staffymonkey Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 I don't think it's meant to be taken too literally as in all mongrels = good and pure breeds = bad (he links to the SBT Clubs on Buster's website) I am beginning to wonder if I read a different version of Roy Hattersely's article I honestly don't get some of the criticism that has been levelled here Roy is extolling the virtues of getting a rescue dog and we are all into promoting rescue aren't we Whether or not we want a mongrel or pedigree I would hope that rescue would be the first port of call for anyone wishing to home a dog. I couldn't go to a breeder for a dog, whatever the make, when I know so many are in rescue. This is what I see the article as endorsing. Marion What they did say Wonder how he feels about breed specific legislation ?? Good point .... *ray shuffles off putting her DNB hat on...* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mum24dog Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 Wonder how he feels about breed specific legislation ?? I would expect him to be totally against - given that he has a large staffy cross that has exhibited somewhat aggressive tendencies in the past (if only towards geese). Pam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingrid Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 Going to put a tin hat on and duck here. If you are going to share you life with a dog you also have to like it, certain breeds and mongrels do absolutely nothing for me, if I'm not going to bond with my companion then life isn't going to be a bed of roses, believe me I've been there. If I go to a rescue looking for a dog, I want to make a choice and then go and discuss whether it would be suitable, I don't want someone to come out with a dog and say this is the one you are haviing I would walk away. Then point I am trying to make is that whilst I applaud his article, not all dogs are the same, I personally love GSDs & terriers because I find them easy, I understand them , some others I don't have a clue about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mum24dog Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 Then point I am trying to make is that whilst I applaud his article, not all dogs are the same Of course they aren't, but there are dogs running the whole gamut of canine type and temperament in rescue and therefore something to suit everyone who takes the time and effort to look. Pam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fee4 Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 He makes the usual, boring assumption that pedigree is all about looks, there is a lot more to it than that, the fact that he doesn't see that makes me think he is the one putting all the emphasis on looks. Or that he doesn't really understand what it is he is criticising. sorry-but i disagee with you. i have shown at the top level. pedigrees are about just that breeding for specific looks. a good breeder also bothers to make sure the temprement meets the standard as well. Reality-the majority of the dogs at crufts do not undertake the job they were originally designed to do-so as long as they look the part-capability is Not judged. There are still a small minority to have dual champions and who compete in several arenas ( eg working trials & breed for border collies) but they are few and far between fee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LurcherGirl Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 (edited) Going to put a tin hat on and duck here. If you are going to share you life with a dog you also have to like it, certain breeds and mongrels do absolutely nothing for me, if I'm not going to bond with my companion then life isn't going to be a bed of roses, believe me I've been there. If I go to a rescue looking for a dog, I want to make a choice and then go and discuss whether it would be suitable, I don't want someone to come out with a dog and say this is the one you are haviing I would walk away. Then point I am trying to make is that whilst I applaud his article, not all dogs are the same, I personally love GSDs & terriers because I find them easy, I understand them , some others I don't have a clue about I have to largely agree with Ingrid. All of our dogs have been chose by looks first and then secondly checked whether their temperament would suit our circumstances. Of Dylan and Flash I saw pictures and fell in love with them before I even knew anything about them. Troy we knew was a Pyrenean Mountain Dog, so we knew what he was going to look like. My husband loves pyreneans because of how they look and because of their temperament. And the American Cocker Spaniel... well, it's a long story, but I met an American and totally fell in love with her and hence the breed... And Jesse was even chosen by colour rather than temperament (and yet, he has fitted in beautifully and is just perfect). I agree that I have to click with a dog... and the first thing I go on is looks! If a dog doesn't do it for me, then I'd have a hard time bonding (though I am sure it would not be impossible). Sometimes I can't explain why I like a certain dog or a certain look, but it just happens. And sometimes I fall in love with dogs that I never thought I would like... It doesn't matter to me in the slightest whether a dog is a pedigree or a mongrel/crossbreed... we have two crossbreeds (lurchers) and two pedigrees... We love them all equally regardless of their ancestry. After all, it is not the pedigree dog's fault that it was born and they have just as much a right to be loved. I don't like and understand "breedists" regardless of what side of the fence they are... (be it breedists regarding mongrels or breedists regarding pedigrees). We all love our dogs and that should be respected. I fully agree of course that the first port of call when getting a dog is a rescue organisation and lots more work needs to be done to drive this home to the general public! But to make a sweeping statement that people that have and love pedigrees are not good dog owners, is extremely unfair in my humble opinion. Vera Edited March 16, 2007 by LurcherGirl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KathyM Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 To be honest, much as I like the sentiment of the article and don't think it's worth getting worked up over, it's hard *not* to see where people are coming from when the title is: Crufts dog show: Real dog lovers prefer mongrels I don't think that's reading into it what isn't there, if you get me. It says it quite plainly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elricc Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 And why not?It's a very honourable thing to do. Whatever is wrong with publicising the rescue dog as an alternative to buying from a breeder? The more publicity the rescue situation gets the better. Goodness knows, Crufts gives enough publicity to the breeders. Pam Totally agree Excellent article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happylittlegreensquirrel Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 Its not government policy or any new law, its just one mans personal view on a subject and it makes no real difference to my dog or yours what he thinks if people are feeling fired up and angry can you have a look at the Greyhound section , today a man who killed 1000's of dogs went to court and received a small fine ( compared to the money he made from killing dogs ) he could not even be trialled for killing the dogs as that was not even illegal , he was fined for burying there bodies without the appropriate permissions/licences etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mum24dog Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 To be honest, much as I like the sentiment of the article and don't think it's worth getting worked up over, it's hard *not* to see where people are coming from when the title is:I don't think that's reading into it what isn't there, if you get me. It says it quite plainly. Only if you don't read any further than the heading, which unfortunately doesn't actually reflect the thrust of the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KathyM Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 (edited) Only if you don't read any further than the heading, which unfortunately doesn't actually reflect the thrust of the article. Which is basically wot I said - I like most of the article, I don't like the heading. Edited March 16, 2007 by KathyM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fee Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 I really like the article, it shows a warmth towards his own dog and love of dogs in general. I'm sure he intended it to be provocative, particularly with all the press coverage Crufts has received over the last week or so. If it makes a few people think twice and consider a rescue instead of buying a puppy then it's done its job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brenda Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 I think it is a great article and I definitely agree with his sentiments. Well done Roy, definitely gone up in my estimation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue B Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 Its not government policy or any new law, its just one mans personal view on a subject and it makes no real difference to my dog or yours what he thinks if people are feeling fired up and angry can you have a look at the Greyhound section , today a man who killed 1000's of dogs went to court and received a small fine ( compared to the money he made from killing dogs ) he could not even be trialled for killing the dogs as that was not even illegal , he was fined for burying there bodies without the appropriate permissions/licences etc Wot she said I think that nitpicking an article that promotes rescue dogs and says that buying and selling dogs is not an honorable profession is a bit much, given that he mostly seems to be singing from the same hymn sheet as most of us on here. I didn't get any feeling at all that he disliked pedigrees at all, just the snobbery attached to them through events like Crufts and the show world in general. I also agree that crossbreeds are geneally healthier, its not a critisism of pedigrees, just a statement of fact. And, like Sam, I can think of a lot more people I would like to vent my anger on than Roy Hattersley. don't think he murdered any Greyhounds lately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teddmus Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 I love any dogs, any breed, any types, just love dogs. Good on you Roy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts