Pedigree Dogs Exposed

Well. Two days ago there was another helping of a Documentary called "Pedigree Dogs Exposed - Three Years On". You could say that this was a sequel to the first programme that was aired three years ago regarding the health and welfare of Pedigree Dogs. There has been a lot of controversy with regards to these programmes. Namely due to the one sided nature of both pieces.

Dog breeders, Show Handlers and even the general dog owner have come under fire due to this one sided argument. However, as with everything else. It is not a case of just black and white. There is always that little shaded spot in between and that's where I have gone from. Unfortunately, there is a bad apple in every bunch and no, not all breeders are perfect. I am not here to say that every single breeder that is registered under the kennel club has an absolute shining reputation. What I am saying is that the number of good breeders far out weighs the number of bad breeders. If Jemima Harrison had done her homework correctly she would have discovered this. To hear a vet say that watching Crufts is like watching a mutant parade. I find this highly offensive. I have KC Registered dogs, two of which are show type and they are in no way mutants. They are the nicest, healthiest, funniest dogs that I have and I challenge him to come and find a mutation within my dogs.

However. Let's get back to the real reason for this little piece of mine. I remembered reading an article where Jemima Harrison condoned the breeding of cross breeds and essentially she has paved the way for these crosses because she basically presented that Pedigree Dogs are unhealthy "Mutants". General Joe Public will look at that and think "Ok. Well I won't get a pedigree. I will go out and spend three times as much money buying a ridiculously named crossbreed with absolutely no idea if the parents have been health tested. But it's ok. The woman who made Pedigree Dogs Exposed said that it was ok". Ridiculous. No decent, ethical, proper breeder will allow their dog or bitch to be mated to another breed of dog to produce a litter of cross breeds. For one it goes against the code of ethics of the breed clubs for "Improving The Breed". Mixing two breeds to make a cross, then slapping a name on it does not make it a breed. At the end of the day it is still a cross breed. Not only that, it is a cross breed that has no doubt come from untested parents because the breeders of these dogs have only one thing on their minds. Pound signs.

The Kennel Club have come under serious fire since the first documentary was made. They have been working at making these changes long before Pedigree Dogs Exposed One was released. You cannot expect these changes to become solid overnight. It is going to take time but surely it is good enough that the breed standards have been redone. The Kennel Club are involved in health testing schemes and they are doing everything they can to help their breeders produce healthy dogs. They have been doing this for years but as usual the KC guidelines were edited to within an inch of their life for the purpose of showing them in a bad light. Judges are being retrained and monitored to ensure that dogs with problems are not being placed at the big shows. I mean. What did she expect? The first PDE would be aired and then ALL the changes would happen the very next day and everyone would be happy? Rose tinted glasses much? No. These changes are going to take time because it is a case of gradually changing the dogs to what the breed standards should be and if you read the Kennel Club guidelines you will see that there have been so many changes made and they are trying everything they can to make our dogs healthier. The Kennel Club have already done so much for dogs over the years and they continue to do so even under fire.

There should be a programme made called "Designer Dogs Exposed" and you can see how many of these crosses end up in rescue centres because they are cross breeds and breed rescues are unable to take them. Also if you buy your puppy from a reputable, ethical breeder. That breeder will always say to you "If there is ever a problem with the puppy or when the dog grows up I will take the puppy back". All the breeders of my dogs said this to me when I purchased them. But your general person who just wants to breed a litter of cross breeds to make money will say "Your dog, I got my money so it's your problem" therefore they are adding to the rescue problem.

Let's take off our rose tinted glasses and see stop trying to sugar coat everything and state that it is black and white. That's not the way it works. There are thousands of fantastic breeders and exhibitors of dogs out there who are working hard to improve their breeds health and welfare and they should be given our support. Not judged because one person decided to seek out the bad apples and show them to the world.

Lynn-Alexandria McKendrick

Breed Specific Legislation

Breed Specific Legislation is no different to racism. It is the equivalent of me saying that "All Muslims are terroritsts" or "All Scotsmen wear kilts". I do not believe either of these statements as I know them to be untrue. However it does not alter the fact that legislation in place that is in fact formatively racist when it comes to certain breeds of dog. There are four banned breeds in the Dangerous Dogs Act

Pit Bull Terrier
Japanese Tosa
Dogo Argentino
Fila Braziliero

Under the Dangerous Dogs Act. It is illegal to own, breed from, sell or abandon any of these breeds or crosses of these breeds. The authorities can seize any dog that they believe is a banned type. The methods of identifying whether or not a dog is a banned type is somewhat dated in my opinion. Taking certain measurements from the dog, looking at the dogs appearance and such like to me there is no way to prove that a dog is a banned breed. It does not matter if the dog has never attacked anyone or there has never been a complaint against the dog. If the authorities believe that your dog is a banned type then they can take it without a warrant.