cycas Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 Off topic but I offered him a home before Xmas,emailed,left messages on phone and was then emailed that he had been rehomed.Is this true or not? He was still looking on 17th Jan: perhaps the home offer before Xmas fell through? Worth another try? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 (edited) Dogs Today have not been refused admission to Crufts - all that's happened is that their official 'press' status has been withdrawn - so the photographer can take pics like the rest of us but he doesn't get to take 'special' pics with the rest of the press and he doesn't get the privilege of the Press Centre and he doesn't get his free grub. DT were definately there on their stand selling magazines today. There's a post from Beverley Cuddy on DP this afternoon where she states that they do not have a stand & haven't had for a few years, even turning down one offered for free. It's stated that the magazines you've seen are given away to charities who then distribute them in exchange for donations. She also says that without a press pass any photo's taken cannot be used for commercial use. Edited March 8, 2008 by Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katiebob Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 There's a post from Beverley Cuddy on DP this afternoon where she states that they do not have a stand & haven't had for a few years, even turning down one offered for free. It's stated that the magazines you've seen are given away to charities who then distribute them in exchange for donations. She also says that without a press pass any photo's taken cannot be used for commercial use. On point one regarding the stand - I'm at Crufts tomorrow so I'll have a look bearing in mind what Beverley Cuddy has said. On point two - frankly, if she can't take photos - it's her own fault. If I went to a dinner party and complained to the hostess about the food, would I be surprised if I wasn't invited again?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mop Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 She has put another on, very interesting reading. http://coldwetnose.blogspot.com/2008/03/banned-wagon.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kats n greys Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 On point two - frankly, if she can't take photos - it's her own fault. If I went to a dinner party and complained to the hostess about the food, would I be surprised if I wasn't invited again?? The Kennel Club is suppose to be representing "what is best about pedigree dogs" so surely they should be trying to promote good health in the dogs they accept payment for registering? It's not a "private" do, it suppose to be a representative body. They do themselves and the breeders who are trying to do the best for their breed no favours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudi Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 She has put another on, very interesting reading. http://coldwetnose.blogspot.com/2008/03/banned-wagon.html It is very interesting and hits the nail on the head I believe - I've read the KC making statements that unless people sign up to the Accredited Breeders Scheme then DEFRA and Europe could impose other guidelines for breeding. The KC do some good stuff - the best thing they've ever done is the Good Citizens tests. But they do very, very little to promote the breeding of healthy dogs with correct temperament - in rotties I know for sure that high hip/elbow scores, entropian, poor temperaments are all bred from and all get registered with the KC. The ABS is daft, I know someone who bred from a rottie with a shockingly high hip score and who has more dogs than she has room for but is an Accredited Breeder. As I understand it the ABS cites all sorts of health tests BUT dogs that fail them aren't excluded from breeding - so it's pointless. One ray of hope is that the KC have (so I read a while ago) stopped registering breedings from merle/merle matings in Chihauhaus, oh but they'd roll out a more extensive programme of refusing registrations from dogs that should not be bred from. When you compare the breeding guidelines/restrictions for registered dogs in the UK to other European countries, it's just ludicrous that the KC can keep resisting doing something more to promote good breeding practices and health. Trouble with the KC is that it doesn't represent the people who pay into it, just the elitist few. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kats n greys Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 I'm at the GSD, to me it looked so wrong, deformed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyMalc Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 Like I said, I'm not at all a KC-fan, it's one of the reasons I won't go to Crufts, but it would just seem obvious to me that if you're attacking them relentlessly in your mag, they're not going to give you press passes so you can go in and collect more ammo While I do applaud Dogs Today's efforts to show up the KC for what they really are about, it seems a bit childish to me to go on and on in a blog bigging it up that they've not been invited to Crufts - what else did she expect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maria Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 The Kennel Club is suppose to be representing "what is best about pedigree dogs" so surely they should be trying to promote good health in the dogs they accept payment for registering? It's not a "private" do, it suppose to be a representative body. They do themselves and the breeders who are trying to do the best for their breed no favours. I agree - I've now taken out a subscription to Dogs Today, as they seem to be the only mag that will take a stand for healthy dogs to be bred, rather than obscene deviants - something the kc doesn't seem to have an interest in. And it appears they have 'leant' on some advertisers because they clearly don't like the scrutiny So I'll be boycotting JWB as well and letting them know why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maria Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 Like I said, I'm not at all a KC-fan, it's one of the reasons I won't go to Crufts, but it would just seem obvious to me that if you're attacking them relentlessly in your mag, they're not going to give you press passes so you can go in and collect more ammo While I do applaud Dogs Today's efforts to show up the KC for what they really are about, it seems a bit childish to me to go on and on in a blog bigging it up that they've not been invited to Crufts - what else did she expect? A lot of organisations with nothing to be ashamed of / hide would do the opposite - do the whole charm offensive etc to try and show why they are better than first perceived, and change minds. But the KC have been caught out with the discredited breeder scheme, which shows they clearly don't give a t*ss about the health of dogs, only the money they can earn from registration. I don't think DT have been childish - I actually think the KC has taken the childish reaction, and in so doing has given DT a great PR advantage - if it weren't for this and threads on other fora I wouldn't have been aware of this at all, and so wouldn't be in a position where I can now subscribe to a magazine who's ethics I applaud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katiebob Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 The Kennel Club is suppose to be representing "what is best about pedigree dogs" so surely they should be trying to promote good health in the dogs they accept payment for registering? It's not a "private" do, it suppose to be a representative body. They do themselves and the breeders who are trying to do the best for their breed no favours. You're assuming that Beverly Cuddy is telling the truth?? Either way, it's my personal belief that you achieve more if you persuade rather than dictate. We're talking about a magazine which relies on it's unique appeal to sell copies - we're not talking about someone sensible ;chatting' at a dog event and looking to change opinions. I think she's working on public sympathy here - not relying on the facts which might or might not speak for themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helly Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 i applaud DT for having the balls to speak out against the KC breeder scheme. They are quite correct in their accusations about the lack of checks for health and known hereditory problems and its about time someone shouted loudly that a few quid can buy you a place in their directory that means shag all for the reliability of the breeder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudi Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 You're assuming that Beverly Cuddy is telling the truth?? Either way, it's my personal belief that you achieve more if you persuade rather than dictate. We're talking about a magazine which relies on it's unique appeal to sell copies - we're not talking about someone sensible ;chatting' at a dog event and looking to change opinions. I think she's working on public sympathy here - not relying on the facts which might or might not speak for themselves. What do you mean by facts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happylittlegreensquirrel Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 not being even mildly interested in buying a dog from a breeder I will admit I know nothing about KC accredited scheme I would presume that if I did want to buy a dog from a KC accredited breeder that some form of check on the breeder and dogs would have carried out and I would be buying from a good breeder breeding only the best dogs , from reading the DT blog and responses on various forums it seems that is not the case can someone explain it to me in simple terms ( being a bit dim re breeding and buying ) Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nouggatti Posted March 8, 2008 Report Share Posted March 8, 2008 basically Sam what you've outlined is not true. If you as an individual were to assume that a KC accredited breeder would have tested e.g. for syringemella (sp) and heart problems e.g in a cavalier to keep their accreditation that is not the case. It is currently up to you as an individual to be aware of the health issues of your chosen breed and ask individual breeders if they test and get the hard copies of test results. One does not have to test for genetic breed defects to be an accredited breeder. It is recommended by the KC but not required. So DT basically did the black book of dog health, listing all the problems, and it appears according to DT that lots of dog owners found problems with their dogs as a result and had them treated. DT have the view (and rightly so imo) that the KC should insist that accredited breeders test for genetic defects. Furthermore, the KC are encouraging membership of their accredited breeder scheme to show that there is something in place as an alternative to proposed EU legislation controlling what dogs can and cannot be breed to encourage healthy breeds. Hope that makes some sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts