Nsw To Ban Greyhound Racing From July 2017

[asal]

Asal you don't need to justify yourself or why you or anyone sold to Mcdougall back then . Mcdougall advertised a big two page spread in the Canine Journal and a printed notice for Dogs NSW members was circulated telling all of their members how great it would be for them to proceed to sell their puppies to PIAA member Transpet who was an agent for Mcdougall.No one who sold puppies back then to them breached any ethics or regs and some of the biggest names in the business were involved. It was actively encouraged by the canine councils.

That was then this is now and what ever you did or did not do 20 years ago simply isn't something you need to feel you should have to answer for on a public forum especially in a thread about banning greyhounds. Better to ignore the bullies when they start.

Trouble is that's why so many remain silent and the ANKC'S are in the mess they are now. the real question is, is it too late now to turn the tables and become pro-active before its too late instead of reactive damage control?

did you spot the survey request on the General forum? The wording was pure peta. We are now a "caretaker" of our pets.

Most uni students or vet students for that matter don't even realise they are being peta Indoctrinated and what have our ANKC'S done to educate them instead?

Research is over and over again proving the health benefits of not desexing let alone the results of early desexing, yet how many vets with their certificates with the ink still drying want to desex everything with 4 legs that walks into the practice? My sister became so sick of being asked when she was going to book her two girls in she finally gave them an ultimatum. never broach that subject again or she was changing vets.

Wonder when it will dawn that once breeders are eliminated they will be finding themselves looking for a new line of work?

Edited July 18, 2016 by asal

[asal]

I confess sometimes I wish moosmums posts were in plainer language, but I absolutely love them, because they usually force me to think, hard.

I don't confess to completely understand, but what I take from it is. The environment is everything apart from the self. If the self can't, won't, don't, refuse to adapt to the changing environment outside of themselves, then the environment will force it's hand. History tells us plain and clear what happens to those who don't adapt to their environment. The self cannot expect the environment to adapt to it ......the self must adapt to the environment. Whether that means I put more clothes on so I am comfortable sitting in my cold lounge room, or pedigree dog breeders adapting to changing purpose and expectations.

Thanks Gruff. I wish I could be plainer, but this is the way I talk. Its not such a problem face to face.

Buy yeah, you have it right. When you create an organization, you are creating an environment with its own purpose.

Thats not usualy a problem, because its still just PART of an environment out of many parts.

The problem is when its a closed or exclusive organization. It sets limits its pupose. Its no longer just another part of the whole. Its distinct from the rest.

Its members are responding to that organized environment alone. The demands from out side are an intrusion on that space. Theres very little give and take of messages to act on. The message its members act on are those set out at its inception. The culture is set, or fixed and not able to quickly adapt or respond to change. Its an environment for its members, but since it 'acts' independently of the larger environment, its also an identity. Or another 'self' but far more influential on the larger environment than you or me on our own because of the sheer numbers of individuals all acting on the same message.

Each in their own way, yes. But still the single environment and the messages its members receive from THAT environment. If its an exclusive org, Its messages must take precedence and its members a fixed single identity.

The purpose( keeping pedigrees) isn't the problem. Thats an identity that serves a purpose. The exclusive nature is.

Because that makes it an environment IN an identity it can't escape. It can't effectively respond to any demands out side of its ' self '. It can't be both a distinct identity and an isolated environment. An environment does not respond. It can only demand.

I like your posts too. they do what so many are loath too. think!

[Salukifan]

Wonder when it will dawn that once breeders are eliminated they will be finding themselves looking for a new line of work?

No breeder I know and respect considers what they do "work".

As for blaming the ills of the dog world on the ANKC. The issue is bigger than that. The causes are myriad and a simplistic finger-pointing response that lays all blame at the door of registered breeders is a nonsense.

The rise of the double income family, 450 sq m blocks and higher density living, changes to the cultural demographic and yes, animal rights campaigning are all shaping changes in attitudes to dogs.

The amount of misinformation about dogs, dog breeds and dog raising is rife. I think that is the space where the ANKC best operates but when you have little money and the press prints what it wishes to, its a tough ask

I'd like less finger pointing and more solutions that go beyond "they should". As I've already said, "they" should be "we".

Edited July 18, 2016 by Haredown Whippets

[asal]

Wonder when it will dawn that once breeders are eliminated they will be finding themselves looking for a new line of work?

No breeder I know and respect considers what they do "work".

As for blaming the ills of the dog world on the ANKC. The issue is bigger than that. The causes are myriad and a simplistic finger-pointing response that lays all blame at the door of registered breeders is a nonsense.

The rise of the double income family, 450 sq m blocks and higher density living, changes to the cultural demographic and yes, animal rights campaigning are all shaping changes in attitudes to dogs.

The amount of misinformation about dogs, dog breeds and dog raising is rife. I think that is the space where the ANKC best operates but when you have little money and the press prints what it wishes to, its a tough ask

I'd like less finger pointing and more solutions that go beyond "they should". As I've already said, "they" should be "we".

I was referring to the vet's pet.

As for the ill's you refer to? I was referring to the fodder seen on pedigree dogs exposed. each and every one an ankc pedigree dog, it was decades after questions began to be asked before that was filmed and collated, plenty of time to have been proactive before the event.

Edited July 18, 2016 by asal

[Pjrt]

I confess sometimes I wish moosmums posts were in plainer language, but I absolutely love them, because they usually force me to think, hard.

I don't confess to completely understand, but what I take from it is. The environment is everything apart from the self. If the self can't, won't, don't, refuse to adapt to the changing environment outside of themselves, then the environment will force it's hand. History tells us plain and clear what happens to those who don't adapt to their environment. The self cannot expect the environment to adapt to it ......the self must adapt to the environment. Whether that means I put more clothes on so I am comfortable sitting in my cold lounge room, or pedigree dog breeders adapting to changing purpose and expectations.

Thanks Gruff. I wish I could be plainer, but this is the way I talk. Its not such a problem face to face.

Buy yeah, you have it right. When you create an organization, you are creating an environment with its own purpose.

Thats not usualy a problem, because its still just PART of an environment out of many parts.

The problem is when its a closed or exclusive organization. It sets limits its pupose. Its no longer just another part of the whole. Its distinct from the rest.

Its members are responding to that organized environment alone. The demands from out side are an intrusion on that space. Theres very little give and take of messages to act on. The message its members act on are those set out at its inception. The culture is set, or fixed and not able to quickly adapt or respond to change. Its an environment for its members, but since it 'acts' independently of the larger environment, its also an identity. Or another 'self' but far more influential on the larger environment than you or me on our own because of the sheer numbers of individuals all acting on the same message.

Each in their own way, yes. But still the single environment and the messages its members receive from THAT environment. If its an exclusive org, Its messages must take precedence and its members a fixed single identity.

The purpose( keeping pedigrees) isn't the problem. Thats an identity that serves a purpose. The exclusive nature is.

Because that makes it an environment IN an identity it can't escape. It can't effectively respond to any demands out side of its ' self '. It can't be both a distinct identity and an isolated environment. An environment does not respond. It can only demand.

That makes a lot of sense to me, thanks.

In relation to the language you use, I think to convey the same basic message across many scenarios it's wise to use, let's say, generic language. It is sort of a template to lay across whatever scenario, instead of having to spell out many many different scenarios using the same language. It just takes a bit of thought and effort to bring the language to the scenario you may be looking at.

[Pjrt]

I confess sometimes I wish moosmums posts were in plainer language, but I absolutely love them, because they usually force me to think, hard.

I don't confess to completely understand, but what I take from it is. The environment is everything apart from the self. If the self can't, won't, don't, refuse to adapt to the changing environment outside of themselves, then the environment will force it's hand. History tells us plain and clear what happens to those who don't adapt to their environment. The self cannot expect the environment to adapt to it ......the self must adapt to the environment. Whether that means I put more clothes on so I am comfortable sitting in my cold lounge room, or pedigree dog breeders adapting to changing purpose and expectations.

Thanks Gruff. I wish I could be plainer, but this is the way I talk. Its not such a problem face to face.

Buy yeah, you have it right. When you create an organization, you are creating an environment with its own purpose.

Thats not usualy a problem, because its still just PART of an environment out of many parts.

The problem is when its a closed or exclusive organization. It sets limits its pupose. Its no longer just another part of the whole. Its distinct from the rest.

Its members are responding to that organized environment alone. The demands from out side are an intrusion on that space. Theres very little give and take of messages to act on. The message its members act on are those set out at its inception. The culture is set, or fixed and not able to quickly adapt or respond to change. Its an environment for its members, but since it 'acts' independently of the larger environment, its also an identity. Or another 'self' but far more influential on the larger environment than you or me on our own because of the sheer numbers of individuals all acting on the same message.

Each in their own way, yes. But still the single environment and the messages its members receive from THAT environment. If its an exclusive org, Its messages must take precedence and its members a fixed single identity.

The purpose( keeping pedigrees) isn't the problem. Thats an identity that serves a purpose. The exclusive nature is.

Because that makes it an environment IN an identity it can't escape. It can't effectively respond to any demands out side of its ' self '. It can't be both a distinct identity and an isolated environment. An environment does not respond. It can only demand.

So what is your solution?

The 'environment' outside of of the ANKC Is everyone else other than their members, which is a lot of people, largely ordinary pet owners and non pet owners. The ANKC have created their own little environment in which is members are stuck, exclusively. The bigger, outside environment, ie, the general public, is demanding change, but the exclusive environment of the ANKC inhibits change by its very nature. The solution lies in the smaller environment, the ANKC, making itself less exclusive and more able to adapt to the bigger environment, the general public.

I don't have answers on how they can do that, maybe moosmum doesn't either. What she has done is realise and explain the problem.

The change can only come from within. The larger outside environment of the general public is putting more and more pressure on the smaller exclusive environment of the ANKC. The smaller environment will implode unless it finds ways to become more harmonious and inclusive to the larger environment.

Right now the ANKC (and all that encompasses) are sort of in the pressure cooker. They have to vent enough pressure into the outside environment or they will explode/destruct.

Geez MM I'm starting to sound like you!

I am an uneducated person. If I can get my head around it surely it can't be that hard. You just have to think about it.

Edited July 18, 2016 by Gruf

[Salukifan]

The 'environment' outside of of the ANKC Is everyone else other than their members, which is a lot of people, largely ordinary pet owners and non pet owners. The ANKC have created their own little environment in which is members are stuck, exclusively. The bigger, outside environment, ie, the general public, is demanding change, but the exclusive environment of the ANKC inhibits change by its very nature. The solution lies in the smaller environment, the ANKC, making itself less exclusive and more able to adapt to the bigger environment, the general public.

It's most people, including most breeders.

You'd think most pet owners would be in favour of higher standards of breeder care and health testing.

So why do they keep buying puppy farm dogs?

Edited July 18, 2016 by Haredown Whippets

[Pjrt]

The 'environment' outside of of the ANKC Is everyone else other than their members, which is a lot of people, largely ordinary pet owners and non pet owners. The ANKC have created their own little environment in which is members are stuck, exclusively. The bigger, outside environment, ie, the general public, is demanding change, but the exclusive environment of the ANKC inhibits change by its very nature. The solution lies in the smaller environment, the ANKC, making itself less exclusive and more able to adapt to the bigger environment, the general public.

It's most people, including most breeders.

You'd think most pet owners would be in favour of higher standards of breeder care and health testing.

So why do they keep buying puppy farm dogs?

Because 'registered breeders' ie, ANKC member body, and their members, come across as exclusive, which they are, by the very nature of the membership.

They go and buy puppy farm dogs because those breeders work within the larger less exclusive environment of 'most people'

I'm not saying it's great, just saying that it is that way

'Registered breeders' need to find ways to become less exclusive and more involved with 'most people' .. If they don't at best they will just remain their own little exclusive environment with little meaning to most people, at worst they will cease to exist because of the pressure of 'most people'.......which in the interests of staying on topic, is pretty much what has happened to greyhound racing NSW

Edited July 18, 2016 by Gruf

[Pjrt]

The 'environment' outside of of the ANKC Is everyone else other than their members, which is a lot of people, largely ordinary pet owners and non pet owners. The ANKC have created their own little environment in which is members are stuck, exclusively. The bigger, outside environment, ie, the general public, is demanding change, but the exclusive environment of the ANKC inhibits change by its very nature. The solution lies in the smaller environment, the ANKC, making itself less exclusive and more able to adapt to the bigger environment, the general public.

It's most people, including most breeders.

You'd think most pet owners would be in favour of higher standards of breeder care and health testing.

So why do they keep buying puppy farm dogs?

And yes, you'd think pet owners would be in favour of higher standards , and they probably are. But the 'registered breeders' seem to preach among themselves mostly. They need to find ways to get the message out into pet owner land. Expecting pet owner land to come to the message is arse way up thinking. Not saying that's great either, but it is that way

[Steve]

I confess sometimes I wish moosmums posts were in plainer language, but I absolutely love them, because they usually force me to think, hard.

I don't confess to completely understand, but what I take from it is. The environment is everything apart from the self. If the self can't, won't, don't, refuse to adapt to the changing environment outside of themselves, then the environment will force it's hand. History tells us plain and clear what happens to those who don't adapt to their environment. The self cannot expect the environment to adapt to it ......the self must adapt to the environment. Whether that means I put more clothes on so I am comfortable sitting in my cold lounge room, or pedigree dog breeders adapting to changing purpose and expectations.

Thanks Gruff. I wish I could be plainer, but this is the way I talk. Its not such a problem face to face.

Buy yeah, you have it right. When you create an organization, you are creating an environment with its own purpose.

Thats not usualy a problem, because its still just PART of an environment out of many parts.

The problem is when its a closed or exclusive organization. It sets limits its pupose. Its no longer just another part of the whole. Its distinct from the rest.

Its members are responding to that organized environment alone. The demands from out side are an intrusion on that space. Theres very little give and take of messages to act on. The message its members act on are those set out at its inception. The culture is set, or fixed and not able to quickly adapt or respond to change. Its an environment for its members, but since it 'acts' independently of the larger environment, its also an identity. Or another 'self' but far more influential on the larger environment than you or me on our own because of the sheer numbers of individuals all acting on the same message.

Each in their own way, yes. But still the single environment and the messages its members receive from THAT environment. If its an exclusive org, Its messages must take precedence and its members a fixed single identity.

The purpose( keeping pedigrees) isn't the problem. Thats an identity that serves a purpose. The exclusive nature is.

Because that makes it an environment IN an identity it can't escape. It can't effectively respond to any demands out side of its ' self '. It can't be both a distinct identity and an isolated environment. An environment does not respond. It can only demand.

So what is your solution?

The 'environment' outside of of the ANKC Is everyone else other than their members, which is a lot of people, largely ordinary pet owners and non pet owners. The ANKC have created their own little environment in which is members are stuck, exclusively. The bigger, outside environment, ie, the general public, is demanding change, but the exclusive environment of the ANKC inhibits change by its very nature. The solution lies in the smaller environment, the ANKC, making itself less exclusive and more able to adapt to the bigger environment, the general public.

I don't have answers on how they can do that, maybe moosmum doesn't either. What she has done is realise and explain the problem.

The change can only come from within. The larger outside environment of the general public is putting more and more pressure on the smaller exclusive environment of the ANKC. The smaller environment will implode unless it finds ways to become more harmonious and inclusive to the larger environment.

Right now the ANKC (and all that encompasses) are sort of in the pressure cooker. They have to vent enough pressure into the outside environment or they will explode/destruct.

Geez MM I'm starting to sound like you!

I am an uneducated person. If I can get my head around it surely it can't be that hard. You just have to think about it.

Yes I understood all of that and I agree - to a point . I still get frustrated and lost when the pedigree environment or system or whatever is in the mix. As to how they can do that - I don't believe they can based on the current system and I conceded about 13 years ago that I couldn't see them changing from within. So we started another environment that isn't exclusive that has adapted and does continue to do so with changing world environment.

Fact is this particular issue is about conformational characteristics which are being bred into a dog which compromise its health and welfare which is now on the radar and being tagged cruelty. This is not unique to the ANKC or the pedigree system - some may argue it was originally caused by the show system and breed standards but in the year 2016 thousands of people breed these dogs and most are far outside of this exclusive environment. They are part of the environment as a whole. if over night the ANKC became less exclusive and let them all in and throw their stud books open without any restriction and were therefore more inclusive how do you see that this would stop the breeding of dogs which suffer due to the way they are selected - how do you think by being more inclusive this would prevent legislation into the future which may prohibit some conformational issues or breeds or showing when so many outside of the current environment do so now and whether they are in or out will continue to do so.

So in amongst all of this environment talk - which I would be more able to keep up with if each environment was named as a more conventional description - where in all of this do ratbags, zealots, radicals fit in when they are nothing more than a small but noisy cashed up part of the game?

[asal]

The 'environment' outside of of the ANKC Is everyone else other than their members, which is a lot of people, largely ordinary pet owners and non pet owners. The ANKC have created their own little environment in which is members are stuck, exclusively. The bigger, outside environment, ie, the general public, is demanding change, but the exclusive environment of the ANKC inhibits change by its very nature. The solution lies in the smaller environment, the ANKC, making itself less exclusive and more able to adapt to the bigger environment, the general public.

It's most people, including most breeders.

You'd think most pet owners would be in favour of higher standards of breeder care and health testing.

So why do they keep buying puppy farm dogs?

Because 'registered breeders' ie, ANKC member body, and their members, come across as exclusive, which they are, by the very nature of the membership.

They go and buy puppy farm dogs because those breeders work within the larger less exclusive environment of 'most people'

I'm not saying it's great, just saying that it is that way

'Registered breeders' need to find ways to become less exclusive and more involved with 'most people' .. If they don't at best they will just remain their own little exclusive environment with little meaning to most people, at worst they will cease to exist because of the pressure of 'most people'.......which in the interests of staying on topic, is pretty much what has happened to greyhound racing NSW

Bravo Gruff great work.

the sticking point though is ankc members are extorted to not breed for the pet people, that would make you a puppy farmer and unethical. to be ethical you should only produce a litter when necessary to produce the next generation, if your bitch only has one pup so be it that's what you have been granted, to breed successive litters to get a better selection is to risk being the unthinkable.

some even mooted to be truly ethical one must not sell any of the puppies you don't keep or pass on to fellow members should not only be on limit register regardless of how high their quality but to be truly ethical do not sell at a price high enough to realise a profit.

doubt me?

Ive heard it all mate. Some breeders have waiting lists that are years before you get a call, if your lucky. know, tried to source a pup from a highly recommended breeder by one of the heads of the ethics committee when I gave him a list of the qualities I was looking for. except when and if you make the cut none leave on main register soo why wait anyway.

the figures tell it all 70,130 ankc puppies born australia wide for 2015. for every man woman and child in a country with over 25 million people.

thats the highest number recorded since 2000. not many to go around is there from that source.

Edited July 18, 2016 by asal

[Pjrt]

To be honest I'm not sure there is a straight answer or a clear path ahead. And I do understand and agree with what you're saying overall too.

If different entities throw their hats in to the ring I suppose it adds to the confusion among most people. Unfortunately money talks, either directly through public campaigns, or indirectly through back door funding. Change takes time, we all have to accept that. Whoever gets their message across more loudly ultimately wins the most support among most people.

unfortunately the message from registered breeding is that because the dogs are generally health tested and breeding is selective etc etc that the animals are somehow better and therefore people expect they will be, as in guaranteed to be better. When the animal doesn't meet or fails the high expectations surrounding animals from registered breeders, that message gets out loud and clear. The few bad messages will always rise above the thousands of good. Owners who get a great animal are just content and we don't hear their message. Owners who don't want everyone to know their gripes.

I guess when people buy a pet outside of the registries they lower their expectations, for better or worse.

Like I said, I don't have the answers, I just want to juggle the pieces of the puzzle to see if I can get any to slot together

[Steve]

The 'environment' outside of of the ANKC Is everyone else other than their members, which is a lot of people, largely ordinary pet owners and non pet owners. The ANKC have created their own little environment in which is members are stuck, exclusively. The bigger, outside environment, ie, the general public, is demanding change, but the exclusive environment of the ANKC inhibits change by its very nature. The solution lies in the smaller environment, the ANKC, making itself less exclusive and more able to adapt to the bigger environment, the general public.

It's most people, including most breeders.

You'd think most pet owners would be in favour of higher standards of breeder care and health testing.

So why do they keep buying puppy farm dogs?

Because 'registered breeders' ie, ANKC member body, and their members, come across as exclusive, which they are, by the very nature of the membership.

They go and buy puppy farm dogs because those breeders work within the larger less exclusive environment of 'most people'

I'm not saying it's great, just saying that it is that way

'Registered breeders' need to find ways to become less exclusive and more involved with 'most people' .. If they don't at best they will just remain their own little exclusive environment with little meaning to most people, at worst they will cease to exist because of the pressure of 'most people'.......which in the interests of staying on topic, is pretty much what has happened to greyhound racing NSW

They go and buy puppy farm dogs because they can get one from them - because there is no where near enough bred by ANKC registered breeders to fill the demand.

Sure some wont like how some registered breeders make the process harder but most of us don't in fact lots of us will sell to anyone without a care in the world about where they are going.

For now the environment [ the general public] is as desensitised to the way a particular breed characteristic makes the dogs they choose suffer as the people who are breeding them are. Registered breeders who are breeding them are a drip in the ocean of the rest who are breeding them.

The other bit of the environment wants less dogs to suffer because of how they are selected and it gets bigger and louder every day.

The strategy from every one breeding them and owning them is denial whether they are pedigreed or not and until there is an acknowledgment that its a problem and it needs to be dealt with its a threat to the status quo - but Im curious as to how such a small minority ecxclusib=ve group[ environment] is expected to be able to control what those outside of their environment do and how they can not be in the muck as the plug is pulled.

The greyhound thing really was/ is exclusive. You cant breed a grey or race it unless you were part of that exclusive gang [environment] but anyone can breed a pug without being a part of any environment [ group].

[Pjrt]

The 'environment' outside of of the ANKC Is everyone else other than their members, which is a lot of people, largely ordinary pet owners and non pet owners. The ANKC have created their own little environment in which is members are stuck, exclusively. The bigger, outside environment, ie, the general public, is demanding change, but the exclusive environment of the ANKC inhibits change by its very nature. The solution lies in the smaller environment, the ANKC, making itself less exclusive and more able to adapt to the bigger environment, the general public.

It's most people, including most breeders.

You'd think most pet owners would be in favour of higher standards of breeder care and health testing.

So why do they keep buying puppy farm dogs?

Because 'registered breeders' ie, ANKC member body, and their members, come across as exclusive, which they are, by the very nature of the membership.

They go and buy puppy farm dogs because those breeders work within the larger less exclusive environment of 'most people'

I'm not saying it's great, just saying that it is that way

'Registered breeders' need to find ways to become less exclusive and more involved with 'most people' .. If they don't at best they will just remain their own little exclusive environment with little meaning to most people, at worst they will cease to exist because of the pressure of 'most people'.......which in the interests of staying on topic, is pretty much what has happened to greyhound racing NSW

They go and buy puppy farm dogs because they can get one from them - because there is no where near enough bred by ANKC registered breeders to fill the demand.

Sure some wont like how some registered breeders make the process harder but most of us don't in fact lots of us will sell to anyone without a care in the world about where they are going.

For now the environment [ the general public] is as desensitised to the way a particular breed characteristic makes the dogs they choose suffer as the people who are breeding them are. Registered breeders who are breeding them are a drip in the ocean of the rest who are breeding them.

The other bit of the environment wants less dogs to suffer because of how they are selected and it gets bigger and louder every day.

The strategy from every one breeding them and owning them is denial whether they are pedigreed or not and until there is an acknowledgment that its a problem and it needs to be dealt with its a threat to the status quo - but Im curious as to how such a small minority ecxclusib=ve group[ environment] is expected to be able to control what those outside of their environment do and how they can not be in the muck as the plug is pulled.

The greyhound thing really was/ is exclusive. You cant breed a grey or race it unless you were part of that exclusive gang [environment] but anyone can breed a pug without being a part of any environment [ group].

Yep, all of that is true too.

[asal]

The 'environment' outside of of the ANKC Is everyone else other than their members, which is a lot of people, largely ordinary pet owners and non pet owners. The ANKC have created their own little environment in which is members are stuck, exclusively. The bigger, outside environment, ie, the general public, is demanding change, but the exclusive environment of the ANKC inhibits change by its very nature. The solution lies in the smaller environment, the ANKC, making itself less exclusive and more able to adapt to the bigger environment, the general public.

It's most people, including most breeders.

You'd think most pet owners would be in favour of higher standards of breeder care and health testing.

So why do they keep buying puppy farm dogs?

Because 'registered breeders' ie, ANKC member body, and their members, come across as exclusive, which they are, by the very nature of the membership.

They go and buy puppy farm dogs because those breeders work within the larger less exclusive environment of 'most people'

I'm not saying it's great, just saying that it is that way

'Registered breeders' need to find ways to become less exclusive and more involved with 'most people' .. If they don't at best they will just remain their own little exclusive environment with little meaning to most people, at worst they will cease to exist because of the pressure of 'most people'.......which in the interests of staying on topic, is pretty much what has happened to greyhound racing NSW

They go and buy puppy farm dogs because they can get one from them - because there is no where near enough bred by ANKC registered breeders to fill the demand.

Sure some wont like how some registered breeders make the process harder but most of us don't in fact lots of us will sell to anyone without a care in the world about where they are going.

For now the environment [ the general public] is as desensitised to the way a particular breed characteristic makes the dogs they choose suffer as the people who are breeding them are. Registered breeders who are breeding them are a drip in the ocean of the rest who are breeding them.

The other bit of the environment wants less dogs to suffer because of how they are selected and it gets bigger and louder every day.

The strategy from every one breeding them and owning them is denial whether they are pedigreed or not and until there is an acknowledgment that its a problem and it needs to be dealt with its a threat to the status quo - but Im curious as to how such a small minority ecxclusib=ve group[ environment] is expected to be able to control what those outside of their environment do and how they can not be in the muck as the plug is pulled.

The greyhound thing really was/ is exclusive. You cant breed a grey or race it unless you were part of that exclusive gang [environment] but anyone can breed a pug without being a part of any environment [ group].

excellent points, I forgot that.

[Pjrt]

No one wants to have what they have now taken away from them. Some people will realise the problem and accept it, and accept change is needed, but most just cling on to what they have and oppose change. Can't see the trees for the forest etc. Those left to bring change have their work cut out. It's the nature of the beast.

[mita]

Just back to the Peke thing. Here's a Peke, with the glorious name of Wonton Soup, not being prevented from having a bouncing good time by any feature of his breed. (I wonder what they call him for short?)

Fits one of the breed standards laid down by Dowager Empress T'zu Hsi of China.

"Let it be lively that it may afford entertainment by its gambols'.

Wonton sure can gambol!

Edited July 18, 2016 by mita

[Steve]

No one wants to have what they have now taken away from them. Some people will realise the problem and accept it, and accept change is needed, but most just cling on to what they have and oppose change. Can't see the trees for the forest etc. Those left to bring change have their work cut out. It's the nature of the beast.

The major difference which links in with some of MM points is that the people who are members of a group. ANKC, AAPDB and the MDBA hear it, see it, and we know its in the mix . We can all tell our stories of how our members are targeted and how we are punched up on pretty much every level by animal rights. As groups we have choices in how we will respond in order to create change or fight for where we are and want to stay. The rest of the members of the wider environment who are not being kept upto date on what is going one will still know to keep an eye out for the radicals but they wont see a possible ban on them breeding certain breed types coming.

Whats more we all know - those within and outside of the ANKC environment that they [the ANKC - own the breed standard that they run the shows that these breeds compete in and everyone seriously expects that if it is a situation where any part of what they publicly proudly make so much money out of is under threat that of all groups, all environments or all members of that environment that this is where the battle will rage . If this environment group isn't going to pull their gloves on and fight for those who breed these breed types then who will?

And to be honest why would the rest of the world want to be included rather than get as far away from them as possible to save themselves?

Edited July 18, 2016 by Steve

[Sheridan]

Ah, Steve, true colours come shining through.

You can say that again. Again I say to you play the ball and not the man.

#snert

[Rebanne]

Just back to the Peke thing. Here's a Peke, with the glorious name of Wonton Soup, not being prevented from having a bouncing good time by any feature of his breed. (I wonder what they call him for short?)

Fits one of the breed standards laid down by Dowager Empress T'zu Hsi of China.

"Let it be lively that it may afford entertainment by its gambols'.

Wonton sure can gambol!

My parents had 3 registered Pekes as pets. Only one had the very full coat seen in the show ring. They certainly could do much more then walk around a show ring, especially tge one that chased the mail man around tge front fence nearly every day of his life! All lived to double figures. The full coated one did lose an eye to injury.