> Not sure if it's because of 'that' programme

The financial climate may have a lot to do with it.

> The financial climate may have a lot to do with it.

Exactly.

Very few people are buying a new car either and I dont think even Ms Harrison would claim to have influenced that.

Why on earth would someone spend a huge amount of time to train a dog to roll around screaming as if it was in agony , And exactly how would you train a dog to do that ?

As far as I am aware the tricolour shown was put to sleep long before the documentry was filmed. 

>As far as I am aware the tricolour shown was put to sleep long before the documentry was filmed.

I think you mean 'long before the documentary was broadcast' ... ;-)

Actually, no. The tricolour cav was filmed by his owner and the dog was put to sleep some time before the documentary. It is archive footage - filmed because his owner was desperate to highlight the plight of dogs suffering like him.

Jemima

So jemima,
Can you please answer all the other questions directed at you on here since the program was broadcast??????
If you dont know where to look we can give you the links of them all :) :) :)
Lea :) :)

Yes it would be interesting to know whether the Boxer & Cavalier were bred by pet breeders, BYB, puppy farmers or a show/working breeder. Nothing was mentioned on the program if I remember right.

Also can you tell me why the very young GSD shown with the typical puppy lack of firmness wasn't identified as being shown @ Manchester Ch Sh & not being the World Sieger Zamp nor Champion Ice @ Crufts(with a totally different judge) ? 

Ah Jemima, good to see you back! Would you please explain why it wasn't pointed out that any dog, of any breeding, can suffer from epilepsy; that it's not limited to pedigree dogs? And why you didn't explain how easy it is for breeders to test their breeding stock to try to eliminate health problems, rather than giving the public the impression that randomly-bred dogs are the only healthy ones? Because, believe me, that's what the programme's done, and has been a marvellous boost for the puppy farmers.

getting off subject i have just been on jh's website and saw the following
''ARE ALL OUR DOGS SPAYED/NEUTERED?

This is a controversial issue, but the short answer is: no. The dogs that come from Irish rescues are often neutered as it is part of their policy. But the latest scientific evidence suggests that young dogs, especially, need their sex hormones to help them physically develop normally.  It is also increasingly thought that neutering does NOT help with many behavioral problems. 

And so we do not routinely spay/neuter. You are, of course, completely free to spay/neuter a dog after adoption if it is your preference.''

seems like you are taking in dogs and homing them where they could easily get pregnant again but then as you put it is the new owners preference and you are doing your best for the dog world i think not.

I think that's responsible to be honest -LOTS of good reasons for not neutering before 18 months to 2 years. If they can't trust the new owners to not cause puppies to be born they wouldn't be very good new owners, would they?

Please keep this thread on topic - Jemima Harrison's rescue policies have nothing to do with the subject matter of this particular thread.

Thanks

The boxer is actually the progeny of a full-sib mating - something we didn't mention because it didn't seem partic relevant. Think a pet line but the point we were making was as much in general about pedigree dogs as it was about show breeders.  The cavalier was descended from UK showlines. The cavalier that won at the Malvern Show, of course, was of course owned by a show breeder and, against the veterinary guidelines/breeding protocols endorsed by the CKCSC he has sired at least two more litters since then. Still no censure of this breeder, either - whereas the Club has chucked Margaret Carter off their health committee for speaking out about the problems.

Then there was that very exaggerated basset hound that won at Southern Counties.  And the over-angulated GSD that won at Manchester. As for excusing the young GSD with wobbly hocks... words fail me. That dog was a total travesty. And if you have another look at the film (and it's still widely available on YouTube and elsewhere) you'll see that we did indeed distinguish between Manchester Ch Sh and Crufts.

Was very pleased, incidentally, to see this from the GS breed council.

http://www.gsdbreedcouncil.co.uk/page.php?page_ID=19

Jemima

> Think a pet line but the point we were making was as much in general about pedigree dogs as it was about show breeders.

Well, what a shame no effort was made to get that point across.  Were you really so naive as not to consider that the impact could have been to drive puppy purchasers away from show breeders, who in the majority do breed responsibly from health screened stock, en mass to the arms of puppy farmers and BYBs?

It is, indeed, possible for any dog of any breed to suffer from epilepsy. But in some breeds it is very prevalent - the Belgian Teuveran, Finnish Spitz and Australian Shepherd spring to mind. The boxer was used generically to show how terrible this condition is and how badly it needs to be tackled.

There is no test for epilepsy (well, except for Laforas in miniature dachshunds - a test incidentally that has had little, or even nil, take-up by breeders) so the only way to tackle it is for proper openness and transparency and an effort to breed away from badly-affected lines.

I'm all for health-testing, of course, where available. The problem we found was that too often breeders were not availing themselves of the test and with the KC loathe to make health testing mandatory, too many dogs are born from untested parents.

As for the programme being a boost to puppy-farmers... I have yet to see any proof of this. Much more likely, I think, that people would choose to buy a crossbreed instead - or get a rescue dog. 

Jemima

out of interest jemima if you would like to see people taking on rescue dogs or crosses why do you own a breed?

Think a pet line but the point we were making was as much in general about pedigree dogs as it was about show breeders.

Shame you failed to mention that in your programme, it was ALL about people who breed show dogs you never featured a pet breeder or puppy farmer, they are part of the problem and you never mentioned them!

>There is no test for epilepsy

No, because epileptic fits can be triggered in any dog, under certain circumstances. The only difference between 'epileptic' and 'non-epileptic' dogs is the trigger level.

>The boxer was used generically to show how terrible this condition is and how badly it needs to be tackled.

This was not made clear. I work at a vet, and clients mentioned to me the 'terrible fact that boxers have epilepsy' - no mention that it's found in dogs of all breeding.

>I'm all for health-testing, of course, where available. The problem we found was that too often breeders were not availing themselves of the test and with the KC loathe to make health testing mandatory, too many dogs are born from untested parents.

What a shame you didn't make that clear in the programme. What a lost opportunity to promote health testing.

>As for the programme being a boost to puppy-farmers... I have yet to see any proof of this. Much more likely, I think, that people would choose to buy a crossbreed instead - or get a rescue dog. 

Did you not see the ads on that well-known puppy-sales website, where vendors used the phrase "Not KC registered so guaranteed healthy" for their pet-bred purebred and crossbred litters, in the days immediately following the programme?

> think, that people would choose to buy a crossbreed instead - or get a rescue dog. 

and if they choose one whose parent carries this disease they may also be afflicted.  Would it not have been better to simply stress the need to buy from reputable breeders who not only health screen but have awareness of the general health of their lines?  The KC are not able to ensure unregistered dogs are untested, so pointless to blame it all on them.  The have however created the ABS which does require screening to be carried out and had plenty more in the pipeline. Why was this aspect so neglected?  The perfect moment to steer people to a better breeder.

Only a few weeks after the programme someone was advertising my breed as health guarenteed but will not be KC Registered because they did not believe that dogs should be shown. On doing some research on this person I discovered not only they breed 20 other breeds on their farm (so many breeds can only be a puppy farmer) they also used to show dogs!!!

> The boxer is actually the progeny of a full-sib mating - something we didn't mention because it didn't seem partic relevant. Think a pet line but the point we were making was as much in general about pedigree dogs as it was about show breeders.

That is totally disgraceful,

> The cavalier was descended from UK showlines.

That isn't the question I asked was the dog bred by a show breeder ??

As for the GSD is was not over angulated it was a 6 month old very immature dog(it you want to see over angulated dogs go to the Alsatian site, but that is OT). I've seen the dog in question since & he's now a sound moving dog

So I expect you to publish the fact that the Boxer wasn't bred by a Show Breeder & also to come clean about why you intimated that it was typical of the show bred pedigree dogs

Actually, re epilepsy, the commentary said: "Boxers suffer from several life-threatening health issues - including heart disease and a very high rate of cancer, especially brain tumours. ...In common with many other breeds, they can also suffer from epilepsy... and behind closed doors, hundreds of owners are struggling to cope with this most distressing of conditions.. " Then at the end of the sequence it said: "There are no official figures to say how many boxers suffer from epilepsy. But in some breeds it is 20 times the rate found in humans."
  
Re health tests, the point we felt needed to be made is that health tests alone are not enough and that some breeders were ignoring the results. Breeders need to act on the results - like, for instance, not breeding from a dog with syringomyelia. Additionally, too many breeders do NOT avail themselves of available health tests.

I have kept an occasional eye on epupz (keep praying that I'll see an ad for cavaliers where it mentions that both parents are heart-clear and have been MRI scanned... but perhaps those breeders don't need to advertise). Didn't see the ads you meniton (although happy to accept they existed).

Jemima

again i would be interested to hear your answers to two questions that you must have not noticed before, namely:

"what are your thoughts on the programme & the aftermath? Did you achive the goals you set out? And why did your programme seem so negative to the exhibtors of pedigree dogs? You tared us all with one brush."

and

"Why did she feel the need to insult living relatives of the 20,000,000 plus people who died at the hands of the Nazis in Concentration Camps ?" (please be aware this question was originally posed by a jewish dog breeder)

as others have mentioned there has been a dramatic increase in such adverts as 'not kc registered, guarenteed healthy!" and such since the release of the show. i presume you are a dog lover as you have flatcoats, as such i imagine you are rather cut up about the astonishing pain your program will have caused the dogs held in appaling conditions by puppyfarmers cashing in on your shows misconceived ideas.

i do hope you manage to cope with the grief.

oh, and btw, one of the posters on this board was also verbally assaulted following your program for owning a perfectly healthy Briard. When she was at the park. With her child. Perhaps an apology is in order? i imagine you'd find her if you search.

> "Boxers suffer from several life-threatening health issues - including heart disease and a very high rate of cancer, especially brain tumours. ...In common with many other breeds, they can also suffer from epilepsy... and behind closed doors, hundreds of owners are struggling to cope with this most distressing of conditions.. "

do they all??? goodness, how on earth have they all survived so long??

i think your missing a 'can' or a 'some' from that sentence.

and no, those cav breeders don't have to advertise. their pups are begged and pleaded for.

quote

As for the programme being a boost to puppy-farmers... I have yet to see any proof of this. Much more likely, I think, that people would choose to buy a crossbreed instead - or get a rescue dog.

yes the programme has given puppy farmers a huge boost
in one of my breeds,a toy breed
the are crossing it with anything from shar pies to boxers
advertising them as rare breeds and selling them for a lot more than the pedigree dogs
and stated healthy cos they are not pedigree
look on the well known puppy internet sites and see just how many cross breeds are being bred
this programme has made the crossbreeds seem very healthy and will be the result of many so called designer dogs being bred
pity you did not tackle the BYB and puppy farmers

Jemima - you have done "us" - the responsible and caring breeders, who make use of the health tests available, who contribute our dogs' DNA to ongoing research, and only go ahead with matings after a great deal of research - a huge dis-service.  I really wish that you had made some effort to distinguish between ethical and non-ethical breeders, that you'd guided people towards doing some research on their chosen breed and using the breed clubs. 

And you are right - most of us who are ethical have such a good reputation within our breeds that we don't need to advertise.

> Jemima - you have done "us" - the responsible and caring breeders, who make use of the health tests available, who contribute our dogs' DNA to ongoing research, and only go ahead with matings after a great deal of research - a huge dis-service.  I really wish that you had made some effort to distinguish between ethical and non-ethical breeders, that you'd guided people towards doing some research on their chosen breed and using the breed clubs. 
>
> And you are right - most of us who are ethical have such a good reputation within our breeds that we don't need to advertise.

absolutely. an effort could have been made to educate (for surely thats the point of a documentry?) the public in what to look for when buying a dog, to demonstraight the need for health testing with these poor animals, and showcase breeders to tick all the good boxes- they are not that hard to find! plenty right here!

instead this farce has driven the public to support an evil industry.

astarte - and i would like to add to this that several times i have been verbally attacked for owning a rhodesian ridgeback. once in the butchers whilst getting a bone i was informed that i had a "mismarked dog" and should be ashamed of myself, better to have a ridgeless one which is healthier (?) and once in the street by a woman who informed me it was disgraceful that ALL RR breeders cull ridgeless puppies, when i tried to inform her that not all do, i was told, ah, but i saw it on a programme....

i only knew of this one instance but to be honest if i was responsible for people receiving this kind of abuse (and i am sorry to hear you've been treated that was :() as well as championing the deplorable puppyfarming trade then i would be issuing a public apology and a retraction.

oh, and the nazi thing...

You haven't directly answered any of the criticisms Jemima. Do you honestly think its better for people to buy an unregistered puppy from a backyard breeder than a KC registered one from a caring breeder that does health tests? Because that's the impression Joe Public got from your programme. I haven't even got KC dogs (but my Patterdales are 'pure-bred' and do have pedigrees - and one is from a grandfather to granddaughter mating, but I suppose thats alright because they haven't got KC papers?) but even I am angry about your programme, because I have friends who ARE pedigree breeders. They spend hundreds of pounds on health testing their dogs before they breed a litter, but you didn't mention people like them.

If you haven't seen adverts that say the dogs are healthier because they arent KC registered then you can't have looked very hard.

Oh, and the Nazi thing...........

The Nazi thing. By a Jewish writer:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OTYyM2Y4YzEyNDJmYWIzNjNmYjE0M2NlY2MzYzlkMDA=

Jemima

> The Nazi thing.

Yes, but why did you give credence to such a wacky view when you had already chronologed the interest in pedigree breeds to the Victorians?  Are breeders of pedigree farm animals also Nazis I wonder?
Animals are not humans.  Are we to allow every dog to mate on the streets with who it wishes to avoid accusations of eugenics? 

"Do you honestly think its better for people to buy an unregistered puppy from a backyard breeder than a KC registered one from a caring breeder that does health tests? Because that's the impression Joe Public got from your programme."

I am Joe Public, and this was definately not the impression that I got from the program.  I saw nothing in it shocking, and nothing in it that conscientious breeders should be worried over.  Reading the reaction of breeders on forums days following, I asked my sister (who shows Papillons) and father, who is another Joe Public, and neither got this impression either.

Here's one advert I found instantly -the pic shows a VERY untypical dog, more like a different breed, and the ad itself does lie -the KC do NOT charge £25 for registrations. And if it really was true that these people have never had a genetic problem in cavaliers in 15 years, then I think every single Cavalier breeder would want their dogs -regardless of how poor specimens the dogs are of the breed in looks.

Both the parents can be seen. Our policy is to breed puppies that are typical of the breed, healthy and most of all happy. We do not show our dogs!!! They are happier running around the garden getting dirty! We have bred this family of Cavaliers for the last 15 years and have no history of genetic problems. All puppies will come with 6 weeks free insurance, 5 Generation Pedigree and information pack. If you would like your puppy Kennel Club registered, we add a small charge of £25 (which is what we get charged by the Kennel Club) for doing so.

Well that's one of the most badly written and ill thought out pieces of journalism I've come across.

It's always worth pointing out -- because it's so embarrassing for feminists -- that Margaret Sanger, the feminist icon and founder of Planned Parenthood, was a repugnant eugenicist and racist who championed sweeping sterilization laws. She called for the elimination of "weeds . . . overrunning the human garden" and for the segregation of "morons, misfits, and the maladjusted." Her magazine warned of "The Rising Tide of Color Against White World-Supremacy" and published such declarations as: "[W]e must resolutely oppose both Asiatic permeation of white race-areas and Asiatic inundation of those non-white, but equally non-Asiatic regions inhabited by the really inferior races."

So is your next programme going to be about the evils of feminism?

>As for the GSD is was not over angulated, it was a 6 month old very immature dog.

It's a well known fact that over angulation is a current problem in West German Showlines.  Even breeders and judges are admitting that openly themselves.  Kennel blindness and denial does not do the breed any favours at all.

Let me turn this round. Do you approve of the tougher line now being taken by the KC? Would you like to see mandatory testing introduced and some limits on inbreeding... perhaps some greater awareness of the importance of genetic diversity.. some limits, maybe, on the amount of times a top-winning dog can be used.. particularly if they have not passed breed-specific health tests...  less emphasis on looks and more on health?

This is what we were fighting for with PDE. I would like to be able to buy a flatcoat puppy and not have to fear that it has a 50/50 chance of developing a tumour by the age of seven/eight. I would like those show breeders I met at the BMD ring to not tell me "You have to love them as much as you can because we dont have them for long". I do not ever want to see another shar-pei on a can of iron-easy spray. I do not want a Crufts Champion to have had to have a soft-palate resection in order for it to be able to breathe. I do not want a KC show secretary (and no prizes for guessing for who might be stupid enough to say this) to tell me that it is all right for another Crufts winner to be blind because it is a beautiful dog and, after all, Stephen Hawking an barely lift a finger. And I do not want to have to look at these pictures:

**Mod Edit: sorry no links to breeders' websites allowed**

I have always maintained that those who do the right thing should have nothing to fear from the film.. that it should provide the impetus for them to go back to their breed clubs and fight for a change of emphasis in the way dogs are bred.. for transparency, for an awareness of the perils of inbreeding, of clinging to purity at all costs. Whatever the strength of feeling here (and of course I hear the anguish and I really do understand why some are so upset), we have had dozens of emails from breeders (and even several judges) who have thanked us and believe, as I do, that at the end of the day it will be a powerful force for change.

Jemima

> It's a well known fact that over angulation is a current problem in West German Showlines

& the best of breed at Crufts had this ?? Of course the English GSD(Alsatian)doesn't have any problems ? & are all fit for purpose ?

> Do you approve of the tougher line now being taken by the KC?

I think that is very unfair. You make it sound as though all that has followed is down to you.  All that has followed was already in the pipeline.

Not the point Isabel. Eugenics, as based on aesthetics and the notion of purity,  is a flawed and failed philosophy. Most of the meat you eat is crossbred/hybrid because the stock is healthier/more vigorous and the yield is greater. There's now a concerted effort to keep inbreeding co-efficients low - and breed conservation plans for many breeds with effective population sizes greater than some dog breeds.

The link between dog-breeding and eugenics is well-established in academic circles (after all, it was Professor James Serpell and Prof Steve Jones who brought it up in the film) See also:

http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2006/05/inbred-thinking.html

Animals are not humans. But we have a special duty to dogs as our relationship with them is totally unique. 

Jemima

I find that totally muddled. You cannot apply human philosophies to animals.  If you are saying we have no business controlling the breeding of animals you may as well say they can mate with who ever they meet in the street.  It's utter nonsense and just how responsible would it be?

>& the best of breed at Crufts had this ?? Of course the English GSD(Alsatian)doesn't have any problems ? & are all fit for purpose ?

What has the English Alsatianist got to do with it?  We are talking about West German Snowline dogs as shown. Comparing against the 'Alsatians' does not make the unacceptable acceptable and does a disservice to those breeders who are striving to improve the breed.  To improve, one has to admit that faults exist in the first place.

This is not true. Some of the changes were in the pipeline but by no means all. 

Jemima

Why did you give no credit to the ones that were then?

> Let me turn this round. Do you approve of the tougher line now being taken by the KC? Would you like to see mandatory testing introduced and some limits on inbreeding... perhaps some greater awareness of the importance of genetic diversity.. some limits, maybe, on the amount of times a top-winning dog can be used.. particularly if they have not passed breed-specific health tests...  less emphasis on looks and more on health?

In Germany this IS the case now with GSDs. They must be health tested, DNA profiled, pass working tests, top dogs are only allowed a set number of bitches per year & they also have to pass a breed survey before they can be bred from & the puppies registered(& in Germany unregistered GSDs do not sell). the very dog(ZAMP)that your program intimated was unfit has in fact fulfilled all the health, character & fitness you want-yet your program made him out to be anything but "fit for purpose"

Why not a small mention of the amount of testing done in some breeds that have pioneered the way forward with health testing ?? Like the Irish Red & White Setter breeder whose contribution ended up on your cutting room floor. Not such an expose as the pet bred Boxer(that you see no reason in mentioning)I presume. Border Collie breeders are very aware of all the health testing that needs to be done, ie DNA testing, clinical testing etc etc & you will rarely see a Show BC breeder who does not do all the testing-yet people still buy unregistered BC puppies bred from pet dogs, because they only want a "pet".

I've spent nearly £1,000 on DNA testing & one set of hip X rays & I now face more expense & more testing as my bitch whilst DNA Normal has a poor hip score(not that anyone can notice BTW)

I've been told personally that all my dogs must be sick because they are KC registered(even my ISDS BC who I registered with the KC)& that their dog is better because it is from unregistered parents because all KC dogs are inbred & sick !

> I find that totally muddled. You cannot apply human philosophies to animals.  If you are saying we have no business controlling the breeding of animals you may as well say they can mate with who ever they meet in the street.  It's utter nonsense and just how responsible would it be?

It was the other way round - Hitler borrowed his ideas from dog breeders. But eugenics isn't just morally flawed - it is scientifically flawed - and hence why I think kennel clubs and breeders should be re-evaluating the way dogs are bred - as indeed, livestock breeders already have.

The challenge I believe is the preservation of beautiful, healthy dog breeds for the future.

Jemima

> See also:
>
> [url=http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2006/05/inbred-thinking.html" rel=nofollow]http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2006/05/inbred-thinking.html[/url]
>

Well, now I am on familiar ground - I may not be too au fait with all that's going on in the KC world, but I do know my terriers - and Terrierman is the most biased, ill-informed, bigoted commentator that you could cite.

If he is one of your 'authorities' Jemima, then we really cant take you seriously.

"I have always maintained that those who do the right thing should have nothing to fear from the film..  Jemima"

But you maintaining your belief doesn't actually make it true, Jemima.  I refer you to my earlier post.  You have done "us" responsible breeders a great dis-service by not taking the opportunity to point out that there are responsible breeders out there who care a great deal about the health and wellbeing of their puppies.  I keep in touch with all of my puppy buyers (bar the odd one moving and forgetting to tell me!) and know the health status of the dogs that I breed for the entirety of their lives.  You didn't mention "us" - a missed opportunity

Jemina, you say

"It is, indeed, possible for any dog of any breed to suffer from epilepsy. But in some breeds it is very prevalent - the Belgian Teuveran, Finnish Spitz and Australian Shepherd spring to mind. ...................."

"There is no test for epilepsy ....................... so the only way to tackle it is for proper openness and transparency and an effort to breed away from badly-affected lines. "

There is a gene test for epilepsy - see is http://www.lagottoromagnolo.fi/epilepsy.htm.

Epilepsy was a recognised problem with Australian shepherds since the first imports, and steps taken over here to eradicate epileptic dogs from the gene pool have been in place for many years.   I suggest you research C A Sharp - and also http://www.ashgi.org.

>Eugenics, as based on aesthetics and the notion of purity

'Eugenics' by definition, is simply a technical-sounding name for 'selective breeding'. Selective breeding for health (by not allowing unhealthy animals to reproduce) is as much 'eugenics' as selectively breeding for working ability, or appearance, or temperament, or whatever.

> It was the other way round - Hitler borrowed his ideas from dog breeders.

So, now we are responsible for the Nazis :-D
Actually I was not as outraged by the Nazi slur as others as when it popped up incongruously in your programme I did feel that, at least the intelligent viewer, would then take all else with a pinch of salt :-). 
I am curious to know though, as someone who chose a pedigree dog herself, do you feel akin to the Nazis?