Pedigree Dogs: Three Years On BBC4

[stargirl1701]

Anyone else watching? I saw the original programme and was shocked. Things haven't changed enough since 2008 it would seem. So sad. I would love a Cavalier King Charles but it would appear the breed is doomed. Just so sad.

Was just about to start a thread asking if anyone was watching this.

So, what's the answer? As it said at the end, this isn't the only issue facing dogs. Maybe a joined up body that looks at all dog welfare is needed. After all, puppy farms and unwanted dogs are a huge issue too.

Our second dog came from a friend who had a litter of puppies, something I later found out is very frowned upon on here. I would still defend that friend (whilst appreciating that every litter bred means more dogs needing homes); all the puppies had a home to go to and she made it very clear she would take them back at any point in their lives. Poppy at nearly 2 looks to be very healthy and happy, and certainly the vet approved of us getting a mutt. Though looking at the programme tonight, the cavalier bit worried me (she's basically Jack Russell/ Cavalier cross and has those big eyes) and I accept that cross breeding is no guarantee they won't pick up bad stuff from both.

Our eldest dog is a pedigree and still very healthy at 10 years old, though not one of the breeds featured with problems (he's a sheltie). He has had slightly dodgy eyes since a puppy, something I believe the breed suffers from. Otherwise doing well.

I'm just rambling on here, anyway. Interested to hear the thoughts of others.

I think we need to shy away from the 'pedigree dogs are unhealthy' message that the program, and the previous one, gave out. Done right, a dog with a known pedigree gives you a record of all the excellent health test results of its ancestors, a record of their working achievements and qualifications and is basically therefore a guarantee of the appearance, likely temperament and likely incidence of heritable health issues in the end result puppy.

As I said on the other thread, the finger needs to be pointed at the brachycephalic breeds and those with extreme features (like the excess skin on the Neopolitan mastiff).

The KC do also need to step up and just bloody legislate. The assured breeder's scheme - fine, in principle, you have to health test your breeding dogs to be one. Great. Only, it doesn't matter if those tests come back with, say, a hip score of 90 - so long as the test has been done you can call yourself an assured breeder and churn out litter after litter of pups with any manner of genetic abnormalities. Pointless.

When they start legislating for health testing, when they stop registering puppy farmed dogs, when the odd Big Name Breeder pulls their finger out and admits there's a problem in the breed rather than trying to bulldoze on regardless, when people return to the idea of function over form, when more people work their dogs in the manner for which they were intended, when people stop buying puppies on a whim, when people recognise that dogs with flat faces are deformed and refuse to buy them, when they lose their ridiculous ideas about rescue dogs all being 'dodgy', when working trials and dog sports become more mainstream and can count towards show results, blah blah blah, then we might get some progress.

Very good and interesting post, toboldlygo.

One thing that I thought watching it, which you've touched upon, is should dog shows be something different altogether? Much more dog sports, maybe, dogs competing by doing the things they were originally bred for, and maybe dogs chosen for things other than looking at this supposed picture of perfection. More like the stuff that goes on at companion dog shows?

One of the reasons I love dogs so much is that it is so utterly joyous to see a dog doing what it is good at - whether that is a spaniel or a Lab working as a gundog,a sheepdog herding, a greyhound running, a hound hunting, or a terrier enthusiastically ratcatching on a farm. When I see our greyhounds run, I see an utterly perfect canine athlete, living completely in the moment, running in a way that illustrates perfectly the marriage of form and function. It is so beautiful that sometimes I have a lump in my throat when i watch them.

But that is not the function of the majority of pet dogs in the UK. We are an increasingly urban society, and dogs are expected to be able to live solitary, controlled lives in our homes, behaving in a compliant way that fits with our rather peculiar expectations of them. Pedigree dogs are shown and valued overwhelmingly for appearance - not for temperament, not for health, not for fitness. Look at the problems people get when they take on an intelligent, sensitive yet physically tough BC - needs plenty of exercise, and a great deal of sophisticated mental stimulation, including managing of the herding instinct. Look at Bassets and beagles - tough little hounds but as pets - prone to wandering off, destructive, scent orientated - not for the faint hearted. We have major issues of safety when people take on large dogs with poor socialisation for dubious reasons of "status". I've not come across any convincing reason why a person living on a busy urban housing estate with young children really needs a Cane Corso, or a ten stone mastiff.

yet also on the bright side there has never been a better range of activities to do with dogs. Dog owners can do obedience, agility, heelwork to music, Cani X, Bikejoring, go orienteering, geocaching, flyball, lure coursing, the list is endless. Maybe we should be valuing dogs for different things - not just appearance. Maybe we could get rid of the snobbery that values a pedigree and replace it with an enthusiasm for doing things with our dogs - we'd all probably be fitter and healthier too!

Scuttlebutter that post was fantastic. I totally agree with everything above.