Dear All,
Thought you'd like to read this which appeared in the
Sunday Times Newspaper yesterday.
My own breed is on the banned list :(

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2099-756310,00.html

Hmm - I've read it - and talk about emotive reporting - "cutting off puppy dogs tails" :(.

I'd also lime to know what is a "merle terrirer" or "merle collie" - do they mean ALL merle- coloured dogs?
Merle is not a breed - it is a genetic colouring!

I must admit, I did stop breeding persian cats when all that I could see had their noses on a level with their eyes!

Margot

It raises some interesting points, but it is also sensationalist, ambigous, non-factual, irrelevant rubbish.

It confuses several issues, and is very difficult to follow.... I don't think you can write an article on "reptile neglect by the masses" and compare it too the breeding of the bulldog and put it all under the blanket of "cruelty" Two very separate issues.

Agree with you Chloe. At first I thought this was just going to be another anti-EU regulation piece, but the author hyped the story so much that the few important points are lost. The author actually makes it sound as if owning any pet is cruel - if they aren't genetically modified by selective breeding then owners are likely to overfeed them to the point where they are in physical danger.

There are breeds that have been so transformed cosmetically by selective breeding that there is no chance they would survive if left to themselves and only allowed to breed amongst their own population. Breeds that cannot give birth naturally would quickly fade out of existence. Breeds that cannot breath normally would die off. Breeds with protruding eyes or other physical characteristics which make them prone to serious injury and health problems would also fade out of existence. My opinion is that if a breed cannot reproduce itself naturally, could not maintain and support itself itself "in the wild" than there is something seriously wrong with the breed standards. I am not saying that breeding these animals is cruel, since they are obviously not intended to fend for themselves. However, standards which codify what amount to physical defects should be changed.

That's the important point in the article to me. Too bad it was lost amongst so much rubbish.

Stacey

Hi Chloe and all

Did you go to the DEFRA site and read the various sections when they were asking for input last year. Many dog people only looked at the docking issue but I read most of it (and replied regarding docking and the selling of tropical fish that outgrow their tanks - part of which was used in their on-line reports). It covered many subjects which is why the Times article also does I would assume.

Yes, it is sensationalist but I agree with much of what has been written - especially regarding those dogs that can't reproduce naturally, have breathing and other problems in nearly every member of the breed or particular colour of a breed.

Christine

Hi Christine.... I agree with most of what is written too - its just unfortunate that you cannot "see the wood for the trees" in the article... too much to take in... I had to force myself to read to the bottom of the page! My criticism is aimed at the article, not what it stands for necessarily.

I agree that there are too many dogs being bred unethically, particularly dogs that could never survive because they have been so modified - but there is just too much money in *some* dog breeding (especially in certain breeds) for it to change without a massive fight from the breed clubs. Edit to say there is too much money in reptiles, fish, the pet industry as a whole! Until prices tumble and the "elitist" attitude wanes, there will always be a market for "something different".

The overweight/cruelty aspect I also agree with, killing with kindness is a big issue, but surely its a separate article in itself :)

Hello everyone, we read the article in our house and wondered whether a germ of truth relating to poor breeding/bad ownership has been exploited to attack "posh people" 1.e. the kennel club and all pedigree breeders in the same way some people object to horse racing -using animal welfare to pursue an envious grudge against those of a perceived monied background?

To a certain extent I think you've got a point. BUt not all pedigree dog owners are posh or have lots of money.
But the certain breeds that are going for lots of money should somewhere along the line as chloe said change. I for one own an expensive breed, but sadly I don't think I will be owing another. I visited my first champ show last week and spoke to several breeders to be told future puppies will be sold for £2000. One breeder had just had a litter of 17 and sold them for £1500 I could have nearly bought my house for that. The dog would be well worth the £2000, and if it ever needed £2000 in vet bills it would get it, but I refuse to line a breeders pocket with £2000

Alison Rant over

Most modern day dog breeders are ordinary folk like me and you. I own, show and breed my few dogs from a suburban house.

I would love to be able to have a lager kennel of dogs with different lines running side by side.

I keep the number i can walk in one go and fit in my living room :D

These days I imagine that is the majority of breeders.

Alison, the point is that NOT all breeders/horse owners are wealthy and I know this, it's a false perception on the part of the oppostion. What breed is going for 2K?

Hi Lorelei
I did agree with you about not all breeders/owners being wealthy??
The breed going for 2K is Neapolitan Mastiff
Alison

Hi, 'in the same way some people object to horse racing- using animal welfare to pursue an envious grudge against those of a percieved monied background' maybe if you read this article you may reconsider, horse racing is without doubt a very cruel 'sport' with or without a monied background.
http://mysite.freeserve.com/puppy_alert/horse_racing.htm

Hi, I am aware of hideous abuse of horses in the racing industry having worked with horses in my youth - also in polo, showjumpingetc and no doubt it exists in dog showing as someof the other posts have indicated. Any over competitive, selfish individual can abuse the animals in his/her care for their own ends but I don't condemn the entire sportingcommunity for this, nor would I say that everyone holding your point of view is acting from envy.