Lazy, deaf - or brotherhood?

The Ponsonby Poodle - by Sir Robert Ponsonby Staples, 1897
- standing on a white glove...a garment of special ceremonial
significance in freemasonry

A quote in Dog World last month from Kennel Club chairman , Steve Dean, made me sit up.

It was in an article in which the Kennel Club was witheringly rude about the new standard for breeders recently announced by the Dog Advisory Council. And in it Professor Dean said:

"We have a close relationship with DEFRA and we have made our views felt. They are well aware of the concern and will be even more aware shortly, as we have made sure we have raised issues with them. Be assured that the KC is very firmly allied to these people.”

(You can read the whole thing here - an article in which the KC is also gobsmackingly rude about DAC Chairman, Professor Sheila Crispin - a discourtesy that seemed particularly ill-advised given the current focus on dog-breeding in the UK. )

DEFRA, for our overseas readers, is the Government's Depart for the Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (under which umbrella dog breeding falls).

The KC has always had friends in high places. When we were researching Pedigree Dogs Exposed, we used the Freedom of Information Act to request correspondence and minutes of meetings between DEFRA and the Kennel Club and it revealed a pretty cosy relationship between the two organisations (one exchange included DEFRA running a press release by the Kennel Club for approval). This is not that unreasonable of course - but I believe it is at least partly responsible for so little being done on the dog-breeding issue prior to Pedigree Dogs Exposed.

Of course, since PDE, the climate has changed and new people have come in at DEFRA, so I was a bit surprised by the quote from Professor Dean - particularly in the light of a current Government select committee hearing evidence regarding dog breeding in the UK.

During the past few weeks, this committee has heard evidence from quite a few "stakeholders", including:

• Professor Sir Patrick Bateson (who chaired probably the most important of the three independent reports into dog breeding that followed Pedigree Dogs Exposed)

• Professor Sheila Crispin, who chairs the Dog Advisory Council that was set up follow the Bateson report

• the British Veterinary Association

• the British Small Animal Veterinary Association

These four, when asked, said they thought the Dog Advisory Council - currently funded on a wing and a prayer and with no teeth given its purely-advisory capacity  - should be made a regulatory body. Indeed, I argued the same in the follow up to Pedigree Dogs Exposed that aired earlier this year.

All also believe that there is a strong case for introducing secondary legislation under the 2006 Animal Welfare Act to protect dogs (and other companion animals) from being bred in a way that is injurous to them (as, indeed, farm animals are protected under the current farm animal welfare legislation). This, it is felt, would send out a very strong message to breeders (of all dogs) as well as give owners and welfare bodies recourse to the law in cases where clear negligence can be proven.

Overall, the general concensus amongst the above - all experts that have been on the case since Pedigree Dogs Exposed (and at least to a degree beforehand) -  is that the UK is in need of a properly funded "Dogs Body" to oversee the welfare issues surrounding dog-breeding (all dog-breeding, not just pedigree/KC-registered dogs.

There are some dangers in this. There is, undoubtedly, the risk of an overbearing authority getting it hopelessly wrong. But get it right, and it has the potential to bring about real change not just the problem of conformation breeding and genetic disease highlighted in PDE, but puppy farming, dangerous dogs, stray dogs and worries regarding dog ownership such as the record level of pet obesity. These are all issues that currently cost the UK Government and others a great deal of money - and its citiizens (two-legged and four) much heartache.

Two years ago, in response to the continuing lobbying from individuals and welfare bodies  regarding dog-breeding post-PDE, the Department for Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) announced that it would and could not take any action until it had proper advice from the Dog Advisory Council (that DEFRA both endorsed and helped set-up).

Well, DEFRA now has that advice and so it must be at least considering a regulatory body and/or secondary legislation, yes?

Er,  no.

Last week, the select committee called Lord de Mauley, Parliamentary Under-Secretary at DEFRA, to ask for his views.  And, to the obvious bafflement of the committee given the compelling testimony they had heard from Bateson, Crispin and the vets, Lord de Mauley insisted that there was no need for a regulatory body... no need for any new/supplementary legislation... and that we should leave it the Kennel Club whose work on the pedigree dog breeding front was "impressive" - to sort it all out. "We think that is better done by organisations such as the KC,” Lord de Mauley said - although when pressed for a reason he admitted he was "not able to elucidate".

Read all about it in this report in this week's Dog World.

The Kennel Club is understandably delighted - as this statement reveals.


So what's with Lord de Mauley? Did he not listen to the evidence? Do the experts endorsed by his own Department count for nothing?

A hereditary peer, Lord de Mauley is the 7th Baron de Mauley - real name Rupert Ponsonby (yep, really). And he is a Freemason according to this source listing the House of Lords Register of Members interests.

So what?

Well, I'm not really into conspiracy theories. But I have always been interested in the Kennel Club's Freemason connection - ever since a senior member of the Kennel Club made the mistake of giving my other half (and PDE co-producer) Jon a masonic handshake. This, needless to say, was early on in our relationship with the KC. In fact, the KC member wasn't that far off - Jon isn't a freemason, but his father was so he's no stranger to their odd ways.

The KC's president is a famous Freemason, too - Prince Michael of Kent - and I'm told that Kennel Club masons frequent the Connaught Lodge at the Connaught Hotel.

So... want to know who it was at the KC who shook Jon's hand masonically?

I am open to bribery...

Dog show disapproval enters popular culture

Have a listen to this sketch - clipped from the John Finnemore Souvenir Experience show on BBC Radio 4 last night... If I was the Kennel Club, I would be very worried about this. It's graphic evidence of how very uncool dog shows in their current format are seen to be by many people. 

Here's hoping the KC think-tanking is all about how to make dog shows more relevant in a world that finds beauty contests in humans distasteful - rather, that is, than try to persuade us that the public are being misled by people who've got it in for pedigree dogs. 

Meanwhile, today's Daily Mail carries the story of how former Crufts' presenter Ben Fogle believes the BBC was right to ditch Crufts - an interview picked up, in fact, from the November issue of Dogs Today magazine. 

Of course they still have Clare Balding who has continued to take the Crufts presenter shilling. I still have hopes, however, that Clare will reconsider. She's a terrific broadcaster - and smart. And I am not sure it's great for her image to continue to support the broadcasting of canine beauty contests. Indeed, her withdrawal would do a lot to quicken the radical re-invention of the dog show that surely must be on its way if the Kennel Club wants to remain relevant.

Apologies for the recent leave of absence, btw... have been otherwise engaged. But keeping tabs and lots to blog.. 

The grim reality of Bulldog sex

This is what's known as a "natural mating" in Bulldogs (distinct, that is, from artificial insemination).

Do they ever give rohypnol to dogs?

From SOS DOG: The Purebred Dog Hobby Re-examined by Johan and Edith Gallant.

"Most of the breeders are very well aware of fertility cycles, and a bitch that finds herself close to the eleventh day is often loaded in a car destined to the breeder’s idea of her perfect mate. Since time equals money, it is expected from the bitch that, on arrival, she courteously concedes her rump to the male and lifts her tail out of the way to enable a rapid and uncomplicated mating. Should the bitch, on arrival, refuse advances from the male, she will be characterised as dangerous. Most often she will then be escorted to a small enclosure, have her muzzle tied-up and have her body held still, ready to be mounted by the “mating machine.” 

"It is amazing how many breed speciality books advise the newcomers and aspiring breeders about the dangers of mating. The unwilling bitch could bite the stud dog and ruin him for life! Once the stud has penetrated and the genital lock or tie is effective, a restless bitch could remain agitated tot he point that the penile bone causes internal damage or breaks! The authors of such books then advise that the bitch should be muzzled at arrival by tying a silk stocking or pantyhose around her snout and behind her ears, that she should be help up so that the male can easily mount her and that she should be firmly restrained from turning her head back and from growling at the stud. Once the active part of the mating is over, the the owner of the male should carefully lift one of its hind legs over the back of the bitch so that they stand backside to backside, and they should both be restrained until the end of the genital lock and thereupon be separated without allowing further contact between the two partners.

"Theoretically speaking, the sperm cells have found their way to the ova and all is well that ends well. This is rape, and what the deep consequences of such an act could be on an animal that genetically has been programmed for reproductive behaviour within its social group, has not provoked one criticism. 

"It remains a fact that for highly social animals, such as dogs, a 'par force' inducted mating can precipitate enormous stress on the female. Dogs are highly susceptible to stress. In nature and in domesticated dogs, too, stress plays an evolutionary role. It fosters an unyeilding condition or atmossphere ie a condition in which reproduction would best be interrupted or terminated. Therefore, stress can cause the failure of coming in season, re-absorption of the fetus, premature birth or stillborn pups. When a mating is enforced on a bitch with human assistance (it would not happen without) we create a stress situation where the detrimental consequences are beyond calculation. Such a scenario is not only detrimental to the bitch, it actually also works in favor of stud dogs without guts i.e. Those that lack the natural sexual behavioural patterns dictating courtship and the necessary convincing attitude and drive to mate. Human assistance not only tolerates but also encourages males that in nature would never stand a chance to mate. Of course such matings may produce the desired color, the chiseled head that one is after or improve on any of the external features described in the breed standard, but the chances that it is instrumental in improving mental stability and true canine behaviour is remote. 

"Because 'par force' inducted mating brings two individuals together that most likely would not mate under natural conditions, the offspring that they produce are in fact contrary to nature and improvement of the breed concerned. When we are faced in modern dogdom with an endless list of complications in canine reproductive behaviour and with general behavioural disorders, their origins can be found to a large extent in human-induced mating, which in many cases has been applied over consecutive generations."

Colour bars

The posting of a picture of a particular Bulldog on one of the show forums provoked a strong reaction recently.  “Dreadful!” remarked one commentator. “We must stop this!” said another.

The problem? The Bulldog was a colour not permitted in the breed in the UK.

The old saying “a good horse is never a bad colour” doesn’t apply to pedigree dogs.  There are very strict rules about what colours specific breeds can be. In some instances, it makes sense because some colours are associated with health problems. Or it might be due to a sneaky cross to another breed. Very often, though, it's just irrational doggie racism. And there can be dire consequences for pups that pop out the wrong colour or pattern, although fewer are put to sleep these days as vets are less likely to agree to euthanize an otherwise-healthy pup. To be fair, breeders are less-inclined to cull on these grounds today, too, although I believe it still happens.

The permitted colours for Flatcoated Retrievers are black and liver, but occasionally a yellow one is born. This isn’t due to an illicit liaison with a Golden Retriever – the yellow gene is a legacy from earlier times when retrievers were just retrievers and came in several colourways. In fact, all Golden Retrievers descend from a yellow Flatcoat and the gene – although rare -  is still there in Flatcoats, often lying hidden for generations until a dog is mated to another dog that also carries the colour recessively.

In the old days, yellow Flatcoats were “bucketed” at birth; these days they are more likely to be placed in a pet home and neutered.  But old attitudes die hard. There is, currently, huge disapproval  within the Flatcoat community that an American breeder is breeding from yellow Flatties. Worse, he is breeding them not just to other Flatcoats but to American Cockers to produce an attractive, smaller retriever which he dubs a Chatham Hill Retriever, or “Chattie”. Of course I’m cool with thoughtful crossing, as long as it is done with as much due consideration as practised by the best purebred dog breeders and, having exchanged several emails with this breeder over the past two years, I think he should be supported, not slammed.

I can also muster no moral objection to the idea of breeding from a non-permitted colour, while appreciating that most core breeders won’t want anything to do with it.  But this poor chap has received many anonymous, abusive emails from Flatcoat breeders from those that believe that what he is doing is evil – and no matter that he can boast a great health record for the 100 or so pups he has bred in the past eight years. There hasn’t been a single case of hip dysplasia, or PRA (an eye problem seen in American Cockers). And neither has there been a single case of cancer so far – a problem that plagues around 50 per cent of purebred Flatcoats.  Now it’s early days in their breeding programme, but I find this much more interesting than the fact that they’re cross-breeding or using non-permitted colours.

The problem, of course, is the hallowed breed standard which dictates what colours are and aren’t allowed. But some breed standards were drawn up at a time when the inheritance of coat colour was poorly understood.  Indeed, coat colour genetics is still a bit of a minefield because the genes that code for colour often interact. Some, for instance, might mask or modify the presence of another. For instance, golden retrievers often carry the gene that codes for brindle.  

The reason you never see a goldie with a brindle coat, though, is because another gene masks it. Cross a golden retriever with another breed, though, and the brindling sometimes appears, as in a gorgeous rescue dog, Jacob, that my rescue recently rehomed.

Goldie x Jacob

 There’s a huge fuss at the moment about brindle Salukis – with the purists claiming that these dogs must be mutts and very likely a cross with a greyhound, lurcher or other sighthound. Worse, there’s even dark talk that brindle originally came from Bulldogs and that brindle Salukis may have totally the wrong shaped bones as a result. This is truly unfounded scaremongering but it has convinced many to lobby against the colour.

A report commissioned by the American Saluki Club last year concluded that there have always been brindle salukis in the Middle East/Asia – and that it is likely that the nucleus of imported Salukis that formed the founding stock of the breed in the UK (and subsequently to other Western countries) also included brindle. It is hard to be sure because colour wasn’t always recorded accurately in those days. It is true, however, that there are no known brindle salukis in the current KC registered stock. 

The controversy ignited when a UK-bred dog exported to Australia threw brindle pups – and in 2010 a brindle descendant of this line won a big show in the US under American Kennel Club rules. The colour is not disallowed in the AKC breed standard; whereas in the UK brindle is listed as “highly undesirable – effectively kyboshing any chance of one ever appearing in the showring.  However, the American champ’s line has been bred from and so more brindle salukis are being born.  There are also breeders keen to expand the Saluki gene pool who are importing the occasional desert-bred brindle Salukis from their country of origin. Tigger here, for instance, is owned by American biologist and Saluki breeder, Dr John Burchard. She came from central Asia and is indubitably all Saluki. 

Tigger... brindle Saluki

“I believe the Kennel Club standard should allow all colours, including brindle, since all colours are to be found in Salukis in the countries of origin” says Sir Terence Clark, who has made a long study of Salukis in the region. He thinks this even though he concedes it is possible that brindle may be due to crossbreeding further back in the Saluki's long history. “At what stage does a Saluki become a Saluki?” he asks. “Historically, the Saluki has undoubtedly been crossed with other breeds and after three or four generations of back-breeding, it is impossible to tell. As the custodians of the breed in the region would say, if it looks like a Saluki and runs like a Saluki… it is a Saluki!”

It won’t be a surprise to hear that in these days of increased awareness of the need for genetic diversity that I agree with him. But there are many who will disagree vehemently and the battle looks set to rage for a long time yet.

The situation gets even more complicated with the knowledge that some genes that code for colour are associated with health problems.  Too much white, particularly on the dog’s head, is linked to an increased risk of deafness – although this does seem to vary from breed to breed.  The reason white dogs suffer is because pigment plays a role in the development of the auditory system.

The Dalmatian has a high rate of deafness as it is, essentially, a white dog - and large patches of colour which could help reduce the deafness, are considered a fault. A Dalmatian pup born with a patch on its ear is considerably less likely to be deaf – and yet these are not used for breeding (and they used to be culled).

In Boxers, breeders often breed for a “flashy brindle” – a brindle dog with white feet often extending some way up the legs, white on the tummy and chest, white on the face and possibly a white collar as well.. Breeding for them, though, increases the risk that some dogs in the litter will be born white with, again, an increased risk of deafness. Boxers breeders used to cull these white pups. Fortunately, there is now a demand from the pet market for white Boxers, so far fewer are put to sleep.

There’s a condition called Colour Dilution Alopecia (CDA)  - or “blue dog syndrome” - that can lead to hairloss and skin problems. It’s caused by a gene that dilutes the base colours black or brown to produce blue and lilac dogs.  The highest risk is in blue dogs (in reality a slate grey) with a black base colour and short-coated dogs are more likely to suffer than long-haired.

If two merle dogs are bred together, there is a risk that the pups will be born deaf or with severe eye abnormalities  - including no eyes.  And yet merle is incredibly popular in breeds such as the Sheltie, Rough Collie and Australian Shepherd with some breeders even willing to risk merle-to-merle matings to ensure all the pups are merle, a strategy that almost inevitably results in some pups in the litter being deaf or blind. 

Conversely, there’s a huge battle to try to prevent the registration of working-line Bearded Collies which carry the merle gene.  There is very little consistency of thought or practice across the breeds with some colours that are associated with health problems actively selected for, and others  that cause no problems at all being frowned upon.        

A few weeks ago, I was contacted by a Elisa, a Finnish breeder fighting a colour bar in German Pinschers. She is among a small group of breeders hoping to persuade the breed clubs that chocolate/tan (a colourway often seen in Dobermanns and Dachshunds) should also be acceptable in German Pinschers – a breed known these days for being all-tan (technically “red”) or black and tan

It turns out that there were chocolate/tan dogs originally in the breed but it was bred out. This was partly by chance and partly because it was considered a colour associated with health issues – wrongly in this case as it happens.  As a result, the chocolate/tan was removed from the German Pinscher standard in the 1970s. But now some chocolate/tan pups have been born in Sweden – from a rare line of German Pinschers.

Elisa believes they should be registered and bred-on, particularly because the breed is struggling with a very small gene pool. But the resistance remains even though the claim that the colour causes health problems has been disproved. At heart, it is fuelled by traditional breeders simply thinking the colourway is ugly – an attitude that is hard to counter.

And there’s a crazy colour bar in Newfoundlands. The breed has three accepted colours: solid black, solid brown and black-and-white (known as Landseer) and one banned colour: brown and white. The way the colour genes work in Newfies means that all four colourways are possible and there is absolutely no health risk in brown and white.  And yet it is not allowed. It is completely illogical.

Similar stories are to be found in many other breeds. White German Shepherds were once thought to be at higher risk of health issues and even though that’s not true, the colour is still not considered acceptable despite a white dog being one of the founding dogs for the breed.  Instead, aficionados have had to create a whole new breed – the Swiss Shepherd Dog.  They are recognised in Switzerland and other countries, but still not in the UK.

I do think it’s time to reassess what is and isn’t acceptable in terms of colour  and to challenge hard where there is no sense to it – particularly if a colour does not come with any health risks.  It too often smacks of the kind of overt discrimination that led to whites-only public transport, restaurants and schools. That, thank goodness, is a thing of the past.

Of course, it’s not racism in the sense that it is any psychological insult to the dog – but it still leaves an unpleasant taste in the mouth.

Further reading:

http://www.doggenetics.co.uk/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coat_(dog)

http://homepage.usask.ca/~schmutz/dogcolors.html

With many thanks to coat colour expert Liisa Sarakontu for her considerable help in compiling this article

This article first appeared in the August 2012 issue of Dogs Today Magazine.

It's a crime

Video from 2010 of top German show-line iennel in Croatia, here showing off a bitch puppy by a top German sire - for all the world as if she is something to be proud of.

Watch it and weep.

This kennel is currently advertising a bitch, Emely, who is three years old and pregnant with her fourth litter.

Vet checks come under pressure from contradictory decision

Doowneerg Usi

Three weeks ago, Neapolitan Mastiff health rep, Kim Slater, was on cloud nine when her heavy male, Doowneerg Usi, went Best of Breed at Leeds and passed his vet check - going on to take 4th in the Group. He has also passed a vet check at Paington Show. But this week, Usi went BOB at the Welsh Kennel Club Championship Show (WKC) - and failed his vet check. His angry owner is now demanding an enquiry.

Kim Slater has worked hard for the health of the breed and has supported the vet checks (brought in earlier this year for 15 high profile breeds) in the face of a lot of opposition.  She feels that Usi's recent wins are vindication both for that support and proof that a "typey" dog could win.

I have to confess that while I was happy for Kim after Leeds (I admire her in many ways), my heart sank a bit.  Usi is clearly in good health and has a very good hip-score of 7/7. But he does have ectropion (as do most NMs) and I wince when I hear Mastino breeders refer to their dogs - as Kim does Usi - as having "plenty of nice quality skin". I find it impossible to see that as a desirable quality, knowing the toll it takes, particularly as the dogs age and particularly in the heavier dogs like Usi.
So while Usi might be brimming with health at the moment, I worry for his future.

Kim knows that I much prefer her lighter, leaner, tauter-skinned Vaoila who is the first Neapolitan Mastiff within the show-world that I have ever truly liked. The Mastinorati look down their nose at her though. Not 'typey' enough.

So I was concerned that Usi's wins at Leeds might herald a return to the heavier NM being rewarded in the ring.  And when Usi went BOB again at WKC last weekend it confirmed him as the Top Neapolitan Mastiff of 2012.  But then he failed his vet check - for abnormal eye conformation which the vet said interfered with normal tear drainage and for scarring and hairloss on his jowl. This is another common problem in Mastino (often the result of skin infections aggravated by slobber),  routinely overlooked by judges before the increased focus on health.

"This isn’t just about my feelings – it’s about the future of the Neapolitan Mastiff in the UK," a very angry Kim slater told Dog World this week. "He is a healthy dog – hip scored, heart and thyroid tested etc.

"I want the world to know that nothing about this process is right. Show are being affected because people are nervous and not turning up.

"If even the best of the best isn’t good enough where do we go from here? I told the vet I have worked my guts out for this breed and that he was judging him on the wrong criteria.

Clearly, there was a bit of an exchange and KC Chairman Steve Dean was called:  "But I received a message saying he was unavailable,” says Kim. "I was barking mad. I think the vet began to realise I knew what I was talking about. I told him I wasn’t a bog standard exhibitor and this wasn’t a bog standard dog."

She followed it up with a letter to KC Secretary Caroline Kisko demanding a full enquiry: "I feel totally let down," she wrote. "After all my years of study, engagement, hard work, supportive stance to the KC throughout a difficult and high pressure period of time for all involved in the high-profile breeds, the very time I required the KC’s support during an unfair and incorrect vet check assessment,, Steve Dean could not walk 20 yards when I have travelled hundreds of miles to attend Clarges Street to support the launch of the KC film in my own time, with my own money."

I'm not sure about the attempt to play the "you owe it to me" card here. Kim may feel she has some leverage as a breed health co-ordinator and it is true that she has supported the KC through difficult times, but she must surely realise that there was no way Steve Dean could get involved - it would totally undermine the principle of the vet checks which are supposed to be independent.

However, she has a point about vet-check inconsistency.  It is, perhaps, inevitable given that vets are human beings and will grade issues differently. Maybe one just has to accept that. After all, the dog world accepts that a dog may win one week but goes unplaced the next.

I still struggle, too, with the fact that breeders are trying to produce a healthier dog without sacrificing what they see as essential type - when it's that essential type that is the problem. It's like the pug breeders trying to find a gene for brachycephalic airway syndrome in order to be able to continue to breed dogs with really flat faces.  In both instances, it's possible. But an awful lot of dogs are doing to suffer along the way.

The original Shar-pei... a new style icon?

"Loch", a bonemouth Shar Pei owned by Hong Kong writer, Hing Chao

I confess that when I saw this picture my heart beat a bit faster.  I'm sure there'll be some who will whinge about some aspect of his construction, but just look at this dog's head.. distinctive but not overdone. Beautiful, expressive, clean eyes, too.

This dog is an original "bonemouth" Shar Pei and he is featured in the current issue of style mag Hong Kong Tatler, in an article by his owner, writer Hing Chao, charting the history of what happened to this breed to turn it into this... what's called the "meatmouth" Shar Pei.

Shar Pei at Crufts 2012

The claim is that the original Pei was bred with bulldogs, pugs etc to exaggerate the wrinkling to appeal to the Western market.  In other words, what you see in the showring and pet market today is a mutt... not the real thing.

I love that the original breed has been featured in a top style mag... it sends out a strong and clear message... Want a proper Shar-pei or the canine equivalent of a fake Cartier watch?

There are a few bonemouths in the UK. It would be good to see more. And I would also love it if those who own them would enter them into shows to show people that there is an alternative. (Please let me know if you do so I can come and watch.) We were very much hoping to feature this breed - and the latest research regarding the link between the excessive wrinkling seen in the meatmouths and Shar-pei Fever - in Pedigree Dogs Exposed - Three Years On. Sadly, we ran out of room.

I was delighted recently to be invited to join a very health-focused Facebook group dedicated to improving the health of this breed. Clearly there are good and committed breeders out there.

It is not impossible to breed a long-lived, healthy meatmouth Shar-pei. But it is harder.