Sunday, 16 June 2013

Jilly's Jolly Fraud - an update

Click to enlarge

The above image has not been posted on the official Jilly's Jolly Jaunt Facebook page. And we now know that Jilly did not walk "more than 140 miles".  Up to half of the walk was actually done by another Petit Basset Griffon Vendeen called Daisy.

The image is up on Best in Show Daily in the US, though - a scrolling banner at the top of the page here.  My first draft of this post suggested that the Event's organisers sent the image over to BISD before the hullabaloo started here - after all, it looks like official artwork. But it turns out that I was wrong.

According to the comment below, BISD claim to have created the image independently of the Event's organisers. They say they weren't aware that Jilly hadn't walked the full 140 miles - but that it doesn't matter because everyone had a jolly time and lots of money was raised for charity.

I've taken a bit of stick in the past 24 hours for daring to highlight the fact that Crufts Champion Jilly (Soletrade Peek A Boo) did not walk the whole route of her epic walk.

Several people have pointed me to a filmed DogWorld interview from April in which Jilly's owner talks  about alternating dogs.  It is up on YouTube and you can watch it here  (and the relevant bit is between 4 and 5 minutes in). Until it was mentioned in the comment section on my last post (the first I'd heard of it), it had attracted only a handful of views.

But I stand by the story.

All the written publicity/press releases/statements/tweets suggested that it was Jilly herself doing the walking and the walk was sold on this.

The official press release, put out by the Kennel Club in conjunction with Jilly's Jolly Jaunt, was entitled "...Crufts champion walks 130 miles for charity".

In this release, which post-dates the DogWorld video by some weeks, owner Gavin Robertson specifically says: "...Outside of the show ring Jilly is such an active dog, so I know that she'll have no problems walking 130 miles."

And here's DogWorld's front page take on the walk, from April 26th - which uses Gavin's quote from the press release and also very specifically says that pointer Flo will be "completing the entire 130 miles". As we now know, she didn't. In fact, I understand that Flo and Jilly walked about half the trip each in the end. This is still a substantial feat, of course; just not the one advertised.



The official Twitter feed for the event also refers to: "Approx. 130 miles to be walked by crufts Best in Show winner to raise funds for GOSH, Doglost and the KC Charitable Trust".

And here's a more recent DogWorld interview, posted just a week ago, which focuses entirely on just Jilly.


Meanwhile the wording on the official website is entirely unambiguous. It even says:

"...Jilly will be wearing a GPS collar from http:/www.retrievatracking.co.uk/. You'll be able to see where she is and how well she's doing if you use JJJ as the username and password."

In reality, they were taking it off Jilly and putting it on another dog and pretending it was Jilly.

Finally, here's a radio interview done by Gavin on the first day of the walk (download link). The presenter introduces the piece by saying that Jilly is walking 130 miles along the canal to raise money for charity. Gavin does nothing in the interview to disabuse him - or the listeners - of this. He also mentions that Jilly is pulling his arms out during the interview. This is no great surprise - he was photographed with the other dog just a few miles earlier, so Jilly had not been walking for long at that point.

I am sure that at least some people who joined them for the walk knew it wasn't Jilly all-the-way, but everyone else thought it was Jilly doing the whole thing and the walk was sold on it. It is impossible (because I've tried) to find anything anywhere published or printed or written about it on the internet prior to the event starting that says otherwise - apart from that one rather obscure video interview.

The stupid thing is if they'd been more upfront about it, no one would have minded at all. It is a lot of miles. And I genuinely thought it was a great idea. I was delighted to see a functional and characterful dog win Crufts this year. And from everything that everyone says, Gavin is a genuinely nice guy. I recognise, too, that everyone had a good time and lots of money was raised for good causes.

For all the above reasons, I did think twice about blogging the story. But, at the end of the day, the walk was billed as proof that a a pedigree dog was  capable of walking 130 miles and it was wrong to suggest that Jilly was doing the whole walk when she wasn't.  

Can you imagine, too, the derision if it had been me doing the walk to show that crossbreeds could do such a walk and I'd slipped in a Jake lookalike? (That said... if anyone's got one...)

 In truth, I suspect that JJJ will get more donations as a result of my blog - sympathy money from those who will hate me for highlighting it and of course donations from those supporting me on my walk which I will do for the same charities.  Just a few more pledges to go and I will be committed to it...

In the meantime, you can donate to Jilly's Jolly Jaunt here.

Edit 14:58 17 June 2013: the banner image has now been removed from Best in Show Daily.
Edit 20:02 19 June 2013: add of DogWorld article dated April 26th and information received that Jilly and Flo walked about 70 miles each - half the walk.

103 comments:

  1. You have a problem here Jemima. Sorry let me rephrase. One of your big problems here Jemima is that having to come back with an "update" post means your original "scoop" didn't quite nail it. So you had to spend Sunday digging around for further proof in an attempt to support your spurious claims. My guess is you spent quite a bit of Sunday doing that. Whilst you were frenetically keyboarding away doing that most of us were out in parks or on walks enjoying our dogs. My guess is you invited people to add comments when the balance of them went the wrong way, for we all know how heavily you curate the comments. But that is not the main part of your problem. That lies in the fact that for whatever reasons, who knows, you cannot stomach the thought that despite all your very best efforts the British psyche is deeply enthralled by the pedigree dog. So much so that an event like Jilly's Jolly Jaunt commanded high profile sponsorship, media coverage wherever it went, it brought out dignitaries and MPs, it even won the support of your best friend Beverley (a statement from her on her disappointment on this would be helpful, BTW). Get a group of photogenic pedigree dogs out in the summer sunshine, preferably of all shapes and sizes, preferably with a romantic backdrop of barge and canal, and the media fall over themselves to get a snap. Your arguments here amount to nothing more than semantics, I still have not encountered anyone who has supported this event who is expressing anything other than how uplifting an experience it was. It was a joy from start to finish save for the blisters. For some reason you have decided to take an entire weekend out of your life to try and deflate that joy. That is because you are a sapper and not a zapper. This attack on a great fundraising idea means, Jemima, that you have lost. You have lost the argument, here in Britain at least. Time for a week on Angelsey, no?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon 16 June 2013 22:53: So, your point is that if you lie about walking your dog for 130 miles, you a hero, and if Jemima points out the lie, she is a sapper. Sounds like you must write speeches for MPs. -- Rod Russell, Orlando, Florida USA

      Delete
    2. Dear Anonymous, please take this as official notice that HAVE now encountered someone (myself) who supported this event and will state clearly that although it was an uplifting experience AT THE TIME, to be told afterwards that the event I pledged to support was a fraud with regards to the public perception of it is extremely downheartening. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad my money went to support the causes it did but the method of garnering my support, well lets just say I have such a bitter taste in my mouth I might vomit !!

      Delete
    3. Also to Anon of 03:19...

      I am only appearing anon as I am commenting from work.

      When I saw this in the local newspaper I thought it was fantastic and was looking forward to see the success of this also broadcasted on this blog.

      It definitely leaves a sour taste in your mouth when you see that how the walk was potrayed was not how it panned out. Clearly no one here wants the money to be reclaimed. GOSH is a great charity. What we wanted was to know the truth of what we were sponsoring.

      Delete
  2. Hello Jemima, Greetings from Best In Show Daily! I am one of the founders of Best In Show Daily and I'd like to assure you Best In Show Daily's team does work weekends and we do know how to read. Best In Show Daily created the ads to support the walk, celebrate its successful completion and congratulate all the donors for exceeding the donation goals set. The postcards are written by Jilly. Obviously, dogs don't write postcards or sing songs to their iPods (as our previous ad presented when we started to publicize the event). The language used is to celebrate the end of the event and the money raised. As we understood things, it was approximately 140 miles that was walked; and we are not aware of any switch in dogs, nor have we been asked to remove the ad by Jilly's Jaunt organization. None of those things however, change the greatness of the event, its broad support, and its successful conclusion. We could, if it would suit you, add such disclaimers as "dogs don't really write postcards. to our knowledge, dogs do not have ipods with song lists that include 25 miles. dogs don't really understand the word of ambassador". We do believe dogs understand the word "love". We're used to such disclaimers in the United States, usually they end with "could cause a headache" however we felt that the positives of this event should be the focus. I would like to ask that you remove facts that are untrue from your blog as noted in my second sentence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for the clarification Kayla.. I have edited the above accordingly.

      Delete
    2. Kayla: Your disclaimer should be that Jilly did not actually walk the 130 miles, and that Jilly's owner did not prove that showdogs have the stamina to do so. This is not about raising money on a false pretext (although that is what happened); it is about misleading the public about what else showdogs can do, and particularly one kennel's Petit Basset Griffon Vendeens. --
      Rod Russell, Orlando, Florida USA

      Delete
    3. I second "Anonymous." Any reference to this walk anywhere online should specifically state that Jilly and most/all of the other dogs did not walk the 130 miles.

      This is completely misleading to people who are looking for a healthy pet, agility competitor, etc. Everybody will look at sites like Best In Show Daily and think: "wow, a show-bred PBGV is just the ticket for endurance running, a backpack journey across Africa, etc." When in fact, this BIS PBGV was only capable of going a few miles before conking out.

      This is misleading advertising. The same as books that say the average English Bulldog lifespan is "10-12 years," when current stats show that it is more like "3 years."

      For the record, I have purebred dogs, including conformation champions. They've all proven their athleticism in a wide variety of venues, including agility, disc, sheep herding; and also do long-distance hiking and back-packing. Any of my dogs, including my current Papillon--if wearing rubber-soled boots--could easily have done this 130 mile walk.

      However, I know better now than to select a PBGV for my next sports competition dog, thanks to Pedigree Dogs Exposed blog. If PBGV show breeders want to prove me wrong, lets see one of them do a VERIFIED 130 mile walk.

      Delete
  3. Hi Anon 2253

    I can tell from your comment that you're upset. I am sorry to hear that you have lost your joy.

    This must have been a tough weekend for you. I don't believe any of the comments or posts here, except the ones against Jemima, meant to harm anyone, rather most of them IMO seem to want to inform the public.

    I don't know you, but I do have the day free, so I will try to respond to your comment, but I don't know Jemima either, so my words here are my own.

    1. It does seem that Jemima wrote a second post this weekend, is that a problem for anyone?

    She did take flack on the first one, so going over the material again for those who didn't quite get it the first time makes sense to me. I found the update post helpful.

    2. I have no idea how Jemima spent her weekend. You seem to be taking a nasty pleasure in the idea that she might have been stuck on a computer whilst you romped with your dogs.

    I don't know if she invited anyone to post on her blog or not. I just wandered in and commented anonymously, I guess others can too. Did you get a special invite to comment or did you just wander in too?

    3. "the British psyche is enthralled with the pedigree dog". Yes, I think you got that one correct. Good point Anon 2253.

    Did you know that the word "enthralled" means "enslaved" or "spellbound" ?

    4. Wow. Try to not get too full of yourself on the internet, okay? The media falls all over themselves all the time. It is what they do. As you said, stick a bunch of dogs near a nice back drop, and the media will take photos. That is what photographers do.

    5. You say that the other side is just arguing about words. I disagree. I believe the arguement is about truth.

    6. I am glad that you and others enjoyed the walk and everything which went with it.

    But if other people were left believing that the walk was easy enough for a heavy dwarf dog, then others might have tried it too. And it wasn't that easy was it? So I believe Jemima did right in saying that the news reports were wrong.

    Also, long distance hikers might have read media reports and bought a puppy of your breed expecting it to be able to walk 130 miles, when that wasn't proven by this walk.

    6. I don't know if anyone tried to ruin your joy or not. I read the posts, and I just thought it was a regular factual article. Perhaps you read more into the posts because you are closer to the subject?

    Maybe in the future, you could have someone else read your reviews and just show you the good ones, it might be easier to keep your joy if you did that.

    7. I don't know Jemima so I don't know if she is a sapper or a zapper. Do you know her well?

    I do know how sapped I feel when I read show dog blogs and some kennel writings. It makes me feel so sad, both for the dogs and for the enthralled people.

    And many of the enthralled people are mean and rejecting of any ideas but their own.

    I hope you don't feel as bad as I have been made to feel when I post things that I believe, like "I would rather have a puggle than a pug". Just go to a dog show site and and post that, and you will see how the pureblood breeders make you feel.

    8. I don't understand how you can say that she attacked your fundraising.

    She waited until it was over, nobody bets on a race after it is finished, so you weren't going to get more money were you?

    She did two post on JJJ, which could get more anti Jemima people to donate.

    And she is going to do a walk for the same charities herself.

    What more could you ask?

    9. She can't loose. She has already won. Pedigree Dogs Exposed change the way people see dog breeding. Everything else will just be frosting on the cake.

    Why did you mention Angelsey, is this one of those "I know where you go" comments?

    Well that certainly took awhile to type. I was practicing replying to see if I wanted to start my own blog. Hope Jemima didn't dislike it. But this takes time.

    How well did I do?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I did indeed spend a bit of time putting together the update - and not least because I thought it fair to highlight the April video (rather than just leave mention of it buried in the comments section on the first post).

      But, believe me, if I didn't take time out to walk the dogs on Salisbury Plain every afternoon, they would eat me.

      And no, I never invite my friends to post here in an effort to boost support. What would be the point? If I get more flak than support on some posts (as sometimes happens) then that's fine by me. I don't pretend to always get it right or expect everyone to share my opinion.

      The Anglesey ref? Someone trying to show how well they know me. I spend two or three weeks there every summer with the dogs running on the beach. It's where I re-fuel my mojo. Off there in a few weeks...

      Delete
    2. An excellent reply Anon to the person (also Anon) who likes to guess a lot about what Jemima is doing. Strange way of expending one's energy. I thought Point 9 was especially well said.

      Delete
  4. I agree with the first comment. If its joyous and the goal is of good will, it should not be criticized at all, regardless of any lies or cheating involved. You are a very bad person if you do criticize them, and should be ashamed for doing so. You are a loser and failure at life who wants everyone to be a villain.

    Objectivity and truth hold no value compared to smiles and sugar.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I really hope people don't take my comment at face value. A surprising number of people can't seem to detect sarcasm in textual communication. But I'll write this just in case, since it has happened to me many times before.

    ReplyDelete
  6. And whist you are it it, Jemima, re the tracking,
    you can remove the line:- " and putting it on another dog and pretending it was Jilly."... as there was no 'pretending'!Once again you are trying to imply deceit and that certainly was not the case! Go look at all the photos! You should be welling up with pride..pedigree dogs at their best, including several veterans..healthy, happy and fit for function! Forgive me, but isn't that what you wanted...?

    poster as in 16 june 14:15 in previous Jilly blog

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon 1408, I don't get people using anonymous or alias, if you want to pass comment use your name. Cowardly otherwise, comment to all the others who use this method of title. Nobody, especially Gavin, has offered an explanation to dispute Jemima's findings and reports. Consequently, no response indicates to me that Gavin is reluctant to confirm that another pbgv was used, even though photographs prove otherwise. All that needs to be done is that an explanation is offered that is honest and truthful. Simple as that isn't it? Lambusting JH because she has reported on a possible misrepresentation/dishonest activity is unacceptable. We are fortunate to live in the a free part of the World and those who were duped by misinformation need to be informed and the people who do that are to be applauded for their bravery but most of important of all, their honesty. Jemima has read the comments, done further research, accepted that she is infallible and got on with the update. Are you honest?

      Delete
    2. Ann @ 14:08: no I won't remove the line that they were pretending it was Jilly.

      I repeat, the Event's website is entirely unambiguous on this point. It says specifically:

      "...Jilly will be wearing a GPS collar from http:/www.retrievatracking.co.uk/. You'll be able to see where she is and how well she's doing if you use JJJ as the username and password."

      Delete
    3. The GPS is interesting. If it was active, and I assume it was for the twitter/youtube or whatever these methods of communication are, for the whole of the 130/140 mile walk then what is the problem with Gavin/organisers confirming that Jilly did indeed do the whole/complete/step by step walk? The information is ambiguous, they do indeed talk about dogs resting but as I said previously is it that the mileage was split up/broken down and that pointer one did the first phase, pointer two did the second and Jilly did the last leg. I cannot find any reference to two pbgvs being involved in the walk, the whole impression is that it is JILLY'S JOLLY JAUNT, with Gavin, pointer owner and her two pointers and other guests and their dogs, no mention of an additional pbgv. Come on Gavin, pick up the 'phone or plug in the computer and tell the world what the truth is, it doesn't lessen your effort and fund raising, but if you remain silent it does lessen your credibility and it shouldn't for such a nice person.

      Delete
    4. Georgina ..er Georgina who?...sorry, the reason i did not give my name (and i did think about doing so) was because I thought it would draw attention to myself as possible self promoting for me or my dogs....and I am not interested in doing that.! ..
      Jemima, you only see what you want to see, and are not interested in any explanations, the video, or Gavin's comments and are dismissive of any other comments or points of view not in your favour. You did not respond to my previous post or to my other comments in the above post. You appear so blinkered and mind set on trying to put down something that has been a fantastic gathering of healthy dogs joining in a campaign championed by Gavin, Amelia, Jilly and Flo. which has done only enormous good to the charities. I don't even think you are interested in welfare of the dogs anymore...just your own self gratification!.....

      Delete
    5. What absolute tosh. Anon 1904. You are hiding behind the Anon title because of being embarrassed about making caustic remarks. I am unaware of your response to my blogs so would you be good enough to let me know what you said, I do not wish to be caustic or rude. It is why using Anon is so confusing because one cannot identify who is replying to who. Contrary to your comment about being blinkered, it is quite the opposite in so far as it would be good to have confirmation of how many dogs pbgv took part in the walk and whether they too completed the 130/140 mile jaunt and who wore the GPS collar. Again I will reiterate that apart from the confusion caused by the lack of information from Gavin and or the organisers of the fantastic walk no body has undermined or discredited the effort made by everyone who took part in the jaunt. You seem to have misunderstood my words but if you know the facts please advise the rest of us and the matter can be closed.

      Delete
    6. Georgina...? .you have miss read my 19:04 post as only the first paragraph was in response to you....The rest was in response to Jemima...which is why I headed the paragraph 'Jemima ' ... So i don't see why you should be confused....

      Delete
    7. Anon 0036, quite right, sorry. I guess the real reason I am confused is because I don't understand why Gavin is apparently reluctant to repsond either on this site or fb to questions about how many pbgvs undertook the walk and who wore the collar? The information regarding Australian legislation would frighten the life out of me so I don't think I will be undertaking a charity walk, especially over such a mammoth distance.
      Again, accept my apology for misreading your blog but your words are a bit sharp in it.

      Delete
    8. Apology accepted, and just for clarification, so my posts are not confused with other anon posters (including some that have been unhelpfully vitriolic).. my posts have been, re First Jilly jaunt blog... 16th june 14:15, Jilly Jaunt update blog, 17 June 14:08 and 19:04 and 18th june 00:36 and including this one... ...

      Delete
  7. I do hope someone from the charity will show up and tell you how despicable you are for tearing down such a wonderful event that raised money for a worthwhile cause. If it were up to me if you tried to give one dime to my charity I would tell you to go to hell. I would tell you that my charity does not need money built upon hatred and malice and that your "idea" to get your sycophants on this blog to give you money if you duplicate the walk so that you can demean what was a happy event is NOT NEEDED.
    Curmudgeon and malcontent come to mind but sapper works well too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jemima, do you work for the Army? I thought a sapper was a military engineer specialising in laying mines?

      Curmudgeon - I doubt anyone on here has an inkling of the meaning of that word without Googling it. Although Jemima does have a right to be bad-tempered.

      And malcontent - I'm sure this is probably the most accurate as from what I've read Jemima is certainly dissatified and discontented with this event.

      Really, if you must use abusive adjectives and nouns please research them fully!!

      Delete
    2. Given that definition, Ian... sapper might not be that inappropriate...

      Delete
    3. Anon 16.02. I find your comments ridiculous. You would refuse money for a charity because it came from someone who dared to point out the problems in pedigree dogs? How sad is that. I never read much about Jilly's jaunt to be honest, i figured it was another mawkish PR attempt like "we love our dogs" on Youtube. But from what i did read i assumed that the dog would be walking it over a period of days. People are saying "she couldn't do it she only has little legs" isn't it meant to be a hunting hound or something. I have some boofy little short legged dogs and they knock out 6 miles in a heartbeat, i have no doubt that could do ten miles a day.

      Everyone is tickled pink at the amount of money raised but the fact is the point of the exercise was to promote pedigree dogs and i'm afraid they haven't really done that convincingly. Since Ms Harrison has been a critic of Pedigree dogs it does not surprise me that she would point this out. Jilly was infact a part of a 130 mile dog walk for charity but she didn't walk 130 miles.

      If this has been some kind of charity event using other animals or something and someone had pointed out that the claims of the event had not been exactly accurate i expect you and many others would be questioning it. If you're trying to make a point too the public my best suggestion would be to make sure you follow through with it!

      As it is you're just shooting the messenger and you're doing that because it is the woman that dared to criticise your "hobby"... Also malice as far as i can tell.
      SHADE.

      Delete
  8. Lets try a different aspect on this. Lets say David Beckham and Wayne Rooney get two teams of football stars to play a charity match and they have advertised that they will captain those teams. And the charities they are supporting are just as heart tugging and valid as the JJJ charities. The event is held at Wembley and attracts huge media focus. You paid £50 for a ticket to support the charities and watch the football stars. But the match is fixed, Rooney is "injured" early in the game and is taken off, Gareth Bale, playing for Rooneys team commits countless fouls in the penalty box that are too obvious, meaning Beckhams team win through a load of penalties etc, etc.........

    Yes, the charities are still winners as you've pledged your support by purchasing a ticket but how do you feel about the match you just watched, cheated? You came to the home of UK football to watch professional footballers play a proper game of football. If you wanted to just give money directly to the charities you'd have done that and not gone to Wembley.

    I supported this event as I too have pedigree dogs that I show that should be more than capable of walking this distance. And what a fabulous idea it was. But how do I feel about it now? Cheated? Yes of course.

    This is about the public perception being manipulated yet again, which we see with pedigree dogs and showing a lot, and in my opinion, this will now have a negative effect on the perception that pedigree dogs are "Fit for Function"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. you are the perfect example of a curmudgeon. bit thanks so much for the "english" lesson and for noting that most on here would not know what a curmudgeon is. Tends to make one wonder if you have to google the word.

      Delete
    2. Haha, sounds like what happens in a lot of professional games by default, charity or not. Corruption truly is everywhere, its just that this happens to have a face of good intention.

      Delete
  9. Time for humour.

    Has anyone heard about the Price-Stern method of naming babies? The idea is that if you name one baby "Goofball" , the baby will grow up different than if you had named him a regular name.

    The PBGV in question is named "Peek A Boo" like in "Now You See Her, Now You Don't". I hope they name her next litter after famous Magicians like: Harry Houdini, The Great Randini, Johnny Carson's The Great Carnack, Oz, and the Harry Potter people.

    I smile when I read "Peek A Boo" because it's like she is just popping in and out of the walk. So cute.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The book is: What NOT To Name The Baby.

      Delete
  10. Seriously, swapping dogs and using ringers is disgraceful, and getting caught at it is no walk in the park.

    It calls into question the validity of all dog show events.

    It ruins people's ability to trust the word of dog breeders.

    And because this was a Crufts Champion, it might take microchips or ear tatoos to win back the lost trust.

    Or maybe not, in the words of MIB, people are a gullible breed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely right Anon 18:00, if Jemima's findings were published in a more public forum aka newspaper, tv programme etc. your words would be too uncomfortable for those caught in this unfortunate outcome. Dog showing/breeding stinks as far as jo public is involved and this event will confirm what they believe to be true and irrefutable. Like you they will take it to the next stage and question which bitches have bred which puppies, sired by which stud dogs, and indeed is the puppy purchased really the bloodline it says it is from the pedigree. Until the breeder/owner of Jilly informs everyone of what exactly happened we will remain sceptical about the truth.

      Delete
  11. I would never want to make anyone uncomfortable.

    People make mistakes. The media makes mistakes.

    If it were my dog, I would just say: "I am sorry for any misunderstanding. I told the truth at the begining, but got carried along with the fantasy aspects of the media hype surrounding the charity walk. I am sorry that I didn't make more of an effort to introduce both Daisy and Jilly, and for any confusion that might it have caused."

    I give my permission to any party involved to use those words if they want to.

    If my understanding of the unfolding of the events concerning the walk are incorrect, please tell me. I am not perfect either, we all make mistakes.

    I believe this comment more helpful, supportive, and comforting to those involved than all the posts from Jemima haters who are not defending the JJJ walkers, but simply spitting at Jemima, who has, once again, told the truth.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Might want to amend the above to: "told the truth as she thought it to be".

      I don't do facebook, I didn't believe it would contain the sort of articles which I would want to read.

      Not having joined FB, I didn't seem able to read it, but I just figured out a different way to use google's news search. So just read JJJ's face book blurb.

      It read: "Jilly, Flo, Daisy, Clown, and Touri who did the walk between them...".

      So that seems to settle that.

      Delete
    2. That was posted on Saturday - after I broke the story here - and was the first ever mention of Daisy.

      Jemima

      Delete
    3. Yes anon 21:26, I have just read the facebook blog (and left a message requesting clarification) but it is AMBIGUOUS.... Yes it does say exactly as you state above, however "did the walk between them" is meaningless. Because one could interpret that as walking as a pack not individually and again the question of GPS rears it's head, as JH pointed out, if they each did a stage, then who wore the GPS collar and if it was swapped to another dog were the people told who were tracking Jilly's progress that another dog was wearing it whilst Jilly was resting because therein lies the deception whether intended or otherwise.

      Delete
    4. "told the truth as she thought it to be". She's not the only one with eyes or a brain mate!
      SHADE.

      Delete
  12. There is no doubt in my mind that the media said that Jilly was doing the walk.

    All of the blurbs which I read said it was Jilly. But I am not reading this from a full sized computer therfore I am not seeing video or bothering to click on many headlines.

    I am not a journalist. The views I offer are just those of Jo Public surfing the net.

    It was called Jilly's Jolly Jaunt and so a person would expect Jilly to be walking it, wouldn't they?

    I found no mention of other bassets except here on PDE and now on FB.

    The question seems to be which media sources failed to mention other bassets, which were fuzzy about how far Jilly herself would be walking, and who, if anyone, reported the flat out truth the whole time?

    I would guess that most media and most blogger just repeat what they have read,so another question would be which people and organisations would have known that Jilly would not be going the whole way, or who all could see that it wasn't Jilly doing the walk, and yet reported that it was only Jilly.

    The people who did not know didn't lie, they just didn't know the real story.

    So it is another case of: Who Knew What When.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I think the question now is how to prevent this type of confusion from happening in other situations in the future that are more dire.

    What if a dog bit a child on the walk? What if "Jilly" had run off? What if someone met Daisy on the path, and knew that wasn't the dog she saw win Crufts?

    People need to be sure and clear about their dog's identity in public. Not that I should talk, since I post anonymously.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon 2335, but your post is relevant and perhaps others in the future should take note.

      Delete
  14. I find this a bit, well, irrelevant. I don't really find it that important that the breeder alternated his dogs on some fun thing he did for charity. It's not like he qualified for Crufts with one dog, and brought another instead. I think most people with more than one dog would prefer to split their time so the others don't get left out.

    As an endeavour (and this I suppose is my own interpretation) for the better breeding of pedigree dogs, I find a lot of the posts on this blog very negative and unconstructive, where it could be used in a much more proactive and positive way. There are breeders out there breeding carefully and trying very hard to improve their breed in terms of more than just making what they breed stand out to a conformation show judge. Why not highlight them and the good they do rather than focusing on the negative? When the Flatcoat is your breed and you're concerned about the cancer risk in these dogs, why not start your own Flatcoat breeding programme, perhaps doing the outcross you mentioned, or at least find and support a Flatcoat breeder working towards similar goals by buying your next dog from them? I enjoyed the programme and thought it conveyed important information, but all this is a bit petty and not really constructive, as is the backlash suggestion of doing a charity walk with your mutt. Mutts are great and it's nice that you rescued him, but this is still doing nothing to improve the health of and raise awareness of improving the health of pedigree dogs. It almost looks like you are saying by this that because pedigree dogs are in trouble, people should turn their backs on them rather than trying to help/support, and have any random dog and that this somehow solves the problem, which it doesn't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why is it ok to mislead people with respect to a charity walk but not ok to mislead us at Crufts? That smacks of double standards.

      Delete
    2. Because Crufts is a competitive venue, and a charity walk is just a charity walk.

      Delete
    3. Anon 23;16, I may be incorrect but I think Barbara is alluding to honesty and integrity, whether work, sport, charity any activity undertaken by people that involves other people's trust has to be beyond reproach/suspicion.

      Delete
    4. Thing is, when I was a child, we had to spend a day at school doing 'something' to raise money for charity. So I said I would read books all day. In actual fact, I didn't read books all day. A good proportion of the day was spent going to the toilet, eating lunch, doodling, picking my nose, talking to the person sitting next to me, etc. The point is, it wasn't a competition, and no harm was done by me not doing literally what I was supposed to do and not explaining in smallprint any exceptions. If the sponsored walk was not reported precisely in the media, or the owner did not explain what he was doing clearly enough (or started and realised there was a problem with his plan and didn't stop to make it clear), this isn't exactly *right* but it's nowhere near the same league as someone taking shortcuts or cheating in a competition where this will lead to unfairness.

      Delete
  15. The only proof here is that we all know for sure that Jemima Harrison is an A1 bitch - and no doubt a mongrel!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah. Those damn human mongrels.

      And people call PDE's references to the Nazis unfair.

      Delete
    2. Stupid comment. Why not write a sensible argument that adds to the discussion, instead of an idiotic ad hominem attack?

      Delete
    3. Almost every human alive is a mongrel. The only humans that live in societies like anything approaching the closed registry system that 'purebred' dogs are bred within are typically beset with high rates of inherited disease, like the Amish, Hutterites, FLDS, etc. Telling, no?

      Delete
    4. There is no such thing as a human mongrel or a human breed, because humans were never bred for specific purposes. Race and breed are not interchangeable and people need to stop comparing them and dragging genocide and racism and other human-to-human hatreds into it as emotive triggers. Keep the discussion rational.

      Delete
  16. If this had happened in Australia (irrespective of the charity angle) then Jilly's owner and organisers would have been eligible for a prosecution from the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission for "misleading representations" (S52) - and the test is whether the 'reasonable man" would have been mislead, possibly into giving to the charity 'under false pretences'. Minimum fine A$50,000 for an individual and A$500,000 for a corporation. Fraud is fraud, regardless of whether there is a charity involved....

    ReplyDelete
  17. The bit about the GPS is a good point. Did it show Jilly resting or off the trail in a car?

    Or would even someone who followed the event that closely have been led to believe that Jilly walked the whole way? Did anyone look at the GPS results?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You can check for yourself. Go here and type in JJJ and JJJ for the username and password.

      http://www.retrievatracking.co.uk/login.aspx

      To see the whole walk, you need to:

      • select "Manual Map" which will allow you zoom out.
      • under the map, select Show History (bottom right).
      • change minutes to "points" on the drop down menu on the left, then type in 8000
      • zoom out until you can see the whole walk.

      The longer blue lines are from a journey the week before and don't relate to the walk.

      We have a Retrieva GPS collar ourselves so am familiar with the mapping software.

      But anyway, as you can see, it was on whichever dog was doing the walking - or perhaps Gavin himself.

      Delete
  18. There are different ways to give to charity:

    One way is to give money to organised charities, let them take their cut, and hope the money goes to where you thought it would.

    There was a storm in the US media several years ago, when after a disaster, charities collected loads of money. The people who donated money believed that their money was going to help those victims, but some of the charities used the donations for other charitable causes in other countries.

    Like how would you feel if a rare big flood destroyed homes near you, you were asked to donate, gave your money, and then found that half of your donation was was sent to a religious group in Africa who were trying to teach people there that sex and birth control were wrong and that the other half of your donation went to help poor women in Asia get abortions. Then you found out that the charity kept most of your money for themselves, and that none of your money went to flood victims near you. And then when people complained the charity refused to say they were sorry, and insisted the money went to "people who needed it"?

    You might not be too happy if something like that happened near you. I have since forgotten which disaster it was, which charities, and most of the details. What stuck in my mind was not the news articles, but all the outraged comments. People commenting how, after the truth broke, they looked up where the charity sent the donations. People often found that their money went to causes which they were opposed to.

    While I would have said that the people seeking donations certainly gave the idea the money was for the local disaster, the law seemed to take a narrow view that the charities had not actually promised that the money would be spent locally, and made cracks about how people who donate money need to find out where the money goes BEFORE donating.

    Do you know that it is illegal to donate to terrorist groups? Such groups don't have to use words like "war", "blood", or "guns" in their name. They are more likely to use words like "help" "save" and "poor". But you can get in trouble for "supporting" them if you donate.

    It was advised to not ever donate impulsively. To ask for an email address or website, go home and carefull read and fully research your choice of charities, then make regular donations to that charity.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Wow! What a scoop! A job at The Daily Mail awaits.....

    Lets look at the positives - Gavin raised over £30,000 for charity. I donated and do not feel cheated. He has hardly committed fraud where he has benefited. Would you have rather Jilly walked the full distance and bleated on about animal cruelty if she was hurt?

    May I suggest with all the time you have on your hands, which judging by this article is far too much, you attend anger management classes, or try some meditation. Failing that some new batteries might put a smile back on your face.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. CRUFTS BEST IN SHOW INJURED BY WALKING!!!!

      This was a PR exercise that the organisors were naive enough to think could be something different than as advirtised. Well done to the walkers but if you're trying to make yet another nah nah neh nah nah point you'd better make sure you dot i's!
      SHADE.

      Delete
  20. Jeremy, just supposing you went to a garage to purchase fuel. You draw up at the super fuel pump because it is your fuel of choice and you fill up your car. The super fuel is more expensive but you accept the price charged. However, earlier in the day the garage ran out of super fuel and filled those tanks with regular fuel. They forgot to tell the purchasers, or alter the price charged and until someone noticed that their car, which HAS TO RUN ON SUPER FUEL, starts to stutter and choke the mistake goes unnoticed. That person returns to the garage and asks for an explanation as to why his car is suddenly "crooked". The garage owner blanks him, he realises that a mistake has been made and it was a genuine oversight, but to acknowledge this purchaser will entail the manager having to contact all the other purchasers and also publicly accept that whilst it was unintentional, a fundamental mistake has occurred and that money should be restored to those people because of the misrepresentation. Now, if the manager had been open with the purchaser with the crooked car and publicised locally that a mistake at his garage had been made then the matter would end at that point, the manager's reputation intact and the matter would be quickly forgotten. But in this case, mainly because there has been no explanation or reassurance that everything was carried out as advertised, speculation will continue as to what really happened for some time. I know now that rather than remembering Jilly's fabulous image and being expertly handled to a very worthy BIS win at Crufts 2013, I will just associate her handler with this episode, my focus now off the dog and on him. Sadly I think that there will be many others out there of the same opinion. Again I have no wish to diminish his effort, it was admirable and beneficial to so many but it would be good to learn the facts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The analogy doesn't compare. The 'super fuel' problem is false advertising, i.e. someone purchased something under the apprehension it was something else, and damage to this person's property (the car) occurred as a direct result. The customer is entitled to sue the person/company who sold the fuel for negligence if said person does not admit to their mistake and offer suitable compensation. There is no real comparison with the case of someone doing a walk with dogs for charity and being nebulous/misleading, deliberately or unintentionally, about which dogs would accompany him in what measure, because no damage to property or person occurred and there is no negligence.

      Delete
    2. Anon 20:16, you have taken my blog too literally, it was an example. Your second sentence is exactly what I was saying, "false advertising". I was likening it to the people who have seen the advertisement regarding the walk and that a BIS crufts winner was doing the whole 130/140 mile walk, and because of this fact they felt they wanted to support the fund raising. If it had just been ordinary pedigree dogs that were advertised as undertaking the walk, the people may have thought "Oh that's kind" and probably instantly forgotten the event. However, because IT WAS A CRUFT'S BIS WINNER is what caught their attention and triggered their interest sufficiently to want to be part of the event by contributing funds. My example was to try and underline that most of us take for granted what is before us, we rarely question we just accept that what is on offer/for sale/charity fund raising or whatever is genuine. I was trying to explain that there was no intention to misinform at the outset but when the logistics came into play the realisation by the owner/organisers that perhaps it would be inadvisable to make the dogs walk the whole way. The humans could choose to undertake the walk whereas the dogs just do our bidding without choice. If there was a switch of dogs for compassionate reasons then I cannot understand why the owner/organisers have not explained what the situation actually was, there is no shame in loving their dogs and wanting to protect them, all they need to do is offer an explanation.

      Delete
  21. I don't understand why Jemima's post has upset some posters here.

    Nobody is talking about jail or fines for Jilly or her people.

    Is it that the poor people recieving the charities view Jilly as a canine Robin Hood? Like "I don't care where the money comes from, just fetch it." If that is the case, then they should be happy about Jemima' walk.

    ReplyDelete
  22. By the logic {if we can call it that} used by some of the commenters here, a mafia don should not be put on trial for any of his crimes if it can be shown that he gave some of his ill-gotten gains to a charity.

    ReplyDelete
  23. So the headlines today: Sex offenders getting let off, freak weather catastrophe, war in the middle east, economic disaster - Yet some lovely chap takes the time and effort to raise over £30,000 for charity and you're all up in arms about it. Get a grip. The PBGV standard is focused on keeping the dog true to type and maintaining its ability to hunt and run. Of course Jilly can easily do the walk. But if she was rested , so what?. Good for them for being humane and considerate. I actually don't care if a 3 legged donkey walked the miles (you lot would undoubtedly have an issue with it) - all I care about, was that money was raised for charity. Nobody's money has been stolen or embezzled. Gavin and co walked every mile. Unpaid. For charity. So Jemima, what have you done today that has made you proud? I suggest you get a hobby.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon 20;02 but I don't believe it was Gavin who was being sponsored to do the whole walk, it was Jilly his lovely pbgv. Hence the title Jilly's Jolly Jaunt, if it was otherwise it would have been called Gavin's Jolly Jaunt wouldn't it? Like anon 22:55 explains, which runner did the run? which dog did the walk?

      Delete
    2. Yeah, I agree. In fact, why does the event even exist if it doesn't matter? The point is that its a charity. What does running dogs have to do anyway with raising money? Its not like people expect anything real about theses things, and what does it accomplish regardless? So the content and false advertisements of a charity event is meaningless, no matter how poorly done or deceptive it is. Its a waste of money in the first place to set up and monitor, that could be better spent giving to the money pool directly. These people that actually care about the events obviously want to give everyone a bad time.

      And these people that comment on this? They are criticizing people on the internet that have no connection to them personally. Getting all up in arms about it is stupid and a waste of time. I suggest they get a hobby, since blogging and commenting on issues they care about is obviously not one, and doing so also is obvious in the assumable fact that they don't have a hobby at all.

      Delete
    3. Sky, not sure what you are saying and whether it is serious or meant to be funny?
      Assuming it is a serious comment, are you saying that you wish to donate some money. Are you saying that this hard earned money has been donated to a charity of your choice, say for child illness/education/safety, and you are assured because you have accepted the advertising at face value that that is where your donation has gone to, but in the fullness of time you find that the money donated actually went towards firearms to kill children in a war zone. Are you saying you would be happy about this, it is irrelevant to the fact that you just wished to donate to charity and don't really mind where the donation ended up? Are you? On a much more simple basis, in this case, nobody is in doubt that Gavin and Co are full of good intentions and that their efforts are beneficial, the only doubt is that they advertised that Jilly was doing the whole walk, hence people contributed because of this fact, but to find later that Jilly didn't appear to have done the whole walk and that other dogs participated. And I am personally in no doubt that I would have done the same thing and quite understand that Gavin would want to protect all of his dogs but in my case I would have told people from the outset that Jilly was going to be around the whole time for people to see and talk to, but not just walking every mile and that her kennel mate would be helping out, if indeed that was the case. We won't know 'til someone from that end of the woods let's us know.

      Delete
    4. Georgina, I'm guessing that what SkyArk is doing is phrasing the other side's comments in plainer English, using other examples so to try to spotlight what a strange idea the other side of the debate is using as the base for their arguement.

      SkyArk, if I guessed wrong then I apologise, and feel free to reply.

      The other side seems to be trying to say that the event itself, Jilly's Jolly Jaunt, is so unimportant to them, that it has no meaning at all, zero, zip, nada.

      The other side then seems to me to be forcibly saying that their point of view is the only correct point of view, that like Robin Hood, how money is taken is not important just so long as their own group recieves it.

      That side is trying to tell us not to look at the event a all, only how happy they are to have recieved the money.

      A point of view not yet stated is that these events are ways to EARN donations, by selling people something they want, like entertainment or watching a favorite compete at something, with the "it's for charity" but being the icing on the cake.

      Obviously, if the interest of donors continues to be abused, ignored, and belittled, then the interest of donors in charity event will wane.

      Some people fail to see the obvious fact, because they view these events as advertisements but they never pay attention to the product side of this, which is the event itself. And they show no interest in trying to understand, only repeating that the money went where they wanted it to go.

      Then they criticise people for complaing about possible fraud, lack of truth in advertising, and deception as a way of getting money.

      Other peple seem to be posting that the media reports of Jilly wlking the whole way do not match with reports that different dogs were used, but that we should not blame everyone involved, as some of those people appear to have been telling the truth all or part of the time.

      Delete
    5. I really wouldn't have expected the dog to do it against the clock!!! i thought they would be walking for however many miles a day and would be stopping off on the way. People who are outraged about the criticism are mainly so because Jemima Harrison is involved. We all know it was well intentioned and it raised lots of money but the fact remains that Crufts BIS did not walk the distance and therefore as a pedigree dog PR exercise it was a bit of a failure on that point alone.
      SHADE.

      Delete
    6. Thanks anon 13:54,hopefully some of the other commentors will understand your words, I do. One of the unpleasant aspects of all of this topic are the really unkind, hostile personal comments towards JH, just because as a journalist in the free world, she has informed the rest of us that there appears to be misrepresentation, intentional or accidental. Freedom of the spoken/written word is a huge privelege in this present state of world affairs. None of us should ever underestimate how fortunate we are to live such a society. Thus the people who have been so rude should rethink their position and take note that JH has not publicly humiliated them, when she could have returned the insults, but kept on line with regard to the topic and tried to persuade the organisers to offer an explanation. I do not know JH, I have never seen or met her and apart from sharing a fascination and love of dogs we share no common ground so there is absolutely no bias in my comments. Once again thanks for your sound blog.

      Delete
    7. Georgina, very well said and I totally agree with you. The personal attacks and speculation on JH are ludicrous. She has done a great job of staying on task. I know I wouldn't be able write off the harsh words and criticism as well.

      Delete
    8. To clarify, I was intentionally showing exactly what Anon 20:02 was actually giving an argument for. I was hoping it would be obvious enough to see the sarcastic fun in it, especially with my first two comments above doing the same. In a way though I think I ended up making it seem very logical in nature by showing their train of thought, if stupid, as we can see here.

      Delete
    9. And yes, the last bit was a fun run of showing the anon's own hypocrisy in getting all up in arms with his comment to this blog, which he says is worthless and a waste of time, and yet he somehow gives it enough value to write all that, wasting his own time.

      Delete
  24. This is a dog blog. Some of the people here have purebred dogs and they wanted Jilly to show that purebreds can be fit for function.

    It is like if every country sent their best runner to a world's best runner event. Naturally you want the runner from your country to win. He does. But then it is found out that four of his friends and he took turns in the run.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My goodness..I have never known so many small minded, ridiculous people, making analogies that are totally non comparable...No one has bothered to listen to Gavin's early statement...in which he explained what would happen on the walk..how come we all knew.....yet you deliberately chose not to..... it is bizarre...and if it wasn't so
      pathetic ..it would be laughable....

      Delete
    2. I think people have listened very carefully too what was said. No one would stick their head on the popularity block again by criticising a charitable effort that was raising money for a sick kids hospital without bothering to listen!!
      SHADE.

      Delete
  25. Whether a fit and healthy dog can walk 130 miles without harm to its welfare, and whether the event actually helped the charities are irrelevant questions. The only issue here is whether the material advertising the walk misleads potential donors as to the nature of the walk.

    There's some irony in the apologists' "ends justify the means" approach, since by that standard what Jemima is doing here would be a great thing. She is raising money for charities, who cares how she does it. How dare you pathetic people criticize a charitable endeavour.

    ReplyDelete
  26. O what a meaningless blog this has become. Going from pedigree health issues to Sherlock Holmes, investigating a crime committed and "Exposing" Jilly's fraudulent walk. How far you have come for sensation. Please prove to this blog forum that the money is embezzled and used for other means than what the charity was set up for. What is it that you want to achieve here? Prove that pedigree dogs can't walk 130 miles?
    Tsk Tsk

    ReplyDelete
  27. If truth does not matter, why hold any show at all? Why not just say that whoever donates the most money wins?

    Oh we can't do that with dog shows because people would enter dogs with unfortunate mutations like flat faces, terrible breathing problems, hips which cause pain and suffering, hunting dogs that look like a silk factory, double dwarfs whose chest rubs the ground when they walk, big dgos whose hind quarters sway when they move, dog with longer lower jaws who can't eat or breath easily, dogs with folds of skin that grow colonies of disease, shrieking dogs with head problems, and many many suffering dogs whose pain is where it can not be seen - in the heart which can't beat right, the back which painfully slips, the mutated biochemistry which disorders the health and mind...

    We must have dog shows to prevent that sort of suffering...

    ReplyDelete
  28. In the dog world video at 2.22 where there is talk about previous Crufts BIS winners joining the walk...they show a photograph of Fabulous Willy. Am I not right in thinking that Dog World reported that he had died a year or so ago? I suppose he would be there in spirit. Can somebody clarify that information for me please?

    We cannot take away the great achievement of raising almost £30,000 for excellent charities...but I was always under the impression that Jilly would be doing the whole walk....it never occurred to me that she wouldn't be doing that. If Fabulous Willy is deceased and he is being used as a marketing tool to promote this event by Dog World I feel that is in very poor taste. And a nice little plug for Yumega too. It seems that lots of people have benefited from this event....

    I wonder if it wasn't an event that started off just small and the PR machine got well and truly oiled taking this into a new direction? Whatever happened....the outcome was fantastic in that the money raised will go to worthy causes....but I do feel the marketing should have been more truthful.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hmm Anon 15:25 I hadn't registered your point re FabWills, but extremely relevant!! The plug for promotion of the products was noticed by me, the pills and the cool coats. One would hope that those companies sponsored heavily for the free advertising and in answer to someone else's blog, how much did they contribute and will the funds received be audited by an independant company, is that what usually happens when huge sums are generated from the public for charity? I don't know. Your final paragraph is spot on.

      Delete
    2. To Anon 1526

      If Fabulous Willy was a Tibetan Terrier, Wikipedia says he died four and a half years go.

      I am writing from a lightweight travel machine which does not get video, open second windows, show Jilly's GPS map, and has a tiny keyboard, so I can't look up stuff and be more of a help, sorry, but thanks to your comment, I did find Dog World's magazine online.

      Their article about JJJ says: "...They were joined at various stages by 18 previous Crufts best in show winners..."

      Since Crufts is held only once per year and has only one BIS winner each year, one dog must be at least 18 years old, one dog must be least 17 years old, and so on.

      And since puppies don't win BIS at Crufts, many of the dogs would be older than that by now. And for each BIS winner who has died, like Fabulous Willy, then one must count backwards one more winner so that they end up with a tally of 18 LIVING Crufts winners - since it is rather difficult to walk a dog who has been dead for more than 4 years.

      Delete
    3. !!!!!! Anon 1818, goodness, the apparent misrepresentation just gets worse! Without your research and logical presentation again this obvious information will have been accepted as correct because the rest of us hadn't thought it through. I will applaud the free press again and again and again.

      Delete
    4. Araki Fabulous Willy died just aged 7. Not sure what he died of, but unless it was due to injury/RTA, that's a pretty poor lifespan for a fairly small dog.

      Delete
    5. 'Vbos the Kentuckian', the Flatcoat which won in 2011 has also died (aged-11), as has the Vizsla 'Hungargunn Bear It'n Mind', which won in 2010 (died aged-9, nearly 10).

      Delete
  29. Margaret Carter19 June 2013 at 15:55

    http://www.dogworld.co.uk/product.php/94849

    "It was fantastic to see so many faces turn up to support us each day,” Gavin said. "The welfare of the dogs was paramount, and at the KC launch we announced that while Jilly would walk the lion’s share with Flo, we would also be taking kennelmates along to relieve them for sections of the walk. -

    Is there a published report of the KC launch anywhere?



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How far is a lion's share? My guess would be 51% Yet I read the walk was in 5 mile stages. That would still make this a fine breed for older people who would never walk more than 5 miles. Did she walk more than 5 miles per day? Did she just show up for photo ops? Did she walk 139 miles? Was the amount walked shared equally between all dogs on the walk?

      The lack of information tells us nothing useful about the walking ability or requirements for this breed, nor how easy the walk is or isn't for those who might want to walk it with their dog.

      Delete
  30. I don't know what Gavin said.

    But I do know that google search turns up oodles of articles or posts saying Jilly was walking 130 or 140 miles. And it also turns up many results which say that she finished that distance.

    Perhaps Gavin should be angry at being misquoted?

    Oh what a fine week this has been for purebred dog. not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I meant, of course, the maybe he should be angry at whatever or whoever spun the story or maybe left out or added to what he said, because if he did mention another dog or dogs taking turns, then why was that not in later articles?

      I mean people don't usually lie about something once they have already told the truth about it, do they?

      This whole media thing isn't making sense to me.

      Delete
  31. Edited to add Dog World article.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Good one Jemima Good one!

    I was having a cup of coffee and a bite to eat when I started thinking about where it said they had 6 weeks to plan the walk. But Crufts was more than 6 weeks ago.

    So I thought "repost". Then I thought "repost from April Fool's day".

    You had me going there, but I knew the stories just were not adding up right.

    That bit about a ghost dog, and 18 other BIS winners!

    If you don' print this, I will know that you are waiting to get more fish in your trap , or am I the last one?

    Ghost dogs!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The media coverage of this event has had its twist and turns, leaving me unsure as to what actually happened.

      At first, everything said it was a 4 day walk - which I find hard to believe. Except for well exercised young adults, how many PEOPLE could have believably walked 130 - 140 miles in 4 days? How could I, not having gone on the walk, know if Gavin walked it or not? My hat off to any of you who can walk that far that fast and take time out for chats and photos, and excuse me if I sound like I'm from Missouri, but I can only say "maybe or maybe not, I don't know if anyone walked the distance or not".

      And NO, I will not accept a GPS on Jilly as proof she, or anyone else, walked that far that fast. But it would be lovely if people did, and if so you must have a fit body.

      Next I read that it was a week long walk. That makes it more believable for me. 5 dogs each walking 5 miles per day, equals less than 6 whole days of walking. Add a little time for media and resting, a week sounds like a good walk time for one person to do 130 or 140 miles - different reports give a different numbers of miles.

      Then I read where someone walked the 5th day of the walk - said to be the last day of the walk where they walked across London. Ah come on people! Was it 4, 5, or 7 days?

      Then I read where 18 past Crufts BIS winners and 7 group winners from this year's show were there. See dogworld at the same link Margaret Carter posted above. It is very near the begining of the article, to the right of the photo.

      Then a few lines latter, below the photo, it says it was various people from these BIS winners who were there. You know how that works - you read it the first time but just skim over where someone seems to be repeating. But they weren't repeating, two sentences in the same article contradict each other.

      I guess to some people a dog wins Crufts, but to other people, a person or team of people win Crufts, the dog is what? a crafft project they did? I don' know.

      And it gets worse from there! Dogworld, again same link, talks about pekes and bulldogs walking - but not how far. It is upliting and nice, but I want hard facts.

      Delete
    2. Brilliant blog 03:49, you've summarised the whole event perfectly, the info, the misinfo, the contradictions, the lies (re 18 BIS Crufts winners attending - an impossibility for some of those gorgeous dogs who have passed on!) etc etc. We all accept that a huge effort was undertaken and that a lot of people are going to benefit from same. That has never been in contention. But the extremely poor, ill thought out promotion is in question. It seems that the beautiful, endearing Jilly accomplished 70 miles of the walk which is a credit to her breeder/owner because to achieve thus means she was in supreme condition.

      Delete
  33. To those who have said it would be unfair to walk a small dog such a distance...a PBGV isn't a small dog, it's a medium sized dog with little chondrodysplastic legs. I think a fit small dog, like a Parson JRT for example, should be able to do that walk. I would not expect a dog with the joints of a dwarf to do so.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Latest Dog World article stating a very interesting couple of quotes:
    "It was fantastic to see so many faces turn up to support us each day,” Gavin said. "The welfare of the dogs was paramount, and at the KC launch we announced that while Jilly would walk the lion’s share with Flo, we would also be taking kennelmates along to relieve them for sections of the walk.
    "When Jilly did miss the odd section she was not happy being left out of the limelight – she’s a diva to the end! Charity was what this event was about, but a clear message was being sent out that pedigree dogs are fit for function – Bulldogs, Neapolitans, Mastiffs and Pekes were all walking freely and happily – and the walk united British dogdom, with new friends made and thousands of memories created.”
    Walkers came from right across England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and Jersey – some leaving home in the middle of the night to join Gavin and Amelia when they set off at 8am each morning.”

    So that's it then, all pedigree dogs are fit for function because a few dogs walked a few miles????

    Do I really have stupid across my forehead????

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. yes!! but for different reasons!!

      Delete
  35. Jemima, you may have seen the blog on Gossip Hound regarding Maisie and Ellie by somebody called Lynn-Alexandria Springer McKendrick, you may wish to respond to it?

    ReplyDelete
  36. Ian you are one of the smart ones, it is just that some other people can't tell a sheepdog from a sheep.

    ReplyDelete
  37. I have read the latest Dog World post from the link Margaret Carter provided above, and I would like to comment on three quotes from the same, all three of which I am in agreement with.

    1. "...it seemed to catch the imagination of the entire dog-showing community..."

    I agree, except I would have typed "IMAGINATION" in all caps.

    2. [JJJ] "...snowballed into an event which will be remembered by the world of purebred dogs for years to come...."

    Oh, I agree, we will remember it for years, but maybe not in the manner in which the sponsors had hoped.

    3. "...setting an example to all show dogs...."

    Yes and to their people too, on the value of clarity.

    ReplyDelete
  38. On the latest Dog World article, did anyone else get a creepy feeling about how much pedigreed dog showers seem to have their own egos linked with their dogs?

    We all love our dogs, but I sense a blurring of ego boundries when "18 previous Crufts best in show winners" must refer to "handlers, owners or breeders of 18 previous Crufts BIS winners" - either that or the ghost of previous BIS winners were seen along the walk.

    ReplyDelete
  39. The most disappointing quotes are IMO about the denial of certain health problems in dogs.

    If breeders will not look right at the health problems in their breed and in their own dogs - and see what is obviously wrong, then they must stop being a dog breeder, because not facing up to the fact that their breed, and their dogs, have a health problem precludes their own ability to work towards a cure.

    ReplyDelete
  40. "...a clear message was being sent out that pedigree dogs are fit for function Bulldogs, Neopolitans, Mastiffs, and Pekes were all walking freely and happily..."

    Then why didn't they call it "High Profile Breeds Hopeful Hike"?

    If they had called it that then we could have photos of Bouncing Busy Bulldogs, Never-drooling Neos, Much-trotted Mastiffs, and Playfully Pulling Pekes - I'd of loved to see photos of those breeds doing even 5 miles a day.

    But the part I don't get - someone please explain it to me - is even if Jilly did walk 140 miles, how would that imply that Pekes are fit???????

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oooh, now that would be something: A sponsored 60-mile walk over 4 days for Pekes, Pugs, Neos, Bulldogs, Boston Terriers, French Bulldogs, and with no ringers. I've reduced the mileage because they're mostly small dogs, even though most terriers and spaniels could do this length of walk with ease.

      Dogs with smashed-in faces are fit and functional? Great. Here's your opportunity to prove it!

      Delete
  41. Saddest of all is this quote:

    "...Many of these were breeds which need a bit of a boost either suffering the indignity of being on the 'high profile' list or through their lack of numbers..."

    Oh yes, dogs SUFFER from the embarrassment of being on a list of those dogs who need help with health problems. NOT.

    But no mention of these dogs who really are SUFFERING with trouble breathing, walking, cooling by panting, or who can NEVER have sex because of the form they were bred to have.

    People have to admit that their dogs have a health problem before they can hope to find a cure.

    Just say it! "My dog has a health problem." "Many dogs in my breed have health problems."

    Dogs are suffering and dying because people will not admit that their dog has a health problem.

    ReplyDelete