DogForum.net | Dog Forums and Community
     
 
Home Gallery Register Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Calendar Members List
Search
Go Back   DogForum.net | Dog Forums and Community > Dog Breeds > General Dog Breed Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-02-2009, 07:53 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,806

Rep: 135 Jake2006 will become famous soon enoughJake2006 will become famous soon enough
Unique Rep: 64
Default Addressing the weaknesses of under-regulated dog breeding

I'm posting this as I came across it on Pet Owners Parliament.

Addressing the weaknesses of under-regulated dog breeding practices in the United Kingdom.

Subtitle: What the Government needs to do | What the Kennel Club needs to do

GOVERNMENT:

* Under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, secondary legislation, provide protection for dogs from the suffering and premature death which is the result of inherited diseases and traits.
.
* Incorporate the EU principle: No one should breed companion animals without careful regard to characteristics (anatomical, physiological and behavioural) that may put at risk the health and welfare of the offspring or female parent). Sign the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals.
.
* Authorise and fund an independent welfare organization, such as the Companion Animal Welfare Council (CAWC), to monitor the work of the Kennel Club and breed clubs.
.
* Law requiring permanent identification of dogs (PI)
.
* Law requiring veterinary profession to provide data on breed specific diseases (eg, Paul McGreevy’s Scheme)
.
Include normal consumer protection: if a puppy later develops a recognized genetic disease, and if it is proved that recommended health screening had not been carried out, pet owners should be refunded the full cost of the puppy by the breeder (perhaps an upper age limit should be included).



THE KENNEL CLUB

* Make Kennel Club registration a mark of quality by only registering litters from dogs which have been health screened or DNA tested and found to be clear of breed specific hereditary disease. (This must include all schemes – not just the BVA/KC and other ‘official’ schemes)
.
* Scrap the seriously flawed Accredited Breeders Scheme which even if reformed would still create a two tier system and leave the vast majority of pedigree dogs unprotected (see Notes).
.
* Actively help to facilitate a long term project to collect DNA from all dog breeds to facilitate future DNA tests (as in Finland)
.
* Require breed specific Certificate of Health for entry to dog shows and for breeding (see Notes)
.
* Limit the use of stud dogs to no more than 12 litters (number would depend on existing genetic diversity and would therefore need to be breed specific)
.
* Create an on-line facility for breeders to calculate Coefficients of Inbreeding (COI). Encourage a lowering of COI in all breeds to ideally below 6% based on a ten generation pedigree. COIs to be recorded on pedigree certificates against the breed average.
.
* Where Estimated Breeding Values (EBV) or Genetic Breeding Values (GeBV) are available, record these on pedigree certificates
.
* Ban the mating of close relatives, such as mother to son, brother to sister, and any other mating whose offspring would have COI > 20%
.
* Allow outcrossing to a related breed to reinvigorate the gene pool if the Effective Population Size falls below 50, or where the incidence of a particular condition is high
.
* Require health testing certificates to be included in the documentation given to puppy buyers
.
* Require breed clubs to be open and transparent. Ordinary members of breed clubs should be entitled to see the Agenda and Minutes of Committee Meetings
.
* Require breed club committees to have at least one member to represent the interests of pet owners.
.
* Provide a publicly accessible online resource for all registered dogs, linked to pedigree, where owners can enter health records, including date of death.
.
* Provide compulsory training for judges where the priority is on health and soundness, and avoiding exaggerated traits.

Jake2006 is offline Jake2006's Gallery  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2009, 07:59 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Chaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England
Posts: 5,968

Rep: 46 Chaz is on a distinguished road
Unique Rep: 20
Default

I think that the kennel club should only register puppies from parents who have had all the health tests, and come out healthy in all of them, and actually I do agree with most if not all of that.
__________________
thanks for the sigpic Fede.
Don't blame the wrong end of the lead.
''I'm chillin' with the forum! ''

I've been fleeced by sheplovr


Owned by Honey and Diesel the hounds. Saffy the mini beast. Karma and Tinsel the cats. Drew and Harley the rabbits. Misty and Myth the Chinchillas. And Sunshine, Sawyer, Sailor and Swift the fish!

Chaz is offline Chaz's Gallery  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2009, 07:15 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,806

Rep: 135 Jake2006 will become famous soon enoughJake2006 will become famous soon enough
Unique Rep: 64
Default

Nobody interested in this? I would have hoped that the proposals would inspire some comment from those people who are directly involved.

Jake2006 is offline Jake2006's Gallery  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2009, 08:10 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
boxerpups's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 741

Rep: 39 boxerpups is on a distinguished road
Unique Rep: 14
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake2006 View Post
Nobody interested in this? I would have hoped that the proposals would inspire some comment from those people who are directly involved.

Ok, will give my opinion on this... but to be honest , we have done this to death already!!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake2006 View Post
I'm posting this as I came across it on Pet Owners Parliament.

Addressing the weaknesses of under-regulated dog breeding practices in the United Kingdom.

Subtitle: What the Government needs to do | What the Kennel Club needs to do

GOVERNMENT:

* Under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, secondary legislation, provide protection for dogs from the suffering and premature death which is the result of inherited diseases and traits.
.
* Incorporate the EU principle: No one should breed companion animals without careful regard to characteristics (anatomical, physiological and behavioural) that may put at risk the health and welfare of the offspring or female parent). Sign the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals.
.
* Authorise and fund an independent welfare organization, such as the Companion Animal Welfare Council (CAWC), to monitor the work of the Kennel Club and breed clubs.
.
* Law requiring permanent identification of dogs (PI)
.
Agree with this..all dogs should have some form of identification..either chip /tattoo

* Law requiring veterinary profession to provide data on breed specific diseases (eg, Paul McGreevy’s Scheme)
.
As long as they work hand in hand with breed es and not dictates

Include normal consumer protection: if a puppy later develops a
recognized genetic disease, and if it is proved that recommended health screening had not been carried out, pet owners should be refunded the full cost of the puppy by the breeder (perhaps an upper age limit should be included).

I think that would be very hard to implement... what if for instance a cancer is in the breed.. but as we know cancer can get any dog at any time.. how do you prove it is hereditary/ heart problems in Boxers, Cardiomyopathy is a condition that can surface at any given time for many reasons..hereditary and environmental.. how do you prove the 8 yr old`s condition is done to one or the other...

THE KENNEL CLUB

* Make Kennel Club registration a mark of quality by only registering litters from dogs which have been health screened or DNA tested and found to be clear of breed specific hereditary disease. (This must include all schemes – not just the BVA/KC and other ‘official’ schemes)
.
Agree completey with this

* Scrap the seriously flawed Accredited Breeders Scheme which even if reformed would still create a two tier system and leave the vast majority of pedigree dogs unprotected (see Notes).
.
No , dont agree it should be scrapped, it may be flawed but it can be improved, and many breeders are doing their uppermost to make it as it should be , a guarantee of quality...

* Actively help to facilitate a long term project to collect DNA from all dog breeds to facilitate future DNA tests (as in Finland)
.
Yes, good idea

* Require breed specific Certificate of Health for entry to dog shows and for breeding (see Notes)
.
Again, good idea

* Limit the use of stud dogs to no more than 12 litters (number would depend on existing genetic diversity and would therefore need to be breed specific)

Absolutely disagree with this... 12 litters in nothing in a studs life..what on earth is wrong with using a well bred, health screened dog....if we did this , we could loose quality in our dogs...not to mention the vulnerable breeds, where numbers are low.

.
* Create an on-line facility for breeders to calculate Coefficients of Inbreeding (COI). Encourage a lowering of COI in all breeds to ideally below 6% based on a ten generation pedigree. COIs to be recorded on pedigree certificates against the breed average.
.
I think many more breeders are already educated in this.. if it helps it is a good idea , but again it is not always as simple as that.. referring again to vulnerable breeds

* Where Estimated Breeding Values (EBV) or Genetic Breeding Values (GeBV) are available, record these on pedigree certificates
.
Any health tested results will already go on pedigree papers, so nothing new there

* Ban the mating of close relatives, such as mother to son, brother to sister, and any other mating whose offspring would have COI > 20%
.
No do not agree with this at all...for most breeds the gene pool is large enough for such matings not to be necessary..but for vulnerable breeds where numbers are low... it may be essential..and to be honest I dont buy into the hysteria of incest in animals..as long as all dogs are free from hereditary traits , it is OK with me.


* Allow outcrossing to a related breed to reinvigorate the gene pool if the Effective Population Size falls below 50, or where the incidence of a particular condition is high
.
If absolutely necessary, yes, but then you will have to take into account the health issues if out crossed breed..

* Require health testing certificates to be included in the documentation given to puppy buyers
.

Already happens, health results will be on pedigree

* Require breed clubs to be open and transparent. Ordinary members of breed clubs should be entitled to see the Agenda and Minutes of Committee Meetings

Again already in in place..any member of any breed club has the right to attend club meetings.

.
* Require breed club committees to have at least one member to represent the interests of pet owners.
.
Why??? cant understand that one.. good breeders dont breed purely for the pet market... surely the interests of an owner whether they are pet or show, will be the same..healthy dogs with good temperaments!!


* Provide a publicly accessible online resource for all registered dogs, linked to pedigree, where owners can enter health records, including date of death.
.
This is already in place... the breed record supplement along with the KC have on line registers where you can check if health tests have been carried out on individual dogs

* Provide compulsory training for judges where the priority is on health and soundness, and avoiding exaggerated traits.
As far as I am aware judges already do this... a unsound dog will be easily Picked out, you dont need to have qualifications to see this..

heath /temperament and type are all equally important

All in all , some good suggestions , but for the most part, nothing that is not already in place.. and unless all of the above becomes law.. it will be as it is now.. good breeders do , bad ones dont.
__________________
Jackie, Millie & Bandit

"I've got the do you?" thanks sheplovr
.............................................

IF YOU WANT THE BEST SEAT IN THE HOUSE....MOVE THE DOG!!!

boxerpups is offline boxerpups's Gallery  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2009, 12:52 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
applesmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 6,612

Rep: 332 applesmom is a jewel in the roughapplesmom is a jewel in the roughapplesmom is a jewel in the roughapplesmom is a jewel in the rough
Unique Rep: 78
Default

The discussion has been done to death. Those outside the world of purebred dogs will never-ever comprehend the damage that could be done by allowing government interference.

If the uninformed are allowed to have their way, the world of pure bred dogs will become extinct or worse yet corrupted by politics.

Why not just go all the way and forbid all dog showing and breeding completely? That would solve all the problems.
__________________



A well trained dog will make no attempt to share your lunch.

He'll just make you feel guilty while you're eating it.

applesmom is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2009, 01:45 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,806

Rep: 135 Jake2006 will become famous soon enoughJake2006 will become famous soon enough
Unique Rep: 64
Default

I disagree it hasn't been done to death. If it had I would not be asking for opinions. I am grateful that Boxerpups replied. As I am well aware, I am an 'outsider' - I don't know what goes on in the show world. I only know about breeding with regard to Irish Water Spaniels.

And, with respect, this really is a UK issue. When the US have shut down all the Amish puppy mills, or your animal welfare organisations have forced the government to shut them down, I think you are in a position to decry our superb animal welfare standards. Sure, they are not perfect. But if the UK animal activists (not animal liberationists)get a hint of a puppy mill then they will do all within their power to force legislature or get the media to expose poor practice- e.g. our own RSPCA.

I'm not interested in the few rogue breeders that everyone knows about already. I'm interested in the way forward regarding animal welfare. I am grateful that Boxer Pups took the time to reply to me.

Jake2006 is offline Jake2006's Gallery  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2009, 01:54 PM   #7
All American Dog Lover
 
skunkstripe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: New England USA
Posts: 20,995

Rep: 359 skunkstripe is just really niceskunkstripe is just really niceskunkstripe is just really niceskunkstripe is just really nice
Unique Rep: 142
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake2006 View Post
I disagree it hasn't been done to death. If it had I would not be asking for opinions. I am grateful that Boxerpups replied. As I am well aware, I am an 'outsider' - I don't know what goes on in the show world. I only know about breeding with regard to Irish Water Spaniels.

And, with respect, this really is a UK issue. When the US have shut down all the Amish puppy mills, or your animal welfare organisations have forced the government to shut them down, I think you are in a position to decry our superb animal welfare standards. Sure, they are not perfect. But if the UK animal activists (not animal liberationists)get a hint of a puppy mill then they will do all within their power to force legislature or get the media to expose poor practice- e.g. our own RSPCA.

I'm not interested in the few rogue breeders that everyone knows about already. I'm interested in the way forward regarding animal welfare. I am grateful that Boxer Pups took the time to reply to me.
The US is not one single country but is made up of 50 states. As such, regulations are not necessarily at the federal level but are sometimes at the state level. And some states are the size of the UK.

I happen to agree that it has been done to death but other than to comment that we in the US are fortunate enough not to have a nationwide "Dangerous Dogs Act" I shall refrain from adding to the discussion, as the presence of puppymills in a state several hundred miles away evidently disqualifies me from voicing an opinion.
__________________
Help us Help you! Read and understand the Terms of Service, report offensive posts and Forum Reputation.
Helpful Tips - in our FAQ Section and Newbie Guide.
Connect with DogForum.org members - Add yourself to the dogforum.net member map.chat with us!
Things to do - Start a blog. Be sure to visit the DogForum.net photo gallery Let's see YOU!
Use your computer to benefit mankind - join the DogForum.org Folding Team.
Thanks Fede for the sigpic!

I've been fleeced by Draco!

skunkstripe is offline skunkstripe's Gallery  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2009, 01:58 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Borzoi mad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 7,596

Rep: 126 Borzoi mad will become famous soon enoughBorzoi mad will become famous soon enough
Unique Rep: 51
Default

Sorry Carole but I too think this has been done to death and although Boxerpups has replied to you she has said that she thinks this too.

I have deliberately stayed away from this thread for this reason,
__________________
My dogs are my Life

Ive got the do you. Thanks Sheplovr


The picture is of My Two Borzois Pellow and Rye I also had a Golden Oldie named Ludmilla who went to the Bridge on 14.03.07 and my special wee man Brodie who sadly went to the bridge on 22 August 2008 All loved and missed as are all the others who have gone before I still have little Faun my dachshund and last but by no means least Keri the Birman Cat.

Borzois are like chocolates one is never enough

Borzoi mad is offline Borzoi mad's Gallery  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2009, 02:00 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Chaz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England
Posts: 5,968

Rep: 46 Chaz is on a distinguished road
Unique Rep: 20
Default

OK I am not involved in breeding but anything that can benefit dogs has to be a good thing, and I'm sure that the pet person being in there, is because that we care about the dogs to, as I'm sure that breeders won't forget that pet homes do buy from them to, you have to have pet owners on your side, other wise the breed won't go forward as much, as you would need to breed to have good genetics, and strong genetics, each show kennels or show home can only have so many dogs, and even breeding two show dogs together can result in animals that are not show quality, and that is when you will need the pet homes on side, unless you are willing to cull unworthy dogs to make room in the kennels or your homes for the show quality dogs. Everyone cares about the dogs, and will do everything that they can to help them, and I don't think that pet owners should be alienated by breeders.
__________________
thanks for the sigpic Fede.
Don't blame the wrong end of the lead.
''I'm chillin' with the forum! ''

I've been fleeced by sheplovr


Owned by Honey and Diesel the hounds. Saffy the mini beast. Karma and Tinsel the cats. Drew and Harley the rabbits. Misty and Myth the Chinchillas. And Sunshine, Sawyer, Sailor and Swift the fish!

Chaz is offline Chaz's Gallery  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2009, 03:09 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
applesmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 6,612

Rep: 332 applesmom is a jewel in the roughapplesmom is a jewel in the roughapplesmom is a jewel in the roughapplesmom is a jewel in the rough
Unique Rep: 78
Default

The problems that indisputably exist in a few isolated breeds of purebred dogs are world wide and not limited to any one country. As a result, every breeder or dog fancier in every country has a stake in the outcome of what's happening in the UK.

It simply isn't rational IMO to allow any democratic government to control or even have a say in breeding practices of purebred dogs. In the UK the uproar appears to be aimed solely at gaining control of the KC and their breeders as if they were the sole cause of the problems in those few breeds.

There are thousands upon thousands of excellent breeders all over the world. Every day purebred dogs are shipped into other countries for showing or breeding. Many of those breeders could lose a lifetime of work and dedication by being subjected to the well intentioned but uninformed intervention of just one government in a far away country.

It absolutely breaks my heart that so many pet owners think they know what's best for the pure bred dogs of the world and feel they have the right to inflict change through government intervention--even where change isn't needed. Yet the pet owners are the ones who appear to be the ones predominantly behind this scheme to discredit the KC and breeders.

In reality, IMO the majority of pet owners know absolutely nothing about the devotion, heartaches and sacrifices that occur daily in the world of purebred dogs.

Dogs aren't a product that can be regulated, put together in a factory and sent through quality control before reaching the consumer.

They are living, breathing creatures and just as in all living creatures bad things can happen during gestation, birth or in their lifetimes. Unrealistic expectations by animal activists will never be able to stop nature from taking it's natural course.

Continuing to allow the dedicated breeders to make their own decisions and dictate their own changes and initiate their own health programs(as they're already doing) will bring about the necessary improvements in the few affected breeds much faster than government intervention ever could.
__________________



A well trained dog will make no attempt to share your lunch.

He'll just make you feel guilty while you're eating it.

Last edited by applesmom; 01-03-2009 at 03:14 PM..

applesmom is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:20 PM.

Shogun Interactive Development Copyright © 2006-2015 Shogun Interactive Development. All rights reserved.