I have been given a ticket to attend this meeting where the KC hierarchy answer questions from the general public. What question would you like me to ask on your behalf? Roger
Re: Kennel Club Question Time 12 May Oooh, interesting! After the controversy with the way the Best In Show at Crufts was picked up by its handler, are they considering changing the wording of the rules to make it illegal for the dogs to be handled in this manner?
Re: Kennel Club Question Time 12 May When are the Kennel Club going to BAN those horrid very thin slip leads and also stop the handlers positioning it behind the dogs ears, which is the most painful place, just so they can hold their dogs head up? Thank you Roger. x
Re: Kennel Club Question Time 12 May How about "what are there plans to deal with the health challenges of closed registries?"
Re: Kennel Club Question Time 12 May [quote author=bbrown link=topic=10761.msg160111#msg160111 date=1430400578] How about "what are there plans to deal with the health challenges of closed registries?" [/quote] Not sure I fully understand what is meant by closed registries. Please expand. Roger
Re: Kennel Club Question Time 12 May The registry that holds the information about each pedigree dog is closed therefore only progeny from existing registered dogs can be subsequently registered. This has a detrimental impact on the genetic diversity within a breed and is one of the reasons the coefficient of inbreeding (COI) is so bad for some breeds. There is the possibility to do sanctioned outcrosses but they're rare and they can subsequently become popular sires as they lower COI due to the way it's calculated. When you add in factors such as WWII which caused genetic bottlenecks in many breeds this all becomes multiplied and closed registries don't really allow for solutions to these challenges. If a dog looks like a lab and acts like a lab why can't it be registered as a lab (to be controversial!) There's an article here: http://www.k9magazine.com/kennel-club-closed-registry-harmful-dogs/ It's less of a problem for labs than other breeds as they're so popular but even for them the effective population size is only 114 (ie equivalent to 114 individual dogs) I'm not anti-pure breed by any stretch of the imagination, quite the opposite but if we're to hold on to these lovely dogs we need an over arching plan for healthy breeding and the KC should be at the forefront of that. Unfortunately I think they're doing a better impression of an Ostrich.....
Re: Kennel Club Question Time 12 May For anyone who's interested there are some thought provoking articles by Carole Beuchat in the Institute of Canine Biology and she's running some work and education via Facebook: http://www.instituteofcaninebiology.org/blog/vulnerable-breeds-how-small-is-too-small
Re: Kennel Club Question Time 12 May A great article on closed registry by Patrick Burns and I am now much better informed; many thanks! I suppose it is stating the obvious but it seems to me that one either maintains the pedigree and breed standard which clearly has a huge a global market for which the penalty is in-breeding disease and deformity or one encourages cross-breeding and subsequent loss of line? To be fair to the Kennel Club they have made a start with the Accredited Breeders scheme. As far as I am concerned I would accept the loss of line if I could eliminate the threat for example, of dysplasia in Labradors. I am aware that the Australian who bred the Labradoodle did so for people who had an allergy to dog hair, now bitterly regrets his decision as it created other genetic problems. I am not sure there is a simple answer to this problem other than to wait the outcome of veterinary research programmes, such as Dogslife? Roger
Re: Kennel Club Question Time 12 May It's a fascinating subject and if you can stand the skirmishes that break out, the Pedigree Dogs Exposed Facebook page has some interesting nuggets. The ICB Facebook articles are also proving educational. Most recently have been some comments from breeders who've used outcrosses who say it's been easier than expected to get back to "type" from a looks and measurement perspective. They are (quite sensibly imo) reticent to claim improved health at this early juncture and it's a very long term commitment from them to see the out cross and subsequent matings through to a point where the positives and negatives on health are understood. Carole has some interesting maths based approaches to trying to ensure health through genetic diversity. Whatever happens I think it needs the breeders and registry holders to pull together and I'm not sure that will ever happen while there are ribbons to be won and reputations to protect.
Re: Kennel Club Question Time 12 May [quote author=bbrown link=topic=10761.msg160473#msg160473 date=1430489669] It's a fascinating subject and if you can stand the skirmishes that break out, the Pedigree Dogs Exposed Facebook page has some interesting nuggets. The ICB Facebook articles are also proving educational. Most recently have been some comments from breeders who've used outcrosses who say it's been easier than expected to get back to "type" from a looks and measurement perspective. They are (quite sensibly imo) reticent to claim improved health at this early juncture and it's a very long term commitment from them to see the out cross and subsequent matings through to a point where the positives and negatives on health are understood. Carole has some interesting maths based approaches to trying to ensure health through genetic diversity. Whatever happens I think it needs the breeders and registry holders to pull together and I'm not sure that will ever happen while there are ribbons to be won and reputations to protect. [/quote] I entirely agree but would add, a large amount of money to be made to your final sentence! Roger
Re: Kennel Club Question Time 12 May Are there breeders who become rich from their efforts? I'm not talking about puppy mill efforts but ostensibly "good" breeders who health test, don't breed the same bitch too many times etc etc. I don't have any problem with people earning a living from providing a good service or product to a market that will sustain the prices. I'm just not sure there's a big profit margin in dogs.....although I don't know what show breeders charge for dogs.
Re: Kennel Club Question Time 12 May You are right to be cautious and I neither have the facts nor begrudge breeders making an honest living, however, I suspect that breeding show dogs is similar to horses and winning something like the National/Crufts would generate large sums in stud fees and advertising? Roger
Re: Kennel Club Question Time 12 May Quite possibly but I'm guessing we both remain in the dark about how lucrative (or not) it is in that sphere, at that level ;D
Re: Kennel Club Question Time 12 May Very few people (who are doing it properly) would make any money out of breeding dogs. Even if you have a top show or competition winning dog most of the progeny will have no prospect of the same. There's no money in showing/breeding dogs as there is in horse racing... It should be a really interesting event - looking forward to your report afterwards, Roger
I attended the meeting last night which was held in a hotel near Bracknell. The panel consisted of 6 members of the Kennel Club (KC) hierarchy including the Chairman with an audience of about 50 the majority of which were mainly breeders of the fairer sex. I am not sure why I was invited, but went along as an owner of a KC registered dog, interested only in the welfare of my domestic pet and not because of any interest in breeding or showing. It soon became clear from the questions raised by the audience, who I judged as largely responsible breeders had strong views about the competency of the KC, particularly in its ability to do anything about unscrupulous breeders. The Assured Breeders Scheme (ABS) was introduced some 6 years ago now has some 2500 members and was designed to set a standard and provide guidance for members of the public wanting to buy healthy pedigree dogs. The Scheme in principle was a step in the right direction but in practice has many drawbacks. Breeders wanting to join ABS are required to meet certain standards and then given a home visit by KC to confirm those standards have been attained. Unless, there is a formal complaint where evidence of wrong doing is produced, ABS members were never visited again by KC and remained lifelong members of the scheme. Many examples were given of ABS breeders getting around the rule that bitches should only have 2 litters a year simply by changing the name of the bitch and neither the local Council nor KC were reluctant to investigate/prosecute without hard evidence. Other than to register my dogs over the years I have had little to do with KC which generally is regarded as a wealthy Victorian organisation out of touch with its members. I think this is a little unfair as slow progress in regulating breeding and training standards has been made, it supports research programmes and provides advice to Government on such things as the Dangerous Dog's Act, but now needs to effectively police the changes it has introduced. I left the meeting feeling that KC is making changes for the better but needs to move faster to meets the demands of today's society. Roger .
Thanks for the summary of the meeting What sort of things were they focusing on that made you feel that they were making some positive changes? I'm sure there are people in the organisation who wish it to change quite a lot to keep up with modern expectations....but it takes time to turn a big ship..
They vigorously defended ABS but did not have the resources to police it. Accept it takes time to turn a big ship but this one has been going for 6 years and my impression of today's management was that it was old and tired. Roger
