Pages

Wednesday, 3 June 2015

KC Chairman ousted... Members revolting




Yesterday, Kennel Club Chairman Steve Dean was booted out after four years in office. His crime? Professor Dean had tried to steer the Kennel Club into the 21st century. The natives, however, are determined to remain in the 19th. 

Dean believed strongly that if the KC is to be taken seriously in the modern age; if it is to enhance its stature after a difficult few years, it should be more inclusive... to be about all dogs, not just purebred dogs.

“This has been our stated mission for many years now, and yet some members clearly believe we should narrow the focus of our efforts to purely the registered purebred dog," he wrote in the June issue of the Kennel Club Journal.

This, said Dean, was an "isolationist approach" which would not allow the KC to speak authoritatively on canine issues "unless members are content to limit our remit to speaking only about health and inherited diseases in the pedigree breeds.

“The world of pedigree dogs has a vast array of experience and knowledge that can be used across the spectrum of dog ownership. The practical skills we bring to the table on breeding, genetics, training, socialisation and husbandry are extensive and form an important part of the public debate on dog ownership.

The KC, he felt "should stand up for all dogs whatever their origins."

But this stance has enraged the diehard show-head purists who simply don't want the KC to have anything to do with mutts. Hell, they even want breeders who produce purebred dogs in non-standard colours to be chucked off the Assured Breeder Scheme.

The KC's recent AGM was marked by a lot of anti-crossbreed, anti-outcrossing, pro-purebred rhetoric. Dinosaur judge Jean Lanning proposed (and won) a motion to review the KC's acceptance/promotion of crossbreeds. She also criticised the acceptance of imported dogs which may contain "alien" blood,  and suggested that recent concern about purebred dog health was a veterinary plot.

As reported in DogWorld:
[Lanning] feels that there are many thousands of dogs who on the whole lead pretty healthy lives if they come from good breeders, but she “finds it sad that a very small elite section of the veterinary profession appear to many of us to be far away in remote ivory towers, often advocating that some of our most cherished pure breeds should be crossed out to a different breed.” 
She instanced horses from the Spanish School of Riding and the Chillingham cattle which have been bred for centuries without fresh blood, and mentioned the plight of the wild cat, whose demise is threatened by interbreeding with the feral cat.

At the same meeting, breeder Pat Brigden raised concern that an outcrossed Irish Red + White Setter had qualified for next year's Crufts, clearly reflecting the concerns of many in the room. Brigden is a staunch opponent of the Irish Setter/Irish Red + White Setter outcross programme which is endorsed by the Irish Kennel Club. She has, apparently, warned about solid red dogs popping up unexpectedly in future generations of IRWS (something that's genetically impossible).

Here, btw, is sneak peek of the second-generation IRWS that's qualified for next year's Cruft's  - one of two outcrossed IRWS to do so in fact. As you can see, he's a very nice, very typical young IRWS.  More importantly, this dog and the other outcrossed progeny offer genetic salvation to a breed that is now horribly inbred and has an unsustainable effective population size.

Dalriach William Wallace - 9mths, second-generation IRWS outcross
But to some people this dog is impure... tainted... a mongrel (irrespective of the fact that there are loads of solid red dogs in IRWS pedigrees because, of course, they all used to be the same breed).  And, boy, there are way more of these Luddites than I feared. A few days ago, this comment appeared on one of my posts about the LUA Dalmatians (if you remember, dogs that descend from a single Pointer cross in the 1970s, seventeen generations ago).

I'll NEVER adopt a Dalmatian who has the LUA Dalmatians in them. They aren't Dalmatians they are crosses! Hence the word "out cross". The breeders are so high and mighty about them too, when it's wrong. Yes breeds have out crosses from 100s of years ago, but not as recently as this. It's wrong. If you want a pointer get a pointer, don't mess around with a wonderful breed.

I try not to swear much here... but really, how fucking thick can they be?

Today, I tend to move in dog circles populated by bright, educated and energetic people who are doing their utmost to marry science with good stockmanship skills in order to breed better dogs, whether purebred or not. Clearly, I have been labouring under the illusion that they are representative of the wider breeder community.

Check out this editorial in last week's DogWorld:
Clearly a great many breeders of ‘pure’ bred dogs feel the KC has gone a step too far in its emphasis on ALL dogs.  
For decades they have coped with the club having a separate list for dogs not on the pedigree register, so they can compete in some of the working disciplines. More recently, they have accepted the club setting up yet another register, for ‘companion dogs’. They accepted the KC getting involved in Scruffts, a ‘competition’ for mongrels, and making it a centrepiece of Discover Dogs, and even going so far as to giving it a high-profile ‘final’ in Crufts’ main ring. They have accepted – often with some reluctance – the KC allowing outcrosses in certain breeds.  
 But now their patience seems to have been exhausted. What was the final straw? Was it just a build-up of resentment, or is it the fact that the Assured Breeder Scheme, which the KC is so keen for leading breeders to support, is also able to encompass those who produce non-pedigree dogs? 
Most can cope with the fact that charities like Guide Dogs, which produce crossbreeds for specific good reasons, can be members, but beyond that it is perhaps a step too far for many.
And thus it has proved. And so it's out with the old... and in with the older. The Kennel Club has been reclaimed by those who believe in purity at all costs and want the KC to be only about pedigree dogs.

The new Chairman is Simon Coryndon Luxmoore - also Chief Exec of the Royal Aeronautical Society. He is - allegedly - a bit of a thug, albeit a reasonably well-bred one. He went to Millfield - a public school best known for attracting those with more prowess on the sporting field than in the classroom.

Somewhat confusingly, he was known until recently as Simon Luxmoore Ball. We duffed up his half-brother, Nigel Luxmoore-Ball, in  Pedigree Dogs Exposed for breeding a horribly-overdone Basset.

In recent years, Luxmoore has dropped the Ball (and him a sportsman!) although his wife still prefers the double-barrel.

Luxmoore is a Siberian Husky man - as is KC Secretary Caroline Kisko. In Sibe circles he is known as Damian to Kisko's Mrs Baylock (the nanny of the anti-Christ child).  The pair co-authored (with Luxmoore's first wife, Sheila, and Caroline's husband, Chris Kisko) a well-regarded book on the Siberian Husky. Indeed, some suggest that this is a an unholy coup hatched up betwixt Luxmoore and Kisko who wasn't happy that Dean was appointed Chair last time round.

Certainly, at the Dog Health Workshop in Dortmund earlier this year, it was Steve Dean who seemed to be embracing reform while Mrs Kisko remained largely impassive. We shared a workshop and in an often lively discussion about ways to improve dog health, Kisko did not speak.  She is a daughter of Mike Stockman, a former Chairman of Crufts, likely rather more steeped in KC culture than veterinary surgeon Dean - although Stockman, too, was a vet.

In the absence of much of an alternative, I guess I've been fairly supportive of the KC recently, feeling that inching reform is better than none and pleased that the KC had seemed to be adopting a more inclusive approach. Dean made it clear to me in Dortmund that he saw this as the KC's future (thus no doubt marking his card further... how dare he speak to the enemy!)

So my first response to what would appear to be a retrograde step was horror. But, actually, on reflection... let them at it. Let them bury themselves in their increasingly irrelevant, isolationist pit while the rest of us embrace the real world. Let them continue to trot their dogs round in meaningless circles in pursuit of meaningless ribbons. Let them continue to throw increasingly ineffective potshots at crossbreeds while show entries and purebred registrations continue to decline. And let them think (because this, apparently is the ticket) that better  PR  - rather than better breeding - will get pedigree dogs out of the hole they're in.

My mate Ryan O'Meara (K9 Media) sums it up perfectly:
"No bad thing. A bit like FIFA. When the choice was between an incumbent who's overseen decades of corruption or a Jordanian prince, one may assume reform could be on the way if the lesser of two evils won - a false hope. As it is, with an organisation so rooted in its insularity they picked the greater of two evils and thus the organisation continues to eat itself. In the long run, this is best. Write them off, witness their demise and continue to promote an alternative view.
"Both FIFA and the Kennel Club would rather the rest of the world just went away and left them to get on with things in private. The problem is, they also want respect, kudos and credibility despite trampling all over such values in a very public way. The fact that Blatter has (clearly) been forced to jump changes little. He was well supported. The people who supported him despite his overseeing abject failure and embarrassment are still there and they still see their organisation through a prism that is completely out of touch with the majority of the real world.  
"As a football fan, I wanted with all my heart for our own representatives to not just talk a good talk but walk it. I wanted them to remove themselves from the process, take a stand and watch others follow. I want the same for the Kennel Club. Those who are tainted by association need to think outside of the confines of an organisation that has repeatedly proven itself to want to paint an image of reform but whose deeds speak to a quite different way of thinking."



76 comments:

  1. You might remember I drilled out that Chris Kisko is a member of the BNP.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow! They really ARE racist and bigoted - it's official! Sad and hopeless little people who can't bear change or progression. They are frightened of what they are not familiar with and are unable to think critically and rationally. Ideological thinking is so bloody dangerous and so tragically misapplied in the dog world. I have had enough now. What can we do though? Petition for reform?

      Delete
    2. FYI The new Mrs Luxmoore is black.

      Delete
    3. WoWow!w! So the new Mrs Luxmoore is black. Really?! What on earth....so please enlighten me, what has somebody's skin colour got to do with their nationality? if she was white and from Africa would that make a difference...?

      I'm thinking we could do 'The Kennel Club' as a sitcom in the style of 'The Office'? It's comedy gold....

      Delete
    4. Um... someone described "them" as racist and bigoted I believe. I think Skin colour would be covered by that statement. Plus of course the mention of the BNP. While it is fine to tackle an organisation on it's policy and practices when you start throwing racism and Nazism into the mix it looks as if you are losing the plot which is I believe that of dog breeding. Perhaps you can explain what racism and bigotry have to do with that?

      Delete
    5. Anon 4 June 2015 10:31
      You do understand that pedigree dog breeding was founded in the eugenics movement? Eugneics was originally used to keep people 'in their proper place'. i.e. Stereotyping and judging people as being to fit to breed according to their race, colour of their skin and other perceived undesirables.

      This cognitive dissonance is applied to pedigree dog breeding - 'pure-blood', 'alien blood', 'out-crossing akin to heresy' etc. and it doesn't take a genius to figure out the warped logic if they vote for the BNP? Have you read any of the other blog posts on here? Pied English Mastiffs are 'deviant' according to the breed club...

      http://indefinitelywild.gizmodo.com/why-breeding-pedigree-dogs-is-just-eugenics-by-another-1692030738

      That excerpt is taken from this book by Michael Brandow:
      'A Matter of Breeding: A Biting History of Pedigree Dogs and How the Quest for Status Has Harmed Man's Best Friend'

      These people are engaged in a perverse ideology that they practice through breeding dogs the way that they do.

      It's a psychopathology. At it's extreme,these people knowingly breed sick and deformed dogs because they like the way they look and choose to reject the evidence that tells them that what they are doing is harmful.

      And, better still the KC will outright reject cross bred or mixed bred dogs (perfectly healthy and functional) because they are not recognised man-made breeds. Or 'pure'. Ironically, evidence suggests that these types of mixed breed dogs live up to two years longer than the average pedigree dog - that's a heck of a significant percentage in terms of dog years.

      Can you see the sickness yet?

      Can you recognise the breedism connected to racism and the warped logic at work here? 'My dog is more superior than your dog because he;s a pedigree. Your dog is a mutt, does not have pure blood and is inferior'.

      We all do it - it's a very fundamental human flaw.

      You can't kid the rational people that it's OK to inflict this and deliberately harm dogs.

      Delete
    6. Anon at 12 57. I definitely can see some sickness! So someone describes "them" as racist bigots and then asks "what on earth does Mrs Luxmoore being black have to do with that". Are you for real?! Here you are fucking lecturing me and you have no clue where I stand on any issue here. I was pointing out that if anyone wants to ride the eugenics/racism pony again the KC will point out that there is a flaw in your argument. Here's a tip for you "evidence suggests" that racism and Nationalism are not the same thing.

      Delete
    7. Racism and nationalism are not the same thing.....

      So the BNP have never had any racist policies or inflammatory ideology based on race then?

      And practising eugenics has nothing to do with racism according to the KC. Well, that's ok then let's just forget anybody dare mention it. Jesus Christ....'alien blood'...I mean what planet are these people on?

      :)

      Delete
  2. Margaret Sierakowski3 June 2015 at 13:32

    Brilliant piece of writing, Jemima and Ryan!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Same as it ever was. Inbred thinking. http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2009/11/fearing-foreign-blood-at-kennel-club.html?m=1

    ReplyDelete
  4. "We are reviewing where we are and what we can offer the membership, but I am mindful that I have inherited a tremendous legacy. Any chance will be measured and well thought-out," he says. "I am cautious, but on the other hand prepared to take the lid off and look inside. We will focus on the good and polish up where necessary." Simon Luxmore 11/09 on his appointment at the RAC

    ReplyDelete
  5. Brilliant post but absolutely abhorrent behaviour. Thick as shit aren't they? 'And like FIFA, it will all come crashing down when the educated and intelligent people start their own pragmatic registry for dogs based on solid science and ethics. It's coming....

    Really you couldn't write this stuff! It honestly would not be out of place as an episode of South Park. Sadly, for some dogs there really will be no hope. It's a travesty.

    Now, where is Chris Landauer.....?

    ReplyDelete
  6. "She instanced horses from the Spanish School of Riding (sic) ... which have been bred for centuries without fresh blood". Completely useless comparison. The Lipizzanner horses at the Spanish Riding School are performance and soundness tested for *years* before being used to produce the next generation; only the stallions most superior in the extreme athletic and temperament requirements of the School are used for breeding. Every mare is tested for soundness, disposition, and trainability by work in harness. Both genders are further tested via their offspring. SRS horses are not judged in "halter", the equivalent of a dog show conformation class judged on what they look like (and how clever their grooms are). Despite all this care in breeding, the Lipizzanners do have some genetic issues, entirely because of the limited gene pool. Limit a gene pool, and you WILL cause issues sooner or later. Combine a limited gene pool with breeding for style and exaggeration of any feature not related to usability and health, and sooner will be NOW and WORSE.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "He who comes too late is punished by life."

    Gorbachev on the ossified East German communist party in 1989.
    And the wall came down just a month later. That comes from that. Thankfully it does.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Oh my Lord....the only saving grace is that most Dinosaur Dog Breeders will soon be of no influence ....good breeders who can see the writing on the wall and have for a good while are leaving in droves...they have no support from the KC or their fellow breeders ...they actually dont want to produce unhealthy dogs, as most breeders dont but they have looked for support and found it a shallow , time consuming, life consuming ...waste of time ! So rather than adding fuel to an ever burning bonfire they give up breeding . The KC will reap what they have sown ....good luck with that !!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Isn't it time to implement Jem's Big Ideas # 1: kiss goodbye to the KC register ???

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah - definitely. Also, human folly and weakness can actually work in our favour here. It will be quite cool for people to have types of dogs not recognised by the KC as an alternative for people who are intelligent enough to understand science and want healthy functional dogs ;)

      Big ideas are great. Implementing them is the challenge...

      Delete
  10. AlphaMare says 'Limit a gene pool, and you WILL cause issues sooner or laater.' I couldn't agree more, but what happens if they keep on in-breeding the line becomes so wek they can't breed any more. So hopefully the inner sanctum of the KC will do the same. You know the old saying 'Give them enough rope and they'll hang themselves. HOPEFULLY

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous, given enough rope, they will continue to hang the dogs they profess to cherish... The problem is rather that the length of the rope is way too long already.

      Bodil Carlsson

      Delete
  11. The problem facing anyone who wants to set up in opposition to the KC is that the general public actually like the concept of breeds. When they see a dog their first question is often "What breed is it?". When you buy a puppy you buy a breed - which tells you the likely size, temperament and abilities of the adult dog, so you know pretty much what you will get. They also like the idea of a "purebred" dog - even though that term is meaningless (unless you are considering crossing a dog with a wolf, say). When you describe your dog to someone who doesn't know it you just tell them the breed - no need to describe the coat, the temperament, the shape of the head, even the colour in some cases. Breed is an incredibly efficient way of describing a dog in very few words, although it does rely on everyone knowing about lots of different breeds. The real trick is going to be to find an easy way to categorize dogs as efficiently as this, but without the need for chopping up the gene pool into ever smaller parts.

    Another problem is that even if you succeed in opening up breeding so any dog can breed with any other unrelated dog, there will still be people who like particular colours or shapes and insist on breeding to try to obtain those colours or shapes -
    and we are back to where we started!.

    Chris R.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Then we re-educate the public and regulate breeding practices.

      Delete
    2. Why don't you re-educate the public now. People will always want pedigree dogs because they like the particular looks or traits of said breeds. Far better to work towards convincing the public how healthier versions of these breeds can be produced.

      Delete
  12. I think you'll find that the general public like "dogs" and don't usually give a flying f*** what breed or make up it is as long as it's healthy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sure that is why when someone sees your dog they say Hey is that a healthy dog instead of Hey what breed is that? People are endlessly trying to discover the backgrounds of their mixed breed dog.They even have DNA test to try to figure it out.But that will not be a problem when Jemima sets up her new registry, will it? All cross bred dogs will be registered only when they are completely health tested for every disease or genetic fault that they may carry. There will be photographs ( heck why not videos) of every dog in the "pedigree" and people can choose which dogs to mix together . All health testing will be mandatory ( vets will like that) and no one will be allowed to breed a dog without a permit and license and degree. Get on it.. we are all waiting. seems like lots of chatter here about what "should " be done but no action.. with the internet it could not be that hard to start your own registry..we have lots of them in the USA. All mouth and trousers here

      Delete
    2. beatuvall, talking through your ass again. Most people who have a dog that is not pure, are not endlessly trying to discover the backgrounds of their mixed breed dogs. Could you actually back up your claim of us mutt owners endlessly trying to discover the background of our mixed breed dogs or did you just make it up for dramatic effect ?

      Delete
    3. For the first, and probably only time, I agree something Bestuvall has said (though my motivation is different from hers): it's time to stop talking and start a new registry.

      Kennel clubs are built on rotten foundations. Ask any architect or engineer how far a lick of paint will take you towards making a structure on such foundations sound. While I’m not for a minute suggesting taking the heat off and abandoning dogs to kennel clubs, sensible, sane, intelligent people have better things to do with their time than banging their heads against a brick wall trying to work with the incorrigibly willfully blind and cognitively dissonant to make their inherently flawed structure stand for a bit longer.

      The model is out there: the KPNV. They have a registry. They are not breed specific but function specific. Their dogs are registered and have pedigrees. They do inbreed to fix traits but they also do true outcrosses to other breeds to get the traits they want. Go back in the pedigrees far enough (and often not too far is necessary) and you will often find that one of the dogs is not like the others. KPNV dogs are tested and rewarded through functionality. Unlike the registries that Bestuvall mentions, which are typically the ones that show people throw out there to 'prove' that any alternative to their chosen organization is even worse, the KPNV is world class – their dogs are in high demand all over the world. More than enough trousers to go around there.

      It can be done. Only Show People think it can’t be done because they are so caught up in their own world and its mythology that they can’t see that there are viable models that could be used to set up something better.

      The KPNV produce police and military canines, not pets, but you can select for any trait you want. Use them as a model. Select for dogs that have the characteristics for work and reward that if that is what you want. Select for dogs that have the characteristics for being a pet and reward that if that is what you want. If it looks like Breed X, register it as Breed X. Simple. If it looks like a cross, register it as Breed X cross. Plenty of people couldn't care less as long as the dog is healthy and temperamentally suits their purpose for getting a dog.

      Create a registry that rewards functionality. If its going to be a pet or used to produce pets, give the dog a championship based on passing a canine good citizen test of some sort and running a simple agility type course: as well as being friendly and temperamentally stable, a good pet should be minimally trainable and able to run a course with a few jumps on a warm summer day without needing to be hospitalized. If you are worried about the breeding for extremes that any kind of championship produces, whether for show or sport, then set a maximum time allowed for the dog to do the course – any dog that goes faster is penalized. Also give a championship based on the slowest time the exercises were done accurately - some people want a slow but trainable dog. That should eliminate the over-the-top breeding for drive in sport dogs if what you want is a nice pet.

      Jemima, you are in a position with your reputation, connections and following to set up something better. Keep up the barrage of criticism – it’s needed - but do something that will make the dinosaurs go extinct – create viable competition: a working dog registry for dogs whose work is to be a pet.

      Please, look into some of the working dog registries as models, especially the KPNV as it is not a registry for a breed but a function, if you will, and think about this.

      Delete
    4. I am not sure why you think Jemima should do this. Why don't you do it? At least get a group together ( there seems to be many like minded people here) and start the registry now. Patrick Burns is on this blog frequently . He could help. I am not sure why you would want to use "breeds" perhaps "types" would be a better model. Breeds are just made up dogs that other people have developed throughout history . Why would you ever want to use such a thing as a "breed'?

      Delete
    5. Bestuval you are spot on. Designer dogs have silly names for a good reason.Cross breeders are under constant pressure to come up with names for their dogs and the first thing you'll be asked if you try a new cross is - "what will you call it". I've just bred a beautiful litter of "Latin Goldenspoodles" ..... dumb name but a wonderful cross. Golden Retriever X American cocker - a sweet gentle medium sized long haired bitch. Crossed to a Poodle X Lagotto Romagnola - medium sized robust sensible dog. The puppies are consistently medium sized, wavy coated, non shedding, normal dog conformation under that coat and heaps of hybrid vigour, also very beautiful - but they have to have a name.
      Can anyone think of a name for a Cavalier KCS X Golden Retriever (with just a touch, 1/16th, working coolie sheepdog) bred to a Lagotto X Poodle?
      I know - eyes will be rolling as most of you read this - but they'll be fabulous pets and some of them will be merle coloured! (yes - they are all DNA & eye screened.)
      Breeds are very useful because they have so much homozygosity that the progeny of a cross are very predictable - if you know coat genetics you can predict the appearance accurately, you can combine complementary breeds to overcome extreme conformation.
      Agriculture traditionally uses crossbreeding to produce animals and plants with superior performance, but if you don't have breeds you can't breed crossbreds!

      Delete
    6. OMG – I agree with Bestuvall for a second time!

      You are quite right about ‘type’ as opposed to ‘breed’ – ‘breed’ is just a made up political definition that really doesn’t hold up under scrutiny.

      A few years ago, the Number 1 Belgian Shepherd in Canada was a Groenendael. Or was he? Mum was a Tervuren. So, the dog recognized and rewarded in Canada as the current ‘best’, ‘purebred’ Belgian Shepherd couldn’t compete in the States because there, he is a mutt/crossbreed/designer dog (choose your favourite perjoritive). Canada recognizes four varieties of one breed; the US recognizes three breeds and doesn’t recognize the Laekenois at all. So, is the Lakenois a breed? Are any or all of them breeds? And what about those black Malinois? Or are they short-haired Groenendaels? Some short-haired black dogs are registered as Mals and others as Groenendaels in working dog registries. The show people won’t have these incredibly beautiful dogs at all though there have always been short-haired black herding dogs in Belgium: the first Belgian breed club was actually for these dogs, not the dogs recognized as Belgian Shepherds/Groenendaels/Tervurens/Malinois/Laekenois today. So black Malinois/short-haired Groenendaels were originally the recognized ‘breed’, at least by some people, but now they are not recognized at all and don't even have their own name.

      So, define a Belgian Shepherd. Define ‘breed’. On second thought, please don’t bother. Who cares? I don’t. 'Type' suits me just fine and always has.

      Delete
    7. Kate .. now you are speaking Jemima language..I suggest GoldenKingLatipoo. all to be call named Chuck.. about the 1/6 the "coolie "
      I think you will have to leave that out as it is a bit racist and God knows we would not want that in our registry.
      Sarah yes lets see all working types together.. all sporting types together all herders together and a free for all breeding program like the one Kate is doing.. sounds fabulous cannot wait to see it up and running

      Delete
  13. Steve Dean a reformer? This is the same Steve Dean who in a Meet the KC public meeting last month closed proceedings by stating that his lifelong dream was to see the erradication of all crossbreed dogs so that the purity of pedigrees would be preserved. At the end of the meeting Caroline Kisko introduced me to her Sibe/Shepherd cross, so it is presumably not her dream.

    Having said that (and yes, I am a Sibe owner), I fear that having a non-reforming Sibe man at the helm will see the breed decline into miniscule poppets trotting round the ring that couldn't even pull a tea tray. At least Luxmoore does agility.

    Perhaps it is time to stop supoprting the KC in any shape or form and let them have enough rope to hang themsleves while the same dog world works to improve the lives of all dogs.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Seriously - he said that? I confess to being surprised as it's not what he's said elsewhere. Could it have been a flippant remark?

      Delete
    2. while ignoring the comment on the cross bred owned by Kisko

      Delete
    3. Bestuvall, do you not see the ousting of Steve Dean as a reclamation of the KC by its core members who want it to be about purebred dogs, and not about *all* dogs? Isn't this, primarily, what the fuss is all about?

      I'm sure Caroline is not the only KC person/member who has a crossbreed (and I'm glad that she sees some kudos in wheeling the dog out in public from time to time - perhaps he's the most people-friendly of her dogs). Even Jean Lanning talked about an "adorable" cross at the AGM - but it was part of a pitch for the KC to not support crossbreeds. Or perhaps you see it differently?

      Delete
    4. Time will tell but in the meantime I see the KC supporting all sorts of dog activities plus funding research for the health of ALL dogs world wide. Also I am not sure why a club should be "all inclusive'. Everyone has the right to breed whatever crosses or pure bred they like ( so far) You have the right to slog them for the pure bred . Why don;t they have the right to exclude crosses? It is not a free for all.. it is a club. If you cannot or will not be a member or supporter and you disagree with their principals start your own club. It is a s simple as that. The Crossbred Kennel Club or whatever with your own rules and regulations of lack thereof. Your club .. your choice. And the comment about Ms Kisko and her "friendly" dog is beneath you or it should be

      Delete
    5. Bestuval - i agree that Jemma was letting her irritation show - but the same thought crossed my mind!

      Delete
    6. bestuvall, a club that lobbies the UK Government to control all dog breeding. If it wants to do that, it will have to be totally inclusive. Just close your eyes bestuvall and think of the revenue. The rosettes and cups can be even bigger. LOL

      Delete
  14. As we have come to expect Ms Harrison is "economical with the truth" a bit of a trademark for her really when she says "although Stockman, too, was a vet." and the fact he was the President of the British Veterinary Association is a thing she chose to omit!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting that you point out that one completely insignificant issue in the whole post rather than concentrate on the welfare issues. It's like adding nothing to the whole debate....that's because you can't refute any of it can you? so you have to try and distract people with tit for tat!

      Delete
    2. The very fact that so many of the posting by Ms Harrison here are full of incorrect information (I will afford her the politeness of not calling them all lies) or she twist things to suit or edit out parts of articles/reports/speeches to fit her own bias points show more about this "debate". The very fact that she describes Mike Stockman as "too was a vet" belittle the great amount of work he did in the veterinary world and the advancement of health for all dog. Val Stockman his wife was also a very well respected and eminent vet. Ms Harrison as the puppet master here allows only things that suit her to be published and cries foul when she is caught out by others, just look at her record and you will see how discredited she is on so many of her "stories". The Ku Klux Klan were the most evil of human society and to show anyone even in a cartoon way as being associated it a nasty thing to do indeed I suspect it would come under Defamatory libel

      Delete
    3. Yet again and again you neglect the actual problem at the heart of the debate. You are just not capable of having a debate actually based on the science are you? Either that or you choose to ignore the evidence presented before you. Jemima Harrison's record? Pretty good from what I can see. Did you miss the fact that her work for PDE was groundbreaking and paved the way for reform? And if you are accusing Jemima of being discredited maybe that might also come under defamatory libel too.

      Delete
    4. So it's nasty to refer to eugenic breeders acting like the KKK but not nasty to deliberately continue to inbreed dogs and cause them unnecessary disease, suffering and premature death?

      Delete
    5. Anonymous 5 June at 10;20 and the KC have never endorsed anything evil or nasty. Endorsing breed clubs that openly promoted and now promote behind closed doors the culling of perfectly healthy pups because they don't conform to breed type and the promoting of breeding siblings together and parents breeding with their offspring are just a few that come to mind. The Ku Klux Klan killed and treated black people them badly because they did not conform to what they thought was truly human, so the KC have a lot in common with them.

      Delete
    6. Anon 19:15, I'm not sure that your statements are correct about such inbreeding these days. I know in Irish Setters the breeders are conforming with COI which is the inbreeding percentage, the lower the number the less likely inherited problems should occur, or so I believe and I think this is backed by the UKKC. I would imagine other breeds are included? HOWEVER, where there is money and breeders find a "perfect format (ha!)" then they will sink to whatever level to win for as long as possible and charge maximum per puppy. Maybe all dogs should be scanned at mating by a vet who independently advises the KC that the dogs named are the dogs used.

      Delete
    7. Georgina, I'm not saying they do it now as the premise in the first sentance of my comment is that the KC have endorsed evil and nasty things and I give two examples of two things that they have openly endorsed, but I should of made it clear that they do not openly endorse such practices now.

      Delete
    8. The KC are still endorsing dogs suffering needlessly from inherited disease burden. I think the time has come to petition the government to get the law changed to forbid these people from continuing in their present form. Uneducated, ignorant and wilfully arogant, the structure is clearly rotten to the core. They seem pathetically determined to continue to regress, not progress. It will self destruct. Hopefully!

      Delete
  15. I will try this again as it seems to keep "getting lost" . The cartoon seen here is just about the same one promoted and advertised by PETA.. the truth will out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep - the truth being that both you and PETA are both one and the same. One extreme to another eh?

      Delete
    2. bestuvall and your comment is the same old tripe. If you can't beat them, then try and discredit them.

      Delete
    3. at least try to be original. PETA uses this comparison all of the time tiresome and redundant.. we get it.. so off now with you to set up your own registry..cannot wait to see it

      Delete
    4. Be careful what you wish for, Jan....

      Delete
    5. not a threat.. not worried about it.. go for it.. but at least try to be sensitive to those in the dog world who are not "white:"

      Delete
    6. You *really* just said that to ME? Very funny Bestuvall.

      Delete
  16. Jemima, how thick can they be? They´re not thick. They´re religious.

    Bodil Carlsson

    ReplyDelete
  17. This is a really sad development for purebred dogs. It’s going to hold back their progress and will be a cause of continued suffering for them. Those who truly see and understand the issues know that crossbred dogs have to be recognized because the only way we can insure the preservation of the vast majority of purebred dogs is by cross breeding them.
    There are so many problems in my breed and many of our judges and breed club representatives are masters at playing them down or have resigned themselves, (and others), to accepting them as just part and parcel of owning the breed. The problems occurring in my breed are occurring in many other breeds that have endured severe genetic bottlenecks. They are the predictable consequences of breeding within the confines of a tiny gene-pool and/or with dogs whose average co-efficient of inbreeding values are already over the inbreeding depression threshold. Some of the effects of being over this threshold include reduced immunity to disease and infections, increased chance of inheriting recessive disorders, shortened lifespan, infertility and/or reduced fertility, bloat, reduced size, and uterine inertia. All these things happen in my breed on a regular basis. It doesn’t have to be this way for them and the scientific community is screaming at us to come to our senses in regards to how we breed.
    It’s incredibly frustrating and truly a crying shame when people who seem to understand so little of the science behind breeding healthy dogs get voted into top positions within organizations that have the ability to achieve so much good for all dogs. The message that only PURE dogs matter and deserve representation is wrong. Most purebred dogs originate from a crossing of breeds and over the last century breeders have relentlessly inbred and line bred to ensure that various lines of crossbred dogs, (today’s purebred dogs), only breed true for the ‘ideal’ look, according to their standards. They have achieved their goals, but a consequence of breeding for a singular look, (and only to dogs within a breed’s stud book, no matter how related those dogs already are to each other), has caused the diversity that was originally present to dwindle to unsustainable levels. This is having horrific consequences. We shouldn’t go on breeding them using this method given that it would be so easy to help them by the introduction of fresh diversity through controlled crossbreeding’s every so often.

    Why can’t we have a new chairman that understands the genetics behind preserving breeds? This should be a prerequisite for holding the top position within a kennel club. Also, NO crossbred dog is less worthy than a purebred dog. If you saw a crossbred dog bleeding in the street would you not help it? In an interview that I conducted in 2007 with David Hancock, the great British author and canine historian, he said, “Dogs are more important than breeds”. He then went on to say, “It’s the progeny that are important and I don’t believe there is any sense in perpetuating a tiny gene pool if you are producing sickly dogs, dogs that are not sound, dogs that don’t lead a long and full life and where you haven’t got their wellbeing at heart.” These words from David have always stayed with me.
    It is possible to maintain breed type while injecting fresh diversity by crossbreeding. If your Kennel Club is forcing to breed pure, just for the sake of breeding pure. Find another registry or keep your own records because it’s not breed purity that really matters.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just a further thought in addition to my reply to Jen above.

      Any new "pro-genetic diversity" registry could promote and sponsor dog shows, but these could be more of a "Dog Fair".... a gathering of the breeds to do participate in a range of activities designed to show the public what each of the breeds can do and to show breeders what dogs are around within their own breeds (wasn't this latter the original purpose for dog conformation shows anyway?). Geez, they could even include conformation "parades" if needs be... no prizes awarded though and no judges, except other breeders looking for additions to their breeding programs!!

      Delete
  18. Brilliant final paragraph.

    Personally, I wouldn't like the see the demise of "breeds", because as Anon above says there is great value in the predictability of breeds....knowing the likely size, characteristics and temperament that a puppy will grow into. The dog loving public are people and a human trait is that most of us want predictability in our lives in as many respects as possible. Adding a family member in the form of a puppy is no different in this respect.

    However, what we need, as you say Jen, is a registry for breeds that freely allows for widening of breed gene pools by cross-breeding. Purely as an example, a litter that is 75% Labrador and 25% something else, can still be registered as a Labrador litter. (I've just pulled the figure of 75% out of thin air. I don't actually know what % would be required for puppies to still retain breed type, but surely science could provide an answer to that?).

    Then, that registry has to insist that the COI of any mating is kept below a certain level. The parent club in my breed offers 6.25% as the ideal maximum.

    Then that registry has to promote itself and its registered puppies like mad across the world!!! It might need to be known as a social movement of dog breeders for change.

    Some "showies" might see the value in such a registry and come on board, but most probably would not, but that would be okay. They could still stick with their out-dated Kennel clubs, as they slid into oblivion. Some breeders might "straddle" both types of registries.

    It's a huge task to set up an alternative breed registry such as described above, but as they say "from little things, big things grow".

    What also needs to be kept in mind is that every animal carries within it, its own burden of genetic disease......no matter what its ancestry. This is just the way of nature. So no dog litter can be promoted as completely healthy... some are just more likely to be healthy, than others.

    PS I am posting as Anonymous, because I can't seem to find how to post as myself. I am Leila and have posted here before

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes exactly.

      I think looking at how commercial livestock is bred these days is quite pertinent. Cattle for meat production. Cattlemen (and woman of course) have no qualms about cross breeding. In fact even pedigree registered cattle for example Angus only need a certain % Angus to qualify as Angus.

      Dogs breeds should be seen as a continually evolving too. Not a stacked pedigree of isolated genes.

      I think though it is of the utmost importance that the public are continually exposed to the issues at hand as in blogs like this one.
      If the KC gets left behind well it gets left behind but we cannot forget the dogs.

      I saw a youngish little Cavalier spaniel yesterday tied up outside the supermarket. It was worried about being left alone and had befriended the sweaty topless body beautiful workers flashing their Calvin Klein undies and chiselled glistening torsos. They were huddled squatting around it prodding its delicate bubble head side to side gently while soothing it with Cantonese sweet nothings. I took one look and rushed back to the car and got an umbrella and some water for it, it was 36%C and 85% humidity not a whisper of a breeze.

      What struck me was how sad this dog was. Its watery eyes were bulging grotesquely, its snorting face looked like a frog and its splayed paws and skinny legs looked like they belonged on a seal. I found it sad but it had this audience of admirers too.
      It just made me realise how important public awareness is, we just cannot take it for granted that everyone can actually see an animals suffering in how it looks.

      So I explained to the adoring crowd using many hand gestures that it was all wrong, not at all all nice for it to look like that, eventually and much head nodding later its carer appeared. Just before the party split up the Filipino domestic worker shooting flirtatious smiles walked off with the sad dog in tow. As delighted as it was to see her at last It couldn't walk very well, having a strange hunched back end, cow hocked shuffle which started with a desperate bum spin as it tried to get itself off the ground.

      It is important not to forget the dogs involved so keeping up the pressure on the KC is still the right thing to do. No living creature should be intentionaly bred to suffer.









      Delete
    2. forget writing on blogs you should be a novelist.. fiction is your thing.. bodice rippers in particular

      Delete
    3. In livestock breeding a "full blood" has no introduced outside blood lines from the point of origin and when building up a herd of a new breed in a new place they can be registered as "purebred" when they reach 15/16th of the new breed. 7/8th is usually indistiguishable from a full blood or purebred.
      This is really only of interest to stud old style hobby breeders these days.
      Good stud breeders now use Estimated Breeding Values or EBVs for their breed so that they can identify superior animals for particular purposes - ease of calving, growth rate, eye muscle area, gestation length ....
      Livestock breeders use studs to access superior blood lines for their particular requirements and catalogs from studs will include a huge amount of genetic information - and breeders will happily crossbreed if necessary.
      ........ wouldn't it be lovely....... if purebred dog breeders actually had meaningful registries full of real information about health & temperament and even conformation.

      Delete
  19. Is there any change of government regulation on this? If the KC does go this way, dogs are going to suffer. If a breed has a significant chance of pain because of genetic faults it shouldn't be bred, in the same way you shouldn't be able to abuse a dog. A law setting a maximum CI would also be simple and effective way to force reform, is there any anyway the UK Parliament could pass such laws?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Thanks for reporting on this Jemima, although it's some of the most disappointing news on the dog world I've seen in a long time. Thick indeed, and definitely stuck in the 19th Century. These pure-breeding, inbreeding ignoramuses won't even let their leaders show them the way, their so stuck in their elitist rut. It's the cynological equivalent of racism, and it stinks. But it's so entrenched, I fear it's going to be harder to reform than we thought.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why? Why harder than you thought ? I just do not understand why all of you bicker and complain about the KC and still do nothing on your own. I encourage you to set up your own club or registry or whatever suits your needs I encourage you to breed all of the crossbreeds and mixed breed dogs you think will be necessary to compete with the pedigreed dog or elite the pedigreed dog if that is your goal. If you think they are in art. build your own road to what you consider to the the healthiest soundest dogs on the planet. What is stopping you? Starting breeding your ideal dogs today .. why wait?

      Delete
    2. bestuvall - interesting that you choose to think people are wanting to 'compete' with the KC by setting up another registry. Are you so entrenched in the shallow show world that you think this is just another vanity fuelled ego trip? Why use the word elite? What has that got to do with anything other than the show world of dog showing where genetic 'purity' of blood lines is a warped human expression of superiority.

      Some people care about animal welfare and that doesn't make them PETA extremists, competitive nutcases or even want to start breeding dogs themselves. They just want to see a better system that puts welfare at the heart of breeding dogs.

      What makes it hard is people like you who trash it and see it as competition and not collaboration.

      Delete
    3. bestuvall, I'm doing my own thing and don't give a toss about the KC, but I do give a toss about dogs. Don't want to be elite.
      What pisses me off about the KC is they think they speak for the dog world, when in fact they should stop pretending they give a flying fuck about any thing other than pure breeds.
      They pay lip service and think they do enough good to outweigh the bad, a bit like old Jimmy Savile because I'm doing loads for charity it counter balances the bad and that is why so many turned a blind eye to what he was doing.
      The KC should be true to itself and declare that all it truly cares about is purity, but unfortunately beauty parades are not cheap things, so the KC needs revenue, so to get that it has to play the, we care about all dogs card, when it does not and that really pisses me off.
      Hopefully this change of management will see the KC be true to itself and bestuvall you can trot off in to your wonderland of purity, in the knowledge that purity is all safe and warm with the KC. The KC is coming home, bestuvall get ready to greet it with open arms. Lol

      Delete
  21. But we crossbreeders need your purebreds Bestuval! If you keep going the way you are they'll all be extinct in 50 years and then where will we get our lovely predictable inbred genetics from?

    ReplyDelete
  22. I think your writing is brilliant and your insight is phenomenal on this issue but I think the KKK parallel drawn at the end is unnecessary. I understand your passion for this issue but I sincerely hope you can understand why African Americans who still struggle with racism in America today would find the comparison of a dog club to a militantly white supremacist organization.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Racism is not confined to america and african americans. Remember WWII? Cambodia and Indonesia in the 1960s? What about Rwanda? Oh, and don't forget Europe in the 1990s with the atrocities that occurred in the former Yugoslavia. Yes, the KKK was specific to african americans and the horrific prejudice, suppression and downright inhumanity of people towrads other people with a different colour of skin but this is not the point. The picture uses racism as an example of when human's apply warped logic to a belief system. it often has dire consequences. It's just an example of extreme ideology...

      Racism is a form of cognitive dissonance prevalent in human beings at different rates, the effect of which is dependent on the culture of where they inhabit the planet, their education and their ability to think critically and rationally. Judging a dog on the basis of it's breed? On the way it looks? Forbidding to register dogs who are not pureblood? Forbidding people to cross breed in case they introduce alien blood to their line? Referring to certain types of coloured dogs as deviant? Doesn't that sound a bit silly and a little bit dangerous within the rational world of welfare, science and ethics? Taken to it's extreme, which it has done, has produced disastrous consequences for dogs.

      The reference to the KKK and choosing to be upset by it feeds into all that unfortunately. You choose your own reaction to that. To me, it illustrates perfectly what is so utterly immoral and screwed up about the KC. It s a belief system. A religion and it's bonkers. It IS supremacist, or at least tries to be, as it judges people and their dogs based on really bad eugenics. It's people who breed dogs. You are excluding both people and their dogs based on genetics.

      Delete
    2. I wonder if there was a survey of KC/breed club members and people who show dogs in the UK, how many would be white British middle class and voted UKIP or BNP?

      Just curious...

      Delete
    3. Racism isn't unique to America but the KKK is an American organization. Comparing the suffering human beings had at their hands to the suffering on dogs may be an apt metaphor but it still dehumanizes African American suffering.

      Delete
  23. They are Death Eaters. Obsessed with pure blood.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Anon 06:07

    I believe there are legal grounds to challenge the K.Cs .
    Their ruling that members must not breed out side of the registry should be seen as ruling against fair trade practices.

    It can certainly be shown to be antagogistic to breeding that takes place outside of their own registry on many levels.

    While forcing a change on that ruling may not seem what you are after, It would , over time, alter the culture that is currently favoured within.

    I don't believe more regulations or registries are what is required, but rather common expectaions of value. This ruling forever divides the species into camps that can only ever support goal limmited to their own personal values for the species.

    We need common expectations for the future evolution of a species, Not groups divided into many fringe groups promoting purposes that don't take into account the demands of the whole environment, because thats what determines success of a species.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Chris 00:34

    No, You would categorise dogs in a new registry according to purpose. More than one if waranted.
    Then you are able to promote value and a desire to education to maximise that value. Community driven and sustainable,reflecting the foundations of domestic dogs.
    That way, there is room for pedigree breeders, cross breeders, working breeders and any other that evolves, as long as there is purpose and value to the dogs being bred that offers value to the community and is enforced by community expectation.
    Community expectation is then , finaly, able to evolve freely again in a way that is inclusive.

    Domestic dogs evolved to be a highly successful species when its development was driven by whole community demands.

    It started to fall apart when K.C rules divided the species and community expectations for it. The ruling against cross breeding seeks to claim responsibility for the species with out taking any responsibility for meeting the demands of the species environment.

    The two are inseparable. There is one species-domestic dog. The demands being made by that species environment can not make distictions on type, unless it is to rule them out as unsuccessful.
    Untill that ruling is removed, restictions and legislation is the environments only available solution to antagonistic elements

    ReplyDelete
  26. Luxmoore was the kingpin and chief motivator of a massive split in the Siberian Husky racing scene back in 1996. A successful series of races organised by a collective group of race organisers decided to ban any Siberian with the 'zero' line within its 5 generation pedigree. This rule still stands today and is enforced by BSHRA. Luxmoore and his followers (he was infamous in the Siberian racing scene for always having a clique around him-mostly consisting of women)was getting beat by superior racing teams who had this line of dog, so very suddenly they banned them, thereby creating a split that irreversibly damaged the sport. So not only us he a ' pure breed man' he is actually a 'selective pure breed man' and woe betide anyone who does not agree with him. He will give you the silent treatment and order his ever present clique to do the same. He will damage the Kc and make it ever more irrelevant- a good thing I am sure, but he will use his corporate contacts to fight the good fight against all that he disagrees with. Those who love dogs, and not just purity of dog blood will need to keep a look out. Don't trust him. Incidentally, please do your research on the above mentioned zero ban. It was an unbelievable series of events. Kisko is a recent BSHRA champion and was/is a leading clique member since the early 90's......

    ReplyDelete
  27. I think you are correct in your view that by exclusion, the KC will implode. Take horse breed clubs for example. Even in the horse world, where blood might as well have dollar signs attached to it... outcrosses are not only allowed, but celebrated! Take the Appendix Quarter Horse Three Bars... almost every champion Quarter Horse can trace back to Three Bars... he was seen as a "Mutt Horse" at the time... but now his name in a pedigree is a badge of honor!

    "The first Thoroughbred bloodlines brought into the American Quarter Horse Association were not welcomed by all the board members. They decided to bring in Three Bars because he fit the conformation description of a Quarter horse. He was small for a Thoroughbred and met the requirements. His bloodline is used as a foundation bloodline to the Quarter horse." http://www.americanappendix.com/appendixbreed.html

    If horse breeders, known for staunch adherence to pure bloodlines, can not only accept, but raise a mixed blood horse to fame... Why can't the KC? Quarter Horses and Thoroughbreds are still very distinct breeds of horse... but the occasional inclusion of an Appendix is not frowned upon, and often encouraged, in order to promote healthy, robust bloodlines.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've never seen the use in a horse which is purposely built with its back end dramatically higher than its front end. In my opinion it's a freak a fully intended downhill freak as much as a show bulldog is with its overly squashed face or a French bulldog is with buckled down front legs.



      Delete