has anyone else read the article about ped/mutts yet?  she claims we champ-doggers are pedigree breeders who agreed after a debate that 'pedigrees were heathier- phew'. i dont remember us saying that, we said it cant be proved they arent.
im also not a breeder but did start the debate about whether we should pay so much for designer breeds.
she seems to condem our chat quite a lot. she did the ped dog exposed prog. she must be lurking in the background somewhere.

No she doesn't always Lurk, she has been joining in that thread.

oh i see
so why are her comments in dogs today not the things we wrote? unless she interpreted it wrongly

Journalistic License, sensationalism seems the ladies prefered style.

You know what they say about the media, why let the truth stand in the way of a good story.

> ped dog exposed prog

otherwise known as  'passionate' sorry I mean 'poisonous productions'!

Where is the article to read.

Passionate productions I guess. http://www.passionateproductions.co.uk/shop.htm

The thread disappeared, i'm surprized its not taken out. 

Thanks for the link.  Can't see the article though.

I apologise for any offence caused by my post - I cant delete it now. However, that programme caused me offence and lacked tact and I found it disrespectful and rude.

I agree, just like she said its acceptable if you own a certain breed to be tarred with the same brush and that it must also be unhealthy, then it is acceptable to tar her with the same brush that i do most other papparazzi.

Not to mention it was totally biased and edited in a way to suit her opinions - the Beeb issued an apology with words to that effect too!

Hi,

If you need/want to delete a post and you can't just let one of the moderators know and we can help.

Thanks,

Jeff.

Thanks Jeff, I think I want to leave it for now - it is my opinion afterall ;o)

> Where is the article to read.

At last I've spotted it Sunshine 'Dogs today' I guess again.

Thanks for that sian.  will have a look at it.

I don't think you should delete your post, i was just surprised it stayed thats all.  No offence only to the person it was directed at and as you say its your opinion.  Didn't know you were in the programme. 

I do think the programme was very biased and did a lot of damage to pedigree dogs in general.  I think they had a point about dogs getting champions ect when not fit and maybe highlighting that but not the way they did it.  They maybe should have explained about the breeds more, who knows.  It caused a so much upset that lost the Crufts coverage which was pathetic.  and for the vet, she should have been sacked.  Makes you wonder how the RSPCA treats a pedigree that comes in to them.

Yes its in Dogs Today.  Guess I'll have to bump sales up and buy a copy to read.

She did state that she might write an article on it in another post or that post, can't remember which.

Well I for one won't be buying a copy. That 'lady' will not get a penny of my money. Pity she doesn't use her 'license' for the good of breeds instead of sensationalism and to make a name for herself.

Makes you wonder how the RSPCA treats a pedigree that comes in to them.

Not at all sure they know a pure bred dog when they see one, if fact I am sure they don't or they would not talk such tosh.

> Thanks for that sian. will have a look at it.

Hi ray of sunshine

I don't quite understand this post above to me.

I will clarify -

1. Andik's original post (now deleted). I had a problem with her tone, and referring to Jemima as an idiot the way she did, I was a little offended by.

2. My reply (also now deleted). Just said the above.

3. I never asked for any posts to be removed, and would never do so, freedom of speech an all.

4. I was never in the programme, and hadn't read the original posting about pedigree dogs either, so I have no opinion on jemima, however I didn't agree with her being referred to as an idiot.

5. I wish I hadn't bothered replying now in the first place.

Cheers. Still think your great :)

I was surprised at the article, seems we practically researched and wrote the article ourselves, although not quite with the right conclusion! Being a journalist seems like easy money, go on a forum asking for opinions then write an article about it. Mind you i contributed to that discussion and i'm not a breeder or pedigree dog owner, so she got that bit wrong.

> I don't quite understand this post above to me.
>

Lol.  It took me a while to work this one out.

i was only say thanks for the link to you.

The rest was referring to another post, he stated that he'd been on the programme.  Sorry.  i think when the topic disappeared for a while it might have confused things.

> The rest was referring to another post, he stated that he'd been on the programme.Sorry.i think when the topic disappeared for a while it might have confused things.

This is the part I didn't understand, I think you had me confussed with Andik, who's post upset me a little. Or maybe you didn't, oh it's all really confusing, and does it really matter anyway? Who cares.

I agree programme did highlight some important issues, however, it was done in a sensational way and totally biased. It tarred ALL breeders and ALL pedigree owners with the same brush. It also made out that people who show their dogs care only for the red ribbon and for nothing else. The worst thing about the programme is that it exhibited pedigree dogs as unfit and uncared for dogs. This, as we know, is NOT the case.

The sensationalism of the programme was insulting and I still hold my original opinion about the maker.

Again, I do apologise for the offence I seem to have caused you Sian - it was never my intention.

Hi Andik

> Again, I do apologise for the offence I seem to have caused you Sian - it was never my intention.

Of course it was never your intention - how were you to know what you said about Jemima would offend me. I didn't know myself till I read it, geez I must have a crush on her or something...

There is no need to apologise, you are entitled to your opinion like anyone else, I just replied to let you know what I thought of your little outburst.

I personally would like all the deleted posts back, (I never requested removal, but I suppose they were a tad slanderous so I can not see that happening) and then perhaps a real, proper, debate/battle can begin. Even Ms sunshine would contribute I'm sure, along with others...It would be a one sided debate however because I think I would be the only one standing in Ms Harrison's corner for the wrong reason's. Boxing gloves at the ready..

Sian (not worth going to bed now) Owen :)

TBH Sian I agree that Ms Harrison is entitled to her opinion, my arguement is that if you are going to make a programme to try and infuence others then you should give a fair and representative picture surrounding the topic. She did not. It was extreme and fantastical, propaganda at best. Like I said previously I think that some important issues were raised but it was in the manner that they were raised that was wrong. I think she should be ashamed of that programme and she did her cause no favours at all.

Hi Sian,

Sorry but it is not possible to "un-delete" posts and it was indeed me that deleted them- hands up :-) . Of course everybody is entitled to their opinion but, as a moderator, I do tend to err on the side of caution especially as there may well be children on here although I don't always get it right.

As far as Jemima is concerned, you might be surprised at how many people agree with her that there is a problem. However I would suggest that although many people agree with her aims they despair at her methods. Personally I think many things need changing but unfortunately between the spin coming from all sides those of us trying to do the right thing are getting very dizzy indeed! :-)

Jeff. 

> As far as Jemima is concerned, you might be surprised at how many people agree with her that there is a problem. However I would suggest that although many people agree with her aims they despair at her methods. Personally I think many things need changing but unfortunately between the spin coming from all sides those of us trying to do the right thing are getting very dizzy indeed! :-)
>

I don't think I would be surprised at how many people agree with her, and I do know that some of the KC committee who she damned in her programme are of the same opinion as we have here that there are things which need doing to improve things. Like many here I disagree with the way she is going about things, and in my opinion I did find her programme trashy, so much more could have been achieved and I do honestly believe she has put progress in these matters in jeopardy and stalled the progress that the KC and responsible breeders were trying to move towards. I also believe her constant criticism in Dogs Today is not going to help and just further entrench those who do not want to move forward, however as we have seen here on CD she has an opinion and will not listen to anybody else's opinion, she constantly talks at us not with or to us.

She can talk to me anytime she likes, any way she likes. :)

I used to enjoy "Dogs Today" but am sick & tired now of their constant criticism of the Kennel Club. Beverley & Jemima need to get over it and go back to an enjoyable, well balanced magazine. I am also sick of them suggesting putting dogs in cages as the panacea for all problems. How did any of these people manage in the "good old days" before cages & complete foods? I have raised 21 dogs over the years (plus some litters) without relying on either. I'm sure I am not unique?

> I also believe her constant criticism in Dogs Today is not going to help and just further entrench those who do not want to move forward

I've thought about this and have decided that, although it gets on my wick ( being lumped in with the reckless, the ignorant, the greedy and the animal abusers), I accept that the problem in many breeds of dogs is bigger than my delicate sensibilities and I need to get over it!

I don't read the mag and if I did I would be writing to the editor to tell them that I have decided to not purchase it again and my reasons why. Obviously I did not know about the cage issues but I have to say that if that is what they are suggesting for all problems then I am with you on this. Think it just about shows them for what they are and as so many people do listen to them I can forsee many poor dogs being kept for long periods of time in cages and ending up with lots of problems.

Hi Toolz,

That is a first class attitude to have, if I might say so, but my concerns are that if we continue to be lumped together with those you describe things will get even worse. You are quite correct we are all tough enough to take it but we don't form opinion at Government level and that is what concerns me. Any charity can fund researchers for an MP and my concern is the "research" might possibly be biased, albeit unintentionally, or at worst downright skewed.

Jeff.

Jeff,

After much reflection Ive decided to work at ground roots alone, sticking to my principles and making it obvious why I make my breeding decisions.
If every concientious breeder just touched a handful of people by their committment, improvements and dealings with others - we could make a huge impact.

In the last couple of years I have backed off from high profile 'statements' and positions where I am seen as a zealot. I am now being approached more frequently by those looking for help in improving the health of their future litters.
Presumably I seem less judgemental and less 'holier than thou'.

Toolz,

Well said, as I often say to my mentor when she gets frustrated with the actions of others within our particular breed we must plough our own furrow and hopefully those with lower standards will fall by the wayside.

Jeff.

Amen to that Jeff.

Do successful, reputable breeders have more money to spend on finding the best mate for their dog? and if so does better mate - equal better health for the breed in the long term and more income for the breeder. It's a little like retail in that a good reputation usually means successful business long term. Breeders I presume are not necessarily trained sales people, but if they sell healthy product, give good customer service at the point of sale, be knowledgeable to answer cutomers questions, and let the customer know that at a time in the future, you are there to offer guidance. A satisfied customer will spread the word about you, to people looking for a dog and the excellent service you gave.

I know nothing about this topic being discussed, and probably a lot of the gp are like me, ignorant. So it is important that, at the point of sale the public are made more aware of the advantages of buying from you the reputable breeder, selling quality product, rather than from any other portal. If they have just come to view, give them a list of disadvantages to take home with, spelling out the problems with buying from certain places - puppy farms, petshops, etc, giving advice on the problems they could experience with buying badly bred puppies from these places, such as health issues, behaviour issues etc. This would take time but eventually like in retail the reputable businesses grow, whilst the other slowly die away.

> This would take time but eventually like in retail the reputable businesses grow, whilst the other slowly die away.

This is the theory ( with slight modifications) yes but somewhat complicated in that in many cases it is not a business.

Could you please clarify then for me tooolz, because I have no idea, do some breeders not sell on then? I'm not really sure how it works.

I think I understand, not all breeders sell. Some hire out (couldn't think of a better word) dog's to mate. For instance, Lexi best in show Crufts 19 nought dot, is hired to mate with Bern little whipper snapper. I am getting there? Tooolz

> Do successful, reputable breeders have more money to spend on finding the best mate for their dog? and if so does better mate - equal better health for the breed in the long term and more income for the breeder. It's a little like retail in that a good reputation usually means successful business long term. Breeders I presume are not necessarily trained sales people, but if they sell healthy product, give good customer service at the point of sale, be knowledgeable to answer cutomers questions, and let the customer know that at a time in the future, you are there to offer guidance. A satisfied customer will spread the word about you, to people looking for a dog and the excellent service you gave.
>

The best breeders breed only to further their hobby and interest in their breed and the number of litters that they can rear to the best of their ability and keep up with the after sales support needed usually fairly extensively during the first year or so.  Remember many will have to take time off work or pay someone to help out.

So one would hope that one has built a good reputation and if having a waiting list is proof of this then that is so, and most breeders really have no need for advertising to the general public (bragging rights to their peers in the canine community is different).

There are people in dogs from all walks in life ans some may be well off, but the majority are ordinary folk trying to get by, with a  little spare cash or those willing to go without in order to carry on their interest in dogs.  Many are retired, so definitely not monied.

A conscientious breeder will make the effort to use the best dog they can for their bitch.  I have imported in partnership (none of the four of us were wealthy and only one could maybe have done it alone). 

I have travelled abroad to mate my bitch (nice litter but all the best ones were male and went to pet only homes, so wasted effort really, but maybe my average bitch will reproduce her good breeding for me to keep a good pup from her) after saving hard.

I am busy saving to go to the USA in January and just hope I get there (they won't fly you below 20'F), and that she accepts her mate, gets in whelp, and has a good bitch pup for me, as it is stupidly expensive to transport a dog cargo (£800 out and $1500, and then £275 to DEFRA and Heathrow Kennels on the way back.).  We are opting for the cheaper but more fiddly alternative flying out with her from Healthrow but returning to Brussels and hubby and Friend driving out on PET Passport Ferry route to fetch us.

As for puppy prices, generally from responsible breeders pups are give or take £50 the same reasonable price (enough to cover the costs of an average litter and defray some of the costs of keeping the greater number of dogs one has to maintain a breeding line).  In fact often no more or little more than the ones commercially sold or privately bred with no papers or health screening, and of course no breeder responsibility or help after the sale.

> giving advice on the problems they could experience with buying badly bred puppies from these places, such as health issues, behaviour issues etc. This would take time but eventually like in retail the reputable businesses grow, whilst the other slowly die away.

Unfortunately it ends up coming down to numbers.

If one looked at the total number of dogs bred the majority will 'numbers wise' will be bred not to the highest standards.

The good breeders may actually be the majority of breeders (though I doubt it), but not the breeders of the majority of the pups, as good breeders breed far less often.

The output of one puppy farm in a year will maybe be the same as a lifetimes breeding by a good breeder.  The casual breeder of the one off litter may not be as bad from the buyers point of view, but because they only have a snapshot of the breed in their one bitch and maybe dog they do not know what lies behind, or that it matters a lot.

It is likely their stock was badly bred (if it were well bred they would be working with mentors in their breed) they will perpetuate the health issues if not the socialisation problems that Puppy farmed pups face, and most importantly they are not in it for the long haul to look out for their puppies lifelong.

Because of the low volume output by good breeder they rarely need to advertise outside of specialist canine venues such as breed club, personal website, or specialist canine literature or a site like champdogs. 

Many will not directly advertise within the main media and the less fussy websites (some will have a breeder listing to hopefully filter away to good breeders those who search about a breed more deeply) as they don't want to be rubbing shoulders with puppy farmers.  so their clients will be the type that research well, and most of us prefer it that way, less time wasted on people who would never qualify for a puppy.  this does of course mean the average well meaning Joe biogs who thinks a dog is a dog is a dog never get as far as a decent breeder and are quite happy to hand over money for substandard 'merchandise'.

> so their clients will be the type that research well, and most of us prefer it that way, less time wasted on people who would never qualify for a puppy. this does of course mean the average well meaning Joe blogs who thinks a dog is a dog is a dog never get as far as a decent breeder and are quite happy to hand over money for substandard 'merchandise'.

If this is the way it is then substandard 'merchandise' is here to stay.

I picked the magazine up yesterday and had a quick look through it.  Looked at price and realised it was £3.75 and put it down, not worth the money ...

As said just more "sensationalism."  Magazines like this could do so much to educate would be dog owners, yet repeatedly seem to fail to do so.

There is also the case that the good breeder will protect their work and refuse to sell to those they believe unsuitable so unfortunately they to will go to the substandard seller.

> If this is the way it is then substandard 'merchandise' is here to stay.

Sadly it is unless the general public wise up, it's like pitting MacDonald's against the finest restaurants.

The Latter don't need or want the number of clients your average McD has in a day, couldn't cope with it.

I can probably quote you the latest promotion on TV from MacDonald's, but don't know the name of a single top quality restaurant.

With the above scenario only your palate is abused and maybe your standard of nutrition, but with the dogs it is their lives.

>Magazines like this could do so much to educate would be dog owners, yet repeatedly seem to fail to do so.

"Your Dog" is a much more balanced, rational magazine; it's the one we allow in the reception area at work because of the quality of the advice and the sense of the contributors.

what would be nice is if one of these magazines would produce an article on the benefits of pedigree dogs e.g working gundogs or racing huskies (just as examples).  I personaly am getting bored with the whole pedigree dogs are faulty.  As a family we have owned many pedigree dogs all of which have lived to ripe old ages.

> my arguement is that if you are going to make a programme to try and infuence others then you should give a fair and representative picture surrounding the topic. She did not. It was extreme and fantastical, propaganda at best. Like I said previously I think that some important issues were raised but it was in the manner that they were raised that was wrong. I think she should be ashamed of that programme and she did her cause no favours at all.

I totally agree, whatever 'good agenda' was there has lost any respect and tackled it wrong.  when i watched it, I was arguing with the tv which way it should be going.

It has taken a lot of people's enjoyment way.  My MiL loves Crufts but can't go due to ill health and loved it on the telly.  Although more4 kindly picked it up its not the same or as extensive.

As for buying the mag to read the article, never bought it before and prop won't buy it again, I would like to read it to have an informed opinion and see what is actually put. 

Can't argue with not familiar with can you.

Do as I'm going to do sunshine, I'm going to start purchasing the 'Your Dog' magazine, jeangenie has suggested, this sounds a better read.