# Pedigree Dogs Exposed Petition



## Guest (Sep 16, 2008)

"Following the powerful Pedigree Dogs Exposed documentary on BBC1 the Kennel Club still seems reluctant to grasp the nettle, face the problems and reform itself. The program revealed it urgently needs to bring in mandatory minimum standards on levels of inbreeding, make health testing mandatory, prevent unhealthy physical exaggerations being rewarded and stop the culling of healthy non-standard pups by changing breed standards. The KC continually complains that it lacks the backing of legislation to bring in these urgent and much needed reforms, so we the undersigned urge the Prime Minister please instigate legislation to ensure pedigree dogs are saved from unnecessary future suffering."

If you would like to add your name to this petition please go to this link:

Petition to: introduce legislation to reform the Kennel Club. | Number10.gov.uk


----------



## Sgurr (Aug 24, 2008)

You have to think carefully when a petition is worded.
Quote:
_we the undersigned urge the Prime minister please instigate legislation to ensure pedigree dogs are saved from unnecessary future suffering_
Unquote

How will such pedigree dogs be saved from unnecessary future suffering? Are they to be culled as puppies as their heritage shows they are most likely to have potenitally debilitating conditions such as hip displasia? Well there go the Pugs, over 60% of them displastic, and with eye problems and breathing difficulties -PDE never commented on the hips though did they? And if the Pugs go ( and I personally would not miss them but I accept that others would) then all the Designer Dogs with this as a cross should go too.

And what about the cross breeds and just honest mongrels, no legislation to ensure that they are saved from unnecessary future suffering?

Mongrels and cross breeds do not suffer from genetically controlled conditions that are adverse to health?

Take a Pug and cross it with a Beagle (over 60% of the breed dysplatic from the Pug and over 18% of the breed from the Beagle) and you might get something 40% displastic and call it a Puggle - I think they do. ESS as a breed are about 14% dysplatic but with 8.0% having excellent hips - the best you could say for a Puggle is the Beagle rating of 2.4% excellent (Pugs are 0.0% BTW) and say (about) 40% dysplastic for the cross bred. There would be only about 15 pedigree dog breeds worse than this, call it 20 to save unnecessary argument.

I am totally for the welfare of all dogs and totally against knee jerk and ill-informed reactions.

Let me put a case - Rytex Racine (ESS) won both the All Variety Spaniel Championship and the Irish Spaniel Championship in the very early 1990's. Probably the first spaniel ever to win two national championships - and to the best of my knowledge only two others have done it in nearly thirty years. Racine had the same sire as her half brother to whom she was mated. I do not condone this but I realize what it achieved in terms of a fit for purpose dog.

So we stop breeding pedigree dogs and just adopt rescues, and when the rescues run out we do what they are doing in the USA and import rescues from the third world? No we don't need to do that, we are already importing rescues and farmed puppies from Ireland and ensuring that dog welfare there is secondary to a quick buck or should I say punt? (edited to say Euro)

No, Iam not signing such an ill thought out petition.
There is much more to be done for all dog welfare, but this is not the way forward.

Sgurr


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2008)

Excellent reply Sgurr! I won't be signing this petition either - for the reasons you state, but also because of these words:

_prevent unhealthy physical exaggerations being rewarded and stop the culling of healthy non-standard pups by changing breed standards_

The Kennel Club already does this.


----------



## tashi (Dec 5, 2007)

and neither will I - sorry


----------



## Bindura (Sep 17, 2008)

Sgurr said:


> You have to think carefully when a petition is worded.
> Quote:
> Well there go the Pugs, over 60% of them displastic, and with eye problems and breathing difficulties
> Sgurr


Sorry but where do you get that figure from? As a pug person myself, in this country at least HD is not a problem in pugs, there are odd ones as there are in any breed, but it's not a 'known' or common problem. As for breathing, everyone quotes pugs can not breathe, I can't vouch for all pugs but the vast majority have absolutely no problems at all, mine have never had any problems breathing or chasing down my cocker across my paddock for hours. The only times I have seen pugs struggling to breathe is if they are very overweight. Again with eyes, not had any genetic defects with pug's eyes, had the odd eye scratched, I will admit, but my cocker has scratched his eye before.

Sorry for the small rant, just keep seeing all these quotes about pugs and no one seems to want to stand up for them.


----------



## marlynaveve (Aug 13, 2008)

spellweaver said:


> Excellent reply Sgurr! I won't be signing this petition either - for the reasons you state, but also because of these words:
> 
> _prevent unhealthy physical exaggerations being rewarded and stop the culling of healthy non-standard pups by changing breed standards_
> 
> The Kennel Club already does this.


so you wont 'unhealthyphysical exaggerations to be awarded top placing in the ring do you? You also want healthy non-standard pups to be culled, I take it that is what you mean by not signing
Mary
x


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2008)

marlynaveve said:


> so you wont 'unhealthyphysical exaggerations to be awarded top placing in the ring do you?


The KC don't place the dogs,Judges do, and to be fair judges can only judge the dogs they have infront of them.
The breed standards are interpretated differently by judges and breeders.


----------



## marlynaveve (Aug 13, 2008)

sallyanne said:


> The KC don't place the dogs,Judges do, and to be fair judges can only judge the dogs they have infront of them.
> The breed standards are interpretated differently by judges and breeders.


You've lost me now. As I understand it the idea behind the petition is to get the KC to make health testing mandatory and to also prevent extreme physical exaggerations being produced. With this in place, in time we would see healthier less exaggerated types in the show ring, well thats how I interpreted it anyway, maybe I'm wrong.
Mary
x


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2008)

marlynaveve said:


> You've lost me now. As I understand it the idea behind the petition is to get the KC to make health testing mandatory and to also prevent extreme physical exaggerations being produced. With this in place, in time we would see healthier less exaggerated types in the show ring, well thats how I interpreted it anyway, maybe I'm wrong.
> Mary
> x


And yes I agree they should make health testing compulsary,breed clubs and Breeders need to push to get this in place,it's not all down to the KC I'm afraid.

Again it depends on what Jugdes think are exaggerated,one might think a dog is overdone in some departments another maynot.It's a vicious circle,dogs are placed which shouldn't be,dogs win which shouldn't,then you get some breeders who breed that type of dog because the judge placed it.

It has baffled me beyond belief,what I think is a good dog won't be placed and what I wouldn't give house room too is placed.
Why are dogs that are shown at all levels winning there class in CH shows yet do not get placed in open shows.
If judges stopped placing over exaggerated dogs then Breeders wouldn't keep breeding them,but again as I said it's how different judges view the dog against the standard.
You only have to look at the variation within some breeds.


----------



## whispers (Sep 2, 2008)

Perhaps if the KC were only to allow puppies to be registered that were bred from parents who had the relevant testing done this would encourage many breeders to get the tests done before hand. It isn't difficult most championship shows, breed shows and vets organise from time to time the relevant experts to come in and do testing. I used to breed and show English cockers and my bitches were always checked by a vet before and after mating. Also I would have already had eye and hip testing done along with heart checks and I always chose a stud for his nature as well as conformation and insisted in seeing his test results. OK so this all costs money but at the end if breeders were not getting testing done and were being prevented from registering puppies don't you think they would either give up or change their ways.


----------



## jackson (May 22, 2008)

whispers said:


> Perhaps if the KC were only to allow puppies to be registered that were bred from parents who had the relevant testing done this would encourage many breeders to get the tests done before hand. It isn't difficult most championship shows, breed shows and vets organise from time to time the relevant experts to come in and do testing. I used to breed and show English cockers and my bitches were always checked by a vet before and after mating. Also I would have already had eye and hip testing done along with heart checks and I always chose a stud for his nature as well as conformation and insisted in seeing his test results. OK so this all costs money but at the end if breeders were not getting testing done and were being prevented from registering puppies don't you think they would either give up or change their ways.


In an ideal world that would happen, but the KC makes far more money from BYB's and puppy farmers than decent responsible breeders, so imagine the revenue that would be lost?

Revenue that the RSPCA are happy to take as charitable donations.....


----------



## Guest (Sep 17, 2008)

marlynaveve said:


> so you wont 'unhealthyphysical exaggerations to be awarded top placing in the ring do you? You also want healthy non-standard pups to be culled, I take it that is what you mean by not signing
> Mary
> x


No, go back and read what I put. I said there is no point in signing a petitition asking the Kennel Club to "prevent unhealthy physical exaggerations being rewarded and stop the culling of healthy non-standard pups by changing breed standards" *because the Kennel Club already prevent unhealthy physical exaggerations being rewarded and do not allow the culling of healthy non-standard pups by changing breed standards.*


----------



## marlynaveve (Aug 13, 2008)

jackson said:


> the KC makes far more money from BYB's and puppy farmers than decent responsible breeders, so imagine the revenue that would be lost?


Most BYB and puppy farms like breed thier bitches at every season and well past the KC age limit, so I don't think the KC gets very much revenue out of them.
Mary
x


----------



## jackson (May 22, 2008)

marlynaveve said:


> Most BYB and puppy farms like breed thier bitches at every season and well past the KC age limit, so I don't think the KC gets very much revenue out of them.
> Mary
> x


Of course it does. Just because they can't register every litter with the KC, it doesn't mean they don't register the litters they can. or add extra puppies onto the litter they do register to use later on. Puppy farmers are fully awre that KC pups sell for more than unregistered ones.


----------



## Sgurr (Aug 24, 2008)

To answer Bindura's question as to where I got the information on Pugs

The Orthopaedic Foundation for Animals is a US based organization (charity I believe) that among other activities to promote animal welfare has an *open* data base of test results for health checks. I use the one for Dogs. You can search for statistics on Breeds or results on individual dogs. (Google for OFA)

Up to the end of 2007, a total of 364 Pugs had been hip-scored. Of these 0.0% were rated as Excellent and 62.1% rated as Dysplastic (by simple arithmetic 37.9% of Pugs would fall in the normal/borderline grades - if you want more detail you can get it from the database but it takes a bit more time)

In the UK, up to 2005 (latest figures I have) 19 Pugs have been hip-scored in a twenty year period and the Breed Mean Score is 22, on a scale where 20 is generally regarded as dysplastic - so 100% of the UK Pugs tested are dysplastic. Now I do think that one should be very cautious about extrapolating from very low samples into sweeping statements, which is why I would normally not quote these UK figures as being breed representative. But you also have to consider that only dogs that are though to be good of their type are hip-scored, so if these are the best the Pug breeders and owners can come up with, I think there is a serious problem with the breed that is being ignored.

As to the eye problems and breathing difficulties, I just generally read breed profiles on a couple of dog sites where health issues are highlighted.

If your dogs are healthy, with no eye, breathing or hip problems, I'm pleased for you. 
Perhaps you should consider hip scoring so you can say with certainty the hips are OK - their is no other way.

I'd just say that problems with hip dysplasia vary from one individual dog to another, and some moderately dysplastic dogs shown no symptoms of pain while others only mildly dysplastic need to be on painkillers. It is also a problem that is age related as the symptoms get worse as the joint wears and becomes more malformed with age - generally called arthritis.

This is not meant to go off thread about the petition, but a fair question deserves a fair answer.

Sgurr


----------



## Bindura (Sep 17, 2008)

Sgurr said:


> so 100% of the UK Pugs tested are dysplastic.
> Sgurr


Just to add that not 100% of pugs in the UK are above a score of 20 (although 22 is only an average, so some will be above and below) because my two have been scored, one 10 and the other 15 and in the BRS I found one more with 17.


----------



## marlynaveve (Aug 13, 2008)

jackson said:


> Yes they will register up to the limit Just because they can't register every litter with the KC, it doesn't mean they don't register the litters they can.


Yes they will register up to the limit but don't register all the other litters they breed. So therefore dont give the KC any more cash than a bonafide breeder. Which is what you first post hinted at.
I don't know why some breeders give the KC such a hard time, they are after all basically just a registration body not the law of the land.
Mary
x


----------



## jackson (May 22, 2008)

marlynaveve said:


> Yes they will register up to the limit but don't register all the other litters they breed. So therefore dont give the KC any more cash than a bonafide breeder. Which is what you first post hinted at.
> I don't know why some breeders give the KC such a hard time, they are after all basically just a registration body not the law of the land.
> Mary
> x


They do give the KC more cash because puppy farmers and BYB's breed far more litters than the decent breeders.

Although some good breeders do breed more often, most decent breeders I know only breed at maximum one or two litters at most a year, and no more than 2 or 3 litters from any one bitch. Plenty breed far less than that, maybe once every 6 or 7 years.

There are FAR more BYB's/pet breeder and puppy farmers than decent breeders, registering far more liteers. You only need to look at the BRS to get an idea of the numbers.


----------



## Sgurr (Aug 24, 2008)

Bindura,

Delighted to see that you have scored yours. Do you have the latest figures for Pugs in the UK? How many have been scored now and what is the new BMS?

Could you PM me if you have so we don't go off thread.
Thanks,

Sgurr


----------



## TinyTashi (May 29, 2008)

I wont be signing it either-sorry


----------



## Shane (Oct 24, 2008)

It seems to me that the direction of many breed standards has gone the wrong way and is more about showing, and breeding from so called champions than it is to do with the health of the dog.
The GSD,s that you see in the show ring are ridiculously low at the back, Who made this the breed standard? It certainly wasn't done in the best interest of the breed.

There is much criticism on the forum of so called back yard breeders but I think there are just as many so called profession breeders that are in it for the money and the glory and are willing to put this above animal welfare.

If the show standard breeders had it their way every GSD would have a ski slope for a spine.

Obviously though, this is a complex issue and and there are good arguments in both directions, but I think the main issue is, Are breeders willing to breed to a standard that is detrimental to the dogs health?
*I think quite a lot of them are.*


----------



## Guest (Oct 31, 2008)

So where do the BYB and PF's enter into all this ?
The ones that consistantly breed sick,unhealthy puppies,oh they take a back seat while we pick on good honest reputable breeder's and the KC.
Instead of the KC we could always use DLRC,the registry that actually supports puppy farming,the club that states they have ethics,really I haven't seen much evidence of this......

What about dogs r us,they are known to be buying puppies from puppy farmers,why despite all the capaigning are they still allowed to do so.

Animal welfare stinks in the uk!!!!!


----------



## bet hargreaves (Oct 31, 2008)

Could I join in in this discussion ,I have just joined this Group .

My Breed is the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel .

The Breed is afflicted with MVD Heart Trouble .

50% of Cavaliers could have a Heart Murmer by 5 years of age .

That means that ,of the 11,000 Cavaliers Registered last year ,in 5 years time 6,000 of those Puppies could have a Heart Murmer. 

While I don't know how Mandatory Health Testing will work for other Breeds for their Health Problems ,I sure feel that for the Cavalier Breed ,that the Sires and Dams should be Heart Tested ,if that has not been done ,then their Cavalier Puppies should not be Registered by the Kennel Club.

Bet Hargreaves


----------



## Guest (Nov 1, 2008)

Jan Bell said:


> I have signed the petition that started off this thread, and feel no reason why I have to justify this to anybody. Whether you choose to do so or not is entirely up to you, as everybody is entitled to their own opinions on whether this will help or not.
> 
> However, I am posting, once only, to make the point that it is a pity that "Spellweaver" feels that the best way to conduct a debate is to trash anybody who does not agree with his/her point of view.
> 
> ...


Mmmmm,
No intro but diving straight into a post to try and discredit another member,Spellweaver will do what she feels is correct,Perhaps if you have a problem with her you should take it to PM,this is going off topic.


----------



## Nina (Nov 2, 2007)

I think the choice to sign any petition, is a personal one, and peoples choices should be very much respected.

As I have said on many occasions, forums should be a place of FRIENDLY debate, not one where people are constantly baiting or berating for their views.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Nina Cole said:


> I think the choice to sign any petition, is a personal one, and peoples choices should be very much respected.
> 
> As I have said on many occasions, forums should be a place of FRIENDLY debate, not one where people are constantly baiting or berating for their views.


*good post Nina.
I appreciate we are not all going to agree and sometimes its best to agree to disagree.my personal oppion on kc reg. pups,is its not worth the paper its written on..as byb and puppy farms can reg. their pups as well.*


----------



## jackson (May 22, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *
> my personal oppion on kc reg. pups,is its not worth the paper its written on..as byb and puppy farms can reg. their pups as well.*


If you have alook janice, the KC are re-froming their acreddited breeder scheme so that there is a difference between the good breeders and the BYB's and puppy farmers.

One thing is for sure, I have never met or heard of what I would call a good breeder who does not KC register.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

jackson said:


> If you have alook janice, the KC are re-froming their acreddited breeder scheme so that there is a difference between the good breeders and the BYB's and puppy farmers.
> 
> One thing is for sure, I have never met or heard of what I would call a good breeder who does not KC register.


*As things stand,correct me if i'm wrong,we have 3 choices, good breeders,byb,and puppy farms. correct? and ALL 2 can reg. their litters with the kc..when and if the kc change this, then i might change my oppion.*


----------



## Guest (Nov 3, 2008)

jackson said:


> If you have alook janice, the KC are re-froming their acreddited breeder scheme so that there is a difference between the good breeders and the BYB's and puppy farmers.
> 
> One thing is for sure, I have never met or heard of what I would call a good breeder who does not KC register.


Agree 
They are also cracking down and want supporting evidence when Breeders are registering a large litter.
They will also be carrying out spot checks on AB's.


----------



## jackson (May 22, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *As things stand,correct me if i'm wrong,we have 3 choices, good breeders,byb,and puppy farms. correct? and ALL 2 can reg. their litters with the kc..when and if the kc change this, then i might change my oppion.*


Well, one thing is for sure. If you buy a non KC registered puppy, you are undoubtedly buying from a BYB or puppy farmer, to varying degrees. (I do think some BYB's are worse than others)

I have just said, puppy farmers and BYB's will not be able to register as AB's on the new KC scheme. I am just about to rush out for the school run, but maybe Sallyanne can find the right link for me if she is about?

(cheeky, I know!) Or I'll post when I get back.


----------



## Guest (Nov 3, 2008)

jackson said:


> Well, one thing is for sure. If you buy a non KC registered puppy, you are undoubtedly buying from a BYB or puppy farmer, to varying degrees. (I do think some BYB's are worse than others)
> 
> I have just said, puppy farmers and BYB's will not be able to register as AB's on the new KC scheme. I am just about to rush out for the school run, but maybe Sallyanne can find the right link for me if she is about?
> 
> (cheeky, I know!) Or I'll post when I get back.


LOL off you go,I'll try and find them,
Here's the link to large litter sizes, 
Large Litter Sizes - The Kennel Club

Large Litter Sizes
11-Sep-08

The Kennel Club has shared for some time the concern of many people within the dog world regarding the increasing number of very large litters that appear to occur in some breeds, and is now taking action to protect the integrity of its registration system.

The Kennel Clubs registration system is initially based entirely on trust, and we are keen to ensure that this trust is not abused in any way. Whilst there is no doubt that larger than average litters sometimes do occur in this modern age of enhanced breeding facilities and veterinary assistance, and are then subsequently registered by the Kennel Club in good faith, measures are now in place to confirm the veracity of such registrations. The problem with any allegations regarding incorrect submissions has always been obtaining the necessary proof that a registration is not correct.

Therefore with immediate effect, the Kennel Club has introduced a policy whereby breeders of overly large litters may be asked to provide evidence of the number of puppies whelped, such as a letter from a veterinary surgeon or photographic evidence.

As a result of this new policy, the Kennel Club strongly recommends that breeders with unusually large litters pre-empt any subsequent queries by DNA parentage testing the puppies concerned

Link to the AB Scheme,
Kennel Club Delivers Blow to Puppy Farmers - The Kennel Club
Kennel Club Delivers Blow to Puppy Farmers
28-Oct-08

As it announces Accredited Breeder Scheme developments

The Kennel Club has warned puppy buyers to be aware of the difference between responsible breeders and puppy farmers and has announced significant developments to its Accredited Breeder Scheme, which will help to further secure the schemes place as a kite-mark of quality in the dog breeding world and to edge puppy farmers out of business.

The Kennel Clubs Accredited Breeder Scheme now has over 3,000 members and to ensure that the Kennel Clubs high standards for dog breeding are maintained, the Kennel Club will appoint a network of Regional Breeder Advisors to visit and assess local AB premises across the country. In addition, the Kennel Club will reward those who are setting an exemplary benchmark for good breeding practice, within the scheme, by awarding Accredited Breeder of Excellence titles.

Accredited Breeders have all agreed to sign up to Kennel Club standards for responsible breeding, which include following guidelines about the maximum age and frequency of litters, providing post-sales advice and giving their dogs the recommended health tests for their breed. Puppy farmers, by contrast, are unscrupulous breeders who remain outside of the scheme and who breed dogs purely for profit and without regard for their dogs health and welfare.

These steps, which will further set apart Accredited Breeders from less responsible breeders, follows the Kennel Clubs call on the government, earlier in the month, to give it the statutory powers to make the schemes requirements compulsory throughout the country. This means that those who have not officially confirmed their willingness to follow the health standards set by the Kennel Club would be unable to produce or sell puppies within the law.

Caroline Kisko, Kennel Club spokesperson, said: As part of its programme of continual improvement and following feedback from scheme members and supportive Breed Clubs the Kennel Club has announced some important developments to its Accredited Breeder Scheme. These will help to ensure that the scheme is recognised nationally as a bastion of quality and excellence in dog breeding and will further help the public to distinguish between good and bad breeders, so that they can make responsible choices when they are buying a dog.

We recently asked the government for the statutory powers to enforce our Accredited Breeder Scheme nationally, which would mean that puppy farmers who do not subscribe to our high standards will be forced to show their hand and would be breeding and selling their puppies outside of the law.

Even without these statutory powers these announcements today mean that puppy buyers can be assured, now more than ever, that Accredited Breeders are following standards that guarantee that a puppys health and welfare is their number one priority.

Our advice to anybody thinking of buying a puppy is to go to a Kennel Club Accredited Breeder. They should certainly never go to a pet shop, whose stock may come from puppy farmers, or buy from somebody who is selling from neutral territory, such as a service station, where the puppies are not seen in their home environment and where they are not given the opportunity to see the puppy with their mothers.

Under the new steps announced by the Kennel Club breed clubs will also be invited to nominate breed mentors, as expert advisors to educate both novice breeders and puppy buyers about their breed.

People will be able to find out more about the Accredited Breeder Scheme and how to buy a puppy at Discover Dogs, which takes place at Earls Court on 8 and 9 November.


----------



## Nina (Nov 2, 2007)

I am not going to debate this any further, but would like to stress the importance of friendly debate and this was the whole point of my previous post.

Time and time again I see inflamatory posts, (some even vented at the mods) who I happen to think do a good job. We all share a love of animals and I think some people forget this.

Of course we are not all going to agree, so lets just take a step back and respect other peoples opinion PLEASE. 

Personally I do not think bullying makes for a good forum


----------



## gemnjoe04 (Oct 17, 2008)

I wouldnt say all non kc registered puppies for sale are from BYB I never registered my litter from Holly even though both her and the stud Rambo are registered and were health checked before hand 

Paperwork was shown to all new owners they have the option to register themselves later if they want to as they have the kc numbers from both parents

I havent registered badger and probably wont bother


----------



## cav (May 23, 2008)

I will always own and buy kc dogs and if i have a litter i would always register the pups


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*I have read what the kc have said,but i'm still not cinvinced its enough...would it not be better to just not allow anyone other than an AB to reg. their litters?if they really do want to crack down on puppy farms and byb.*


----------



## Guest (Nov 3, 2008)

gemnjoe04 said:


> Paperwork was shown to all new owners they have the option to register themselves later if they want to as they have the kc numbers from both parents


I actually hear this quite alot and it is completely untrue.
ONLY THE BREEDER can register a litter or one puppy,not the owner.

To me when I see a non registered litter I start wonderering where else the breeders have cut corners and what was the actual point in breeding.

The parents may have an excellent background show or work but without those papers new owners can't can't get invovled in showing or trialing etc.


----------



## cav (May 23, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *I have read what the kc have said,but i'm still not cinvinced its enough...would it not be better to just not allow anyone other than an AB to reg. their litters?if they really do want to crack down on puppy farms and byb.*


No because im not AB and that would mean i could not register my litter:cursing:


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *I have read what the kc have said,but i'm still not cinvinced its enough...would it not be better to just not allow anyone other than an AB to reg. their litters?if they really do want to crack down on puppy farms and byb.*


they wouldnt do that as the money the kc gets through byb and puppy farmers is too precious for them to loose.

i also dont think much of the kc as long they dont make health tests a rule and as long they let byb and puppy farmers register.


----------



## tashi (Dec 5, 2007)

I am not an AB either and chose not to be, there are a lot of people that are AB and I have never heard of them in a breed that my parents have owned and shown for over 40 years. Havent read the new rulings but will pick up all the necessary at DD on Sunday

But all our dogs are health tested, and we do not breed from any dogs deemed to be unsuitable as parents.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

tashi said:


> I am not an AB either and chose not to be, there are a lot of people that are AB and I have never heard of them in a breed that my parents have owned and shown for over 40 years. Havent read the new rulings but will pick up all the necessary at DD on Sunday


*Tashi my own oppion isn't that all breeders should be AB.i was following through on what was posted about the kc.
i honestly don't know how the kc will stop byb or puppy farms.*


----------



## cav (May 23, 2008)

Natik said:


> they wouldnt do that as the money the kc gets through byb and puppy farmers is too precious for them to loose.
> 
> i also dont think much of the kc as long they dont make health tests a rule and as long they let byb and puppy farmers register.


If we did not have the kc we would have nothing and least with the kc you can check you lines for problems ect a dog that is not registerd pedigree can be completly made upso to me the kc is important you also carnt show a dog that is not kc reg.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

cavrooney said:


> If we did not have the kc we would have nothing and least with the kc you can check you lines for problems ect a dog that is not registerd pedigree can be completly made upso to me the kc is important you also carnt show a dog that is not kc reg.


*Hi Cavvy.my point is, if byb and puppy farms CAN reg their litters how do we change this sittuation?*


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

alot of byb and puppy farmers use the kc registration to be able to sell their pups for more money and also to make the buyers believe they are good breeders. And sadly alot of ppl think that when someone is kc registered then it must be a good breeder.

And why the kc doesnt stop the byb and puppy farmers from registering is only and only the money they bring in.


----------



## cav (May 23, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *Hi Cavvy.my point is, if byb and puppy farms CAN reg their litters how do we change this sittuation?*


jan i could not honestly answer that
and as long as people are willing to buy from these places the breeders will never stop.
i dont agree with the kc on this but to me the kc is good as its all we have got


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

cavrooney said:


> jan i could not honestly answer that
> and as long as people are willing to buy from these places the breeders will never stop.
> i dont agree with the kc on this but to me the kc is good as its all we have got


*lol AT LAST someone see's what i'm trying to say..*


----------



## cav (May 23, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *lol AT LAST someone see's what i'm trying to say..*


but jan if the kc did not register the pups they would use dlr so they would never stop breeding :angry::angry:


----------



## Nina (Nov 2, 2007)

Before I brought Luika, I called the KC to ask what checks they did on people registering their litters. They said none. Surely that cannot be right can it?

I think its the health aspect that people are questioning. Cavroony you breed Cavaliers don't you? We had a little cavalier when I was younger, and he was soooo adorable (but then they all are). We knew very little about the health problems of pedigree dogs, since my parents could never really afford one until we had Charley.

He was diagnosed with heart problems from a very early age. We had to have him put to sleep when he was 6, since he could hardly breath and our vet warned us that the kindest thing would be to let him go.

Surely, with responsible breeding something can be done to correct the awful problems that some pedigree dogs suffer. My breed (GSD) is terribly affected. 

I received a phone call from one of my friends during Crufts, suggesting that I may be interested to see the GSD that had been brought over from Germany. Unlike the majority of the crowd, I was horrified to see the angulated back. The poor dog was almost tottering around the ring. Now surely, if Crufts were to change the breed standard, making the back straighter, it would go some way to preventing HD and spinal problems in future :sad:


----------



## jackson (May 22, 2008)

I agree that in an ideal world the KC wouldn't register litters from puppy farmers and byb's. However, that is not going to happen in this lifetime. 

At least the AB scheme is heading in the right direction. I do know that quite a few very good breeders decided not to go on it, as it isn't without it's flaws (for example, the 'breeder experience' accolade which is given to those who have reared 5 or more litter. Yes, that can be a good thing, but it can also be a very bad one.

KC registered or not, there will always be a market for BYB's and puppy farmers, as there are people who think it is their right to own a dog and they wouldn't be able to get one from decent breeder (kids too young, work full time etc) so they are prepared to get a puppy wherever they can, whatever the cost. (I am talking about non-financial costs) There have even been people on this forum who have bought from puppy farmers, but it's ok, because.... I do think the key is to educate the public though, the vast majority would not buy from these people if they knew what it was really about.


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

but then the kc should start educating by warning the ppl that they register byb and puppyfarmers......
so many ppl dont even know that!


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*Perhaps the answer is for a totaly different body to be set up..with new rules and a different set up to the kc.*


----------



## gemnjoe04 (Oct 17, 2008)

sallyanne said:


> I actually hear this quite alot and it is completely untrue.
> ONLY THE BREEDER can register a litter or one puppy,not the owner.
> 
> To me when I see a non registered litter I start wonderering where else the breeders have cut corners and what was the actual point in breeding.
> ...


ooohhh will have to ring KC then the lady I spoke to said this was fine :nono:

luckly if anyone does register there pups they are all friends and friends of friends and we see them on weekly basis being shoot season also right now

all pups went to working homes not trialling just beaters dogs for flushing out and picking up, for puppies to be docked parents had to be KC registered along with shotgun licence etc

and im not AB either I only bred holly to keep a pup for myself since mine are getting on in age i wanted to keep hollys son or daughter and keep the line going and waited 5 years to find the best kc reg stud plus enough beaters for the puppies that we werent keeping and can assure you no corners were cut on my half and deff dont advise breeding at all its stressful, worrying and you dont make any money if you do it properly, shes off to be spayed after her next season

I think most of you guys on here show so I can understand from your point of view why you need KC, looking back over the generation certificates theres a fair amount of rytex and badgercourt in there and althorp estate theres alot of interbreeding on the rytex lines especially with rytex robb, comet and rob of rytex.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Natik said:


> but then the kc should start educating by warning the ppl that they register byb and puppyfarmers......
> so many ppl dont even know that!


*i know that to be true because i allmost got a poodle from what i now believe to be a puppy farm*


----------



## Guest (Nov 3, 2008)

Until the government brings in legislation to regulate breeding and the advertising and sales of dogs we will always have BYB and puppy farmers.

I think it's unfair to lay this all at the door of the KC,the world of dogs would be in a great deal of mess without them,unless of course you want a DLRC registered puppy who activitly support puppy farming and puppies with this registration are actually sold via commercial outlets such as dogs r us in manchester.

The KC doesn't allow puppies to be sold in this manner.

I would imagine that not many puppies from BYB or PF's are actually registered anyway because that would eat into their profit.


----------



## jackson (May 22, 2008)

Natik said:


> but then the kc should start educating by warning the ppl that they register byb and puppyfarmers......
> so many ppl dont even know that!


Whilst I agree in part, it is up to potential buyers to educate themselves also. So many people think 'I want a dog' and just rush out and get one. They aren't prepared to research, or wait, and I think that is in part reflective of today's society. I have two friends who recently bought Cocker pups and they went to see the pups for the first time and took them away then and there. They even had to stop on the way home to buy beds, bowls, food etc.  I can't believe any breeder in their right mind would let someone do this!

The information is there for people to find, but most don't even bother to look.


----------



## gemnjoe04 (Oct 17, 2008)

so health checks I would say would need to be complusary


----------



## jackson (May 22, 2008)

sallyanne said:


> Until the government brings in legislation to regulate breeding and the advertising and sales of dogs we will always have BYB and puppy farmers.
> 
> I think it's unfair to lay this all at the door of the KC,the world of dogs would be in a great deal of mess without them,unless of course you want a DLRC registered puppy who activitly support puppy farming and puppies with this registration are actually sold via commercial outlets such as dogs r us in manchester.
> 
> ...


DLRC was actually set up by puppy farmers, as far as I am aware.


----------



## jackson (May 22, 2008)

gemnjoe04 said:


> theres a post on this thread somewhere on here about registering and what health checks are done and i have a prime example of were thats failed
> 
> A beater brought a puppy from a gamekeeper KC registered £450 :yikes: and he told my hubby on shoot the other day that one of his pups that he'd sold died of septacimia at 6 months now the stud dog got meningitis as a pup and they couldnt part with it so they kept it and decided to breed with him
> 
> ...


can I ask why you decided not to KC register your pups?


----------



## Guest (Nov 3, 2008)

jackson said:


> DLRC was actually set up by puppy farmers, as far as I am aware.


Jackson I think you maybe right.


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

i believe for the kc being so interested in the health of dogs and so on they should distance themselves from the byb and puppyfarmers.
And no, it will not stop the byb but it will make the kc be more believable and it would make things harder for the byb.

And i do image that byb register as many as they can with the kc only to be able to sell the pups without "being questioned" for more money.

It doesnt make sense to me if they say dont by from a byb but we will still register them  What alot of nonsense.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

sallyanne said:


> Until the government brings in legislation to regulate breeding and the advertising and sales of dogs we will always have BYB and puppy farmers.
> 
> I think it's unfair to lay this all at the door of the KC,the world of dogs would be in a great deal of mess without them,unless of course you want a DLRC registered puppy who activitly support puppy farming and puppies with this registration are actually sold via commercial outlets such as dogs r us in manchester.
> 
> ...


If you look on a certain site,selling pups there are LOTS on there that are advertising week in and week out,and they are kc reg..plus the same breeder has many different breeds of dogs.
surely the kc should have alarm bells ringing if these people are continualy reg. litters.


----------



## Guest (Nov 3, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> If you look on a certain site,selling pups there are LOTS on there that are advertising week in and week out,and they are kc reg..plus the same breeder has many different breeds of dogs.
> surely the kc should have alarm bells ringing if these people are continualy reg. litters.


Could you list a few of these for me please,so I could take a look,
Thanks.


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> the kc should have alarm bells ringing if these people are continualy reg. litters.


i would replace alarm bells with cash bells


----------



## jackson (May 22, 2008)

Natik said:


> i believe for the kc being so interested in the health of dogs and so on they should distance themselves from the byb and puppyfarmers.
> And no, it will not stop the byb but it will make the kc be more believable and it would make things harder for the byb.
> 
> And i do image that byb register as many as they can with the kc only to be able to sell the pups without "being questioned" for more money.
> ...


What they are saying is that they reccomend you buy from an AB, and they are adjusting the scheme now to weed out PF's and BYB's.

At the end of the day, the KC is a business and not a charity, as far as I know. However, they do create a huge amount of revenue, and this revenue goes a long way in helping to support animal charities such as the RSPCA and Dogs Trust (who I note are not refusing their generous donations!)


----------



## Guest (Nov 3, 2008)

jackson said:


> What they are saying is that they reccomend you buy from an AB, and they are adjusting the scheme now to weed out PF's and BYB's.
> 
> At the end of the day, the KC is a business and not a charity, as far as I know. However, they do create a huge amount of revenue, and this revenue goes a long way in helping to support animal charities such as the RSPCA and Dogs Trust (who I note are not refusing their generous donations!)


They are also helping breed clubs with research into developing new tests for certain breeds, and provide some funding too.


----------



## Natik (Mar 9, 2008)

jackson said:


> What they are saying is that they reccomend you buy from an AB, and they are adjusting the scheme now to weed out PF's and BYB's.
> 
> At the end of the day, the KC is a business and not a charity, as far as I know. However, they do create a huge amount of revenue, and this revenue goes a long way in helping to support animal charities such as the RSPCA and Dogs Trust (who I note are not refusing their generous donations!)


a business is all about making money...nothing surprises me then


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

sallyanne said:


> Could you list a few of these for me please,so I could take a look,
> Thanks.


*give me a min. sallyanne and i will go and find the one i'm talking about..*


----------



## gemnjoe04 (Oct 17, 2008)

jackson said:


> can I ask why you decided not to KC register your pups?


I dont really have a reason it wasnt anything to do with cost as it doesnt cost much £12 per pup if i remember rightly and £6 per certificate if i knew the lady on the end of the phone wasnt as clued up as I thought I most probably would have registered them there and then

but luckly i still can so its something I shall look into tomorrow as long as i dont go into labour by then :lol:


----------



## jackson (May 22, 2008)

gemnjoe04 said:


> I dont really have a reason it wasnt anything to do with cost as it doesnt cost much £12 per pup if i remember rightly and £6 per certificate if i knew the lady on the end of the phone wasnt as clued up as I thought I most probably would have registered them there and then
> 
> but luckly i still can so its something I shall look into tomorrow as long as i dont go into labour by then :lol:


Did you realise that by registering them you offer the pups some protection from future exploitation by being able to place endorsements on their pedigrees? That way peopel can't breed from the pups and KC reg. the litter unles you lift the restrictions.

I know you say you sold them to friends, but onyl recently someone on another forum found out that her long term 'friend' had sold on one of her pups without telling her. Anything can happen.


----------



## jackson (May 22, 2008)

Natik said:


> a business is all about making money...nothing surprises me then


Well, it's obviously not _all_ about making money for the KC, or they wouldnt' have recently donated £48,00 tot he RSPCA, as am example, but that is one of many charitable donations it makes.


----------



## bevers2406 (Oct 28, 2008)

I've been following some threads asking how to stop byb and puppy farmers.

I hope you don't mind me adding my opinion into the pot...

At present we have everyone pretty much anyone who wants to using the same registry. Good, bad and inbetween. So at the moment KC reg is not a mark of quality even if it used to be perceived as so. Some of the more money-minded puppy outlets have saved on their overheads by creating their own registry - and there was little consumer disadvantage to having their bit of paper over the KC one as they both relied on the honesty of the person filling in the forms in the first place and neither meant much at all to the pet owner.

The ABS could have changed things and been great, but sadly in the rush to get big numbers using it the setting up of it was botched. With some tweaking and probably a rebranding it could get a lot better. It needs minimum standards consistently applied - and really it shouldn't be seen as an additional cost to the good breeders who already do more than they ask, the millions the KC make each year is sizeable. Yes, they do donate money via their charitable trust - but it only a small percentage of their turnover and profit. 

The ABS or whatever it will be called should be seen as the norm for breeders, if you want to register a litter without health testing then I think you should expect to pay more to use the system. A bit like having a non-eco friendly car - it costs you more in tax etc. The extra cost incentivises you to be a good citizen.

ABS needs to not only insist on health testing it needs to take notice of results - at the moment we have people failing important health tests in breeds like Labs and still staying within the system badged as ABS when they are breeding on from their affected dogs and discrediting the system.

I'd also like to see firm guidance from the KC on Inbreeding - and that's not just close matings - it's the overuse of popular sires. I'd like to see breed guidelines for max COI and if you go over that you lose your ABS accreditation. Same control could be used on exaggerations that affect the heath of some breeds - in Sweden breeders have to refund purchasers for three years after they have sold someone a dog if any health problems crop up.

If ABS gives consumers extra protection, then the differentiation between bad and good breeders gets easier for the consumer to spot.

Hate to mention it again, but the reason the KC say they haven't yet been able to make such minimum standards mandatory across the board (as it is for affected breeds in Sweden) is that they don't yet have the backing of legislation. The thread that this topic relates to is a petition which asks the Government to give the KC the power to make rulings that could see an end to byb breeders and puppy farmers. If we replicate the Swedish model we could find that the people who at present see breeding dogs as a quick way to make dosh would soon decide other scams are less bother if our KC started getting a tough and sensible as the Swedish registry. You don't get dogs in pet shops in Sweden, the rescue centres are virtually empty.

If the KC has legal powers then it can ban the sale of dogs that don't use their system - and that means taking the ads out of the free papers. So legislation could change so much more... do look at what life is like for dogs in Sweden. 

Anyway, couldn't help butting in. Hope there's some ideas here that show we might be on the same side and wanting the same things for dogs.

Regards
Beverley Cuddy
Editor, Dogs Today


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

sallyanne said:


> Could you list a few of these for me please,so I could take a look,
> Thanks.


did you check the site?


----------



## Guest (Nov 3, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> did you check the site?


Yes I saw the ad you were referring too,how many other ads do they place ?


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

sallyanne said:


> Yes I saw the ad you were referring too,how many other ads do they place ?


that lady uses that name and her sisters.i did try and find the different breeds they have but my pc is running real slow today.but i will check again in the morning when my grandson is not on the net as well


----------



## gemnjoe04 (Oct 17, 2008)

jackson said:


> Did you realise that by registering them you offer the pups some protection from future exploitation by being able to place endorsements on their pedigrees? That way peopel can't breed from the pups and KC reg. the litter unles you lift the restrictions.
> 
> I know you say you sold them to friends, but onyl recently someone on another forum found out that her long term 'friend' had sold on one of her pups without telling her. Anything can happen.


I would hope that my Mine/husbands friends wouldnt be so underminding and do it without asking but then how well do you really know someone

possibly selling them without papers would put them off breeding surely :001_unsure: I deff wouldnt breed unless they were kc registered i wouldnt have accepted a stud without paperwork, just to make sure they arent related as most of the spaniels around this area are related to mine as our gamekeeper has been breeding them for 20 plus years which is were my original 2 came from


----------



## cav (May 23, 2008)

Nina Cole said:


> Before I brought Luika, I called the KC to ask what checks they did on people registering their litters. They said none. Surely that cannot be right can it?
> 
> I think its the health aspect that people are questioning. Cavroony you breed Cavaliers don't you? We had a little cavalier when I was younger, and he was soooo adorable (but then they all are). We knew very little about the health problems of pedigree dogs, since my parents could never really afford one until we had Charley.
> 
> ...


hi
yep i do breed but not very oftenand i only do it if my dog and stud dog are both clear health tests ive just had my girl mri scanned and if it was not clear i would not have a litter from her simple as that.
As for your breed i carnt realy say as i dont now the breed but i would hate to see a dog suffering just to please the crowd.
I dont show my cavs and ive been told on this forum that i should to see if they are a good example of the breed but ive owned this breed for many years and i can say they are a good example with clear health checks and thats what is important to me
i do register my pups with the kc and all my dogs are kc reg and would only buy a kc dog and yes i would love see the kc make all breeders do health checks


----------



## bet hargreaves (Oct 31, 2008)

Could I mention that the Kennel Club has recently given Dr S Blott ,who is Researching the MVD Heart Problem and Syringomyelia Problem in the Cavalier Breed £100,000, ,

The Cavalier Breed is the first Breed in the World to be involved in this New Type of Research .

What is so useful about this Research ,it has been discovered that some of the Cavalier Pedigrees have been found to be flawed , this is no-body's fault ,but now there are to be Cheek Swabs taken from Cavaliers ,so that the Pedigrees will be accurate.

What I do wonder though is ,will previous Gene Research ,be using Cavalier Pedigrees that could also be flawed ,and had no Cheek Swabs taken ,will the Gene Research be accurate ,I would think for Gene Research ,it would need to be a priority for the Pedigrees to be giving accurate information

Bet Hargreaves


----------



## gemnjoe04 (Oct 17, 2008)

This adorable critter is chester hes a KC reg cav hes my sister in laws hes got skin problems, joint problems were he screams randomly accross the room and a possible heart condition hes only 4 1/2 she went to look at him but ended up coming home with him his generation certificate is very interbred father and daughter on some parts of it! talk about keeping it in the family

after my sister in law watched the progamme she was in tears


----------



## Guest (Nov 4, 2008)

gemnjoe04 said:


> I would hope that my Mine/husbands friends wouldnt be so underminding and do it without asking but then how well do you really know someone
> 
> possibly selling them without papers would put them off breeding surely :001_unsure: I deff wouldnt breed unless they were kc registered i wouldnt have accepted a stud without paperwork, just to make sure they arent related as most of the spaniels around this area are related to mine as our gamekeeper has been breeding them for 20 plus years which is were my original 2 came from


I learn't a long time ago,I never trust anyone including friends where dogs are concerned.
You wouldn't breed without paperwork but there are thousands out there that do,including BYB and PF's.

I see nothing wrong in using dogs which are related


----------



## cav (May 23, 2008)

gemnjoe04 said:


> This adorable critter is chester hes a KC reg cav hes my sister in laws hes got skin problems, joint problems were he screams randomly accross the room and a possible heart condition hes only 4 1/2 she went to look at him but ended up coming home with him his generation certificate is very interbred father and daughter on some parts of it! talk about keeping it in the family
> 
> after my sister in law watched the progamme she was in tears


hi
sorry to hear this
what line his he from?
also when you say heart problems do you mean a murmor(sorry about spelling lol) 
Im not pointing the finger but these are the reasons why you need to reserch your chosen breed and only go to a good breeder that does health screenin before breeding.
It is a shame so many breeders dont bother with all the test ect and as a result the poor dogs suffer


----------



## gemnjoe04 (Oct 17, 2008)

oh there was quite a few the ones I remember were newroyds, ricksbury keyingham, glencross and emsmere 

there were quite a few more but it was going back Gt gt gt gt gt grandparents

she said he has an irregular heartbeat which I imagine means a murmour 

other than this hes a happy little chappy very loving and affectionate even with all the snotting and drool in the face :laugh: 

she loves the dog alot more than her son think she would be devastated if anything happened to him.


----------



## Nina (Nov 2, 2007)

cavrooney said:


> hi
> yep i do breed but not very oftenand i only do it if my dog and stud dog are both clear health tests ive just had my girl mri scanned and if it was not clear i would not have a litter from her simple as that.
> As for your breed i carnt realy say as i dont now the breed but i would hate to see a dog suffering just to please the crowd.
> I dont show my cavs and ive been told on this forum that i should to see if they are a good example of the breed but ive owned this breed for many years and i can say they are a good example with clear health checks and thats what is important to me
> i do register my pups with the kc and all my dogs are kc reg and would only buy a kc dog and yes i would love see the kc make all breeders do health checks


You are obviously a shining example of what good breeders should be. Its so sad that the minority give the majority a bad name.

Would also like to thank you for addressing my points. I think you are the only one that did


----------



## Guest (Nov 4, 2008)

Nina Cole said:


> Before I brought Luika, I called the KC to ask what checks they did on people registering their litters. They said none. Surely that cannot be right can it?
> 
> I think its the health aspect that people are questioning. Cavroony you breed Cavaliers don't you? We had a little cavalier when I was younger, and he was soooo adorable (but then they all are). We knew very little about the health problems of pedigree dogs, since my parents could never really afford one until we had Charley.
> 
> ...


Hi Nina,
I can ony answer from my breeds point of view,
My dogs are clear from diseases which affect our breed,
Tylers sire was a Carrier for L2 as soon as his owner knew this he was withdrawn from stud and castrated.
We had Tyler tested shortly afterwards,his results came back as clear.
My bitch again is from tested stock and Clear,but will never be bred from.
We breed occassionly when WE want something,we never have and never will breed for others.
We have waiting lists for our puppies way before we plan to mate our bitch,our dog only goes to approved bitches,it makes no odds to us if there shown or not,but they MUST be KC Registered,free from endorsements,a good exampe of the breed with a solid temprament and most importantly be tested clear for diseases which affect our breed.
I make sure I see the bitch,pedigree,KC Registration and the test certificates before I allow him to be used.

I can't help with CKC Or GSD,as they are not my breed and I'm not that familar with them,Sorry.


----------



## Rach (Sep 4, 2008)

An irregular heartbeat is not a murmer


----------



## bet hargreaves (Oct 31, 2008)

Could I just mention that Cavaliers are known to have had an irregular Heart Beat since the 1950's ,I think it's just someting they have,

Bet Hargreaves


----------



## gemnjoe04 (Oct 17, 2008)

Rach said:


> An irregular heartbeat is not a murmer


oohh whats the difference between a murmour and irregular heart beat?


----------



## jackson (May 22, 2008)

gemnjoe04 said:


> oohh whats the difference between a murmour and irregular heart beat?


a murmur is usually caused by a hole in the heart, an irregular heartbeat is just that.


----------



## Jimbob (Nov 4, 2008)

Well i'd have no problem signing it but i'm in Ireland so i can't. We have a lot of english lines in our dogs so it makes perfect sense to me that if things improve in the UK, we'll see the benefits over here.

Regarding the first reply criticising the wording - it's a petition to make the Gov take notice, all the nitty gritty details would be sorted out between the KC and the Gov, i don't think the wording makes any real difference.

If you have the best interests of the dogs at heart, what harm can it do to sign it.


----------



## Nina (Nov 2, 2007)

Jimbob said:


> Well i'd have no problem signing it but i'm in Ireland so i can't. We have a lot of english lines in our dogs so it makes perfect sense to me that if things improve in the UK, we'll see the benefits over here.
> 
> Regarding the first reply criticising the wording - it's a petition to make the Gov take notice, all the nitty gritty details would be sorted out between the KC and the Gov, i don't think the wording makes any real difference.
> 
> If you have the best interests of the dogs at heart, what harm can it do to sign it.


I think a lot of people will agree with you Jimbob


----------



## JoedeeUK (Dec 27, 2007)

Nina Cole said:


> I received a phone call from one of my friends during Crufts, suggesting that I may be interested to see the GSD that had been brought over from Germany. Unlike the majority of the crowd, I was horrified to see the *angulated back(actually you mean topline)*. The poor dog was almost tottering around the ring. Now surely, if *Crufts were to change the breed standard,* *making the back straighter, it would go some way to preventing HD and spinal problems in future* :sad:


That's a very interesting statement. There are however a few glaring errors
1.Backs are not "angulated"Angulation is basically formed by the lay of the shoulders in the forequarters & the turn of stifle in the hindquarters plus the length of the legs
2.Crufts do not write or regulate the breed standard
3.The slope of the back as nothing to do with HD or DM(the GSD spinal"problem"). If HD could be reduced by all GSDs having level(rather that"straight"toplines than why do Labradors & other breeds which have level toplines have a higher incidence of HD than GSDs ?
Which of these dogs would you think as the best hips ?
This one with sloping topline








or this one with an almost level/straight topline







As for Zamp"tottering" around the ring this is a dog with Sch H III, IPO III & AD qualifications(The AD is the endurance test during which the dog is gaited beside a bike at a set speed & over a set distance-not just round a tiny ring once or twice)who also gaited around half a football pitch to become the German Sieger-not something could do if he could only totter.

Of course any changes the UK KC bring in to the GSD breed standard would have no effect on this years BOB @ Crufts as he is a German bred & German owned dog.

Back on topic, there's no way I would sign to support Ms Cuddy & Mr Mears(sp?)stance on pedigree dogs.

& before Ms Cuddy jumps into to slag me off here's my bitch's KC health tests



> Health Results for Maradonar Dragon Dancer At Rayre
> 
> Test Result/Status Date
> TNS Clear 8th February 2008
> ...


 ( I'm waiting for her hip score)
& her full brother's tests


> Health Results for Maradonar Elusive Hawk With Rayre
> Border Collie
> Test Result/Status Date
> CL Clear 25th February 2005
> ...


(he's not old enough to be eye screened for PRA or hip scored)

Now I may or may not breed from them(not together obviously)as Jessie hasn't yet had a proper season & if her hips are scored as I expect them to be I will not be breeding from her & Wukee is way too young yet anyway


----------



## JoedeeUK (Dec 27, 2007)

jackson said:


> a murmur is usually caused by a hole in the heart, an irregular heartbeat is just that.


That's news to me-Murmurs in cavaliers are lnked to Mitral Valve Disease nothing to do with a hole in the heart. Irregular hearts beats are quite common in dogs & nothing to worry about if it is minor


----------

