Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What a mess! I've had two Bichons and they are terrific dogs and today a good quality-not even a show dog- costs about $800. Some people think breeders and show people are in it for the big bucks but to properly show a dog takes a tremendous amount of investment and time and is often the hobby of wealthy people. That is not to say there aren't unscrupulous breeders in it only for money and care nothing about the breed standards. These folks are usually puppy mill folks and back yard breeders.
Some people think breeders and show people are in it for the big bucks but to properly show a dog takes a tremendous amount of investment and time and is often the hobby of wealthy people.
But if they SOLD the dog with no condition as to not neuter the dog, who are they now to claim the dog should not have been neutered by it's new owners because it was once a champion? Seems to me gave up rights when they accepted the $3,000 sale price. I would also think that once the dog was sold, they also gave up claims to that dogs sperm, skin, hair and even it's poop. I don't know, am I missing something?
The breeder asked to have the dog, allegedly in order to breed him, then neutered him without the owner's permission. The owners say it was out of spite because the owners tried to breed him without the breeder's permission.
The article does not say what the breeder's reason for neutering the dog was. I cannot envision any reason to do it, and especially without the owner's consent.
It may depend on what the sales contract says. The breeder says the contract did not put any restrictions on her ability to neuter the dog, but that is not the same as saying she could do it.
Of course, the breeder would not want Beau's owners competing with her, since pups from a champion would command champion prices.
I tend to believe the owners from what I read.
Last edited by suzy_q2010; 09-22-2015 at 11:13 PM..
I am soooooo confused. Who owns the dog? And why would that lady think she has a right to neuter someone else's dog?
OK I just finish reading part of the motion. I had some facts wrong/backwards. The ownership is reversed the breeder sold to the individual and no longer had ownership rights to the dog.
Halstead was the breeder who owned the dog. She sold it to Wagness. The Wagness never said they were going to breed or wanted to breed the dog. Its believed that the Wagness may have started saying something about them breeding the dog again. Before they breed the dog, Halstead asked if she can breed the dog. The Wagness agreed and gave Halstead the dog for breeding purposes but retained ownership. At this point things get weird! Halstead claims the dog was not properly cared for and had several medical issues. The dog was under the care of a vet for those conditions but it's never explained what the relationship is to the medical conditions and the need to neuter the dog, but the dog was neutered. So Halstead (breeder) is being sued by Wagness (owner).
This may be one of those "need to hear the docs report" before we know if it was done for medical reasons or to keep the dogs from being breeded.
Of course, the breeder would not want Beau's owners competing with her, since pups from a champion would command champion prices.
and that appears to be the crux of the lawsuit especially with the questions of Buau's (or is it really Beau's brother) sperm sitting like a popsicle at the vet's office..
This is the reasons the breeder gave for neutering the dog:
Quote:
Halstead's attorney, Joseph Crosby, claims that his client had to neuter the dog after its health deteriorated in the care of the Wangnesses.
In Halstead's counter claim, she claims that the Wangsnesses neglected the dog, leaving Beau with dental disease, low sperm count, impacted anal glands and an unhealthy coat.
The response doesn't explain why neutering was necessary to treat these alleged health issues.
'After hearing about the neutering, and I’m not overstating things at all, Mary literally cried and stayed in bed for three weeks. She never bounced back,' Mr Wangsnesses said.
Mrs Wangsness suffered from a form of Parkinsons and died this past March.
Sounds like the episode worsen the wife's illness and she ultimately died.
.
Perhaps the idea was not to help the dog but to prevent it from breeding with anyone else's dog? Some people are like that
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
