Yes This attitude that people will walk away from the KC, should they make it compulsory is utter rubbish, I think people who have no standards may well do so, but on the other hand people buying pups may well see it as the best option, I know I would rather buy a KC reg dog if I could be guaranteed that all health testing had been done,

Many people myself included, health test our dogs at the moment,

Sadly many dont, even more sadly many do, but if they have a dog with bad hips or whatever, they still go on to breed from that dog, I just dont understand this, We all take the risk when health testing that the results may not be what we want, Yes it must be dissapointing, I know I was a bit dissapointed with my last hip scores {even though they were still below the BMA} But thats why we TEST, is it not? to improve on what we have!

No I doubt it, if that was the case why not show an unbiased view... allowing information out, that will help Joe public to be more informed as to where to find a healthy pup...as it was it tared all breeders of all breeds with the same brush..hence the hysteria we are now seeing of healthy pets being abandoned..

Oh, thats OK then, lets just throw some more into their already bursting banks..

I think this makes some very good points, it was taken from the dogs trust:

Pedigree Dogs Exposed!
It was horrifying to watch last night's Pedigree Dogs Exposed programme on BBC1. I am very aware that the Kennel Club has been making significant efforts in the recent past to persuade breed clubs that they need to make more effort to eradicate genetic disease and carefully control inbreeding. We hope this programme provides them with the impetus and muscle to accelerate their plans.



Dogs Trust is aware that there are many genetic defects in pedigree dogs which cause significant health and welfare problems. We see many afflicted dogs in our Rehoming Centres and deal with the consequences. Not just the physical problems but also the mental anguish. Dogs Trust recognises that the majority of breeders are responsible and prioritise the welfare of their dogs; but we believe that the following foursteps would help reduce the suffering of some pedigree dogs.



1. Existing legislation needs to be changed to prevent inappropriate breeding practices such as those highlighted in the programme

2. There needs to be genetic screening of all breeding stock and the assured integrity of such a process

3. Breed standards need to be reviewed and where necessary revised to ensure they are firmly focused on the health and well being of the dog, not the aesthetics of the breed. Breeders and show judges must adhere to these revised breed standards.

4. When people buy a dog, they need to think about where they are buying it from. Although we always urge people to first consider a rescue dog, if they do want a pedigree, people should buy from a Kennel Club accredited breeder. They must find out the dogs genetic heritage and get screen test before buying. Let's not pander to uncaring breeders



We will be working with the Kennel Club and Defra on these points, but I urge Dogs Trust supporters who watched the documentary and want to help bring about constructive change to write to Lord Rooker, Minister for Sustainable Food and Farming and Animal Health at Defra requesting the above steps. Similarly we would welcome our supporters’ suggestions of how the situation can be improved.

[QUOTE=Jackbox;1462388]No I doubt it, if that was the case why not show an unbiased view... allowing information out, that will help Joe public to be more informed as to where to find a healthy pup...as it was it tared all breeders of all breeds with the same brush..hence the hysteria we are now seeing of healthy pets being abandoned..

There was no mention of all breeds just certain ones with health threatening defomities

My friend had two litters of RR's she has know the breed for years {having been brought up in south africa} She had one pup without a ridge, who I can say hand on heart wasnt culled, she went on to make a super pet that said my friend is a total outcast from any breed club, she has always been as she wouldnt accept there methods,

Have to say, that shocked me...I thought we had moved on from the old school of culling none standard pups

The programme was shocking and the attitude of the KC and some breeders was terrible. Allowing dogs to breed with known health issues is cruel and irresponsible.
I did wonder why some of the owners would keep their dogs alive when they were obviously in pain. If I was considering buying a pedigree pup the programme would have made me think twice as how would I really know that the pup was healthy. Yes I know the same can be said of crossbreed pups as well.

The part about Rhodesian's ridges was missleading imo. You're quite right that the ridge isn't an inbred deformity, it's a perfectly normal part of the dog that happens to only occur in Rhodesians, Thais and Phu Quocs. However, destroying pups who don't have a ridge is disgusting and complaining that vets refuse to do it is beyond words

Originally Posted by Lionhound
The ridge on a ridgeback is not a deformity but came from native dogs which were breed to other hounds. All it is is hair growing in the opposite direction. Ridged or ridgeless bears no impact on the dogs health as I understand it. The culling of healthy pups is always wrong in my eyesHave to say, that one fluxed me... as to how the ridge can be associated spina bifida

Surely the ridge is just the hair going the wrong way... the coat is not connected to the spinal cord... so how do the two connect

These dogs are money machines

I thought the programme was both disturbing and thought provoking. It was not a balanced view of the pedigree dog world in general, however I think it should be applauded for bringing out into the public domain how unethical and downright cruel some pedigree dog breeders are.

It seems to me that the Kennel Club is a money making machine and it won't care one jot whether litters have come from health tested parents, so long as they are raking in their fees for registrations.

It also seems to me that some pedigree dog breeders are extremists and aren't dog lovers at all, but are only interested in winning rosettes and bragging to their friends, as well as churning out unhealthy pups with genetic deformities to the unsuspecting pet owner. Absolutely disgusting!

I don't see a problem with breed standards per se, but I feel the problem is with the *interpretation* by some breeders of these standards. There then appears to be a fashion created of certain types of dogs winning, and then the show breeders lean more towards these exaggerated types in order to win shows - rather than concentrating on health and temperament as well as the dog being fit for purpose.

I wish we could have a complete turnaround in the dog world - whereby breeders look to dogs bred 100 + years ago and try to aim to get back to the original look of a particular breed, ensure it is healthy and fit for its purpose.