In March 2018 at our general meeting in Münster we, ProKromfohrländer e.V., decided by voting to apply to the VDH for membership. Knowing that it involves a lot of work and not a small cost, we decided to go for it. Our goal was in no way any seal of approval, because the best seal of approval is ProKromfohrländer itself. Our breeding regulations are considerably stricter than the VDH minimum requirements. To list them here would go beyond the scope, the interested reader can easily find the VDH breeding regulations as well as our own on the Internet. And VDH papers also have no greater value that underlines the quality than our own papers.
No, our concern was and is a healthy and broad breeding base. The already small Kromfohrländer population is known to be spread over several clubs. Now the VDH statute § 6, paragraph 7 states that a VDH member association (such as the Rassezuchtverein eV, or RZV for short) is only allowed to breed with pure-bred dogs of the same breed that are in a stud book or register recognized by the FCI. General exceptions and exceptions in individual cases require the consent of the VDH. This means that the RZV is not allowed to use our dogs unless they are there in the register of the stud book. Likewise, a dog that we use in breeding is excluded from the RZV. The latter, however, does not conform to the statutes, because these dogs remain registered in the FCI stud book and should therefore not be excluded. The Breeding Association of the Kromfohrländer invokes exactly this point of the statute, but interprets it incorrectly. When asked by the VDH, the answer always comes at the point: The breeding sovereignty lies with the breed clubs. However, this answer comes to almost every question you ask there. The VDH sets up rules, but whether they are observed by the member clubs or not is up to them.
According to the VDH breeding regulations, there is the possibility (this is quite common in other breeds and, according to the VDH letter to the chairmen of the member associations of October 28, 2002 (see below), is even mandatory), to get the dogs bred at ProKromfohrländer in the "register" of the breed book entered. This would give them the opportunity to provide dogs across clubs and also to use them in their own breeding. However, the RZV is not ready for this, although the breeding base there is so narrow that the minimum number of generations in which two dogs to be mated have no common ancestors has been reduced from three to two. In other words: the two dogs can now have great-grandparents together, i.e. they can be 2nd degree cousins. In Prokromfohrländer, however, at least the third generation has no common ancestors. And we will not change that, thanks to good breeding planning, including the following generations, we can do that, and not only in the crossbreeding project, but also in purebred breeding.
At the same time, we have an increasing influx from outside, on the one hand because of our convincing cross-project, but also because of some political decisions on the part of the board in the mother club RZV. Now we are not only concerned with our own dogs, we are very well positioned here, but with the breed of the Kromfohrländer as a whole. Hence the decision to apply to the VDH.
One of the prerequisites to achieve the so-called "maturity for processing" is a breeding base consisting of 14 dogs that are not related to each other until the third generation. These must be licensed and have to be available for breeding for at least 4 years. This means that the bitches must not be older than 4 years, for males the upper limit of 10 years is taken as a measure. 14 dogs doesn't sound like much at first. Exactly, however, that means that none of the dogs may be related to any of the other 13 in the manner mentioned. Each dog has 2 parents, four grandparents and 8 great grandparents. This means that in addition to the 14 dogs in the breeding base, there are at least 210 different dogs in the pedigrees. This is a lot for a small club like ours, but still possible. In our application, we initially specified purebred as well as dogs from the crossbreeding project.
We had to wait a very long time for an answer from the VDH. After many requests from us, the rejection came on the grounds that the 14 dogs on the list had to be purebred. We had asked for a special permit in this regard because of our scientifically supported crossbreeding project, since it is in the nature of the matter that part of our dogs has the Dansk Svensk Gardhund in the family tree. However, this was not granted. We were given a six-week period to complete our list accordingly, otherwise our application would be finally rejected. At first this seemed impossible to us. But then thanks to the great support of many helpers and the commitment of several dog owners who were willing to postpone their other plans to present their dogs early at a licensing, we did the impossible: we were able to raise the 14 purebred dogs required. Incidentally, this amount of unrelated dogs in the mother club is almost identical, as can be seen from the licensing lists, despite the fact that the population there is considerably larger. And including our Projektkromfohrländer we exceed this number by a lot. But only marginally.
So we resubmitted our application with the improved list and waited eagerly for the answer. This time it came faster, and to our great shock it was the final rejection. The reason: some of these 14 dogs had not been licensed by a VDH judge. Obtaining this would only have been possible through the RZV. As already mentioned above, he would have had the option of licensing our purebred dogs, all of which come from VDH dogs, as registered dogs, as stipulated in the VDH breeding regulations. As is known, this door remained locked. One may speculate about the reasons for this, but it is certainly not conducive to the breed. Simply put, a club can only get into the VDH with dogs that are already VDH dogs. Of course, that's not written anywhere. As we now know, the VDH generally only wants one supervising club per breed, with different breeding strategies not playing a role. All "second clubs that exist have reached the VDH via the Cartel Office. We do not want to go this route, however, because we meanwhile have recognized that there can hardly be any fruitful cooperation with the RZV under the current board. Its irregular behavior in relation to the registry (further information on this below) is tolerated by the VDH, which then resulted in the rejection.
Of course we were very disappointed with the decision. Many people have put a lot of energy into this application for membership, and it would have been extremely beneficial for the Kromfohrländer race. However, we do not believe that our efforts have been in vain. Thanks to the great help of so many people inside and outside of our association, cohesion has grown enormously. At this point, many thanks for the immense support to all helpers. We know who we are and we have once again become aware of our very good cooperation and loyalty. We are very busy with members and their dogs and see our breeding activities very well positioned. Of course there will always be setbacks, but we are positive about the future of our club and our dogs.
On the website of the VRZ-DHS-Ost there is a very interesting treatise on the topic of Dissidence or VDH?. There it says as follows:
"Only good cooperation between breeders, regardless of their association, is beneficial to the breed. That should be the goal of all breeders to bring the breed forward and improve it. Whether VDH or dissidence - there are "black sheep" in every association. You as a puppy buyer are also responsible. Be critical and inform yourself. Make your own picture of your selected breed. In this sense .....
Birth of the VDH
There was something ... oh yes, in 1981 the Cartel Senate of the Federal Court of Justice certified the VDH a dominant position, i.e. a monopoly position! In this context, dog breeding was classified as an economic activity! Since then, the VDH has had to take up what is known as dissidence, which it had previously strictly refused to do. That must have been a hard blow for the VDH, but we know that there is still something good to be gained from any situation, even if only from a financial point of view. The VDH admission regulations with their fee schedule speak for themselves.
Dissidence - according to Duden: "Different thinking ... deviating from the prevailing opinion ...". Where does this term actually come from? To do this, we have to go back more than a century in the history of dog breeding and associations in Germany.
On April 26, 1879, the oldest association in Germany was founded in Hanover, the "Delegates Commission for the German Dog Book" (DC), which also published the "German Dog Book" for all breeds (DHStB) every year from 1880. Founding members were:
* Association for the refinement of dog breeds in Germany
* Association Hector
* Chicken Dog Testing Club
* Northern German Hetzklub
* Nimrod Association
On July 16, 1906, another umbrella organization was founded in Germany:
"German Cartel for Dogs" (DKH), which established itself as the second umbrella organization in Germany until 1933 and whose number of affiliated clubs was in no way inferior to, or even greater than, that of the Delegate Commission.
Whether it was the number of affiliated clubs or members, or "only" the suffix "Deutsches", or the political worldview of leading officials, we cannot research or understand it, at least after Hitler's seizure of power in 1933 became the "German Cartel for Dogs" "(DKH) renamed "Reichsverband für das Deutsche Hundewesen" (RDH). All existing umbrella organizations had to dissolve and be classified in the RDH, from then on all associations had to call themselves "student councils". The Delegate Commission, among others, rebelled or opposed this "decision to establish a common law", in this context the term "dissidence" (see above) also appeared for the first time.
Unfortunately, the Delegate Commission (DC) was unsuccessful, as can be seen from the following fact:
Excerpt from the order of the "Secret State Police Office" Berlin SW 11, Prinz-Albert-Str. 8 of June 20, 1935 - B no. 11 1 E:
Due to § 1 of the decree of the Reich President for the Protection of the People and the State of February 28, 1933 (RGBl. 1 G.83) in conjunction with §§ 14 and 41 of the Police Administration Act, the Delegate Commission for German Dog Breeding (DC) is dissolved and forbidden. The canine record material and the assets of the DC are confiscated and seized subject to later confiscation. Violations of this prohibition are based on § 4 of the BD. of the Reich President of February 28, 1933 punished ...
The rest is quickly told (at least at this point):
During the Nazi dictatorship, the "Reichsverband für das Deutsche Hundewesen" (RDH) was renamed to "Reichsverband für Hundewesen" (RH).
* At the beginning of 1933, Franz Bazille was managing director
* In the middle of 1933, Hans Glockner was Reichsführer
* from 1935 Graf von Schwerin was the association leader
From April 1, 1943, and unfortunately this is no April Fool's joke, there was only one association magazine: "Der Hund", all other magazines had to cease publication or contribute their work to them.
* 1943 SS Standartenführer Mr. Mueller was 1st President of the Reich Association for Dogs
* 1944 SS Oberführer Herr Mueller was 1st President of the Reich Association for Dogs
* 1945 SS Brigadführer Mr. Mueller was 1st President of the Reich Association for Dogs
With the downfall of the "Third Reich", the RH and all of its student councils had to dissolve on Allied decision, key date January 1, 1946.
Well, suddenly there was, among other things, a "Cartel for German Dogs" - new name, old structures!
And even before the founding of a new German state, the "Verband für das Deutsche Hundewesen (Association for the German Dogs)" (VDH) was founded on June 11, 1949 in the American zone of occupation in Munich.
* on May 1st, 1950 Mr. Mueller was elected as editor
* in March 1952 Franz Bazille was 1st Honorary President of the VDH until his death on October 12, 1952
If one can believe the VDH's own statement that the VDH (formerly "German Cartel for Dogs" (DKH)) was founded in 1906, then one must inevitably ask the question:
"Is the VDH also the legal successor of the" Reichsverband für Hundewesen "(RH), and is therefore jointly responsible for the darkest age in German history in the field of dog breeding?"
In conclusion, it should only be noted that, based on history, we are proud to be called a dissidence!
May everyone form their own judgment ...
Monopoly of the VDH
Here: VDH monopoly. With this heading, many are wondering what does the Bundeskartellamt have to do with the VDH?
Because it's about making money, and because the VDH is a commercial enterprise and unfortunately not a non-profit ideal association, like its subdivisions, the dog associations!
And now for the circular of the VDH v. 10/28/2002, which of course you will not see in the club magazine, such letters remain hidden from us, if not some brave ones publish them, otherwise they are stored in the president's desk, like many other circulars before.
Letter from the VDH to the chairmen of the member associations on October 28, 2002:
"Bundeskartellamt - here: monopoly of the VDH
Dear Sirs and Madames,
Due to some complaints brought to the Bundeskartellamt regarding the monopoly of the VDH and its member associations, the VDH was invited to an appointment at the Bundeskartellamt in Bonn. The following competition law allegations were made:
1. Dogs without VDH / FCI-recognized pedigrees may not be used for breeding in the VDH member associations, and dogs with VDH / FCI-recognized pedigrees from VDH members may not be used outside the VDH for breeding.
2. The VDH does not allow dogs without VDH / FCI-recognized pedigree for its breeding shows.
3. The VDH prohibits the members of its member clubs from exhibiting outside the VDH / FIC area at breeding shows.
4. Some VDH member clubs do not allow registrations of dogs without VDH / FCI-recognized pedigrees.
By detailed description of the VDH statute goals, in particular the goal of breeding "pure, healthy dogs", the animal welfare effects of the requirement under point 1 could be made clear. After extensive discussions of the facts regarding points 2-4, the VDH finally agreed to inform its member clubs of the following facts, already regulated in § 8 Paragraph 1.4 of the VDH Breeding Regulations:
The VDH associations are obliged to keep a register (Livre dáttend) in addition to the stud book. Furthermore, due to the monopoly of the VDH, the VDH associations are obliged to register dogs without FCI-recognized pedigree or those with non-recognizable pedigree and to include these dogs in the register if they phenotypically correspond to the breed standard. This does not affect the other provisions on breeding approval.
Due to the problems outlined above, at its meeting on August 30/31, 2002, the VDH Board approved the following competition law requirements of the Cartel Office:
Regardless of whether the owner is a member of a non-VDH-recognized association, dogs with VDH / FCI-recognized pedigrees or registration certificates are generally admitted to the VDH breeding shows, provided there are no other obstacles (e.g. proven violation of animal welfare regulations, commercial dog trade, etc. against the owner). Exhibiting dogs by members of the VDH associations at breeding shows outside the VDH / FCI area is not to be seen as promoting commercial dog trade and is therefore not in violation of the statutes and is permitted. We are available for questions at any time. Further explanations will be given on the occasion of the meeting of the responsible breeders on November 2nd and 3rd, 2002. There you also have the opportunity to ask questions to those responsible for the VDH.
Copy: Bundeskartellamt Bonn
First of all, under pressure from the Federal Cartel Office and the threat of antitrust proceedings, the VDH has clearly stated that the registration of non-VDH dogs is not a "can" - but an imperative "must" provision. Even if this was previously interpreted by the individual clubs as a "can" provision and was handled independently - this is precisely a violation of antitrust law, as Fischer now explains, which can cause bad tornadoes for both the individual club and the VDH as a whole.
Furthermore, Fischer unequivocally points out that this "must" provision must be carried out without discrimination and without the individual clubs' own discretion or scope for action.
Now it is helpful to be a little familiar with competition law. And with EU law. Read it carefully:
§ 19, abuse of a dominant position
The Federal Cartel Office is responsible for the supervision of abuse, which is why it has been involved and acted on with the VDH.
Let's take the example of Dieter Dissident from the dissident association, who wants to have his dog "Dumbo Durchlaucht von der Dissidentsburg" registered and exhibited. He turns to the VDH association responsible for his breed. This must enter the dog without discrimination. What is now non-discriminatory?
1. The entry is made in the same form as for the VDH dogs. A lubricating paper ("Dumbo", WT 01.05.2002, chip no. 4711, registration number 0815) is not enough. Instead, the papers must record the same data as for the VDH dogs, e.g. the pedigree. The papers of "Dumbo Durchlaucht von der Dissidentsburg" have to look exactly like those of "Vicki Vulgaris vom Verbandshügel" afterwards, a stamp would still be possible ("This dog does not belong to the VDH"), but it is more likely that this cry of despair in the small print the papers will go under.
2. The entry is made at the same price as for the VDH dogs. "Penalty fees" for the dissidence, which are higher than among the VDH members, are price discrimination and thus an inadmissible restriction of competition among monopolists.
3. The entry is made according to the same requirements as for VDH dogs. Quote: "Dogs are to be entered in the register, the pedigree of which cannot be fully documented in three recognized generations of stud books, or those with non-recognized pedigrees, the appearance and nature of which, after prior checking by at least one breeding judge, correspond to the specified characteristics of the breed." Nowhere does it say that it must be a VDH judge. One FCI judge is enough. According to German law, a judicial expert or official veterinarian is probably enough, right now we have tons of people busy examining dogs for their breed.
Many will now embark on the path described for Dieter Dissidenz. And should these "dissidents" encounter obstacles in the form of discrimination, there will be reports to the Federal Cartel Office and legal proceedings. Putting your head in the sand, closing letters in the drawer or appeasing me doesn't help against Dieter Dissidenz. The law is on his side, he will prevail sooner or later. So why are letters kept secret, why is it appeased? To keep the paying members calm. I asked many breeders why they are actually members of the VDH when they are so dissatisfied? Answer: "Just so I can get papers for my dogs." In the foreseeable future you will get papers like this. When the members find out, they automatically start asking themselves cost-benefit questions: What has the VDH done for me? What does my breed dog breed club do? What does the board of my pedigree breed club do? What does the first chairman of my pedigree breed club do? What do I actually need them all for? Do I need it?
At the same time, another development is emerging: So-called dissidence associations organize themselves through Briard friends in order to become FCI member associations directly, decoupled from VDH membership. As is possible in other European countries. Measured against German competition law and EU law, the long-term (estimated next year) can only be as follows:
1. Either breed dog breed clubs can soon become FCI members. (due to EU law). Then the VDH was disempowered and became meaningless.
2.Or the VDH has to change its admission regulations and lower its fees, e.g. in future based on the number of members of the club to be included. (Competition law, non-discrimination). Then the VDH was disempowered and became meaningless.
If we now look at the forecast scenario in detail, the following examples are most likely:
Dieter Dissident happily breeds with almost the same papers and registered dogs in his kennel "von der Dissidentsburg". The puppy buyers frame the papers and hang them on the wall.
Arno exhibitor has two dogs of the same breed. The first comes from a field forest and meadow random breeder, the second from a VDH breeder. He registers both dogs and competes in the federal winner show. There he meets a competent and honest judge (probably flown in from abroad). "Cerberus of pure coincidence" is the national winner and gets a lot of press. Of course, only if "Dumbo through the dissident castle" does not become the national winner. (There is really an Arno exhibitor, the previously paperless Golden Retriever is now 10 years old and in top shape. The VDH Retriever had to have a new hip inserted as a young dog, and is currently being operated on with both eyes for ectropion at the age of 3.)
And then there are Willi Witzbold and Stefanie Scherzkeks. In 2000 Willi found a male pit bull mix puppy in a garbage can in Berlin. Stefanie found a female pit bull mix puppy in a garbage can in Hamburg in 2000. The two met in 2002 via an internet chat. Then they measured their dogs and found that they met the FCI standard for American Staffordshire Terriers. In 2003 Willi and Stefanie registered their dogs and in 2004 the first litter American Staffordshire Terrier (with papers) from the new kennel "from the Garbage Can" is planned. Neither have become a member of an association, neither dissidence nor VDH, because they do not like associations.
Not to forget: The 7 dog owners Meier, Müller, Schulze, Schmidt, Hinz, Hunz and Kunz, who all have dogs of the same breed. After their afternoon walks together, they draw up a statute and a breed code and set up a pedigree dog breed club. From then on they breed with their FCI / VDH dogs, all of which have to be registered. How was it "The VDH as we know it may be dead. Likewise, pedigree dog breeding, as we have known it in Germany, is also dead."
Well. Quod errad demonstrandum. The only chance of survival in the free market and healthy (exhibition) competition is only if the seal "VDH" or "VDH Association" would actually guarantee the puppy buyer that the dogs sold are good and healthier than those of the competition. For example, due to appropriate breeding requirements, breeding programs, breeding controls, etc.
Are the VDH clubs prepared for this acid test? Are they even up to her? "