Yes, that's how it felt to me too Marianne. Seems a tad short-sighted to me. I wonder if they thought they might get too much hassle? You'd have thought if they had such a convincing story to tell, they'd be looking forward the chance to educating people.

M.

Is it just me that can't follow the Dogs Trust link any more? I wonder if they decided to re-word.

M.

> Is it just me that can't follow the Dogs Trust link any more? I wonder if they decided to re-word.

Try this

http://www.dogstrust.org.uk/press_office/pressreleases/2008/dt-not-at-crufts.htm

Purchasers of dogs should first consider a rescue dog. .....

...are they all completely mad ! - how illogical is that statement - on the
one hand they are stressing the importance of health testing all breeding
stock and on the other they are seriously suggesting that rescue dogs are a
better option - shelters are full of the fall out of IRRESPONSIBLE breeding
practices - they are there to mop up the results of back yard breeders etc who
take no responsibility for what they produce and those who cannot be bothered
to either keep their dogs safe when in heat or get them neutered ...just how
is this better than supporting breeders who health test for an ever
increasing range of genetic problems - who import new lines to widen their breeds
gene pool and who undertake to have back any dog they have bred ...in short
your average 'good' show breeder ??!!!.

...Rescue shelters in effect, act as enablers for bad breeders ... they can
simply continue to churn out poorly bred dogs knowing full well that shelters
will take care of the results ...and now thanks to Dogs Trust and the RSPCA
they can sit smugly back and tell the gullible public that their dogs are a
much better option that show bred ones ....words fail me !!!

Yvonne

The reason why the Dogs Trust states they never put a healthy dog down is they refuse so many dogs. A local authority "animal welfare"officer received a little dog from sn owner's son. She asked the Dog's Trust if they could house the little dog(smaller than my Cavaliers)until she could sort out a home-they point blank refused-despite having taken in number of Pedigree dogs from the same officer earlier in the same day ! Their excuse was they wouldn't be able to rehome the dog as it was too old(2 years) Funny that as some of the pedigrees they had accepted were older ! I've yet to come across anyone who has managed to rehome their dog to a Dog's Trust Centre, our rescue has even had people referred to them by their Local Dog's Trust with GSD crosses, stating it was the"Breed"rescues job to rehome them !!

I used to support them, but IMHO they are not as"no kill"as they appear. I know someone who was passed for one of their dogs(well bitch) & had chosen one that was awaiting recovery from a broken leg. She paid for all the bitches vet fees & also paid up front for the bitch to be spayed. The day she went to collect her, she was told that she had been PTS that morning because she had been grumpy towards one of the kennel hands !!!!! My friend was devastated, how could they do this ? the little girl had been through so much, hadn't bitten or gone for anyone, she'd just been grumpy, but the manager stated they couldn't risk her"turning"on her new owner as it was a well known fact that"Alsatians"were known for doing this :-O & no it wasn't years ago it's less than 12 months since !

>The KC, BVA, RCVS and RSPCA should be working closely together with a way forward but and it's an important BUT, responsible pedigree dog breeders should be factored into these deliberations also.

That's fair enough Teri...and from what I've heard, they have'nt pulled out at all; they have suspended plans for next years Crufts.   They want to see a change to prioritise health, welfare and temperament and they will continue to work with the KC behind the scenes.  They are making a stand; nothing more; nothing less. 

So why don't responsible breeders start a thread on here about how they could help them all plan a way forward??

> I don't think it will hurt Crufts at all - however I do think it will hurt those of us who breed, show and judge

Definitely!  I think people who are saying good riddance etc are perhaps not fully appreciating where all this terrible publicity may lead.
There was a further exchange between the BBC presenter and Caroline on Radio 4 pm this evening prior to which several of the messages left on their blog were read out.  All ,but one ambiguous one, was extremely anti pedigree dog and breeders who make huge profits (sic).  The conversation then went on to the Ofcom complaint in the course of which Caroline mentioned that the complaint will be dealt with not on the basis that the KC felt they were misrepresented but if the viewer thought so.
I really think people should wake up to the need to stand with the KC in maintaining their position and that means supporting them in the steps they have already taken and those they plan to.  This would mean not only writing to the BBC but breeders joining the ABS.  If we don't take a more positive approach to supporting them now the RSPCA and Defra may be controlling breeding, probably under legislation and quite probably dog owning as well, because sensibly you can't do the former without the latter.

> They want to see a change to prioritise health, welfare and temperament and they will continue to work with the KC behind the scenes. 

Have you listened to the Radio 4 PM interview involved Mark and Caroline yesterday.  That was clearly not happening any time soon.

>how they could help them all plan a way forward??

Simple, support the KC.

> the RSPCA and the Dogs Trust will almost certainly lose out themselves! Where else are they going to com across so many dog lovers in one place over 4 days, and be able to receive donations, sell goods etc?

I think that is piffling to the massive support these large charities get beyond the world of dog show people.  I don't think we should under estimate the power the RSPCA has or what they might be planning.

Hi Spender

unfortunately 'the stand' these organisations are making will put further pressure on all of us intimately involved in dogdom to defend ourselves - now bearing in mind that MOST of us have nogenuine need to be defensive, that's a pretty damning scenario.  So IM the 'nothing more, nothing less' comment is unfortunately not likely to be the outcome at all - in fact very much the opposite as it appears they are confirming everything exposed by Passionate Productions sensationally biased documentary to be representative of all breeds, all breeders and the preferences of all judges

> So why don't responsible breeders start a thread on here about how they could help them all plan a way forward??

I don't really think a CD thread will carry much clout with any of the appropriate bodies involved in this debacle and hope that, like myself, they will concentrate their efforts in writing directly to the KC, RSPCA and Dogs Trust - although TBH it's the general public that will need to be won around now and I don't personally think that will happen even if both the RSPCA and DT retracted their statements and did support Crufts, DD and the KC in general :(

The public will best remember the remarks relating to Nazis, mutants, £10m spent weekly on health problems, and not least the gasping, wheezing, crippled and fitting specimens that were portrayed as the norm for pedigree breeds coupled with the horrors of the SM affected Cavaliers :(   I know I can't get them out of my head and I know better!

regards, Teri 

> I don't think we should under estimate the power the RSPCA has or what they might be planning.

bang on with that statement Isabel :(  I really fear that this particular can of worms is going to be a lot longer lived than many currently appreciate and that it's extremely short sighted to believe that such a widely acknowledged and respected authority as the RSPCA will not be able to keep the vast majority of the public on side.

the puppy farmers and BYB must be rubbing their hands in glee
i see a load of so called designer mutts appearing on the puppy internet sites
in the long run this will backfire on both the dogs trust and rspca
they will get more so called healthy mutts in rescue and i know of at least 3 people today who have said
they are not leaving any money in their wills to either now but will give it to their breed rescue schemes instead.
i will no longer support shows run to benifit either of them any more
maybe if more people did the same they will get the message
i doubt it tho,
pity they don,t channel their  thoughts on the puppy farmers
today i saw a web site advertising they are   accredited breeder , they have been in the breed little over 18 months
and already have had 2/3 litters plus litter for so called friends
oh and their dogs do not need eye testing because they are healthy.
a fancy web site will fool most novice puppy buyer,
they do not show because they think its rubbish
most people in the breed, test for pra, but they don,t need too
says it all
the kc needs a kick up the backside and need to get their act together

...Rescue shelters in effect, act as enablers for bad breeders ... they can
simply continue to churn out poorly bred dogs knowing full well that shelters
will take care of the results ...and now thanks to Dogs Trust and the RSPCA
they can sit smugly back and tell the gullible public that their dogs are a
much better option that show bred ones ....words fail me !!!

Yvonne

> i know of at least 3 people today who have said
> they are not leaving any money in their wills to either now but will give it to their breed rescue schemes instead.
> i will no longer support shows run to benifit either of them any more
> maybe if more people did the same they will get the message
> i doubt it tho

Again, please don't overestimate how important people with an interest in pedigree dogs are.  For every breeder who has struck the RSPCA off their donation list there will be many more who will be praising their actions over this.  The RSPCA have a great deal of influence and power and we should not underestimate that.

>i saw a web site advertising they are   accredited breeder , they have been in the breed little over 18 months
>and already have had 2/3 litters plus litter for so called friends
>oh and their dogs do not need eye testing because they are healthy.

If you think anyone has broken the terms of their ABS rules then please report them but do remember the KC encourages people to join at the outset of any breeding career in order to encourage and control the breeding carried out.  Eye tests are not a requirement for every breed only if the breed club has deemed it appropriate. Again if that is the case here please report it.  It is down to everyone to ensure the KCs efforts are not undermined or, as you have pointed out, we are handing breeding over to the worst kinds at least until such time as dog breeding may become heavily regulated by legislation and control by other bodies than the KC.

i actually worked for them many moons ago
yes i know their influence and power
i left because of the so called twin set old dears who interfered
not having a flipping clue
as for the so called ABS breeders i would not buy a stuffed dog of them, let alone
a live one,
no the breed involved do not compulsory eye test.
tho most breeders do, pra has been diagnoised
affected and carriers.not just the uk but world wide.
i would never buy of any breeder who did not test,
if tests are there, they should be used
irish setters used tests to clear pra and clad
now all breeding dogs must be teasted clear to register with Kc
irish red and whites are doing the same
the KC need to get their act together and the breed clubs the same

> the breed involved do not compulsory eye test.
> tho most breeders do, pra has been diagnoised
> affected and carriers.not just the uk but world wide.
>

If the breed club request it, the KC will add any test to the requirements for Accredited Breeders. If they don't there's no point in condemning individual breeders, even if 'most' breeders test.

Apparently there will be a representative from the KC on Alan Titchmarsh's show this afternoon  on ITV at 3 to put their side forward.

Dogs Trust have also now pulled out of Crufts.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article4769813.ece

Has anyone looked at Mark Evans website? This is his latest 'news'!

Which bit are we looking at?

Just seems to me that he seems to have an awful lot of other irons in the fire and not a lot of time to be too concerned with the pedigree dog issue ;)

me too
pity he does not stick to cars

seems to me that he seems to have an awful lot of other irons in the fire and not a lot of time to be too concerned with the pedigree dog issue ;-)

I would love the KC, in a public arena to ask the RSPCA why, as the largest animal welfare body, it took a TV programme to alert them to the problems in pedigree dogs, and if they were aware of it before why they spent time effort and money on getting tail docking banned rather than confronting this much more serious problem. 

The undernoted is part of an article on DW's home page

[The PDSA said it would be at Crufts next year but the Blue Cross said it was currently considering whether it would attend and would take a measured desicion in the next few weeks. "As one of the world's biggest dog shows it attracts thousands of animal lovers and we see it as an opportunity to talk about responsible pet care and highlight the many homeless dogs in our care" said a Blue Cross spokesman.
The PDSA said Crufts was an ideal location for its vets and nurses to offer advice and promote vital pet health messages to owners. 
"We aim to ensure that the health and welfare of dogs is the number one priority for all breeders and owners," a spokesman said.

The full article can currently be viewed HERE

Six months ago I went with my brother and sister -in - law to look at a puppy. They thought they had done their homework, spoken to the breeder -KC AB. All the questions they had asked got the correct answers.

They had lost their 2 'old' dogs last year,  and now my brother felt time was right to get another dog.
I don't breed very often but enjoy the 'breed club' and have lots of friends who breed and I'm passionate about my dogs and all dogs. I was really excited at going to see and select a puppy.

I nor they, could believe what we saw - puppy farming at it's worst. We were shown into a nice house / room. The puppy and mother brought in to see us. When I asked to see the papers and health screeing results and questioned the pedigree cert. (This did not look like a 2 year old bitch and she was very sore and scratched.) I was asked to wait in the car. We played dumb - I left but looked around outside and found the kennels. I took a photo on my phone!!
A long story cut short neither the RSPCA or the KC did anything. They were taken in and did nothing. I still fret over those poor dogs.

I am still on the case but the 2 organisations that could have done something did nothing but get taken in.

I'm so angry with the lack of focus on the real issues.

Have just seen Roger Mugford on SKY news talking about the RSPCA and their statements regarding pedigree dogs, the gist of it went a little like this -

Pedigree dogs are no more unhealthy than mongrels, DNA profiling is now helping eradicate some problems (mentioned red setters and eye problems), MOST pedigree dogs will lead a normal active life and there is no evidence that they have a shorter life span then mongrels, mongrels are just as susceptable to so called pedigree ailment (mentioned HD). He was then asked if the RSPCA are talking rubbish and he replied that yes they are and that they are a self serving society only after the publicity.

LJR how awful. just goes goes to show how deceptive it can be. Had you not questioned nor seen the kennels round the back you could well have ended up with a very poorly puppy or a dog with numerous health problems and short life.

WHY was nothing done about it...talk about make my blood boil Well done for keeping on the case. I too would not be able to rest until this had been sorted.
All too often we here about "RSPCA cases" when its too late. i.e rather than getting animals out of horrendous conditions they leave it until the animals are dying or too far gone to be saved and hence euthanised. such a shame.

> Pedigree dogs are no more unhealthy than mongrels, DNA profiling is now helping eradicate some problems (mentioned red setters and eye problems), MOST pedigree dogs will lead a normal active life and there is no evidence that they have a shorter life span then mongrels, mongrels are just as susceptable to so called pedigree ailment (mentioned HD). He was then asked if the RSPCA are talking rubbish and he replied that yes they are and that they are a self serving society only after the publicity.

Hooray that man!!

M.

Pity it was on Sky News - but it's a start!  Methinks Roger Mugford should be fronting the KC - plus I'm still heavily leaning towards a pro PR team being the best bet here :)

Good to read something positive for a change

> Have just seen Roger Mugford on SKY news talking about the RSPCA and their statements regarding pedigree dogs, the gist of it went a little like this -
>
> Pedigree dogs are no more unhealthy than mongrels, DNA profiling is now helping eradicate some problems (mentioned red setters and eye problems), MOST pedigree dogs will lead a normal active life and there is no evidence that they have a shorter life span then mongrels, mongrels are just as susceptable to so called pedigree ailment (mentioned HD). He was then asked if the RSPCA are talking rubbish and he replied that yes they are and that they are a self serving society only after the publicity.

hurrah!

Pro PR is a must as far as I'm concerned, am sick of putting the plus' forward on the reptile forum I'm a member of, funny how they condeme us show folk but are happy to buy cute little shitz x chi puppies without test certificates inherited diseases or that they're not worried about the inbreeding going on in pythons, corns,  or beardeds causing neurlogical disorders ie they EXPECT a spider morph royal python to have a wobbling head!

I've listed these on one the RSPCA article via the link provided above where they have a section 'have your say' not sure if they check them before listing but mines not up as yet!
http://the-shg.org/campaign.htm
http://cheetah.webtribe.net/~animadversion/
http://the-shg.org/SHGPressReleases.htm

I have my own feelings about the RSPCA but they are there to fight cruelty so I would want to know a lot more about the people involved before adding support to anyones campaign.

WHY was nothing done about it...talk about make my blood boil

Same feelings here. I thought the reasons for the AB was to make for better bred puppies, and any complaints would be investigated, not ignored. And i thought the RSPCA took action against puppy farming. :(

>and any complaints would be investigated, not ignored

I believe it was investigated

>They were taken in and did nothing.

Some bitches can look pretty poor after nursing a litter, for instance puppies can make them sore or they can suffer mastitis in the carefullest of hands.  Perhaps she had improved or she was receiving veterinary attention. 

A long story cut short neither the RSPCA or the KC did anything. They were taken in and did nothing. I still fret over those poor dogs.

I am still on the case but the 2 organisations that could have done something did nothing but get taken in.

I believe it was investigated

from the post mentioned, what gives you to believe it was investigated? The poster is carrying on with this herself, and good on her.

Perhaps she had improved or she was receiving veterinary attention.
if a complaint is followed through, this could be ascertained. And she could receive advice on how best to care for her bitch if it requires attention.

Isn't it suspicious that, because someone asks the relevant questions, they are asked to leave the house and wait outside? Does this sound like the actions of a responsible AB? or the actions of any responsible breeder, don't they welcome questions and be ready with the answers, paperwork etc? If not, wouldn't you wonder what they had to hide?
Thats as may be or not, but surely it should be investigated 

I've quoted that bit that I felt indicated it was investigated.

>Isn't it suspicious that, because someone asks the relevant questions, they are asked to leave the house and wait outside?

I have no idea what went on because I was not there but accredited or not I know I would ask anyone to leave my house who I thought was disrespectful, rude and certainly if I felt they were being aggressive.  And before you start on about judging anyone remember we are being asked to judge this breeder on the same basis of a story on a message board.

Ok, on re reading can see what you mean, but to what depth they investigated only the poster will know, and she said she was keeping a long story short. The kennels could have left much to be desired full of different breeds (or not, as the case may be) BUT I still feel the breeder is suspicious due to her actions. But then, it seems anyone can use the AB scheme to make themselves sound better, and this seems to be the case here. Such a shame, hope the poster gets some action.

You edited whilst I was replying. I was commenting on the post, and I would still say that it is suspicious to be asked to leave simply because you request to see the relevant paperwork.

And before you start on about judging anyone remember we are being asked to judge this breeder on the same basis of a story on a message board.

How odd you say this when those who breed crossbreeds/alleged byb and PF are being judged almost every day ****confused**** As are the RSPCA, KC etc etc....all personal opinions, made from various posts

Isabel: If you put yourself in the OP's shoes would you not think it was dodgy?!
I know to give benefit of the doubt but this "breeder" the OP visited has suspicious written all over it.

To the OP: How is the investigation going? Have you heard anything back?

> but to what depth they investigated only the poster will know

and the KC and the RSPCA.

>and this seems to be the case here.

..but we don't know

> I would still say that it is suspicious to be asked to leave simply because you request to see the relevant paperwork.

I would agree if that was simply the case but as I said, we don't know what reason the breeder had.

> How odd you say this when those who breed crossbreeds/alleged byb and PF are being judged almost every day

It's quite straight forward.  Any of us can judge these activities to be unacceptable but whether they apply to a particular case requires actual knowledge of the situation.

> If you put yourself in the OP's shoes

I would need to put myself in the shoes of everyone there to know what went on wouldn't I? :-)

I didnt ask what went on, i asked if you were in the OPs shoes would you think it was dodgy? I would certianly question being asked to wait outside then discovering that.

It's quite straight forward.  Any of us can judge these activities to be unacceptable but whether they apply to a particular case requires actual knowledge of the situation.

Legally, to take action, yes of course. To voice an opinion on if it seemed odd, or not the actions of a good breeder....the personal opinion of the post is being given, and anyone can do that, is that not what these advice forums are for? The breeder/breed/area/ is not disclosed, so no harm can come there. How many times when someone says they are having problems with a puppy are they asked about where it came from, and the suitability of the breeder? How many times have people been told they did not research their breeder in the correct places, or research the breed. All this is personal opinion, with no actual knowledge of the situation. Without opinions on things asked, with no more knowledge of the situation other than the posters question, and resulting discussion, there would be no exchange of information.

> I didnt ask what went on

Perhaps not but without that I don't really have an opinion on whether they sound dodgy. I can't see the point.

> the personal opinion of the post is being given, and anyone can do that

They certainly can and but we were not there and few stories are told completely by one narrator as I am sure you will agree.

Well, if that is the case (and of course I agree that there are many sides to any incident, even if 4 people were to witness an incident they could give slightly differing accounts, all of which would be correct because its how they viewed it) I can see little point in discussing most things, because we only ever have one side of a story.

> I would ask anyone to leave my house who I thought was disrespectful, rude and certainly if I felt they were being aggressive

asking to see relevent paperwork is disrespectful, rude and aggressive?? can't say i'd find it so... what on earth makes you say that about the poster?

> asking to see relevent paperwork is disrespectful, rude and aggressive??

Of course not.

>what on earth makes you say that about the poster?

I didn't.  I said the posibility existed and I could not know what went on there.

> asking to see relevent paperwork is disrespectful, rude and aggressive??
> Of course not.
>
>> what on earth makes you say that about the poster?
> I didn't.  I said the posibility existed and I could not know what went on there

isabel you don't ususally have issue giving your opinion without having a full and catagorical account of a situation (as we all do, the nature of the medium makes it imposible to do otherwise as calmstorm has said), whats different this time?

of course a different possibility exhists, we live in a world of infinate possibility, but we can only comment on the info given. if faced with what the poster describes i would be suspicious- being asked to leave when you request paperwork for an apparently ABS breeder would get the alarms well and truely ringing.

Have you read all the thread.  The poster is perfectly entitled to post their opinion and I have commented on the information given.

>being asked to leave when you request paperwork for an apparently ABS breeder would get the alarms well and truely ringing

Yes, it would if it happened to me just as it says my point is we don't quite know that.