Who Is Writing About Dogs?

[SkySoaringMagpie]

http://www.carolinecoile.com/1/post/2012/05/dog-breeders-we-have-a-problem.html

Please don't repost without the original author credit/details - From Caroline Coile's blog.

--

I recently attended an event with several other dog writers, most of whom were a younger crowd who wrote blogs or published local pet newspapers. It was an eye-opening experience. As with any group of dog writers, we talked about our own dogs and shared their pictures. Almost every other writer had cute mixes and we all cooed over how cool they were. A few initially thought my dogs were also pretty cool, but that was when they still thought they were mixes. I could swear that once they found out my dogs were an actual breed the compliments and interest stopped. OK, maybe my imagination.

Or maybe not. I was interested in an article one writer wrote about a hairless pit bull. Because I'm interested in genetics, I was anxious to find out if the writer was sure of the dogs' parentage (yes, supposedly two fully coated pit bull parents) and if they'd had any DNA testing done or otherwise made the dog's DNA available to researchers. It was the last comment that led to indignation on the part of the writer, who proclaimed the owners had neutered the dog because they refused to allow the AKC to make another breed from it, and that they had been offered thousands and thousands of dollars by breeders but had refused because of their ethics. I tried to explain that AKC

doesn't make breeds that way, but that from a scientific viewpoint it would be interesting to know if the responsible mutation was the same as that causing hairlessness in other breeds (this dog also had dentition similar to that seen in hairless Chinese Cresteds and other breeds thought to arise from the same mutation). I'd like to think I convinced her that no ethical breeder would be interested in creating a hairless pit bull (although I suppose some might think a toothless one might be a good idea) but I am not sure I fully succeeded.

Fast forward to dinner talk---and another writer who proclaimed show breeders were responsible for shelter dogs. Huh? Yes, she said: In their quest for a dog with some perfect trait, they bred litter after litter, and sold the rejects for $5 to $15 each. These rejects then ended up in shelters. She knew this was true because for one thing, look at the dogs on Petfinder.org. Most are purebreds, but not show dogs---obviously breeders' rejects. With the help of another experienced writer I explained that the dogs on Petfinder are usually labeled with a breed name to increase their exposure and interest level to browsers, and very likely to make them noticed by breed rescues that may take on a dog that is partly their breed. (I just visited Petfinder and found 36 Salukis or Saluki mixes listed. Of them, one is a saluki---anyone in New Jersey want a 7-year-old black and tan female Saluki? http://www.petfinder.com/petdetail/22844275 ---and one other is a very cute sighthound mix: http://www.petfinder.com/petdetail/21871898 . Just because a dog is thin or has a brush tail does not make it Saluki or even part Saluki). We also pointed out that simply from a financial viewpoint it would be stupid to sell puppies for $15; the same money goes into creating a pet puppy as a show puppy from the same litter. And finally, we explained that reputable breeders love their dogs and often place show quality puppies in pet homes because they want the best homes and lives for their puppies. Again, I suspect we failed to convince her, but perhaps we at least planted some doubts.

Purebred dog breeders are fighting a bad reputation. We've blamed the mainstream media for that, but the problem may be more insidious. When our own writers---the people who purport to know about dogs, and who the public rely upon to inform them in turn---are so terribly misinformed about purebred dog breeders, we've got a problem.

[LizT]

Misinformation is indeed a concern.

And who are these Dog Blog writers? My sister who lives in London sang the prasies of a "dog Person" who is an "expert" and has a Blog. She was sending her "naughty dog" there for a "time out". She posted me the link. Sorry, but the woman lost me when she advised that owners with dogs with vomiting and diarrhoea due to eating rubbish from overflowing bins in Parks "Take up the water so as not to have watery vomit on their carpets etc.". A dog with vomiting and diarrhoea can dehydrate so quickly. Water is of the utmost importance in this situation! What kind of stupid advice is this?

[mita]

Good question. Who are these Dog Blog 'writers'?

Just because someone writes a 'dog' blog (which anyone can), it doesn't give them any special qualification to have expertise in some, or all, areas relating to dogs.

They're better called 'bloggers' and bloggers are people who write subjectively from their own experience. Which is fine. But anyone looking for the checks and balances of science in the average blog, is likely looking in the wrong place.

Scottish author, Andrew O'Hagan wrote: "The internet has created a kind of global stupidity contest...' Bit harsh, but a tiny grain of truth. :)

Edited May 13, 2012 by mita

[Diva]

Fast forward to dinner talk---and another writer who proclaimed show breeders were responsible for shelter dogs. Huh? Yes, she said: In their quest for a dog with some perfect trait, they bred litter after litter, and sold the rejects for $5 to $15 each. These rejects then ended up in shelters. She knew this was true because for one thing, look at the dogs on Petfinder.org. Most are purebreds, but not show dogs---obviously breeders' rejects. With the help of another experienced writer I explained that the dogs on Petfinder are usually labeled with a breed name to increase their exposure and interest level to browsers, and very likely to make them noticed by breed rescues that may take on a dog that is partly their breed. (I just visited Petfinder and found 36 Salukis or Saluki mixes listed. Of them, one is a saluki---anyone in New Jersey want a 7-year-old black and tan female Saluki? http://www.petfinder.com/petdetail/22844275 ---and one other is a very cute sighthound mix: http://www.petfinder.com/petdetail/21871898 . Just because a dog is thin or has a brush tail does not make it Saluki or even part Saluki). We also pointed out that simply from a financial viewpoint it would be stupid to sell puppies for $15; the same money goes into creating a pet puppy as a show puppy from the same litter. And finally, we explained that reputable breeders love their dogs and often place show quality puppies in pet homes because they want the best homes and lives for their puppies. Again, I suspect we failed to convince her, but perhaps we at least planted some doubts.

One of the reasons I hate the 'guess the breed and call it that' game rescues have to go through - it makes the purebred breeders look responsible for far more of the homeless dogs then they are, either directly or through first crosses.

As for the rest, a lot of what passes for the moral high-ground in blogs and other populist writing is just regurgitated feel-good sound bites from people who have no real knowledge but a wealth of self-rightousness. A little depressing really given how influential it is.

[Alkhe]

Hm, there are some worrying things there, but I'm not really sure what to think. People will read what they read - that's a problem with the internet broadly, it gives everyone an equal position on the soap box, and if you're not on the ball, it can be hard to separate the wheat from the chaff.

I'm not sure that there's an insidious group of 'dog blogs' out there, though - there are just people all over the place writing about all sorts of things. That article makes it sound like there's a cohesive group of people writing blogs as a guerrilla kind of anti-purebred thing, and I don't think that's really the case. It seems like a bit of a straw man to me.

I personally started my own website as a means of writing about what I think are important things (related to dogs), that there's lots of conflicting information on. In some ways it just adds to the buzz that blogs create, but if it provides something to think about to even one person, then I'm happy.

[Squidgy]

I have read quite a few "dog blogs" some that have been quite helpful and some that have been nothing but rubbish promoting how healthy DD are etc. The ones I have read about health etc have been quite informative but yeh I agree just because someone writes a blog doesn't exactly make them a credible expert or give them any qualification :)

[Dame Aussie]

This is the problem with the interweb....anyone can start a blog about anything and unfortunately a lot of good ones get lost in all the guff. People who are uneducated on the topic will just believe whatever they read and there you go.

I do agree though that breeders and purebred owners have got a bad reputation. I've experienced it myself and I have a cross breed and used to work in a shelter! But how dare I buy a purebred dog....

[mita]

Some of the best dog stuff I've found is on the websites of individuals/organizations who have specific expertise where they're required to put their money where their mouths are....and shape up publicly in the real world. There's more to what they do than simply 'blog' out into cyberspace.

Like, excellent information on the social development of dogs, is on the Rottweiler Club of Victoria's website.

Also great information (tho' North American based) on longevity statistics for the various purebreeds is on a qualified vet/academic's site.

And a neat summary on the positive goals that the best of purebred breeders work towards, is on a Swedish breeder's website.

'Stuff' like this, has educational value.

Edited May 14, 2012 by mita

[Jed]

Unfortunately, it is all smoke and mirrors, rumour and innuendo, begun by animal rights as part of their campaign to remove pet dogs yet people believe it.

It is happening everywhere. Because no one withe purebred dogs believes it - except older people - no one does anything.

http://naiaonline.org/articles/article/guilt-purebred-dog-owners-can-play#.T7BiPJbc8N3.facebook

The NAIA is actually doing something about this. The new president of the AKC made a wonderful inaugural speech recently, and if he can achieve his aims, things may improve.

This article is very long but worth reading for anyone with an interest in the future of purebred dogs .. if anyone thinks they have a future. :)