lappiemum Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 oh, this would make me nervous... The basis upon which legal action can be brought is usually (breach of) contract or negligence (breach of duty of care). The contract with the Vet is between the Society or the Kennel Club not the exhibitor. The veterinary opinion and observation is being sought by and given to the Society or the Kennel Club. It is important to understand that the examination is not intended as a Veterinary diagnosis upon which an exhibitor should rely. In the event that a Vet highlights concerns, the exhibitor is strongly recommended to seek his or her own independent veterinary advice after the Show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheridan Posted March 8, 2012 Author Share Posted March 8, 2012 I think the reason to do just the BOB is threefold. One is to be seen to do the right thing. The next is not to have to vet check 26,000 dogs. And, the most important one, is to make a point, not just to the competitors but also to the judges. They are making the point that judges should not reward extremes. But that is my point - being seen to be doing the right thing is precisely that - being seen... Again, they do it with cat shows. Each dog needs to check in at registration. This would be one more step. Come on, if we could put a man on the moon people I'm sure they can check these dogs - even if its just in the 15 identified breeds..... My issue with the vet check system at a dog or cat show (or any type of animal show) is that it only gives an indication of the physical speciman. If, for example, a wheaten terrier was vet checked for physical issues and passed then hey, the dog's healthy right? Well, tell that to the people whose dogs died of a protein-wasting disease passed down from the sire or dam whose blood tests were clear. No genetic test right now so how do you show that a sire shouldn't be breed from because he's a carrier? You can't so physical tests are a waste of time. Sometimes a pointed 'look you' is the best frightener that can be had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizT Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Shouldn't the RUBOB get a chance to go up for Group? I don't know if they have similar rules to us in that regard. Surely though if you are going to Vet, do it before the breeds compete, instead of messing around like this afterwards. This seems more like a bit of grandstanding to try and show that they are acting on the bad publicity they have received. I agree but it is more costly and time consuming to check ALL the dogs entered just so that they can ensure that the BOB will be up to the required standard of fitness. Peppered with a bit of grandstanding too I'd imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 oh, this would make me nervous... The basis upon which legal action can be brought is usually (breach of) contract or negligence (breach of duty of care). The contract with the Vet is between the Society or the Kennel Club not the exhibitor. The veterinary opinion and observation is being sought by and given to the Society or the Kennel Club. It is important to understand that the examination is not intended as a Veterinary diagnosis upon which an exhibitor should rely. In the event that a Vet highlights concerns, the exhibitor is strongly recommended to seek his or her own independent veterinary advice after the Show. Kind of skips completely over a few other causes of action but I"m still not sure having your dog disqualifed is a direct impact on YOUR reputation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megan_ Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Why would that concern you? IF the quick vet check says "all is okay" this doesn't mean your dog is in 100% health. I'm glad they're doing this. Yes - it is very public and could damage some reputations but they needed to do something very public. Also, I would imagine that if you are breeding extreme dogs (or awarding them) you'll be thinking twice now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lappiemum Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 oh, this would make me nervous... The basis upon which legal action can be brought is usually (breach of) contract or negligence (breach of duty of care). The contract with the Vet is between the Society or the Kennel Club not the exhibitor. The veterinary opinion and observation is being sought by and given to the Society or the Kennel Club. It is important to understand that the examination is not intended as a Veterinary diagnosis upon which an exhibitor should rely. In the event that a Vet highlights concerns, the exhibitor is strongly recommended to seek his or her own independent veterinary advice after the Show. Kind of skips completely over a few other causes of action but I"m still not sure having your dog disqualifed is a direct impact on YOUR reputation. At crufts, I think it may ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheridan Posted March 9, 2012 Author Share Posted March 9, 2012 oh, this would make me nervous... The basis upon which legal action can be brought is usually (breach of) contract or negligence (breach of duty of care). The contract with the Vet is between the Society or the Kennel Club not the exhibitor. The veterinary opinion and observation is being sought by and given to the Society or the Kennel Club. It is important to understand that the examination is not intended as a Veterinary diagnosis upon which an exhibitor should rely. In the event that a Vet highlights concerns, the exhibitor is strongly recommended to seek his or her own independent veterinary advice after the Show. Kind of skips completely over a few other causes of action but I"m still not sure having your dog disqualifed is a direct impact on YOUR reputation. At crufts, I think it may ;) I think it's somehow worse if there's no public reason given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lappiemum Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 (edited) Why would that concern you? IF the quick vet check says "all is okay" this doesn't mean your dog is in 100% health. I'm glad they're doing this. Yes - it is very public and could damage some reputations but they needed to do something very public. Also, I would imagine that if you are breeding extreme dogs (or awarding them) you'll be thinking twice now. But what is extreme? It may sound odd, but the judges that gave the BOB to these dogs were told to look for examples of extremism, and they thought these dogs - who were later disqualified - were sound enough to award. Again, it is a single vet opinion, and so be it. But I just think that there are better ways to deal with this issue, that is all. I get the feeling that the KC's approach is that you can't make an omlette without breaking a few eggs - but they should also be prepared for any ramifications down the track. Its a double edged sword they are using. oh, and that statement made me nervous as it may be interpretted as undermining the validity of the opinion of the vet. It could be used to challenge that opinion later on. Edited March 9, 2012 by lappiemum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Why would that concern you? IF the quick vet check says "all is okay" this doesn't mean your dog is in 100% health. I'm glad they're doing this. Yes - it is very public and could damage some reputations but they needed to do something very public. Also, I would imagine that if you are breeding extreme dogs (or awarding them) you'll be thinking twice now. But what is extreme? It may sound odd, but the judges that gave the BOB to these dogs were told to look for examples of extremism, and they thought these dogs - who were later disqualified - were sound enough to award. Again, it is a single vet opinion, and so be it. But I just think that there are better ways to deal with this issue, that is all. I get the feeling that the KC's approach is that you can't make an omlette without breaking a few eggs - but they should also be prepared for any ramifications down the track. Its a double edged sword they are using. Possibly but they've also got one hanging over their heads. They need to act, they need to be seen to act and they are doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kavik Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 What is the level of confidentiality on the results of the Veterinary checks? A. The matter shall be kept confidential between the relevant parties. If the exhibitor is approached, what they allow to become public knowledge is at their discretion but the Vet and Show Society must keep the reason for failure to pass the examination confidential. Q. Will details of failed checks be published? A. No, the details of a failed Veterinary check will be kept confidential but any Best of Breed not awarded will be annotated in the Kennel Club Stud Book. Q. What will be published on Show result websites? A. If a dog has failed the Veterinary check, the Best of Breed should be published as ‘Not Awarded’. So we will not find out why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dog geek Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Hmmm... I wonder if checking each class winner, and awarding/non-awarding at that level, might not be a more productive approach? I think I rather approve of the direction the KC is taking, although I view some their *tactical* moves as being appallingly *tactless*. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheridan Posted March 9, 2012 Author Share Posted March 9, 2012 Why would that concern you? IF the quick vet check says "all is okay" this doesn't mean your dog is in 100% health. I'm glad they're doing this. Yes - it is very public and could damage some reputations but they needed to do something very public. Also, I would imagine that if you are breeding extreme dogs (or awarding them) you'll be thinking twice now. But what is extreme? It may sound odd, but the judges that gave the BOB to these dogs were told to look for examples of extremism, and they thought these dogs - who were later disqualified - were sound enough to award. Again, it is a single vet opinion, and so be it. But I just think that there are better ways to deal with this issue, that is all. I get the feeling that the KC's approach is that you can't make an omlette without breaking a few eggs - but they should also be prepared for any ramifications down the track. Its a double edged sword they are using. oh, and that statement made me nervous as it may be interpretted as undermining the validity of the opinion of the vet. It could be used to challenge that opinion later on. But why is a better way to deal with it vet examining all dogs before entry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mita Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 (edited) A Pekingese, Malachy, won Best in Show, at Westminster in February. He wasn't disqualified for unspecified vet reasons. I wonder how he'd compare with the Crufts Peke? Malachy won a lot of hearts with his win, with no screams about being exaggerated. In one interview, his handler/co-owner, said that Malachy trains like an 'athlete', doing daily walks up & down the long driveway (so breathing must be fine). http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/15/sports/westminster-kennel-club-dog-show.html Why isn't a vet screening done, first, at Crufts? In that way, the Kennel Association could say they have certain veterinary standards before dogs can go in the show ring. Don't know the logistics, tho'. Edited March 9, 2012 by mita Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 So much riding on the opinion of one vet, what if that vet is biased, so many are. I agree that the KC needs to take a stand and make changes but I'd rather see dogs pre-vetted (prior to show day) by a panel of approved vets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lappiemum Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 So much riding on the opinion of one vet, what if that vet is biased, so many are. I agree that the KC needs to take a stand and make changes but I'd rather see dogs pre-vetted (prior to show day) by a panel of approved vets. :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lappiemum Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Why would that concern you? IF the quick vet check says "all is okay" this doesn't mean your dog is in 100% health. I'm glad they're doing this. Yes - it is very public and could damage some reputations but they needed to do something very public. Also, I would imagine that if you are breeding extreme dogs (or awarding them) you'll be thinking twice now. But what is extreme? It may sound odd, but the judges that gave the BOB to these dogs were told to look for examples of extremism, and they thought these dogs - who were later disqualified - were sound enough to award. Again, it is a single vet opinion, and so be it. But I just think that there are better ways to deal with this issue, that is all. I get the feeling that the KC's approach is that you can't make an omlette without breaking a few eggs - but they should also be prepared for any ramifications down the track. Its a double edged sword they are using. oh, and that statement made me nervous as it may be interpretted as undermining the validity of the opinion of the vet. It could be used to challenge that opinion later on. But why is a better way to deal with it vet examining all dogs before entry? Because if they aren't fit for entry, they don't go it. Thats it. Well, the fallout is starting already internationally - link below is to a Westminster perspective. The disqualified pekanese is from the same kennel and is related to the BOB winner at Westminster this year. http://www.bestinshowdaily.com/blog/2012/03/crufts-campaign-against-the-purebred-dog/comment-page-1/#comment-4477 BTW - I support improving health in all our breeds - and if some standards need to be revised to do so thats fine. But I am not sure how effective this approach is going to be in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megan_ Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 The title of that blog is "Crufts Campaign Against the Purebred Dog". TAlk about hyperbole! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkySoaringMagpie Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Somewhere in the mess of quotes earlier in the thread is some discussion about the difference between extreme preparation and extreme breeding. I think extreme preparation can also not be in the interests of the dog's health and welfare. I can't comment on Cresteds as I don't own them, but dogs with excessively long coat are one example. As for the current shit storm, you know, I'm not sure this is the right way to do it, but to date people have shown they are incapable of making changes without someone using a stick of some kind. If this is what it takes to stop people breeding dogs that sound like a steam train at rest, let alone on the move, well, perhaps this is what it has to take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dame Aussie Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Somewhere in the mess of quotes earlier in the thread is some discussion about the difference between extreme preparation and extreme breeding. I think extreme preparation can also not be in the interests of the dog's health and welfare. I can't comment on Cresteds as I don't own them, but dogs with excessively long coat are one example. As for the current shit storm, you know, I'm not sure this is the right way to do it, but to date people have shown they are incapable of making changes without someone using a stick of some kind. If this is what it takes to stop people breeding dogs that sound like a steam train at rest, let alone on the move, well, perhaps this is what it has to take. Well said, I completely agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 (edited) Somewhere in the mess of quotes earlier in the thread is some discussion about the difference between extreme preparation and extreme breeding. I think extreme preparation can also not be in the interests of the dog's health and welfare. I can't comment on Cresteds as I don't own them, but dogs with excessively long coat are one example. As for the current shit storm, you know, I'm not sure this is the right way to do it, but to date people have shown they are incapable of making changes without someone using a stick of some kind. If this is what it takes to stop people breeding dogs that sound like a steam train at rest, let alone on the move, well, perhaps this is what it has to take. Amen to that. The Dog Fancy has shown no inclination within its ranks until now to reverse the direction of breeding for exaggeration that has occured in some breeds. If this is what it takes to get heads out of the sand and thinking about these issues, then so be it. Edited March 9, 2012 by Telida Whippets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now