Thanks for the thread examinator.
I saw it but had to turn off, it made me angry and such pain always does.
How perfectly stupid and self interested some of those owners are.
Please tell me why they did not put a pet they loved out of that misery?
Those who read my thread about a lost dog and buying another will know I love dogs.
I got ripped right of in buying Sky, pure breed Foxy female?
Not likely but she has no defects yet if she gets them? she will not be let suffer.
Blue is female half Foxy, who knows what else but she is fit well a pound puppy and cheeky, her and Sky are best mates with each other and me.
Here in tick country hairy little balls on legs die every year, almost every one.
So inbreeding and cross breeding kills dogs too.
We should have laws that stop such breeding and real penalty's for offenders.

Yes examinator, I too watched that program with much disgust.
I am the proud owner of two King Charles Cavalier Spaniels, so you can imagine how devastated I was watching those poor dogs in such pain with the seizures etc.
I wanted to jump through the tv to confront those self-righteous breeders and judges in England. I consider applying clamps to their skulls and slowly squeezing each side of the head too good for them!
Hell, maybe deep down I am one of those violent females constantly talked about on other threads!
Stop inbreeding dogs, and ensure comfort and quality of any dog's life is high on the list of breeder attributes.

What got me about the show was the hypocrisy about the definition of the breeds, the comparison between "definitive examples" then and now.
Clearly, endless emphasis on a given "feature" produces grotesques.

To me, the problem is that the breeds are defined using qualitative terms like "has a ridge of fur" or "short legs and long body".

I think the breeds should have definitions of absolute measurement such as "stands X inches high at shoulders" or ratios such as "length from back of skull to base of tail shall be P:Q. perhaps even a requirement that the over/underbite be within a certain range and functional.

Currently, if all the entries have a given feature, then the owner and breeder will argue endlessly that their particular grotesque is the true breed because the defining feature is "pronounced". If the definition gave a measurement, then those self-same people would go to great lengths to breed to that measurement.

Of course, this does not prevent inbreeding, but makes it far less desirable to try unless you know a lot about the particular mechanism of expression of the feature.

I further think the definition should include features other than appearance. Average lifespan, ability to run, jump etc. not just obedience in following an easy course, but reasonably difficult for a prime example.

I'm sure some dogs do have this in their definition, but something similar could be done for all, including the poor grotesques.

Rusty

Okay I’m back on track. Apologies again Exam.

I have two miniature poodles; they don’t lose hair and are hypoallergenic. They are also too small to cause physical harm in any significant way and big enough to not be too damaged in any significant way, they are one of the more intelligent breeds that are inclined to be gentle. They are also one of breeds that live the longest.

So yeah – I couldn’t just go to the pound in the last 20 years and pick just any dog for a household like mine, I need better odds. But for the small kids that I get they have an important role and a lot of children will warm to them before the other humans.

Hey Rusty – yeah they do have cm’s and definite measurements... no idea how over time they sort of shifted. I guess like beauty contests the bar keeps getting raised or something.

Hey and seriously – same thing has already been done to cats.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1162118/Inbreeding-makes-pedigree-cats-diseased-deformed-animal-welfare-groups-warn.html

http://current.com/items/89215980_inbreeding-makes-pedigree-dogs-diseased-and-deformed.htm

http://news.scotsman.com/uk/RSPCA-pulls-out-of-Crufts.4494035.jp

Thanks, TPP.

So, some things are defined in absolutes, but probably not all.

I think a winning example of a given breed should look almost indistinguishable from a winner of say fifty years ago.

Those "furnished" beagles for instance, or the english bulldogs. clearly the measured attributes didn't give any clue as to when a given feature had been taken to the stage of "that's just silly". They clng to very simple "more is better".

Other measures, not related to the "feature" could easily be defined. If the definition of the spaniels had included the head width and circumference of historical examples, current cranial issues might not exist.

I actually suspect that the images shown in the show were extremes, and that the "long ago" and "now" examples were cherry-picked. Nonetheless, the basic message is still there, and, I think, still valid.

Rusty

Rusty

<< Those "furnished" beagles for instance .. >>

I missed the start of the show and had actually thought that beagles hadn't been featured, even though I did glimpse a brief shot of one once or twice I think. Was wondering if you'd have a moment to elaborate on your reference to 'those furnished beagles'. What was that all about?

My daughter has recently bought a pedigree beagle in the UK and I've had two here in Aus, so I have a personal interest in the breed. We did notice a fairly close breeding relationship I remember with one of them when we looked over the papers.

Beagles are beautifully natured dogs and not meant to be susceptible to many health problems, which is why we decided on that particular breed when the kids went through the inevitable 'We want a dog' stage over a decade ago now. They can be prone to heart problems and both ours developed a heart murmur around their sixth or seventh year.

My daughter's beagle is a very different shape to ours - longer legs and more of a racy greyhound look, whereas ours aren't nearly as lean, though they're not fat. I commented when I visited her that he looked underfed, and her reply was that the beagles in the UK tend to be like that.