tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post3774075850040836683..comments2024-03-20T17:32:35.238+00:00Comments on Pedigree Dogs Exposed - The Blog: No time and no showsJemima Harrisonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05092892697145388048noreply@blogger.comBlogger57125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-88135483845778228012012-02-10T15:26:13.119+00:002012-02-10T15:26:13.119+00:00It would also be a result if people like yourself ...It would also be a result if people like yourself gave their name instead of being anonymous!Valerie R-Jonesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-50099878887895727592012-01-02T22:43:02.067+00:002012-01-02T22:43:02.067+00:00Romany Dog,
Consider this situation then. A famil...Romany Dog,<br /><br />Consider this situation then. A family historian found recently that five generation back on her side of the family, and six generations back on her husbands side of the family there is a crossing of families (grandparents however many times removed were THE SAME). No pedigrees are involved with humans, without the genealogy interest the situation would never be known. The same person found about two months ago the link through her family lines to the current Royal family (admittedly around the year 1500), and the same person has links to Robert the Bruce. You really don't know what you are truly dealing with in humans.<br /><br />The techniques used with breeding are simple. Study the pedigree, and actually the selection criteria is trying to keep lines sufficiently diverse, rather than bringing lines together. But then, I guess we are lucky in my breeds that the gene pool is rather more diverse than some.Daznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-46897581454506947052012-01-02T20:29:10.645+00:002012-01-02T20:29:10.645+00:00Daz, Humans that come from certain inbred populati...Daz, Humans that come from certain inbred populations DO need genetic counseling before reproducing with someone from the same background. Thankfully I am a complete outcross. LOL!<br /><br />Forgive me for assuming that you are doing some close breeding. If you are not, and if all your pups are show quality as you say, you should really share your techniques (whatever they may be) with all the many, many breeders who feel the need to inbreed in order to achieve success in the conformation ring.Romany Doghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17282398450593521005noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-35355559240281999632012-01-02T10:51:57.905+00:002012-01-02T10:51:57.905+00:00Romany Dog,
You would be surprised at just how &#...Romany Dog,<br /><br />You would be surprised at just how 'inbred' humans can be without realising it. Without looking into your family history you may not even know. Maybe you should look sometime, you may be surprised. But, my point was not about inbreeding, but about health testing. Humans have problems such as hereditary eye defects, HD and much more. We don't 'test' for it, we discover it when the problem raises its ugly head, by which time we usually already have kids.<br /><br />As for the dogs, well you don't know what practices I employ in relation to selecting a suitable pairing, your comments are way off the mark. I said above I do not breed for 'show quality', no-one can guarantee it, but each and everyone, having come from 'show quality stock' has potential to be used as a show specimen. But I also know of labs that have come from that same 'show stock' being taken and used in the field as 'working stock'.Daznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-40502424980495920982012-01-02T09:14:59.352+00:002012-01-02T09:14:59.352+00:00Daz, Humans do not need to be tested for health de...Daz, Humans do not need to be tested for health defects before mating because we are not inbred. And regarding your question about what other precautions you might want to take, one good thing you could do for the dogs would be to breed with an eye towards increasing, or at least maintaining, genetic diversity. This would mean no longer inbreeding or *linebreeding* which I assume you must be doing if every pup you produce is *show quality*? If we could ask the dogs, I expect they would prefer to be healthy rather than to be *show quality.* I know I would rather be healthy than beautiful. LOLRomany Doghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17282398450593521005noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-4250527330476242742012-01-02T00:10:30.175+00:002012-01-02T00:10:30.175+00:00I said it before, and I will say it again.
The cr...I said it before, and I will say it again.<br /><br />The criticism is that current standards are causing the problem, and the suggestion is that the standards should be changed. Well my way of thinking is that change the standards, you will not actually change anything, only the AIM if that is correct. You need to change people's way of thinking rather than change the standard. The standards are NOT the problem, it the interpretation (i.e. peoples way of thinking) that is the problem if one exists (which in some breeds I don't think it does).<br /><br />I'm glad that Jess made her post above, since it agrees with my way of thinking if I read it right. But let me say this. I and many if not all of my peers do not breed 'show' and 'pet' quality animals, we breed the best that we can. Most breed to keep a specimen to show with the others being sold for either pet or show homes. Most if not all could be used as 'show' specimens even of the buyer does not wish to do so. Any which fall outside the 'show quality' criteria would be indicated to the prospective purchaser.<br /><br />As for the health problems, well again I have said it before, we are not dealing with 'white goods' , we are dealing with animals. Like humans, animals suffer from health problems, but whereas humans don't get tested for health defects before mating dogs do. What more precautions can you take in relation to hereditary problems?DAZnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-35900862065558476672011-12-28T15:15:23.326+00:002011-12-28T15:15:23.326+00:00Sarah said: "... [T]ake a good, honest look a...Sarah said: "... [T]ake a good, honest look at the system you are supporting through your participation and if you don’t like it, change it."<br /><br />Bravo.<br /><br />Enough with the pedantry, please! We all have seen the pitfalls of this breeding for some codified ideal called "standards"--in our dogs. That is, your dog, my dog, a friend's dog, a neighbor's dog--real dogs suffering real health problems, despite the best intentions their breeders may have had.Kristinanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-33506357827360603102011-12-24T19:51:55.530+00:002011-12-24T19:51:55.530+00:00Daz said...
"Sarah,
Can I put it to you tha...Daz said...<br /><br />"Sarah,<br /><br />Can I put it to you that anyone who plans what sire to put to which dam is to a degree practicing 'eugenics', regardless of whether you are planning a purebred or a crossbred litter."<br /><br />Yes. If you are going by the most basic definition, which is 'guided' reproduction, IOW, the individual who do and do not get to reproduce are chosen, ALL selective breeding comes under the umbrella of eugenics. I have crossbreeds and I have no problem with this.<br /><br />Under this broad definition, human parents who choose which embryos of many to implant for IVF, or choose to abort a defective fetus, are practicing eugenics. Do you really want to go there?<br /><br />However, the concept of racial purity or of class prejudice which lay behind much of the modern eugenics movement is what Sarah is referring to, I believe. The obsession with purity even against rational argument, as was seen with the objections to the LUA Dals is a good example of dog fancy parallels with that type of thinking. The division of dogs into 'show' and 'pet' quality falls under that category as well.<br /><br />All this blathering about eugenics is simply a distraction, IMO. It's purely an insult to dog breeders, and a sensationalist one at that, designed to stir people up. All it accomplishes is to make dog breeders defensive, and then they are not open to any kind of discussion about incorporating the emerging science into their breeding practices.Jesshttp://desertwindhounds.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-86001971900115320972011-12-24T18:37:24.309+00:002011-12-24T18:37:24.309+00:00Sarah,
Can I put it to you that anyone who plans ...Sarah,<br /><br />Can I put it to you that anyone who plans what sire to put to which dam is to a degree practicing 'eugenics', regardless of whether you are planning a purebred or a crossbred litter.<br /><br />Of course whether you agree with that depends on how you define eugenics, but that is the way I see it.Daznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-34784956201823948832011-12-24T14:12:54.182+00:002011-12-24T14:12:54.182+00:00Sarah said.......
"I agree entirely that bei...Sarah said.......<br /><br />"I agree entirely that being associated with eugenics is objectionable but breeders who operate within the closed registry, ‘pureblood’ show system are inevitably practicing the eugenics. Hurt feelings, outrage and denial do not alter facts, nor do they count as argument or evidence. So far, I have seen nothing but hurt feeling, outrage and denial from breeders who actively put eugenics into practice."<br /><br />That last sentence is certainly true in my breed, where the latest Breed Record Supplement shows one of the most vocal of breeders has a litter with a 30% COI ( breed average is 5%) <br /><br />The Kennel Club and breeders were outraged at PDE, they felt it unfair.<br /><br />It was not unfair, it was just that they were so inured to what they were doing that they could not recognise the harm they were doing slowly but inevitably over the years. Hence the defensiveness and the slow rate of progress in changing breeding practices. <br /><br />Any change seems to be driven by the pressure to appease public outrage rather than by any real acceptance that inbreeding, decades of line-breeding, or breeding for exaggerated traits will inevitably compromise health.<br /><br />There are many good breeders that use the available health schemes to produce the healthiest puppies possible. That unfortunately is no longer enough when those that deny the need for change feel justified in sabotaging efforts to improve breeding practices.<br /><br />It is a shame that misplaced loyalty to fellow breeders, however misguided, rather than to the welfare of their breed, means that honest breeders allow blind fools to lead them.Margaret Carternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-7149526108354075792011-12-22T17:22:40.421+00:002011-12-22T17:22:40.421+00:00Daz said:
‘The 'eugenics' section was on...Daz said:<br /> <br />‘The 'eugenics' section was one area in particular where I was upset, since the way it came across to myself was that the accusation was that all breeders were intent on this 'process'. If I thought that way there would almost certainly be others.’<br /> <br />Yet in the thread ‘Bred for Looks, Born to Suffer’, you say:<br /> <br />‘The dogs bred for the pet market are, if I may use the term, the rejects from the show scene. They are what are not considered suitable for the show scene, and by definition will not be the ideal.’<br /> <br />Your second statement is pure eugenics. According to the Westminster Kennel Club, ‘The basic purpose of dog shows is to facilitate the evaluation of breeding stock for use in producing the next generations.’<br /><br />< http://www.westminsterkennelclub.org/dogshows/aboutdogshows.html><br /> <br />I agree entirely that being associated with eugenics is objectionable but breeders who operate within the closed registry, ‘pureblood’ show system are inevitably practicing the eugenics. Hurt feelings, outrage and denial do not alter facts, nor do they count as argument or evidence. So far, I have seen nothing but hurt feeling, outrage and denial from breeders who actively put eugenics into practice. <br /> <br />If you want to convince me, and others, that kennel clubs and breeders who operate within the system don’t practice eugenics, you are going to have to come up with a plausible, documented alternative. If breeders who don’t like being called eugenicists can’t find an alternative, take a good, honest look at the system you are supporting through your participation and if you don’t like it, change it. If you don’t want to change it, accept that you are all practicing eugenics.Sarahnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-8504391905993764532011-12-20T16:54:16.659+00:002011-12-20T16:54:16.659+00:00Jemima,
Its no surprise at all, but the way I saw...Jemima,<br /><br />Its no surprise at all, but the way I saw your program was that all breeders were under attack.<br /><br />Yes there are problems out there, I don't think that is something that is under dispute, but there are also breeders out there doing their utmost to ensure the best for the puppies they breed. It is unfair to have all tarred with the same brush. The 'eugenics' section was one area in particular where I was upset, since the way it came across to myself was that the accusation was that all breeders were intent on this 'process'. If I thought that way there would almost certainly be others.<br /><br />Certainly I guess you are to be congratulated in some way, since the program has certainly stirred up debate, and probably made a lot of people think a lot more than they would otherwise have done, but I also feel that a degree of harm may have also been done, since the 'general public' seem to have the misguided impression that pedigree is bad, crosdsbred is good. I have actually heard this said by 'non-dog' people.<br /><br />Even prior to the screening of your program, I have had debates with others as to whether the health testing we carry out is worthwhile, and put forward ideas that some would probably find somewhat 'outside the box'. As for crossing out breeds, maybe because the breeds I have involvement with are more 'mainstream' and as a result have a fairly diverse gene pool, it is something I have to admit I have never really thought about. With breeds with a smaller gene pool, maybe there COULD be an argument for its consideration, but only under closely controlled conditions. But then are you coming close to entering the realms of 'Eugenics' by doing so?Daznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-92148443021158975682011-12-20T16:40:44.601+00:002011-12-20T16:40:44.601+00:00Jemima - at this point it would probably be a good...Jemima - at this point it would probably be a good idea not to feed the troll. ;)Éadaoinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-10949042448321065382011-12-20T15:31:08.222+00:002011-12-20T15:31:08.222+00:00Daz, I know this might come as a bit of a surprise...Daz, I know this might come as a bit of a surprise, but I am not "anti-dog", neither was PDE, and neither is the vast majority of PDE supporters - many of whom are owners and breeders of pedigree/purebred dogs. <br /><br />The "anti-dog" or "anti-pedigree dog" charge is a myth peddled by those who hated or felt insulted or threatened by the film. Now I understand why they felt this way but do think that it's important for them to know that there's a whole other camp out there, just as passionate about pedigree dogs, who feel exactly the opposite - ie that PDE was and is a force for the good because more needed to be done to first acknowledge and then address health and welfare problems in pedigree dogs. <br /><br />PDE2 features at least one of those breeders - those who in my view are doing everything right. And that is acknowledging the problems, embracing the science and thinking outside the confines of the purity box in breeds that are in trouble genetically. Many breeders do the first two things; but very few - as yet - have grasped that unless a breed has a lot of inherent diversity (and a great many don't) that outcrossing is going to be needed sooner or later unless a breed is very lucky indeed.<br /><br />JemimaJemima Harrisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05092892697145388048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-3671750884881968622011-12-20T12:29:59.540+00:002011-12-20T12:29:59.540+00:00Is the argument therefore that the Eugenics accsua...Is the argument therefore that the Eugenics accsuation is based on a simple statement from history, detailing what the Victorians believed?<br /><br />If my reading is correct, Queen Victoria passed on over 100 years ago, and much knowledge has been gained since then, resulting in the medical advancements we have today, not just in dogs. It does not say it is the belief and policy of the 21st Century<br /><br />As for wanting to protect something that is 'clearly not in the best interest of the dogs', I think many of what i would term (and probably incorrectly) 'anti-dog' brigade (i.e. the supporters of the PDE programme) have missed the main point of the majority of breeders who have objections to the content and manner in which dog breeders were portrayed.<br /><br />I don't think there would be a single breeder out there that would not admit that problems do exist. But, to lump all breeders under the umbrella of 'irresponsible' and simply 'interested in looks' is both unfair, and possibly immoral, in that it fails to recognise that there are also breeders out there who do their best for the animals they breed. We do not always get what we want in life, and this extends to the results of a mating. There will always be elements of resulting puppies that the breeder does not like, even in the breeds in which I am involved.<br /><br />When you look at the likes of a bulldog, or a pug, or a gsd, you CAN say that that nose is too short for the dog to breathe, or that dog has a curved spine and may therefore have difficulty walking, but does that actually mean that this is what the breeder of that particular specimin actually intended? There are breeds out there with folds of skin, that on the face of it cannot be healthy. But what do you do if this is what is occurring as a result of the matches that breeders chose? Yes I accept that there can be 'trends' and this is what people look for. Several years ago, Tibetan Terriers had a trend where the accepted height rose above standard (I noticed around the show rings several other breeds had the same 'problem'). The 'trend' I felt at the time came from the influence of American imports, sicne America had a different standard (as a result of a typo way back in history). The 'trend' had no real impact on the dogs health, indeed movement within the breed seemed somehow more flowing, and there was suggestion the UK standard be changed. Over time the natural size of the dogs seems to have diminished. May breeders I spoke to were non too happy with the size changes, but it took time to rectify. <br /><br />The purpose of my previous question regarding the pictyre of the poor mouth, and whether the animal was a result of a mating under the FCI system is tha, if my understanding is correct, the FCI system is altogether more regulated, and if it were to be a dog bred under that system, can I suggest that even a more regulated system can result in problems.DAZnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-47875751733379142182011-12-20T09:57:24.211+00:002011-12-20T09:57:24.211+00:00Pedigree Dogs exposed was a terrific programme Je...Pedigree Dogs exposed was a terrific programme Jemima and looking forward to part II. I can't understand why some on here appear to want to protect something that is clearly not in the best interest of the dogs. Animals lovers? I think not.Jane Saltnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-77933912343012318342011-12-20T09:23:56.599+00:002011-12-20T09:23:56.599+00:00J.Sampson being Jeff Sampson, the KC's genetic...J.Sampson being Jeff Sampson, the KC's genetics advisor.<br /><br />JemimaJemima Harrisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05092892697145388048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-44300382634898081262011-12-20T08:50:34.605+00:002011-12-20T08:50:34.605+00:00Anon. 23:39
Ms Price was just clarifying the date...Anon. 23:39<br /><br />Ms Price was just clarifying the date that Galton started his theories.<br /><br />However since you wanted me read up on the history of the KC, I found this.......also in the above PDE myths busted;<br /><br />“The Victorians were clearly fascinated by the ideas of breed purity and genetic improvement. Indeed, there was widespread concern about the concept of degeneration, the progressive ill health in succeeding generations of a family, and the need to actively reverse this trend. This in turn probably lay behind early ideas of eugenics and interests in physiognomy that also advanced in parallel with ideas of purity in dogs and other species.”<br /><br />The Dog And It’s Genome, Chapter 2; The Kennel Club and the early history of dog shows and breed clubs; J. Sampson, M Binns; P27Kate Pricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12984661154425549615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-42490309071946689702011-12-20T04:15:14.631+00:002011-12-20T04:15:14.631+00:00Jemima said "The Kennel Club was born out of ...Jemima said "The Kennel Club was born out of the Eugenics movement", clearly and undeniably. There is no escaping that fact Katie Price, it is on record and recordings of the program she made. Sounds like she made a huge boob or did she just lie because her facts didn't hold any water.Taurean Blaquenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-61949630442592975152011-12-19T23:39:51.819+00:002011-12-19T23:39:51.819+00:00I think Ms Price would be better looking at the hi...I think Ms Price would be better looking at the history and work of the kennel club on dog health and welfare from the its very start, or perhaps shwe would liek to look at the work done in setter in the 1940's (all missed out by PDE but that would of made not such a entertaining tale would it. The very fact that the programe mis lead its viewers on the Eugenics movement and tried to make out the KC was born out of it shows that perhaps its writer look too much at wikipedia too, or perhaps they realised their mistake when all those other countries refused to have the "german" section and insist on its removal .......... and not just because they needed extratime for ad breaksAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-49049666656674015672011-12-19T22:44:42.781+00:002011-12-19T22:44:42.781+00:00Why is that dog Cooper's bottom teeth so wonky...Why is that dog Cooper's bottom teeth so wonky and uneven?<br /><br />How can a champion dog have such wonky (althought very clean) teeth?.https://www.blogger.com/profile/01159881635090149811noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-792270885304368252011-12-19T20:50:17.793+00:002011-12-19T20:50:17.793+00:00Jemima, I recommend screen grabs. Darren has had ...Jemima, I recommend screen grabs. Darren has had his post altered by a message board moderator.Heather Houlahanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13891198124130533198noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-40326993131832619082011-12-19T20:47:41.210+00:002011-12-19T20:47:41.210+00:00Here's the "fit and agile" and in no...Here's the "fit and agile" and in no way extreme winning English bulldog that Ms. Dykema urges us all to admire:<br /><br />https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.176366789109938.45279.169276569818960&type=3<br /><br />Body-image-dysmorphia-by-proxy. If it is not in the DSM-IV, it really should be.Heather Houlahanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13891198124130533198noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-9899837770655675202011-12-19T10:52:22.675+00:002011-12-19T10:52:22.675+00:00Didn't Galton start his theories and sharing t...Didn't Galton start his theories and sharing these ideas in 1865 "Hereditary Talent and Character"???<br /><br />ps......it's further down the page on wikipaediaKate Pricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12984661154425549615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1183957703077342201.post-74825201007200125822011-12-19T09:22:50.653+00:002011-12-19T09:22:50.653+00:00Jemima does research!?! well as the Eugenics the ...Jemima does research!?! well as the Eugenics the word wasnt worked out by Galton until 1883, but the Kennel Club establised in 1873, in her program Ms Harrison the latter was BORN out of the former, when it comes to basic FACTS the NOTW had a better record!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com