Pedigree Dog Segment On The 7pm Project

[oakway]

I have had some time to think about this programme.

My thoughts are now that it is all propaganda to remove pure bred dogs and their breeder from the scene and to eradicate dogs full stop.

Don't fall for it people just laugh at them, it is what those that started this all off deserve.

Yes, I nearly fell for it for it last night.

That's their objective to make us angry and then we will make silly mistakes and give them the grounds that they are looking for.

Don't fall into the trap. Laugh and do the right thing, complain/join through an organization with power behind them to complain in the right direction.

[dog geek]

I was wanting to do just that - complain to my CC - but was not sure in what form I should present my complaint in... anyone have any ideas to start me off??

BTW - the Cheetah had a population crash that led to the contemporary population of Cheetahs having very little genetic diversity... their COI is very, very "interesting"; yet the species is still physiologically functional, reproduces normally, and are relatively successful in the wild.

Food for thought, huh!!

[SparkyTansy]

One thing that I would like to highlight is that once again, no one from the ANKC was there to stand up for us. We are targeted because we are small and there is no one to fight for us, and everyone knows it.

[toy dog]

One thing that I would like to highlight is that once again, no one from the ANKC was there to stand up for us. We are targeted because we are small and there is no one to fight for us, and everyone knows it.

as i said in the other thread if a bunch of us email or demand that we need someone to respond from ANKC or our state controlling bodies maybe they will listen.

i just emailed dogsvic to ask them if they could respond. But as alot of us have been saying for alot of years, we need someone with a bit of charisma to stand up and be the voice of reason.

its just unintelligence all this crap about how pedigree dogs are inbred and bad when a person with a bit of sense about them knows that all dogs no matter what origin can suffer from genetic problems.

[toy dog]

I was wanting to do just that - complain to my CC - but was not sure in what form I should present my complaint in... anyone have any ideas to start me off??

BTW - the Cheetah had a population crash that led to the contemporary population of Cheetahs having very little genetic diversity... their COI is very, very "interesting"; yet the species is still physiologically functional, reproduces normally, and are relatively successful in the wild.

Food for thought, huh!!

ask your CC to respond to the negative story on 7pm project about pedigree dogs. Email them. Thats my thoughts. If many people do this maybe they might get someone. CEO of the CC. I've just asked DogsVictoria to respond as they were asking a while ago to report to them anything negative about the pedigree dog. Doesn't say that now on the new website though.

[toy dog]

toy dog, the dog-buying public should be hearing what you've posted.

yes, i'd love to give them a piece of my mind. It didn't really give the full picture what chris brown said at the end its up to the public not to buy these dogs to force breeders to breed better dogs. Being a vet he should know better to have said that all dogs no matter if cross or pedigree suffer from genetic problems and they don't have to be inbred to suffer either.

i've thought about writing to this chris brown yet again, (emailed him about his article advising pet owners in a mag about 2 years ago) he recommended to get an oodle dog for an apartment as they were ideal in his eyes. So i let him have it about puppy farms and promoting a cross etc. when there are shelters full. yadda yadda yadda. He does listen, he obviously listened to what i wrote next thing he is on a puppy farm raid and going on about puppy farms and designer dogs, how bad they are.

ETA: sorry i seem to be repeating myself, bear with me i have a very bad head cold and am not thinking straight at the moment :D

Edited July 1, 2011 by toy dog

[oakway]

One thing that I would like to highlight is that once again, no one from the ANKC was there to stand up for us. We are targeted because we are small and there is no one to fight for us, and everyone knows it.

The ANKC is in my opinion a toothless tiger.

The ANKC is only made up of delegates from the controlling bodies.

Should this not be the other way round ?.

Until be have a complete National Body that has some power we shall get nothing.

Always remember Queensland has not had the voting rights of other states.

We may get a fair go if the negotiations continue to take place with the RNA and Dog Queensland.

How do you expect to get a fair go for the Pedigree Dog World when, up to now Queensland has not had the right to vote in the powers that be.

Until we have a National or similar body don't expect much.

Edited July 1, 2011 by oakway

[toy dog]

One thing that I would like to highlight is that once again, no one from the ANKC was there to stand up for us. We are targeted because we are small and there is no one to fight for us, and everyone knows it.

The ANKC is in my opinion a toothless tiger.

The ANKC is only made up of delegates from the controlling bodies.

Should this not be the other way round ?.

Until be have a complete National Body that has some power we shall get nothing.

Always remember Queensland has not had the voting rights of other states.

We may get a fair go if the negotiations continue to take place with the RNA and Dog Queensland.

How do you expect to get a fair for go the Pedigree Dog World when, up to now Queensland has not had the right to vote in the powers that be.

Until we have a National or similar body don't expect much.

does anyone know which state 7pm project is produced in? If its melbourne maybe try emailing dogsvic to respond, just a thought. They seem good here, they do try anyway here to do right by the members i feel.

Monday night VCA just promoted channel 9 peter hitchener as patron alot of members attended. I feel thats a good step in the right direction. I was surprised to read he's been a member of our organisation for 28 years. I don't know what breeds he owns, remember seeing him in a KCC mag years ago with his dogs.

[stormie]

I was wanting to do just that - complain to my CC - but was not sure in what form I should present my complaint in... anyone have any ideas to start me off??

BTW - the Cheetah had a population crash that led to the contemporary population of Cheetahs having very little genetic diversity... their COI is very, very "interesting"; yet the species is still physiologically functional, reproduces normally, and are relatively successful in the wild.

Food for thought, huh!!

This is true, but in the wild, only the fittest survive. So if any conditions did pop up which would hinder the Cheetah in anyway, it would most likely die and therefore not reproduce.

[lappielover]

A controlled outcross is not the answer for every disease in every breed, but it certainly could be the answer for many of the diseases in many breeds. That is the real point and not that it may not work for some disease.

What I find really frustrating is even in the case of the Dalmatian, where the work has been done and successfully, most breeder would rather breed dogs with disease than use a dog with a cross some 10-13 or more generations ago and prevent the disease in their dogs. It boggles the mind. Personally I think any breeder who refuses to bring the healthy genes into their Dals should be banned. I guess it will take the RSPCA to make it a welfare issue and get a government law made first.

It may take a new generation of dog breeders to effect some of the needed changes. I just hope that breeding for 'breeds' is not totally banned by then and that most breeds are not already lost or are too far gone before we start to see the needed changes happen.

Just want to say I totally agree with your comments Shortstep. It's so refreshing to hear from someone who can see the "big picture" of what is happening with purebred dog breeding. Thank you.

[shortstep]

I was wanting to do just that - complain to my CC - but was not sure in what form I should present my complaint in... anyone have any ideas to start me off??

BTW - the Cheetah had a population crash that led to the contemporary population of Cheetahs having very little genetic diversity... their COI is very, very "interesting"; yet the species is still physiologically functional, reproduces normally, and are relatively successful in the wild.

Food for thought, huh!!

This is true, but in the wild, only the fittest survive. So if any conditions did pop up which would hinder the Cheetah in anyway, it would most likely die and therefore not reproduce.

Their semen is awful, this alone could do be the final push.

http://www.pictures-of-cats.org/cheetah-semen-is-much-worse-than-domestic-cat-semen.html

Thankfully with dog breeds, there is no reason to reach this extreme state of inbreeding.

[quoll]

Was it propaganda or was it an observation.

There is enough evidence making it's way into the public arena to support the fact that, some pure bred dogs have been aesthetically altered to suit a "look" and that these changes have come about at the detrument of the breed's health.

In the case of the Bull Terrier and the German sheperd the changes are obvious, the faces of many breeds have also been flattened, with now big round eyes about to pop.

There is a real need to take a long hard look at the pure bred dogs ( this does not mean I advocate the X dds styles ) and the harm we may be doing to these animals in the quest of beauty.

We have all heard the term kennel blind and it is not a term which has come about lightly, many breeders are so focussed on their next winners that the breed's health and strangely enough even confirmation will suffer. A well carrying eyecatching "showy" dog will do well in the ring, even if it is as far removed from the breed standard as possible.

The other side of the coin is that many of the litters produced for that elusive winner end up in pet homes. The question here is : Is it fair to inflict a dog with many health or even one health problem unto a family, who will bond with that gorgeous puppy, and than see it over come with health issues. Where is the fairness there, for the dog or the family.

Some of the health issues we have seen in the media in the past ten years, have been so debilitating to the dogs that it may well fall under the heading of cruelty. What right does a breeder have to inflict this onto the world.

Moving on to judging, at times it is very difficult to understand the results in the ring. The risk that corruption will interfer ( if not already ) with the future confirmation of the dog is a grave concern. When a dog is seen to do well in the ring, it is most likely that it will be sought after for it's stud, or in the case of a bitch her future pups. But what if this fame only comes about as a result of let's say face judging, and that the winning animal is in fact a poor example of the breed?? Are we not in this situation maping a bleak future for the dog ?

There are many layers to this debate, it is as they say today complicated, the pure bred dogs rely on us to secure their future, yet that is very much in the balance if no changes take place.

[shortstep]

Just want to say I totally agree with your comments Shortstep. It's so refreshing to hear from someone who can see the "big picture" of what is happening with purebred dog breeding. Thank you.

Really there are many people in the ANKC and kennel clubs around the world that hold views that they would like to see some modernization and change.

Here are some good links about inbreeding. They attempt to explain inbreeding in a factual way and to answer some the agruments made which attempt promote inbreeding. You will have read many of these arguments before and here they are investigated in more detail.

This one might be good if you are not sure you really want to spend much time reading but want to get a general idea, as it covers some of the most frequent topics you will read about.

http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/2010/11/inbred-mistakes-ii.html

The whole series of 6 Inbreeding Mistakes is found here

Inbreeding Mitakes

http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/?s=Inbred+mistakes

[SkySoaringMagpie]

I was wanting to do just that - complain to my CC - but was not sure in what form I should present my complaint in... anyone have any ideas to start me off??

I would email or phone and ask DogsACT what the ANKC's strategy is for dealing with the latest round of pedigree scare-mongering.

[bryan_mannix]

Just want to say I totally agree with your comments Shortstep. It's so refreshing to hear from someone who can see the "big picture" of what is happening with purebred dog breeding. Thank you.

Really there are many people in the ANKC and kennel clubs around the world that hold views that they would like to see some modernization and change.

Here are some good links about inbreeding. They attempt to explain inbreeding in a factual way and to answer some the agruments made which attempt promote inbreeding. You will have read many of these arguments before and here they are investigated in more detail.

This one might be good if you are not sure you really want to spend much time reading but want to get a general idea, as it covers some of the most frequent topics you will read about.

http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/2010/11/inbred-mistakes-ii.html

The whole series of 6 Inbreeding Mistakes is found here

Inbreeding Mitakes

http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/?s=Inbred+mistakes

Thanks for the considered comments (refreshing to hear) and the links. I will have a read and get back if I have any questions...

[toy dog]

Just want to say I totally agree with your comments Shortstep. It's so refreshing to hear from someone who can see the "big picture" of what is happening with purebred dog breeding. Thank you.

Really there are many people in the ANKC and kennel clubs around the world that hold views that they would like to see some modernization and change.

Here are some good links about inbreeding. They attempt to explain inbreeding in a factual way and to answer some the agruments made which attempt promote inbreeding. You will have read many of these arguments before and here they are investigated in more detail.

This one might be good if you are not sure you really want to spend much time reading but want to get a general idea, as it covers some of the most frequent topics you will read about.

http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/2010/11/inbred-mistakes-ii.html

The whole series of 6 Inbreeding Mistakes is found here

Inbreeding Mitakes

http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/?s=Inbred+mistakes

hmmm okay.....what the media is saying is that we see many genetic problems/faults because of inbreeding with the pedigree dog. This statement is incorrect.

my point still is, a dog can suffer from a disease, genetic problem by being outcrossed to a bloodline and recessive genes, the dog doesn't have to be pedigree.

to get features in breeds that may not be desirable can be due to selection rather than straight inbreeding.

We have all heard the term kennel blind and it is not a term which has come about lightly, many breeders are so focussed on their next winners that the breed's health and strangely enough even confirmation will suffer. A well carrying eyecatching "showy" dog will do well in the ring, even if it is as far removed from the breed standard as possible.

it doesn't necessarily have to be breeders who are only breeding for the showring. I've seen it in breeders who are only concerned with their hip pockets. It can affect any breeder not only show breeders.

The other side of the coin is that many of the litters produced for that elusive winner end up in pet homes. The question here is : Is it fair to inflict a dog with many health or even one health problem unto a family, who will bond with that gorgeous puppy, and than see it over come with health issues. Where is the fairness there, for the dog or the family.

an ethical breeder strives to breed a healthy litter, by doing tests and using healthy examples, researching a bloodline viewing as many of that bloodline as possible to ascertain if there are any genetic problems that will be passed onto the produced pups. however, some genes being recessive doesn't rule out that we get that odd one that might be slightly affected with a genetic problem. All you can do as a breeder is inform the buyer of these problems, get the dog desexed so it does not get used in the gene pool. what else can you do? all dogs no matter what their breeding is has potential to be affected with a genetic problem whether we know the bloodline or it is not known (cross breed bitsas).

just my thoughts.

it just continually gets up my nose how these people are reporting on genetic problems when they are not reporting on the full story of what is actually going on here.

Edited July 2, 2011 by toy dog

[shortstep]

hmmm okay.....what the media is saying is that we see many genetic problems/faults because of inbreeding with the pedigree dog. This statement is incorrect.

my point still is, a dog can suffer from a disease, genetic problem by being outcrossed to a bloodline and recessive genes, the dog doesn't have to be pedigree.

Yes thank you, this is an excellent example of the failed argument that she discuessed here;

This is a rather weak straw-man that uses the some-all fallacy to suggest that if we can name a woe in purebred dogs that isn’t caused or exacerbated by inbreeding that we can discount or ignore all the problems that are. This neither proves nor disproves anything.

Bottom line is, as she explains so well, the term 'fixing traits' really means removing genes. Inbreeding is always removing of genes, genes that are gone forever. Inbreeding never adds genes.

The few genes that are chosen to inbred (remove) for, say removing genes for a certain coat colour or for normal shaped nose, are just the the tip of the iceberg of all hidden genes also being affected. Gene choices that offer who knows what to the dog but can also be removed in the process of inbreeding and there was no breeder selection of removal going on there.

Edited July 2, 2011 by shortstep

[shortstep]

The other side of the coin is that many of the litters produced for that elusive winner end up in pet homes. The question here is : Is it fair to inflict a dog with many health or even one health problem unto a family, who will bond with that gorgeous puppy, and than see it over come with health issues. Where is the fairness there, for the dog or the family.

an ethical breeder strives to breed a healthy litter, by doing tests and using healthy examples, researching a bloodline viewing as many of that bloodline as possible to ascertain if there are any genetic problems that will be passed onto the produced pups. however, some genes being recessive doesn't rule out that we get that odd one that might be slightly affected with a genetic problem. All you can do as a breeder is inform the buyer of these problems, get the dog desexed so it does not get used in the gene pool. what else can you do? all dogs no matter what their breeding is has potential to be affected with a genetic problem whether we know the bloodline or it is not known (cross breed bitsas).

just my thoughts.

it just continually gets up my nose how these people are reporting on genetic problems when they are not reporting on the full story of what is actually going on here.

To me the full story is that inbreeding and closed stud books are at the root of the need to do health testing.

Health testing is looking for defective genes which are now wide spread enough in the breed as to be commonly found, which now require some sort of screening or testing for.

That is ass backwards.

Good breeding, ethical breeding, should mean that we are not making breeds that end up with wide spread health problems that need to be tested for in the first place.

The whole system is geared to make health problems. Starting with the concept of purebred, which madates inbreeding forever on a small number of ansectors. The Kennel Club moto really should be 'Keep it all in the Family'.

Inbreeding is with out question removing a wide selection of genes from each dog and eventually the whole breed, most of these genes we have no idea what they do or that we are removing them. Closed stud books force contiuned inbreeding even for those breeders who want to reduce inbreeding levels in their pups.

This goes far beyond being ethical because we health test.

It is the very foundations of how we breed dogs in the kennel club system, it needs a very close and honest review.

I think the Uk Kennel club is starting to do this, I think they know they have to, it is no longer a debate or an option. Now we need to start talking about it, from the ground up, not from the top down.

Edited July 2, 2011 by shortstep

[toy dog]

The other side of the coin is that many of the litters produced for that elusive winner end up in pet homes. The question here is : Is it fair to inflict a dog with many health or even one health problem unto a family, who will bond with that gorgeous puppy, and than see it over come with health issues. Where is the fairness there, for the dog or the family.

an ethical breeder strives to breed a healthy litter, by doing tests and using healthy examples, researching a bloodline viewing as many of that bloodline as possible to ascertain if there are any genetic problems that will be passed onto the produced pups. however, some genes being recessive doesn't rule out that we get that odd one that might be slightly affected with a genetic problem. All you can do as a breeder is inform the buyer of these problems, get the dog desexed so it does not get used in the gene pool. what else can you do? all dogs no matter what their breeding is has potential to be affected with a genetic problem whether we know the bloodline or it is not known (cross breed bitsas).

just my thoughts.

it just continually gets up my nose how these people are reporting on genetic problems when they are not reporting on the full story of what is actually going on here.

To me the full story is that inbreeding and closed stud books are at the root of the need to do health testing.

Health testing is looking for defective genes which are now wide spread enough in the breed as to be commonly found, which now require some sort of screening or testing for.

That is ass backwards.

Good breeding, ethical breeding, should mean that we are not making breeds that end up with wide spread health problems that need to be tested for in the first place.

The whole system is geared to make health problems. Starting with the concept of purebred, which madates inbreeding forever on a small number of ansectors. The Kennel Club moto really should be 'Keep it all in the Family'.

Inbreeding is with out question removing a wide selection of genes from each dog and eventually the whole breed, most of these genes we have no idea what they do or that we are removing them. Closed stud books force contiuned inbreeding even for those breeders who want to reduce inbreeding levels in their pups.

This goes far beyond being ethical because we health test.

It is the very foundations of how do and are allowed to breed dogs in the kennel club system that need a very close and honest review.

I think the Uk Kennel club is starting to do this, I think they know they have to, it is no longer a debate or an option. Now we need to start talking about it, from the ground up, not from the top down.

um where do i start, testing ensures that we are using the best healthiest examples available to us.

some breeds, you cannot register a litter of pups until the pups are tested, GSD for example. im sure there are now others.

in toy breeds, there is a wide spread of patella luxation, as everyone knows by now or they should considering i have a big mouth because i am passionate about all this :D i interviewed a few breeders wrote down information collated it all together as grading of PL is very hit and miss approach from breeders and vets. I got ear bashed and even threatened when i brought this whole thing up and all i wanted was to have breeders test for it before breeding their stock and also being honest with each other and themselves, it opened up a whole can of worms, some denied that our breeds had a problem mainly older breeders, some thanked me for my reports, some looked eagerly for the next report.

it went to the national breed club and they ascertained that it is up to the individual breeder to get testing and to learn about this disease. so we didn't end up getting anywhere. wasted effort. there's been numerous people trying to start a PL scheme for toy dogs without much success over many years. its really sad and disgraceful. until this happens we cannot claim we are any better than the average joe blow breeding their dogs really is my honest opinion of all this.

today there is 50/50 chance that a toy dog can have this problem it is very wide spread and some vets say it is normal. when it shouldn't be. there's still alot of breeders breeding in PL and either don't give a damn that their dogs are affected or try and deny and infer that their stock doesn't need testing at all because they are all healthy by the breeders general view. Some talked to me like as though i invented this disease in all dogs

i took it to state controlling body to start having lecture days, clinics to inform breeders what we are dealing with, to just start educating on PL, got an answer back it is up to breed clubs, in turn breed clubs said it is ANKC. so everyone was handballing and nothing got done in the end. so i gave up.

so i kept writing my articles trying to appeal to the average breeder, so as a result many new breeders out there who read my articles and take some of what i write onboard.

my message: test, be honest, if found desex, don't try to breed out with infected because infected produced infected and this is how we have come to this point today.

so you can lead the horse to water but you can't force it to drink. we need guidance by the higher authority and we aint getting it by what many say on here.

how do you police breeders using affected stock when there are no compulsory testing of a genetic problem that is wide spread? How do you police dishonesty? ideally i'd like to see some move towards combatting patella lux. but we are a long long way from having that attended to.

my brother said a funny thing one day he is someone that isn't in this whole system, not interested in breeding/showingdogs ever. he said the whole pedigree register system seems to be made up like an honor system.

hmmmmmmmmm don't know if he is far wrong there. as much as i don't want to say it.

but i still say inbreeding is not the single cause of why pedigree dogs are suffering from genetic problems.

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

While the British Bulldog standard still has this in it, they deserve to be called to account.

http://www.ankc.org.au/Breed_Details.aspx?bid=183

The skull should be very large - the larger the better - and in circumference should measure (round in front of the ears) at least the height of the dog at the shoulders. Viewed from the front it should appear very high from the corner of the lower jaw to the apex of the skull, and also very broad and square. The cheeks should be well rounded and extended sideways beyond the eyes. Viewed at the side, the head should appear very high, and very short from its back to the point of the nose.

In the faults section - it says something about faults (ie not being as described by the standard) being weighed up against the health of the dog, but really - I think that dogs that are required to be born by C-section because of their genetic shape - should be excluded from the main (breeding) register. And ones that can't breathe easily when exercised - because of the genetic shape - too.