American Coton de Tulear Association, Inc.

Editor's Comments:

It has been repeatedly requested of the ACTA that they post a brief description of their club on this page, but even though they claim to be the "Official Parent Club" of the Coton de Tulear, they have refused to do so. In addition, the executives of the ACTA have repeatedly attacked the Coton Page, the CTCA, and just about any coton owner who disagrees with them. Samples of their emails can be read by clicking here.

Furthermore, although the ACTA puts together an informative newsletter in excess of 50 pages, complete with color photos, they have repeatedly refused to send out copies of their newsletter to other than ACTA members. Clearly, whatever their agenda, it is NOT to promote the distribution of information about the breed.

As such, this writer, being a member of the ACTA has notified them that I withdraw my membership to their club (a.k.a. "clique") and will refer anyone seeking information about the breed to other clubs or individual coton owners.

Netrix Apologizes to Mr. Calamis, Dr. Russell and All Coton Page Readers, for the Slanderous Emails of "Idamiani" (aka the ACTA, Pam Heidinger and Kennette Tabor)

In response to the email posted by "Idamiani", Netrix, the Internet Service Provider (ISP) for Idamiani sent a letter and formal apology to Jim Calamis and has asked that it posted on the Coton Page. In the letter, Mr. Siler, Netrix's attorney, confirmed that their investigation has revealed that the emails were sent by Pam Heidinger, the Executive Vice President of the ACTA, and Kennette Tabor, the President of the ACTA, "had worked together to write the messages", using the computer and email name of one of Netrix's employees. Netrix's apology is posted below in its entirety.

"TO ALL CONCERNED PARTIES:

It has been brought to the attention of Netrix Corporation that a series of inflammatory messages has been posted on the Coton Home Page, and e-mailed to various parties interested in the subject of Cotons, under the identity "Idamiani@netrix.com". "Netrix.com" is the Internet address of Netrix, a computer networking company located in Virginia. Netrix has investigated these messages and has learned that they were initiated in California by a social acquaintance of a Netrix employee using the employee's home computer but without the authorization of the employee or Netrix. Netrix understands that the perpetrators of those messages have now identified themselves to Mr. Calamis, who operates the Coton Home Page, and to Dr. Russell, who was the subject of some of the messages.

Netrix categorically disavows the opinions expresses in the "Idamiani" messages. Netrix does not have any view regarding the subject of these unfortunate messages. Netrix wishes to publicly express its apologies to Mr. Calamis, to Dr. Russell and to the other recipients of any of these messages and regrets any offense or confusion that the messages may have caused.

For Netrix, the only positive element in this controversy has been the chance to learn about the Coton de Tulear breed, which was previously unknown to us. Netrix has only the best of wishes for all owners, breeders and other enthusiasts of this fine breed.

NETRIX CORPORATION"

Email Received From the Executives of the ACTA:

Subj: Bad thing {received within days of the starting of the Coton Page}

Date: 95-11-22 13:31:15 EST

From: 100756.250@compuserve.com (Pamela Heidinger)

To: jcalamis@cotonpage.com

I guess by now you have heard the rumblings going on amongst breeders over. your over zealous love for your dog. A lot of Breeders are now deciding not to do public breedings to try to prevent others like yourself from wanting to make money off the Coton de Tulear. You have opened the door for many lawsuits especially when allowing people to complain about other breeders. I know your intentions are good, however, a little mis-guided. There are many underline currents that go on among breeders. I would hate this forum to be used for airing jealous exhibitors who aren't winning and want to lash out.

This is very unethical of you to even suggest doing this. And any good breeder will not participate in this effort to exploit this breed.

Advertising the price on these dogs will open a giant can of worms. People who don't know what they are doing will become backyard breeders ruining this breed for good. I have seen many Cotons that are so far off the standard of the breed just because people think they are going to make a lot of money. Another mis-guided assumption.

I don't care how many disclaimers you have in your system, it will still not prevent lawsuits. And I for one will be watching it very closely for any reason to sue. As will many other ethical breeders.

Subj: ACTA Newsletter {received after I referred someone who wanted info on cotons to the ACTA}

Date: 96-02-13 19:52:44 EST

From: Amercoton@aol.com

To: jcalamis@cotonpage.com

Dear Jim,

Please do not suggest to anyone that we might have any extra newsletters available to non-members. As you can imagine, this newsletter is extremely costly to produce, and our club will be running in the red for awhile, as most new clubs would be. Thanks.

Phyllis

Subject: Solicited Comments {received after I posted info about a possible puppy mill}

Date: Aug 15, 1996 1:31 AM

To: jcalamis@cotonpage.com

Cc: All readers of the Coton Page

From: "ldamiani" (investigation through ldamiani's ISP's attorneys has shown that the anonymous "ldamiani" emails were the joint effort of the ATCA President, Kennette Tabor (757)421-7685 Cottonkist@aol.com and Executive Vice President, Pam Heidinger (408)354-7115 ChateauCtn@aol.com

Jim,

Since you have asked for comments regarding the current situation relating to Jacques Sade of Plattekill Kennel and the CTCA and you have seen fit to publish this on your Coton Page, I submit my comments to you to be published on your Home Page for another viewpoint. I hope you will begin to see the folly of the free-for-all type of forum you have encouraged on your Home Page, and how this type of forum can and will be used and abused by some very questionable people with dubious intentions.

On 7/16/96, Laurie Spaulding-Russell of the CTCA, sent out an unsolicited email to me and many other people. Mrs. Russell's email askied us to send her more "evidence" for the Russellls' ongoing vicious personal vendetta against a former CTCA supporter who fell from the CTCA's disfavor because he dared to publicly oppose the Russells' bogus, newley dreamed up "CTCA Champion" con job program. The Russels have used a complaint of kennel conditions based purely on hearsay to launch a high-tech lynching of someone that they wanted to quiet anyway.

This hearsay allegation could have been investigated in a thoroughly credible and professional manner by proper authorities to find out if it even had any basis in reality, and proper action then taken if it was found to be true. Instead you have aided CTCA in this lynching by publishing this disgrace on your Home Page. If it is found to be untrue, how do you plan to undo the damage you have done to this person's reputation due to a flimsy allegation by email?

The following email reply was sent by Julie Stevenson, a highly respected official of CRBA (the Canadian Rare Breed Association). Ms. Stevenson's reply was sent to Laurie Spaulding-Russell of the CTCA, and copied by Ms. Stevenson to many of us who received Mrs. Russell's origin email message. Ms. Stevenson has given her full permission for her message to be published on your Page or anywhere and to anyone. Ms. Stevenson's reply is a well-thought out professional view of this situation.

This whole vendetta appears to have started when the Russells' conjured up a scheme that they hoped could finally enable them to type the word "champion" on CTCA pedigrees. Apparently, unable to cut it at REAL shows, with REAL judges, with REAL top quality dogs, the Russels have come up with a scheme to simply DECLARE some of their poor, uncompetitive creatures with the underserved and unearned title of "champion". This hocus-pocus illegitimate title appears to be a sad and desperate attempt by someone who is unable to breed real quality, and thinks they have conned a way to "create" the prestige of a REAL championship minus genetics, training, conditioning and professional objectivity not to mention the usual reluctance of backyard pet breeders to spend those hard-earned "puppy profits" (what other reason would they give for breeding pets?) for the advancement of the breed by showing at legitimate dog shows. Funny that the Russells rail against the "politics" of dog shows, but have devised a scheme whereby one single uncertified layperson (Jay Russell) will DECREE a dog a Champion! How much more subjective and "political" can you get?

This whole scheme is laughable and is already the butt of jokes. It is going to take alot more than silencing one man for them to hope to sell this lemon. I now happily own one neutered pet Coton, but showed Golden Retrievers for almost 8 years, so I am sadly familiar with these types of occasional hucksters who come along and try to crate show titles out of thin air where none exists. This scheme by CTCA reminds me of that old saying, "You can put a saddle on a donkey, but that doesn't make it a race horse." Your editorial comments like "spread the word" regarding this unsubstantiated hearsay is a disgrace. Apparently, anyone can send anything to you, and regarless of its validity, get published by you and even ENCOURAGED.

Are you so easily duped? Or do you think that this will create much-needed interest in your business endeavor of your Coton Home Page? Your Home Page seems to be sinking lower and lower regarding any journalistic standards of decency and fair-play. Is this downward direction going to continue: You are really harming the breed that you claim to love, and I have noticed that not a single reputable (or even disreputably!) USA advertiser will contribute to your "tabloid-style" Home Page. Apparently, none want to be associated with it. Does this tell you anything? It would be nice if you would clean up your own act, and become a credit to the breed.

Your current biased and uneducated comments are detrimental to the real efforts being made by others I have talked to that are trying to educate the public in a positive way about our breed. My feelings are, I have no opinion for or against Mr. Sade - that jury is still out. But I do understand greed and manipulation. Both seem to be hard at work on your Home Page.

Dear ldamiani (Sorry, but I don't know your real name), and Julie, I have received an email from each of you concerning my Coton Page comments about Platteskill. Julie's comments have been posted on the page for a while now, and everyone getting this email has already received "ldamiani"'s email. I will be brief in my response, since we all have better things to do then this.

FIRST and foremost, I have absolutely no affiliation with the CTCA and have never met Jay. The fact that some of my views may be the same as his just shows that "great minds think alike" (only kidding of course).

I'm sure that we have an equal or greater number of views that clash. Believe it or not, my only interest in cotons comes from being the owner of one of these great dogs. I don't care what the "breed standards" are, nor do I care if a dog has a blue ribbon or the title "Champion".

"Breeding standards" can hurt a breed as much as it can help. For the record, I do not consider ANY COTON to be, as you put it, "poor, uncompetitive creatures with the undeserved and unearned title of 'champion'" To me, my Snowball is PERFECT (except when he eats all the shoelaces off my shoes) and every bit a champion, with or without an award saying so.

Turning to my "unsubstantiated hearsay" and "rumors" about Sade:

1. The possible problem was not brought to my attention only by Jay.

2. I received emails from at least 3 other people describing comditions at Plattekill Kennel.

3. I also have been notified by a number of people that, like me, they were not permitted to visit Plattekill Kennel when they were looking to buy a coton.

4. When I asked to visit Platteskill in mid August to dispel the stories that were circulating, Mr. Sade readily said I could visit, and even go into the basement to see his dogs (if I would cover my feet to avoid the spread of disease). Two weeks before I was to visit, the invitation was withdrawn, and as far as I know, nobody has been allowed to see the kennel since.

Quite simply, except in the OJ case, circumstantial evidence can be sufficient to build a case. In my opinion, the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming. Sade could readily have put the matter to rest by letting someone see his kennel, but instead he has cried "foul" and insisted that all of the allegations are "political". If the only person complaining was Jay, the claims would never have been published on the Coton Page. That was not the case, and I felt it was in the best interest of prospective coton buyers to make them aware of the claims so that they could check him out for themselves, not to discourage sales if they found the claims unwarranted. To date, I have not received even ONE email stating that the conditions at Platteskill are other than have been described. I wish I had!

As for my seeking publicity or profits from the controversy, all I can say is that I have spent HUNDREDS of hours working on the Coton Page, and have received a total of $300 for advertising. I figure that comes out to about 3 cents per hour, far below my usual legal fee of $250 per hour. Yep, I must be in it for the money.

To all reading this, COMMENTS ARE WELCOME, either in support of the Page (I love hearing that people enjoy it), or in criticism (I'm a big boy and can take it) like "ldamiani's". - I still don't know his or her name

Best regard, and enjoy the remainder of the summer.

Jim Calamis

Subject: Comments Aren't Welcome

Date: 20 Aug 1996 19:42:47 U

From: "ldamiani"

Jim,

Even though you tell me that "COMMENTS ARE WELCOME", and that you can take criticism, that must not be quite true, since you are refusing to post my comments on your Home Page as I requested. Why? Although I am not surprised you wouldn't want to post them since I have brought up some unpleasant truths, your unwillingness to post my message on your Home Page only serves to illustrate to everyone reading this how biased and suspect your "postings" are. You can pick and choose who and what will be posted on your Page, and disagreements with you will never see the light of day (which proved me right to copy to several people on your mailing list so at least THEY would see it and know what is happening regarding your "journalistic integrity"). In the future, visitors to your Site should always ask themselves, "How many OPPOSING viewpoints did this issue or any other issue receive?", "Is this a fair representation of emails and responses that Jim actually received on a particular issue?", and, "What did Jim choose not to post that he found not to his liking?" This is one of the many follies of your forum, and how it can and is being used by you, and those who influence you (whether you admit it or not) to slant views in favor of ideas that may (and do) have overwhelming opposition. You have only verified this by refusing to post my complete comments on your Home Page as I requested. What are you afraid of?

Your defensive statements to me only serve to illustrate your lack of interest in becoming educated about the Coton as a breed, and the dog world in general rather than being open to learning and gaining much-needed knowledge. First, your statements that, "I don't care what the "breed standards" are...", and, "Breeding standards can hurt a breed as much as it can help", are unbelievably ignorant and reflect a casual and uncaring attitude toward the breed you claim to love so much.

You have made similar comments in other places on your page. If you would have had any interest in learning about the dog world (and if not, why presume to open up a Home Page about DOGS?), you would know that EVERY breed has an official Breed Standard. This isn't an optional type of thing. That you would even make such ignorant statements testifies to your total lack of interest in learning even the simplest and most basic fundamentals of purebred dogs. Although I now only own one much-loved pet Coton, I did show Golden Retrievers for several years in the past (and yes, they also have a Breed Standard!). I have attended some shows for rare breeds to watch and learn, and have done quite a bit of research on this subject (too bad you haven't been interested enough in the breed to do this also). What I have found is that there are NO shows that will permit judging under the CTCA's Standard!

Their Breed Standard is not allowed at any dog shows. Only the FCI Standard, not the CTCA's Standard is used at all dog shows. Did you know this? This makes "CTCA" and "Show quality" incompatible terms to use in the same sentence. Therefore, it is an IMPOSSIBILITY to evaluate a puppy as "show quality" if using the obsolete CTCA Standard. Perhaps the importance of a Breed Standard will make more sense to you on a personal level. You say that your Snowball was sold to you as show quality. That is quite possible if the breeder you purchased him from breeds to the FCI Standard. But what if you had bought him from a CTCA breeder? What if he had been graded under their Standard that only they use and you paid show price? What if he had possessed a disqualifying fault for the REAL show ring because he was graded as CTCA "show quality" (a very real possibility since the CTCA's standard permits lots of things that are disqualifications in a real show ring)?

Would it have mattered to you that you had paid the higher show price, actually entered him in a show, and had a judge disqualify him for not fitting the Standards for showing (which means "PET")? Would you have felt you paid a higher price for a pet puppy that was not honestly represented and not what you had contracted to buy? An honest breeder could never use a Standard for grading that they know will never be used in an actual show ring. I see now where CTCA is trying to change their terminology from "show quality" to "breedable". This should mean the same thing, and should send up red flags to anyone looking for a good show quality puppy. Anyone wanting to buy real "show quality" had better do his homework on this one! Does a "Breed Standard" still mean nothing to you after reading this? Are you at all beginning to see how your ignorance and unknowledgeable advice-giving can be so damaging to this breed, and to the people who read your Page, or are you totally disinterested in what is going on here? There are alot of things that you really need to learn that you appear to have no interest in learning. Your statements only serve to make you look foolish and damage this lovely breed.

Second, I am somewhat dismayed at your twisting of my statement regarding the poor quality of specimens that will soon be declared "champions" by the CTCA in their new bogus "championship program" they have recently concocted. Obviously, if these dogs were of the necessary quality to be REAL champions, they would have already earned that title through legitimate dog shows. Since these dogs must be of VASTLY inferior quality and unable to compete fairly, the CTCA has schemed to "pull a fast one" on the public to try to trick them into believing that one uncertified layperson (Jay Russell) can "annoint" a dog a champion just by his say-so! What a joke! The public is WAY beyond this hocus-pocus trickery. These CTCA titles will never be regarded as more than a sad joke in the dog world. Try as they might, there is only one way to make a REAL champion: breed a good one, train it, show it, and earn that championship title under certified judges in quality competition. Sorry, CTCA, were it only as easy as you would like to make it! But then, the EARNED title of "champion" wouldn't carry the clout that CTCA so desperately dreams and schemes of having on all those hundreds of untitled Oakshade/Alika dogs. That you think your Snowball is "Perfect" and that all Cotons deserve to be "Champions" is heartwarming. It also illustrates that you should never be allowed to be in the position of making the responsible, hard choices that good breeders must in grading a litter. Based on your theory, they would all be graded and priced as show quality, regardless of reality. That is where your illogical and uneducated views lead. This may be all fun and games to you, but it is taken quite seriously by good breeders and puppy buyers expecting to get what they are paying for.

You also somewhat shockingly state in your message to me that you have posted MS. Stevenson's reply on your Home Page. Where is it? No one can seem to find it. You also state that not one person has written in to you with a positive view of Plattekill kennel. Do you not read what you post on your own Page? "LUVCOTONS" clearly sent in an extremely positive first hand view of this kennel and its conditions. Don't you count that one? Do you even know what is on your own Page?

Regarding your "volunteer work" to your Home Page, and that you have only received $300.00 for advertising: I think this low monetary return on your investment speaks more to the intelligence and discriminating tastes of the myriad of lost ADVERTISERS who have refused to line your pockets and thereby be associated with your "tabloid" low class Home Page, rather than this speaking to your philanthropic works. $250.00/hour is pretty good - when and if you are getting it. To have this much extra time on your hands gives an indication of the number (or lack thereof) of those who are willing to pay you $250.00/hour. Or are you turning down those kinds of fees to contribute to your Home Page? Please, don't even insult us with that one. Let's face it, you tried to drum up business/advertising for a fat fee on your Page, but no one bought! Yep, I do believe you TRIED to be in it for the money.

Perhaps your legal business will become more successful, and you will be able to spend more time on something you hopefully know alittle more about.

I have withdrawn my membership (and support) in the ACTA, and urge all coton owners who find these comments unbecoming of the "Official Parent Club" to do the same.

Jim Calamis

[go to top]

© Copyright 1995-2002 by James P. Calamis, Commack, New York