View Full Version: A message to Kim Seegmiller

Decker Hunting Terrier Forum > General Discussion > A message to Kim Seegmiller

Pages: [1] 2

Title: A message to Kim Seegmiller

edrats - October 13, 2009 02:34 AM (GMT)

First of all, I want to be very clear, what has taken place is not what I wanted, and in no way did I ever harbor any jealousy towards you, or what you are doing or have done. I would have been very happy playing a small role in the future of the Decker Terrier. I will not go into the unethical practices I discovered that pushed me into action against you, as you know what they are and so does everyone else, so there is no point in re-hashing that out. I won't even go into the issues that are side stepped constantly. This is not a bashing session, it is a post to set the record straight.

Kim...You are not raising Decker Terriers, You are raising Seegmiller Terriers. What you have done is completely against everything the Deckers stand for. The insults you continue to launch are at the very name you claim to be so in love with, and it makes no sense.

Now, every chance you get here lately, you bring up the Seegmiller Line. I would like you to think long and hard about what I am going to suggest! If you are so proud of your name and all it stands for, why don't you call your dogs Seegmiller Terriers? Please consider this: You can consider any dog that is 3 generation bred Seegmiller a Seegmiller Terrier. Call your club and registry the Heritage Seegmiller Terrier Registry. Every chance you get, you act like any of the people in this group are using dogs bred by you, but I will say, they were developed long ago, and what you are doing now goes against everything the name Decker stands for. You are not developing the Decker Terrier, you are developing the Seegmiller Terrier. Take what you have, and whoever wants to breed Seegmiller Terriers with you, and do what you want, under your own name, not under a name that you have drug through the mud for the past several months. If your registry really has 1400 registered breeding dogs, you should have a good start on your project, and if it doesn't, you can breed dogs like there is no tomorrow, and populate the Earth with Seegmiller Terriers, and make Your family name proud!

Just a thought.

Ellis Decker

Jackie - October 14, 2009 12:05 AM (GMT)
Ellis, Excellent Idea! I also feel it is time to give credit where it is due. Kim is creating her own style of terrier, one she is very proud of. She needs to step up and take credit for her hard work. 'Seegmiller Terriers' I LIKE THAT!

Bill Warner - October 14, 2009 01:46 AM (GMT)
how are the Seegmiller terriers bred?
Bill Warner

Wildwood Deckers - October 14, 2009 02:14 AM (GMT)
... Depends on weather you want to know the true parentage or whats on their registration papers....


Milton - October 14, 2009 02:16 AM (GMT)
Maybe they are bred in such a way that poor old Angus and River were shot close enough together that they could be burried in the same hole. That horrible hunting accident may have been just one more step in the master plan. No exhumed DNA would work after that.

Slickrock Deckers - October 14, 2009 03:27 AM (GMT)
Well, I don't think we need to stoop to their level, Mr. Decker. I know you are justifiably upset at the revelations that have been made, and some of the things that have gone on in your name, but I suggest we try to take the high road.

Despite what Kimmy has done, I know that she loves these dogs, and River has a special place in their history. Angus too, as it turns out. They were excellent dogs, as are many of her current ones. I think we risk alienating some folks who can help perpetuate this breed, if we continue in this vein.

With respect for all you have done, and all that you will continue to do.
Jack Gossett

edrats - October 14, 2009 03:42 AM (GMT)
I was being serious Jack. I posted a serious option for her. She seems to be more concerned with breed status than anything else at this point, and is very concerned with bringing up the Seegmiller line when given the opportunity. I really feel what she is doing at this point goes against everything the Decker name stands for, and it would do everyone, including her, a great service if she would use her own name and work towards breed status for the Seegmiller Terrier. I know a few jokes have been cracked, but joking aside, calling what she produces from here on out, as well as any that want to breed the Seegmiller Terrier, by a different name would make a lot more sense, as they are taking a different road, and the name Decker will in no way reflect what she is doing in the future. I can't understand why she would want to put someone elses stamp on what she is doing? Calling her dogs and what she produces from now on a Seegmiller Terrier makes a lot of sense, as, they will continue to change, and will only resemble a Decker in appearance soon.


Slickrock Deckers - October 14, 2009 04:12 AM (GMT)
There is a place for the new blood, and there is a place for crosses amonst the old. It's not about Seegmiller Kennels anymore, whatever she calls her dogs. But it is about keeping good examples of the genetics she put together.

Bill Warner - October 14, 2009 08:40 PM (GMT)
i apologize for the remark about the Seegmiller Terrier. i should have not have made the comment i made because i do not know this breeder. I know your are serious about the statement you made and i believe you are correct. When a person puts in years raising a strain of dogs then they should put their name on the strain. Every breed is always changing in one direction , whether it be good are bad. My hope for the Decker Strain is for a healthy hunting dog and companion. I have seen what inbreeding will do in several different types of animals and i do not wish that for the Deckers.
Bill Warner

edrats - October 14, 2009 11:30 PM (GMT)
Thanks Bill, but certainly no need to apologize. I agree, a healthy breed is the main goal for the future. This wonderful group of common sense people that has grown by leaps and bounds certainly shows a bright future!


Marcy - October 16, 2009 02:33 PM (GMT)
Here here Ellis, I suggested that to Kimmy a long time ago. She has the smarts and marketing machine to go her own way. I'm surprised she has not done that.

I also continue to be surprised at how her club members all read this forum. Go be happy and do your own thing Kimmy and gang....

You go Ellis.

San Fermine Terriers/Marti - October 18, 2009 08:56 PM (GMT)

My kennel was small, but I was / am proud of it. I don't know if any of these people were ever given permission by the Decker kennel to use their name in creating/ or trying to create a new breed of dog. If they weren't in writing then it could be a potential problem. I always wondered about this.

I know if someone were ever trying to create a new breed of dog using my name without written permission and then finding out that there may have been some unethical things done and my name was tied to it - Welllllllll

This is for all of you breeders out there to think about;; I am not trying to say that I am perfect in any way shape or form... But I feel at times, in this world that we live in, it is easy to loose sight of what our original intentions were. I don't believe we as breeders set out to hurt our animals. A lot of times it just gets away from some of us.

I feel we have a responsibility as breeders to be ethical and to be Mentors. I for one have never understood how anyone can take PRIDE in what they do when they knowingly have done some things not right. Those people know who they are. Believe me what goes around Comes around. It always does.
I also have never been able to raise dogs just like livestock and use strictly as a tool. Lets say I have 20 dogs or more, who will I love today? (fictional Only) Oops little Missy is in heat and so is Amy and so is AmyII. Oh gosh I just went out my back door out to the kennels and ohh No, Bud and Mikey have been able to climb over the top of the kennels, Mikey is in with Amy and Bud is with AmyII. I didn't breed Missy, but she ends up pregnant also. So I'll put Buds name on that litter cause he was the closet. What we didn't know was that Ole Mack had snuck in the back.
Or better yet. I want pups from AmyII but my old Tinker doesn't seem to be able to produce. Everyone loves Tinker and I have lots of buyers ready with $$$. I have a nephew of Tinker and he looks like him, so I'll just use him and no one will know the difference..... except ME. I don't understand how that would make me feel proud.

These kinda of things happen a lot more than people would like to admit. I have never understood why anyone would have more than 10 dogs for a breeding program now days.

Years ago when folks had large kennels they usually had great wealth and massive Estates with paid kennel help and trainers. It doesn't seem to be the case much anymore. In my opinion some of what we have now seems to be not much better than puppy mills. I know this may make some of you upset - but just for a moment go outside and stand outside your kennels and don't say a word. Most of your dogs will have their eyes glued to you. Some will be barking pic me for just an hour of your time. Just me and you. Some will just look you in the eye and are quite, thinking: will I get to go out with my person for an hour of petting loving, grooming, hunting, resting at your feet today for an hour every day 7 days a week.

Dogs are pack animals (You are part of the pack).

I am not pointing fingers at anyone in particular, just throwing this out there because of my views only.


Slickrock Deckers - October 18, 2009 10:48 PM (GMT)
Dogs should not be a commodity raised in bulk like a chicken. They deserve better. The big kennels had a role in preserving some valuable genetics in the decker's case. That's how I would justify it anyway but I personally couldn't do it. To me, they are family. It never occcurred to me that someone, especially with the decker, wouldn't operate as a breeder under the rules of honesty and ethical behavior. I guess I was just nieve.

Mistakes and accidental breedings can happen. One should own up to them and prove parentage when asked thru DNA without question. If not, well it looks like you did it on purpose, especially if you could get double or triple the money on every subsequent litter.

Good to hear from you, Marti.

Slickrock Deckers - October 21, 2009 02:29 AM (GMT)
Lookie Ellis, Seegmiller made a post under "new registry" on heritage chat about you and didn't even use your name. Seems to be calling you the "Rat Terrier registry" and encouraging confusion between DHTR and NRTA registration standards. Honesty and ethics anyone? Does a disagreement over adding some tree dog skills justify a win by whatever means attitude?

Wildwood Deckers - October 21, 2009 09:53 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Slickrock Deckers @ Oct 21 2009, 02:29 AM)
Honesty and ethics anyone? Does a disagreement over adding some tree dog skills justify a win by whatever means attitude?

For one, honesty and ethics does not even belong in the same sentence as the heritage decker terrier club, they are a contridiction in terms...
Secondly, they need to justify a win by whatever means they can... they don't have much of anything else to grasp onto... that club is a joke...


Marcy - October 21, 2009 02:50 PM (GMT)
Marti GREAT post! I too have been questioning the size of kennels and how many dogs can one, two people actually take care of with out the dogs becoming live stock like pigs.

I've been doing a little bit of research (inbetween working on the balloon rally, taking care of my dogs, painting new house...walking our fence line to make sure the puppies are not digging out...pant pant) So far what I have found for the county I live in it says if I own more then 4 dogs I need a kennel licence. I find no mention of for example, you must have at least an acre to have ... 10 dogs. Or only 2 dogs can be kenneled in a 6 by 10 kennel. Nor do I find any mention of kennels will be inspected every year, 2 years, inspected at all.

I've been told that UKC, AKC inspect kennels. Have any of you ever had your kennels inspected? Part of why I bring this subject up is because like all business's, if we don't police ourselves, peta and other animal groups will get even a stronger platform for legislation against everyone who is breeding dogs.

I also have been told to make money as a breeder (I've already decided making money isn't my goal, breaking even sounds good) I would need to own 10 female dogs. And as Marti said how do you decide which dog get's attention on any given day? AND the part that really bothers me, is what happens to those females once they can't make puppies????? Do they live out their lives all in one kennel with minimal human contact? I have a feeling that is what happens in lots of kennels across the country. I wonder how many kennel owners would be willing to have their kennels inspected by say... a county employee, maybe two other kennel owners and someone from one of the registries. I'm all for flying under the radar but... the thought of 10 Deckers females locked up in a kennel for the back half of their lives makes my stomach hurt.

What can we all do about that? That is my question to you all.

I recommend to perspective puppy owners that if possible they may want to see where their puppy comes from. As well as getting recommendataions from other puppy owners. If that is not possible to ask and get proof that one of the registries had inspected the kennel in the past year or so.

So what do you all think? Back to working on the balloon rally, have a great day all.

edrats - October 21, 2009 04:07 PM (GMT)
Marcy...I'm sure the subject you have brought up is one that it would be impossible to get a group to agree on totally. There are so many what ifs... First what if is this, so, the county inspector comes out to inspect, but the inspector is an animal rights activist that supports the HSUS, PETA, and other groups. To them, a person like me, who has 6 to 8 dogs and has a litter or two each year is a puppy mill. I can't possibly get a fair shake on that inspection.
Second thing is this, though I don't want to have a ton of dogs, I am also a person that believes in human rights. I don't want 50 or 60 dogs, but I also don't know that the right thing to do is take away a person's right to have that many dogs. See, I look at it like this, if today, the right to have 50 dogs is taken away, so the maximum a person can have is 49, will the animal rights groups quit? If they would, it might be a thought, but they wouldn't...they would just start petitioning that 40 should be the max, then, when they get that, it will be 30, then 20, then, 10, and so on, until you, with your one or two intact females and a male, are all of the sudden the next thing on the agenda.
Thing is, what this will do is take away the rights of law abiding citizens, but not the crooks. The crooks will always be crooks. They will give a bad name to those that are not crooks, so the best thing is to expose them where possible.
In my county, you are supposed to have a kennel license to have over 4 dogs. I do have one, but I doubt the puppy millers in my area do. All regulations do is keep the honest people honest...You can't make a crook an honest person through regulation.
A kennel club inspection, the way I understand it, is going to look more at the sanitary aspects than whether the dogs actually get attention. I don't know if there is a way to police giving a dog attention. How many dogs are chained to a tree in a back yard right now, getting little attention? Probably a lot, but taking away the rights of a large breeder to have their dogs won't change the life of those dogs. Some larger breeders have a lot of time to put into their dogs, and others have very little.
Here is an idea to think about. How many litters should a female dog have? If you watch the amount of work they put into it, it is hard to imagine breeding them too many times. Everyone has an opinion on this, but here is an idea. Get a litter or two out of a female, even 3 or 4 litters, depending on how they do at being a mother. Love her, house break her, make her a part of the family. If she is outstanding, and produces outstanding offspring, keep the best of them to advance your program, and have her spayed and find her a good home while she is still young. A lot of people want an older dog, past the puppy phase and house broke. I personally think they should have at least one heat cycle off between litters, and they shouldn't be bred on their first heat for sure, but a nice, female from 3 to 5 years old that is house broke isn't that hard to sell. Now, I know some people will say they are too attached to them by then to do this, and that is fine, if you are too attached and don't want to part with her, keep her. This is just an idea. If you breed them until they are 9 years old, they are hard to place, and if you keep offspring from them, pretty soon you have a bunch of dogs, and a hard time getting them enough attention.
OK...That is enough contraversy to spout for one day! LOL


Slickrock Deckers - October 21, 2009 04:37 PM (GMT)
A true puppy mill producing a commodity probably isn't going to keep a dog after it stops producing. They probably just shoot them. But being kept in a cage all your life is not a better alternative.

An exercise requirement would be a good idea if not for animal rights activists. Their goal is to stop you from breeding, not insure that your dogs get care and attention. They will push it as far as they can push it, and when they get their laws passed, and their hack in as the county kennel inspector, our days of going out of town for the weekend will be over.

Seegmiller kennels is AKC inspected. There is no attention or exercise requirement, but such inspection and certification may serve to slow the progress of government control over dog breeding. That's about the only good thing I can think of to say about the AKC. If you could believe Kimmy (you obviously can't) her dogs get free range privlidges on a rotating basis. At least that's what she told me when I sent my dog there for almost two years to further "the grand cause".... These days I feel kind of like one of those escapees from a polygamist sect or something...right before Rene got back I heard that River had actually frozen to death kenneled alone there in that brutal Missouri winter. There was some speculation that this had also been Angus' fate.

P.S. Note to Kimmy: yeah, that's a rumour, but it didn't come from a member of this board, just another breeder you had some issues with. Ever wonder why Kimmy? It's your freewheeling attitude towards the truth. You are still scheming and scamming. If your attorney advised you that an apology might expose you to liability, you should just have laid low for a couple of years. That would be the best thing you could have done for your new breed. For your own sake, SHUT UP. Everything that you have said lately is unbelieveable or unethical. If you don't want to be called out on this board, you, my ex friend and mentor, need a new attitude. Why are you afraid of a fiest? Even if successful, it will still be a minor part of the overall genepool. If someone like me ever goes to a fiest descendant for a cross, it will certainly look like a decker at that point, and will be selected for decker traits. Show Milton and Ellis the respect they deserve and embrace debate on an honest basis. I am not accepting your invitation to join your facebook page or your club until you demonstrate a change in your behavior. At this point, I doubt that is possible.

Wmratz - October 21, 2009 06:26 PM (GMT)
Here's the dilemma with the government. The USDA agency gives out agricultural grants, some of which go to high volume breeders and dealers who supply good $$ lobbying to our leaders in DC. Then we have the HSUS and agencies like that, lobbying as well, for animal rights, restricted breeding etc...again, more $$ to get those schmucks elected.

So who can these law makers hit without taking a big hit in votes or dollars?

That's right, you, me and the other hobby breeders out there.

If you are USDA registered, it's almost like the Hebrews painting blood over their door when the Egyptians were cursed. The Government passes over these USDA (mass breeders) and looks for whomever is NOT protected by some influential lobby. Doesn't matter that the dogs are given the MINIMUMS of care, even if the minimums are raised, sanitation standards etc. does NOT change the fact that they are high volume breeders! There is no way each animal can get the care and quality of life being handled by employees (I'm guessing not well paid ones so there's probably some rate of turnover there) and enjoy life in general.

The HSUS & PETA, will take what it can get in wins. MAke you and me out to be puppy millers and back yard breeders, and try and coax people to rescue or adopt vs. buying from a breeder. With the ultimate goal, of people not owning dogs PERIOD. They don't care if the dogs are raised to hunt, in fact they deplore these uses for dogs, stating that it can endanger wildlife or the life of the hunting dog by subjecting it to such work!!

Now, the government doesn't care if you get a dog from a pet store, or a shelter. They really don't. They just want to keep the lobbies (Forget their constituants) happy. I'm talking the D's, R's and I's here. So it's not a party thing, it's everyone with dirty hands there! Every layer of government sees fit to put tighter regulations on us honest, hobby breeders and exempt the big guys, the shelters (some of which also have deplorable conditions and receive grant money!!)

So, my answer to high volume breeders is DO let the kennel clubs enforce their code of ethics. Shoot! I would even suggest that the kennel clubs do some restructuring so they have the funds to take care of these things without government intervention. (Ie. AKC could move their HQ's from expensive NYC to say, Rural MI, OH, or IN or some place that real estate is cheap and a burst in tourism & commerce would be welcomed) If a kennel club rep finds ANY violation in existing law, they should contact authorities immediately. Regulating only the high volume kennels and not interfering with the private lives of the smaller hobby breeder who may raise litters in their own homes.

My concern, is that dishonest people will even cheat THAT system, by registering only a few litters/ year and AKC (or whatever registry) and selling some dogs without registration and possibly fudging names on pedigrees so they can avoid inspections, fees or penalties. A cheat is a cheat though. They will exploit whatever loopholes, no matter how tight the system of regulation is.

Now, personally, I prefer to support breeders who have very few litters. My experience w/ that is that the breeders have more time to invest in the development and care of the puppies, so that I get what I pay for. If someone has 50+ dogs and their pictures are showing weepy eyes, long nails, sad countenance and turd stains on their coats, chances are I'll PASS, even if the bloodlines are impressive.

If the system, and if the media were honest, they would start a campaign that SUPPORTS the small time hobby breeders. Dog exhibition venues (which also come under attack by government granted organizations) and so on. The NRA, the Sporting dog clubs etc... should be pushing any media outlet that will hear them of the virtues of the sport and the dangers of losing these breeds, these sports, and this rare but valuable type of breeders.

When we go to the voting booths, the best thing we can vote for is the person who is most likely to advocate LESS government interference in our lives PERIOD. This will allow registries to thrive too, and hopefully jobs to increase, allowing breeders the opportunities to attend shows, hunts and enjoy more leisure time once again. Improving their life quality as well as their dog's quality of life. :)

Did you know we even have idiots in DC who even want to make it illegal to do videos of animals dying. INCLUDING the hunting of wild animals? Now tell me, how you'd enjoy the hunting shows on Outdoor network when they won't let you see the shot, the taking down, dressing etc... of the animals. It'd be like a cheezy horror movie where you never see what happens and nothing makes sense. LOL Like the "Blair Deer Project"

Slickrock Deckers - October 21, 2009 06:41 PM (GMT)
I thought AKC was out of Raleigh, NC now. One reason animals rights is really active there now. Wanting to embarrass the big dogs in their own backyard.

Wmratz - October 21, 2009 06:55 PM (GMT)
Are they? How about their big shows? I know it's a tradition, but isn't Westminster getting expensive? They could save more $ there too by moving their big show to one of those hurting states.

Slickrock Deckers - October 21, 2009 07:21 PM (GMT)
I recall a news story about Westminster Kennel Club saying AKC was going to pull the big show out of New York City if some stupid law was passed. Money certainly talked in that instance, it's still there.

Wmratz - October 21, 2009 07:45 PM (GMT)
Ha, Money speaks louder than Principles and Integrity!

Slickrock Deckers - October 21, 2009 09:41 PM (GMT)
The money in that case was all the bucks the New York hotels and restaurants were going to lose if the Westminster show didn't happen, as well as the ticket sales. It had an influence in the defeat of some special license requirement for unaltered pets entering New York. Or something, I'd have to look it up.

FromHangTown - October 21, 2009 11:14 PM (GMT)
The big AKC show is in Long Beach California now. Last year roughly 3 million was spent there during the show. When we were fighting SB250 the number spent annually here came up over 2 billion in the state.

My county allows two types of kennels. Non-commercial and commercial. Both types are open to inspection.
We just fought and won against HSUS for a limit on the number of dogs allowed. Once they put a number they can change that number.

Like Meta we don't produce a lot of pups. It's been 18 months here since the last litter.

Marcy - October 21, 2009 11:22 PM (GMT)
Thanks gang. One thing we are all in agreement with is no more goverment regulations.

Ellis, your right there could be so many variations to the story and I agree with your suggestion about selling dogs before they are unsellable. Yes there are people out there who want older dogs, I'm raising up a pup right now for a family that wants a dog but because of their busy life style and two children, need an older dog that has been house trained. I'm raising him the way they have requested meaning he doesn't get to get up on the couch or bed. I figure they will find out about Deckers ability to climb in the couch for lovin once he is in their home.

Jack, I would like to suggest you stop going to the Heritage Forum. Actually I think none of us (I don't) should go there. I would also like to suggest we stop the bashing of Kimmy on this forum. Not because she doesn't deserve it, but because it does not further what we are all about or what we think or what we want to do as a group. We are all pretty much in agreement about how we view Kimmy and truth is we can't stop her by bashing her. I've already had one experience of stating what I thought of Kimmy to a perspective puppy owner and having the response be... not what I would have thought. Now if I get a summons to go to court against Kimmy, I am on the plane at my own expense!

George Palmer has taken the higher road with all of this and it hasn't exactly worked, but... karma and what goes around comes around is one of the forces of nature. (darn it!) So I'm working at climbing towards that higher road. Now if I have the experience of the Decker family or other of the old timers (sorry Milton, you are old) breeders being trashed by Kimmy and the Heritage club??? Yeah my claws and and fangs come out. Show respect! and if they are not showing respect it's because they are afraid of the truth and need too as a judge I know once said "Throw mud on the wall to see what will stick" I could care less what they say about me, I do care about what they say about the people who put their passion into devoloping these dogs and protecting them such as the huge leap that Margeret made.

With all this said I will always recommend to anyone looking for a puppy, find a smaller kennel and visit it if you can. That will encourage smaller kennels and maybe keep the crooks and liers on their toes. well... maybe.

Slickrock Deckers - October 22, 2009 01:25 AM (GMT)
I just keep hoping she'll change I guess. The purpose of the "bashing" has been to try to get her to see the error of her ways and repent. You are right tho, I haven't convinced any of them to change.

Wildwood Deckers - November 6, 2009 12:35 AM (GMT)
Ok, I know this post has fallen down the list aways, and I have tried to ignore it and not comment any more on it... however.... its too hard, can't do it, must speak up....

Now, the part that gets me is the idea that "someone" should regulate or inspect kennels.... BS!!!! The reason I say that is because the bottom line is that dogs, like any other animal, or object is private property, plain and simple... now don't get me wrong, I to believe dogs as well as other animals deserve to be taken care of in a humane manor...

However, we can't look at it that way.... it only opens the door for other regulations on other things in our everyday life... should everyone be regulated on how often they wash their car, paint their house, how much rust to allow on a vehicle, when you cut your grass, IF you should cut your grass... I could go on and on... the bottom line is each and every thing that is bought and sold, or held in ownership is PRIVATE property... private being the key word....

Where do we draw the line to what is and isn't private.... before you know it, we have no privacy, we have no rights, and our constitution gets flushed down the toilet....

If you just take a look around you, its in our everyday lives.... stop and think about it... how many ordinances do you have to abide by now? Who's business is it what you do on you property, you buy it, you pay taxes (thats another story, don't get me started on that one), perhaps you live in the city, with a viable vein of water running under your property, but are not allowed to drill your own well you have to pay for water from the city... you could have your own septic system, but the city "requires" you to hook up to the city sewer system.... ok, I think you can see where i'm going with this... and if you don't, you never will...

If you don't like how someone takes care of their dogs, don't do business with them... but, we can't all agree on feeding the same kind of dog food so, should that also be something that should be regulated... no...

nuff said

curdinger - November 6, 2009 01:51 AM (GMT)
very well said clyde.

edrats - November 6, 2009 05:11 AM (GMT)
That was well said Clyde. One of the best things about this forum is, there is the ability for reasonable discussion to take place. We don't all always agree, and that's ok. We can all learn from each other and respect other views, even if we don't agree. A forum where there is no ability to have a different point of view displayed would be of little point. Thank You for allowing Decker breeders and enthusiasts a place to share freely the many different perspectives. :D


Slickrock Deckers - November 19, 2009 06:10 PM (GMT)
Getting back to your original idea on this thread Ellis, this morning I accepted an invitation to join the facebook group "Seegmiller's Decker Terriers". I probably shouldn't have been shocked, but I was, to find a recent post from Seegmiller dissing the DHTR and the idea of adding further outcrosses to the decker. It wasn't that part that was shocking, it's just an opinion, and everyone is entitled to one. What was apalling was the following she felt compelled to include.

"I am no longer a member of the NRTA or NRTR. I am apalled at the way things were happening in that small registry and choose to dissassociate myself and all my dogs from that mind set."

She says she will continue to reproduce the foundation of the original blood established in 1970, but then goes on to contradict herself by saying "Our kennel is proud to produce consistently dogs of the decker breed that are FAR BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL BEGINNINGS." (caps mine)

Well I commented that she had misrepresented the fact that she did not choose the dissassociation with NRTR, and suggested that if she wanted to disapprove of further outcrossing she should stick to the issue, do it in an honest manner, allow other opinions, and not make statements that several of her fans would recognise
as false. I was apparently booted off that site rather quickly.

Yes Marcy, I was checking them out again. But it wasn't me who chose to continue to rewrite history. For the water to pass under the bridge, she should stop polluting it. I'm going to agree with you now Ellis. If they are far better than the original beginnings, she should rename them in her honor. To say that an inbred line which may now have picked up some tempremental issues and genetic faults and lost some hunting skills is far better than the original is a direct slap at the name Decker.

There was a "two thumbs up" added to this post from Dan Clark. Ms. Delong commenting on how great her dogs are now. Bridget Placka saying no outcrosses for me. Kmmy chiming in to say she is against breeding in any "long haired mongrels". What was that? A reference to Henry? But no one saying hey wait a minute, isn't this the wrong approach to trash our breed's heritage and founder like that? Was anyone privately rolling their eyes and wishing the charismatic leader would adopt a more concilliatory attitude and afraid to speak up lest they be banned as well? It is hard for me to write these people off, to believe they believe what they are told. But what conclusion can I draw, but that the time has come.

Milton - November 19, 2009 07:45 PM (GMT)
It seems as if leaders don't need to be honest to be followed. Hard to believe that intelligent people or any other kind would rather be led by a known and proven fraud, that to think and act for themselves. Milton

Slickrock Deckers - November 19, 2009 07:51 PM (GMT)
A mystery to me is why the leader would feel the need to post something like that just to disagree with someone else's breeding plans...

Wildwood Deckers - November 19, 2009 08:02 PM (GMT)
I believe it is likely written in the bylaws of the Seegmiller Decker Terrier Franchise, that you must agree for better or worse with her....

Its like any good horror film, everyone gets stabbed in the back in the end and the monster in the last scene is seen befriending some new unsuspecting victim...

The only difference is not only is this a real life scenario its much scarier!!!!!!!!!!


Slickrock Deckers - November 19, 2009 08:12 PM (GMT)
The new unsuspecting victims are definately a concern. This is why I reported this on a public forum.

Milton - November 20, 2009 03:04 AM (GMT)
I agree. It would be nice if this fraudulent nightmare could end. However, once lies get started,it seems that, only more lies ocurr. I certainly hate to see Decker newbies duped. Milton

Buckhorn - November 20, 2009 06:40 AM (GMT)
The new unsuspecting victims are definitely a concern as they are being filled with garbage. But, even more concerning to me is at some point her loyal followers, who without a doubt know the truth, through association become as unethical as her. I for one am very disappointed in the breeders who find it necessary to associate themselves with her even though down deep inside they all know the truth. At one time I thought some of them would be instrumental in the future of the breed. I guess they understand the road they have chosen to take. I just do not get it.

Marcy - November 20, 2009 01:28 PM (GMT)
The loss of friendship and I thought mutual interest in the betterment of the Deckers has been really hard for me. Didn't see it coming and it still stings.

Not enough for me to communicate with the "others who follow a false profit" yeah I did mean to spell it that way...

Milton - December 10, 2009 04:44 PM (GMT)
I've noticed a new front page on Decker Herritage site. I think the photo of that young woman is wonderful to behold. She looks as if she adores that dog in her arms.

After seeing this, I can only guess that the subject is Kim Seegmiller. I really have trouble imagining all the problems this very innocent looking human has caused for so many who trusted. Milton

If I am correct, I still think it is a great photo. Also, I'm still ashamed to have my name associated with this person.

Umpqua - December 11, 2009 02:12 AM (GMT)
This thread is very important to the betterment of the decker and their breeders.....

Everyone should reread it and refocus their alliance and intentions....

This is serious info on the future direction of the deckers and what the breed will become.....

If breeders are intent on progressing the direction of the deckers...then all alternatives for the betterment of the health of the deckers should be considered.....out crossing and line breeding have to be considered.....

Everyone should consider the intent that is the focus of so called self described "heritage" breeders.....


Hosted for free by zIFBoards