I've seen it mentioned many times about how dogs with tails over the back are hard to read their behaviour lol.
People believe what they're told too.

LOL my Elkhound never have any problem communicating their wishes either to me or other dogs. Also heard it said that dogs with curled or no tail can't balance because the tail in used as a rudder - Er, OK. not seen that many falling over but there you go perhaps I am not concentrating.

Lol people are so funny, all mine can walk in a straight line and wag their tails.. Clever doggys :-)

Lol people are so funny, all mine can walk in a straight line and wag their tails..

One does wonder where these ideas come from it would not be so worrying if I had not heard vets expressing these ideas as if they were  facts. All dogs are different shapes and their tails are very different with breed specific carriage but there does not seem to be a problem with one breed of dog recognising the species or intention of an other.

Sorry, me again, thought those who are interested in what the CA is doing my be interested in this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZP3RHhUaJqQ

It is Andrew Brace talking at the inaugural meeting last Thursday.

> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">And yet this wasn't a problem at the Supreme cat show - last year 1300 cats were vetted!     <br /><br />

but the average champshow has over 2000 dogs entered per day!!!!

Thanks, that made it much more clear for me to understand :)

Again I think once they hold as many certs as say the clumber did I would be annoyed to have to que say as often as once a week in huge ques for the vet to tell me what the certificates already said.

> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> dont think, or I hope that the Elkhound tail will not be a issue as Elkhounds can drop there tail if they want too, its not so tightly curled as to have no use like some breeds. but i can see what your saying as every breed could be picked on for one thing or another

A curled tail is one of the first changes that came with domestication, it also happened quite spontaneously with the fur foxes, when they started selecting for less aggresive ones in a Russian study, as did floppy ears, white markings and shorter legs.

It is not the same as the malformation causing a screwtail. I know a white GSD bitch born with a three inch screw tail that ahd to be amputated eventually, but there was no movement in it like in oru curly tailed breeds.

It would seem that some of these traits are intrinsically linked to traits desireable in a domestic animal, and werenot originally deliberate traits bred fro fro mans vanity.

I have said it before, any trait that is not found in wild canids could be found to be detrimental in one way or another, and woudl not be ideal for suvival unaided by man.

Floppy ears, short or long coats, and any number of features we would not find exagerations, for a dog that is.

Yes, I've joined - and put my money where my mouth is!
I own (but don't show) one of the 15 breeds - GSD) but my main breed is one of the least likely - or I would like think - to appear on the list. As a moderate, unexaggerated, middle sized "natural" breed you would think that the Buhund wouldn't be a target for any AR group (apart from that disabling curly tail, of course) and yet it is one listed in the Council of Europe breeds that shouldn't be bred in its present form. Why? Apparently it has an "abnormal position of legs" What that actually means is lack of hind angulation - something very rarely seen these days.
Other breeds mentioned are the Airedale, Bedlington & Cocker Spaniel (but not the American Cocker)
I wonder how it will be before this resolution raises its ugly head again?

Yes, I've joined - and put my money where my mouth is!

Glad you have joined hope it all works out and in the end we have some means of fighting against those who wish to see that pure bred dogs disappear followed in no short measure by all dogs in fact all domesticated animals. Don't think I am being paranoid when I say the AR people have had far too long to worm their way into the public subconscious who now find they believe things in relation to the keeping of animals without any idea why or even if the things they believe are true - they have been brain washed on the drip system.

> is one listed in the Council of Europe breeds that shouldn't be bred in its present form. Why? Apparently it has an "abnormal position of legs" What that actually means is lack of hind angulation - something very rarely seen these days.
> Other breeds mentioned are the Airedale, Bedlington & Cocker Spaniel (but not the American Cocker)

Glad you have joined.

This must be a change to the listed breeds, as the original one release included the American Cocker due to excess coat and ear length.

I used to have a hard copy of the list - needless to say, I can't find it and haven't been able to find it on line, except one very hard-to-read site, just double checked that one and it says English Cocker Spaniel & doesn't include the American - which isn't logical is it? May just be an omission on that particular site though (or maybe I just can't see it).

KC runs a monopoly, and doesn't tend to listen.  why will it be any different this time?

I joined because I believe the KC has to acknowledge very poor policy-making and leadership that has led to a miserable outcome for several breeds and left the rest in doubt as to the future. If everyone were to agree to boycott Crufts 2013 we might have a very swift and hopefully effective response from the KC.

First meeting of the Steering committee tonight so with luck there will be something to report tomorrow and those who have shown interest will become registered members. Items like a web site, proper forum, bank and such things as flyers and posters should be put in hand, will also hope for an agenda for action to start but perhaps that is asking too much too soon.

Exactly Nova, the framework will begin to be put into place.  What the Alliance is very aware of is that whilst immediate action was important we don't want to be hurried into the sort of knee jerk reaction the KC operates by at times.  They  have an excellent team in teh steering committee with lots of different talents and a broad knowledge base.

I dont think, or I hope that the Elkhound tail will not be a issue as Elkhounds can drop there tail if they want too, its not so tightly curled as to have no use like some breeds. but i can see what your saying as every breed could be picked on for one thing or another.


And here is a lovely gem of infactual rubbish taken of a blog

a tail that can be used to properly communicate with other canines - not one that is curled over there back which also creates health problems with the spine
.
Yes some idiot posted that :-(

It is amazing some of the things you hear and very sad that people believe them, it seems sometimes that anyone who has ever owned a dog is an expert but their actual expertise is restricted to that one dog or at most the few they have owned.  They believe the rubbish written in some of the dog magazines but will ignore the lady up the road who has owned and bred dogs for 60 years because they would rather believe the journalist above the expert.

I cant see the point of all the talk of vetting at the door when those vets would have most likely excluded every one of the pekes, clumbers, mastino and bulldog which was entered at Crufts.

I cant see the point of all the talk of vetting at the door when those vets would have most likely excluded every one of the pekes, clumbers, mastino and bulldog which was entered at Crufts.

Yep a very pointless exercise

Perhaps some sort of certificate could be issued by ones own vet to say the dog being entered in a show or being bred from was healthy and had no condition that may detract from its quality of life. Then that certificate could be registered with the KC and you given a number which you quote when entering a show or asking for pups to be registered. Not really thought through but something of the sort would ease the problems of trying to test at a show in such a unfair manner.

> Perhaps some sort of certificate could be issued by ones own vet to say the dog being entered in a show or being bred from was healthy and had no condition that may detract from its quality of life.

Dont you think many vets have got wind of this and would any now put their neck on the block and declare in writing that a bulldog or peke is
"healthy and had no condition that may detract from its quality of life."?

I think the whole point of this is being lost here, this is about 15 breeds which many vets will not pass...so what is the future for them?
At first it seemed that time was being given to get their house in order but it now seems they are to be squeezed out.

I am more than happy if the vet test is fair and above board and is for all breeds, how is it fair when a dog is disqualified for a minor problem when the dog that was placed Reserve in Show was much worse. If the KC insists on continuing this practice it must be seen to be fair.

How fair when the breed has improved to an extent that the only thing the vet can find wrong with it is an old healed scar but it is still disqualified. It may only be 15 now but more will be added so lets go for all breeds now and make sure the vets employed are accountable and that there is a means of appeal.

I know that a lot of what we have heard of the vet checks is hearsay, but at least 2 if not 3 are meant to have failed due to an old scar on the eye.  I do not understand how any vet can say,  with no room for doubt, that a scar has been made by a conformation fault and not by an accident.  I also do not understand the constant harking back by both Dean & Kisko to the "if a dog is lame it may be better next day" to justify a) passing under another vet  at the next show and b) being given a "clear" by a truly independendt vet/specialist the net day.  As far as we are aware none of the fails were due to lameness anyway but both of the KC "voices" have repeated this stance several times.

Does anyone know if there is a regulation which says you must present your dog for BoB?

> I think the whole point of this is being lost here, this is about 15 breeds which many vets will not pass...so what is the future for them?
> At first it seemed that time was being given to get their house in order but it now seems they are to be squeezed out.

It looks like that is the plan :(

I have been reading comments on a particular blog (and adding my own comments to the pathetic rubbish that is spouted!) and it seems to me as if a certain person wants to see then end of some breeds/types of dog. But the biggest thing she is forgetting is that the KC is not the entire dog world, it is perfectly possible to breed dogs that are not KC registered and more to the point - thanks to a certain persons programme - it appears as if many of the GP would PREFER a non -KC reg'd dog.

What I see happening is not what I first worried about (the end of my beloved mastiff breed), but a turn away from the KC - away from people that are trying to instill changes overnight that simply can't happen overnight.

Nobody regulates the BYB or puppy farmer, they are free to churn out what they like as often as they like and sod the consequences. Surely a responsible breeder - one that is dedicated to breeding for betterment of the breed and one who actually  gives a flying fig about the dogs they producing also resembling the breed in looks AND temperment, could still breed with no KC registration and would still have plenty of homes for their pups from people that trusted their breeding.

The KC are not doing anything to HELP the breeds they have listed, they are only pushing them OFF the KC radar and away from public scrutiny.
A certain little lady can not seem to see past the end of her own nose.

If people want a certain breed of dog they will have one - the illegal pit bull is proof of that.

Well said ML

> I also do not understand the constant harking back by both Dean & Kisko to the "if a dog is lame it may be better next day" to justify a) passing under another vet  at the next show and b) being given a "clear" by a truly independendt vet/specialist the net day.

They do see the loss in revenue clearly then?

If the vet who posted her experiences is to be believed, bulldogs and pekes were to be judged against the morphology and functional requirements of the generic 'eurodog'. NONE would pass and it is fairer to come out and say so rather than this ........" oh dear try again" attitude.

Im all for these breeds being 'evolved' away from exageration but it is undo-able in 1 year and they know it.

They should reward those who are taking steps towards it.

could still breed with no KC registration and would still have plenty of homes for their pups from people that trusted their breeding.

Of course, the best breeder in  the country will produce the best dogs but how will they or anyone else know about the dog they own or the stud they are using unless those dogs are registered and as accurately and as far back as is possible.

IMO it is easy to say that it does not matter if a dog is registered, that is true till someone wants to breed and then it matters very much.

I was added I did not ask to join. I wonder how many others are in this situation and if they don't pay to join will they be 'deleted' from the group?

Thinking more generally about all the breeds, not just the high profile ones, I suppose reading Steve Deans statement that everyone was given the power to complain and request a BOB is vet checked for three years prior to this being introduced and nobody did so maybe this is the next step? I have seen many posts relating to lame dogs getting BOB so do wonder if we have not been as quick as the KC were hoping we would have been?

I was added I did not ask to join. I wonder how many others are in this situation and if they don't pay to join will they be 'deleted' from the group?

As I understand it those either joining or being added to the FB page does not make them members, so if you are on the group and do not wish to be just delete yourself from the group. There was a time when people were being added and then deleted because that is the nature of FB, it is very prone to trolls and mischief makers.

Only those who have paid (even if only £1) will be members in the first year and I believe that there will be a members forum making the one on FB redundant although the CA Lounge may remain open for chat.

The above is only the feeling I have been given as the Steering committee only met last night and we have not had any feedback yet and, of course, there has not been any committee elected as yet and I think that may take a while. The job of the Steering committee is to get the Alliance up and running with the requirements of an organisation put in place before we will be in a position to vote in a committee.

So by the time it is up and fully running its ideals will be clear and those who wish to be part of it can but there is no compulsion to join if you are either unwilling or do not want to be a member. However it stands to reason the larger the membership the more chance the Alliance will have in being able to liaise with the KC and have the voice of the general breeding showing community heard.

>IMO it is easy to say that it does not matter if a dog is registered, that is true till someone wants to breed and then it matters very much.

Fast forward 5 years when the 15 breeds are not part of the KC as they have been forced out - there will be no choice but to get a non-registered one.

Fast forward 5 years

Unfortunately I am not blessed with foresight only hindsight - also I do not lay down and die that easy and accept all is lost until it is, but there we are all different I just hope there are enough to stand up and make a fight of it.

Polly, a new page has now been opened which is available to all, and membership details will be issued shortly, however those who have already paid are being given automatic membership, so your beng added to the page does not reflect in membership numbers.

This is the official Canine Alliance page now - http://www.facebook.com/CanineAlliance

Membership has been set at £10 and all who have already made donations are now official members :-)

You beat me to posting the link.  Everyone who backs the aims, please join.  The representatives going to next weeks meeting with the KC need to know they have our support, the KC need to know just how strongly so many of us feel on this issue.

Sorry Gwen :-D Came home from work and went straight to the group page to nosey around...lol

I think Jemima's running scared. She's even posted a childish anti-gay dig at Andrew Brace and the CA on her blog, calling it the 'Gaynine' Alliance. I didn't think she would sink that low, but I was wrong.

Wow that really is vile, didn't realise she was that low class :-(

Unbelievingly crass but then only to be expected I suppose from someone so self-seeking, the interests and feeling of others never darkened her door nor the dark recesses of her 'brain'.

I think it is rather interesting how she is now applauding the KC and coming out strongly anti Canine Alliance - perhaps she thinks that we may be less easily bullied?

She's edited it out now, after two people called shame on her, but I have a screen capture of the page if it's ever needed.

I think Jemima's running scared. She's even posted a childish anti-gay dig at Andrew Brace and the CA on her blog, calling it the 'Gaynine' Alliance. I didn't think she would sink that low, but I was wrong.


Where is this dig? I can't see it in the blog.

I think Jemima's running scared. She's even posted a childish anti-gay dig at Andrew Brace and the CA on her blog, calling it the 'Gaynine' Alliance.

SURELY there has to be somewhere we can report this to????

Ah, posted before I saw your update

I have a screen capture of the page if it's ever needed.
Good work JG!!!

Well done JG, wonder if she thought better or if she was  led to see the problem.  This is the 2nd homophobic comment she has posted on her blog, she did something similar during the coat testing comments she made.

I think it is rather interesting how she is now applauding the KC and coming out strongly anti Canine Alliance - perhaps she thinks that we may be less easily bullied?

May be siring around in the ashes. Nice to know we have someone on the steering group who will make sure she stays the right side of the law, although the removed remark must have been close to breaking the UK laws.

I'd forward it to the police. Look what happened to the facebook rioters

In response to Gwen, I think they may be worried by the fact that one dog placed in a Group clearly looked to be lame. I also watched the judging of another breed on the list and the BOB looked lame to me and many others but I think I am correct in saying it failed the vet check on something else.
They are indeed correct re lameness one day but not the next although surely one judges the "dog on the day".
Jeff. 

one judges the "dog on the day".

Actually one judges the dog in your ring on that day - in another ring on the same day it may well 'go' lame.

It is true to say no lame dog should be placed but it can and does happen.

Yep last year we had a very well known judge at Leeds and a dog in a class of 4 was severely lame could not put his rear leg down yet he still gave it 4th no one could believe he didn't ask it to be retired, then the owners were giving it metacam right beside the ring so they clearly knew it was ill. Gobsmacked I was.