Purebred Dogs Bagged On Radio National This Morning

[BittyMooPeeb]

During the 'Life Matters' show on RN this morning, an author was interviewed. He has written a book called "the a-z of unfortunate dogs" and he made the following comments about the purpose of his book:

- purebred dogs are in huge amounts of trouble

- they are in trouble because they are all so inbred

- they all have lots of genetic problems

ARGHHHHHHHHH!!!! His 'proof' of this was that his Pug's eyes 'look in different directions' (something he claimed is a genetic fault).

The interviewer didnt question him on any of these statements, which have now been heard by thousands of people.

So, we need people to ring or write to the station to answer these claims and point them in the right direction!!!

Link to the story is here: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/lifematters/stori...010/3080843.htm

There is a link to make comments under the blurb ("add your comments")

Gail

[raz]

Who is he - a comedian? B is for Barry who's eyes are all wrong, and K is for Kevin who's legs are too short. Judging from that photo, he sure looks like a clown. My pug's eyes dont go in different directions and her legs are certainly not too short.

[The Ark]

I could cry after listening to this. :D And I like Richard Aedy (usually).

How much damage is done by idiots such as Adam Elliot with throw-away lines such as "purebred dogs are in trouble because of all the in-breeding", with absolutely no evidence required to support the statement? That has cost the pet industry/BYB/puppy farmer NOTHING and there's their message out there yet again for all to hear : Crossbred good, purebred bad.

(Big, big swearing session going on here.......) :)

ETA: Thanks for bringing it to our attention, Gail.

Edited December 1, 2010 by The Ark

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

so he has 2 pugs that might not be the best example of the breed and the book is about those dogs.

hmm, lets hope he hasn't tarred good examples of the breed with the same brush.

[conztruct]

Are some of our posters who have the "good" words to use for a response to this able to provide some guidance. I'd like to respond, but a united message would be better I think?

Any ideas?

[Starkehre]

Are some of our posters who have the "good" words to use for a response to this able to provide some guidance. I'd like to respond, but a united message would be better I think?

Any ideas?

.....Poodlefan... Jed...?? :D

Edited December 1, 2010 by dyzney

[Adza]

Are some of our posters who have the "good" words to use for a response to this able to provide some guidance. I'd like to respond, but a united message would be better I think?

Any ideas?

.....Poodlefan... Jed...?? :D

Same here, I'd like some help on this

[The Ark]

I did comment, but thought the same thing afterward. We need a calm, well-worded response that will hopefully invite the programme to spend some time righting the wrong. Nothing radical and heated.

[SparkyTansy]

I listened to a segment interview with him last week on our WA talkback radio - he didn't mention any of these things and I assumed that it was a bit of a comedic look at various individual dogs - not a slight on purebreeds (and when they announced the interview, I was all ready for it)

This person has won a couple of awards for short film pieces, and this book was a bit of a time filler before he can start his next project. He has not written a book before and certainly isn't qualified to make the statements he has on our breeds.

[merijigs]

Ok how about this:

Richard,

Your guest this morning, the filmaker, Adam Elliot, said, "like a lot of purebred dogs which are in a lot of trouble, seriously, a lot of the purebreds are so inbred they have all sorts of genetic problems." This kind of throw-away generalised statement does substantial harm to registered breeders of purebred dogs who spend $1,000's and lots of time and effort to access every available health test to screen breeding stock for soundness before producing puppies. I suggest that at that point in the interview Mr.Elliot could have been asked whether his two Pugs had been acquired from Breeders registered with their relevant State and national Canine Control bodies. If they were not, but instead were produced by a puppy farm or by an ill-considered backyard breeding, then it is no surprise that unsound dogs were the outcome.

Please air this counter statement on your program tomorrow to be fair to the many registered Breeders who are committed to ethical practices.

Thank you for your program.

[AmandaJ]

How does this sound?

Your guest is categorically incorrect. Pure breed dogs by nature are structurally sounder than cross breed dogs due to the similarities in phenotype. The cross breeding of animals with dissimilar phenotype leads to structural instability due to the nature of genetics and how we inherit aspects of each parent. Just because one parent is one type and the other is another type does not mean you will get something in between which fits together properly! That is a misnomer which the Anti-Pure Breed people want you to believe. Facts are facts and Genetics is genetics.

Responsible Pure breed breeders (as opposed to those Pure Breed Back yard Breeders) test their animals for genetic conditions when testing is available and study the blood lines, the breed and all aspects of breeding. Puppy Mills and Irresponsible BYBs get their hand on good healthy breeding stock and then proceed to breed for profit. It is from these people where sick, deformed, poorly bred animals come - and that is not restricted to pure bred dogs - it also includes your mutts!

[Fleuri]

I'm not a breeder just a pet lover. I find both respones/letters really good. Only from a avarage persons point (me being the average person :D ) I like merijigs response/letter a little more.

[mita]

Good on you for wanting to give a response. I heard the same program. It was fantastic until it got to the point where it switched to 'all purebred dogs' being in trouble for physical malformations & conditions. The same over-generalisation.

[Souff]

So if Barry's eyes are all wrong and supposedly looking in different directions, and Kevin's legs are too short ...... WHY DID HE BUY THESE 2 PARTICULAR DOGS?

A turned eye is not difficult to spot.

And anyone who is not wearing a blindfold can pick short legs on a pup ...... oh then again, maybe some can't.

I am getting very tired of buyers making bad choices and then whinging publicly about it later.

Nobody forces anyone to buy a substandard item - if people like Adam make such a choice and don't look for something better, why bleat about it later?

To sell books that they write?

Souff

[raz]

So if Barry's eyes are all wrong and supposedly looking in different directions, and Kevin's legs are too short ...... WHY DID HE BUY THESE 2 PARTICULAR DOGS?

EXACTLY Souffle. Boring twit he is. Buyer beware - too bad, buddy!

[Shazzapug]

Did he buy from a reputable breeder? Does he know what a reputable breeder is? Did he buy from a Pet shop? Statements like his need to be backed by more info.

Edited December 1, 2010 by Shazzapug

[puglvr]

He also made the same sort of comment on the Circle on Friday. So I have sent an e-mail directly to him at [email protected]

[Frenchfire Frenchies]

How rediculous! And would they like to see the statistics on just how many PURE BRED Animals are imported into our country on a yearly basis?

Do they IMPORT CROSSBRED DOGS for the purpose of breeding and showing? I THINK NOT :D (NEW BLOODLINES) Imported.(NEW BLOODLINES) Bloody idiots..

The fact is that most breeds, even the hard to purchase "due to number of breeders", are far more healthy 'because of importing", than they were 20 years ago..

Far less defects. Due to the hard work and study of a breed...Thanks to dedicated breeders.

P.S I do believe there are even fare less cases of pugs being born with The "wobbly head(or big head syndrome) nowdays also.