Want Your Blood To Boil?

[Nekhbet]

- difficulty breathing

- difficulty walking

- difficulty giving birth without veterinary intervention

- serious problems with their eyes

- serious problems with their skin

- chronic back and hip problems

breathing ... hmm ever listened to some of those DDs or byb smallies with the elongated pallates that choke them?

Walking ... yup see a lot of SWFs and small breeds poorly bred with angled, crooked legs, knees that flick about

c-section ... so we do the BYB/puppy farmer trick and just let the dog die without intervention? Women around the world need it too should we charge them with child abuse?

eye problems ... who tests for things? Oh look reg breeders. Who breeds dogs with proper shaped heads? Ooops look at that ... reg breeders

skin problems ... err yeah OK so the 'english staffy' and 'blue' craze riddled with problems is the ANKCs fault is it

back and hips ... rememberdiesel.webs.com

what a crock of sht.

[Evolving]

Does this mean that all non pedigree dogs, the designer dogs that come from 2 breeds crossed with no pedigrees, the well it looks like a something or other cross & the we don't know breed

Are all healthy & free of all these problems ?

I was watching dogtown USA the other day. There was a dog on there that had problems walking and they though it had problems with it's neurological system. They called it a bulldog when it was very clearly a cross with possibly some bulldog in it. They then proceded to go on about how due to being a purebred it must have been a genetic disorder that came about due to mating close relatives together because that is what happens with purebred dogs.

On the other hand I know of at least two litters of puppies that have been born to brother and sister matings due to them living together and not being desexed and I really don't know that many people who have had puppies.

[sandgrubber]

Their comments about individual breeds are, in some cases, quite silly. For example, my breed seems to be praised with faint damnation:

"Are Labradors predisposed to any disorders?

Labradors in Australia can also have eye and joint problems. Responsible breeders screen their animals

via the Australian National Kennel Council/Australian Veterinary Association Canine Hip

Dysplasia/Elbow dysplasia and Eye Scheme"

Duh! Most breeds and most crossbreeds can have joint problems . . . in Australia, and everywhere else. Registered Lab breeders are required to screen for hip and elbow problems, and if you do breed comparisons, Labs come off pretty well. And they can't even get the names of the screening programs right, or make the distinction between genetic screening for PRA and annual checkups.

Edited March 16, 2010 by sandgrubber

[Nekhbet]

Are Labradors predisposed to any disorders?

yes. Idiot owners who dont train them, feed them a rubbish diet, let them get to double the ideal weight, let them jump about as pups then complain all the problems are the 'lines' or 'genetics'.

[sandgrubber]

Could add, Labradors . . . and most pedigree dogs . . . aren't any more prone to joint disorders than humans. What fraction of us will suffer some sort of arthritis in old age? I'd guess it's well over 20%.

Are Labradors predisposed to any disorders?

yes. Idiot owners who dont train them, feed them a rubbish diet, let them get to double the ideal weight, let them jump about as pups then complain all the problems are the 'lines' or 'genetics'.

Edited March 16, 2010 by sandgrubber

[BJean]

Our canine societies need to make more efforts at educating & promoting.

Maybe they should run some T V advertising from our membership funds too.

Our CCs need to know this is happening and that it matters to their members..

ANKC members should write to their state CC's and ask them for a response to the RSCPA's campaigns and 'public information' announcements, which denigrate and/or provide misinforamtion about pedigree dogs.

I wrote to Dogs VIc - originally it was to be for the AGM -

but they said it was to much to go through in one night

so it is now a formal document for the Management Committee to go through and provde a response to by the end of March.

I've asked Dogs Victoria for their resposne to the RSPCA's campaign against pedigree dogs.

. . Despite Dogs Victoria's public profile and dialogue with the RSPCA, it is apparent that there is a gulf of understanding between the RSPCA's perception of Dogs Victoria breeder members, and indeed the quintessence of the pedigree dog world.

We are increasingly being told what to breed, how to breed, how to train,

by an organisational body that see pedigree dogs and their breeders as part of the animal welfare 'problem'.

Justifiably in response to the RSPCA public statements and legislative direction, an increasing number of Dogs Victoria members no longer view the RSPCA as friend to all animal lovers, but rather as foe and threat to the existence of pedigree dogs and their breeders - why is a charity able to mandate on laws which affect the organisation and member constituents of which the RSPCA have nothing to do with?

Where is Dogs Victoria’s public voice and defence of its Members and breeding practices against attacks by the RSPCA and attempts to wrest control of dog breeding away from dog breeders and their representative body?

It is up to Dogs Victoria - as the representative body of registered pedigree breeders - to not only consider the implications of RSCPA Victoria's Policies and Priorities, but to actively defend its Members and counter RSPCA Victoria's false claims.

. . .

It wouldn't hurt if other CC members did the same.

It takes just as long to write an email to your CC about the RSPCA

as it does to read and post on DOL

Edited March 16, 2010 by lilli

[BJean]

Is there a problem with pedigree dog breeding in Australia?

Yes. A wide range of serious welfare problems currently exist in pedigree dog breeds in Australia due to

selective breeding to breed standards. This is a major concern for the RSPCA. These problems include:

- difficulty breathing

- difficulty walking

- difficulty giving birth without veterinary intervention

- serious problems with their eyes

- serious problems with their skin

- chronic back and hip problems

Are the issues in Australia similar to those in the UK?

The documentary – Pedigree Dogs Exposed – uses specific examples about problems with pedigree dogs

in the UK, however, we do have similar problems here in Australia. All the breeds featured in the

program are present in Australia. The Cavalier King Charles Spaniel is the 4th most popular ‘registered’

breed, Pug 7th, Boxer 11th and Rhodesian Ridgeback 19th. While the full extent of these problems in the

Australian pedigree dog population is currently unknown, there is no evidence to indicate that they are

significantly different from those experienced overseas. Dog breeding in Australia is subject to the

same breed standards and breeding practices as in the UK. The only major difference is that the

pedigree dog population is much smaller, which means there are less individuals in each breed.:

Imagine the converse if Dogs Vic or the ANKC website, cited that most RSPCA dogs had behavioural issues and the reason why so many were pts,

is NOT because there are not enough homes for them,

but because the RSPCA deem these dogs NOT rehomeable due to health or temperament defects.

Really though

anyone who is concerned by the RSPCA campaign against pedigree dogs

should stop reading this thread

and just hammer out an email to their CC highlighting your concerns, asking them for a response and what they intend to do about it.

If my breed was listed on that RSPCA F&Q shiite piece, I'd be storming down the highway to the DogsVic office in person ...

as it is, I was moved enough before to write to my CC about the RSPCA anti-pedigree campaign -

If this issue matters to you, then do the same

thankyou

Edited March 16, 2010 by lilli

[sandgrubber]

Here's another charmer:

What is the dog show circuit like in Australia?

The dog show circuit is active in Australia and is taken very seriously by the pedigree dog breeders who

frequent them. The dog show circuit uses the written breed standard as the basis in determining

‘winners’ just as they do in the UK. The RSPCA would like to see a fundamental change in the attitudes

of show judges, with much less emphasis placed on physical traits.

Unlike footy, rugby, cricket, basketball, cycling, and a dozen other sports, whose supporters don't take the game seriously at all.

What is the show circuit supposed to use for judging conformation if not the written breed standard? The judge's reading of the dog's aura? Fine with me if they say some standards should move back toward earlier, less exaggerated forms . . . I'd agree with that . . . though respect people who would be opposed. And I think it would be good if some standards included more health-oriented criteria, such as making signs of allergy or shortness of breath explicit faults. As for 'much less emphasis' on physical traits . . . health criteria are physical traits. You can't say on the one hand that standards should include health criteria, and on the other that standards should place less emphasis on physical traits. Not to mention totally ignoring other parts of the show circuit, such as agility, obedience, herding, tracking, retrieving, dancing with dogs, and the rest.

The person who wrote this stuff must have been asleep at the time . . and not known much about pedigree dogs.

Edited March 17, 2010 by sandgrubber

[Melbomb]

I was watching dogtown USA the other day. There was a dog on there that had problems walking and they though it had problems with it's neurological system. They called it a bulldog when it was very clearly a cross with possibly some bulldog in it. They then proceded to go on about how due to being a purebred it must have been a genetic disorder that came about due to mating close relatives together because that is what happens with purebred dogs.

If you mean Wiggles, they did actually say he was a bulldog mix not a PB bulldog. They also mentioned that he had been a stray and his exact breeding was hard to determine but that they believed there was some bulldog in the mix, and that his problems could have been the result of in-breeding. They certainly weren't bashing PB's if that's what your trying to suggest?

[BJean]

If you mean Wiggles, they did actually say he was a bulldog mix not a PB bulldog. They also mentioned that he had been a stray and his exact breeding was hard to determine but that they believed there was some bulldog in the mix, and that his problems could have been the result of in-breeding. They certainly weren't bashing PB's if that's what your trying to suggest?

If they believe the dog is a cross bred

then how do they go from breed component, to inbreeding being a causal factor of the dog's issues?

As dumb as their logic is - this dog has some bulldog in its breeding so its problems must come from bulldog inbreeding -

it is PB bashing

albeit dumb PB bashing.

Edited March 17, 2010 by lilli

[Evolving]

I was watching dogtown USA the other day. There was a dog on there that had problems walking and they though it had problems with it's neurological system. They called it a bulldog when it was very clearly a cross with possibly some bulldog in it. They then proceded to go on about how due to being a purebred it must have been a genetic disorder that came about due to mating close relatives together because that is what happens with purebred dogs.

If you mean Wiggles, they did actually say he was a bulldog mix not a PB bulldog. They also mentioned that he had been a stray and his exact breeding was hard to determine but that they believed there was some bulldog in the mix, and that his problems could have been the result of in-breeding. They certainly weren't bashing PB's if that's what your trying to suggest?

If not bashing PB's what were they doing? There was no need to go into bulldog inbreeding at all. Even if it were due to the bulldog in it wouldn't it all have been solved by the outbreeding it clearly had in it? I could have sworn that is what they are trying to suggest will solve all of the worlds problems.

Many people who watched it will think oh look at what people do to those poor purebred dogs when they really know nothing about said dog and were just speculting on what could have happened to make him the way he was.

[Quickasyoucan]

If you mean Wiggles, they did actually say he was a bulldog mix not a PB bulldog. They also mentioned that he had been a stray and his exact breeding was hard to determine but that they believed there was some bulldog in the mix, and that his problems could have been the result of in-breeding. They certainly weren't bashing PB's if that's what your trying to suggest?

If they believe the dog is a cross bred

then how do they go from breed component, to inbreeding being a causal factor of the dog's issues?

As dumb as their logic is - this dog has some bulldog in its breeding so its problems must come from bulldog inbreeding -

it is PB bashing

albeit dumb PB bashing.

I watched an episode of dogtown with a rottie or maybe rottie cross in it. They spent quite a bit of air time saying all his problems were due to him being a purebred. Put me off watching the rest of the show.

[Melbomb]

If not bashing PB's what were they doing? There was no need to go into bulldog inbreeding at all. Even if it were due to the bulldog in it wouldn't it all have been solved by the outbreeding it clearly had in it? I could have sworn that is what they are trying to suggest will solve all of the worlds problems.

Many people who watched it will think oh look at what people do to those poor purebred dogs when they really know nothing about said dog and were just speculting on what could have happened to make him the way he was.

I guess from my perseptive when i saw it (and being someone that knows nothing about breeding dogs!) i just picked up that it was a bulldog mix. I don't think they mentioned pure bred bull dog at all? Maybe i should have thought about it more but i personally didn't think they were bashing all PB's!

I think anyone with a bit of brains would also realise they were speculating on the dogs problems and breeding. But maybe i give people too much credit!

Edited March 17, 2010 by Melbomb

[mita]

Is there a problem with pedigree dog breeding in Australia?

Yes. A wide range of serious welfare problems currently exist in pedigree dog breeds in Australia

...

Are the issues in Australia similar to those in the UK?

While the full extent of these problems in the

Australian pedigree dog population is currently unknown, there is no evidence to indicate that they are

significantly different from those experienced overseas.

The only major difference is that the pedigree dog population is much smaller...

It makes me reach for a red pen. This fails the reasoning test...

First, it states definitely there's a wide range of serious welfare problems in pedigree dog breeds in Australia.

But further down it says the extent of these problems is unknown.

Did the writer have short-term memory problems that they forgot they were now contradicting their opening statement?

What they've managed to say is, 'We definitely know there's a lot of problems with pedigree dogs in Australia....but we don't actually know that.'

The nonsense continues when it's said there is no evidence to indicate that they are significantly different from those (problems) experienced overseas.

There cant be any science in the background, because well-taught students learn to chant...no evidence, is not evidence.

In other words, you can't say something is definitely so, on the grounds there's no evidence about it .

Chant again, children, No evidence, is not evidence.

Then they dig themselves further into the pit:

It's said that the only major difference between the pedigree population here in Australia & that of the UK (purportedly riddled with problems), is that we have fewer dogs. NO......there are differences in the gene pools.

The UK folk only have to pop across to Denmark, where a rigorous study found that the dogs with the highest longevity level.....were a bunch of pure breeds. Including a breed like the Dachshund, which copped flack from the media dramatists in the UK for having all the weird body shapes....long back, short legs.

Meanwhile, even further away, in Australia....we, too, have differences in the gene pools. (A p/b tibbie is sitting at my feet, with Scandavian dogs in her pedigree!!! Tibbie next door has New Zealand dogs. Friends tibbie, has Singaporean).

Ah.....but the article says, there are similar breeding pratices here in Australia as in the media-judged UK. Really? Are they once again offering no evidence, as evidence?

This piece of writing seems to have been written in the shadow of the UK stuff. Logic is ignored to claim.....yep all that stuff is definitely here in Australia, too. See, kiddies, what you can do when you don't use science? Make any links you like. No evidence required. In fact, no evidence can actually be used to become evidence.

The ANKC should register a strong protest about 'information' written like this.

Edited March 18, 2010 by mita

[Jed]

Justin 19801

I don't think PETA controls the RSPCA, they are actually competitors for the public's dollar, their beliefs are the same though

Do you know the affiliations of those on state RSPCA committees?

Haven't bothered for a while, but there were PETA members on committees when I last checked.

Justin 19801

Don't be fooled by the TV stars.

Who, ME?

You have to be kidding!! Ask anyone.

lili

I have expressed my concerns to the CCCQ (Dogs Qld).

It has occurred to me that the ANKC may think it is all a good thing. Breeder accreditation scheme = more $$ for the CCs. Unfortunately, the CCs, and the AVA don't seem to be able to grasp that without purebred dogs, the CCs will go the way of the dinosaur. Vets, particularly small animal vets (which most of them are these days) are also going the same way. No breeders = no vets.

Too many people who can't see the wood for the trees, too many people sitting on their hands, t oo many people disinterested.

Pups up to about 3 days old feel no pain when docked,because the nerves have not developed, and cannot transmit sensations to the receptors.

The "old" people knew this, that was why they docked. We didn't know why our pups didn't care. Now we know.

There has never been a fatal attack by a purebred Americal Pit Bull Terrier in Australia.

Soon I'll be able to say -

purebred dogs never did any harm, it's a shame we dont have them any more.

The question is not that breeders will walk away, the question is at what point.

Second generation matings banned? Some will go then, particularly a lot the more experienced and successful ones, who have kennels full of line bred, typey, healthy dogs.

Outcrossing? The majority will go then, if the uproar about the bobtail gene in boxers is any yardstick

Approbation by the public? Lots will get sick of it, and go then.

MRI your Cavalier for syrinxes prior to breeding? At $1000 a time. Some will go then, particularly those who have never seen syringo.

Who will be left? Some very new breeders, who will struggle on without any mentoring or advice, and after a few years of spending a lot of money, and not breeding anything much good, or being inspected all the time, endless forms, paying for a lot of tests, they will toddle off as well.

Edited March 17, 2010 by Jed

[justin19801]

Justin 19801

I don't think PETA controls the RSPCA, they are actually competitors for the public's dollar, their beliefs are the same though

Do you know the affiliations of those on state RSPCA committees?

Haven't bothered for a while, but there were PETA members on committees.

No I didn't realise this. Thank you for exposing

[Kissindra]

hasn't Dogs QLD not long created a new possition primarily targeted at liasing with the RSPCA amoung others?

I believe from memory it is an ex board member who has stepped down from the board to fill this possition.

It was publicised in Dog World, January and February I think - seems to me this is the logical person to contact with concerns for those in QLD.

[Jed]

Mark Shepherd (Sheppard??) I believe, Kissindra. He attended the seminar at Monash, but left before question time.

I don't believe the CCCQ perceives there is a problem.

The CCCQ aided the government in implementing BSL, and they ran seminars to teach council ACO's how to identify "pitbulls". Because they thought that by doing that, the purebred dogs would be safe. It wasn't terribly popular with members. But they did it anyhow.

Now they have decided to ban first generation matings, saying "no one much does it anyhow".

I believed then (and I told the CCCQ) and I believe now, that instead of knuckling under, the CCs should be saying "we are the premier dog organisation in this country" (and they are), and you should listen to us, because we are right, you are wrong, and this is all bullspit."

Many people don't perceive the problem. Some breeders believe that what was shown on PDE refers to another country, and there will be no spin off here. It was only a TV show, after all.

Others believe that stopping people line breeding is a good idea, some believe that we do not attend to health concerns enough.....blah blah. Many believe that their dogs are perfect, and it is all those other dogs and breeders who should be regulated

As some were in favour of banning pitbulls. And some were in favour of banning tail docking - because they didn't like it, or didn't want to do it, or didn't have a docked breed. Now they are arguing about showing docked dogs, presumably in case they have an advantage, and beat the long tailed dogs. They fail to see beyond their own tiny sphere. *sigh*

They don't understand what history shows us, they don't understand how implacable animal rights are, and they don't believe that animal rights wants to prevent dogs being bred.

Issues which have come here from animal rights in America include "breed only for yourself" and "don't increase the numbers in the pound" and "breeders are responsible for numbers in the pound", "there is an over supply of pups" and quite a few others. Unfortunately, over the past 15 years or so, the culture of the CCs, and breeders have changed to embrace that culture.

Once, no one worried if a breeder had 10 or 12 litters a year. It was presumed that they could care for them, and they did. That's where you went for your show dog. They had a lot to choose from, and they were more likely to get a top one from 20 than from 2 and if they probably bred when they didn't want to keep one, so your chances were good.

Now anyone who has more than 2 or 3 litters annually draws a lot of raised eyebrows. In fact, most breeders wont talk about how many litters they have. No matter whether they have 1 or 10

The general tone of the public, as witnessed on this forum, is that it is cruel to allow a bitch to have pups. Bitches shouldn't have pups, they should all be speyed, and the general tone is sorrow for the bitch, and commiseration. Bitches love having pups, that's what nature made them for, yet it's suddenly horrible if they have pups. And I am not talking about accidental litters, I mean the overall attitude to whelping.

And that culture has led to a reduction in number of registered dogs bred. Not by itself, natural attrition has played a part.

Now there are insufficient breeders to pay enough to counter moves by animal rights.

Nearly all the long time breeders can see where it is all going. Because we have the benefit of hindsight.

With each new "regulation" a few more breeders will wander off. No one much will notice, numbers at shows will fall, it will be difficult to obtain a pup. However, with the current anti-purebred promotion and advertising, the public probably wont care.

By the time it is apparent what is happening, it will probably be too late.

And I suspect the vets will notice first. It will take a while, but their incomes will drop. No breeders = no pups = no dogs to treat.

And once breeders have walked off, and most of the dogs are a slew of various other breeds, and the shit hits the fan, with problems galore, there will be no well of well bred, healthy purebred dogs to breed to to improve matters.

I personally disagree with outcrossing only, and that would make me walk away. I also disagree with restricting the use of "popular" sires. I've used popular ones, and ones no one has heard of. I use the dog most likely to give me the best pups with what I have. As for outcrossing to another breed - pffft.

I'm not a terribly enthusiastic show person. Sometimes I show, mostly not, but I don't want to breed crap dogs either. I want to breed them to the standard, and doing that ensures they will be healthy. One I bred was BOB last weekend, and another, orfanother breed, was puppy of breed. I'm certainly not mating a boxer to a kelpie to avoid epilepsy, and producing crap dogs in the process.

Edited March 17, 2010 by Jed

[justin19801]

It was Vicki Hearne, author, poet and animal philosopher (not a wannabe like Singer) who first exposed the link between animal rights and animal welfare. They want to change the world and are prepared to bide their time. Their successes are mounting while the usual suspects squabble over what breed a dog is or what a wonderful and responsible owner they are while everyone else is a bunch of irresponsible rejects. They are happy to kill pet ownership by death by a thosand cuts than to ban it outright, as once it is banned their bloated salaries cease.

[mita]

hasn't Dogs QLD not long created a new possition primarily targeted at liasing with the RSPCA amoung others?

I believe from memory it is an ex board member who has stepped down from the board to fill this possition.

It was publicised in Dog World, January and February I think - seems to me this is the logical person to contact with concerns for those in QLD.

That OP statement comes from the national body of the RSPCA.

There are bright spots in Qld where both Dogs Qld & the state's RSPCA are working with the University of Qld on a number of matters.

And it's from one of these ventures that research has uncovered the fact that registered breeders are more in control of what they're doing in breeding & raising puppies. As in, socialising them far better & producing far less accidental litters. Also the Australian Cattle Dog Club has cooperated in ground-breaking research re deafness in dogs.

OK, this doesn't mean that all genetically-based conditions are thereby wiped out....but it does up the chances that there's some responsible decision-making amongst registered breeders.

So, it's not surprising that, in this Qld scene, , the RSPCA Qld's Campaign Courier for February, 2010, contains this advice to the pet-buying public:

"If you are considering adoption, why not visit the RSPCA or another reputable rescue organisation first. If you are seeking a specific breed then we recommend you find a responsible breeder. "

The national organisation, the ANKC, needs to register a complaint about the OP statement as it's a product of the national body of the RSPCA. And appears under their banner

Edited March 18, 2010 by mita