Hardly, if Joe Public were willing to wait for well-bred, tested pups puppy farmers wouldn't get a look in or would have to clean up their act   It's the want it now, must have it now, want something different tomorrow people who are the main customers of Puppy farmers.  

People who want pedigree dogs and know what that means are more willing to wait for well-bred pups from tested parents 

Trude also bought a "docked" Spanish Water Dog a few years ago, something that she had to think hard about as she doesn't like docked breeds, but she loved the breed and knew that her breeder bred properly !

> But isn't it a fact that selective breeding is causing health problems in certain breeds or am I just imagining this.

of course it can, if its done by uncaring people. MASSIVE heads on bulldogs or whatever are not that common anymore becasue judges ae sensible and interpreting the standards (in my view) more correctly, i.e. fit for purpose. and FIT in more ways than one- an unhealthy dog does not often win so does not make money so is not bred....

> Isn't this preoccupation with having pedigree dogs encouraging the above i.e. puppy farming and the unfair treatment of animals

pmsl! what preoccupation with pedigree dogs?? the labradoodle, snoodle, pomapoo, insert stupid made up name here is the order of the day at the moment.

people need to understand that a good breeder aims for health above all else in their stock- thats one of the reasons we;re not breeding from our lovely younger bitch- her line carries a cruciate prob (only found out long after mating her mum grrr). not a proven genetic issue i think but just in case! (also she couldn't show worth a damn lol, shes like melted chocolate as soon as touched, all about cuddles lol)

Had a phone call from a friend who has had a new puppy owner backout of having her pup due to the news on tv this afternoon.  Said they were sorry but they couldn't afford a dog that might cost them lots of money to have put right. (There loss)

A few reputable breeders I know at the moment are finding it difficult to find homes for pups, how hard is it going to be after the programe is aired.

Oh god just seen a clip on richard and judy and I dont want to watch the full programme!

I really don't know what to say with this.  It's going to give such false information out and I hope, in a backwards way it pushes alot of people to buy from puppy farmers and buy a cross breed with more health issues!  I have given up talking to non pedigree people and even hear myself agreeing with them that cross breeds are healthier because I know that way the conversation ends quickly and I won't get on a high horse and cause problems between friendships!

I hope in the long run this doesn't do any damage but I also think that BBC droping Crufts would be a great idea!  That way it may become a dog show again! :)  and no breeds will miss the group because the BBC NEED to start broadcasting!

There is no way the minority of pedigree people will be able to cope with being heard after this program tonight. :(

Would this not end if the KC just started today by saying any dog registered with them must have passed the relivent breed health checks or they arnt allowed to breed?

Would this not end if the KC just started today by saying any dog registered with them must have passed the relivent breed health checks or they arnt allowed to breed?
It would definitely help at least a bit and other countries do that! I can't see why we can't.

I thought Richard got the crux of the matter when he asked, after watching the dramatic, eek, eek, graffic of the Bullterrier skull changing evoking some sort of idea that breeders have literally put the dogs through such a morph :rolleyes:), what difference does that particular change make? 
I hope Caroline sues her for lying about what she said this morning :-)  Caroline clearly said the results of the study had only been out a couple of days not that she did not know about the study inself before then, grrrr. 

Oh my God!  It's just been announced as fact on the six o'clock news that "pedigree dogs are so inbred that they are prone to diseases"!

For more than two years now the Kennel Club and others have been co-operating with a TV production company called Passionate Productions who have been making a film on the subject of canine health. We agreed to take part entirely on the basis of that company's written assurance that the programme's ultimate message was "intended to be a hopeful one, showing how science and breeders can combine to preserve our purebreds for the future."  That message fits precisely with the view of the Kennel Club, and so we set about giving information and interviews to the production company, and encouraging others to do so as well.

Sadly we soon discovered that the members of the production company seemed to have pre-conceived and extremely biased views on the subject.  Alarm bells rang when we found out the biased nature of many of the questions being posed both to ourselves and to others. The vast majority covered negative issues - few if any were about the positive aspects of purebred dogs

We now know that the BBC, which has bought the programme, will show it on BBC1 at 9pm on Tuesday 19th August.  From the beginning the Kennel Club has worked consistently to explain our point of view on canine health both to the production company and latterly to the BBC, describing the vast amount of time, effort and money the majority of breeders put into breeding healthy dogs. We have also ensured that other interested parties have made the same point to the BBC. In so doing we have of course acknowledged that there are problems in some breeds, many of which originally stem back to the Victorian era, but we have stressed that we are today in the forefront of using science to address these issues.

We have also explained the work done to eliminate from breed standards any exaggerations which might cause problems. We have described the work going on to ensure that show judges pay particular attention to issues which could be detrimental to the health or welfare of dogs. We have outlined the many DNA and other health screening programmes which exist, and have given details of the Accredited Breeders Scheme and our latest "Fit for function: fit for life" campaign.

Finally, we have been at pains to remind the BBC of the requirements in its Charter to be rigorously impartial and balanced in its reporting.

Despite all of this we still fear that, when broadcast, this programme may omit much of the positive information supplied, with the result that it will be damaging to the reputation of pedigree dogs, dog breeders and the Kennel Club. We hope that, in the process, it will not end up damaging the very dogs which, throughout, the programme makers have claimed they are so anxious to help.

This is of course looking at the worst case outcome.  It may be that our efforts have been understood and borne in mind as the programme has been put together and that we have done enough to balance the content and tone.   Whatever the eventual result you can be assured that the Kennel Club will go on working for the benefit of pedigree dogs and that we will continue to communicate the many positive messages which are there to be told.

Ronnie Irving

Chairman

August 8, 2008.

 
 

When that statement first came out the only thing that baffled me was why nobody at the Kennel Club seemed to have taken a look at the previous output from Passionate Production.  One look would have convinced me, did convince me when she posted on here, that this was a producer looking for a more exciting story that "KC working steadily towards healthier dogs".

Did anyone notice on the richard and judy programme how caroline agreed with them that the gsd that they showed in the clip, was a breed that needed looking into,
if the kc knows of animals that are being bred that do know justice to the breed, why do they register them,
is it because of the amount of money they get from registered litters, or they know that some of the pups will then go onto
shows, which again gives them money,
the kennel club accreditated breed scheme may work, may not work,
there are a couple of breeders i know that should of never been give the title accrediated breeder, never mind getting a
licence to breed from the local council,
people who truley love their breed will fight tooth and nail to protect there dogs, have all the correct tests etc, but the kc must listen to people who
have growing concerns over certain breeds.
And with regard to the bbc with the crufts coverage  animal planet , used to help make the crufts bbc programme do not know if they still do,

will there be anyway of contacting the bbc after the programme airs tonight to make our views heard ?
carolann

I Agree 
Today's Times had a report about the programme which might be of interest:

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/tv_and_radio/article4561098.ece

The Program is on Tonight at 9pm called
Pedigree Dogs Exposed on BBC1,
Just incase no-one knows its on, I have just found it now.
Will be intresting to watch.

Hardly, if Joe Public were willing to wait for well-bred, tested pups puppy farmers wouldn't get a look in or would have to clean up their act   It's the want it now, must have it now, want something different tomorrow people who are the main customers of Puppy farmers.  

People who want pedigree dogs and know what that means are more willing to wait for well-bred pups from tested parents 

But surely its Joe Public who is the problem so its not "hardly" is it?

> Then it seems entirely logical to save money on that 5%.

That's direct sales (shows, breeder accounts etc.), however what is their turnover on from the pet market based on recommendation.  i.e. puppy goes to new home with Pedigree puppy pack from breeder, some (by no means all) will continue at least for a short while to feed Pedigree.

Everyone failed to see the significance of the KC writing to all the breed clubs years ago asking them to write a revised standard for full tails - this was proved to be the start of looking at the docking ban and this was years and years before the much publicised debate and then legislation banning docking.

I'm so glad BBC Scotland is showing it's soap River City instead.   The discussion on Jeremy Vine's Radio 2 programme was enough for me today, some loony from Animal Aid extoiling the virtues of mongrels.

> Everyone failed to see the significance of the KC writing to all the breed clubs years ago asking them to write a revised standard for full tails - this was proved to be the start of looking at the docking ban and this was years and years before the much publicised debate and then legislation banning docking.

My recollection is slightly different :-)  I would have said the debate and winds of change being registered by the KC and them acting accordingly.  I certainly have never consider the KC the driving force behind the ban.  There are much stronger contenders in my view.

> I certainly have never consider the KC the driving force behind the ban

This is not what I said!!!!!!!

What I actually said was the KC wrote to the breed clubs asking for new standards.  Many breed clubs did not see that this was the beginning of the docking ban!

it looks like it will be very one sided
i,m glad i,m not breeding a litter at the mo
this will put people off i,m sure
mind not so long ago on r and judy show they had so called designer pups and were singing how healthy they were
pity they don,t look at the pet breeders and so called designer mutts

They show it on Friday evening in Scotland Christine.

im in Scotland too but if you have any cable i.e Virgin or Sky they have the other BBC regions just flick through the tv guide, i have mine set to record off to ring craft tonight

> What I actually said was the KC wrote to the breed clubs asking for new standards.  Many breed clubs did not see that this was the beginning of the docking ban!

I don't know what you are saying then.  It seems to me they did not see this as the beginning of the docking ban because it wasn't.  The KC did not bring about the ban, it never supported the ban it simply responded and prepared for the ban by ensuring standards were prepared.

>The discussion on Jeremy Vine's Radio 2 programme was enough for me today,

I missed the programme, but emailed in, about humans being the most uninbred species, and yet have more hereditary conditions than pedigree dog breeds. I don't suppose he read it out ...?

Just to lighten the discussion slightly, I rather like this post on the BBC message board:

Should we do more to protect pedigree dogs?
Well, of course we should. And, as far as I'm concerned, the sooner the better. The sooner we start to throw our support to the pedigree dogs, the sooner cats will know how we really think.

:-D

lol I read that one too Isabel :)

what a load of old tosh people are writing on there - I never realised quite how ill informed the general public really are.

maybe the general public are ill informed, because programmes that are going to be on tonight are going to be watched and believed,
maybe it is time we hit back with what we love to do,
be it, breed showing, agility,flyball.obedience,working trials, hwtm, anything to do with our dogs,
it can also be pat dogs, and dogs for the disabled , guide dogs, dogs that detect cancer,
if we want to put our own points across we have to find a tv company willing to put us across what we do why we do it
we need to show the general public what they can achive with their dogs and not be put off, we need to show some of the breeds
they are going to belittle in the programme tonight doing things,
i know of pugs doing agility , german shepherds herding, etc,
it is about time we stood up and said enough there are plenty of us that do different sports with these so called malformed dogs (thats a laugh in its self)
so why will nobody take this up because it is not worthy news,
it won't grab the headlines, it won't sit up and make the general public watch,
but something needs to be done but what i don't know
carolann

Would this not end if the KC just started today by saying any dog registered with them must have passed the relivent breed health checks or they arnt allowed to breed?
I agree completely with this. The KC have been complicit with puppy farmers and BYB by registering their puppies. They are not squeaky clean and have ignored this issue for years. They need to clean up their house and force breeders to health test before they register progeny and that includes DNA testing of parents and puppies to prove that they are what they purport to be.

Linking dog breeders to hitler???

That poor boxer almost made me cry.

This programme is full of poo but yet again joe public will believe everything, no mention about sinus testing in breeding dogs????

The thing is selective breeding is eugenics and Hitler was its biggest fan, but Eugenics is about Humans NOT animals, so its a non starter as a comparison really!

Slander really dont you think

> They show it on Friday evening in Scotland Christine.

I think I've got a date to watch the grass grow on Friday or the paint dry...................

Very very sad :-(

The Nazi stuff was so ludicrous it cheared me up no end.  Even the most susceptible viewer must have questioned her credibility at that point :-D

I have to admit to a small giggle when she asked the KC guy if he would breed with his daughter :-D  . Where do these people come from? Mind you I did agree that something needs to be done to force breeders to health test.

The programme was deliberately bias and set out to sensationalise the topic.  Whilst I cannot comment on the specific issues discussed for some of the breeds I have to say that so much seemed ridiculous that I would seriously doubt anything they reported on the programme.  But I agree that the KC needs to try and do more to get rid of the backyard breeders and puppy farms that cause such problems and suffering for the dogs.

Louise

Yes i agree that the cav's problems cant spell it lol the dog shouldnt have been bred from, but nothing to stop him winning the shows. Afterall they are on the closest match to the standard not really health.

Yes, meant to say re the cav that got BIS - is anyone familiar with this story?  It was one of the few things in the programme that really concerned me and I wonder if it really is as it was reported.

> Mind you I did agree that something needs to be done to force breeders to health test

The did make the point a couple of time that forcing breeder to do things can be counter productive and the risk of them just operating outwith their influence.  The Accredited Breeder Scheme is there to encourage health testing and I think this is the way to go.  The more that builds and the more breeders are available for purchasers looking for these things the less opportunities are open to breeders to choose not to with or without KC registration.

Shame Ronnie didn't respond with the fact that, given the opportunity, dogs (and many other species) will naturally mate with close relations - they're not forced into it. It's not taboo because they're amoral.

They didn't make it clear if he was a type D or type E - type D has the malformation but no symptoms, and can be bred with type A (no malformation). Type E has symptoms and cannot be bred. I have personally never seen this dog show symptoms, but only his owner sees him all day and can say yes or no. We certainly got clobbered in our breed!! Only good thing was we didn't get done for killing pups like the Ridgies or thinking it's ok to have dogs fainting like the Pugs. We need another programme to show our side of things! The one thing I would say is that a lot of Cavalier people wish that we DID have KC rules to test our dogs before mating, that's the only way to get the people who don't test to start doing so. :-(

I know that forcing testing could be counter productive but I'm not sure how much value the accredited breeder program will have if regular checks aren't done on premises. ETA:If they recorded incidences of inherited conditions then they could stop registering future progeny of these dogs but they don't, they will register any pedigree dog provided you pays your money and that isn't right.

> I know that it could be counter productive but I'm not sure how much value the accredited breeder program will have if regular checks aren't done on premises.

They say they do, certainly when they receive adverse feedback but there would be no disguising whether health tests were done or not.

In reply to JG, that is probably the difference between animals and humans ( Well some humans :) ) ...........animals have no morals or emotions regarding who they 'breed' with! 

i thought the breeders shown were cold and callous. they know the suffering this causes to both the dog and new owners and YET they still breed from unhealthy dogs.

also the culling of healthy pups has got to stop. just because they dont have a ridge!!!!!!!

absolutly barbaric.

the programme has shown me just how untrusting people are.

I do prefer pedigree dogs, and given the choice of a healthy dog would choose a pedigree every time, but I do think this programme made a very valid point, some of the dogs shown whether typical or not were definitley suffering, and I couldn't believe that the lady with the lovley looking king charles that won best in show actually bred from him knowing he had such a dreadful problem, am I missing something here?

I'd also like to add that the german shepherds shown looked very deformed and looked in pain when they were walking, so I cannot believe this is breed standard.

Having been on the receiving end of a very badly bred golden retriever a few years ago, I know the pain and anguish this kind of thing can cause both to the dogs and the owners.  So I do think people need to be aware and without programmes of this type it is difficult to get to the masses.

Having said that I know that there are also good reputable breeders around, my present dog being from one of the better ones, so I guess we just have to be very very careful when choosing our dogs/breeders. 

I have just watched this program and found it very injurous towards dog shows and  breeding...but I think it may well make at least some members of the public question deeper into health checks before purchasing a pup. That has got to be good news!
I feel they missed the piont completly though as it is way way time the powers that be brought in LEGISLATION to govern breeding of dogs, at the moment any tom dick or harry can produce a litter of pups regardless of health and flog them to anyone with the cash. We need stong laws in force to regulate breeding of dogs, we need the KC to insist on breeds having ALL available health checks done prior to pups being registered and backing from the government to make sure this is a fully regulated passtime. Puppy farmers would then need  to conform (That would be a miracle as things stand at the moment) and only laws will make this happen...the KC has a roll to play but the government in my opinion has a bigger one.
This may have been a very one sided programn but I think it carried some valid pionts!
Going into the bunker now to keep my head down...
Aileen.

The woman that bred from her affected Cavalier I think was a disgrace!!

Does anyone know if the story about the ridges is true?

Not if you read the new wording on the CC's!

Sorry this was in response to Louis DDB

> Shame Ronnie didn't respond with the fact that, given the opportunity, dogs (and many other species) will naturally mate with close relations - they're not forced into it. It's not taboo because they're amoral.

This is the thing.  Having raised these issues she should have allowed the time to discuss the different ethical and social issues why close sanquinity is not permitted in human culture. 
One issue that was raised today was the fact that the KC were not permitted to see this until transmission tonight.  What was Jemima worried about?  Was she worried that they would have been aware of all the claims made and would have been able to refer to the more ludicrous aspects such as this in the rounds of pre publicity conducted today.