New Advisory Board On Dog Breeding

[Steve]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peterwed...allenges-ahead/

The saga about poor health in pedigree dogs continues, with the announcement today of the founder members of the Advisory Council on the Welfare Issues of Dog Breeding. These include a broad spectrum of people with a strong interest in healthy dogs, including members with backgrounds in genetics, animal welfare, animal behaviour, neurology, university teaching and a legal expert.

The new committee is due to meet the first time on 8 December 2010 and its first tasks will include the development of its strategy and priorities for the next three years as well as forming a response to the Welsh Assembly consultation on proposed legislation relating to dog breeding. The Welsh proposals include measures to tighten up on so-called “puppy farms”, such as:

• tightening the thresholds where a dog breeding licence is required;
  
• a staff to dog ratio of one person to care for a maximum of 20 adult animals;
  
• compulsory microchipping of dogs on licensed breeding premises;
  
• the need for behaviour and socialisation of animals to be taken account of in the licensing requirements to meet the obligations in the Animal Welfare Act 2006.
  

Apart from puppy farms, there’s plenty of fodder for the new committee to get its teeth into; my suggestion in a blog last week that the Kennel Club’s “Discover Dogs” exhibition was “less controversial than Crufts” may have been a little off the mark.

The new blog by Jemima Harrison, the producer of the BBC documentary “Pedigree Dogs Exposed”, included photos and

taken of pedigree dogs on display last weekend. There’s no doubt that some of the individual dogs are suffering on account of their poor conformation, yet they’d been chosen to represent “the best of their breed”.

On its website, the Kennel Club proudly maintains that its aim is “that every dog, even if its function is solely to be a pet, should be able to see, breathe and walk freely.” We can only hope that the new Advisory Council is able to make constructive suggestions, perhaps forcible, to help to achieve that objective.

[shortstep]

Did not see this till now.

I see Jemima attacked the one person who is representing the kennel club, who the photo shows sitting a rock with to typical working bred border collies (nothing show bred about these dogs and would be as any working sheepdog you would find across the UK. There wil be no pleasing.

Launch of new Dog Advisory Council

Sheila Crispin, with her two collies in Cumbria

Today marks the official launch of the new Dog Advisory Council on the Welfare Issues in Dog Breeding.

The launch of the Council follows Pedigree Dogs Exposed two years ago and the three major reports that followed it (RSPCA, APGAW and the Bateson Report) - all of which stressed the need for an independent body.

I've been anxious about the make-up of the Council, not least because its Chair, Professor Sheila Crispin, is an honorary member of the Kennel Club and did not feel it necessary to resign her membership of the KC's own Dog Health Group following her appointment. I also felt when I interviewed Sheila for Dogs Today recently (entire interview online here) that she cut the KC too much slack and was far too focused on puppy farms - an important issue, of course, but not if it's going to let mainstream pedigree dog-breeding off the hook. But there are some very good names here, including:

[Steve]

Did not see this till now.

I see Jemima attacked the one person who is representing the kennel club, who the photo shows sitting a rock with to typical working bred border collies (nothing show bred about these dogs and would be as any working sheepdog you would find across the UK. There wil be no pleasing.

Launch of new Dog Advisory Council

Sheila Crispin, with her two collies in Cumbria

Today marks the official launch of the new Dog Advisory Council on the Welfare Issues in Dog Breeding.

The launch of the Council follows Pedigree Dogs Exposed two years ago and the three major reports that followed it (RSPCA, APGAW and the Bateson Report) - all of which stressed the need for an independent body.

I've been anxious about the make-up of the Council, not least because its Chair, Professor Sheila Crispin, is an honorary member of the Kennel Club and did not feel it necessary to resign her membership of the KC's own Dog Health Group following her appointment. I also felt when I interviewed Sheila for Dogs Today recently (entire interview online here) that she cut the KC too much slack and was far too focused on puppy farms - an important issue, of course, but not if it's going to let mainstream pedigree dog-breeding off the hook. But there are some very good names here, including:

So is this something they just gave up on and put together on their own to prevent legislation or did they have no choice because of legislation?

[shortstep]

Not a clue, as I said I did not know about this till I read your post. Still trying to wrap my head around who they 'Advisory Council on the Welfare Issues of Dog Breeding' are.

Welcome

Welcome to the website of the Advisory Council on the Welfare Issues of Dog Breeding

Within the last 18 months three separate reports have been published recommending the creation of an independent Advisory Council to provide advice regarding the welfare issues of dog breeding. The first two reports were released in 2009 and the third in January 2010 (‘Pedigree dog breeding in the UK: a major welfare concern?’ commissioned by the RSPCA, a report from the Associate Parliamentary Group for Animal Welfare entitled ‘A healthier future for pedigree dogs’ and the ‘Independent inquiry into dog breeding’ by Professor Sir Patrick Bateson).

In February 2010 a consortium of organisations* concerned with the welfare of dogs formed an interim ‘Review Board’ to take forward the key recommendations of the three reports. Their unanimous view was that the most important first step was the formation of the independent Advisory Council.

Following an open competition, Professor Sheila Crispin was appointed as the founding Chairman. The press release and further details about Professor Crispin can be found here.

A further open competition has now been completed for the Members of the Council. A press release detailing the new Members will be available from Thursday 18 November.

The first meeting of the Council will be held on 8 December 2010. Further details of the agenda will be available on this website nearer the date of the meeting.

The Advisory Council has been established as a company limited by guarantee. As a non-statutory body it depends entirely on grants and donations to progress its work. It does not benefit from any financial support from government. Progress so far has been made possible by generous donations from a number of animal welfare charities.

In order to place the Advisory Council on a sustainable footing for the future we aim to establish a structure of patrons or sponsors willing to support the work of the Council. We are approaching a number of organisations with a strong interest in the welfare of dogs. If you are interested in learning more about becoming a patron or sponsor, please contact Heather Peck on [email protected].

If you would like to contribute to the work of the Council, please send your donation to John Hird (The Welfare Fund for Companion Animals), c/o Mrs Heather Peck, Cherry Tree Cottage, Scotland Farm, Dry Drayton, Cambridge CB23 8AX. All cheques should be made out to “The Advisory Council on the Welfare Issues of Dog Breeding

If you have views or evidence you wish to offer the Council, please contact the Acting Secretary, Mrs Heather Peck.

[shortstep]

and this

The selection of the founding chairman was made through an open competition conducted in accordance with the Nolan principles on standards in public life. The selection panel was chaired by Prof Sir Patrick Bateson FRS, and the other members were Lord Soulsby of Swaffham Prior and Mrs Caroline Wood (previously Director of English Nature responsible for Human Resources). The panel secretary was Mrs Heather Peck FCIPD. The post was advertised and the selection of Prof Crispin was made from a strong field of eminent applicants.

The organisations forming the Review Board on the welfare aspects of dog breeding are:

Blue Cross

BSAVA (British Small Animal Veterinary Association)

BVA (British Veterinary Association)

CAWC (Companion Animal Welfare Council)

Defra

Dogs Trust

Kennel Club

PDSA (People’s Dispensary for Sick Animals)

RCVS (Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons)

RSPCA (Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals)

Scottish Government

Welsh Assembly

So it looks like this was a group decision of the above and not lead by the kennel club.

Abnd I can now see why Jamime would not like who is heading up the Advisory Board as she appears to be a moderate in her approch and opinions.

Edited November 21, 2010 by shortstep

[Steve]

and this

The selection of the founding chairman was made through an open competition conducted in accordance with the Nolan principles on standards in public life. The selection panel was chaired by Prof Sir Patrick Bateson FRS, and the other members were Lord Soulsby of Swaffham Prior and Mrs Caroline Wood (previously Director of English Nature responsible for Human Resources). The panel secretary was Mrs Heather Peck FCIPD. The post was advertised and the selection of Prof Crispin was made from a strong field of eminent applicants.

The organisations forming the Review Board on the welfare aspects of dog breeding are:

Blue Cross

BSAVA (British Small Animal Veterinary Association)

BVA (British Veterinary Association)

CAWC (Companion Animal Welfare Council)

Defra

Dogs Trust

Kennel Club

PDSA (People’s Dispensary for Sick Animals)

RCVS (Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons)

RSPCA (Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals)

Scottish Government

Welsh Assembly

So it looks like this was a group decision of the above and not lead by the kennel club.

Abnd I can now see why Jamime would not like who is heading up the Advisory Board as she appears to be a moderate in her approch and opinions.

Interesting - it raises some interesting questions and explains a bit for me that has been going on behind the scenes.

[shortstep]

Read the whole interview of Dr. Crispin done by Jemime. I am still working through it right now.

http://coldwetnose.blogspot.com/2010/08/je...-with-prof.html

I can see more trouble brewing.

Jemime (I think I spell her name differently every time I type it, I really do need to learn how to spell it) seems to widening her attack to include working breeders now. If this happens she might just loose most of her support other than the far left animal libbers. I know she has already lost several prominate working people support, but there are many more that still support her. (some if not a fair amount of the research is comeing from those with a working dog history who are also very highly involved in the Uni systems. We might even include McGreevy in that group...Ok that is a strech to far...LOL But you get the idea).

[Steve]

Here is the question do you look at whats going on and duck for cover and put together an advisory board before they make you do it or worse before they just hand the job over the the RSPCA or do you tell them to nick off and we will look after our own business? Will they - as in government - then back down or will they give us no choice. Ducking doesnt really appeal to me much because its sort of like admitting guilt -and Im not that happy with peopel who I think know little about what purebred breeders do to out number us- but there are moves underway now to try to head it off by putting together our own advisory board and its out there right now in Australia.

Its not going to be my call anyway as if they decide to duck they will duck no matter what I say but perhaps ducking isnt the answer. can we seriously see a government giving us no choice but to answer to this type of board and is it even legal for them to affect our poroperty right even if they wanted to.

edited to add that I know originally they were planning on pushing for this under POCTA but would the government go that far ? This is the question .And whats best for the dogs of course.

Edited November 21, 2010 by Steve

[Natsu chan]

In Victoria Steve I think anything is possible, Hugh Wirth would love it!

Personally I think they should say nick off and produce the evidence of decades of health testing schemes, and of breed clubs etc funding research and of breeder supplying dogs and DNA, blood etc for research free of charge. Realistically how many pets and their owners have benefited from all that time and money and effort? You don't see them wanting to do this with race horses or greyhounds do you?

The whole situation is becoming ever more farcical. There are a small number of people (relative to the whole) who really need their arses kicked but the majority don't need or deserve all this nonsense. It will probably happen anyway as the KC has less back bone than a jellyfish and they will either duck or roll over.

I have to say to as unpopular a view as it is that I don't think inbreeding is the devil it's made out to be either. The healthiest dog I ever owned was very intensely inbreed but by someone who knew what they were doing from generations of healthy stock. I don't actually see that many breeders using inbreeding anymore anyway and out crossing can only go so far too.

[shortstep]

Here is the question do you look at whats going on and duck for cover and put together an advisory board before they make you do it or worse before they just hand the job over the the RSPCA or do you tell them to nick off and we will look after our own business? Will they - as in government - then back down or will they give us no choice. Ducking doesnt really appeal to me much because its sort of like admitting guilt -and Im not that happy with peopel who I think know little about what purebred breeders do to out number us- but there are moves underway now to try to head it off by putting together our own advisory board and its out there right now in Australia.

Its not going to be my call anyway as if they decide to duck they will duck no matter what I say but perhaps ducking isnt the answer. can we seriously see a government giving us no choice but to answer to this type of board and is it even legal for them to affect our poroperty right even if they wanted to.

edited to add that I know originally they were planning on pushing for this under POCTA but would the government go that far ? This is the question .And whats best for the dogs of course.

10 years ago, yes make your own advisory board, and make it really address the issues which I at least think are truely there (I being the expert on all things important LOL). But there is still no heart for this today. Today, I think it is way too little and way too late. If it were to happen then it really would have to be made up with no one from ANKC on the decision making group. It would have to show total submission to the will of the advisors. I can not see that happening unless the government takes over the problem and appoints the advisory panel, pretty much like what is happening in the UK.

I was just reading that one of the expected problems they are facing is many breeders are threatening to either leave breeding totally or to break away from the Kennel Club and thereby escape the changes being demanded. This will be something to watch and will likely affect what happens here. The net might get a lot bigger, which I think I am already seeing down here. Just ask the rescuers in Vic eh? LOL

Edited November 22, 2010 by shortstep

[shortstep]

Ok this is what I would like to see happen that I think might show some sincerity and be believable. I know it is not perfect and is not intended to be perfect. It is action, which can then be refind though experience ad needed. Only problem is the ANKC as it stands seems to be totally incapable of taking action in any sort of direct way. LOL This would not be meaningful if it is done by a group of breeders independent of ANKC, as it would not then control what happend within ANKC.

Plan of action. ANKC actually takes a shit right now and then gets off the the pot and pulls up their pants and stands ready to act again as needed.

Address major problems

1. Puppy farms. No puppy farms allowed in ANKC, end of story. Limit number of registration per year, lets say 30-40 pups or something, just pick a number and get on with it. That's it, nothing more and then enforce it.

2. Health testing. Each breed club has 6 months to also take a shit and get off the pot, by writing up what tests will be required to register a litter. If breed club can't do this or breed has no club then one of the Scandinavian clubs breed tests will be used. In fact, this is even better. To make it even simpler and quicker just copy the Scandinavian health testing requirements for all breeds. If a breed club does not like it then they can fight it out amongst themselves at their leisure and submit a new test list, until then they have to follow the ones mandated.

Enforcement, Every parent dog has to get a * on their registration prior to litters being registered. * is earned by returning to ANKC prior to breeding, Heath Test form which will document the required tests. Breeder lies or fails to do required tests prior to breeding, litter is not registered and breeder is given to the RSPCA to be fed to shelter dogs. No excuses, get this done and do it now.

3. Extremes/Standards. Policy is to accept and impliment what ever the advisory panel decides in the UK.

4. Inbreeding, make a rule about it, now. Add COI to all rego papers, so people start to think about it.

5. And so forth for other divisive and emotional issue and take the high ground and the simple, direct and do it now plan with no business or legal speak. Act now, adjust and change as needed in leasurire.

Now everyone in ANKC is in a much better place. Able to rebuild our reputation based on facts about out breeders and dogs. Also stop worry about what other dog breeders are doing and instead make sure ANKC breeders deliever the very best breeding programs and dogs that we can ( and in most cases already do).

I know it is just a dream or nightmare depending on where you sit.

Edited November 22, 2010 by shortstep