Crufts-winning mother-and-daughter duo plead guilty to keeping 104 dogs in 'horrific

RubyGirl

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2004359/Crufts-winning-mother-daughter-plead-guilty-keeping-104-dogs-horrific-conditions
.html

:mad:

Shanao

The link isn't working, try this one.

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/local/localbrad/9086134.Bradford_Crufts_winners_kept_104_dogs_in__appalling__squalor/

homerhop

The kennel club are allowing them to stay showing dogs yet they went in and took down photos showing the history of Bavarian mountain hounds because they showed them stalking at this years Crufts. What an upstanding organisation.

joyce2009

blooy disgrace,,24 of the poor dogs had to be put down:mad::mad:

henryporter

The Kennel Club doesn't care about animal welfare - as long as the breeders pay their subs and produce shiny congenitally diseased animals they simply don't care. These pair are a perfect example of the dog show breeders out there - I've yet to meet one who actually likes having the poor animals as companions, with the animals best interests at heart. This proves the BBC right in refusing to air Crufts any more.

Hopefully in years to come the whole barbaric charade that dog shows are will cease to exist and who knows, maybe someday people will figure out that cruelty to animals is no different than that to humans and the punishment for either will be the same.

andreac

henryporter wrote: »

The Kennel Club doesn't care about animal welfare - as long as the breeders pay their subs and produce shiny congenitally diseased animals they simply don't care. These pair are a perfect example of the dog show breeders out there - I've yet to meet one who actually likes having the poor animals as companions, with the animals best interests at heart. This proves the BBC right in refusing to air Crufts any more.

Hopefully in years to come the whole barbaric charade that dog shows are will cease to exist and who knows, maybe someday people will figure out that cruelty to animals is no different than that to humans and the punishment for either will be the same.

God your narrowminded, ignorance is un real!!:mad:

Im sorry, but you cannot tar all breeders/exhibitors with the same brush. These people are in the very small minority.

I own and show dogs and my dogs are my world, and mean so much to me and likewise for all the other people i know involved in showing and owning dogs, so please dont tar everyone with the same brush, its very, very unfair.:mad:

My dogs are very well looked after and want for nothing. I put them first nearly before myself. They have the best of food, live indoors with me. Are brought for lovely walks to all different places regularly. They are exercised twice a day, so how can you say that we dont see our dogs as companions?? You just cant generalise like that.

Dog shows are far from barbaric, have you ever been to one? My dogs absolutely love showing. All i have to do is take out my show bag and the dogs are at the front door dying to go to the show.

henryporter

andreac wrote: »

God your narrowminded, ignorance is un real!!:mad:

Im sorry, but you cannot tar all breeders/exhibitors with the same brush. These people are in the very small minority.

I own and show dogs and my dogs are my world, and mean so much to me and likewise for all the other people i know involved in showing and owning dogs, so please dont tar everyone with the same brush, its very, very unfair.:mad:

My dogs are very well looked after and want for nothing. I put them first nearly before myself. They have the best of food, live indoors with me. Are brought for lovely walks to all different places regularly. They are exercised twice a day, so how can you say that we dont see our dogs as companions?? You just cant generalise like that.

Dog shows are far from barbaric, have you ever been to one? My dogs absolutely love showing. All i have to do is take out my show bag and the dogs are at the front door dying to go to the show.

So why did the BBC want to have nothing to do with it. Also why get so defensive and not bother to comment on the OPs comment. Dog shows are all about show dog owners egos and one-up-manship and very little to do with providing dogs with a pursuit - always the usual response from those wearing rose-tinted glasses 'Its not me; its a few bad eggs blah blah' - its up to you as a competitor in the dog showing world to make sure the bad eggs are stopped, but you don't - instead you wait on animal welfare people to do your dirty work and when they give out about the bad eggs, they're branded as narrow-minded and ignorant. Must feel pretty nice sitting up there on the fence...

andreac

henryporter wrote: »

So why did the BBC want to have nothing to do with it. Also why get so defensive and not bother to comment on the OPs comment. Dog shows are all about show dog owners egos and one-up-manship and very little to do with providing dogs with a pursuit - always the usual response from those wearing rose-tinted glasses 'Its not me; its a few bad eggs blah blah' - its up to you as a competitor in the dog showing world to make sure the bad eggs are stopped, but you don't - instead you wait on animal welfare people to do your dirty work and when they give out about the bad eggs, they're branded as narrow-minded and ignorant. Must feel pretty nice sitting up there on the fence...

How can i not get defensive when you have basically said all dog show owners are bad and that none of us actually care about our dogs, of course i will get annoyed and defensive!!

Dog shows are not all about dog owners ego's, have you ever been to a dog show or know anyone personally who shows their dogs? Im guessing not as your view on it is very one sided.

I show my dogs as a hobby and love it. Its a social thing too, making new friends and the dogs get to meet all their buddies there and enjoy the buzz of it all. If you see some of the dogs at the shows they absolutely love it.

Im not sitting on any fence, far from it... The people i know in dog showing all make sure their dogs are happy and healthy and are health tested before their dogs are bred from, me included.

The BBC did a documentary that was all one sided. I dont disagree at all that there are bad breeders out there, there will be bad people in all aspects of life, hobbies included and its up to us to make people aware of the bad ones and warn them to stay away which is what i do when anyone asks to recommend a good breeder in a certain breed.

ppink

henryporter wrote: »

So why did the BBC want to have nothing to do with it. Also why get so defensive and not bother to comment on the OPs comment. Dog shows are all about show dog owners egos and one-up-manship and very little to do with providing dogs with a pursuit - always the usual response from those wearing rose-tinted glasses 'Its not me; its a few bad eggs blah blah' - its up to you as a competitor in the dog showing world to make sure the bad eggs are stopped, but you don't - instead you wait on animal welfare people to do your dirty work and when they give out about the bad eggs, they're branded as narrow-minded and ignorant. Must feel pretty nice sitting up there on the fence...

In fairness you could apply that logic to just about everything on the planet!

If I decide I am competing in showjumping is it up to me to make sure the bad eggs in showjumping are stopped? and how much up to me is it? do I voice my concerns or do I make allegations.......or maybe i should do some private investigating?

all you can expect people to deal with is what they suspect or know for a fact, which I am sure most people do. and all they can do legally is report.

andreac

Anyway, the people in that link are not dog lovers, they are puppy farmers, no doubt about it. How can 2 people take care of so many dogs and give them all the attention they need, they cant, end of.

summer_ina_bowl

What an awful story! I can't belive that idiotic pair were allowed to keep ANY dogs *rolls eyes*.

Also, I have to say henryporter, that your blanket statement above is totally unfair. I dog show dogs, but I am a Veterinary Nurse who also works in Rescue so it's fair to say I'm aware of the doggy scene. Just as I sometimes deal with terrible pet owners and dreadful breeders, I also sometimes deal with questionable dog showers with dodgy motives for what they do, HOWEVER, there are many great dog showers who put the interests of their dogs foremost, just as there are also good pet owners and good careful breeders. What you stated above is akin to saying that all restricted breed dogs are aggressive or that all vets are in it solely for the money or that all rescue dogs have serious issues... It's ridiculous, there's enough unfounded predejuce in the canine world (and even more genuine issues which nobody seems to argue about?!) - why did you feel the need to bring up even more absolute rot? Yawn.

henryporter

andreac wrote: »

How can i not get defensive when you have basically said all dog show owners are bad and that none of us actually care about our dogs, of course i will get annoyed and defensive!!

Dog shows are not all about dog owners ego's, have you ever been to a dog show or know anyone personally who shows their dogs? Im guessing not as your view on it is very one sided.

I show my dogs as a hobby and love it. Its a social thing too, making new friends and the dogs get to meet all their buddies there and enjoy the buzz of it all. If you see some of the dogs at the shows they absolutely love it.

Im not sitting on any fence, far from it... The people i know in dog showing all make sure their dogs are happy and healthy and are health tested before their dogs are bred from, me included.

The BBC did a documentary that was all one sided. I dont disagree at all that there are bad breeders out there, there will be bad people in all aspects of life, hobbies included and its up to us to make people aware of the bad ones and warn them to stay away which is what i do when anyone asks to recommend a good breeder in a certain breed.

Obviously I'm hitting a nerve here somewhere but the generalisations go both ways - I have been to dog shows and I do know dog showing people - I also have two rescue dogs. I simply do not agree with a concept of dog showing which creates the behavior described in the article posted by the OP - just because there are a number of people out there who think that dog showing is nice and good, doesn't stop people like the Humes from trying to make a sordid and despicable living out of it - it took a few posters a number of tries to get off their high horses about my comments to come back down to earth and discuss the issue at hand.

I once bought a pedigree German Shepherd for my Mrs., a dog she loved to bits - bought the pup from a IKC registered breeder, within a year the dog was diagnosed with megaesophaegus - a congenital disease - neither the breeder nor the IKC could be bothered to do anything about it - and do you know what we wanted them to do - stop breeding the same animals, get to the bottom of it and sort it out; that was all - they just didn't bother to return our calls. That poor dog died last year. When I bought the dog I was as naive about dog breeding as most people but not anymore - now its rescue dogs only for me. So maybe you can all understand a bit when I get annoyed at pedigree breeders, dog shows and so on.

Did you ever ask yourselves what happens to the dogs that bred and aren't 'good' enough to be shown?

andreac

henryporter wrote: »

Obviously I'm hitting a nerve here somewhere but the generalisations go both ways - I have been to dog shows and I do know dog showing people - I also have two rescue dogs. I simply do not agree with a concept of dog showing which creates the behavior described in the article posted by the OP - just because there are a number of people out there who think that dog showing is nice and good, doesn't stop people like the Humes from trying to make a sordid and despicable living out of it - it took a few posters a number of tries to get off their high horses about my comments to come back down to earth and discuss the issue at hand.

I once bought a pedigree German Shepherd for my Mrs., a dog she loved to bits - bought the pup from a IKC registered breeder, within a year the dog was diagnosed with megaesophaegus - a congenital disease - neither the breeder nor the IKC could be bothered to do anything about it - and do you know what we wanted them to do - stop breeding the same animals, get to the bottom of it and sort it out; that was all - they just didn't bother to return our calls. That poor dog died last year. When I bought the dog I was as naive about dog breeding as most people but not anymore - now its rescue dogs only for me. So maybe you can all understand a bit when I get annoyed at pedigree breeders, dog shows and so on.

Did you ever ask yourselves what happens to the dogs that bred and aren't 'good' enough to be shown?

Of course you are hitting a nerve, you are telling us that we are all bad owners, go figure!!

Can i ask when you bought the German Shepherd, did you ensure that the parents were health tested and hip scored? Ikc doesnt always guarantee a healthy dog, its only a piece of paper to show that its registered, nothing else.
So its important for people to do their homework when researching a pedigree dog and make sure the breeder is a responsible one that health tests their dogs before breeding.
Dog showing does not encourage the behaviour thats in that article. Those people are horrible, nasty cruel people who dont care about dogs, end of. You absolutely cannot compare those puppy farmers to people who show their dogs and care deeply about them.

You have to remember, the IKC and breeders are not the same. The IKC is just a body that keeps a database for registering dogs and really only have money as their main priority and i dont agree with a lot of the things they dog.
Most breed clubs set up the clubs so they can promote responsible and healthy breeding and showing of dogs so they can inform and help people the right route to do down with pedigree dogs.

With your comment about show dogs that dont make it, you obviously dont know, that in every litter that is bred, only one or 2 out of the litter might be show quality so the others are sold to pet homes and to people not interested in showing or breeding, so its not like the breeder puts them down:rolleyes: What did you think happens to them?

I think your knowledge on the whole showing/breeding issue is very limited and you seem to be just jumping to conclusions and assuming an awful lot when in fact you are wrong so please be careful what you post on this matter if you cant back it up properly.

lrushe

henryporter wrote: »

Did you ever ask yourselves what happens to the dogs that bred and aren't 'good' enough to be shown?

Good breeders make sure they go to homes like mine where they are neutered, cared for and loved until their dying day. I have 2 such dogs, my third would be show worthy though I don't think I will have the time now but she is as much a pet as the other 2.

ppink

henryporter wrote: »

I once bought a pedigree German Shepherd for my Mrs., a dog she loved to bits - bought the pup from a IKC registered breeder, within a year the dog was diagnosed with megaesophaegus - a congenital disease - neither the breeder nor the IKC could be bothered to do anything about it - and do you know what we wanted them to do - stop breeding the same animals, get to the bottom of it and sort it out; that was all - they just didn't bother to return our calls. That poor dog died last year. When I bought the dog I was as naive about dog breeding as most people but not anymore - now its rescue dogs only for me. So maybe you can all understand a bit when I get annoyed at pedigree breeders, dog shows and so on.

Did you ever ask yourselves what happens to the dogs that bred and aren't 'good' enough to be shown?

I really think that when purchasing a dog that you want to be a fine example of the breed a LOT of work has to be done researching it, especially with GSD's. In recent years it has been highlighted more how badly the breed has gone here and in the UK, this was not as widely know years ago...well not for regular Joe Soaps like me anyway.
I know there is a serious issue with the breed when my own vet cannot find a line decent enough to get a pup from.

doggiewalker00

Appaling story.

lrushe

ppink wrote: »

I really think that when purchasing a dog that you want to be a fine example of the breed a LOT of work has to be done researching it, especially with GSD's. In recent years it has been highlighted more how badly the breed has gone here and in the UK, this was not as widely know years ago...well not for regular Joe Soaps like me anyway.
I know there is a serious issue with the breed when my own vet cannot find a line decent enough to get a pup from.

Just to point out also that there is nothing stopping you from going outside Ireland to source a pup if that's what it takes to find a healthy sound dog.
For the likes of a GSDs Germany would be a great place to souce one, they take the heath and status of their national breeds v.seriously.

Discodog

It can be very difficult for the average buyer to thoroughly check out a breeder. I know someone who did a lot of research & finally went to a highly recommended breeder in Belfast. He ended up paying 3000 for a dog that has massive congenital health problems - the Vet certs were fakes as was the pedigree.

The BBC Panorama program "Pedigree Dogs Exposed" was certainly not one sided. In fact the journalist returned undercover to Crufts the following year & apparently recorded breeders saying that the fuss would die down & they could get back to normal.

The Court was very lenient in this case - I would not be surprised if the sentence is appealed.

paula w

Dog showing has hit a nerve with you all I see!!! There are so many good breeders & people who show their dogs but its unfortunately the minority who spoil it for the majority. I really do think the kennel clubs should get their fingers out and regulate better for the sake of dogs welfare. We bought a GSD for showing but after seeing the panorama documentary we only have her as a pet. Yes I still dabble in showing and I also breed Labradors and all my dogs are registered but I also have 2 rescue dogs. My lab pups have been donated to various charities because I want my dogs to do some good in the world.

Discodog

Then it is up to the majority to shop, reveal & throw out the minority but that is not happening. I am amazed that some reputable breeders have not set up an alternative to the KC.

Shanao

Discodog wrote: »

Then it is up to the majority to shop, reveal & throw out the minority but that is not happening. I am amazed that some reputable breeders have not set up an alternative to the KC.

This is something I was thinking about lately. Seems more like the responsible breeders are doing all the work while the IKC kickback, relax and wait for their money to roll in. What are the odds of it actually being possible though?

ISDW

But who are they going to shop them to? Breeding, even mass breeding isn't illegal, so who is going to listen?

If the IKC take any kind of sanctions against anybody, then that breeder just goes and registers their dogs with a.n. other registration agency.

If the responsible breeders set up their own registry, they wouldn't be able to enter their dogs in shows, compete in certain events for their particular breeds etc.

Discodog

ISDW wrote: »

If the responsible breeders set up their own registry, they wouldn't be able to enter their dogs in shows, compete in certain events for their particular breeds etc.

They don't need to. All a group of people have to do is form an association. Then they can have a set of rules that all members agree to. It would be a great selling point. Bit like the Dogs Trust do with rescue dogs.

slashygoodness

It would be fantastic to see an independant breeder association that really checked and verified the health - emotional and physical - of the dogs and puppies.

IMO I feel that dog shows send out the wrong message about why we have canine companions - they focus on striving to produce a 'dog' to an artifical set of criteria, that is not always in the best interest of the dogs involved.
Perhaps the criteria should change to promote the well being of the dogs.

I am all for fun and engaging activities but wonder if the competitions are more about the people feeling the need for acknowledgement than the dogs needing a competition...

I know many people enjoy them, but I can't help thinking of them the same way, as I do about the Kiddie beauty pagents..

Would love to see a really great show that focused on the welfare of dogs.. if any one has any suggestions of which ones to visit would love to hear about them..

ISDW

Discodog wrote: »

They don't need to. All a group of people have to do is form an association. Then they can have a set of rules that all members agree to. It would be a great selling point. Bit like the Dogs Trust do with rescue dogs.

Like the breed clubs that already exist?

I don't understand what you mean by what the Dogs Trust do in this instance.

Discodog

ISDW wrote: »

Like the breed clubs that already exist?
I don't understand what you mean by what the Dogs Trust do in this instance.

I agree with Slashy. I am sure that there are some good breed clubs but there needs to be a more universally recognised standard where the health of the dog is paramount.

The DT match the dog to the proposed owner & breeders must do the same. If rescues can homecheck then why not breeders.

The welfare of the dogs needs to be put above profit & the customer needs to be able to recognise this type of responsible breeder. There should be a logo that can be used on ads etc.

ISDW

Discodog wrote: »

I agree with Slashy. I am sure that there are some good breed clubs but there needs to be a more universally recognised standard where the health of the dog is paramount.

The DT match the dog to the proposed owner & breeders must do the same. If rescues can homecheck then why not breeders.

The welfare of the dogs needs to be put above profit & the customer needs to be able to recognise this type of responsible breeder. There should be a logo that can be used on ads etc.

OK, its just that you said Dogs Trust, not any other rescues, other rescues do the same thing.

Of course you are right, but humans being humans, there will always be good and bad. A good breeder does indeed match the pup to the owner, and I do know breeders that do homevisits, interview people and in fact I know a few that will only give pups to people that they personally know, or have been highly recommended. But these are people who breed for what I think are the right reasons, only when they want to add to their kennel, not for profit.

Discodog

ISDW wrote: »

OK, its just that you said Dogs Trust, not any other rescues, other rescues do the same thing.

Yes but the DT turn it almost into a brand. As well as breeders it would great if all the rescues formed an association with a code of practice.

The point that I am making is that breeders & rescues complain when they get tarred with bad publicity caused elsewhere. But it is up to them to show that they are different & operate to higher standards. Many suppliers are members of associations that offer protection to consumers so why not breeders ?

summer_ina_bowl

discodog, I'm not sure how much you know about the general running of rescues, but I doubt many have the money, time or extra man-power to start setting up associations to prove they're doing a good job.

As for a breeder association, it'd be great for buyers to have that piece of mind, but again, I'm not sure how feasible it is for breeders to put their time and money into this, after all it is only the puppy farmer type breeders who make a huge profit on pups as they don't have the costs of health tests, high quality feeds, or top notch kennel/home maintenance. Another problem is that needless to say there'd have to be more than one visit to assess the suitability of a breeders premises and I wonder how representative of the breeders standards the visit would be if the breeder had previous notice they were to be inspected.
Also, if the regulation was internal, whats to say that it would be unbiased and strictly selective of the best breeders? More likely, it'd be too political for breeders to regulate other breeders, leading to arguments, clicks, and spin off associations.

I under no circumstances agree with the practices of puppy farmers or pot luck breed-for-money owners, but I have to say, I believe that surely some responsibility lies with the buyer?

If a bakers named Backstreet Bobs was selling stale, disease ridden bread from a filthy premises, (lets say he has escaped the health and safety checks because he knew they were coming lol) would it be expected of the good bakers (Brilliant Bills) operating down the road to intervene and give up their time/money to put a stop to Bobs dastardly ways? No. People would stop shopping at Bobs in preference of Bills superior service and Bob would go out of business.

Sadly, most people would do more research when getting a new washing machine than when getting a dog

Discodog

summer_ina_bowl wrote: »

discodog, I'm not sure how much you know about the general running of rescues, but I doubt many have the money, time or extra man-power to start setting up associations to prove they're doing a good job.

More that you could ever imagine . It would obviously need to be set up by someone with "admin" time - great job for maybe a retired or unemployed person. It's not rocket science to agree a list of principles.

Of course a puppy from a "guaranteed" breeder would be more expensive & would give the breeder a bigger margin. People do not do research but it is up to the breeders to explain why they should.

The buyer does have to take some responsibility but it is impossible to check out the breeder & be 100% sure. The breeder exposed by Panorama was regarded as the best of the best & beyond reproach. Unless you had access to her Vet reports there would be no way of knowing what she was doing.

summer_ina_bowl

In many cases, I know of people who've bought dogs without papers, or from questionable sources just because they were cheaper - unfortunately to many people a dog is a dog and best price wins so having the guaranteed breeders pups more expensive could possible do more damage than good.

Agreeing a list of principles is one thing, enforcing them is another.

Good breeders already do encourage research - look over the countless threads here where breeders are almost screaming through their computers for people to buy responsibly.