Lablover Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 glad you find the telling of lies to be funny. Wonder if the people who feel duped find lies funny as well. Wonder if the dogs that may now be neglected because of such lies find life funny. well find me a website from a registered lab breeder that proudly states "voted worst breed for leaving hair everywhere by Best friend Holiday Retreat" or a website from registered french bulldog breeders that has in it's banner "WANT A FARTING DOG?" and then I will duly frown at Kate for glossing over some matters on a website designed to attract buyers. Spotted Devil - I too had some problems following Kate's talk. I don;t think it was so much the lack of the powerpoint rather than she was reading notes rather then speaking out to the audience and "presenting" plus many things she said caused some muttering in the audience - making it hard to tune just her voice in and truly 'listen'. I note the people most disinclined to take anything said 'onboard' and make quick smart posts dissing the presenters (and even the people who DID go) weren't actually there. One aspect of the seminar was very much about how dialogue needs to be opened between all stakeholders for the good of the species we all love - dogs. We can't afford to have a multiple "us and them (and them and them and them, oh and them too!)" situation. Yes I agree we need to have an open dialogue but lets be honest its going to be difficult when first blood has already been drawn. Steve, please explain. Some breeds of dogs would be considered endangered due to health issues. I for one, cannot understand the fuss over a one day relatively "soft" seminar. Someone mentioned the Lavelle/McGreevy clash, regarding the use of WEAK hip dysplasia results improvement overall. Discussion, data disclose is good, as we all agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KismetKat Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 Yes I agree we need to have an open dialogue but lets be honest its going to be difficult when first blood has already been drawn. Just remember how calm the final panel question time was - anyone and everyone I spoke to was predicting it would be a fiery event and that was during lunch before Kate (the most controversial) spoke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheridan Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 I note the people on this board most disinclined to take anything said 'onboard' and make quick smart posts dissing the presenters (and even the people who DID go) weren't actually there. I don't take notice of puppyfarmers, no. I'm surprised you would. One aspect of the seminar was very much about how dialogue needs to be opened between all stakeholders for the good of the species we all love - dogs. We can't afford to have a multiple "us and them (and them and them and them, oh and them too!)" situation. Yes, we can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poodlefan Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 I note the people on this board most disinclined to take anything said 'onboard' and make quick smart posts dissing the presenters (and even the people who DID go) weren't actually there. I don't take notice of puppyfarmers, no. I'm surprised you would. One aspect of the seminar was very much about how dialogue needs to be opened between all stakeholders for the good of the species we all love - dogs. We can't afford to have a multiple "us and them (and them and them and them, oh and them too!)" situation. Yes, we can. If "us" is ethical registered dog breeders and people who make some effort to learn about a breed before buying and "them" is the breed for profit brigade and irresponsible dog buyers then I'm in favour of division. Kate uses yellow Lab and Golden Retriever bitches and an apricot toy poodle dog. She AI's the bitches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KismetKat Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 One aspect of the seminar was very much about how dialogue needs to be opened between all stakeholders for the good of the species we all love - dogs. We can't afford to have a multiple "us and them (and them and them and them, oh and them too!)" situation. Yes, we can. No you can't. From your own sig Two health issues known in wheaten terriers are diseases where protein is lost from the intestine (protein losing enteropathy—PLE) or from the kidneys (protein losing nephropathy—PLN).There is no cure for PLE or PLN but regular testing can ensure that your wheaten is clear at the time of the test (testing cannot predict if your dog will develop PLE/PLN). If your wheaten is at risk from these diseases, early diagnosis will be crucial to the management of their long-term health. Most of the health information about PLE/PLN comes from the US where research for both diseases is advanced, although the mode of inheritance is still unknown. Not all the North American tests are available in Australia and the language of the US testing protocols can be different to that used in Australian veterinary medicine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mita Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 (edited) I note the people on this board most disinclined to take anything said 'onboard' and make quick smart posts dissing the presenters (and even the people who DID go) weren't actually there. One aspect of the seminar was very much about how dialogue needs to be opened between all stakeholders for the good of the species we all love - dogs. We can't afford to have a multiple "us and them (and them and them and them, oh and them too!)" situation. Dissing the presenters... or critiquing what was reported to be presented? And, very briefly introduced here. I take your point that there's a difference. Most posters seem to have stuck with the second, tho'. When any of the research work is presented/ published, the whole point is to open it to critique. It's what university scholarship is about. People are taught to be critical re content. I can't understand why anyone would diss the people who DID attend. It seems they're being helpful in passing on their impressions. Edited February 12, 2010 by mita Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KismetKat Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 If "us" is ethical registered dog breeders and people who make some effort to learn about a breed before buying and "them" is the breed for profit brigade and irresponsible dog buyers then I'm in favour of division. The "them" is anyone involved with dogs. Researchers, rescue organisations, dog owners, vets, vet nurses, groomers, scientists, judges, kennel councils, RSPCA, pet breeders, pet shops, feed suppliers, ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poodlefan Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 If "us" is ethical registered dog breeders and people who make some effort to learn about a breed before buying and "them" is the breed for profit brigade and irresponsible dog buyers then I'm in favour of division. The "them" is anyone involved with dogs. Researchers, rescue organisations, dog owners, vets, vet nurses, groomers, scientists, judges, kennel councils, RSPCA, pet breeders, pet shops, feed suppliers, ... The day I'm expected to find common ground with a petshop owner that sources 6 week old pups from puppy farmers and sells them to the first person with a credit card is the day they'll be wearing parkas in hell. There is no common ground to be found with people who exploit dogs for profit. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 I note the people on this board most disinclined to take anything said 'onboard' and make quick smart posts dissing the presenters (and even the people who DID go) weren't actually there. I don't take notice of puppyfarmers, no. I'm surprised you would. One aspect of the seminar was very much about how dialogue needs to be opened between all stakeholders for the good of the species we all love - dogs. We can't afford to have a multiple "us and them (and them and them and them, oh and them too!)" situation. Yes, we can. If "us" is ethical registered dog breeders and people who make some effort to learn about a breed before buying and "them" is the breed for profit brigade and irresponsible dog buyers then I'm in favour of division. Kate uses yellow Lab and Golden Retriever bitches and an apricot toy poodle dog. She AI's the bitches. That sums it up for me too. The pedigree world can survive without the cross breeders, they can bring nothing to the table in terms of animals that are usefull to us. On the flip side, they need us to supply them with the purebred parents to produce their F1's and back crosses, which line their wallets. Talk, share information and knowledge for the good of "dogs". Absolutley I agree with that, there's so much more that can and should be done, especially when it comes to research into disease and improving the life of every dog. But I do not find puppy farms acceptable and I will never aid through the use of my pedigree dogs, cross breeding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebanne Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 glad you find the telling of lies to be funny. Wonder if the people who feel duped find lies funny as well. Wonder if the dogs that may now be neglected because of such lies find life funny. well find me a website from a registered lab breeder that proudly states "voted worst breed for leaving hair everywhere by Best Friend Holiday Retreat" or a website from registered French Bulldog breeders that has in it's banner "WANT A FARTING DOG?" and then I will duly frown at Kate for glossing over some matters on a website designed to attract buyers. I note the people on this board most disinclined to take anything said 'onboard' and make quick smart posts dissing the presenters (and even the people who DID go) weren't actually there. Really. No I wasn't there and yes I will diss you when you say it's okay to tell lies on web sites, oops sorry gloss over some aspects of the dogs they are producing. As for Best Friends voting labs as the dogs who leave behind the most hair I don't know as I haven't looked at the web site nor do I know that Frenchies are a breed noted for farting alot. And you of course know this because you know many french bulldogs? To me you are saying it is fine to gloss over things (tell lies) because you want to attract buyers. Not very ethical no matter what you are selling, let alone a living breathing creature that relies on us humans to care for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KismetKat Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 I can't understand why anyone would diss the people who DID attend. It seems they're being helpful in passing on their impressions. Well I've been accused of promoting crossbreeds just for reporting what I heard. I think board moderation was even being suggested. When any of the research work is presented/ published, the whole point is to open it to critique. It's what university scholarship is about. People are taught to be critical re content. True - but people aren't reading what is posted by people there and just posting from their own assumptions about what they assume was said. Really, while some aspects of what was said was cotroversial and confronting, overall what was said was reasonable and backed up by studies. But some people want to say the studies are wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebanne Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 If "us" is ethical registered dog breeders and people who make some effort to learn about a breed before buying and "them" is the breed for profit brigade and irresponsible dog buyers then I'm in favour of division. The "them" is anyone involved with dogs. Researchers, rescue organisations, dog owners, vets, vet nurses, groomers, scientists, judges, kennel councils, RSPCA, pet breeders, pet shops, feed suppliers, ... The day I'm expected to find common ground with a petshop owner that sources 6 week old pups from puppy farmers and sells them to the first person with a credit card is the day they'll be wearing parkas in hell. There is no common ground to be found with people who exploit dogs for profit. Period. couldn't agree more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KismetKat Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 oh dear the hyenas are out - so before I go off and do something more fun... The day I'm expected to find common ground with a petshop owner that sources 6 week old pups from puppy farmers and sells them to the first person with a credit card is the day they'll be wearing parkas in hell. Tho Kate's proposed code of ethics for commercial dog breeders (and making pet shops responsible for lifelong commitment) would mean the end of puppy farmers and pet shops sourcing pups at 6 weeks age. nor do I know that Frenchies are a breed noted for farting alot. And you of course know this because you know many french bulldogs No, I know this cos I started a fun thread called (Dark Secrets of the Breed" - you can search for it if you like. Point is the vast majority of breeder and breed association websites DO gloss over aspects of breeds. Why frown at a 1st crosser for doing the same? It's time to grow up, enter the realities of the real world and be an adult. Change what you can for the betterment of dogs whatever way you can. Be a grown up and think of the dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mita Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 Yes I agree we need to have an open dialogue but lets be honest its going to be difficult when first blood has already been drawn. Just remember how calm the final panel question time was - anyone and everyone I spoke to was predicting it would be a fiery event and that was during lunch before Kate (the most controversial) spoke. I would have questioned the study about collecting data on dog behaviour. Very challengeable, from descriptions posted here. Has nothing to do with 'us' & 'them'. It's about content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elfin Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 I thought I heard Kate say she had bred 3000 dogs.... at which point my head actually exploded. I would liked to have asked if she tested her breeding stock for PRA. I know she is a vet, but from daily experiences, I know many, MANY vets cannot diagnose advanced PRA, let alone early PRA. I wanted to say that in the two weeks preceding the seminar, we saw just over 80 pedigreed dogs for ACES eye screening. Not one dog presented with a hereditary eye disease, thanks to the years of hard work by responsible breeders. In this same period, we saw nine "F1 hybrid" dogs (deliberate Poodle crosses, usually with Cockers, Schnauzers or Labs) with PRA. Not one of these dogs was over 4.5 years old. One also had cataracts. But my head had exploded several times over and I could not form a sentence... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 oh dear the hyenas are out - so before I go off and do something more fun...The day I'm expected to find common ground with a petshop owner that sources 6 week old pups from puppy farmers and sells them to the first person with a credit card is the day they'll be wearing parkas in hell. Tho Kate's proposed code of ethics for commercial dog breeders (and making pet shops responsible for lifelong commitment) would mean the end of puppy farmers and pet shops sourcing pups at 6 weeks age. nor do I know that Frenchies are a breed noted for farting alot. And you of course know this because you know many french bulldogs No, I know this cos I started a fun thread called (Dark Secrets of the Breed" - you can search for it if you like. Point is the vast majority of breeder and breed association websites DO gloss over aspects of breeds. Why frown at a 1st crosser for doing the same? It's time to grow up, enter the realities of the real world and be an adult. Change what you can for the betterment of dogs whatever way you can. Be a grown up and think of the dogs. I don't appreciate the "hyena" comments, just because I like many others are passionate about our pedigree dogs. Blind freddy can see what's going on and it's under the guise of "for the betterment of dogs". To have it suggested that the pedigree dog breeders should find some common ground and work with the puppy farmers and those who breed purely to line their wallets is an insult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 I'd choose to lose dog ownership over assisting puppy farmers. I hope the day never comes that there will be puppy farmers included in the us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 (edited) I thought I heard Kate say she had bred 3000 dogs.... at which point my head actually exploded.I would liked to have asked if she tested her breeding stock for PRA. I know she is a vet, but from daily experiences, I know many, MANY vets cannot diagnose advanced PRA, let alone early PRA. I wanted to say that in the two weeks preceding the seminar, we saw just over 80 pedigreed dogs for ACES eye screening. Not one dog presented with a hereditary eye disease, thanks to the years of hard work by responsible breeders. In this same period, we saw nine "F1 hybrid" dogs (deliberate Poodle crosses, usually with Cockers, Schnauzers or Labs) with PRA. Not one of these dogs was over 4.5 years old. One also had cataracts. But my head had exploded several times over and I could not form a sentence... Elfin Hang onto those figures we are going to need them. Our survey is showing similar things but I doubt they are going to believe our stats without thrashing us a bit and you are in the perfect spot to supply a follow up. Is there any way you can keep track of the stats for us for a while longer? By the way - you're beautiful and I was truly glad to meet you in the flesh. Julie Edited February 12, 2010 by Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poodlefan Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 (edited) Tho Kate's proposed code of ethics for commercial dog breeders (and making pet shops responsible for lifelong commitment) would mean the end of puppy farmers and pet shops sourcing pups at 6 weeks age. The only ethical response to puppy farmers and pups in petshops is to ban both practices completely. Happy healthy family dogs are not whelped in warehouse conditions or sold via petshops. The research on that exists. It's time to grow up, enter the realities of the real world and be an adult. Change what you can for the betterment of dogs whatever way you can. Be a grown up and think of the dogs. The reality is that dogs suffer at the hands of people who exploit them for profit. If you think for one moment that we're all going to "grow up" and accept that then you've sadly underestimated the depth of passion some people have for dogs and the utter disgust with which they regard those who exploit them. If feeling that way makes me a "hyena" then I'll wear my spots with pride. The only reason that the profit driven dog exploiters are even talking about ethics is because the RSPCA has them fair and square in their crosshairs and they know it. I'll be happy to assist the RSPCA to fire those shots. The reality is that they're trying to improve their image. You need to look past the pretty words and see the practices - they aren't changing. When Kate removes every derogatory comment on her website about purebred dogs then maybe I'll take her seriously. Edited February 12, 2010 by poodlefan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebanne Posted February 12, 2010 Share Posted February 12, 2010 No, I know this cos I started a fun thread called (Dark Secrets of the Breed" - you can search for it if you like. Point is the vast majority of breeder and breed association websites DO gloss over aspects of breeds. Why frown at a 1st crosser for doing the same?It's time to grow up, enter the realities of the real world and be an adult. Change what you can for the betterment of dogs whatever way you can. Be a grown up and think of the dogs. I am grown up and I will frown at anyone who lies on web sites or thinks it's acceptable for others to do so. I do think of the dogs and one of the things I think of is not to vaccinate at 6 weeks, nor to have my dogs separated into groups to live in the back yard, nor to breed some poor bitch 7 times before deciding she was worthy of a home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now