YAAAAAAAAAAAY :) :)
I had set it to record on sky+, but when I came to watch it back it hadn't recorded :( Thank you for that link :) :)

Fantastic, thanks!

I enjoyed it - though OH had to leave the room when i ranted about pack theory during the wolf bits.

Anyone note with the WILD wolves filmed in the US.... the alpha was most certainly NOT eating first, alone, whilst the others waited.. everyone piled in and grabbed what they could.

And then the shaun ellis bit - now i wouldnt argue he knows HIS wolves very well, and probably more about captive wolves than anyone else in the uk..

But his wolves as has been mentioned, are in no way comparable to a wild pack - they have no need to stay as a pack because they dont need to travel or hunt or protect themselves against danger. Then it is not surprising that they dont behave as we are told a wolf pack should - how is it the 'alpha' then needed a human to intervene? And if he IS the alpha, why dont they all wait for him to eat first or learn that he wont tolerate in-fighting... if the alphas rule is sacred and no one dares break it, as we are constantly told is the case...

But otherwise, yay for Martin Clunes, more of HIM and less of some others i could mention but wont!

Just watched this last night, found it a very interesting programme.
My fave bit was the part where Martin Clunes spoke to the indigenous Aboriginal people who mentioned the dreamtime stories, have such respect and a healthy relationship with the dingoes.
However, I did enjoy seeing the wild wolves, and the howling just sends me every time, something very very magical about that.

> The problem i had with it was the idiot with the wolf pack

I think this is the same guy who wrote the book, I think it was called wolf talk, he certainly isnt an idiot he lived amongst a wild wolf pack and also the wolf pack at longleat and learnt alot about them as well as getting accepted as one of them.

Great programme though, even my non-doggie OH enjoyed it !

I thought it was a good show and glad its a series. In my opinion there aren't enough tv shows about dogs! 

I think its only a 2 part series isnt it ?

Yes it is part 2 is on Sunday at 9 pm cannot wait avery good progamme

Before you set out to see the dog exhibit at Tring I'd just check on their website. I think i read somewhere because the government has given the museum 87 thousand pounds for repairs and refurbishment that the dog s on display bit may be closed till december.
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/about-us/news/2008/may/news_14505.html

Reminder that this is on again tonight, and also I think covers the pedigree/health issues topic again.
Will be interesting to see if it differs, or not, in comparison to the bbc's effort

talking of the wolf man, about 12months ago there was a programme dedicated just about him and the wolfs it was fantastic and what he didnt do for those wolfs was amazing, his marriage suffered also ( i think it ended in divorce), it was so interesting and very moving, i will record tonights 2nd part as there is a good drama on bbc1.

I thought that was a little more balanced than Jemima's programme certainly less sensational about it all.  For a start it placed things in context of the establishing of selective breeding although it still made the same errors in confusing inbreeding with selective breeding to exaggeration.  A pity more could not of been said about how these things are being addressed but I suppose that was not what the programme was about.  I did think Bruce Fogle got to within a breath of adding that the Bull Dog standard no longer says head as massive as possible but alas he didn't not let it tip over out of his hobby horse.

Definitely more balanced. A shame he didn't mention the HD x-rays (or did he? There was a lot of discussion in the room at the time!) and the other tests that can/should be done to breeding animals, but the message left was more positive.

Enjoyable and more sensible programme by a man who just seems to be in love with our four legged friends. 

no he didnt mention the HD x-rays, I was sat there willing him to say it, that part and the bit about so called in breeding ruined what I thought was a fantastic programme.

Loved the programme and loved Martin Clunes .
Please can we have him on Crufts instead of Ben ?!?!?????

> Please can we have him on Crufts instead of Ben ?!?!?????

But he didn't answer Ben's Dad back either :-D

Yet again we have NO IDEA what ended up on the cutting room floor ;)

Yes, yes, yes!!.......Martin Clunes for Crufts pleeeeeeeease!

Brilliant program very much enjoyed it, I have recorded it and will watch it again it was that good :)

I just loved this programme - a joy to watch even with the negative points.  But they weren't sensationalised: just a shame not more was said about how problems are being recognised and dealt with.

he preaches a lot but he doesnt do what you are supposed to do with dogs

>he preaches a lot but he doesnt do what you are supposed to do with dogs

I've never found Martin Clunes to be 'preachy'. And what does he do that you're not supposed to? Could you elaborate, please?

I've seen several references to the BBC1 programme being unbalanced and biased but I think it's whole purpose was to highlight the things that aren't right, not the things that are.  If you were to watch a programme that exposed bullying teachers, you wouldn't expect it to tell you about all the good, dedicated teachers would you ? 
The 'norm' does not need to be reported, but bad practices do :)

I'm not a breeder so not directly affected (no sour grapes) but there were some things I didn't like about it. One, it was Pedigree Dogs Exposed - not selective breeding exposed, or extreme physical characteristics exposed. It implied that all pedigree dogs suffer from horrible diseases and are all debilitated. Not surprising if you know that Jemima doesn't believe in having pedigree dogs period. I do agree that some breeds have problems due to selecting for extremes of physical traits and that inbreeding can wreak a bit of havoc genetically. Less sensationalism and more facts would have been better. The public was left with the impression that if they buying straight crossbreed or mongrel is the only way to get a healthy dog. That's simply not true. While some mongrels and crosses are beautifully constructed and healthy others are not. Hip dysplasia, cancer and epilepsy can be found in all dogs. I would consider breeding a GSD with a corgi for example bad practice yet that sort of thing wasn't mentioned.

Also, in my opinion, highlighting a problem then not providing a solution or ways to avoid it just smacks of personal agenda rather than useful information.

What the BBC program omitted was who bred the dogs shown n the program I do not mean their names(although it would have been good to see them interviewed)but whether the dogs were bred by active show/hobby breeders or by pet breeders & how to move forward. They didn't the fact that Ms Cuddy & Ms Milne were on the program makes it bias before it started(they are both very Anti KC & Ms Milne is very anti pedigree dogs period !)

The good practices do need to be highlighted for example what tests another breed has now available because of the efforts of the breeders-like Border Collies-The public do need to be advised not to buy Border Collies from"pet"breeders or anyone else who does NOT health test & believe me there are many who don't know anything about the dogs they breed.

As a point of interest I contacted all the Cavalier breeders who advertised in our local area"***4Sale(or something like that)the day after the program none had done any health tests on their dogs, one new advert had the wording"my puppies are not imbred & do not have Stringomaylia(their spelling)because they are not KC Reg & living as pets"they all told me that their dogs couldn't have SM because they were not KC registered & only KC reg Cavaliers had SM !! not just one or two but 7 "breeders totally unaware of the health conditions under the skin of their dogs !!! & of course Joe public will go to them because they believe what appeared in the BBC program :-(

I've been told by a BC owner who comes to our training club her dogs don't have or carry any health conditions because they are not registered !!!  :-O

>The 'norm' does not need to be reported, but bad practices do

Bad practices are better exposed when compared with good practices. If the alternative is omitted then a false impression is given - which in a documentary is itself 'bad practice'.

Ditto loved it his enthusiasm about the dogs and the fits of laughter with the Dingo on the piano. It was a "light" documentary really but well done i thought, Yes I would vote for Martin at Crufts, he's a dog lover owned by two cockers and a lab!!.

> Ditto loved it his enthusiasm about the dogs and the fits of laughter with the Dingo on the piano. It was a "light" documentary really but well done i thought, Yes I would vote for Martin at Crufts, he's a dog lover owned by two cockers and a lab!!.

Same here I thought it was a really enjoyable programme with no scare tactics!

>> The 'norm' does not need to be reported, but bad practices do
> Bad practices are better exposed when compared with good practices. If the alternative is omitted then a false impression is given - which in a documentary is itself 'bad practice'

totally agree, you cannot just claim something is terible and not show how to remedy it.

> not show how to remedy it.

Or discuss what has been done over recent years and what was ongoing.

HERE HERE A VERY ENJOYABLE AND AT TIMES INFORMATIVE PROGRAMME .....WISH THERE WERE MORE INFORMATIVE DOG RELATED PROGRAMMES ON TV ...AFTER ALL HOW MANY DOGS ARE KEPT AS PETS AND WHY OH WHY COULDNT THERE BE ASERIES FOLLOWING PUPPY TRAINING AFTER ALL THEIR ARE ENOUGH FOR SO CALLED PROBLEM DOGS ...ie VICTORIA STILLWELL (ITS ME OR THE DOG ) DOG BORSTAL ,DOG WHISPERER

>WHY COULDNT THERE BE ASERIES FOLLOWING PUPPY TRAINING

I think that's an excellent idea. A series following a celeb of some kind sourcing a dog correctly and following its training week by week (mistakes and all!) would make great TV and be very educational.

where is the link???

> I think that's an excellent idea. A series following a celeb of some kind sourcing a dog correctly and following its training week by week (mistakes and all!) would make great TV and be very educational.

What a brilliant idea!!  The BBC could rectify the blunders made by the last programme if it were to do this!  I reckon you ought to contact the BBC JG and volunteer to be the programme's consultant/technical advisor! :)

>where is the link???

What link?

A series following a celeb of some kind sourcing

it would be good but............you would have to have every breed of dog to make it fair to all, and from every type of breeder, to show all sides. Like was said about 'that program', it should show all sides, breeds, and breeders.

Hollywood here we come :)

>you would have to have every breed of dog to make it fair to all

Not really: you could show the celeb visiting Discover Dogs to learn about the different breeds and find out what best suits their lifestyle and their taste. Then they (and the viewers) are led through the process of contacting the breed clubs; finding out what health tests are necessary for their shortlist of breeds; visiting the adult dogs in their own homes to find out more about what they're like to live with; contacting breeders and going on a waiting list - all before seeing a single puppy! In convenient bite-sized chunks the nuggets of information about the evils of puppy farming, random BYBs, unhealth-tested parents etc can be dropped in so that Joe Public isn't blinded by science.

That process is the same no matter what breed they ultimately end up with - that's the process that Joe Public needs to learn about.

> where is the link???

It's on page 1, but here it is again :)

I agree with what you are saying, but I do think all breeds should have a good mention, especially with what to look out for in terms of health and testing, find out exactly what each breed could be prone to, and what genetic problems have been caused by the way the dogs have been bred over the past years to change them. Like it or not, many dogs have conformation and health defects that were not there many years ago and breeding has changed that.
A well balanced program would point out that not all show born puppies are any better than BYB (That program showed that) puppies and they will learn what to ask, and what the answers mean, when looking for their next best friend. It may also take the 'slur' off show bred puppies. It is certainly exceptionally worrying that people are turning away from well bred puppies when the 'show' word is mentioned, do they not realise that many 'show' dogs will be in the pedigree of a BYB or puppy farmers puppies, after all many decend from these lines, yet these puppies parents will not have had the health tests required, so could well be full of the problems shown on the tv. 

Could you not have a shortlist of say 3 or 4 breeds to investigate further and meet breeders but then make it clear that info on individual breeds is available and have a webpage dedicated to that?

>what to look out for in terms of health and testing, find out exactly what each breed could be prone to

Absolutely. :) One programme in the series could be dedicated to the types of health tests the various breeds require, and it'd be simple to film a dog having its hips x-rayed, dogs having their eye tests etc. My own puppies were filmed for TV 13 years ago having their BAER tests, so it's not difficult to arrange!

I think too much technical detail will bore the public; a proper feature on each of the 200-odd recognised breeds would have them switching off in droves! Martin Clunes programme had double the viewing figures of the BBC programme; this had a lot to do with MC's popularity but also because the programme kept itself light, to keep the viewers who have very little interest in dogs (hard for us on here to believe!).

Does anyone remember 'Dogs with Dunbar'? He IMHO would be superb for the programme every one is suggesting. I loved DWD, and I love his attitude and training methods. Quite cute to look at too! I know he resides in the states now, but I'm sure could be tempted to do a prog, especially as he did reply to the original prog (quoted in Dogs Today this month).

K

> especially as he did reply to the original prog (quoted in Dogs Today this month).
>

What did he say?

He said
"Ruthless selectively breeding for conformation, coat colour and cuteness has had extremely deleterious effects on health and life expectancy. I love purebred dogs as much as I love mixed breeds, but I would love for them to be healthier and live longer. SUrely it would be a no brainer to breed for health and longevity at the same time as breeding for conformation. The solution of course is simple: only to breed from unrelated healthy male dogs that are at least seven years old. Longevity is simply the very best overall indicator of health, fit genes and good behaviour and temperament".

An interesting thought, not posed by anyone else in the great debate, which I haven't really had time to consider properly yet!

it was posted on a blog at www.dogstardaily.com (which I haven't had a chance to have a nosy at yet)

K

> SUrely it would be a no brainer to breed for health and longevity at the same time as breeding for conformation. The solution of course is simple: only to breed from unrelated healthy male dogs that are at least seven years old. Longevity is simply the very best overall indicator of health, fit genes and good behaviour and temperament".
>

I certainly take health and longevity into account when making decisions on breeding as I do want my dogs around a long time, but inheritance is not that simple.

My foundation bitch comes from a long lived line, her mother lived to 14 and grandmother and great grandmother lived to over 15 years.

She had to half litter sisters belonging to a friend, both were bred from, one lived to 11 and the other nearly 16, the first would be seen as lacking longevity (the breeds average age at death being just over 13).

My girl lived to 13 1/2 and was very fit until the last few weeks when it became apparent one of her organs would fail (kidneys), but her daughter died a few months later at only 11, has a son and several daughters winning well and in one case taking up a new sport (Tracking) at 8, 9 and 10 years of age..

My current oldest is 11 on the 1st of October and has never needed the Vet in her life, so I would consider her very fit and healthy, she has had 3 litters.

When deciding on my current lien bred litter I took the above into account and the fact that the common grandparent is nearly 9 years old and fit as a flea, and that one grand sire is 8 and the other almost 7.  the latter boys mother is still well and that line have longevity and brains too.

So I think it is very unfair to suggest that breeders who really care about a breed are not breeding with the whole animal in mind.

A dog I bred who is still placing well in Open at champ shows is nearly 10 and didn't sire a litter until eh was 6 1/2, though often a male tried later in life will not get the hang of stud work (I tried a lovely champion male twice), and of course a bitch needs to be bred from before she gets too old (our breed club advises a first litter by five). 

I do tend to try and find an older proven partner for a young bitch and vie versa, if |I want to use a younger male it will be on a bitch having her second or last litter so likely to be 5 to 7 years old by then.

Bitches and dogs would have passed health testing so would be over a year old for males and over two for bitches.  In practice few would be as yougn as this across the breed when bred from.

Im obviously in the minority but i dont think its a good idea to show more programmes about training. I think its far better to recommend going to a training class where you can have demonstrations and a trainer can watch you and correct you, rather than just copying tactics off a programme.
I dont know if ive explained myself well. Heres an example, if i wanted to take up gymnastics i wouldnt just copy the athletes on the olympics - i would go to a gym and train with an instructor, working my way up from a novice.
Sometimes the TV makes out its so easy to train animals when in actual fact there are hours and hours of training that have gone on behind the scenes to get the animal to a well behaved/trained stage.
If you have a problem dog, or try to do too much too soon the chances are you are going to make the issues worse not better.
More damage is caused by using incorrect methods when training!! but people dont realise that and think they are saving a buck by copying the tele as opposed to going to classes

>if i wanted to take up gymnastics i wouldnt just copy the athletes on the olympics

Would you want to take up gymnastics if you hadn't seen them on the TV first? ;) Remember that there are lots of people who don't even realise training classes exist, Fred's Mum! If they were publicised, and how cheap (generally) they are, more people would go. But if people don't see training classes on the TV, they won't go.

True, but there is a huge difference in advertising and recommending classes through the TV, and showing the actual techniques on TV.
How many times do we hear of people using cesar milans technique and getting it wrong?! Why?......becuase people see it on TV and copy it.
These people would be better to go to a class but see it as a cheaper easier option to do at home!

Freds Mum

The trouble with encouraging attending training classes (as with TV programmes and certain training books) is how good will the trainer actually be?  Many times we read on here about classes having heavy handed trainers - advocating check chains, pinning, alpha rolling etc?   There are many good classes but equally there are many bad ones, and in the absence of getting specific recommendations for a local class where the trainer uses only hands off and reward based methods, it's still a mine field for the average pet owner.

I'd like to see fun fuelled programming whereby basic commands and easy tricks were taught using (as example) clickers and treats :)  This could prove to be light entertainment (essential for viewing figures!) and a major breakthrough in educating the dog owning public at large on how simple and fun it can be to give their pet acceptable social skills. TBH most family dogs probably don't go to any type of training classes for a multitude of reasons and a great many of them are still happy, friendly, well adjusted dogs with good to very reasonable control :)  And think of all the dogs owned by the homless, Big Issue sellers etc.  I'd be willing to bet none of these have been formally trained and these dogs, not forgetting their poor owners, don't have the "cheaper easier option to do at home"

regards, Teri