What do you hope will be in Pedigree Dogs Exposed 2?
We're writing an article looking back at the original documentary - Pedigree Dogs Exposed (PDE) and asking what we'd all like to see in PDE 2 - which will be shown in the New Year by the BBC.
Jemima Harrison's documentary sent shock waves around the dog world. It was undeniably a pivotal emperor's new clothes moment.
Many of us had long voiced concerns about the future welfare of pedigree dogs, but much of the content of the documentary had even the most pessimistic commentator shocked. Things would never be the same again.
Unfortunately the better breeders felt they were tarnished by the documentary, that the general public would think all breeders were just as bad as those on the documentary. They felt equal air time should have been given to the good as well as the bad - but that's not how TV works.
When Panorama looked at MP's expenses it would have been a very dull show if they'd told us about everyone who had made reasonable claims!
It was after all called Pedigree Dogs Exposed - not Pedigree Dog Breeders Appraised.
When you make a big splash there is going to be unexpected ripples, but some in the dog world became polarised into extreme positions and became stubbornly anti-reform and hated the documentary and the maker rather than reacting to the content.
A small group of these denialists formed a facebook group that has attempted to sabotage the making of Pedigree Dogs Exposed 2.
We'd like to know what people from lots of different parts of the dog world would like Pedigree Dogs Exposed 2 to achieve.
I personally would like to see some harmony - where everyone who loves dogs agrees to work together to try to solve the problems that we all know lie ahead.
But how do we get there?
Email claire@dogstodaymagazine.co.uk with what you'd to see covered by PDE2.
We're not encouraging anonymous contributions, there's already been far too much mud slinging by people made brave by anonymity.
But we would love to hear what you think should be in it and why. What has been the effect of PDE 1 in your opinion? We would also like to hear from people who have perhaps changed their mind about PDE over the years since it was made.
Do please share your opinions.
Jemima Harrison's documentary sent shock waves around the dog world. It was undeniably a pivotal emperor's new clothes moment.
Many of us had long voiced concerns about the future welfare of pedigree dogs, but much of the content of the documentary had even the most pessimistic commentator shocked. Things would never be the same again.
Unfortunately the better breeders felt they were tarnished by the documentary, that the general public would think all breeders were just as bad as those on the documentary. They felt equal air time should have been given to the good as well as the bad - but that's not how TV works.
When Panorama looked at MP's expenses it would have been a very dull show if they'd told us about everyone who had made reasonable claims!
It was after all called Pedigree Dogs Exposed - not Pedigree Dog Breeders Appraised.
When you make a big splash there is going to be unexpected ripples, but some in the dog world became polarised into extreme positions and became stubbornly anti-reform and hated the documentary and the maker rather than reacting to the content.
A small group of these denialists formed a facebook group that has attempted to sabotage the making of Pedigree Dogs Exposed 2.
We'd like to know what people from lots of different parts of the dog world would like Pedigree Dogs Exposed 2 to achieve.
I personally would like to see some harmony - where everyone who loves dogs agrees to work together to try to solve the problems that we all know lie ahead.
But how do we get there?
Email claire@dogstodaymagazine.co.uk with what you'd to see covered by PDE2.
We're not encouraging anonymous contributions, there's already been far too much mud slinging by people made brave by anonymity.
But we would love to hear what you think should be in it and why. What has been the effect of PDE 1 in your opinion? We would also like to hear from people who have perhaps changed their mind about PDE over the years since it was made.
Do please share your opinions.
Comments
Ensuring facts are correct at the time of transmission so that apologies don't have to be made after a threat of court action (re. Rhodesian Ridgebacks and the dermoid sinus falsehood)
And as for what we would like the 2nd programme to achieve, for dogs to be bred how they used to look years ago, not to have exaggerated body lines, for example the GSD looking like a hyena with no back end, labs having short stumpy legs and chibby bodies where as yrs ago they were a lot taller and muscular, there are many breeds that need to change still, and also yes the puppy farms, which don't always mean a farm which most people think, its peoples houses too, I for one know as my dog cme from such a puppy farm/house, I couldn't leave her there once I had saw her, it opened my eyes indeed.
Thank you for hard work, which sometimes cannot be very pleasent
I also think advice on how to source and choose a responsibly bred puppy would be appropriate (explaining health testing schemes etc.).
That is because it is all very well seeing what can sometimes go wrong when things are not done properly, but people need to know what they should be looking for instead. This would also help to reverse the trend of tarring all breeders with the same brush.
Also, some follow up on what changes organisations such as the Kennel Club have been making in the wake of the first programme would be useful.
Although saying that my mum bought a King Charles Spaniel from an old fashioned highly regarded breeder and had to have her poor 16 month old pup put to sleep because of auto immune disease. Mum had feared getting another one of these lovely but ill-fated dogs and did the best she could and was still let down.
Is there any point taking these issues up with the Kennel Club or will they do the same as the breed club and take the word of the long-standing breeder against the novice dog owner?
Many of the ads on sites like gumtree are for pedigree puppies, or designer breeds.
More on those breeders & breed clubs who refuse to see that there are health &/or temperament problems in their chosen breeds.
It needs to be balanced, by
showing the breeders & breed clubs who ARE doing their bit to not only improve the health &/or temperament of their breeds, but the general welfare of all dogs of their breed, who operate ethically, & have good practices such as breeders with good puppy contracts, & breed clubs that will help to rehome any dog of their breed.
1.the KC's ABS scheme, and how easy it is to join without being vetted!
2. how the KC continue to register litters from puppy farmers who breed extortionate amounts of litters per year.
3. How breed clubs set recomended health tests/code of ethics which many KC and breed club members do not adhere to
4. Champion dogs with poor health test results. STILL!
5.90% of KC reg puppies are not of "breed standard" so what is the point of kc registration? & What does KC registration give a dog which is not in the show ring?
6. False pedigrees and why is in not mandatory for ALL parentage to be officially DNA'd?
7. How the KC continue to register litters from Dam/sires with extortionate hip/elbow scores way over the breed average!
8. How some breeders pass on their breeding stock once they have stopped making money from them.
9. How dogs are tossed to one side if they do not "make it in the ring" ::Sigh::
But I think the main thrust of the programme still needs to be against the lunacy that has led to rewarding more and more extreme type, at the expense of health and longevity. There is still a huge degree of breed and kennel blindness out there.
I would like the 'hidden' diseases, such as cancers and auto-immune diseases to be investigated, and more pressure put on breeders to not breed from dogs with cancers and auto-immune diseases in their line, as this 'reputable' breeder had, and as far as I know is still doing. I found out too late, and it is a terrible thing to see your beloved dogs going through the suffering involved, and knowing that this could have been avoided. I will never get over this even nearly two years on, and I will never forgive her either.
If anyone else would like to be considered to be quoted, please do get in touch via my email address (given in post).
Thanks!
Claire Horton-Bussey
To show that not every one who shows is evil and also that not everyone who never shows is good. To give some balance to help the public purchase a pup in a responsible manner.
To highlight what they should be looking for. Also to make it known that not everything can be tested for or prevented. Mother Nature can be an evil bitch and all the health testing in the world CANNOT prevent problems from arising - it can only help reduce the incidence of problems. I have been told by my vet that HD is declining, but not gone and although parents can be tested for numerous problems, some unfortunately still occur despite having parents with low numbers in hip / elbow scores.
The Labradoodle Trust shows this to be the case with these doodles.
http://www.labradoodletrust.com/health_information.html
to tell the truth about where most pups are bred ....... the overwhelming majority come from BYB's and puppy farms with the most basic of standards
to stop targeting the one section of breeders who do the most testing, issue contracts, calculate Co -efficients of inbreeding and offer life time support for their puppy buyers and pups
to highlight and condemn the sale of pups through pet stores
to highlight and condemn the many many designer cross breeds that are bred for no other reason than their name sounds 'cute' ( and certainly with no health tests etc )
To look at the kind of dogs that are filling up rescues throughout the Uk - and targeting their breeders ( the show world has been the sole target of PDE so far yet how many show dogs end up on rescue ? )
but above all - to work towards ending the misery, pain and suffering that is puppy farming
please