conclusion I have included a recent article written by an eminent Professor, Pierre De Vos, who deals with Constitutional matters affecting South Africa. Hereunder is what he has to say concerning the sub judice rule, in condensed form:
“As the law stands now, the sub judice rule will almost never be applicable. Where anyone invokes this rule, they are doing so either because they are ill-informed about the law or because they are using the rule to avoid accountability. Whenever a politician invokes the sub judice rule, I for one will assume that the politician is admitting guilt or other wrongdoing, but is trying to hide from scrutiny and accountability for his or her actions.
So next time you read that a politician has invoked this rule, please do not believe for one second that the rule is applicable. It will not be applicable. Assume instead that the politician is ducking and diving because he or she is scared; or is trying to avoid being caught out in a lie; or is looking for an excuse to justify a constitutional breach of a duty”.
Prof Pierre de Vos is the Claude Leon Foundation Chair in Constitutional Governance and teaches in the area of Constitutional Law. He has a B Comm (Law), LLB and LLM (cum laude) from the University of Stellenbosch, an LLM from Columbia University in New York, and an LLD from the University of Western Cape. He taught at the University of Western Cape from 1993 to June 2009 and held a Professorship at that institution from 2001. Prof de Vos is the chairperson of the Board of the Aids Legal Network and is a board member of Triangle Project.
27 July 2011
Mr. Noik, I read you often, and I find you more sensible than most. You're actually a good sort (even if you're long-winded and prone to preaching) but I think you've missed the point.
I don't know Dippenaar from a bar of soap (I don't even know what he looks like) but I know that he's being pre-judged by a kangaroo court (as Mike Dannat said.) Your no-name-brand friend (and the other kangeroo's) insist on his resignation, and it seems you support him/her/it/them. I'll happily swallow my words the instant the court finds him guilty. If not, I won't even come back to say "I told you so."
I also don't give a toot about Prof. Pierre de Vos and his list of qualifications (he wont be officiating in the Dippenaar case now, would he?!)
Yes, you are right when you think I despise no-name-brand correspondents. Of course I agree that some might have a need for anonymity under certain conditions, but this cat doesn't qualify. He/she/it simply found safety in anonymity to add more drivel to what has already been received. Anonymity is never a total safeguard - all have read the 'sleazebag' description, and it fits nicely.
I remain unrepentant.
27 July 2011
Good gracious, when did Professor De Vos start showing dogs? How did he come to know KUSA and its leadership so well?
"So next time you read that a politician has invoked this (sub judice) rule, please do not believe for one second that the rule is applicable. It will not be applicable. Assume instead that the politician is ducking and diving because he or she is scared; or is trying to avoid being caught out in a lie; or is looking for an excuse to justify a constitutional breach of a duty”.
Only if you know your way around
They walk among us
27 July 2011
Reading the rabid rantings of Chris Pretorius, one cannot help feeling sorry for him. Its like the kind of sorry one would feel for Anders Behring Breivik.
It takes all sorts
27 July 2011
Reading the opinions about "sub judice" by a top lawyer and a top academic, it seems that Kusa's legal advisor is not only expensive, but also a bit behind the times.
Maybe somebody should whisper in his ear that its OK for Kusa to tell the members what's cooking in the
If you ask me, hiding behind the sub judice thing is just another of Kusa's cover up atempts. The only difference is that this time many of us are watching.
I am purposely not going to sign this because I know how much it irritates Mr Pretorius. I want him to spew some more vitriol so we can all enjoy the spectacle.
Sub judice schmoodice
27 July 2011
Dear Mr Pretorius
I thank you for you condescending kindness, which is of course unnecessary.
You are quite correct. I have missed the point. In fact after reading your response to my post, it becomes as clear as mud what your point actually is. I therefore will have to take a wild guess at it.
I responded to the salient points of your post which in my opinion included:
(i) Your questioning the motives of the Dogworld editor in permitting the publication of the mystery writer’s post.
(ii) the aspect of pseudonyms being used which you so vociferously object to.
(iii) my responding opinion on the so called “drivel” written by the mysterious contributor.
(iv) transparency of G Eva and the sub judice rule in law.
Not wishing to appear stupid, I must confess that the issue,(I guess), which you appear to be most concerned about seems to be Dippenaar’s being tried by a “Kangaroo Court”. This didn’t even cross my mind. But then how could it? Nothing in your post impliedly or otherwise indicated that that was the focus of your ire.
So Mr Pretorius, if you wish to emphasize your opinions, perhaps you should dispense with the ranting behaviour and communicate your feelings in a mature and concise manner, so that all of us “cats” and “ long-winded preachers” out there could take notice of what you say, rather than label you as a joker.
Have a nice day hear
28 July 2011
Lionel my friend (forgive the familiarity), there is no need for self-reproach in trying to gauge the gist of the latest correspondence. Your adopted role as the dog-world's conscience is widely applauded (yeah, couldn't I too, be as pure as the wind-driven snow!)
I'm afraid I have to admit to a number of failings, like finding it very difficult to cultivate sufficient respect for the 'Hidden Brigade' who dwell in these halls. Also, I have this tendency to refer to drivel as drivel and to sleaze-bags as sleaze-bags.
No, I just can't repent.
30 July 2011
On the subject of Mr Dippenaar, there are many things known in the Free State but nobody wants to get involved, the old hands have either died, moved away or don't want to get involved. The fact is, he ran the clubs like a private enterprise and nobody was either strong enough or determined enough but many irregularities occurred. Another thing was that he involved his father who in the meantime passed away but was on the board of the club when he was nearly too feeble to be in an old age home. For new people to become a member of the club was as far as I know, impossible. Myself and other people tried, even going as far as including the membership fee with the show entry fee and saying so, but never getting a reply or receiving the money back. Open shows were never held as far as I know, everything was organised between Mr Dippenaar and a few close friends and anybody that objected was worked away.
Mr Pretorious says he doesn't know Mr Dippenaar but has a very definite opinion especially towards people who don’t give their name but doesn't consider that some people might be afraid but some of those people might know things he doesn't have a clue about and being rude doesn't alter the point.
At dog shows did all the donated dog food go to the exhibiters? This is a question currently doing the rounds. As for the dogs in his kennels - how can a man like he is walk or exercise them and look after them? These are all things that a lot of people in Bloemfontein know about and at different times have been reported but nothing has ever happened.
Alec van Strien
30 July 2011
Thank you to my cocker spaniel "Soya", who this afternoon alerted me to three robbers on my property. All were arrested. May you always be allowed to use your voice.
01 August 2011
I'm an aspirant on the judges scheme and we have been hearing that this grand new scheme is coming but we have been told nothing zip nada.
I KZN and
So in the mean time we maar carry on the old way.
Can anybody tell us what is going on please.
And just before Pretorius has one of his ridiculous tantrems again I'm not going to sign this because I don't want my reports failed.
Judge on the scheme
01 August 2011
I met Myrtle Bornman in 1979, as an enthusiastic 12 year old, having recently acquired my first mini smooth dachshund, I wanted to let her have a litter. I called KUSA to ask for stud dog listings in the
Myrtle Bornman was without a doubt one of the most sincere, loving and incredible people I have ever had the privilege of knowing. Her love for family and dogs was an inspiration. I learnt so much from her, not only about dog breeding but about life too. She was the embodiment of kindness itself. The temperament of her dogs was testament to her outstanding personality, love and genuineness.
I have an 11 year old male mini from our collective lines and people stop me everyday to compliment me on him. As my mom says, you can spot a ‘Myrtle’ dog anywhere.
So, finally, I would like to pay tribute to Myrtle Bornman of Avalon Kennels for all the patience, love, education, kindness, acceptance and humour that she embodied.
She was my teacher, but more than that, I was lucky enough to call her my friend.
Travel well wonderful lady, I will always miss you. God Bless you always
01 August 2011
With regard to the comment of one of your letter writers perhaps he/she would avail herself/himself of the opportunity of coming tomorrow night to Dogspc.
Discussion on the subject will be held and I use the word discussion advisedly. It is not a bitch session it is merely to keep the members informed and seek advice on whether the path we have embarked upon is correct.
The current judges scheme is NOT a judges scheme it has no clear parameters, it has no goal. Now through the offices of your local judges committees we have endeavoured to put some coherency and transparency on a future scheme.
I note that the writer regarding KZN uses the words I heard that it was a bugger up and considering the people involved he/she is not surprised!!!!!!!!!
Pretty strong words.
That is just the point "you heard" were you present??
Your local committee has worked very hard in the last 18mth to put on seminars that are useful and educational. These new formatted lectures are in line with the future strongly educational approach that a revamped judges scheme hopes to bring to the table.
The national judges committee has worked even harder to prepare a document that fulfils everyone's expectations!
It will have strong educational principles that it will allow anyone ,anywhere in
However one must bear in mind that all documents are the result of compromise (look at the
My presentation tomorrow night is part of DOGSPC continued efforts to keep our member clubs and their members informed on the progress of this important task.
Chairman Judges Education DOGSPC
02 August 2011
Thank you Fran.
Between you, Joy McFarlane (whose very well prepared presentation I was privileged to attend), Martin Croeser and all who have been working at this; the Scheme will succeed. Your intervention has been long overdue.
Bless you all.
02 August 2011
Dear Monique - I don't know either of you, but I was moved. What a nice tribute to your friend Myrtle.
Thanks for sharing.
02 August 2011
I just LOVE this!
'Judge-on-the-Scheme', you really have zilch to fear from me (but, you'll either have to improve your spelling before you submit your reports, or present really good reports!)
Yeah, I know I'm not English, but neither are you!
08 August 2011
Good day, the poisoning of dogs using Temik has again raised its extremely ugly head. Yesterday morning my neighbours wife broke into tears when she saw that her four dogs had been poisoned. Two were dead, but we managed to save the other two. This morning I let my two Dalmatians out, and I was horrified to see one was chewing on something. I managed to get it away from her and it was a small plastic bag containing sausage meat laced with black granules (temik). My other bitch was not so lucky, she had already swallowed the poison; she started vomiting and went into convulsions, despite giving injecting her with the antidote and despite getting treatment at the vets she died this morning. I am very heartsore; she was a beautiful little Dalmatian with a lovely personality Worse to come; during the last two days literally dozens of dogs have been poisoned up and down the streets in Mooinooi. What next? When is Bayer going to stop manufacturing this horrible chemical! ? Why do the farmers persist in using it when it is banned in Europe and its use is severely restricted in the USA ? Stop using Bayers products until they stop manufacturing this horrible poison !!!
08 August 2011
Whoa , Whoa , Whoa ........................ Hold your rabid horses Judge on the Scheme.
For your information and to set the record straight , the proposed KUSA Breed Judges Learning Programme has NOT been presented to KZN .
On instruction from the Convenor of the National Judges Sub Committee the proposed scheme will be presented to PROVCO and interested parties .
You are most welcome to attend .
Chairman KZN Provincial Judges Sub Committee
14 August 2011
In addition to overseeing the administration of its own events (the KUSA Championship Show and the KUSA Nationals), KUSA has evidently also undertaken the administration of the other three all breeds shows in the Free State cluster – those of Bloemfontein, Kimberley and Northern Free State Kennel Clubs.
Every other show in the country receives and receipts its own entries, balances its own books, arranges its own data-capturing, deals with its own enquiries and produces its own catalogues. This is all done by committed volunteers who often work fulltime and have to perform these duties after-hours, frequently working into the small hours of the morning in the run-up to the show. But in the case of the three Free State clubs, the KUSA secretarial machine is deployed to take care of everything. KUSA personnel are pulled off their normal KUSA duties for which we, the members, pay, to provide secretarial services to the three dysfunctional clubs.
Hopefully other clubs who run into financial and other difficulties in future would also be able to avail themselves of KUSA’s secretarial services with the President’s personally capturing their entries, producing their catalogues and organising their certificate-printing on show day. What a fantastic deal! I’m surprised that not more cash-strapped or under-resourced clubs have thrown in the towel. All Club Secretaries would then have to do is to rock up on show day immaculately coiffed and corsaged.
I have a few questions for the President:
· Do his entry-capturing activities for the three Free State clubs take place during office hours - in other words, on our time - or after hours?
· We already know that Ms Carlene Hooper (and probably other KUSA personnel as well) deals with the entries of the Free State Clubs during normal office hours (our time). Is the time that she/they spend on this task meticulously recorded, and KUSA compensated for the hours out of the entry fees?
· What happens to any surplus revenue (I am disinclined to call it “profit”)? Does KUSA get to keep it, or will it get poured back into the abysses that are the three Free State Clubs?
The membership and the exhibitors are entitled to know to what extent they are subsidising the three Free State clubs which appear to be defunct in all but name. I think it was Fran Cristina who taught us all about Potemkin Villages on one of these forums. Apart from the FS&NCPC, the three satellite PVs on the outskirts of the province are, I believe, particularly picturesque and certainly worth investigating.
The President’s response would be appreciated by many of us who have been querying KUSA’s services to the clubs in question.
25 August 2011
KUSA statement on their web site:
I am very annoyed and insulted by the statement posted on the KUSA News and Views page of the KUSA website entitled "BUYING A PUPPY - Beware of internet based scams"
I accept that it is in the interests of the general public to post such a notice, but it is totally unfair to advise members of the public to "consult with our members who are on our Accredited Breeders Scheme "
What about the KUSA members who are not on the accredited breeder scheme? KUSA has thousands of members , of which only an absolute minority ( Roughly 130 or 2%) are on the accredited breeder scheme. The impression given in the notice is that members of the ABS are the only persons to be trusted, since they have signed a form and agreed to abide by a different set of rules. This notice is an insult to all KUSA members who have originally completed and signed an application form in which they agreed to adhere to the rules and regulations of KUSA. Is the general public supposed to assume that the thousands of KUSA members who do not belong to the accredited breeder scheme are all dishonest?
KUSA is actively advising members of the public to not buy puppies from anyone other than members of the accredited breeder scheme. By doing this KUSA is effectively preventing 98% of their members from selling puppies via internet web sites, which is one of the most effective advertising mediums of the 21st century! The large majority of breeders have their own web site, and also use other sites, such as Dogworld, to advertise their puppies.
I understand that the financial forecast for KUSA is currently very negative, and taking the above into account, I am hardly surprised. KUSA should be doing everything in their power to promote the sales of puppies through ALL their members, since we are all painfully aware that a large part of KUSA revenue is generated via puppy registrations.
Instead, KUSA have posted the most irresponsible and poorly worded statement on their web site with no thought of the negative impact that such a statement will have on KUSA coffers nor those of ALL the legitimate KUSA members, who are all entitled to sell their puppies via advertising on internet web sites.
I think that the notice should be removed immediately from the KUSA web site, and re written more carefully to convey the correct message regarding scam puppy sales without creating a negative impression of web site advertising and legitimate KUSA members/Breeders.
26 August 2011
Kevin Young, I couldn't agree with you more. That scheme has no monitoring device of any significant kind, and would only mislead a rather naive public.
26 August 2011
Dear Dogworld Editor
Further to my previous e-mail regarding the post on News and Views re puppy scams:
It is ironic to note that the Dogworld site has a link to the KUSA "News and Views" page, where visitors are advised NOT to buy puppies through websites.( one of which must be Dogworld, since breeders do advertise their puppies on Dogworld) This is problematic for all breeders who pay to advertise on Dogworld, and other similar perfectly legitimate sites, such as my own site and those of many, many breeders.
My web site costs me a lot of money to set up, maintain and host. I pay an advertising fee to several other web sites, one of which is Dogworld. I also pay my annual membership to KUSA, and do not deserve to incur damages and costs and loss of income as a result of irresponsible statements on the KUSA website, which is MY professional association, and to which I have been a member for over 20 years IN GOOD STANDING.
This is an intolerable situation.
Youngstead Saint Bernards
26 August 2011
And Kevin don't forget that not all the KUSA accredited breeders are above board either. I know of under age matings with no xrays being done and then a gippo to the date of birth. report it sorry then I get the flack.
And what about the breeder whose stud dog wasn't the stud dog at all? Accredited breeders se voet.
Ja nee genoeg!
26 August 2011
Dear Dogworld editor
I am happy to see that the Puppy scam notice on the KUSA website in News and Views has been rewritten, and is now much clearer and relevant to ALL KUSA registered breeders.
My thanks go to the KUSA for their prompt attention to my complaint regarding the previous wording of the notice.