Pedigree Dogs Exposed.....BBC1

[21QUEST]

Wot it says ;)

Ben

[BILLY]

just got in ben so enlighten me please:rolleyes: anyhoo I thought you didn't own a telly!!!;)

[21QUEST]

But I have the t'internet :p

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7569627.stm



Ben

[fizzwheel]

Liz and I watched it, was very interesting, The Kennel Club have some funny ideas about what makes a dog special, attractive or best of breed.

Dads breeding with daughters and grandparents being bred with grandchildren. Mad mad, no wander some of those breeds have so many issues.

If we get a dog we're buying mongrel.

[injury_ian]

shocking documentary, :(

[AndyBrad]

my lass is a vet nurse. She see's breeders every day and says its discusting what theyve turned some of the dogs into. They ahve so many medical problems now the vet bills are massive and the dogs suffer. not good is it?

[jimmy__riddle]

and yet breeders claim that crosses have more genetic problems!

[600+]

my X is a lot smarter than the labrador next door!! full pedigree that lab with papers to fill a wall! yeah it's thick as F***

[neio79]

That Programme incensed me. The sheer stupidity of the breeders and failure to accept scientific proof as well as common sense really made me wonder if they were the ones knocking off their daughters, sons and parents!!

I have a English Springer with no papers at all (thank god after that) he looks nothing like the show Springer’s but I am sure is far more capable at what the breed was intended for (springing game) Well I know he is good at it as I have taken him on shoots and he has performed well. He is as fit as a butcher’s dog so to speak, never had any issues with him. However a friend of ours has a female Springer with papers and from a Crufts winner, she is falling apart and has hardly any of the natural instinct Coco has.

Surely these idiots who breed and show these ‘ideal dogs’ can look at a photo taken only 50 years ago and see that is how the breed should look. If they want a good breed standard they should breed them normally and assess them on their suitability for the job in hand and health not looks.

The RSPCA vet put it best Crufts is a freak show for dogs. That show where the German shepherd dogs could hardly walk due to being bread for their stance. Where do these cretins come up with the ‘standards’ . How do they justify making a dog look as a description some Muppet has come up with is more important than its ability yo do its job or its health.

The fact is nothing will change until some one stands up and in a big show like crufts disregards the ‘ideal’ dogs for a dog which is far more capable of doing its job and is healthy.

Also the general public could help by stop buying dogs from these clowns and by all means buy pure breeds but non inbred pedigrees from these cretins. For example if you want to buy a Lab, Spaniel, collie or any dog that is still used by people for a proper job. Buy it from a farm or work place where these dogs are used. Not only will they be cheaper , chances are they are less inbred and going to be a lot healthier.

I for one will never buy a dog from a KC registered breeder in my life after seeing that. As its clear most are concerned with certificates and shows above the health and purpose of the dogs they breed.

[SuzukiNess]

my lass is a vet nurse. She see's breeders every day and says its discusting what theyve turned some of the dogs into. They ahve so many medical problems now the vet bills are massive and the dogs suffer. not good is it?


I agree it is disgusting... (and the first 5 minutes of the programme had me in tears) and as the neurological vet pointed out last night - should one beat a dog over the head with a stick one would be punished yet the breeders out there are getting away with doing the basically the same - namely the King Charles Spaniels.

I have a pedigree Basset Hound puppy and WAS proud of his heritage... after watching last nights programme I can only hope his PEDIGREE doesnt come back to haunt him

I salute those that are out there fighting the cause... may your voice shout loud and be heard for those that cannot speak for themselves.

[ooger]

I missed this (actually the other half didn't want to watch it after the programme guide mentioned "upsetting scenes") but am downloading it, still unsure whether I want to watch it or delete it.

We've got two crosses and one of the other, all Staffs.

[injury_ian]

I for one will never now own a 'pedigree'

Its also sad that you cant find a dog as it used to be, Ie is there anyway the breeds will go back to being healthy?

K C spanels will always have a risk of brain trauma, German sheppards will always have hip problems. there isn't any decent DNA out there anymore.

why are toffs so stupid?!

[dizzyblonde]

I switched it off after 5 mins, as it was upsetting. I see too many chavs breeding Staffs round here, who don't know what they are doing. They do it for the money as some( not all) are work shy bums, and seem to think its ok to do this sort of thing on the sly.
Example... a staff bitch being used over and over again when it is clearly past the breeding part of her life, but still they insist on just one more litter.
I've had a pedigree bassett, and a pedigree Springer. They both had 'issues'.
I prefer my mongrel pooches. A whole load more intelligent, and alert than my pedigree past dogs.
In fact my staff x whippet came from the above chav example. But only because at 12 weeks old i found him in the road and they said they were getting rid, because he wasn't a full staff....ridiculous, they don't deserve what they have. He's turned out to be a beautiful dog, and they have said that too.
What makes me even more annoyed is that the chavs have now bought yet another dog....a mastiff x rottweiller ....WTF... where do these people get off, and where are their principles?

[timwilky]

My sons dog had to be put down at 6 months old because its back legs stopped working. the vet said it was genetic

Fortunately when confronted by the evidence, plus the breeder knew both me personally (old childhood friend) they refunded the money. There was quite a bit of local gossip that this guy had been permitting in breeding between his dogs.

As a child, my family would breed Dalmatians and later Afghans. But bloodlines were always checked. That is the good thing about pedigrees. There is documentation to ensure no in breeding.

However, with show dogs there is the problem that specific traits can be positively bred in, leading to the problems highlighted. As everyone wants to breed from best of breed winners that have the characteristics they all want.

[gettin2dizzy]

Is this why rednecks are so in to beauty pageants? ;)

[jimmy__riddle]

Is this why rednecks are so in to beauty pageants? ;)


haha, yeah i guess its quite similar!

my friend was given a pedigree shih tzu for nothing because the breeder didnt want people knowing it came from their dog, because it didnt fit the characteristics its 'supposed' to have. Cos of this it had no papers etc. Perfectly good dog, no problems after 7 years, however at some point in its life (before i knew this friend) she took it back to the breeder, and paid for stud. The whole litter came out deformed, turns out the breeder mated it with its dad. it just shows how stupid these breeders are.

[ooger]

I was going to write something else, but I think my views are a litle extreme for this forum.

All I'll say is that I've done work for a staffy rescue, and the reasons people hand them over is just unbelievable.

Pedigrees or not, theres such a bad combination of irresponsible owners and plain stupid/selfish breeders that its no surprise we have this problem. Another hurrah for natural selection, Charles Darwin would turn in his grave if he saw this.

Ever wonder what would have happened if we did didn't pursue "perfection"?

[rigor]

I haven't seen the program yet, I'm going to try and watch it on iPlayer tonight.

Sam and I have become fairly involved with our chosen breed over the last couple of years so I would like to put my point of view forward.

Yes, some breeders are stupid/irresponsible and breed with no view to the health of the dogs that will be produced. On the other hand there are plenty of breeders who are VERY concerned with the health of all dogs they produce. To tar the whole community with the same wide brush isn't entirely fair.

The first consideration when breeding should be am I going to IMPROVE the breed of dog that I have chosen. Lines from both sides of the mating should be looked at and studied. Unfortunately some breeders take the "scatter gun" approach to producing a good "show" dog. If you breed 100 puppies, chances are 1 will be good and to hell with the rest. That is wrong.

As for the breed standards, quite a few for the "older" breeds of dogs have been around mainly unchanged for 100 years. It's interpretation that has changed.

To say (as a few have in this thread) that I would NEVER go to a KC registered breeder is frankly stupid, as, if your research is done correctly you should be able to find a good breeder with the welfare of their dogs as their main priorty, rather than "Must Produce a Show Champion" or "Must make as much money as possible"

By not going to a decent breeder (KC registered or not), you could be supporting a puppy farming industry that has NO thought for the welfare of the dogs they have and breed. Yes, some puppy farmers are KC registered, and that is wrong as well.

To say a mongrel is a better dog is also a bit short sited. Most mongrel dogs have no health checks before they are bred (For hereditary problems like cataracts and Hip Dysplasia).

I agree that some breeds have been bred to the point where problems have been bred into them "as standard", and there is certainly a case where the KC should look at Breed Standards to change whatever it is that has brought them to that point. But the KC is just a club, not a legislative body, and has no power of all dog breeders. The breed standards are set by the Breed organisations in this country, so they should be having a long hard look at what they are doing.

[21QUEST]

A question I saw asked somewhere went along the lines of, 'when we define a breed by physical description, does it add value to that breed of dog" .

Almost every brred of dog that has come to acheive(?) KC recognition has in the end been ruined.

I personally have no time for what showing stands for in general. Too many egostic people attempting to play God.

Rigor makes very good points but make no mistakes, a lot of the idiots include plenty who as seen as 'ethical' .




Ben

[jimmy__riddle]

IMHO one of the problems with dogs now is that it has become money orientated, breeders charge ridiculous sums like 2k, and seem willing to do anything it takes regardless of the welfare of the dogs to achieve the perfect show dogs. This stupidly high pricing in turn drives people towards puppy mills etc, and then they have the market to continue the mills.
Well, this is my experience of breeders anyway.

[K]

Like most programmes, there is an unbiased and informative view - then there's 'good' TV. :roll:

Case 1: there is a breeder near me, KC registered and shows many of his dogs. He breeds Great Danes, a breed with the potential for many inhereted problems and with an average lifespan of only 6 years.
Due to his care, examination of the breed history, investment in importing stud dogs (or their 'frozen product' ;)) and careful introduction of bloodlines from other ancient breeds his hounds have an average lifespan of 10 years and far fewer instances of genetic problems.

Case 2: A man (regular bloke on the street) who owns a pedegree, KC registered Cocker Spaniel bitch - his daughter also owns a KC Cocker dog. He decides to let his have 'just that one litter', and with no thought for their respective bloodlines uses his daughter's dog as the stud. The pups are not registered with the KC, so any future breeding from them will have no history and no way of knowing if in-breeding is occuring or not.

So - which is the more irresponsible dog breeder?

Personally, when I got my first Cocker I reserched breeders and saw many litters before I was happy with the dog I eventually bought. This is the stance I would advise to anyone who is looking for a pup - regardless of breed, pedigree, pure-breed, cross-breed or complete mongrol - look into everything and make your own choices for each single instance.
Don't tar all with the same brush - isn't that one thing we hate people doing to us as bikers?

[Shellywoozle]

I didnt watch this as I would have been upset.

Samson is a pedigree KC pup but I had him off family and they have his mum and dad and have their history. I wanted little pups, mainly one for my Mum and thought it nice to have a little Samson. When I looked into it and found that in reality I need to do alot of checks, tests and make sure he breeds with a matched bitch I decided against incase the bitch owner was not as responsible as me. This is one of the factors that lead to me have him neuteured last week, alongside the health benefits.

It's all to easy to let a dog and bitch have puppies, there is alot of background work that should go on that I don't think does just to make some money. :(

[markmoto]

id personaly never buy a pedigree, alot of isssues and big business for the scallys although obviously there are responsible breeders but i dont agree with the whole thing of making money out of breeding dogs, always had mongrels have had some great dogs and i couldnt ask for two better dogs than the ones i have now.. and they cost £Nadda just a donation to the dogs home for the jabs etc...