Uncle Chico Newsletter # 205
Commenting on the repercussion and three posts about my article “Uncle Chico Newsletter # 203” whose link in English is
Dear Fila Brasileiro (FB) and CAFIB friends,
Initially, I would like to thank all those who understood and applauded the clear questions I raised in the above mentioned article about the possible falsification and/or adulteration of pedigree data issued by CBKC-FCI, and that they agree to request only the issue of pedigrees that respect the truth of facts and ethics.
I am especially grateful for the following emails, WA’s and phone call received:
- a) congratulated me for continuing to defend the FB independent of clubs and always with education, argument and respecting opponents in ideas;
- b) compared the pedigrees I made available with piracy unfortunately present in the current underworld;
- c) stated that dogs with fakes pedigrees are like “generic dogs” (*) trying to pass through the originals medical products made in “famous laboratories“, such as Araguaya, Jawa and Ibituruna; (*) explanatory note: talking about generic medicine and/or generic drug.
- d) claimed very objectively that a dog named Truman Capote, who is well known by all FB breeders, cannot be magically renamed and baptized once more under another name, such as Truman Capote of Ernest Hemingway;
- e) stated that those who act ethically and in a correct way do not add names to well-known dogs;
- f) understood that “it is better to err politely than to be intentionally unethical“;
- g) stated that these people “justify themselves in spurious rules as if they were obligatory“…
- h) and, finally, simplified and summarized: “there is a asswholiness“…
To the present moment only the breeder Mr. Olegário Bretas sent me a smart and educated email with its clear clarification, which was posted in full in my blog in English and can be read in the link https://filabrasileirochicopeltierblog.wordpress.com/2018/01/08/post-534-uncle-chico-newsletter-204-commenting-on-the-email-received-january-4-from-mr-olegario-bretas-on-my-article-uncle-chico-newsletter-203-date-jan-6th-2018/ .
However in the last few days there have been three posts in facebooks with several attempts at justification, trying to get their “posters” to dodge on the tangent, telling long stories that have nothing to do with the facts I questioned. The questions are: was there falsification and/or adulteration in the pedigrees that I questioned, and still respecting the ethics and norms in the issuing of these pedigrees? It was simply this that I questioned in my article. I am amused to report that one of these three posts was followed by a commentary done by a freaking out follower lady… Alias, as always …
I repeat: is it legal and ethical to change dogs’ names by registering them in another club? Or putting the name of a “fake” breeder? Or another club copy the ancestry of CAFIB without any previous agreement ?
No posts have been sent to me directly by the three “posters“. No one of the 3 “poster” made available my article in full so that their followers and readers could not independently evaluate my questions. So, I will comment below and I will give back in the same way. But in a polite one.
Thus, leaving aside the rudeness, the lack of education and the lack of an objective counter-argument:
- A post is absolutely unintelligible, so much so that I was informed that it was removed from facebook. I do not know if it was. Perhaps not only because it is incomprehensible, but probably also because it has attached a pedigree that seems to cause discomfort to a breeder “friend” of this same “posters“.
Regarding this first post, the detail I raised was the serious falsification and/or adulteration — not commented by the “posters” — that seems to me to exist in the enormous error and total lack of inspection pointed out for years within the CBKC-FCI system, since a dog born in Kennel Araguaya, [ having as breeder Mr. Américo Cardoso dos Santos Jr., well-known founder, director and member of the CAFIB ], had its breeder name changed by the name of the Kennel Cara Branca. Who changed it? For what purpose? Why did not the recipient of this wrong pedigree request a correction?
Note that in this pedigree that follows again below, in addition, the CBKC-FCI accepted as faithful the ancestry attested in the CAFIB pedigree. But as everyone knows CAFIB never recognized any FB pedigree issued by CBKC-FCI as worthy of Faith, due to miscegenation, lack of verification and control, as it have been several times commented on by other breeders and myself.
- The second posted – thus proving the fact that I questioned !!! – the pedigree which I understand to have been unethically falsified and/or adulterated, issued by CBKC-FCI. In this pedigree, the name of the FB Quilombo do Araguaya, which, as all those involved know, was breed by the Kennel Araguaya, owned by a member and founder of CAFIB, was renamed as Quilombo do Araguaya de São Jose da Lapa, being used by many breeders.
That is, this second “poster” has not even become aware of the falsification and/or adulteration that seems to me to exist and I have questioned so much. And of the use in sequence of this fake pedigree issued by the CBKC-FCI, in which his own kennel and/or his Aunt did. Perhaps later this “posters” will be finally able to understand that the same dog with the name “A” in the CAFIB pedigree cannot be ethically renamed later by the CBKC-FCI as being magically the dog named “A+B” … Or another: that the writer Truman Capote cannot be transformed, renamed and baptized again as Truman Capote of Ernest Hemingway. Right ?
Please note what I question in the pedigrees below:
- Third poster:
3.1. Contrary to the assertion of this third “poster”, who seems to have never really known CAFIB, this club never required any kennel name when approving a FB in its traditional CAFIB Analyses of Phenotype and Temperament (APT). I take this opportunity to suggest the reading of the exceptional APT article translated into English written by Américo Cardoso dos Santos Jr., at http://www.filabrasileirochicopeltier.com.br/fila-brasileiro-filas.html . So, CAFIB never made this requirement for the issuance of its Certificate of Analysis (CA).
The greatest proof of what I affirm is that at the beginning of CAFIB and in the first litter that had as the father the FB named Zerê do Parnapuan, breed by our beloved CAFIB Master of Breeding, Dr. Paulo Santos Cruz, although Dr. Paulo know and has all Zerê ancestry, this not included in the CAFIB-CA.
– The FB named Leão (CAFIB SP 0013), breed by the FB pioneer breeder João Costa, from the city of Itanhandu, MG, was an excellent stud dog and is noticed in several CAFIB pedigrees simply named Leão. CAFIB never unethical added to the name Leão, for example, the name Kennel Parque do Castelo. Remembering that Leão lived in this kennel until his death. And proving that this ethical stance has always prevailed in CAFIB since its beginning Leão received the number 0013;
– the FB named Max (CAFIB SP 1.423), son of Zerê de Parnapuan (CAFIB SP 0597), another CAFIB stud dog, appears in several pedigrees with only his original name and was never unethical modified for Max de Parnapuan;
– recently at the 2nd APT held in Uruguay on Nov, 25th.-2017, the female FB named Pipoca and the male Saci were analyzed and approved among many others, who received the Certificate of Approval (CA) with their real names, Pipoca (CAFIB CA 6.349) and Saci (CAFIB CA 6.350). That is to say: although they were two FBs well known by the CAFIB board, these two CAFIB FB`s were not renamed and unethical receive respectively the new name of Pipoca Piedras de Afilar or Saci do Borghetto.
The fact is that CAFIB has worked with honesty, seriousness and transparency for the last 40 years. It has always been like this, respecting ethics, morals and regulations.
3.2. In contrast to what is also stated by this third “poster“, the following is an example of a pedigree that was requested at CBKC-FCI respecting the ethics and the breeding work of other breeders, which was issued only with the name of the dog: DRAKE. That is, not including the name of the breeder, nor his ancestry. That is: who requested this pedigree did not unethical used the name of known kennels of third parties, nor did unethical include the name of his kennel in this pedigree as being its breeder. Not even the CBKC-FCI copied their ancestry. And that is exactly what I am questioning.
Please note that the two pedigrees of the above item, both issued by CBKC-FCI, also have no ascendants, as opposed to the one posted in item # 1 above.
Please see below the pedigree issued by the CBKC-FCI to the FB called Drake, without his ancestry because, as I was informed, in the CBKC this case is called “Dog of Unknown Origin” or “Initial Registration” and, as such, should not have its ancestry copied from CAFIB documents or from any other club. Even though the CAFIB pedigree is a document believed and worthy of Faith:
3.3. Trying to defended himself he claiming that another breeder authorized him to falsify and/or adulterate one or more pedigrees in the CBKC / FCI. Very nice !!!
If someone “authorized” it, that’s fine !!! So I urge this powerful and important breeder to authorize me, too, to lock down corrupt politicians, businessmen and public officials without due prior judgment and at my own discretion… And pedigree counterfeiters and/or adulterers as well …
Therefore, I fear that it seems that for these three “posters” the ends justify the means.
- But the notary-club CBKC-FCI continues in the eternal omission and in silence … Waiting for this muddy river once again to pass solemnly …
A – With the help of many friends we have spent four months doing a serious and careful investigation, including the Dog Family tool-site, in order to make these objective questions. Meanwhile this group is posting any pedigree, excuses, long stories, rudeness and many sentences without absolutely nothing explain or even incomprehensible, thinking that they can justify themselves.
B – Please note that slush funds (keeping of clandestine funds) was also always a crime, but many pretended it was not …
C – I firmly believe that would be enough if the three “porters” simply had clarified in a polite and transparent manner these three questions if they were clean. But, if they really acted unethical, if they falsified and/or adulterated any dog name, if they modified the name of a real breeder in some pedigree, or if they had add ancestral names in these pedigrees in question, really gets hard and so the three “porters” appeal to rudeness and lack of serious argumentation.
D – I believe that it would be also importante to the CBKC-FCI to clarify whether or not this two club obliges the person who requests a pedigree for the so-called “Dog of Unknown Origin” or “Initial Registration” to indicate the kennel name where the dog was born, the name of the breeder and his ancestry, unlike what occurred with the FB named Drake above;
E – It is ethical that people who have known each other for many years and who know very well the FB`s existing in Brazil, especially those that compose the CAFIB squad, adulterate the name of the breeder and/or keep in their possession a pedigree of the CBKC-FCI with the adulterated name of the breeder of the FB called Quilombo do Araguaya, which as everyone knows is a Kennel Araguaya breeding and a member of CAFIB? It is ethical that people adulterate the name of this same FB called Quilombo do Araguaya, disrespecting the breeding and the work of so many years of one of the most respected people who participate in the FB world in Brazil and abroad, Mr. Américo Cardoso dos Santos Jr., founder, director, columnist and a member of CAFIB since 1978? Is it ethical to sell the FB called Quilombo do Araguaya with adulterated name? Is it ethical to keep the FB called Quilombo do Araguaya with a fake name in some kennel ?
F – It will be correct that the centenary notary clubs CBKC and FCI do not have a simple and basic system of data crossing and information that identifies or at least distrusts that a dog called Quilombo of the Araguaya already has pedigree in its own systems, one with and another without ascendants ?
G – Unfortunately it seems to me that Uncle Chico continues in 2018 pointing out the mistakes and unethical actions that are still committed by breeders who think above good practices, norms, morals and ethics.
H – To be uneducatedly insulted and mistreated is the price that Uncle Chico pays to fight for a CLEAN cynophilia (in dog and FB world) – since 1974 … Therefore, I cannot worry about the impact that my questioning has on people and clubs who act in the similar unethical way or make similar mistakes. Like former breeders João Batista Gomes, Procópio do Vale, his heirs and followers more than 40 years ago. My commitment continues to be with the Fila Braileio… Since 1974.
Uncle Chico has no commitment to the error. I repeat: my commitment is with the FB. So I believe, it is enough for my adversaries in ideas, which unfortunately always slip to the rudeness, as well as the notary-club CBKC-FCI, prove with documents and facts that in item # 1 above the name of the breeder was not modified and no part of the ascendancy of the Quilombo do Araguaya registered in the CAFIB was add. And also that in items # 2 and 3 above that the true and original names of the mentioned dogs were not added the name of kennels of interested third parties. That is, all these pedigrees mentioned in “Uncle Chico Newsletter # 203” were issued respecting the ethics, morals and truth of the facts.
Best Regads, Chico Peltier.