Kathrine Tate - Saving the British Bulldog - BBC One - 14/03/18

Did anyone watch this BBC program last night? What did you think?

I only watched the latter half because I had something else, recorded, that I wanted to watch.   From what I saw, it was 'better' than the previously aired highly controversial Pedigree Dogs doc.    I'd have like to have seen some comment from the KC/other breeders because work is ongoing to improve the breathing (ultra short face) of this breed.  Perhaps this was included in the earlier part of the programme, that I'd missed.   As I didn't see the entire programme 'better' than I expected, can be my only comment.

ps   I am no Katherine Tate fan!

It did occur to me at the time, with all the talk about the small gene pool for Bulldogs in this country meaning it wasn't going to be possible to breed away from the excessively squashed nose, that is a small gene pool in the breed the same across the world?   In other words, rather than going to the type of 'Bulldog' suggested as an outcross (and they'd have to be very careful they didn't end up with something looking like a Pit Bull), a bit of judicious buying in from different lines from other countries, could be the better way forward?  To say nothing of choosing puppies with a longer face from a litter, to go forward with in a breeding programme.

I'd also say that for the vast majority of people wanting a specific breed, it IS about 'looks', as shown at the end of the programme.

The program was good as it highlighted genuine concern for the breed.

CRIB & ROSA (original bulldogs) as seen on the link here should be what breeders today should be aiming for. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crib_and_Rosa

I also believe if breeders started to choose the pups out of their litters today for showing/breeding with the slightly longer muzzle & longer legs etc, over time the breed would then eventually come back to that of CRIB & ROSA in type (free from any exaggeration) without the need to outcross, this will also help lead to better Health within the breed for future generations.

As indeed the first breeders were doing and the difference between their two older bitches and the young dog was massive.

I think whoever said it on the program was right, though - heading back to Crib and Rosa'a type will be just too far for most people.  The Levett bulldogs were like that and they looked like staffy/boxers to me, nothing like bulldogs.  Which I think is a good thing but for diehard lovers of the breed as it is, they aren't what they love.

What I did like to see though was that within that big meetup at Hyde Park, while there were some with really bad faces, there seemed to be more (at least that were shown) that did have some muzzle, and one with almost no nose roll.  That was really good to see and it shows that there are dogs available with less exaggeration so selecting for those features without outcrossing (considering the fury that suggestion tends to bring from breeders) is possible.   As indeed it was being done by the first breeders with the health certificate scheme.

Crib and Rosa look similar to a boxer or the American bulldog and nothing like a bulldog. If people like that look then get a boxer I say

Crib and Rosa look similar to a boxer or the American bulldog and nothing like a bulldog. If people like that look then get a boxer I say

Crib & Rosa are true Bulldogs, take the breed back in that direction (gradually over time) because Good Health for the breed, far outweighs the current Look.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leavitt_Bulldog

I wasn't impressed with these 'Bulldogs' mainly because to me, they looked more like the Boxer than the Bulldog.   However as with all outcrossing when done to bring in certain qualities (and a wider gene pool), maybe using them once and then with careful selection, as happened with Bassets and Bloodhounds back in the day, might help correct this breathing problem.

Just because a dog looked and was built differently back in the day doesn't mean they were any healthier. Many I've seen in many breeds the construction was appalling. Not sure how many would have done a days work. We have no idea what health issues were in the breed or even if they were known and documented.
At least with where we are now changes can be made to construction and health and it's all documented and we can health test too. We know what we have in front of us.
Think of the number of dogs with eye conditions because nothing was known about them and of course no DNA tests either.
We have moved forward in so many ways. Mostly for the better I would say. As for pinched nostrils now that needs to be addressed in  various breeds and personally think all breeding dogs in many of the bull breeds need to be BOAS tested and only certain grades can be bred from. The kc need to buck up their ideas and until they stop thinking of the money and rather about the health of our breeds very little will change.
There are some fabulous breeders out there but there are more breeders out there churning out awful examples. Overdone heads. No care for health and welfare and these are the ones which will come unstuck if breed clubs and the kc actually push for mandatory health testing. I've banged on about this for years that this needs to be the way like some of the Scandinavian kennel clubs do.
Funny enough they don't have a huge issue with rescue dogs either

I wasn't impressed with these 'Bulldogs' mainly because to me, they looked more like the Boxer than the Bulldog.

I agree about looks, on top of which, quite a number will sooner or later end up as the 'in thing' in fighting dogs by those sorts of people.

However, on a more sane note, I think the standard, common bulldogs (see photo's at link) should have been bred right out decades ago, as that will not happen voluntarily, then every one born would have to neutered in law so they could not breed anymore, & for glaringly obvious & well known humane reasons.

http://bit.ly/2Iwi8Nl
.

Rottweiler's are a beautiful breed but sadly in some parts of the world 'Exaggeration' is creeping into the breed (over domed skulls & much shorter muzzle's) if more and more people start jumping on the bandwagon preferring this new 'Look' then we will move away from what a true Rottweiler should look like (an elegant breed that is free from exaggeration and breathes easily).

(over domed skulls & much shorter muzzle's

Thank heaven for breeding regulations inc health reg's practiced as a 'fit for purpose' breed standard in most western euro countries.

UK should be renamed - 'Isle of KC Mutants'
.

> UK should be renamed - 'Isle of KC Mutants'<br />.

Rude!   I have a friend in Switzerland where all potential breeding stock has to be checked by a panel of PEERS before being granted permission to breed that dog.   To me, good as it may be in many respects, given human nature, I'd suggest there is a potential for personal grievances etc., to come into play.  I'd far rather any stock of mine be adjudged by a panel of people with knowledge of, but OUTSIDE the breed.  Of course this possibility is denied, but the cynic in me says it might.   And of course, all this comes at a price!!

> Thank heaven for breeding regulations inc health reg's practiced as a 'fit for purpose' breed standard in most western euro countries.<br /><br />UK should be renamed - 'Isle of KC Mutants'

Actualy photos I've seen of them with shorter muzzles and/or more domed skulls they are more often foreign dogs not UK dogs.

http://www.pedigreedatabase.com/rottweiler/dog.html?id=2738443-umbro-ritter-von-camelot#picturegalleries
http://pedigreedogsexposed.blogspot.co.uk/2016/08/rottpugs.html

This year's crufts winner a UK dog.
http://crufts.fossedata.co.uk/Breed.asp?ShowYear=2018&GroupID=WOR&ScheduleID=20#2018_ROT_BOB.jpg

Compassion 're rottweilers I completely agree and on some parts of the world they look so braccy and a cross between a pug and a rottweiler. It's heart breaking and I've seen one kennel proudly showing off the large number of matings their not has week in week out in the eastern block. It's wrong and sadly some people in some countries are breeding this type because they like it and owners are asking for this. Sadly they are also being rewarded at shows in some countries.
Apparently the way they should look these idiots are calling thwm ugly. It's a fight that's for sure.

look so braccy

What does braccy mean? I couldn't even find that on google!

Brachycephalic

I thought the interview with the KC representative was interesting when he basically said that if they made health tests mandatory then they would lose the majority of the breeders, at 8,000 puppies registered that's a big chunk of income or am I just being cynical. I would have liked the breeders asked about the 80% C section rate and if they were trying to do something about that as well.

Huge chunk of income ? Really ? 8000 puppies are less than 4% of dogs registered with KC last year. Hardly a huge percentage of income

Suck it up I say. With refusal they could send info back saying they will register once this that and other test are done and why they are important to do with details of how you get these tests done. In some cases it might be a simple DNA test. Hips and elbows see your vet, if you are breeding for money then it's easier to send them there. Links to the bva for eye testing. Baer testing in sure they can send details out too.
Heart testing a link to cardiologists who do breed heart testing.
At least the kc could then stand up and say all the pups registered with us are health tested. May not be fully healthy per say but it's a starting point and then they can explain details of what to looks for in terms of results.

Huge chunk of income ? Really ? 8000 puppies are less than 4% of dogs registered with KC last year. Hardly a huge percentage

mixedpack did not say it would be a huge % of KC income, mixedpack said it would be a ''huge chunk'' of KC income, which it would, how much to register a pup with them currently? & how much on top of that is if the new owner then registers it under their name?

Hope that helps you understand the difference between the word ''chunk'' & a numerical % figure
.

Actually I said big but that's just nitpicking, multiply by all the other breeds that could or should be health tested and that probably covers the majority of breeds, the KC would fear the mass desertion of breeders or uprising of an alternative institution perhaps.

Responsible breeders in other breeds already health test, I think you are presuming that most breeders would leave the KC for another organisation, however it would not be cheap to set up to organise shows etc. & run a database that meant anything & dog activities are very popular. None of the alternative organisations are viable they don't make vast amounts of money no matter what they claim

I can think of several popular breeds that all ready do a raft of health testing already & register far more that 9000 puppies a year & would Joe public really run to non health tested over priced puppies ????

> would Joe public really run to non health tested over priced puppies ????

Yes!  They do all the time.  Joe Public doesn't give a hoot about health testing.  You've only got to look at FB selling groups to see that.  Bulldogs, frenchies, pugs, GSDs... name your breed, any time a litter is posted almost all the replies (if not all) are people interested in buying regardless of the health status of the parents or the price.  I regularly see frenchies from non tested parents going for £1500 a pup, and selling quickly.

the KC would fear the mass desertion of breeders or uprising of an alternative institution perhaps.

Yes your right, I think it would just about collapse, after all, the only thing KC >might< be known for amongst many pet owners is that it 'registers dogs' on it's data base.

>& would Joe public really run to non health tested over priced puppies

I certainly wouldn't.

I have recently begun to notice a slight swing to members of the general public asking about health tests, what they mean exactly and how they affect the dog, and how to find those breeders who are health testing. Small steps, but that's where it starts. Also have to point out that puppy farms are adept at producing false documents and that any claims of health tests need to be checked on the KC website.

Compassion 're rottweilers I completely agree and on some parts of the world they look so braccy and a cross between a pug and a rottweiler. It's heart breaking and I've seen one kennel proudly showing off the large number of matings their not has week in week out in the eastern block. It's wrong and sadly some people in some countries are breeding this type because they like it and owners are asking for this. Sadly they are also being rewarded at shows in some countries.

There was probably a time when what you/we are saying here, people were once saying the same about the change made to 'The Original Bulldog' ("they look so braccy and a cross between a pug") ("Sadly they are also being rewarded at shows in some countries") but because most people preferred the new Bulldog look, that's why the Bulldog as a breed no longer look like Crib & Rosa today.

In a nutshell, any changes made to any breed should only be that which encourages better health/performance, beauty is as beauty does.

> Actualy photos I've seen of them with shorter muzzles and/or more domed skulls they are more often foreign dogs not UK dogs.

Those first two dogs are awful - they look like they've got something wrong with them!

I wasn't quoting you verbatim there are no quotation marks in my post.

Actually the KC can only get compulsory health testing to work if it does one of two things, get the support of ALL breed clubs(as per the two Irish Setter breeds)or restrict registration to members as per the ISDS with whom you can only register puppies/ROM dogs if you are a member & agree to their rules). Otherwise the UK law can be used to show that the breeder is have their trade restricted.

> Crib and Rosa look similar to a boxer

Pictures of the first boxers look pretty similar

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxer_(dog)#/media/File:Boxerfirstshow.png  Boxers on the first Boxer exhibition, Munich 1896

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxer_(dog)#/media/File:G_flocky.jpg  Flocky, the first boxe

Your links bring up someone boxing on both. Think you've only posted half a link there

Copy and paste the whole thing.  Bit of a pain but it works.  I've never looked at pictures of early boxers before - very interesting to see the similarities between the breeds mentioned in this thread and how dramatically they have evolved  into very different breeds through selective breeding from that similar starting point.

Most breeds have evolved and many for the better when you look at the construction.

oops it was a photo on wiki

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxer_(dog)#History

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxer_(dog)#/media/File:Boxerfirstshow.png  Boxers on the first Boxer exhibition, Munich 1896

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxer_(dog)#/media/File:G_flocky.jpg  Flocky, the first boxer

They look American bulldog types and the bottom link makes it look like it's crossed with a Boston

Well that's the original boxers