Monday, 13 April 2015

KC mails crossbreed owners inviting them to breed

This is Luna - a pretty collie x girl who is registered on the KC's Activities Register.  She is three years old and spayed. This morning, her owner was completely thrown to receive this email from the Kennel Club. Other people have contacted me about this KC mail-out, too.

Click to enlarge

I honestly don't know how I feel about this. 

Is it inappropriate pimping in a country where several thousand strays/unwanted dogs dogs are PTS every year?

Or is the KC is simply doing the right thing in trying to educate the pet or casual breeder before they willy-nilly breed their dogs? As it happens, I think well-educated pet breeders have much to offer and I don't think that breeding should be the sole preserve of show breeders. 

Over to you...

Leave a comment here or join in the debate on the Pedigree Dogs Exposed Facebook Group


  1. oh for Petes sake Jemima pour that tempest out of your teapot.. I get letters all of the time from the vet saying .." time to castrate your pooch" or "time to spay your female" and calling me a "pet parent" pure animal rights nonsense bought into by vets..these are computer generated .. don;t like the message? toss it in file 13.. "pimping"? LOL as you say you are the one "pimping" the breeding of cross breds I think you would be over the moon about this. KC encouraging dogs that participate in dog activities breeding more dogs.. what could be wrong with that?

    1. I don't think you understand what pimping means in the context above bestuvall. Pimping is another word for prostituting. A pimp is a person who rents out girls or boys for sex.
      Pimping in the analogy above, means the KC is trying to sell you their Assured Scheme if you decide to breed, making money out of just selling you some do's and don'ts of breeding, if you want to be one of the KC high class hookers. The funny thing is though that it clearly states in the scheme literature, that the Assured Scheme cannot be used to promote cross breeds or assure them. If you are an Assured Breeder and also cross breed you are not allowed to sell them using this scheme as any sort of gaurantee.
      How is Jemima pimping ? Bestuvall, you come here of your own accord, not because Jemima sends you an email to invite you to come here and then asks you for money because you came here.
      Bestuvall best stick with what you know best pimping those purebreed bitches.

    2. I assume this is a computer generated mail that has gone out to all owners of regsitered dogs, breed register and activities. Regardless of the dogs status.

    3. I have registered dogs with the KC and a KC email feed, but I have not received this email from them.

  2. Having just had a very long and drawn out debate about this very topic - I'm still on the fence regarding the implications. On one hand, people should be made aware that there is an authority they can register with (although the effectiveness of that authority is questionable) but I think back yard breeding will continue.

    I've just had a three day argument with a puppy broker, who - even with an overwhelming amount of people trying to reason with her...still didn't get that what she was doing was supporting cruelty by selling puppies from an overbred bitch.

    Are the KC likely to monitor this? Or simply register without checks as seems to be the 'norm'?

    Or, it could simply just be another money-making scheme (of course it is).

  3. Yes it is pimping and no I dont think the KC is in a position to promote its Assured Breeders Scheme as being the seal of ethically well bred healthy dogs for breeders or buyers of dogs pedigree or otherwise, just yet, quite a long way from it.

    Lets see the improvements first across the board lets see those happy healthy pedigree dogs (all) first!

    In fact it's an outrageous cheek as well as pimping!

    I think well educated "pet breeders" know this already or they aren't quite so well educated after all.

  4. I think well educated breeders probably avoid the KC?

    It's a shame really as people do need a trusted resource that is impartial and non-biased. The KC do not fit the bill in this regard. Most people would just be confused by that information they received.

    The fact is, most people have pet dogs and I really don't think the KC understand that this function is what is actually important...They are still very much focused on aesthetics, otherwise, breeds would make way for types and health would be of prime importance. So, I think they should either get their house in order or call it a day..

  5. From a science perspective, it's great that some agent is keeping pedigree information . . .on 'purebred' dogs and on cross bred dogs. (I put purebred in quotes because I'm a Labrador person and know full well that my breed is a mish mash of the St. Johns dog imports and various gun dogs and hounds in the late 19th and early 20th century . . . not really that pure).
    I only wish that the pedigree database was more complete and systematic. Health check and genetic information MUST be recorded in the pedigree, as MUST age and cause of death. Including morbidity information (epilepsy, IBD, allergies, etc.) would be a big plus, but simple age and cause of death information would be a major step forward.
    IMO the KC should be encouraged to register X-breed pedigrees, but given hell for not augmenting the sire, dam, and titles information with basic vital statistics.

  6. I'm with you on the idea that pet breeders aren't neccessarily bad. Remember that probably the biggest killer for young dogs is being put down for behavioural problems, often caused by lack of socialisation. I own an unsocialised rescue dog, and it's heartbreaking. I would choose a friendly puppy raised in the owners home and bred from two pet dogs with nice temperaments over any pedigree, kennel-raised dog. Even if the pet dogs weren't health tested.

    1. "I would choose a friendly puppy raised in the owners home and bred from two pet dogs with nice temperaments over any pedigree, kennel-raised dog."

      That is how the majority of pedigree dog enthusiasts rear their puppies, in average homes. Very few breeders these days have the number of dogs that require permanent kennelling, and even if they do puppies are reared indoors, much easier to supervise a bitch and litter that way.

      Of course they may then go out in kennels once they are running around, and have outgrown indoor facilities, or like most of us get to go in a safely enclosed puppy pen/dog run when they are 4 - 8 weeks of age, and need fresh air an excersise in the day. Good breeders ensure that pups are used to all normal household activities.

      Your welcome to view my dogs and litters

  7. Great to see pet breeders encouraged to breed responsibly. My only concern is that dog looks like the kind of dog which ends up in pounds round the world if it is in the wrong hands. Active intelligent herding breed crosses are second after bully crosses in most pounds in Australia because the people who take them on don't understand their needs. Presumably because they are dog sports people they'll have homes for their pups before they are born.

    1. Interesting that Kate Schoeffel, utterly discredited in Australia as a puppy farmer is now on a UK animal welfare blog. I hosted the TV expose of her rotten business on my youtube site for good friends in the Australian anti puppy farming community. Plenty about this breeder here:
      Frankly Kate, we have more than enough of our own UK puppy farmers. We really don't need any extras.

  8. I think what you are seeing is the KC's inability to target its spam advertising properly rather than what you think. I occasionally get emails and junk mail suggesting I enter their 'Scrufts' competition and I don't have any non-breed dogs. Either that or it's simply desperation because of the unpopularity of their breeding scheme.

  9. To think that the numbers PTS mean too many dogs bred, is to go by mere figures without thought of what's behind them. Anyone watching BBC Scotland Investigates puppy farming the other night, or is otherwise aware of that murky world, will know that the problem is more likely to be one of quality than quantity.

    No good expecting government to combat that problem, more regulations will have no effect when those we already have are routinely flouted - while local authorities, if not actively complicit, often look the other way. The only hope is for caring breeders to out-sell the other sort. Though a pure-breed fan, I'd rather folks buy crosses from the right breeders than pedigrees from the wrong ones. And if that is the result of this KC initiative, then great!

    1. Even if all KC regsitered dogs were from perfect breeders (and they are good bad and indifferent) the number of dogs regsitered with the KC only amounts to about a third or less of the number of pups needed to replace the dogs that die out each year if figures of aroudn 8 or 9 million dog population is to be believed.

      it's not an overpopulation problem perse, it's a poor homing problem with too many dogs being given up by owners who are not commited enough to long term ownership. This maybe because they are unsuited to dog ownership, or simply made the wrong choice in type or breed of dog for their circumstances.

      I am a pedigree dog enthusiast because I can find a breed to suit me. I also enjoy showing as a hobby and when I breed I am sharing the traits of my breed with suitable owners who will appreciate the breed, with the knowledge I have done my best to produce sound healthy pups with excellent typical temperaments, who look typical of their breed too, a look I find asthetically pleasing.

      There are many breeds or types of dog I could not happily live with and others that I can.

      Just for example I could not live with most herding breeds, Spaniels, or anything Jowly and slobbery, or below knee, or above waist height.

      Purely esthetically I don't like short coated dogs, those with floppy ears, or short muzzles, or bull breeds.

      A pedigree dog breed gives me a set of fairly predicatable traits, though every dog I have owned (10 so far) has still been a unique individual.

    2. Barbara, it seems we share the enthusiasm for pedigree dogs, and showing, for similar reasons. I've also met one or two crossbreeders whom I'd happily recommend to any pet buyer - the show-ring is not everyone's cup of tea. Dog ownership, like marriage, ought to be a lifetime relationship, but both too often break down. You focus on the owner, I on the dog and the state in which it leaves its breeder; as with broken marriages, no doubt there are faults on both sides. Responsible buyers meet their pup's mum first, so they've some idea what they're taking on.

      So what can we do to reduce numbers in rescue and PTS? What hope of people's commitment to their dogs when so many won't even commit to their marriages? What we in the dog world can influence, is the dogs. As Jackie D says, lack of early socialisation is a major reason why owners give up on their dogs - about which factory farmers don't give a hoot. So how can the puppy mills' evil trade be curbed? Like any business, legitimate or otherwise, its drivers are supply and demand. My hope is we can reduce their demand - and the sad toll of broken relationships - by offering a better supply.

      I realise I've rather gone on about factory pup-farming while this blog is about pedigrees' faults (never said we were perfect!). But should we not look at things in context? Maybe Crufts represents the highest-profile end of dog-breeding, but watch BBC Scotland's programme before deciding which is the most evil.

    3. I disagree in the strongest terms. Dog ownership is nothing like "marriage". When your highly strung inbred, shy, aggressive though "well bred" wife's/husband's hips collapse and they need expensive eyelid surgery so they can see, soft palate surgery so they can breath and their brain starts to ooze down their spinal column because their cranium is too petite and flat we dont take them to the shelter after divorcing them? Do we?

      A dog is a life time project well at least for it's life time. Mistake ownership is a big problem people dont realise the costs, tragedy and heartache associated often with pedigree dog ownership.

      They aren't some badly socialised cross breed either! But there is a good supply of healthy well socilaised cross breeds available in homes across the UK.

      Puppy mills are puppy mills and should be outlawed. So should the sale of puppies in pet shops and so should inbred pedigree dogs be.

  10. I think that having ONE central body handling ALL the registrations is a great idea - however I would only consider one that stood for the right Ethics of breeding, understood and championed Welfare, promoted Open practise through Licensing, used a single format for all dogs no matter what their mix (Pure or Cross) and embraced a single "Breeding Standard" over any individual "Breed Standard".

    I'd want a universal Puppy Contract (already in existence Thanks to the RSPCA and BVA / AWF) and PIP - a single legally binding contract. A single entity that had the ability to actually Enforce it's own Legislation.

    I'd also want the KC to clean it's own act up before looking to take on this Universal database - I'd expect ALL - KC ABS Breeders to be visited and Inspected and to a degree of scrutiny greater than they already have in place (it's possible as a format is already being used by a Cross-Breed Club contrary to claims by KC's Shaun Nield).

    I'd want all breeders at whatever level they are to be Licensed by their local Council even if it's for only one litter ever. I campaigned for the breeder's details to be included on the microchip details of all puppies born, those details need to be accessible to the KC, RSPCA, BVA / AWF and Local Authorities as well as included on a Puppy's paperwork.

    I'd want a Mandatory minimum level of Health Testing to be set for each breed (or crossbreed).

    I'd want it Mandatory that a bitch is only ever bred from once within a 12 month period (currently only a legal requirement for Licensed Breeders). All other breeders can currently breed "back-to-back" - unethically but legally !

    I'd want the In-breeding Co-Efficient to be strictly kept to nothing over 6.25%.

    I'd want it Mandatory that the maximum number of litters bred from a bitch is no more than 4 in a lifetime and that a bitch over the age of 6 years old should not be mated.

    I'd like there to be a stricter set of labels to apply - in that a "One-Off" breeder is just that and not someone with a history of one-off litters. A Hobby Breeder to be someone who only has up to a maximum number of 4 litters in a 12 month period and anything over that to be classified as a Commercial Breeder. There are too many people hiding behind the title "Hobby" who are actually Licensed !

    I'd want the KC to take a stronger stance against Puppies being sold via Pet Shops or Brokers who use a "Pet Shop License" to buy-in and sell-on - as the Where's Mum Campaign's objectives needs to be a Mandatory requirement for all breeders.

    I'd like the KC to embrace Open, Ethical and Responsible Breeding and work to promote that and enforce a "Code Of Ethics" by removing any Assured Breeder that contravenes that Code - in order to Educate the Buyer as well as Guide the Breeder.

    Is that too much t ask in today's society ?????