Anti Brachycephalic Dogs Campaign

[Steve]

If the ANKC think they are going to dodge a bullet on Brachy heads - I reckon they are pretty overly optimistic

Take a look at the speakers and the program

My link

[RuralPug]

Another celebrity vet all set to push an agenda on Brachy breeds, there are brachy specialist vets that could have been approached but they may not have supported the agenda of the organisers.... grrrr.

Toss the baby out with the bathwater seems to be the AR platform. Badly bred brachy breeds can and do have problems - so lets get rid of them all, and then the short legged breeds and then the coated breeds and then the sighthounds and the giant breeds. And so it goes.Let us not fix the problem by encouraging health first in breeding programmes, let's ban anything that is not a Dingo.

And our commonwealth taxes are paying for this seminar!!!

[moosmum]

Another celebrity vet all set to push an agenda on Brachy breeds, there are brachy specialist vets that could have been approached but they may not have supported the agenda of the organisers.... grrrr.

Badly bred brachy breeds can and do have problems - so lets get rid of them all, and then the short legged breeds and then the coated breeds and then the sighthounds and the giant breeds. And so it goes.Let us not fix the problem by encouraging health first in breeding programmes, let's ban anything that is not a Dingo.

Not trying to pick RuralPug,

But I think they have been trying for some time.

It looks like the agenda here IS how to encourage healthier breeding.

Its pretty hard going when there is a belief promoted by C.Cs that its the pedigree Standard that makes the dog, rather than a value used to support a particular type of dog.

Edited October 29, 2016 by moosmum

[mita]

Seriously looking at the position of brachy breeds, with intention to gather evidence, review breed standards and set up monitoring processes, is not necessarily anti-brachy breeds. Nor a step towards eliminating breeds in opposition to national kennel clubs.

I have a lot of respect for the Norwegian Kennel Club who have a fine track-record and on-going program re improving the situation for brachy breeds (see the link). Sweden, next door, also accepts the veterinary recommendations that better management is needed.

I see a lot about these Nordic kennel clubs because my breed of interest, tibetan spaniel (a brachy breed), is among the most popular breeds there & so there are numerous breeders from those countries on our international list. My own imported tibbie was registered with the Swedish Kennel Club & has Norwegian & Finnish dogs also in her pedigree.

http://www.dogworld.co.uk/product.php/156341/1/norwegian_kc_vows_to_intensify_work_to_help_brachycephalic_breeds

In this article, a spokesperson for the UK's Kennel Club praises the Norwegian work as positive & says, approvingly, they're leading the way.

I would hope this Australian Conference picks up on this sterling work.

Edited October 29, 2016 by mita

[mita]

Just out of interest:

The Nordic Kennel Union is a cooperative organisation for the Kennel Clubs of Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Finland and Iceland. Below we list efforts made to address exaggerations in breeds through the NKU country's BSI. There are six basic criteria defining if a breed should be listed as a high profile breed. Breeds which fulfill these and are thus listed are particularly paid attention to at dog show judging by the judge.

Edited October 29, 2016 by mita

[RuralPug]

I agree with you all, encouraging improved breeding choices IS the very best way to avoid problems in brachy breeds. There is no reason to alter the current ANKC standards to do this, simply to encourage better interpretation.

But I honestly don't think that this seminar is going to take that approach more than superficially. It will, I believe, be cited as a reason to avoid pure breeds and the uneducated public will continue to buy crosses of brachy breeds in the mistaken belief that "hybrid vigour" will automatically delete all "bad" genes.

And the vets will continue to include the crosses as brachy with brachy problems not bothering to differentiate between carefully and thoughtfully bred brachy dogs without problems and BYB and crosses.

It is the task of the ethical breeders to DEMONSTRATE that healthy dogs without extreme examples of brachy syndrome can be and are being produced. Then let the RSPCA spend public money on seminars explaining to the public how to choose an ethical breeder - I wish!!

[Maddy]

Another celebrity vet all set to push an agenda on Brachy breeds, there are brachy specialist vets that could have been approached but they may not have supported the agenda of the organisers.... grrrr.

Toss the baby out with the bathwater seems to be the AR platform. Badly bred brachy breeds can and do have problems - so lets get rid of them all, and then the short legged breeds and then the coated breeds and then the sighthounds and the giant breeds. And so it goes.Let us not fix the problem by encouraging health first in breeding programmes, let's ban anything that is not a Dingo.

And our commonwealth taxes are paying for this seminar!!!

But the sighthounds, as a group, are very healthy. I don't think you could honestly say the same of brachy breeds?

If your dog needs its nostrils widened and its soft palate trimmed just to be able to draw breath like a normal dog, I think you have a massive problem with conformation and the standard that isn't going to be fixed by telling people not to be idiots.

[RuralPug]

Another celebrity vet all set to push an agenda on Brachy breeds, there are brachy specialist vets that could have been approached but they may not have supported the agenda of the organisers.... grrrr.

Toss the baby out with the bathwater seems to be the AR platform. Badly bred brachy breeds can and do have problems - so lets get rid of them all, and then the short legged breeds and then the coated breeds and then the sighthounds and the giant breeds. And so it goes.Let us not fix the problem by encouraging health first in breeding programmes, let's ban anything that is not a Dingo.

And our commonwealth taxes are paying for this seminar!!!

But the sighthounds, as a group, are very healthy. I don't think you could honestly say the same of brachy breeds?

If your dog needs its nostrils widened and its soft palate trimmed just to be able to draw breath like a normal dog, I think you have a massive problem with conformation and the standard that isn't going to be fixed by telling people not to be idiots.

100% agree. Are you of the assumption that well bred brachys need nares and palate surgery before they can comfortably be walked around the block? This is not true. Only poorly bred ones do. It is as simple as that.

Long lived, problem free brachys do exist - although there are vets that will happily do nares and palate surgery where it is absolutely not needed. We can point to flyball and agilty champion brachys, but these will be thrown out with the bathwater if those behind the push get their way.

And don't for an instant assume that the animal rights people will not find an excuse against sighthounds - it will be something. Too much prey drive for recall training perhaps?? It is never safe to assume that your own breed is comfortably safe against AR driven legislation. Consider that historically, greyhounds had the earliest BSL in Victoria against them (thankfully gone at long last.)

[Maddy]

Another celebrity vet all set to push an agenda on Brachy breeds, there are brachy specialist vets that could have been approached but they may not have supported the agenda of the organisers.... grrrr.

Toss the baby out with the bathwater seems to be the AR platform. Badly bred brachy breeds can and do have problems - so lets get rid of them all, and then the short legged breeds and then the coated breeds and then the sighthounds and the giant breeds. And so it goes.Let us not fix the problem by encouraging health first in breeding programmes, let's ban anything that is not a Dingo.

And our commonwealth taxes are paying for this seminar!!!

But the sighthounds, as a group, are very healthy. I don't think you could honestly say the same of brachy breeds?

If your dog needs its nostrils widened and its soft palate trimmed just to be able to draw breath like a normal dog, I think you have a massive problem with conformation and the standard that isn't going to be fixed by telling people not to be idiots.

100% agree. Are you of the assumption that well bred brachys need nares and palate surgery before they can comfortably be walked around the block? This is not true. Only poorly bred ones do. It is as simple as that.

Long lived, problem free brachys do exist - although there are vets that will happily do nares and palate surgery where it is absolutely not needed. We can point to flyball and agilty champion brachys, but these will be thrown out with the bathwater if those behind the push get their way.

And don't for an instant assume that the animal rights people will not find an excuse against sighthounds - it will be something. Too much prey drive for recall training perhaps?? It is never safe to assume that your own breed is comfortably safe against AR driven legislation. Consider that historically, greyhounds had the earliest BSL in Victoria against them (thankfully gone at long last.)

Are healthy, long-lived brachys the majority though? I don't think I've ever met a pug who didn't sound like it was struggling to breathe and the few BBs I've seen down here were sad little victims of their own horribly formed bodies, barely able to move any faster than a stilted waddle- although not that you'd want them to move any faster, in case they ran into something and poked out one of their bulging eyes.

It's easy to blame the problem on the "badly bred" but obviously, the badly bred includes many pedigree dogs, bred by people who should know better, but are apparently unwilling to change.

[mita]

Norwegian Kennel Club cites the work of the Norwegian Bulldog Club in improving the health for the Bulldog, and has, in its breed specific strategy, begun work to develop an endurance test.

This test is a tool to measure whether the dog has problems breathing and/or regulating temperature during activity, so that the healthiest individuals may be selected for breeding.

The goal is that this test will provide an objective and scientific measurement of health, and therefore suitability for breeding. Hopefully, this will become one of several tools in the ongoing work to reduce the problems and suffering for brachycephalic breeds through selective breeding.

The NKK is aware that the short-nosed breeds also have other significant health issues as a result of anatomy, particularly with eyes and teeth.

NKK chief executive officer Trine Hage said: “There is no doubt that several short snout breeds have major challenges when it comes to health. The development of certain breeds should not have gone so far. Nevertheless, this very unfortunate development has occurred, and measures must therefore now be reinforced. It goes without saying that NKK should lead the way in this effort, and we have great expectations that our work will give good results.”

The NKK is blunt that there's significant numbers of dogs with major problems. And it's up to their Kennel Club working with the Breed Clubs to develop better measures for selective breeding.

Edited October 29, 2016 by mita

[RuralPug]

Are healthy, long-lived brachys the majority though? I don't think I've ever met a pug who didn't sound like it was struggling to breathe and the few BBs I've seen down here were sad little victims of their own horribly formed bodies, barely able to move any faster than a stilted waddle- although not that you'd want them to move any faster, in case they ran into something and poked out one of their bulging eyes.

It's easy to blame the problem on the "badly bred" but obviously, the badly bred includes many pedigree dogs, bred by people who should know better, but are apparently unwilling to change.

I think badly bred pet brachys are most likely in the majority since the crosses became fashionable and the pure bred but badly bred (yes, some pedigreed) frenchies, cavaliers, bulldogs, pekes, pugs, shih tzus and bostons etc etc. Their popularity as pets has led to this situation.

So this is a reason to bar them all? Do bear in mind that there are many brachy breeds that DO NOT have a majority of their members with extreme brachy syndrome - Do you associate Amstaffs with Brachy Syndrome for instance? And yet they are categorised as Brachycephalic. This is one example of tossing the baby with the bathwater.

I believe that all of the sighthounds are categorised as dolichocephalic, the other "extreme" in head shape. "Normal" head shape for a canine is categorised as mesocephalic. I believe that pointing the finger at a single head type is just a foot in the door, and I will resist ANY legislation that is breed-centered or type-centered.

It would make more sense to institute a fitness test for ANY dog or bitch of ANY breed or mix that must be passed before any puppies from them can be sold. Accidental litters where a fitness test has not been passed should be disallowed from sale, and the offspring handed over to rescue to rehome with full disclosure.

[Steve]

This website has just been launched - I guess they couldn't wait until November

I hate to say I told you so but when you hit the button to help - its a petition addressed the the ANKC .

So much for their assurances that its O.K. as they will be the ones they send them to for buying puppies.

My link

[Steve]

Another celebrity vet all set to push an agenda on Brachy breeds, there are brachy specialist vets that could have been approached but they may not have supported the agenda of the organisers.... grrrr.

Badly bred brachy breeds can and do have problems - so lets get rid of them all, and then the short legged breeds and then the coated breeds and then the sighthounds and the giant breeds. And so it goes.Let us not fix the problem by encouraging health first in breeding programmes, let's ban anything that is not a Dingo.

Not trying to pick RuralPug,

But I think they have been trying for some time.

It looks like the agenda here IS how to encourage healthier breeding.

Its pretty hard going when there is a belief promoted by C.Cs that its the pedigree Standard that makes the dog, rather than a value used to support a particular type of dog.

agreed.

[Steve]

Are healthy, long-lived brachys the majority though? I don't think I've ever met a pug who didn't sound like it was struggling to breathe and the few BBs I've seen down here were sad little victims of their own horribly formed bodies, barely able to move any faster than a stilted waddle- although not that you'd want them to move any faster, in case they ran into something and poked out one of their bulging eyes.

It's easy to blame the problem on the "badly bred" but obviously, the badly bred includes many pedigree dogs, bred by people who should know better, but are apparently unwilling to change.

I think badly bred pet brachys are most likely in the majority since the crosses became fashionable and the pure bred but badly bred (yes, some pedigreed) frenchies, cavaliers, bulldogs, pekes, pugs, shih tzus and bostons etc etc. Their popularity as pets has led to this situation.

So this is a reason to bar them all? Do bear in mind that there are many brachy breeds that DO NOT have a majority of their members with extreme brachy syndrome - Do you associate Amstaffs with Brachy Syndrome for instance? And yet they are categorised as Brachycephalic. This is one example of tossing the baby with the bathwater.

I believe that all of the sighthounds are categorised as dolichocephalic, the other "extreme" in head shape. "Normal" head shape for a canine is categorised as mesocephalic. I believe that pointing the finger at a single head type is just a foot in the door, and I will resist ANY legislation that is breed-centered or type-centered.

It would make more sense to institute a fitness test for ANY dog or bitch of ANY breed or mix that must be passed before any puppies from them can be sold. Accidental litters where a fitness test has not been passed should be disallowed from sale, and the offspring handed over to rescue to rehome with full disclosure.

The MDBA ran a health survey on all breeds which collected data for 3 years and separated the dogs to enable us to identify those who were bred by registered breeders. Some bracy head breeds are not doing THAT bad but there are a couple where those suffering and bred by registered breeders were up around the high 80% .Its hard to see there is much reality in blaming the pet breeders who are not registered as the stats simply don't show that . Less affected % of dogs were bred by non registered breeders.

However, who is mainly responsible isn't the real issue. Its an acceptance that there is a problem and making sure we are part of the solution and not refusing to accept our part it it - or it WILL be deemed cruel and unable to be fixed by breeders and the right to breed them will be removed.

[mita]

The MDBA ran a health survey on all breeds which collected data for 3 years and separated the dogs to enable us to identify those who were bred by registered breeders. Some bracy head breeds are not doing THAT bad but there are a couple where those suffering and bred by registered breeders were up around the high 80% .Its hard to see there is much reality in blaming the pet breeders who are not registered as the stats simply don't show that . Less affected % of dogs were bred by non registered breeders.

However, who is mainly responsible isn't the real issue. Its an acceptance that there is a problem and making sure we are part of the solution and not refusing to accept our part it it - or it WILL be deemed cruel and unable to be fixed by breeders and the right to breed them will be removed.

Where was that survey published?

And did it constitute self-reporting of problems?

Edited October 29, 2016 by mita

[mita]

This website has just been launched - I guess they couldn't wait until November

I hate to say I told you so but when you hit the button to help - its a petition addressed the the ANKC .

So much for their assurances that its O.K. as they will be the ones they send them to for buying puppies.

My link

This is what the 'Help' button pulls up:

"I call on the Australian National Kennel Council to acknowledge the suffering of pedigree dogs with exaggerated features. I ask that you commit to working with breeders, vets and animal welfare groups to prioritise good health and welfare above physical appearance in these breeds."

Why would they consider they have to ask the ANKC to acknowledge that 'exaggerated features' cause problems that result in suffering for dogs, when it's done, without reservation, by Clubs in Europe & the UK? It seems confrontation & division are being whipped up here in Australia. Suggesting among other things that it's commonplace for Australian registered breeders not to put good health & welfare first place.

There's no reference to the fact that such Kennel Clubs have/are developing assessments which don't rely simply on a subjective judgment of what constitutes 'exaggerated features' to a degree of risk to a dog's health.... but which will have validity.

This 'petition' seems to suggest that purebred dog breeding in Australia has no connection with the international scene. Even from my brachy breed's position, I see a great deal of interchange between European, UK & Australian clubs & registered breeders.

As I said before, I hope that Conference picks up on the sterling work being done in the world of purebred dog breeding to address what can be major problems. Instead of just driving divisions.

Edited October 29, 2016 by mita

[mita]

That Australian Conference should just get with the program, instead of fluffing around creating divisions. The organisers have voices ... they should try talking to interest groups . Or, here's a thought, inviting local interest groups and also some of that international work by Kennel Clubs via teleconferencing:

August, 2016. The (UK) Kennel Club is leading on a multi-stakeholder working group to look at practical, evidence-based solutions to health concerns inbrachycephalic breeds.

The first meeting of the working group, held in June at Clarges Street, was very positive and included the Kennel Club press and health teams, veterinary organisations (BVA), members of the veterinary community, researchers (Cambridge University and the RVC), dog welfare organisations (Dogs Trust & the RSPCA) and Breed Health Co-ordinators. It was encouraging to have support for a collaborative approach towards improving the health of brachycephalic breeds, which will further the work already being carried out by the Kennel Club, breed communities, and veterinary researchers in this area.

It is crucial that the improvement in the health of brachycephalic breeds is based on evidence to ensure maximum impact, and the research presented was very useful and will undoubtedly help all parties involved to move forward. It is hoped that the creation of a working group, along with continued research in this area, will accelerate the development of practical tools and sensible resources to guide responsible breeding and produce dogs with a reduced risk of developing brachycephalic related conditions such as Brachycephalic Obstructive Airway Syndrome. Following the success of this meeting, a multi-stakeholder working group has been organised for late July.

Edited October 29, 2016 by mita

[Maddy]

Are healthy, long-lived brachys the majority though? I don't think I've ever met a pug who didn't sound like it was struggling to breathe and the few BBs I've seen down here were sad little victims of their own horribly formed bodies, barely able to move any faster than a stilted waddle- although not that you'd want them to move any faster, in case they ran into something and poked out one of their bulging eyes.

It's easy to blame the problem on the "badly bred" but obviously, the badly bred includes many pedigree dogs, bred by people who should know better, but are apparently unwilling to change.

I think badly bred pet brachys are most likely in the majority since the crosses became fashionable and the pure bred but badly bred (yes, some pedigreed) frenchies, cavaliers, bulldogs, pekes, pugs, shih tzus and bostons etc etc. Their popularity as pets has led to this situation.

So this is a reason to bar them all? Do bear in mind that there are many brachy breeds that DO NOT have a majority of their members with extreme brachy syndrome - Do you associate Amstaffs with Brachy Syndrome for instance? And yet they are categorised as Brachycephalic. This is one example of tossing the baby with the bathwater.

I believe that all of the sighthounds are categorised as dolichocephalic, the other "extreme" in head shape. "Normal" head shape for a canine is categorised as mesocephalic. I believe that pointing the finger at a single head type is just a foot in the door, and I will resist ANY legislation that is breed-centered or type-centered.

It would make more sense to institute a fitness test for ANY dog or bitch of ANY breed or mix that must be passed before any puppies from them can be sold. Accidental litters where a fitness test has not been passed should be disallowed from sale, and the offspring handed over to rescue to rehome with full disclosure.

The difference is that dolichocephalic dogs don't suffer health issues associated with their skull shape. The only claimed health issue is periodontitis (and really just in greyhounds) but that is a result of racing diets being mostly soft and full of carbohydrates. If anything, their skull shape benefits them- huge, open nostrils to allow more air in to start with, long sinus cavity to cool blood and improve heat tolerance during extreme exertion, leading down to a very wide throat. They are the form they are because their function required it, and the result of that is dogs who are, generally speaking, very healthy. Pugs, on the other hand, were selected for facial features that obviously won't benefit the dog and especially not when bred to even further extremes.

Arguing that making changes to one extreme (and unhealthy) head shape is going to open the door to the changing of head shapes that don't impact the dog's health or welfare is really shooting yourself in the foot. As is trotting out limited examples of brachy breeds who don't have such extreme heads or (again) arguing that it's all the crossbred or backyard bred dogs.

However, who is mainly responsible isn't the real issue. Its an acceptance that there is a problem and making sure we are part of the solution and not refusing to accept our part it it - or it WILL be deemed cruel and unable to be fixed by breeders and the right to breed them will be removed.

And completely agree with what Steve says here. Complaining that it's someone else's fault might have worked ten years ago but things are changing and as greyhound breeders/trainers/owners in NSW found out, sweeping things under the rug is no longer an option.

[mita]

The MDBA ran a health survey on all breeds which collected data for 3 years and separated the dogs to enable us to identify those who were bred by registered breeders. Some bracy head breeds are not doing THAT bad but there are a couple where those suffering and bred by registered breeders were up around the high 80% .Its hard to see there is much reality in blaming the pet breeders who are not registered as the stats simply don't show that . Less affected % of dogs were bred by non registered breeders.

However, who is mainly responsible isn't the real issue. Its an acceptance that there is a problem and making sure we are part of the solution and not refusing to accept our part it it - or it WILL be deemed cruel and unable to be fixed by breeders and the right to breed them will be removed.

Where was that survey published?

And did it constitute self-reporting of problems?

Any further information on this? You've reached a conclusion, from your survey, that up to 'around' 80% of dogs in a 'couple' of bracchy breeds were suffering AND had been bred by registered breeders. While those from non-registered breeders registered 'less'' effect (% not specified).

It's not 'the' stats'.... it's stats you've gathered in your particular survey. So a reader looking for evidence needs to know: which breeds, what was your survey method, how was the data gathered about the nature & extent of 'suffering', how were participants recruited, how many were there? If you publicly give your conclusions, the survey context also needs to be made available.

Edited October 30, 2016 by mita

[RuralPug]

Maddy, please read my posts again. I am not denying that there is a problem. I am denying that changes to standards is the way to approach it.

I am saying that the problem will not be rectified by concentrating on ANKC breeders, and banning or barring entire breeds.

What I am trying to say, and obviously too clumsily to be understood, is that if your let the AR mob get their way and bar particular extremes then the precedent has been set to bar other extremes.

The end of that road is undifferentiated breeds. You can stick your head in the sand all you like and say "my breed is safe", no one can stop you - but don't complain later if you hear "I told you so".

The best breeders can achieve a brachy that fits the standard without health problems, just as the best breeders can do in every breed.

The answer to the problem is to ensure that ALL breeding stock, no matter what the breed or cross, passes fitness tests. Why would you find that a problem? Surely you feel that your breeds can pass with flying colours?

AR people have had success with the "divide them to fall" strategy (the PDE show proved that). Saying that all brachys suffer from extremes of brachy syndrome is akin to saying that all pitbulls are vicious and untrustworthy - the same principle applies. It is the individual fitness that should be the measuring stick and not generic typing.