Breed clubs are responsible for breed standards, not the Kennel Club.

Yes, most breeders in the UK will belong to one club or the other... the obvious being the KC followed by breed clubs... /working/ trials/ Obedience and so on.. they will all have a code of ethics to adhere to.

Which dogs?


So that makes it ok?!


I do get the feeling you seriously dislike the KC, I'm not a huge fan either, but just consider how this dislike may be clouding your judgement on the programme. I do feel from this paragraph that you feel the KC "deserves to pay"?

There is bad in all walks of life, I think we're all aware of that.



So it's nothing to do with the dogs, but all about what makes the most sensational programme (at least we agree on one thing, perhaps JH isn't a genuine dog lover, but is more interested in the "angle"!)?

No, not everyone knows about PF's, far from it! This programme could've done soooo much, but she went for the sensationalist angle instead.

Yes the KC are flawed, but yet again I ask - should those show breeder's that work soooo hard to promote well bred, good tempered, healthy dogs be made to suffer at the expense of a journalist trying to find the best media story and/or with a point to make???

If this is about the KC why only highlight show breeders? BYB's also register their dogs with the KC, why not mention those. Oh yeah, cos the story wouldn't have been as sensational. So basically excellent show breeders are ok to suffer because it's a fabulous way to show how bad the KC practices are? Lovely! Nothing quite like a means to an ends, eh?


But I thought this programme was about the plight of all pedigree dogs, not just the badly bred show ones????

I've never asked for a lot of airtime showing frolicking dogs, all I've ever wanted is justice and balance. Is that really too much to ask?

Imagine if Watchdog only stuck to electricians? Every single programme was about how crap electricians were, on a programme that is supposed to highlight all consumer problems. Do you think the electricians would be happy about that?

I don't have a problem with highlighting problems, as long as it fair and balanced. This programme wasn't (really don't know how many more times I can say this!). It used show breeders as a means to an end.


So again it's all about selling the best story and/or finding the most sensational story. Nothing to do with the plight of all pedigree dogs as people have previously stated?


And neither are show breeders the sole problem. It works both ways!

I have to say, I know you're on the opposite side to me, but your posts have given an excellent example of why the programme was so flawed.

From what you're saying it seems that JH was after the best story to demonstrate how bad the KC was. Sadly the best way to do this was to pick on show breeders as it was more shocking to the general public. The major problem I had with the programme was that it was biased - FULL STOP!. You yourself have stated in the above posts that it was about the sensationalism of the story, about highlighting the KC, not the plight of all pedigree dogs!

Indeed, it is my feeling that the programme was not about the plight of all pedigree dogs, but about a journalist trying to find the most sensationalist angle for her story.

It's nice to know we agree on something.

Very few breeders belong to the Kennel Club in the UK.

Excellent post, You have really hit the nail on the head, my feelings exactly wapwcially the last paragraph. Your post says it all for me so thank you for that.

As in registering their pups!!!!!!!!!

No. It is not necessary to be a member of the KC to register puppies.

The KC registry is a completely different thing to membership of the Kennel Club. KC membership is limited to around 1000 people and costs more than £100 a year.

But they ARE responsible for a hell of a lot of problems. ALL backyard breeders and puppy millers are irresponsible, whereas the vast majority of show breeders are responsible. If you compare the number of backyard breeders and puppy mills to the number of irresponsible show breeders, I think you will find that BYB's and puppy mills FAR outnumber show breeders in terms of output of puppies.



Breed clubs are responsible for breed standards, not the Kennel Club.

I can't see why anybody would be anti JH if they are a dog lover. The majority of people who are anti JH are involved in the showing world and feel that JH has tarred them all with the same brush (my interpretation of their feelings anyway). I didn't see this as being the case and neither did many others, only the show people

[B]I see that some of the anti JH people didn't get round to answering your set of questions Ramble.....................wonder why??????[B]

Not true. The KC assumed responsibility for the breed standards many years ago. In fact if you read the standards they all say 'copyright Kennel Club'.

Breed clubs are usually consulted about changes, but that doesn't mean their wishes are necessarily taken into account.

I'm at a loss as to why certain people keep on bringing BYBs and PFs into this discussion. We all know they are the scum of the earth..................that's not what this discussion is about though. It's about those breeders who have bred for their own egos for the show ring and somehow forgotten about the poor dogs they've produced that are sick. It's also about some KC breeders that don't show but are breeding without care and responsibility. That's what JH's programme and this thread are all about

Exactly Cheeky! I think in this short paragraph you have summed up this thread perfectly.

I too am at a loss to understand why some people can't understand that although this wasn't the most perfect programe about issues in dog breeding if the net result is a positive outcome for dogs it can't be bad!!!

How many times do we have to say this? Can any dog lover on this forum put their hands on their hearts and disagree? The KC had been sitting on these issues for decades and finally it is making small steps in the right direction because of this programe!

J