I don't. No matter what I choose not to support P&G in any way shape or form.

Still waiting for my apology and at the very least your acceptance that your statement was in fact in correct.

I don't. No matter what I choose not to support P&G in any way shape or form.
Still waiting for my apology and at the very least your acceptance that your statement was in fact in correct.

Think your links Pidge are bit of "clutching at straws" I applaud you for taking a stand on not buying from a company, but to condemn Crufts "the whole of it" , because of one small aspect , is a little extreme.

JB, read the posts I've made. I'm not condemning Crufts because they support Eukanuba, there is a whole host of reasons all of which I've listed quite clearly. Eukanuba is but one of them but P&G are not just a company, they are massive and carry out horrific tests on animals that I will not support as much as humanly possible.

The second link, lets not forget who wrote the article, she has her own agenda to promote.... herself.

So what if some of the vets are judges???

I can think of at least a couple of vets who also show,/judge and beleive me, they do immense work within their breeds to help rid them of any genetic problems.

Do you really think a vet is going to put his career and reputation on the line, simply because he shows/judges as well.

It just makes for a very un-biased pov and is a lame attempt to try and rectify a massive issue that Crufts were caught out on. IMO.

Many genetic diseases are not apparent from birth, whats wrong with showing a dog that may in there future develop one, I know someone who's dog is epileptic, he still shows, he enjoys it so does his owner, he shows no sign of it in the ring, his medications controls his condition, whats wrong with them both having a bit of fun, now and again.

Why is it assumed that because a dog carries a genetic problem is is automatically going to be bred from

Breeding from know "ill dogs" is something we would all agree is not on, but to just have a hobby and show them , why not! if the dog is well enough good luck to them.

Provided the genetic defect could not have been prevented in anyway shape, or form then I would not have a problem with it. If however it could and is the result of poor breeding then absolutely they should be banned from showing. IMO.

Not everyone shows to further the breed, many do it for pleasure and most of the dogs in the ring, will NEVER be bred from.

Posting links from Jemima Puddle duck, does not really give your argument much credibility..she writes only what fits her purpose, getting facts right is not something she worries over

People read what they want into her. I think sometimes taking a stance and being ''sensationalist'' is sometimes the best way to get the message across. IMO.

She likes to sensationalise,.... writing things like "getting a bunch of vets" does not give her much credence to her article!

You may be on ignore which would be why you haven't had an answer---so might I be which means this post won't help either!

Just using my witchy skills.

rune

Can you categorically say that you dont have anything in your home that comes under their umbrella.

Toiletries, washing up liquids, perfumes, tampax and so many more!

When I first did agility you could enter with a 12mth old dog, which meant training very young. Now its 18mths which is more sensible and TBH it would pay some people to stop rushing the dogs and take the time to get some good basic obedience, specifically a rock solid 'wait'.

HTM freestyle is now 18mths but heelwork remains 12mths, Since any moves can be put into the HW routines it seems a bit silly really!

Pups walking backwards I can't see a problem with, it teaches them where their legs are. It's hard to teach to an unco ordinated dog anyway so I wouldn't think it would cause damage.

Weaving through legs isn't the same as agility weaves at all, much wider gap and different action. I'd be more worried about spins.

rune

I don't. No matter what I choose not to support P&G in any way shape or form.

Still waiting for my apology and at the very least your acceptance that your statement was in fact in correct.

Afraid you'll have a long wait, the Jemima article is a piece of sensatianalism at the very least she trots out her bile every year around the time the entries close for Crufts. The only thing she's good at is self publication,
With regards P &G cant see what that's got to do with liking Crufts as a dog show.
And yes I still think your whole reason for this thread is yet again to stir thinks up.
I for one have enough to do without having to explain to a "novice" dog owner why the dogs are not in destress and why I should be able to take part in the hobby of my choice without being called cruel.
By the way dont bother replying I putting you on block sick of having to listen to you winding every one up,

Afraid you'll have a long wait, the Jemima article is a piece of sensatianalism at the very least she trots out her bile every year around the time the entries close for Crufts. The only thing she's good at is self publication,
With regards P &G cant see what that's got to do with liking Crufts as a dog show.
And yes I still think your whole reason for this thread is yet again to stir thinks up.
I for one have enough to do without having to explain to a "novice" dog owner why the dogs are not in destress and why I should be able to take part in the hobby of my choice without being called cruel.
By the way dont bother replying I putting you on block sick of having to listen to you winding every one up,

Shame some people aren't man enough to admit when they are wrong.