KismetKat

Some good points mita. Just on this last bit, again we now have a HUGE over-emphasis on a very small single point. The 'daily contact' was just one sentence in Kate's presentation about her proposed code of ethics for commercial breeders. So it's really taking things totally out of context that the seminar was somehow advocating this for good puppy rearing. As a topic, puppy rearing was not discussed at all.

Bit hard with attitudes like this And yes, you are right that it is only ever a small number of members who actually do stuff. I've been one of them in the affiliated obedience club I used to be a member of. But I don't think breed clubs would want to be flooded with pet members, at least not as full members. To encourage pet members, but keep to their own goals as breeders and breed associations, they really need to set up a cheaper ancillary type membership. Perhaps a member or 2 from the "companion' section could then be invited into general committee positions to help with events planning etc. You need the 'setup' before you can encourage pet members (and as breed clubs don't have this set up, explains why they tend to be, let's call it 'less encouraging" about getting pet owners to join).

Just what I need more time sitting at the computer Forums are fun but they are no substitute for real life hands on getting out and about with your dog but since I'm just the owner of a dodgy pet shop dog I should just crawl back under my rock hey? It's been fun but I really have to go we have gotten a bit OT anyway. And I, apparently, am the owner of a 'dodgy' rescue dog even tho he came thru breed-specific rescue and they know who bred him. But if PF can't see the benefit of breed associations swelling their coffers with an ancillary membership model, which may well encourge people like me to join who also have "bunny" tatooed across their forehead and happily volunteer to help organise events, produce newsletters and raise funds, and then run events that attract far more than the usual 6 suspects who usually attend (who, funnily enough, are all committee members), which all then leads on to having pet owners who are better educated, are aware of things like puppy farms, and generally become more resposible dog owners with a good knowledge of their chosen breed - well who are we to argue?

I really think you're reading too much into it - to me it was just a catchy alliteration. One speaker did refer to the title - but I can't remember exactly what they said. She wasn't there to "illustrate purpose for breeding", she was there to present a model for better practices in commercial dog breeding. The main thrust of the entire day was, afterall, about dog welfare. Not quite, what they did separate out was breeders who bred only for show and, more to the point, show wins. Two comments were made about this - the first one already discussed about them selling pets, and a second comment (and this one was made a couple of times) that in some breeds this leads them to breeding for extremes that were not good for the dog healthwise. I hadn't thought of it from that angle, but now that you've articulated it I would have to say I thought the seminar was actually about pulling down boundaries, not creating false ones. That's my impression anyways

I think the title was just "building better dogs". I think 3 of the 4 keynote speakers all owned purebred dogs. And certainly some of the student presenters also owned purebred dogs.

The ANKC allows owners of unregistered purebred dogs (and crossbred dogs) to join their affiliate companion dog training clubs, register their dogs as Associates and compete in their obedience and agility events for ANKC recognised titles. Perhaps you can do that. If what you are looking for is a social club then you need to network with other pet dog owners of your breed. That can be done through either a dog training club or a breed club. Some breed clubs have social days. Plenty more use their specialties as get togethers. But if you are not a member of the club, don't expect those who work their arses off to cater to your needs. Participation in club activity is what will allow you to influence the club's direction. Those active in club activities are usually pretty busy people. I can see PF is in an argumentative mood today - but when isn't she?

I think they were speaking anecdotedly, but am not sure. I'll look forward to the seminar being actually published so many things discussed here so far can be cleared up. It's too easy to take a single remembered comment, have it taken out of context, and then have a pistols at dawn argument over what was actually being said.

Steven needs to add an "only" in that sentence. If they had actually said something that basically meant "if you show your dogs then don't sell dogs as pets" there woulda been a mass walkout! You may PF, but there's been more than a bit of antagonism to the scientists on these forums. I can "love the breed" and promote them without handing over money to a club that doesn't let join in or do anything except enter a 'waggiest tail' contest. Why not have a "companion dog" club attached to the breed club? Let anyone with that breed dog join and have activities and fundraisers. Engage the pet owners of the breed. And even if they got their dog from a pet shop you might well find they'll get their next dog of that breed from a registered breeder.

Sheriden my point was about dialogue needing to be opened up, and while I threw in "pet shops" the main thrust is that many posters in this thread have been dismissive and even antagonistic of the science researchers, yet who would you need to speak to about your protein losing disease...?

As the owner of a pedigree rescue dog that I can't prove is a pedigree (tho rescue 'know' that he is as they recognise by looking at him which breeder he came from) I would love to be able to do this. It would be a hands-on way to learn more about the breed that I have come to love as any future dogs I get will be this breed. It would also give me a good reason to actually join the breed club - but as it stands there is no incentive for me to pay up and join as they club doesn't offer much for 'pet owners' and offers nothing for those of us that don't have a bit of paper.

No-one said that. They repeatedly said that most breeders do a very good job. However there was one comment about breeders who breed only for wins in the showring and have taken their eye off the ball (or even don't care) as to how good their dogs are as 'pets'. The jist was (and correct me if I'm wrong those who took notes), if you are that sort of breeder then don't sell to pet homes and cull.

They get their money back from the pet shop. One of the presenters (Paul I think it was) stated that research findings found that HD was in fact reduced in cross-breed dogs even if both parent dogs were breeds prone to it. One question for dog people who've been around awhile - just when did petshop puppies get SO expensive? Surely this is the driving factor of commercial puppy farms? Back in my youth pet shops sold pups for around $10 and the pet shops generally got them from locals who let their dog have a litter and then couldn't find homes for them all. I doubt commercial puppy farms existed back then - why would you when even the retail end only got $10 max for a pup and most people sourced pups thru FTGH. Another aspect to this, is the part played by vastly increased rates of desexing - perhaps this has been TOO successful?

oh dear the hyenas are out - so before I go off and do something more fun... Tho Kate's proposed code of ethics for commercial dog breeders (and making pet shops responsible for lifelong commitment) would mean the end of puppy farmers and pet shops sourcing pups at 6 weeks age. No, I know this cos I started a fun thread called (Dark Secrets of the Breed" - you can search for it if you like. Point is the vast majority of breeder and breed association websites DO gloss over aspects of breeds. Why frown at a 1st crosser for doing the same? It's time to grow up, enter the realities of the real world and be an adult. Change what you can for the betterment of dogs whatever way you can. Be a grown up and think of the dogs.

Well I've been accused of promoting crossbreeds just for reporting what I heard. I think board moderation was even being suggested. True - but people aren't reading what is posted by people there and just posting from their own assumptions about what they assume was said. Really, while some aspects of what was said was cotroversial and confronting, overall what was said was reasonable and backed up by studies. But some people want to say the studies are wrong.

The "them" is anyone involved with dogs. Researchers, rescue organisations, dog owners, vets, vet nurses, groomers, scientists, judges, kennel councils, RSPCA, pet breeders, pet shops, feed suppliers, ...

Yes, we can. No you can't. From your own sig

Just remember how calm the final panel question time was - anyone and everyone I spoke to was predicting it would be a fiery event and that was during lunch before Kate (the most controversial) spoke.

well find me a website from a registered lab breeder that proudly states "voted worst breed for leaving hair everywhere by Best Friend Holiday Retreat" or a website from registered French Bulldog breeders that has in it's banner "WANT A FARTING DOG?" ;) and then I will duly frown at Kate for glossing over some matters on a website designed to attract buyers. Spotted Devil - I too had some problems following Kate's talk. I don't think it was so much the lack of the powerpoint rather than she was reading notes rather then speaking out to the audience and "presenting" plus many things she said caused some muttering in the audience - making it hard to tune in just her voice and truly 'listen'. I note the people on this board most disinclined to take anything said 'onboard' and make quick smart posts dissing the presenters (and even the people who DID go) weren't actually there. One aspect of the seminar was very much about how dialogue needs to be opened between all stakeholders for the good of the species we all love - dogs. We can't afford to have a multiple "us and them (and them and them and them, oh and them too!)" situation.

I definitely remember Kate admitting her mutts shed. Is that the question???

umm, are these pics meant to be of dead dogs?

Thank goodness I have dogs that don't fart. Now this smilie seems appropriate ;)

My guess she was honest yesterday. Bear in mind her website is designed to cater to her 'market' - of course you tell fibs when marketing something ;)

Yes, this was a shame. But a survey sample that turns out to be 98% women, average age around 50, and 30% with experience working with shelters... I wonder how the regression analysis thingy will go.

Goodo - then you could use the test to find which "UNamicable" dogs you could use as breeding stock. The test is not to say dogs should be "amicable", it's simply meant to be a measure.

All it would need is a simple checkbox in the practice management system. Is that too hard?