Anti Puppy Farm Campaigners Hit Out At Kennel Club’s Diversion Tactics

[Steve]

http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/4763/a...ersion-tactics/

Anti Puppy Farm Campaigners Hit Out at Kennel Club’s Diversion Tactics

Puppy Love, an anti puppy farm group which works tirelessly to bring awareness to the horror of commercialised puppy breeding, has issued a statement in response to the recent Bateson review. The group have made it clear they believe the Kennel Club has hijacked the anti puppy farming message in an attempt to deflect attention from its own negative public image. Puppy Love points out that the Kennel Club has and continues to accept money from the puppy farmers they seek to condemn, publicly. The statement reads…

We and other animal welfare campaigners have been saying much the same for years.

However we are concerned that yet again puppy farming will be forgotten while the pedigree dog scandal is dealt with.

In 1999 the sale of dogs act was amended to ensure councils could inspect and protect dogs bred in puppy farms and although it looked good on paper nothing changed. Inspections do take place but it’s just a paper exercise where boxes are ticked then the pup farmers are allowed to carry on their business as usual. Even when cruelty is pointed out to councils no action is taken.

20 years ago Martin Sennatt then chairman of the KC, made a statement on TV that the KC were scandalized for taking registrations from unscrupulous breeders and that they were changing their registration process to address the issue . If they did change their registration process it hasn’t deterred puppy farmers from registering their dogs and pups. The KC are now trying to lead the campaign against this cruel trade but at the same time they continue to profit from puppy farm misery by registering puppy farm bred puppies, hypocritical? Indeed it is. They tell us “As the secretariat and instigator of the Puppy Farming Study Group, which comprises representatives of the Kennel Club, animal welfare organisations across the whole of the UK, LACORS and government, the Kennel Club is at the forefront of moves to try to end the complex and obscure world of puppy farming”

In that case they should explain just how much success they have had and how much longer we have to wait for them to get the situation under control.

The public are still mislead into believing all KC reg pups are reared in an ethical responsible way.

The pedigree dog scandal is a disgrace to our country, after all we are meant to be a nation of dog lovers but make no mistake the puppy farming scandal is just as bad perhaps even worse.

We are assured that the Welsh Assembly are working towards improving the situation on puppy farms in their country where thousands of breeding bitches and stud dogs are incarcerated in unsuitable accommodation such as pig sheds, barns, sheds, garages and even old refrigerated containers.

Puppy farm dogs have no veterinary intervention when they need respite from their pain and suffering, they are left with infected wombs and die in agony and panic or they die a grim death when there is no vet to perform a caesarean section to save mother and pups. Luckier ones go through life with ears running with infected pus, eyes with severe infections, open tumors, rotten decayed teeth, mange, hernias, coccidosis, lice, fleas, mites the list goes on. Some have no beds or bedding they give birth on concrete and according to one council official some female dogs prefer to deliver pups on cold concrete!!

They live in filth, sometimes without food or water, in summer they are too hot and in winter some will be frozen to death. Their coats are matted with faeces, their nails are overgrown, and some are blind but still expected to produce pups. Many are slowly going insane. They spin in circles or pace back and forth in their cells, some never see daylight, and the outside world is a foreign place to them. This also applies to stud dogs, as many are kept in total isolation until they are needed to perform their duty. Should any dogs be lucky enough to be rescued once outside in the open they still circle and pace as if they are still incarcerated? They shy away from human hands as they have never known kindness.

This is cruelty on a very large scale that takes place day after miserable day in the name of commerce. It should be banned but we know it won’t be, there is too much money involved for breeders, dealers, pet shops, advertisers and even government all taking their blood money cut from this horrendous cruelty. Shame on them all.

The public also must take some responsibility for this sorry state of affairs as they are the ones who fuel demand and are willing to buy pups from unscrupulous sources rather than make an effort to source a good ethical breeder. The puppy buying public are mislead at very turn thinking that by buying a pup in a pet shop or a local authority licensed kennel they are purchasing from a decent source when sometimes nothing could be further from the truth.

Time and time again puppy farms dogs have been abandoned and let down by the leading charities and large organisations in this country who have more than enough funds to expose this cruelty, instead its left to the small goups of campaigners like ourselves to organize protests and try to inform the public and to complain to councils who disregard us as cranks.

All evidence we have collected has been sent to RSPCA and we wait and wait and wait for action that probably will not happen.

In a few months time will Professor Bateson’s recommendations regarding puppy farms lie on a dusty shelf somewhere, forgotten and abandoned just like the puppy farm dogs? We expect so as the people in power have let the problem get so big and so out of control no one knows where to start on this huge issue of cruelty to man’s best friend . These abused dogs need help and they need it now .

Puppy Love website =>

[Quickasyoucan]

I have been thinking about this whilst I try and read the report, and whilst I am glad that the report does make reference to puppy farms and to the culpability of the consumer in the welfare of dogs in that it specifically mentions that people need to be educated to buy from a reputable source and to buy the right dog for their situation (paras 7.38 to 7.44) of the report, I think this is in danger of being lost amid the hype on inbreeding.

I don't know anything about the allegations against the kennel club, so can't comment, but one thing where I do see similarity between the UK and Australia with perhaps Australia being worse (certainly in terms of euthanasia rates per human head of population), is in what the report calls treatment of dogs as commodities and the public culpability.

I think too much focus is being put on pedigree dogs and not enough on what has surely got to be the biggest thing confronting dogs, namely public attitudes and the corresponding appalling euthanasia rates and mass breeding of companion animals.

Personally I would like to see a decent media campaign on responsible ownership, penalties for irresponsible serial dumpers and abusers of dogs and proper monitoring of mass breeding facilities. Regardless of whether these dogs are kept in clean conditions and are properly fed, does life in a kennel with little or no human contact really constitute an adequate life for a companion animal?

[Shmurps]

I have been thinking about this whilst I try and read the report, and whilst I am glad that the report does make reference to puppy farms and to the culpability of the consumer in the welfare of dogs in that it specifically mentions that people need to be educated to buy from a reputable source and to buy the right dog for their situation (paras 7.38 to 7.44) of the report, I think this is in danger of being lost amid the hype on inbreeding.

I don't know anything about the allegations against the kennel club, so can't comment, but one thing where I do see similarity between the UK and Australia with perhaps Australia being worse (certainly in terms of euthanasia rates per human head of population), is in what the report calls treatment of dogs as commodities and the public culpability.

I think too much focus is being put on pedigree dogs and not enough on what has surely got to be the biggest thing confronting dogs, namely public attitudes and the corresponding appalling euthanasia rates and mass breeding of companion animals.

Personally I would like to see a decent media campaign on responsible ownership, penalties for irresponsible serial dumpers and abusers of dogs and proper monitoring of mass breeding facilities. Regardless of whether these dogs are kept in clean conditions and are properly fed, does life in a kennel with little or no human contact really constitute an adequate life for a companion animal?

I sometimes never know how to put things into words, but when I read them I know.

So I agree.

[Steve]

I have been thinking about this whilst I try and read the report, and whilst I am glad that the report does make reference to puppy farms and to the culpability of the consumer in the welfare of dogs in that it specifically mentions that people need to be educated to buy from a reputable source and to buy the right dog for their situation (paras 7.38 to 7.44) of the report, I think this is in danger of being lost amid the hype on inbreeding.

I don't know anything about the allegations against the kennel club, so can't comment, but one thing where I do see similarity between the UK and Australia with perhaps Australia being worse (certainly in terms of euthanasia rates per human head of population), is in what the report calls treatment of dogs as commodities and the public culpability.

I think too much focus is being put on pedigree dogs and not enough on what has surely got to be the biggest thing confronting dogs, namely public attitudes and the corresponding appalling euthanasia rates and mass breeding of companion animals.

Personally I would like to see a decent media campaign on responsible ownership, penalties for irresponsible serial dumpers and abusers of dogs and proper monitoring of mass breeding facilities. Regardless of whether these dogs are kept in clean conditions and are properly fed, does life in a kennel with little or no human contact really constitute an adequate life for a companion animal?

No it does not and part of the problem in this regard is that when they make laws and guidelines they base their ideas on what boarding facilities are and what they need.Breeding dogs need different management ,different environmental conditions and different operating procedures. Dogs in boarding kennels are only there for a limited time and don't spend their entire lives on concrete miles away from humans.They need to see and interact with humans,other dogs and other animals more than just when its time to clean and feed.

[Kissindra]

have there been studies compairing the overall health/wellbeing between dogs given different living environments and levels of human interaction?

[Quickasyoucan]

I have been thinking about this whilst I try and read the report, and whilst I am glad that the report does make reference to puppy farms and to the culpability of the consumer in the welfare of dogs in that it specifically mentions that people need to be educated to buy from a reputable source and to buy the right dog for their situation (paras 7.38 to 7.44) of the report, I think this is in danger of being lost amid the hype on inbreeding.

I don't know anything about the allegations against the kennel club, so can't comment, but one thing where I do see similarity between the UK and Australia with perhaps Australia being worse (certainly in terms of euthanasia rates per human head of population), is in what the report calls treatment of dogs as commodities and the public culpability.

I think too much focus is being put on pedigree dogs and not enough on what has surely got to be the biggest thing confronting dogs, namely public attitudes and the corresponding appalling euthanasia rates and mass breeding of companion animals.

Personally I would like to see a decent media campaign on responsible ownership, penalties for irresponsible serial dumpers and abusers of dogs and proper monitoring of mass breeding facilities. Regardless of whether these dogs are kept in clean conditions and are properly fed, does life in a kennel with little or no human contact really constitute an adequate life for a companion animal?

No it does not and part of the problem in this regard is that when they make laws and guidelines they base their ideas on what boarding facilities are and what they need.Breeding dogs need different management ,different environmental conditions and different operating procedures. Dogs in boarding kennels are only there for a limited time and don't spend their entire lives on concrete miles away from humans.They need to see and interact with humans,other dogs and other animals more than just when its time to clean and feed.

I so agree. the report does touch on these things, in that it talks about lack of adequate socialisation, early isolation of pups, but I can see it all getting "lost in translation" as the RSPCA jumps even heavier on the anti-purebreed bandwagon.

In para 5.11 which is problems and potential solutions, out of 12 points raised (a. - l.) at least 7 relate either to breeding (irrespective of cross or pedigree)(e. and f.), public culpability (h). or puppy farming (a, k and l), but I guarantee the only ones that get the limelight are the pedigree ones.

One thing that I do agree with when talking about dog welfare as a whole (rather than focussing on any issues within pedigree breeding) is that change has to also come from the consumer, as the report states:

"Unfortunately in the case of dogs and puppy buying the market place malfunctions, in the sense that attention to good welfare on the part of breeders is not effectively rewarded by higher returns from their puppy sales and poor welfare is not penalised".

I find it incredible when you drive through somewhere like Mosman that has a DD on every street corner that people don't stop to think where the pretty puppy might have come from and what conditions its poor mother might have lived in. So long as the consumer can pick what it wants when it wants point of origin does not seem to matter, good ethical registered breeders aren't rewarded (whether literally or emotionally) for being so, whilst the bad ones seem to get away scott free. Same thing in the report which states that teh majority of puppy farm dogs from Ireland or Wales find their way to the affluent south of England.

I guess what I am trying to see is I wish that the spotlight would focus more firmly on dog welfare and less on minority. issues, otherwise it is blaming a few for the evils of a majority including very largely the public themselves.

ETA: off topic but I note in the bio that Professor Bateson is a breeder of Egyptian Mau cats himself.

Edited January 19, 2010 by Quickasyoucan

[goldchow]

Totally agree that those making the guidlines for the keeping of breeding dogs appear to believe that a boarding kennel type facility is required which is totally incorrect if the aim is to produce happy well socialized puppies for good pet homes.

This report opens a whole can of worms for me as I happen to live in a region often referred to as Puppy Farm Heaven and I know of a number of incidents where reputable registered breeders who do all the right things for their dogs have been approached to either use a stud dog or purchase a puppy. The registered breeder often gives in out of fear that these people, if they don't get what they want they'll come and take it anyway with or without papers. These people don't think of the dogs as we do and there is only so much one can do to protect your own dogs.

Fortunately so far none of them have my breed and I have only ever had to refuse stud services for dingos and GSDs but its always at the back of ones mind.

Its a threat that has always been there but since the advent of the 'designer dog syndrome' particularly here in Australia, it seems to have really unleashed a monster that no-one seems to know how or want to deal with.

[Jed]

have there been studies compairing the overall health/wellbeing between dogs given different living environments and levels of human interaction?

Not that I've ever seen.

[sandgrubber]

Totally agree that those making the guidlines for the keeping of breeding dogs appear to believe that a boarding kennel type facility is required which is totally incorrect if the aim is to produce happy well socialized puppies for good pet homes.

In WA you are not allowed to build a kennel within 10 m of a residence, and if you have more than two dogs . . . or in some shires four . . . they expect a kennel and want you to be in a kennel zone (read dog ghetto). Makes it hard for breeders who want to have three or four or five dogs and do puppy raising in the house. Stupid stupid rules!!!!! The pedigree community hasn't enough clout, or enough focus to get the laws changed . .. maybe it's worth turning to the animal welfare community to find political support???? :D

[mita]

have there been studies compairing the overall health/wellbeing between dogs given different living environments and levels of human interaction?

Not that I've ever seen.

Levels of human/dog interaction were measured for effect, in the U of Q study that looked at extent of socialisation.

Registered breeders of purebreds came out significantly higher than non-registered breeders, in providing that socialisation. And it was concluded that their puppies would be more likely to make good companion dogs, as a result. Would have been great if living conditions for puppies had been coded into that.

Would be interesting to track health, too. I wish an Australian university would do similar research to the Danish study which looked at causes of death & lengevity across thousands of dogs.....purebreds & mixedbreeds. With results which should put at least a minor brake on the bandwagon.

But, also a study that included the variable of conditions which puppies were bred in.....&/or dogs raised in.

Edited January 23, 2010 by mita

[sandgrubber]

Should note that temperament is a mix of heredity and environment. To wit, Belyav's extraordinary experiments with domestication of foxes, where friendliness to humans and playfulness were found to be highly heritable traits. As breeders, we should be selecting for temperament as well as worrying about puppy socialisation, lest our breeds shift from tame to a somewhat more feral state. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tame_Silver_Fox

[Steve]

Should note that temperament is a mix of heredity and environment. To wit, Belyav's extraordinary experiments with domestication of foxes, where friendliness to humans and playfulness were found to be highly heritable traits. As breeders, we should be selecting for temperament as well as worrying about puppy socialisation, lest our breeds shift from tame to a somewhat more feral state. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tame_Silver_Fox

Dont most purebred breeders select for temperament as part of what they do?

[sandgrubber]

Quote from Steve . . . my system isn't allowing a direct reply...:

Dont most purebred breeders select for temperament as part of what they do?

Some, maybe most, but not all. I know of a show stopper whose unofficial call name is "Asshole" and he seems to pass the temperament on to his pups . . . .but he still gets used at stud.

[mita]

Should note that temperament is a mix of heredity and environment. To wit, Belyav's extraordinary experiments with domestication of foxes, where friendliness to humans and playfulness were found to be highly heritable traits. As breeders, we should be selecting for temperament as well as worrying about puppy socialisation, lest our breeds shift from tame to a somewhat more feral state. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tame_Silver_Fox

Dont most purebred breeders select for temperament as part of what they do?

I'd also suggest that the registered breeders of purebreds, who were found to significantly socialise their puppies/dogs more, were thereby more aware of individual temperament traits.....in doing so. The two things are interdepedent. I'd expect most of those breeders would translate that awareness into their decisions re breeding. And they are dealing with dogs that, by & large, have been selected for breeding (& close cohabitation with humans) for a long time.

But I'd agree with sandgrubber that, in circumstances where these standards do not apply, there could well be a breakdown. Like puppy farming & BYB for profit....where selection for breeding does not consider behavioral goals. Nor does raising of the animals take any interest in socialisation. The horror of the puppy farm approach is not just the possibility of physical neglect & ignorance of health issues....but also the breakdown of the process by which dogs become socialised. And the UQ study showed the critical period was in the early weeks.

The worst thing about this current bandwagon of untested premises about pedigree dog breeding.....is what they keep leaving out.

In the forum following the showing of the infamous Pedigree Dogs Exposed program....Dr Peter Higgins kept saying the critical thing is the decision-making about selections for breeding (& why). And it was a matter of using the best of existing knowledge to do that.

But this bandwagon keeps rolling on... throwing out to the public, untested premises about all purebred dogs & all registered breeders. Suggesting that all the ills of the companion dog world seem to come down to them.

Edited January 24, 2010 by mita