This is a placeholder text
Group text
by JudyK on 10 December 2009 - 13:12
I just heard that the documentary "Pedigree Dogs Exposed" which aired in the UK last year will be shown on BBC America in the US tonight. I'm not sure of the time.
Judy
Judy
by Lief on 10 December 2009 - 14:12
this can be viewed on youtube http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=1929F6E7CEE3D67B&search_query=pedigree+dogs+exposed
by missbeeb on 10 December 2009 - 14:12
I think "Fairy Tale" might be more a appropriate description than documentary... at least where the Shepherds are concerned. There's selective editing... then there's that pile of poop!
One good thing.... she (Jemima Harrison) apparently misquoted the KC Chairman (Ronnie Irving)... glad he now knows how it feels to be misrepresented and lied about, Lord knows the KC never even tried to support us (the truth) against her and they damn well should have done!
If you like emotive fiction and watching a few dogs that should have been PTS long before it was filmed, you'll enjoy it!
I found it nauseating and infuriating, she had the perfect platform to do something hugely beneficial for dogdom, but she settled for a tear jerking Soap Opera with some very sick dogs and a very few unsound ones (on a slippery surface) and refused, point blank to assist us in getting the KC to implement a registration system that would have been enormously beneficial to the health and welfare of our dogs. It's all about the money, don't be fooled or blinded by the BS.
by SchHBabe on 10 December 2009 - 15:12
I am glad this program will be shown in the US.
The value of this expose, IMO, is to encourage prospective puppy buyers to hold breeders to a higher standard, to demand proof of health screening like hips, elbows, eyes, etc before opening their wallets. The good breeders are already doing all this anyway. A program like this will hopefully cull some of the BYB's by stifling demand.
It is a sad fact that many "fancy" dog breeds are distorted genetic mutants misshapen from their original utilitarian forms into walking freak shows. The GSD has not been untouched by the fanciers of the "extreme".
It is a disservice to the dog world that major breed registries like the KC and the AKC do not require and enforce strict health screening before slapping papers on a puppy's butt.
Yvette
The value of this expose, IMO, is to encourage prospective puppy buyers to hold breeders to a higher standard, to demand proof of health screening like hips, elbows, eyes, etc before opening their wallets. The good breeders are already doing all this anyway. A program like this will hopefully cull some of the BYB's by stifling demand.
It is a sad fact that many "fancy" dog breeds are distorted genetic mutants misshapen from their original utilitarian forms into walking freak shows. The GSD has not been untouched by the fanciers of the "extreme".
It is a disservice to the dog world that major breed registries like the KC and the AKC do not require and enforce strict health screening before slapping papers on a puppy's butt.
Yvette
by missbeeb on 10 December 2009 - 15:12
This is NOT an expose and it's prime concern is to make money, which it has, in abundance!
If it were so altruistic, as you suggest, Yvette... why would JH have refused to assist us in forcing the KC to make health checks / screening mandatory before registration? Something real GSD people in the UK have been trying to implement for years!
Why would so many very selective and misleading edits have been necessary? It's SHOWTIME!!!!
Didn't take too much to fool some I guess... such is life!
by GSDSRULE on 10 December 2009 - 17:12
Why is it up to a film maker to make your KC and breeders do the right thing?
I don't care what kind of editing was done, that film of those Shepherds was disgusting.
And I mean the people that are breeding, showing and judging those poor creatures, NOT
the person that filmed it.
"Show" people have ruined a lot of breeds of dogs and horses. Why must people that show
be so damn extreme and blind?
I don't care what kind of editing was done, that film of those Shepherds was disgusting.
And I mean the people that are breeding, showing and judging those poor creatures, NOT
the person that filmed it.
"Show" people have ruined a lot of breeds of dogs and horses. Why must people that show
be so damn extreme and blind?
by snajper69 on 10 December 2009 - 17:12
I think some of us just don't like to come out with excuses for these breeders. The dogs should never been allowed to be showed, good job for exposing this garbage.
by missbeeb on 10 December 2009 - 17:12
Nobody suggested it was up to the film maker... did they? However, if you make out that dogs and dogdom are your main interest... why would you refuse to help implement such a beneficial scheme... why?
I agree, that SOME people have ruined some breeds, but I'm not so blind as to imagine that it applies to all. like most things in life, it's the minority (albeit too many) that ruin it for the majority!
If you don't care about very selective editing etc... enjoy your Soap Opera, it was made with you and your ilk in mind.
by bazza on 10 December 2009 - 23:12
Typical of the BBC, pay your license fee, all you get is repeats, repeats, repeats. How about something new, fresh, or maybe factual, now there's a novel idea for the BBC!!!!!!!
by Jemima Harrison on 11 December 2009 - 09:12
"One good thing.... she (Jemima Harrison) apparently misquoted the KC Chairman (Ronnie Irving)... glad he now knows how it feels to be misrepresented and lied about, Lord knows the KC never even tried to support us (the truth) against her and they damn well should have done!"
No, I don't believe I have misquoted Ronnie Irving. This stems from a recent column for Dogs Today in which I wrote:
"Chairman Ronnie Irving, in particular, has spoken out strongly against exaggerations - even going so far recently as to say that if the GSD breed clubs don’ t get their house in order they may be thrown out of the Kennel Club."
The source for this is this article, written by someone who attended a KC symposium to which only a few friendly onsiders were invited is here: www.dognews.com/stander/2009/071709/stander071709.html in which the writer Matt Stander writes: "The second day I was shocked beyond words to hear Ronnie Irving and Ruth Barbour of the GC both say that if breed clubs did not change their standards to the liking of the GC they would consider disenfranchising the breeds in question. Indeed Dr. Barbour said specifically, “Like it or lump it” and Mr. Irving was even more direct by saying specifically that the breed would no longer be recognized in the UK. And this was confirmed to me – I thought at first I was hearing things by Americans in the audience as well."
Missbeeb, you also say this:
"...and refused, point blank to assist us in getting the KC to implement a registration system that would have been enormously beneficial to the health and welfare of our dogs. It's all about the money, don't be fooled or blinded by the BS.
I have, as you know, been very consistent re the need for conformation changes in the breed (about which obviously we disagree), but I have also been consistently supportive of the Breed Council's demand for tougher health testing. From my recent DogsToday column:
"...there’s another reason for the bad blood between the KC and the GSD Breed Council – and that is that the GSD Breed Council has long lobbied the Kennel Club to make registration of German Shepherds dependent on tough mandatory health tests. And to tackle the fact that the KC believes this would drive breeders away, the Breed Council has suggested that the solution lies in a two-tiered registration system – the existing “basic” registration and a new “elite” registration for dogs which have met stringent health demands, much tougher than currently required by the KC’s Accredited Breeder Scheme.
This raises a thorny question for me. We call them health tests, but they’re not really anything of the sort – they’re just tests for hideous inherited diseases. They can only ever be a small measure of what a healthy dog is about, as evidenced by the fact that many of the German Shepherds we see wobbling round the show ring have passed health tests. It’s just that there aren’t any current health tests that measure what we can see with our eyes is patently horribly wrong with these dogs.
Nevertheless, I fully support the GSD Council’s demand for tougher testing as it would help, if not fully resolve, some problems. "
Jemima
No, I don't believe I have misquoted Ronnie Irving. This stems from a recent column for Dogs Today in which I wrote:
"Chairman Ronnie Irving, in particular, has spoken out strongly against exaggerations - even going so far recently as to say that if the GSD breed clubs don’ t get their house in order they may be thrown out of the Kennel Club."
The source for this is this article, written by someone who attended a KC symposium to which only a few friendly onsiders were invited is here: www.dognews.com/stander/2009/071709/stander071709.html in which the writer Matt Stander writes: "The second day I was shocked beyond words to hear Ronnie Irving and Ruth Barbour of the GC both say that if breed clubs did not change their standards to the liking of the GC they would consider disenfranchising the breeds in question. Indeed Dr. Barbour said specifically, “Like it or lump it” and Mr. Irving was even more direct by saying specifically that the breed would no longer be recognized in the UK. And this was confirmed to me – I thought at first I was hearing things by Americans in the audience as well."
Missbeeb, you also say this:
"...and refused, point blank to assist us in getting the KC to implement a registration system that would have been enormously beneficial to the health and welfare of our dogs. It's all about the money, don't be fooled or blinded by the BS.
I have, as you know, been very consistent re the need for conformation changes in the breed (about which obviously we disagree), but I have also been consistently supportive of the Breed Council's demand for tougher health testing. From my recent DogsToday column:
"...there’s another reason for the bad blood between the KC and the GSD Breed Council – and that is that the GSD Breed Council has long lobbied the Kennel Club to make registration of German Shepherds dependent on tough mandatory health tests. And to tackle the fact that the KC believes this would drive breeders away, the Breed Council has suggested that the solution lies in a two-tiered registration system – the existing “basic” registration and a new “elite” registration for dogs which have met stringent health demands, much tougher than currently required by the KC’s Accredited Breeder Scheme.
This raises a thorny question for me. We call them health tests, but they’re not really anything of the sort – they’re just tests for hideous inherited diseases. They can only ever be a small measure of what a healthy dog is about, as evidenced by the fact that many of the German Shepherds we see wobbling round the show ring have passed health tests. It’s just that there aren’t any current health tests that measure what we can see with our eyes is patently horribly wrong with these dogs.
Nevertheless, I fully support the GSD Council’s demand for tougher testing as it would help, if not fully resolve, some problems. "
Jemima
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top