tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post8668016713523226865..comments2024-03-20T17:32:35.238+00:00Comments on Pedigree Dogs Exposed - The Blog: Goodbye GeorgeJemima Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05092892697145388048noreply@blogger.comBlogger118125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-51696483999380017022014-05-21T17:22:19.406+01:002014-05-21T17:22:19.406+01:00Yes, that is a little ironic given that it's a...Yes, that is a little ironic given that it's actually my copyright. Ah well. <br /><br />JemimaJemima Harrisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05092892697145388048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-75059729567252519722014-05-21T17:18:29.540+01:002014-05-21T17:18:29.540+01:00I can't watch the video. Ironically, the error...I can't watch the video. Ironically, the error message says BBC Worldwide have blocked it on copyright grounds...Frannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-78831214246984344712013-11-22T13:45:58.978+00:002013-11-22T13:45:58.978+00:00Too young! Toy breeds should live to at least 13! ...Too young! Toy breeds should live to at least 13! My (pedigree) bearded collie is 13 yrs 2 mo and is fit for fight. She has never been sick in her life. No aging problems showing in either joints or skeleton (her vet is thrilled), and she constantly fools people that she's 1-3 years old. She also swims 600 metres per week without getting tired... only thing age related is that she now is almost deaf. All her closest relatives have died at age 16-17.Linux the Beardiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11778824029773468994noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-31515255858220296362013-05-29T16:22:51.915+01:002013-05-29T16:22:51.915+01:00Yes, and I have done the very same so can't di...Yes, and I have done the very same so can't disagree, however, the genetic pool bank in the puppy who may not be good enough for the "beauty parade" aka showing, is still valid. I accept that the puppy may have developed a physical, undesirable, trait i.e. over/under shot, hd, epilepsy, entropian etc etc that may not manifest itself until age 2, and in the event that this was the case, to breed from the dam again would/should be undesirable unless the next litter was sired by a totally unrelated dog from the first litter and the COI is very low. But in the main, providing all was well physically with the next generation, then I would definately advocate restraint and just have one litter per bitch.Georginanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-22784561569285757042013-05-29T14:25:31.433+01:002013-05-29T14:25:31.433+01:00Georgina, you say "To breed a litter for a pu...Georgina, you say "To breed a litter for a puppy to show, one does not need to breed more than one litter from a bitch, the next litter should be two years later from the puppy kept for showing. Simple."<br /><br />In fact it's not quite that simple because you might not know for a year or so whether the sire and dam's genes have combined well for the retained puppy to be worthy of breeding from in her turn. You might know sooner but often you have to wait until the pups are adult. It's usual to breed another litter from the bitch but using a different sire to get a different selection of genes to increase the chances of one good enough (bearing in mind that only a small proportion of dogs/bitches are suiable for breeding) to continue a line.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-89972727598826891272013-05-28T13:40:29.551+01:002013-05-28T13:40:29.551+01:00Mmm, Jess, the main problem about breeding too man...Mmm, Jess, the main problem about breeding too many litters from one bitch/stud dog is because the effect it has on the genetic pool in any one breed, hence the suffering and misery caused to many puppies and their unsuspecting new owners.<br />There can never ever by a justification for overbreeding - none. Dog breeding is a privilege and the effect humans can have on another species and currently in the UK it is now proving to be catastrophic. Bearing in mind outside influences i.e. feeding products from an "unknown" source aka, horse meat being found in human food sold by major supermarkets in the UK, drugs fed to poultry/livestock, none of which can be monitored by you and me or anyone else outwith that industry. We buy dog food and hope that 90% of which details as ingredients is accurate and harmless to our dogs. So in order to breed good quality, happy, healthy puppies everyone involved has to be much more circumspect with their plans. The frequent breeders are farming their dogs, no question. To breed a litter for a puppy to show, one does not need to breed more than one litter from a bitch, the next litter should be two years later from the puppy kept for showing. Simple. Otherwise if one were to state that they had a waiting list for puppies, then they are trading, breeding to demand, the puppies are stock just like goods in a shop. That is running a busines, that is farming puppies. Stud dogs slightly different, but for the health of a breed there should be constraints by his owner not to be tempted to take the stud fee, but remember that if he sires two or three litters (subject to breed but proportionate to that population) thirty puppies could be bred and the spread of those genetics should be used intelligently if those puppies are bred on. I'm sorry Jess but on the whole I disagree with much of what you have said because it opens the door to those who are less diligent and respectful of their dogs who would see your words as a green light to breed, breed, breed. For the international/worldwide population of dogs a high percentage of those dogs who have unbearable, cruel, wickedly painful lives, the dogs who share our lives are fortunate, in the main, and we are lucky to have them, but don't be disillusioned that what you do, you decide, you create just affects you and your local neighbourhood, no Jess whatever anyone of us does these days in a hugely shrunken world affects us, humans, and other species too. I too do not advocate legislation but health data bases set up without fear of litigation, containing honest, voluntary facts by the breeder is all that is needed, the database being maintained by an independent body to avoid malicious input. The only way a person would be deemed a bad breeder would be by their own hand if they consistently breed sick puppies. The only bit of legislation I would suggest would be that to register puppies with the KC the breeder has to voluntarily update their health information. The main problems with dog breeding are HUMANS, because of their lack of honesty, morality, intelligence and integrity.<br /><br />Georginanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-32852034480061234002013-05-28T08:53:03.612+01:002013-05-28T08:53:03.612+01:00It may be different in the USA, but in the UK, I d...It may be different in the USA, but in the UK, I don't know of an insurer that lists average insurance costs by breed. Most people don't tend to check the premium for a breed until they've bought the puppy. It's too late for it to be a deterrent by then. Frannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-55394047385198992542013-05-28T08:26:00.080+01:002013-05-28T08:26:00.080+01:00OK Jess, you can state your point without eating m...OK Jess, you can state your point without eating me alive. <br /><br />In the UK, breeding back-to-back is frowned upon by the KC (read their 'registering your litter' blurb), and yes, it does strongly suggest that person is a puppy farmer. The reason why it's so frowned upon, is that it's fiendishly difficult to distinguish who is a reputable breeder and who is just breeding for the money and without care for the puppies they produce. Therefore, the more litters produced, the more likely that person is to be seen as in it for the money. <br /><br />There's also those breeders who do most of the right things, but then still breed dogs with COIs pushing 25% and 30%, just because they want to win in the showring. There's also plenty of BYB who can appear perfectly bona fide until you've bought the puppy and then they don't want to know. This is why I was trying to find some way of distinguishing 'good' from 'bad' breeders. All I was trying to do was make it easier for people to find a reputable breeder. <br /><br />In the Whippet breed, it is the pet breeders who are keeping the average COI down. Most of the show bred dogs have COIs over 15% (over 10 gens) and many are pushing 25%. If you would like to check this for yourself, pick the results of any recent champ show and look up the COIs of the dogs on The Whippet Archives (under pedigree analysis). When I was looking for a puppy, I checked all the ABS breeders near me and the COIs of their litters instantly put me off wanting a puppy from them. (Again, this can be checked on TWA, by looking up ABS breeders and then doing a search for the breeders' names on TWA.) If I don't want a puppy with such a high COI, then that severely restricts me to a small handful of show breeders, which I may not know about, and/or they don't breed very often. Or I turn to the pet breeders, most of which don't heart and eye test (not that many of the show breeders do), and probably don't know anything about any health problems in their dogs' pedigrees. Of course, there could be really good pet breeders out there, but it would be hard for me to tell who's good and who's just a BYB. It's easy for breeders to answer your questions in all the right ways. <br /><br />I'd be happy with something akin to the Finnish database, which would make it far easier to sort through all of the breeders and find a puppy based on whatever criteria I might be looking for. <br /><br />I definitely don't want legislation either, in case you thought I did, but I have a nasty suspicion that because so little has been done to stem the tide of poorly bred dogs, we're going to get it anyway. If it's anything like the DDA, it's going to be a disaster, that will then take decades to repeal. I'd far rather have a database of breeders instead. Frannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-38599296413706053262013-05-27T22:35:31.961+01:002013-05-27T22:35:31.961+01:00This statement is arbitrary, Fran:
"I meant ...This statement is arbitrary, Fran:<br /><br />"I meant using the same bitch 3x in 2-years"<br /><br />There are many reasons why a bitch may be bred three times in two years, or on three heats in a row. She may be of a breed that regularly has only 2-4 pups per litter. She may not produce the desired sex or type of pups wanted for the breeders own program. Pups can get sick and die. She may have a singleton. Or a combination of factors.<br /><br />Here in the US it is considered a perfectly okay practice for a bitch in good condition to have back to back litters. It is recommended by the repro vets here. In the UK, this practice is anathema, a sign of a puppy farm.<br /><br />If you're going to be subjective and arbitrary about what numbers of litters for bitch is okay, either back to back or during her lifetime, then what else are you going to be subjective about? <a href="http://cynoanarchist.wordpress.com/2012/01/17/unintended-consequences-or-why-i-wont-just-shut-up/" rel="nofollow">All that subjectivity has gotten us into a passel of trouble with dog breeding laws here in the US. </a> It's the same in Australia; some of the current proposed legislation there states that a bitch can't be bred after age FIVE, which is stupidly arbitrary. Large sighthounds are commonly bred after five; my next litter is planned with an eight year old bitch.<br /><br />The problem is that you and Georgina are taking quantifiable, objective items, also known as facts, (number of litters, health tests) and loading them down with YOUR moral baggage (how many litters is too many, for one bitch, or one breeder, bitches being unsupervised during birth, which market to produce puppies for, etc.) Why, I just recently watched a breeder on a message board, based in the UK, get excoriated for a) having two litters at one time (common practice) and b) one of them was an accident (shit happens.)<br /><br />If you conflate your specific moral considerations with the objective facts, you WILL HAVE PROBLEMS. It is an objective fact that I produce crossbreeds. <a href="http://cynoanarchist.wordpress.com/2010/10/31/today-on-as-the-dog-world-turns/" rel="nofollow">There are many, many people for whom that qualifies me as Bad Breeder.</a> <a href="http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/2013/05/health-testing-in-dogs-is-limited.html" rel="nofollow"> Even the concept of 'health testing' as a litmus test for 'good breeders' becomes questionable.</a><br /><br />The Finnish database is not a 'bad breeders' log, any more than the OFA database is a 'bad breeders' log. There is no stigma or judgement attached to the *facts* in the database. This is an entirely different proposition than a 'bad breeders' log which would 'out' 'bad breeders' according to their practices, some of which are being interpreted in an entirely subjective manner.<br /><br />Let me just put it this way: if *I* appeared on the Bad Breeders According to Fran site, over some subjective bullshit like breeding a bitch on two or three consecutive heats, or breeding what Fran considers to be too many litters, or for skipping a health test that Fran feels is important but that in Objective Reality Land doesn't really tell me anything in regards to future health for that dog or its offspring, YOU BET I'D SUE (if I had the cash. Most people don't. I didn't, for instance, sue the idiot that wrote that article libeling me in the SGHC magazine.)Jesshttp://cynoanarchist.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-28168161275203031362013-05-27T19:44:25.314+01:002013-05-27T19:44:25.314+01:00Jennifer, I certainly look forward to anybody bein...Jennifer, I certainly look forward to anybody being sued for libel on the grounds you named - making correct information accessible to the public. So I decide to breed my poor dysplastic or never-had-an-X -ray bitch every time she is in season for two years running, and incidentally increase my income by selling the puppies to people who may never have heard of dysplastic hips, while I praise my practice as good because the bitch will then have lower risk of pyo or mammary tumours when I "rehome" her. So, Fran starts a blog and tells people that´s what I do, stating the facts correctly, so that people have a chance to decide where they want to buy a puppy. And you will then decide to sue Fran for libel? Ever thought of sueing the Swedish KC open registries for that? Might be a buck to make, because there is plenty of info to be found here :-)... By the way, the very suggestion of using a bitch in breeding for all she´s worth, and then when she is past being useful to me, "rehome" her to thank her for her service - THAT must be libel. Of any decent breeder. Bodil Carlssonhttp://collievaenner.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-21433158467236056562013-05-27T13:29:43.138+01:002013-05-27T13:29:43.138+01:00Fran - sorry to hear that. Genuinely, because if a...Fran - sorry to hear that. Genuinely, because if a COAPE qualified person advises that, the future for the dog is truly bleak indeed. Who else is therefore going to help the dog? Euthanasia?<br /><br />True dog aggression can arise for a number of reasons, but as you are probably aware, most aggression stems from fear. Usually due to poor handling and lack of appropriate socialisation. De - sensitisation and counter conditioning, working under threshold help, in the vast majority of cases. As does BAT. But not if the new adopter isn't prepared to put in the months or years of leg work it usually takes to allow the dog to become confident and to give the dog some space to learn to make more appropriate decisions. A dog to become 'rabid' at the end of a lead sounds like the dog perhaps had failed to alert you with body language before hand? If so, then dogs like these are ticking time bombs and deserve to be in the hands of people who truly understand what it takes to help them. They should not be given to people who clearly have stated that aggressions is beyond their remit.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-43626121514272900722013-05-27T11:29:22.235+01:002013-05-27T11:29:22.235+01:00"However, a dog - dog reactive problem is a t..."However, a dog - dog reactive problem is a treatable and manageable situation in the right human hands."<br /><br />Maybe, but the COAPE dog behaviourist we sought help from, advised us to take him back - clearly she didn't think it was such an easy problem to treat. She was convinced the rescue had lied to us. To not tell the potential owner of such a serious problem is downright dishonest. There is a world of difference between getting a rescue dog and knowing that the dog has a problem, so you can be prepared. Rather than being told 'it's your fault', when the dog turns rabid on the end of the lead and will bite any dog that comes within biting distance.<br /><br />We found out more accurate information from one 5-minute phonecall to the vets, than the rescue were able to tell us after having him for a month. They had his old vaccination card (so clearly him coming in from the pound was also a lie!), so why couldn't they have phoned the vets? <br /><br />My previous dog wouldn't go for a walk when we first had her, as she was too scared. We worked hard to overcome that, which included getting up at 5am to walk her when there were no people and dogs around. I am not the kind of owner to just give up on a dog for no good reason. Aggression is beyond my remit though and we specifically told the rescue we didn't want an aggressive dog. <br /><br />Frannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-13807179829503189242013-05-27T01:34:38.351+01:002013-05-27T01:34:38.351+01:00It depends on your policy. With VPI pet insurance ...It depends on your policy. With VPI pet insurance you need to get the most expensive policy if you want to have coverage for chronic conditions. ASPCA pet insurance only covers hereditary and congenital conditions at level 3 and 4. Trupanion insurance and PetsBest insurance don't cover pre existing conditions. Either way most pet insurance has maximums after a certain amount you have to pay out of pocket for whatever it is you get for your pet.<br /><br />It really depends on the insurance and your policy, that is what really determines how much you pay and/or what conditions are covered.<br />We probably will go with petplan insurance since both dogs had shown symptoms of their pre-existing conditions. Brandi has allergies both environmental and food related and Bear has food allergies and luxating patellas in both his back knees. Brandi is Most Likely a Carolina Dog and Carolina Dog are definitely NOT KNOWN for having health problems since they haven't been domesticated long enough for people to screw with their genetics.Dogs Living +Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14020471845692733005noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-23986357718298513532013-05-26T18:20:09.758+01:002013-05-26T18:20:09.758+01:00Yes Jennifer, but if information was supplied volu...Yes Jennifer, but if information was supplied voluntarily for the benefit of all breeds as outlined in my response to Fran, there is no litigation possibility whatsoever. Obviously anyone deliberately identified unfairly would have a case, but on the other hand someone who deliberately breeds substandard puppies who cruely suffer and that cause their new owners a great deal of sadness and expense is leaving themselves open to deserved litigation. In this age of trading standards and the rest of the EU piffle there will be increasing numbers of court cases against these dreadful, cruel people. The puppy farmer in Ceredigion who has just been licensed for 78 breeding bitches is shocking, sickening. It isn't just 78 bitches, think of the hundreds of puppies that will be produced in a short period of time, and whilst those puppies are being born, the number of bitches whelping without assistance or kindness at the same time is deplorable. Say 10 litters being born in a week, how are they being managed and helped, how many knowledgeable people employed to help the bitches if there is a problem, can you imagine the suffering and anxiety for all of those dogs, I have written to the Ceridigion council outlining my real and true concerns for the bitches but have had no response. Breeding so many puppies when there are so many dogs in rescue worldwide, the barbaric cruelty is sickening I'd advocate a lot less breeding and a lot more care and concern for the dogs in our care i.e. worldwide awareness that dogs/animals have a right to be respected and have a quality of life.Geroginanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-16186638104696461662013-05-26T18:06:20.622+01:002013-05-26T18:06:20.622+01:00Poor Fran, I hear what you are saying. I have bee...Poor Fran, I hear what you are saying. I have been advocating a Health registry breed by breed, administered by an independant body to avoid any malicious input. But publicly, easily accessed by whoever and all. All information supplied would be litigation free and would be considered for the whole, entire, complete benefit of the breed, not the owners. So if an owner/breeder breeds honestly and fairly the whole world can see their record and they become a good breeder if there are few problems and obviously more problems indicates a bad breeder. The facts will speak for themselves, even if the "good" breeder breeds a litter that are sadly affected by some illness/disability. But that breeder will realise what has happened and will use every endeavour to avoid a repeat. The "bad" breeder won't care less what he/she breeds just as long as the money keeps pouring in but, of course, in a very short period of time, their records will disuade future puppy purchasers, stud enquiries from buying/using their stock. Eventually the "bad" breeders will either die off because of lack of income or they will realise that to survive they have to breed and be kinder to their stock. Simple? I don't know why other contributors have to become rude and unkind when the fact that everyone logging in has an interest and care for dogs. It is much better to unite and share for the common good of dogs all ideas and experience.gnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-90947638363386018692013-05-26T14:09:16.542+01:002013-05-26T14:09:16.542+01:00Jennifer, in a rational society (of which we don&#...Jennifer, in a rational society (of which we don't live), racism, homophobia, etc, wouldn't be an issue, because people would not base their assessment of people on arbitrary principles like skin colour, or sexual preference, rather they would base their dealings with people on rational principles of trade, i.e. whether the person was honest, had integrity and was offering an item of genuine worth to that person. <br /><br />If an irrational person didn't buy an iPhone from Steve Jobs because they thought he was a hippie, well really, that's their loss. Others would decide whether the product was good based on rational, reality-based principles, directly related to the quality and user-experience of the product. <br /><br />If a company decides not to hire a brilliant engineer because of the colour of his skin, in a rational world, he'd be snapped-up by a company that hires people based on their ability to do the job. The company that hires people based on their skin colour has lost-out. <br /><br />The problem, of course, is that people aren't taught how to reason, so still base their decisions on stereotypes.Frannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-57514248178311617132013-05-26T11:27:03.322+01:002013-05-26T11:27:03.322+01:00Fran - some, not all, can twist the truth in their...Fran - some, not all, can twist the truth in their use of language. Working with someone who advises a well known organisation on dogs, allows me to see how sometimes the use of language can be critical when it comes to interpreting behaviour. 'Grumpy with other dogs' actually means will rip a dog's throat out when challenged etc. The temperament testing while a dog is stressed and in a shelter may not reflect the true nature of a dog. Fostering or having a trial period before adopting should always be advised and encouraged, particularly for dogs with behavioural issues. <br /><br />Also, it is critical to understand that labelling a dog a certain way rather than describing the behaviour in context is neither helpful to the dog or potential owner. Or for formulating a structural behavioural treatment plan. So a rescue organisation worth it's salt probably won't use aggressive as a general label on any dog because they really shouldn't be allowing truly aggressive dogs to be adopted out in the community. However, a dog - dog reactive problem is a treatable and manageable situation in the right human hands. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-53539642802871699152013-05-26T11:01:50.098+01:002013-05-26T11:01:50.098+01:00Say you believe homosexuality (or interracial marr...Say you believe homosexuality (or interracial marriage) is immoral and publish a list of businesses run by homosexuals (or mixed race couples), with the explicit intent of causing people to boycott those businesses. You deserve to be sued for defamation, and you will be. You can probably get away with publishing a comprehensive data set that happens to include sexual preference (or breeding statistics). But designing material explicitly to defame based on your own sense of good and evil is walking into a legal minefield with a lot of live mines.Jenniferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14389321571689128858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-1372461201785274452013-05-26T07:38:48.966+01:002013-05-26T07:38:48.966+01:00Why are they arbitrary Jennifer? How are the resul...Why are they arbitrary Jennifer? How are the results of health tests, age of death, and diseases afflicting the offspring, arbitrary?<br /><br />Frannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-79300536925745354102013-05-25T23:28:17.590+01:002013-05-25T23:28:17.590+01:00They already pay out in the form of higher premium...They already pay out in the form of higher premiums.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-14026080282927899542013-05-25T22:04:41.047+01:002013-05-25T22:04:41.047+01:00Popular sire syndrome usually involves a stud bein...Popular sire syndrome usually involves a stud being used hundreds of times, and showing up ramified through a breed for as long as you can follow pedigrees. The 'Wycliffe Effect' in standard poodles is a classic example. See, eg.<br />http://www.dogenes.com/poodle/wycliffe.html<br />Or go to the Borderwars website and read about inbreeding in border collies and tollers. See, eg. http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/2011/10/pedigree-collapse.html<br />Please name even one geneticist with publications the in peer reviewed literature who advocates only one mating for each dog and bitch.<br />If you read the literature on genetic problems in pedigree dogs, you must have heard some advocacy of outcrossing. Outcrossing will do nothing if the outcrossed lines have very few progeny. It may seem paradoxical, but unless good, health-and-temperament focused breeders produce more puppies than they do now, there will be no improvement in the average health condition of pedigree dogs. For breeds, like the pug, where exaggerated physical traits have become the rule, it's going to require systematic (to avoid inbreeding), but heavy use of quality breeding stock . . . outcrossed if that turns out to be necessary. Having one fine, free-whelping bitch turn out one lovely litter of pups and then retire is not going to cut the mustard.<br /> <br />Breeding a bitch 3 x in 2 years (ie, back to back breeding) -- provided the reasons behind the matings are sound and provided that the bitch is not bred before she is mature and pups are given excellent care -- could be a good thing. Back to back breeding actually reduces the risk of some diseases, such as pyometra, endrometriosis, and breast cancer. Sure, without good diet it can lead to decalcification, but there is little or no risk with a good diet and exercise. Please provide one reason why it is immoral. <br />Anon 15:25 It looks to me like Fran is advocating a blacklist on some arbitrary principles coming from the Animal Liberation agenda. It would be just for someone to be sued for libel for doing such a thing.Jenniferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14389321571689128858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-12381689287274974422013-05-25T18:23:36.746+01:002013-05-25T18:23:36.746+01:00Anon 21:56: Er, no, rescues should not lie, exagge...Anon 21:56: Er, no, rescues should not lie, exaggerate or misrepresent the dogs, no matter what their perception of the general public. <br /><br />Jemima also runs a rescue and she doesn't have to lie to get her dogs rehomed. She has a waiting list of people wanting to rehome one of her rescue dogs. If I had to choose between rehoming a dog from a rescue which honestly assesses the dog, or from one that bullshits, I know which one I'd choose and which one I'd avoid at all costs. <br /><br />I was lied to by a rescue - they swore blind there had been no sign of dog-aggression problems whilst the dog had been in their care. I phoned the previous owner's vets, which was on the back of his old vaccination card (odd in itself, seeing he was supposed to have come in from the pound), who confirmed his dog-aggression problem. The rescue continued to deny all knowledge when I confronted them. I'm sure this rescue justified their actions in the same way you do. <br /><br />Frannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-80334714289172258342013-05-25T17:50:54.601+01:002013-05-25T17:50:54.601+01:00The problem is that whilst insurers continue to co...The problem is that whilst insurers continue to cover sick breeds, people will still be willing to take a risk on them. If the dog gets sick; they won't be the ones paying out. Frannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-25422781447791560472013-05-25T17:46:59.178+01:002013-05-25T17:46:59.178+01:00Why do I deserve a lawsuit, Jennifer?
I meant us...Why do I deserve a lawsuit, Jennifer? <br /><br />I meant using the same bitch 3x in 2-years - my fault for not being clearer. Additionally, geneticists would advise that to ensure genetic diversity, each stud bitch and each stud dog should only be used... once. Never happens though does it? What you're proposing - the 'healthy' pug being used as often as that, is otherwise known as popular sire syndrome. The use of popular sires is the reason why so many breeds are in genetic dire straits. <br /><br />It wouldn't even have to be a bad breeders log. All it would take is a public log of how often a dog or bitch was used, whether it was health tested and passed, age of death of ancestors, any health problems of stock, etc. Really, information that should be in the public domain anyway so that puppy buyers can easily make an informed choice. Frannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-5661073018387804862013-05-25T15:27:55.352+01:002013-05-25T15:27:55.352+01:00Deserve a lawsuit to warn people about immoral act...Deserve a lawsuit to warn people about immoral activity? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com