The above dog - Mr Chubbs - is currently being pimped as a desirable stud by a Bulldog breeder called Adam Roche from Manchester, a man very happy to feed a new demand in the UK for 'extreme' Bulldogs regardless of the cost to the dogs.
Let's face it, being born a Bulldog is bad enough at the best of times. Only 15% of them can breathe like a normal dog. Some drop dead from overheating in even mildly warm weather. Many suffer allergies and intractable skin infections. Their joints are deformed by design. Their mouths are a jumble of overcrowded teeth and infected gums. They often cannot mate or give birth naturally. They die on average at six years old.
While there are a handful out there that lead reasonable lives - and certainly, like most dogs, many Bulldogs bear the encumbrances foisted on them with good grace - the Bulldog is a breed that is defective by design.
So the idea of taking this effed-up template and effing it up a bit further is incredibly distressing. It's a trend that started in the United States and now it's here - feeding a growing UK market for squidgy, squishy-faced, waddling dogs, usually in non-recognised colours like Mr Chubbs.
These are dogs bred deliberately to be gross. Their owners boast of "lots of loose skin" and "enormous nose ropes".
And it is no longer fringe. The Kennel Club is registering them - in their hundreds if not thousands. Don't believe me? Join the Rare Bulldogs Facebook page and weep. It's a bizarre world where breeders call the dogs they breed "productions" and the worth of a Bulldog is measured in the size of its nose rope, the shortness of its back and legs and how thick-set they are. A quick trawl reveals loads of people in the UK posting really dreadful-looking Bulldogs, including its two British admins.
Pets4Homes, too, is awash with these dogs.
Mr Chubbs was born in the US on 29th September 2014, and was imported to the UK and registered by the Kennel Club as Mr Chubbs at Dezinerbullz Essex UK. This is a breeder called Diego Sanchez who runs a slick website (forgive me if I don't link to it) that claims that "health and temperament" are their main priorities.
It's bullshit. There is no evidence that Mr Chubbs has been health-tested - either when he was with Sanchez or since he's been bought by Adam Roche of "Rochebulls".
The Kennel Club registered Mr Chubb's first litter on 2nd November 2015 so he was first used at stud when he was under a year old. He's had 20 other KC registered litters since then and likely any number of non-registered ones.
|... and so on|
I have had brief exchanges with both Sanchez and Roche on Facebook - begging them, frankly, to not breed dogs like this. But of course what does my opinion matter when they can charge so much money from peddling deformity to a gullible public buying dogs by the wrinkle?
Here's another, almost unrecognisable as a Bulldog but hey... he's KC registered.
Adam Roche, meanwhile, does seem to have one health-tested stud. But here is what he's pimping. Disgusting.
So what do we do?
Well, we could urge people to not buy them - hell, no one should buy any Bulldog (unless one of the more moderate alt-Bulldogs) - but that's clearly not working. Registrations continue to rise.
We could urge people to not breed them? Not while they can make so much money out of them we can't.
We could ask the Kennel Club to no longer register them, perhaps? This is a stance I've taken in the past, but the reason I've been able to find out that Mr Chubbs is not health-tested and has had 21 KC-registered litters is because the KC keeps records and makes them publicly available. It enables us to track them. Plus, this crowd is ahead of the game - they've recently launched a brand new Kennel Club promising to register any breed of any colour. (Click and wince here.)
We could make it illegal to breed dogs like this? Well, good luck with that - where on earth would you draw the line?
Truth is, there IS no single answer as much as I would love there to be.
That doesn't mean we just give up.
We need to keep publicising the problems. We need to encourage those who have bought one of these dogs and paid a heavy price to come forward and talk about it. My CRUFFA campaign and vets need to continue to persuade advertisers to not use any extreme dog (and that includes KC standard Bulldogs, Frenchies and Pugs) Although it's impossible to make their breeding illegal, it is not impossible to beef up legislation to financially clobber breeders who sell a dog that goes on to suffer or die from a breed-related issue. This is something that I understand is being worked on and it can't come a moment too soon.
Finally, a note about those 'rare colours'. Frankly, I don't care what colour a dog comes in - even if it's evidence that there's been some sneaky cross-breeding (most breeds need all the diversity they can get).
But, with the flat-faced breeds in particular, buyers should consider non-recognised or rare colours a red flag by default - as is any advert that lists which colour genes the dogs carry. While there is rarely a health problem associated with the colour itself (whatever the 'conventional' breeders claim), it is very often a sign that the breeder cares more about colour than health.
Jesus wept. I sometimes think that brachy breeders think that the less their dogs look like a healthy, sound canine, the better. Engineered deformity is proof-- Proof, I say!-- that their pooches are purebred, because no animal that malformed could survive and reproduce without a lot of expensive veterinary assistance.ReplyDelete
Honestly, the only thing I can think of that would work is to keep working on the supply side by getting the word out to potential puppy purchasers. Have you read Kim Kavin's 'The Dog Merchants'? Maybe a similar UK-based site where disenchanted owners can share reviews about bad breeders would help.
Though passing legislation allowing pet buyers to sue if breeders give them false or misleading information about the dogs they breed might be another line of attack. If breeders can be sued for vet bills plus mental anguish for failing to disclose the truth about sickly their dogs are, or lie about the kind and extent of health testing done, then they'll be forced to give consumers enough truth to dissuade all but the most irrational.
Well this is a clear case of be careful what you wish for. .. I clearly remember you calling for pet people to shun "pedigree breeds" and go for mongrels, as they are healthier.All the dedicated show breeders you slated, who health test, and work with their breed clubs to try to produce a dog that, while looking like its breed, has as few health problems as possible will be behind you 100%...... because we care about dogs, a fact you were unable to give us credit for, but hey ho !. Glad to see you have finally aimed your focus where it should be.ReplyDelete
You're a lying liar who lies. Jemima advocated for mindful outbreeding in order to IMPROVE the health of certain breeds, as in the Dalmation backcrossing to eliminate the genetic defect in uric acid metabolism. She has NEVER called for breeding increased morphological defects into an already deformed and suffering breed!
No, these "extreme bulldogs" are the direct result of the breedblindness promoted by purebred fanatics, who consider the misery of extreme breeds "adorable". You made this; you own it.
Yes saw you coming a hundred kilometres away.......what part of qualzucht don't you understand!?Delete
Just because it's sanctioned under the KCs doesn't make it right anywhere else, for the exactly same reasons.
BTW many of these are registered with the KC.
Congratulations Jemima, you should take credit for these "Bulldogs" your anti show dog campaign has created a mind-set with pet owners that non show standard and cross breeds are the best option.ReplyDelete
Well that's a good thing then!Delete
wow this is so bad!!ReplyDelete
Cool! So now you can get all the bulldog maladies and the Shar pei maladies in one cute little package.ReplyDelete
Folks, the way to stop this is to slow the demand. we are all talking to each other. The way to a consumer's heart is through the media and the consumer's hip pocket. Suggest media release using Dr Soo Kuan (delightfully hip, mind-like-a-razor-specialist-surgeon from SaSH) who is happy to chat publicly about cost, and other morphological defects including gastric problems, and the huge cost of dealing with these surgically. Quoting an "international specialist" adds to the media cred. Other media stories include the fact that may pet insurers are now not insuring the little blighters - again, use a spokesperson. Just in time for Christmas. Keep up the good work...ReplyDelete
Stopping the demand is unrealistic. The sad reality is that there are plenty of people who will get a dog on a whim because cute puppy and are not reachable through any educational campaigns.Delete
As P.T. Barnum was saying: "There's a sucker born every minute" -- and unfortunately there's a puppy for every single one of them.
Dear Anonymous and Unknown. I guess the Good things you two have done for Animals are both Anonymous and Unknown. No dogs should ever be deprived of their nostrils or nose no matter if it is a show dog or mongrel. What Jemima is doing to help dogs, is obviously far beyond your brain capacity. Wish your dogsReplyDelete
could talk. Talk to an asthmatic person and ask was oxygen deprivation does. Pure Animal abuse to breed dogs that cannot breathe properly.
Bet you never thought you'd see the day when you could look wistfully at photos of flat faced show bulldogs, and say "They were't so bad - by comparison. "
Another hundred kilometres! My eye sight is getting better and better.Delete
What part of qualzucht don't you understand? Just because it's also done outside of KC sanctioned dog shows doesn't suddenly make it OK that it's still sanctioned in KCs.
Many of these dogs are registered with the KC anyway, yawn.
Qualzucht is qualzucht. Just because they've managed to make something awful even worse, it doesn't make the original any better. Neither one should exist. But they do, because some nasty breeders can't leave 'well enough' alone.Delete
Again, hello Jemima,ReplyDelete
Been a while since you've posted on your blog - and it's been awhile since I've delurked to comment here, but I guess this is a good time for it.
I admire your strength of passion and compassion. I hope other dog people can see that in you too. Your deep feelings show in your writings and in your film, Pedigree Dogs Exposed.
Unfortunately, the very zest that makes you so admirable also seems to be a bit too much sometimes, especially when it is directed at individual breeders, who might feel differently about dogs than us more extremely compassionate types.
I wish you the very best of luck in your great efforts to help the future of Man's best friend.
I can't pull any magic answers out of my hat, or tell you how to best proceed, but maybe I can toss out a few ideas that you can combine with what you already knowing order to find a useable path through this quagmire.
Sorry, I guess auto-correct turned a missing space between "know" and "in" to make "knowing". It should be the phrase "know in order to".Delete
I did, when I was blogging about dogs too, read your blog every day. Since I quit blogging, I haven't been keeping up with what is going on in the front lines of dogdom, but I have, from time to time, popped over to read Cruffa on facebook.
I was quite distressed to read your line there, on this identical post, about your hoping this wouldn't be your last post ever.
It worried me that you might be fearing for your life. Which didn't exactly encourage me to join facebook to try and involve myself in whatever the problem might be.
But then I though maybe you were feeling suicidal? Life can often become difficult and unpleasant, yet improve at a later date.
Then I thought you probably were just worried about getting shut out of facebook or some other group.
But then I thought, maybe you are sick, or facing surgery? Maybe you weren't giving up, but were worried you couldn't go on anymore?
Whatever might be amiss, know that you have followers and readers, who would miss you if you left, but that the seeds you have planted have grown firm roots in good soil, and will continue forever.
Whatever the problem is which cauzed you to write that "last post ever" line, know that your life made a difference already, and the fight against, qualzucht, torture breeding, will go on.
I'm crying as I write this, but hoping it was just a stray comment from you.
One of your readers.
Thank you for your kind words. It was indeed just a stray comment. I am fighting fit in body and spirit - other than frustrated that I don't have as much time to blog as I did. The "last post ever" comment was in relation to a very minor concern that taking on the guys that breed these very extreme Bulldogs might provoke a response beyond an outraged email.Delete
I saw one of these dogs being walked in the park near me last week! It could have been the breeder walking him actually (I am in Manchester). I went out of my way to get close to the dog to have a look at him as I couldn't even work out what breed he was - owner told me he was just a puppy and my heart sank because he could barely walk/run. He was moving like an old, old dog and looked so uncomfortable. What are these people thinking?Delete
I think it's totally DISGUSTING what they do to these poor dogs.ReplyDelete
Breeders are firstly in love with themselves, and second (but not far behind, the money. So why not try to go after them from the angle of internal revenue - get your tax guys to start investigating all animal breeders and force them to have their businesses (because that's what they are)registered. Once they're paying tax on the proceeds of every sale, it becomes a lot less attractive.ReplyDelete
Maybe point out to inland revenue the potential size of the loss to the fiscus - N breeders (start with registered with KC) x av. pups per litter x no. of litters p.a. x sales price = Y. Hopefully that might make someone's eyes bulge with joy at getting a new revenue stream.
Mike that is an excellent idea. Hit them where it hurts (in the wallet).Delete
WHY ARE BULLDOGS LIKE SMARTPHONES?ReplyDelete
Well, first there was the original Bulldogs, they were made to fight or pin down bulls, that is why they were called "Bull Dogs". Let's call that type of bulldog "bulldog.1".
Then, from a litter of bulldog.1 puppies, came a dwarf bulldog. He was bred and produced more dwarf bulldogs. We can call the dwarf bulldog type "bulldog.2".
Of course, the breeders of the two types of bulldogs disagreed about how a bulldog should look.
The bulldog.1 breeders laughed at the bulldog.2 breeders and said that the (dwarf) bulldog.2 dogs weren't really bulldogs.
The breeders of the (dwarf) bulldog.2 dogs responded "Maybe, but ours are cuter". We all know who won that argument.
Cute won over athletic. The victory didn't last for a long time, because then the bulldog.3 came out. This type retained the dwarf gene and added the new flat face.
Oh, how the breeders of bulldog.2 must of howled! "Those aren't really bulldogs, just look at their face!"
But the bulldog.3 breeders probably said "Yes, and the flat face is cuter than the old boxy muzzle on your dogs!"
Well, we can all look in the show rings today and see all the dwarf flat faced bulldogs there, so we know who won that spat.
Over time, even the bulldog.3 dogs changed. They came out with flatter faces with each new update. And newer updates often shortened and kinked the tail. Oh, and the nose roll, we mustn't forget to mention the nose roll update.
But, some people weren't real happy about all the updates forced upon them. Many people started to get together and say "The bulldog.2 was a better bulldog than this new bulldog.3".
People complained about the skin infections, the wheezing, the clunkyness of the bulldog.3, but the bulldog.3 remained The Bulldog.
Now out comes the bulldog.4. Chubby wrinkles, and yummy dilute tri-colours! Oh my, is that a double dilute chocolate I see? Aw isn't he the cutest?
Guess the old show type bulldog.3 breeders aren't very happy? Yeah, that would be my best guess too.
So what tune do the old show breeders sing now? "Go get 'em, Jemima!"
Go after those new bulldog.4 breeders. Ironic isn't it?
Thank you for posting about this, as if all the other brachy breeds weren't bad enough, someone had to go ahead and just abuse them further.ReplyDelete
not related but related, I've been hand wringing over the "micro bully" craze recently and the rise of the "american bully." As far as the more moderate "american bully" I want terribly to not have such a strong negative reaction to breeding them (because my negativity comes from the fact that the majority of shelter dogs are dogs that pass as "american bullies," I know this because I have people SCREAM at me that my dog isn't a mutt, he's an American Bully. Btw he was found by animal control so who the heck knows what he is. but NO HE IS AN AMERICAN BULLY) but the exotic, micro, whatever the bullies that actually look like toads are, OMG NO. Someone or a group of someone's have once again taken a FULLY FUNCTIONING DOG, and made it so it is incapable of both moving and breathing. Lovely.
We could start our own kennel club?ReplyDelete
But with expert consultation with a biophysicist and constitution expert to get it right and not fall into the usual trap of trying to out-do all others with restriction. Promoting positive direction instead.
Auss is rapidly headed towards legislation to restrict breeders to such stringent standards it will no longer be a community concern. Its becoming a commercial enterprise only for ease of oversight.
My research indicates this is caused by the K.Cs statement that the only Dog Breeding practice they will allow recognition is the practice of keeping pedigrees.
Any practice of Dog Breeding occurring independently of pedigrees are discredited.
So any value contributed out side a Pedigree system goes unrecognized while any value within that system, remains within. Aimed at supporting the values of pedigree standards and not community demands or expectations.
Sue them! With the numbers of new owners there must be quite a few who discover that their expensive pet is also a very expensive vet´s patient and some who will find out, by listening to the vets, that their dog is actually suffering from his deformity. No one willing to look for those owners? It should definitely be possible to bring charges of breeder being in conflict with national laws for Animal Protection and Welfare, as well as cosumer protection agencies. It shouldn´t be impossible to find pro bono legal counselling, either. AmI wrong?ReplyDelete
In fairness would have to sue breeders of show pugs, French bulldogs and English bulldogs too since they cannot breathe or move freely (surely this is a welfare issue too?).Delete
Yes, it's a welfare issue... but allowing unhappy puppy buyers to sue the breeder who sold them the unhealthy dog without warning them is the first step to changing the conformation show culture. If breeders are forced to either give a comprehensive, accurate list of the probable health problems that the adorable puppy they're selling could develop or face lawsuits with punitive damages... then there's a chance that many of the well-intentioned but breed-blind enthusiasts might wake up and smell the coffee.Delete
And if not... well, with full-disclosure they'll be fewer buyers, and the irretrievably delusional will either be forced out of the business by lawsuits or will wind up breeding far fewer "misery puppies" due to falling demand. This will result in less net canine suffering.
And the purely for-profit breeders will give it up when liability insurance premiums mean that puppy-ranching is no longer cost-effective.
TL; DR-- Hitting them in the pocketbook works faster than trying to hit them in the conscience.
I have no idea why these idiots saying "Haahaahaa! That's what you get Jemima for picking on Bulldogs!" seem to be gloating. THIS IS STILL A BULLDOG PROBLEM. Only this time the problem has a different coat of paint (literally). These Bulldogs are still overdone examples of the canine species, they still are KC registered, and they still aren't required to do much health testing or any at all. If anything this problem started in America with the AKC's and Bulldog Club of America's claim that the breed was healthy and required no health testing whatsoever.ReplyDelete
That line from the post above basically says it all:ReplyDelete
"...the Bulldog is a breed that is defective by design."
So true. And so depressing. When you look at the history of how humans treat their supposed Best Friend, it's beyond frustrating.
No creature has lived with us nearly as long as the wolf. No creature does as much for us or with us. Domestic wolves (dogs) help us hunt, protect us and our property, and provide us companionship. We owe it to them to return the favor. And indeed, all over the world, every human culture reveres at least some type of dog in some way.
But that hasn't stopped those very same cultures from torturing the hell out of these noble creatures. We here in the West (Europe and the Anglosphere) are so proud of our animal welfare laws, and our love for our pets. But really, how is qualzucht (torture breeding) in the West any better than how people torture, kill, and eat dogs in the Far East? Some people in China, South Korea, and Vietnam keep dogs (and cats, and other animals) in deplorable conditions, then string them up, then literally torture them POW style, and then kill and eat them. We decry that as indecent and monstrous, but seriously, I dare you to look at those pictures above and tell me that the West is any better.
Those are CANIDS, man. Those animals are in the same species as the gray wolf, and closely related to coyotes and jackals as well. But look at them! They look like Jabba the Hutt, or at best, burritos. And generally speaking, they have the health of a chronic hospital patient.
And here's the kicker: nobody cares! Everywhere you go, people are either oblivious to the problem, or else actively singing the praises of these "cute" little guys, and their "adorable" habits, such as snoring and collapsing.
As you can probably tell, I am beyond frustrated. Again, the problem is not so much biological as it is cultural or social. We know what's wrong. The problem is that too many people are either ignorant, apathetic, or both. I don't know what else to do. Heaven help us, and heaven help our long-suffering Best Friends.
Oh dear banned on Sanchez's facebook page too, hmmmm too clunky maybe? I didn't even get the chance to call their dogs "bullshit and deformed". (:ReplyDelete
Anyway luckily for blogs like these were the truth will out!
And are the pet insurance companies happy to insure them? If they are, they're adding to the problem. Alternatively, they could charge a premium that reflects how screwed brachy breeds are. Owners with more moderate breeds shouldn't have to subsidise intentional deformity. The current dogs will suffer for this because they won't be able to get insurance, but it may prevent more dogs being tortured in the future.ReplyDelete
I wonder if there's a way to make breeders responsible for the health of the dogs they produce. Meaning, if a dog is found to require airway surgery due to congenital BOAS, the breeder is required to pay for it in full. Microchips could link back to the breeder.
I'm disgusted the KC are registering these dogs, but I'm not surprised, either.
I researched-- it's apparently more difficult to find pet health insurance for brachy breeds, but still possible.Delete
Interestingly, the first reference "pet insurance" I found was talking about insuring your purebred against getting lost or stolen. The reader was advised to make sure their insurance plan entitled them to enough money to purchase a replacement pet. IOW, the dog was treated as property with a specific financial value, rather than a beloved family member.
I'd like to see breeders held accountable for producing unhealthy animals, too! The problem is, our culture still sees pedigreed dogs in terms of what they can be bought and sold for, rather than as living beings whose suffering matters.
The Kennel Club could end this problem.ReplyDelete
The show judges could end this problem.
The politicians could outlaw torture breeding.
Regular people could simply refuse to buy Bred To Live In Misery puppies.
Now, with brexit coming up, the politicians want to look good. They want Britain to show that it can be caring and compassionate towards animals - even without Europe forcing them.Delete
Now would be the best time to educate the people who can make qualzucht breeding illegal.
Show them photos. Send them suffocation videos of flat face dogs.Tell them what is happening to these nice dogs who have been bred with deformities that cause health problems.
Tell thw politicians how much it cost for surgery to fix the breathing problems in these dog breeds, and how some people have to impoverish their family to pay for the surgery, while other families simply can't afford it. Tell them how some families have to give their flat faced breed to a shelter.
Tell them how some people think it is funny to make videos of their suffocating dog.
Ask them what are they going to do to make their country famous for its compassion towards animals again.
Now is the time to educate the politicians, because this is the best few weeks to do it.
Politicians really do need to hear and see the facts about this cruelty towards animals, and towards the unfortunate families who have bought a doomed to suffer puppy.Delete
Politicians are just people. They aren't robots created with programs that tell them everything they will ever need to know; politicians need to learn to facts just like everyone else.
If compassionate people fail to explain to all the politicians the current problems in dog breeding, then all the new laws will be based on what the people who breed these dogs tell them.
Most elected people are just pet owners, not dog show judges, not veterinarians, not canine enthusiasts. Many are too busy for a pet.
They need this explained to them. They need photos and videos, with little notes telling them about these problems.
Couldn't everyone make one email to send around? Show the difference between a normal German Shepherd Dog and a wobble legged German Shepherd Dog. Or send them a good and a bad photo of a flat faced breed, and tell them what a big difference it makes for a dog to be born with a normal nose.
Tell them about dog breeders who breed two dogs together, who both carry genetic diseases, one out of every four people who buy from that litter gets a doomed puppy,and all its veterinary bills, and the heartache of watching their own children having to watch their dog slowly suffer and die. The other 3 out of 4 puppy buyers might remain blissfully ignorant, but the 25% of us unlucky people need protection from people who breed and sell unhealthy puppies.
It would be a big help if every puppy or dog sold had a microchip and if pedigee information, DNA tests and veterinary reports could be added to a data base under the microchip number, so that breeders selling doomed puppies could be held financially liable for the costs of treating and repairing these pets.
Also needed are laws against promoting animal suffering such as rewarding for deformity in a show ring, and using deformed animals in advertising because this incites people to buy puppies who will need veterinary care that the human family often can't afford, and which cause suffering to the pet animal.
Sheepman McSmith sees that, one by one, some of his lambs are missing. Sometimes, the lambs go missing right out of his barn.Delete
But McSmith knows just how to discover what has been happening to his lambs. He whistles for his trusty, loyal, super-intelligent Border Collie X Wolfdog, Lassie.
McSmith asks Lassie about the missing lambs. Slyly Lassie looks up at him and says "foxes".
So McSmith launches a campaign to rid his land of every fox. But still more of his lambs keep disappearing.
"What could be happening to my lambs?" McSmith laments out loud. Lassie hears him, and goes to him, and whispers into his ear, "Its foxes sneaking in at night and nicking off with the lambs".
McSmith trusts Lassie the Border Collie Wolfdog, so he goes out to get rid of more foxes.
And so we all read that non-show breeders are the people who produce these nice dogs in forms that cause them to suffer and strangle for air.
But wait, look in the show ring. Puffing Bulldogs, gasping Frenchies, closed nosed Pugs, and wobbling German Shepherd Dogs still are winning.
Ever get the feeling that the media, and sometimes the government, is getting its information about qualzucht breeders from people who are qualzucht breeders?
Don't trust a wolfdog to tell you who is eating your lambs.
Let the politicians know about the failure of the show ring to reject qualzucht breeding.
Send them video of healthy moving German Shepherd Dogs, and video of wobbly show German Shepherd Dogs.
Send them photos of distressed show dogs. Point out the difference between healthy nostils and pinched nostrils.
Tell them about how the nose tissue in flat faced bulldogs causes respiratory distress.
Ask that The Kennel Club either agrees to put a stop to rewarding qualzucht breeding in the show ring, or to no longer judge flat faced or unfit breeds, or to close shop altogether. Because the Kennel Club can put a stop to letting qualzucht bred dogs win, and that would end much of the problem.
Of the above listed ideas:Delete
a. The KC finally forbidding show judges from awarding any win to a qualzucht bred dog, but still having those suffering breeds in the show ring.
b. The KC having qualzucht breeds that can be entered in events, and can have their purebred puppies be registered, but not any of them being allowed to enter into the show ring.
3. The KC admits its failure to end qualzucht breeding, and closes shop forever (ends its business).
The easiest is "b", that the KC be allowed to go forward with shows for the breeds that haven't slipped into qualzucht breeding, but the qualzucht breeds be banned from shows until a time when over half the dogs registered in their breed are Not qualzucht bred, and their breed standard specifically disqualifies those qualzucht characteristics which once did typify their breed.
Actually, a few years back, when I was on the internet more, this idea was being bantered about more. Why haven't these qualzucht breeds been banned from the show ring? It was the one easy to do idea that could work without harming the KC.
The ban would have to stay in place long enough for breeders of the qualzucht breeds to develop healthier varieties, and for the current crop to age out (leave the scene naturally as they grow old and die out).
When the show ring quits rewarding the breeders who produce puppies who will grow to suffer for most of their adult lives, nore compassionate breeders can have a chance at creating a healthier type of dog.
There are other alternatives, like outcrossing to a healthy form like a beagle or a Miniture Pinscher, but that alternative bothers those who prize the ideal of "pureblood", and, like in the Harry Potter movies, don't want a crossbred (mudblood) dog in the same dog show with their purebred dog.
Whatever the plan, the key is with either the KC fixing the problem of qualzucht breeding (and they can fix it) or the government stepping in and writing a law against qualzucht breeding.
You'd think the government would at least make these breeders pay for the veterinary repair bills for these puppies; its a fraud to sell defective items.
You must not forget that in the show ring, one of the entries must win the ribbon. If you get a pool of qualzucht purebreds say Frenchies or Bulldogs, one of them will have to win and that is a problem. Show ring rules work by awarding a ribbon to the best in show. If they are all poorly bred, one of them will still win! Genes get passed by the winner and we keep making things worse!ReplyDelete
Solution: change showing rules so judges can withold a ribbon if they feel all the dogs in a category aren't worthy of it.Delete
Judges can withhold the placing if they see fit. Unfortunately not as often as they should, probably because the childish outbursts that would ensue. Like the WFT handler I witnessed throwing his 2nd place ribbon in the rubbish in the middle of a tantrum.Delete
Problem: Judges are usually just as breed-blind as everyone else in the conformation show world. If anything, they're the architects of type drift, because most breeders want ribbons, and they breed for whatever phenotype is winning.ReplyDelete
Also, I suspect that if any judge DID show strict allegiance to health and "preserving the original working type", they'd probably stop getting asked to judge dog shows before long.
Theory of identical containment-ReplyDelete
An identity is the environment for all it contains. Defined by a common belief of 'self'. Laws of genetic selection apply to any such space, and determine the condition.
Selection is based on what 'belongs' in that space, so an identities evolution is based on elimination. An Identity is defined 'against' its environment.By what separates the identity from the environment it inhabits.
Its defined by limitation.
A viable identity must recognize all its own parts, or risk destruction of its foundations. The conditions that allow it to be.
So humanity as an identity must recognize humanity in its broadest definitions. The selection of what is 'humane' decides the condition of humanity, based on what is eliminated, and the value brought to to the human identity through the responses of humans. Value being what increases either density or volume of the space available to to the human identity.Recognition of all human conditions is essential for effective response to overcome their limitations.
Dog breeders are also a single identity- Domestic dogs of all varieties depend on the same conditions to bring value to their environment.
The K.Cs are a part of that environment, but have adopted a separate, exclusive identity. The K.Cs must define themselves against their own limitations. Conditions Domestic dogs are dependent on are discredited against pedigree standards.
Alternatives to the recognized standards will be eliminated in the process to define the K.C 'self'. The conditions the species is dependent on, its foundations, are undermined.
The 'rightiousness' of the K.C conditions drive the identity to replicate their own condition on their environment.
This explains why change is so hard to implement....It goes against the identity set up at inception of the K.Cs.ReplyDelete
This is, literally,a culture that does not 'recognize' DOGS as the species they are with a valid niche in their native environment.
They recognize the conditions imposed by the K.Cs on their membership as the 'rightful' environment of the species. The results of their breeding protocols as the 'righful' representatives of the species.
That is what a member has signed up for. They will be held to account for those conditions of the K.C identity to have a place within it.
Can they work against that? Yes.To a degree. But only at great personal cost that still won't change the direction given by the organizational identity.
Breeders who support those rules and direction most fully will be the ones to gain any reward.
Support for breeders within the org. will always favor members who most fully adopt the K.Cs direction.
Support for breeders and any breeding practices that take place out side the K.C environment will NOT be supported.
They will be discredited. If not by the K.Cs elected representatives or individual members, then by the membership overall.
Good breeding practices beyond the k.Cs fall into disarray. Because good practices aren't supported. The environment a breeder practices IN becomes the focus of breeders. The natural environment for domestic dogs is discredited and declines in health.
Equal and opposite reaction on dog breeder culture to an attempt to confine any expertise to a single environment.
Perhaps if insurance companies either refused to insure the dogs on the grounds that it's unprofitable, or put the premiums prohibitively high, those idiots buying deformed and unhealthy dogs will find out how expensive it is to fix the many problems they have.ReplyDelete
The high cost of a pup leads to too many people trying to recoup the cost and make a b it of cash by breeding a litter.
In theory... but in practice, insurance companies exist to make money for their shareholders, and as long as breeders and puppy-purchasers are willing to pay an increased price for the privilege of owning a brachy breed, they're going to keep selling them insurance, albeit at a markup.Delete
Pasing out free copies of Kim Kavin's 'The Dog Merchants' and DVDs of Jemima's PDE videos at KC and AKC dog shows may be our best bet. We aren't going to change the opinions of the deeply indoctrinated, but if we can influence a significant segment of the puppy-buying population to stop feeding the machine, then confirmation show breeders will have to adapt to market demand or declare bankruptcy.
Jemima, is this feasible? I don't know the legalities involved here.
I don't know the situation overseas, but here in Australia there are greater effects than just pedigree health at work.
The push to eliminate dog breeding in any environment other than the K.cs has seen a steady rise in legislation to govern discredited breeding environments. Specifically BYBers. With ever more strict and standardized conditions and licensing conditions to be met.
This is creating a situation where to breed, you pretty much have to have a lot of money invested in licensing, approval,inspections, Education courses, return policies,facilities etc etc. The end result of all this is to drive dog breeding practices out of community hands and into commercial set ups. licensed and heavily regulated breeding 'farms'.
So we are becoming locked in to feeding a different machine that may be just as bad, though in other ways.
Dog won't be selected for any enhanced responses to specific environments, but more for lack of response to varied environments. leading to even lower expectations among the public of what dogs can offer, and their own responsibilities to seek or achieve possibilities.
Its not enough to stop feeding the K.C machine. Not if we are going to replace it with another machine that will be much more effective at directing our expectations of we want or get. Commodification.
I think before we convince people not to feed that machine, we need away to promote a healthy alternative and so far there isn't one with a strong enough voice AND the product that then 'speaks for itself'.
You need demonstrations 1st, of dogs bred to exceed what people have come to expect. To provide a clear alternative direction and understanding of greater possibilities.
I don't think any non pedigree breeder org. has yet to encourage breeders to breed for specific purpose or environments.
And I am sure there needs to be one to promote those breeders who do before people can recognize there are alternatives that offer any more.
In short, I think the problem here is less about discrediting the K.Cs, and more about finding ways to show where its more deserved. Finding ways to promote dogs bred less for a look than how well they respond to the diverse environments we offer.
You 1st need an organization promoting breeding dogs with purpose and value. For their possibilities, and our responsibilities to achieve them as its mission statement.
Create an environment that promotes that ideal for all breeders and you will have your movement.
With out it, there nothing driving anything better than what people have come to expect of dogs or breeders.
For the average citizen, thats not much. So it makes little difference who they support.
Super reply, Anon... Really good points. Thank you.Delete
Seeing eye dogs in Australia use a few breeds including Labradors, Goldens and their crosses. Importantly they may use cross breeds, not necessarily pure breeds. Focus on capability and a little on physical appearance - a rough looking dog will be less likely to be welcomed on a public bus than a soft Labrador like dog.Delete
Don't forget farmers all over Australia. They care a lot less on papers than they do on workability, tenaciousness and drive. Kelpies, Collies and Australian Cattle Dogs dominate yes indeed, but you'll find that the focus is on their skill set and not their papers.
A trap too easy to fall into, where all dog breeders end up discredited if there is no org. to unite breeders under common purpose.ReplyDelete
Where good practices are recognised for the value they bring to dogs.
Its not the environment a person practices breeding IN, but the response they bring to that environment to overcome its limitations.
The K.Cs promote the idea that the value is in the environment.
That will be very hard to overcome until purpose and value gains recognition in ALL dog breeding environments.
So far there is not the organisation to achieve that.
I have good news from Finland!ReplyDelete
We are preparing a new animal welfare law which, besides many other things, highlights life quality of existing - and future! - purebred dogs. I read from journal called Koiramme (Our Dogs), which is published by Finnish Kennel CLub, that new law will significantly effect dog breeding. Vetenarian, who was interviewed for the topic even told, that "Practically their [brachycephalic breeds'] health is so bad, that even mimimum standard for lawful breeding will hardly be met." (Koiramme, 2018/1. pg. 28-32)
And this claim was published, in Kennel Club's own journal!
Also, you and your document was (of course) mentioned in the article.
Things change slowly, but soon there will be one more country, where qualzucht is simply, purely illegal.
"The standards can easily be changed"ReplyDelete
Not so, when then the 'standards' represent the only Dogs 'recognised' by the K.Cs. Change the form/standards and the dogs become something unrecognisable.
Please. Changing judging standards to require fully open nares and a short but functional muzzle won't make any brachy breed "unrecognizable". It'll just restore the phenotype that was prevalent before conformation shows started rewarding over-typey specimens in the judging ring. IOW, it'll restore breeds to their "original working types". How could any group concerned with "preserving" breeds object to that?ReplyDelete
If the resulting dogs truly are unrecognizable to modern eyes, then you need to accept that kennel clubs are the cause of major and detrimental changes in many dog breeds.
One option would be to make breeders responsible for all vet bills for the first 3 years of the lives of any puppy they produce with the exception of accidents and routine vet checks/vaccinations. That way, any breeder that regularly churns out puppies that break down within that time frame will find their venture more expensive than its worth. This would also have the added bonus of effecting puppy mills, possibly even completely eliminating them, and ensuring that any breeder would DNA test their dogs for any nasty recessives common to the breed.ReplyDelete