>Crufts new tagline might be all about "happy, healthy dogs" but don't be fooled. The Kennel Club is the route of the suffering, the Pedigree Dogs Exposed BBC programme and the two subsequent studies in to breeding of dogs have made this very clear. And I'm pretty sure none of the dogs even noticed us, not with the bright lights, clapping and voice over from the commentator.<

I've been reading this and really trying to see your point of view.  This last post has just made it impossible for me to take you seriously.  How on earth can KC be the root of the suffering?  Yes, they hold the breed standards but are informed by the breeders and judges.  They have, along with many breed clubs, organised and encouraged health testing. 
I don't like the extreme exaggeration in some breeds and possibly the BBC programme may help influence breeders to reduce these.  Who do you think these breeders will be?  Certainly not the BYB and puppy farmers.  The dedicated breeders who care passionately about their breeds will. 

What were the two subsequent studies? Who were they carried out by? What were the results? How was their validity checked..?

Being "pretty sure none of the dogs even noticed us.." that's not showing any forethought into the effects of your actions on the dogs.

So in future you'll be protesting outside the puppy supermarket in Manchester, or in Harrods' pet department, or any of the commercial breeders' premises, or on the sink estates where the chavs breed their endless staffie crosses to make them look tough, which is where the real problems are, and where you can make a real difference.

Excellent point. I'd like to know why posters like this come down on the good and responsible breeders who do their utmost to produce healthy pups to breed standard with a lifelong care plan for the puppy owners from training to behaviour and often care for their pups if the owner is sick or having problems or a weekend away along with everything else we offer, who are there for their pups from the minute they are conceived to the minute they pass over, who also put time and effort into careful vetting, why should breeders like this stand aside and stop breeding?

Why should the general public have others forcing their opinions on them to take on the rescue dogs, the mistakes and thoughtless breeding of others, why is this the fault of good breeders?

Quite simply it isn't!!!! Nor should it be, it should not be an issue forced on the general public or the good breeder, by all means take banners and stand outside the homes of puppy farmers, BYB who don't know the front end from the back end and pet shops etc, these are the problem and always will be, the responsible breeder is the cure, and the breeder that all dog owners should always be entitled to, happily get rid of the rest and the rescues will have hardly any dogs in them.

No pounds. I suggest that you go and try and close down the dogs4us pet supermarket in Manchester (Leeds and Bramley too). They sell puppies in the store and you never see them with the Mother like you should do. Please use your efforts to shut places like this down. If you google it you will find it. They even advertise that they sell puppies in store on their home page.

I went to our local RSPCA to get a new dog and was told that I was not allowed to adopt for two reasons. First of all because I had an intact bitch (which although I explained that she was shown was greeted with an unimpressed 'ppffft' and being told that I could 'get away with spaying her and no one would notice') and secondly because my partners job meant that we have to move around the country every two to five years. It didn't matter to them that I could guarantee that we would be living in a large house with a large and secure garden wherever we would move to. Also, my bitch got on fabulously with the dog I wished to adopt and he was certainly not desirable to others since he was missing his ear and a recently repaired jaw (he was a cruelty case). It broke my heart knowing that he was probably destroyed having been decribed as a 'sticky dog' and he didn't have any other interest. I can only get a rescue dog if both my dogs die, and if I chose not to have any children, not to have more than a part time job, not to move house, not to have any other pets etc. It's no wonder that many dog lovers such as myself have become disillusioned with rescue centres, and I am very glad that I went and purchased a puppy from a responsible breeder who has kept in touch with me these past 4 years that I have had my boy. However, if rescue centres were to become more reasonable then I would be more than happy to adopt.

I feel this is going around in a circle.

I feel that I am in a good position to judge the problem of stray dogs as I run a rescue for a long time now. And on the danger of repeating myself: there are several sources where these dogs come from:

-puppy mills i.e. subsequently sold via pet *supermarkets*,
-BYB's,
-irresponsible ownership,
-the *oh she is so cute, let her have one litter* brigade,
-the greyhound industry and I include the lurcher *branch* in that as well,
-the scumbags who breed bull breed as a penis extention,
-and to a small percentage IKC breeders who don't give a damn once the pup has been sold

In my case as I live rural, you also have the sheepdog/cattledog "breeder" who dumps the pups if they don't work.

And as usual I am amazed at words like *exposed*, the BBC did not re-invent the wheel, it was clear to see to those who CARED that some breeds are only a carricature of their former selves.

So to some of us that program was old news indeed it would have been welcomed if it had been in a less sensationalised manner.

Protesting at dog shows such as Crufts has nothing to do with raising the plight of the poor dogs with the public, it is rather the need to be in the limelight that is driving it.

It reminds me of those misguided idiots who released AMERICAN mink and racoons from european fur farms with no regard or knowledge of the impact it had on the natural environment.

LouLou22 - not all rescues have stringent rules like that. I have rehomed a dog to a member of this board who shows and breeds Staffies. My dog was neutered and she has a great life there, so case closed. I am sure there are more rescues out there than just the RSPCA who would have gladly rehomed a dog to you.

I think Otterhound has summed up this debate very well the points she draws to attention are pretty much the way things are not only in Ireland but in the UK as well.

There is no point in continuing around in circles on this. Perhaps next year nopounds you will come on here and ask the breeders if you can meet them at Crufts and let them talk to you show you around the show and explain what the KC actually does do. By the way did you know OfCom found that the programme was unfair to the Kennel Club?

> Their ask of the government is mandatory micro-chipping so sick dogs can be traced back to their breeder (will puppy farm owners do this though?). They are also investigating compulsory registration of breeders. I'm just not convinced by this.

I personally prefer to have my puppies ear tattooed, (every pup I have ever bred has been done)as the Dog Tattoo register will keep my details permanently on record should any dog I have bred be picked up and the owners not traced etc.  Also there is always the risk that an owner will not contact the breeder,and a dog gets into the rescue system.  I have my pups permanently identified as I want to be traced, of course it is the last thing the BYB or PF wants.

In fact a friend of mine who has moved about a lot in the last five years was contacted recently by them to say a dog she had bred was in Bristol Dogs home, had been there for a few months, but no-one had bothered contacting them.

She was immediately able to contact his owner (he had not kept his details up to date), and in fact had lost the dog and been contacting the dogs home about his Border collie, but they didn't realise that is what he was as he was a half white faced Blue merle.

I do suggest owners also chip their dogs, but the chip companies do not keep old details and are not run by dog people like the tattoo registry, and make no extra effort if the address they hold is out of date.

In fact one case I have heard of the phone number was out of date, address still current, yet no effort was made to write to the owner..

Nopounds,
Apart from banning all dog breeding, have you any thoughts on how you would tackle the issue? It would need to be a comprehensive solution since there are many elements which need serious attention and many which only need tweaking. Having asked us for our views could we have yours?

Nopounds - I think, like everyone else in this country you are entitled to free speech and a peaceful demonstration. I too despair (working voluntarily for a local rescue) of the overall situation.  I think this board will not respond favourably to you, as they are primarily a 'breeders' website!  There is no doubt that pedigree dogs 'exaggeration of form' has been led by dog showing, and has been allowed to go unchecked. Pedigree Dogs Exposed came IMO at the right time, and finally focussed the public on breeding fads and fashions, that were and are still impacting on health.  Many, many breeders should not be tarred with the same brush, but unfortunately get caught up in it, often because they so vocally dismiss the concerns raised. Some breeds are working with the KC to reduce exaggerations, some are not. There are good breeders, and there are bad breeders (excluding puppy farmers and backyard breeders). There are some large commercial kennels who make huge amounts of money from breeding puppies, and are not always as well intentioned toward their breed as they would have you believe. Some of the smaller breeders are icons to the world of breeding, genuinely dedicated to preserving and improving the health of their breed. These are usually breeders of dogs who have managed to stay away from exaggerations in the first place, for example elkhounds, along with many others.

I applaud that you do something, rather than give in to the apathy of doing nothing. If I were to suggest anything I would target Pet Shops, who are the reputable face of the puppy farm trade. This is where I think things can be changed, and ultimately legislation introduced to prohibit the sale of dogs at these outlets, whether they be big or small.

yougov.co.uk

you can sign up they want people to participate in surveys but you can also write about your opinions

nopounds....I know this has been covered a lot now and we know where the problem lies.  Just thought would highlight that I had a look on the customer notice board at work today and there were ads for

Border Collie pups - £75
Staffie Crosses - £375
Springer Pups - £100
Labradoodles - £900
jack russel ro rehome - free
NB Admin I am NOT attempting to sell anything here, far from it just examples

none of these responsible breeders out for the breeds interest (easy to tell by the wording on ads but something i needn't go into on here) but note the prices....i remember you saying earlier about how if pups made no money it may deter....this though would clearly say not as the 'pedigrees' are cheaper than the crosses.

I read an article in Dogs Today regarding the problem with pit bulls in the states and again, education it would appear is the only answer in sorting these problems out.  How to educate in this now sadly throw away society is always going to be a mission for sadly, that is how people are now.  Never had the degree of animals in need of homes years ago as we do now I believe (not that I was around 30/40years ago but merely going by what I am told)

what is going to be done??  Well thats the point of this thread I guess but like others, targetting puppy farms and BYBs would be the first stop along with change in legislation etc.  I needn't repeat what others have said for quite clearly, most have already said it very well :)

> Perhaps a law which would mean that breeders can only cover costs?

Works for me - If I breed a litter it will be because I want a pup for myself- With an average litter of 2-3 I would happilly sell just to cover costs.

My last litter (and only litter) gave me one pup and I spent enough to have bought 3 pups but I am happy.
I believe none of us are in this for profit.
We spend a fortune on shows, travel, health tests etc because we want what is best for our own dogs and our breeds not for a spare £100 in the bank

> So if anyone asks me about where they should get a dog from I will not hestitate to tell them to go save a life and adopt a dog from a shelter, rather than buy a puppy from a breeder, no matter how good the breeder is.

Many of us have done just this - gone to shelters, collected flea ridden neglected dogs and brought them back to health and fostered them until well enough for a new home- helped find that home, home check it and follow up on the dog. I have done so a number of times and many on here too many times to count. I cannot see why this should mean we can't also breed a pup of our chosen breed also?

I am not getting at you - You seem to have lots of information and probably share many of the views of lots of us on here except we also have the love of a breed we want to continue and perhaps improve

Nopounds appears to have left the building...

I wonder whether we helped his/her research?

I'd like to think 'they' will now set up camp outside the Puppy Farms and Pet Shops selling puppies and kittens...

.

It wasnt too long ago when the Irish government via the Department of Agriculture sent out leaflets to farmers on how to supplement their twindling income by breeding dogs. Now there is a cause for you to take up!

> It wasnt too long ago when the Irish government via the Department of Agriculture sent out leaflets to farmers on how to supplement their twindling income by breeding dogs. Now there is a cause for you to take up!

Are there still subsidies in Eire for farmers wanting to diversify into dog breeding?

(((So you and your friends are just taking random potshots at anyone)))
No. Taking "pot shots" at people who are contributing to the dog over-population problem, and that includes ALL breeders for the reasons described above.

I'm sorry but in this very small goldfish bowl in which you live in, are you trying to say that the dog owners at Crufts are all breeders? Your not seriously trying to say that are you? You were taking pot shots at dog owners who were doing nothing more than showing their dogs and many never step foot in the breeding circuit at all, so you were just targeting dog owners really weren't you, I guess you were targeting yourself too......... ironically.

Personally I just think you were after a little attention and hoping to get your face on TV.......... you failed. :-)

Silly people like you never know what you are talking about, instead of trying to cause problems for decent dog owners, why don't you go and sit on some of the rough council estates and shout outside the houses of people there who are realing out puppies like hot dinners, no of course you won't, you'll voice your sillyness infront of people who are likely to just ignore you rather than come after you with foul mouths or worse.

Very cowardly don't you think?

> Pedigree Dogs Exposed came IMO at the right time, and finally focussed the public on breeding fads and fashions, that were and are still impacting on health.&nbsp; Many, many breeders should not be tarred with the same brush, but unfortunately get caught up in it, often because they so vocally dismiss the concerns raised. Some breeds are working with the KC to reduce exaggerations, some are not.

I am one who thinks the programme was rubbish, because while it raised concerns I agreed with, it was put together in a way that would cause a back lash to the many good breeders and people who have sought to help breed health like myself (29 years of running eye testing clinics, 3 times a year), taking DNA swabs for breed clubs as part of health research and testing among other things). That is why I am vocal in my opinion that the programme was rubbish.

When I attended the press review, I could not believe that over two years of research went into it, I'd have guessed maybe two months maximum. When it came to writing it up for Our Dogs I could not I felt give it a fair review, so I insisted with my editor that we ask the people featured in the programme and the programme maker to add their comments to be set into the review piece. This Our Dogs did.

I feel I have been proved right and am continuing to be proved right that the way the programme was put together has done good breeders a huge disservice. I was not impressed to find that around the world an edited version was aired removing the eugenics sequences showing the racism and Nazis. If the programme was good enough to be aired in tact here it should have been good enough to aired intact over seas.

Sadly the end result is that a lot of very good breeders have now given up breeding altogether, and puppy farmers and back yard breeders can sell their sickly stock as "Guaranteed healthy as not KC registered".
I do not consider myself a bad breeder but I do resent the backlash I have witnessed where good and bad alike are tarred with the same brush.

I resent the constant "picking at the scab" the general media keep on doing, where some of them have said they "will keep watching" as it clearly shows they have set themselves up as judge and jury! The constant "picking at the scab" is now doing far more harm than good, and as I have said before, if the media keep beating the breeders and KC with a stick they will start to ignore it, to become immune from the taunts and even the poor effort of a programme we got will not have served anyone much less the dogs. However if they were to remember a carrot often works better than a stick they might actually see a lot more changes made a lot quicker.

I am sure the OP is not interested in the politics surrounding the programme since they have particularly asked how we would change things so that dogs are not over bred and how we would achieve the goal of not needing rescues any more. I would suggest that is a more useful reply to the OP's question. As you say at the start of your post everyone is entitled to free speech and peaceful demonstration, I don't think anyone has questioned that right but have been trying to put their point across to the OP.