Comments on: History Repeats Itself in Kennel Club Ground-dog Day

By: Philippa

Philippa — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 13:51:45 +0000

Mmmmm Moppethead it seems to me one man's obsession is another man's very careful research. The 1985 footage, however it came to light, is so revealing about the inertia within the KC. If you are as you say you are a breeder who health tests then what is your beef exactly? Isn't Ryan just one of the many campaigners who are simply asking breeders to change and adapt their breeding strategies to ones that are proven to measurably improve health? That is all we ask. Seems to me that from your over emoting reaction it is perhaps just too big an ask for most breeders. Shame.

By: Julia_M

Julia_M — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 14:32:24 +0000

Pedigree not only pulled out of Cruft's, for whatever reason, but withdrew their help concerning the other 37 Group & Championship Shows across the UK. This has affected these show organsers in a far more fiscal manner than Cruft's. Little "touches" that they put in place to assist these shows, such as wallet covers, various bits & bobs etc has now left a void that is proving hard work for the organisers of these shows to fill.

By: Ryan O'Meara

Ryan O'Meara — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 14:14:14 +0000

It was broadly reported in the press that the withdrawal of Pedigree as principle sponsor was worthup to £1.5m (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1080430/P... This is not confirmed by either party. Also it is not confirmed that Pedigree withdrew over anything connected with the adverse publicity. The brand damage is very hard to quantify but here is an interesting piece: http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/861019/Brand-He...

By: Julia_M

Julia_M — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 14:02:47 +0000

Morning Ryan – Thank you for your reply.

Does anyone know roughly how many; and if so, what does it equate to in £s; sponsors, the Kennel Club has lost beause of the "expose" , so far as Crufts is concerned? I would love to add it up. I'm guessing it's a fair amount of money!

By: Ryan O'Meara

Ryan O'Meara — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 13:36:49 +0000

And, just as night follows day, here you are again – obsessing on MY website, talking about me. I'd laugh if I didn't feel such pity for you, having to dance to someone else's tune because you KNOW full well that your world has been discredited. You need to argue to try and justify what you do now it has been exposed. You are a hypocrite, I have proved it. You make claims about me which are 100% wrong are pure, uneducated speculation on your behalf. You know nothing about me or my dogs, or how many dogs I have owned, or how many dogs I've trained – NOTHING. So I returned the dose and now you cry like a baby. I predicted you'd do it when discussing your rant with others. Look, get some oxygen – your rants are a sure sign of deep trauma and that's not good for you. Deal with the fact that the public has a right to know what goes on in this incestuous world you seem to care so passionately about defending. You know NOTHING about what you are trying to talk about and reveal idiocy beyond description. You can't grasp the simple concept that if you don't like what someone has to say, then don't read it – but no, here you are obsessively reading what I have to say, responding and making a FINE job of embarrassing yourself. I think it's probably reached its conclusion now. I fear you have become unhinged and it's about time I put your obsession to bed. I am not here to answer your questions any more than I would answer the questions of an annoying tele-marketer who also doesn't have the first clue about what point it is they are trying to make.

I think it's time for me to get in touch with your employer and to express my grave concerns to them in writing. I will protect you from further embarrassment and hopefully someone can explain to you that you need to realise that the public's views on the routine abuse of dogs in the name of looks is a concept that is being dismissed and the public has a RIGHT to know that those in public positions need to be able to understand that.

YOU may not see the exceptional importance of a video clip showing the Kennel Club responding to health concerns expressed about pedigree breeding practices from 24 years ago with claims that are STILL being repeated today as those concerns have GROWN – but fortunately for dogs, your views are largely meaningless. The public has a right to see the truth and I'm happy to let them. I am obsessed about dog health and protecting the dog from people who don't have their best interests at heart. And no matter what you try to do to defend your own now discredited hobby, the public is more important than your personal vendetta.

By: Ryan O'Meara

Ryan O'Meara — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 13:31:47 +0000

Hi Julia – it most certainly isn't 'water under the bridge' as far as I'm concerned. Pedigree Dogs Exposed was billed as revealing the 'greatest animal welfare scandal of our time' and I happen to agree with it 100%. Some people are happy to write off the routine abuse and suffering of thousands upon thousands of dogs as a result of endorsed breeding practices, I am not one of those people. I believe we have a duty to ensure the public realise just how wrong it is that people abuse the health and welfare of dogs in the pursuit of personal vanity. It has to end and it has to end now and is absolutely not, as far as I'm concerned, water under the bridge.

By: Julia_M

Julia_M — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 07:13:15 +0000

Hey Ryan

I enjoy your posts regarding the Kennel Club. More about that later… What do you think of the Kennel Clubs latest launch into the publishing market place, especially with regards to the hype surrounding the views concerning showing/breeding dogs? It's a bit of a cheek isn't it or do you think it's now "water under the bridge" so far as the Club is concerned? http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/2188/pg_dtl_…

By: moppetswood

moppetswood — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 19:48:54 +0000

There really is more danger to dogs being done now, people are rushing to buy dogs from puppy farms and back yard breeders and buying the designer breeds because they are not show dogs so will obviously be healthy. As I have repeatedly stated people should buy from responsible breeders who carry out health testing, and no this doesn't affect me as my breed very rarely end up in the hands of the puppy farmers because people like me don't let them and give them too much of a hard time.

I am in dogs because I love them and yes definitely for the benefit of dogs.

As for coherent sentences, mine make perfect sense as opposed to some of your ramblings which I did actually wonder if you may have been drunk at the time.

Obsessed, you said it, who trawled through the history books to come up with a clip from 1985?

Shame that you are so selective about my responses that you show.

I can assure you that in the last 38 years I have contributed plenty to canine welfare.

Shame that you haven't answered some of my other questions though.

By: moppetswood

moppetswood — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 19:48:30 +0000

As to not knowing the first thing about dogs, canine welfare, genetics, dog breeding or canine health. Insult away. I'm sure that my CV would look far more impressive than yours. I continue to live and learn.

Yes you do touch a nerve, when people write such rubbish and only report one sided articles it does tend to touch a nerve.

Although not the biggest fan of Robert Killick your article on him was a case in point. What was actually said was that if he and his daughter were the only human beings left in the world, in order to prevent the human race becoming extinct he would do the necessary. However to show his utter disgust at Jemima Harrison he said that if in the same position with her, he would be unlikely to consider it. Journalistic license, perhaps you should know all about that.

Danger to dogs. Don't make me laugh, exposed for what?

Continued on next post as too long

By: moppetswood

moppetswood — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 19:46:32 +0000

What another load of crap Ryan

Once again you make statements about me, when in actual fact you know very little, you continue to refuse to answer the questions about what exactly you would want dog breeders to do. On another of your threads you asked for opinions on what responsible breeders do, perhaps you could go back to my post and tell me exactly where I am going wrong. I breed healthy, health tested, dogs which remain my responsibility for their entire lives.

As I told you in a previous post which you failed to print, my world is just fine, looking forward to Crufts, going all 4 days, 3 dogs entered. Next two litters planned out. Show diary at the ready. Diesel prices down. It just gets better. As I have previously told you I welcome more health testing and responsible breeding in all breeds, no arguement there.

My amateur detective skills are taken from your own published info, shame that it is so vague, I wonder why?

Continued on next post as too long