# Documentary



## Kristen Cabe (Mar 27, 2006)

*Pedigree Dogs - Exposed*

This is video #1 of 6. It details how pedigree dogs are becoming more and more unhealthy. I haven't watched the full series yet, but I wanted to share it because there is a part about GSD's, starting at around 7:17 of this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1LyjlX4Mp8

The judge they spoke to ........  ](*,) what an idiot!


----------



## Mike Schoonbrood (Mar 27, 2006)

*Re: Pedigree Dogs - Exposed*

The vet at 2:16 makes me wanna take the fork outta her ass.


----------



## Mike Scheiber (Feb 17, 2008)

*Re: Pedigree Dogs - Exposed*

Puppy mill owners/breeders and show dog breeders human debris sorry bastards.


----------



## Jerry Lyda (Apr 4, 2006)

*Re: Pedigree Dogs - Exposed*

Mike, stick that fork back where you found it.


----------



## leslie cassian (Jun 3, 2007)

*Re: Pedigree Dogs - Exposed*

Couldn't watch it... gag ack. 

...but we should all go out and buy a nice non purebred... like the LabX mutt I adopted - severe hip dysplasia, elbow issues (never had his elbows xrayed to diagnose what exactly because the vets told me treatment had only a 35% success rate), food sensitivity issues and no brain (ok he's got a tiny one, but no desire to use it), and a streak of piss me off and I'll bite you.

I love him, but he's part of the reason I chose a _purebred _Malinois when I was looking for another dog.


How do you think the designer dog breeders get their breeding stock?!:-o


----------



## Ian Forbes (Oct 13, 2006)

*Re: Pedigree Dogs - Exposed*

The program really raised some controversy over here in the UK. For me, nothing in it was really new or controversial. The main points being:

-Dog showing has lead to an emphasis on certain forms that are detrimental to health and function.
-The UK KC does not insist on health testing of parents before registration of puppies. They are scared it will hit there bank balance.
-The KC accepts breed clubs that recommend culling of puppies purely on a cosmetic trait (lack of ridge on Rhodesian Ridgebacks).
-The KC fixation with breed purity results in an ever decreasing gene pool and a lack of genetic diversity. I prefer a more functional approach where if the dog meets th ebreed standards in terms of health, temperament, function and conformation, then it is of that breed, regardless of parentage.

I think many people in the UK have woken up to the reality that haveing a KC registered dog is no guarantee of quality.

I do not see that the program glorifies designer dogs, random crossbreeding or BYBs - it just highlights the problems associated with many puerbred dog registries and the show dog world.


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

*Re: Pedigree Dogs - Exposed*

I haven't watched the video on purpose. This is an age-old story. Bastards are never x-rayed, never tested for temperament, etc., so they haven't got hip dysplasia, spinal problems, elbow problems, etc.

Amongst the pedigree dogs breeders, there are also mill producers but on both sides, there are breeders who produce good dogs with and without pedigrees. There is only one word to describe them "honest".


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

*Re: Pedigree Dogs - Exposed*



leslie cassian said:


> Couldn't watch it... gag ack.
> 
> ...but we should all go out and buy a nice non purebred... like the LabX mutt I adopted - severe hip dysplasia, elbow issues (never had his elbows xrayed to diagnose what exactly because the vets told me treatment had only a 35% success rate), food sensitivity issues and no brain (ok he's got a tiny one, but no desire to use it), and a streak of piss me off and I'll bite you.
> 
> ...


Sorry Leslie
I hit my edit button instead of the quote button........and they made me a mod! :-o    :grin:


----------



## leslie cassian (Jun 3, 2007)

*Re: Pedigree Dogs - Exposed*

It all makes sense now... didn't think I'd posted anything that needed to be moderated.

_
I think many people in the UK have woken up to the reality that haveing a KC registered dog is no guarantee of quality._

I think the idea that a registered dog equals a guarantee of quality is really pervasive. 

When I told my friend that her purebred pomeranian foster dog looked like a pet store dog to me, meaning, not a nice example of the breed, her response was, but he's CKC (Canadian KC) registered. :-o 

She was under the impression that the CKC was some sort of quality control body, not just a record of parentage. I think many people may think the same way and 'breeders' use it to their advantage.


----------



## Ian Forbes (Oct 13, 2006)

*Re: Pedigree Dogs - Exposed*



Gillian Schuler said:


> I haven't watched the video on purpose. This is an age-old story. Bastards are never x-rayed, never tested for temperament, etc., so they haven't got hip dysplasia, spinal problems, elbow problems, etc.
> 
> Amongst the pedigree dogs breeders, there are also mill producers but on both sides, there are breeders who produce good dogs with and without pedigrees. There is only one word to describe them "honest".


Gillian,

Perhaps you should watch it. It is not against 'pedigree' dogs per se. It is against many of the practices that abound:

-Closed registry. This results in a shrinking gene pool and the associated health risks.
-Dogs are judged against a visible standard. They are searching for conformity rather than the dog that if fit for function.
-No emphasis on dogs being tested for function
-Health testing is not compulsory.
-Breed standards that actively promote poor health.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy (Apr 19, 2006)

*Re: Pedigree Dogs - Exposed*

I watched all 6 clips
I think they did a good job

I too did not feel they were against purebred dogs but the points Ian mentioned as well as the problems with excessive inbreeding.


----------



## melissa mims (Jul 12, 2006)

The end result when the Ideal of Form annihilates the Ideal of Function.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqYxvlfxvnk&feature=related


A lot of interesting points in the series, but nowhere was it mentioned that a breed's original intent could be used as part of the selection process for breedworthy animals. 

Some of the old photos, esp of the hound and bulldog, are rather shocking in contrast to what the breed has become today.

I like dogs, and this makes me mad.


----------



## David Scholes (Jul 12, 2008)

This was referenced on another thread recently.


----------



## Jerry Lyda (Apr 4, 2006)

My point on AKC puppy mills.

Show breeders, you will get that appearence from these breeders. Even they don't breed for the betterment for the breed. When Judge Terry Hannan said that the show look is what the GSD is supposed to look like. How wrong can these Judges be???????


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Jerry Lyda said:


> When Judge Terry Hannan said that the show look is what the GSD is supposed to look like. How wrong can these Judges be???????


Fred Lanting wrote a fable about how the GSD was turned into what the show look is today. I found it once but never again. :-(


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

David Scholes said:


> This was referenced on another thread recently.


Where was that thread? Anyone remember?


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I recall reading it. Just not sure if it was on here. If I recall clrrectly he even mentions a few of the "top" show dogs that started it all.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> I recall reading it. Just not sure if it was on here. If I recall clrrectly he even mentions a few of the "top" show dogs that started it all.


Recall who posted it?

I was gonna combine.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Not sure! lanting has a ton of stuff on the web. He's been discussing the working vs show for yrs.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> Not sure! lanting has a ton of stuff on the web. He's been discussing the working vs show for yrs.


No, I meant the documentary.


But never mind. I just thought this thread was a duplicate post.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Nevermind!


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> Nevermind!


But I would LOVE a link to that Lanting fable (it was like a fairy tale) about what happened to the GSD conformation.



....... and back to the thread ......


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

TAA DAAAA! 
http://www.workingdogs.com/doc0138.htm


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> TAA DAAAA!
> http://www.workingdogs.com/doc0138.htm


*YES!*

YES YES YES!

That's the one!

PARABLE. Not fable. Duh!

THANK YOU!!!!!!


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

How'd you find it?????





Worth reading, BTW. JMHO.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I googled ' Fred Lanting Working vs show GSD'. It was the first thing on the page. I knew he'd be all over the web. I ran across his stuff yrs before I even owned a GSD.


----------



## David Scholes (Jul 12, 2008)

Connie Sutherland said:


> Where was that thread? Anyone remember?


Here it is:
http://www.workingdogforum.com/vBulletin/f30/pedigree-dogs-exposed-8467/


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Thank You!


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> I googled ' Fred Lanting Working vs show GSD'. It was the first thing on the page. I knew he'd be all over the web. I ran across his stuff yrs before I even owned a GSD.


I was so dumb. I googled Fred Lanting fable, Fred Lanting story, etc.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

There we go ... merged.


----------

