Comments on: At Last! Puppy Farmers are Unmasked (Thanks to the Bateson Report) http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/4982/at-last-puppy-farmers-are-unmasked-thanks-to-the-bateson-report/ the lifestyle magazine for dog lovers Sat, 11 Jun 2011 15:23:06 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: bet hargreaves http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/4982/at-last-puppy-farmers-are-unmasked-thanks-to-the-bateson-report/#comment-88407 bet hargreaves Fri, 12 Feb 2010 10:15:14 +0000 http://www.dogmagazine.net/?p=4982#comment-88407 If I may be allowed to reply to some of the above comments,in the Bateson Report . DOG FARM Any Establishment Breeding Dogs which ,by virtue of the Numbers of Bitches/Litters involved ,falls under the Licensing provisions of the Breeding of Dogs Act . A Breeder who Breeds 5 Litters a Year is Termed a Commercial Breeder . Do those Breeders come under the Breeding of Dogs Act. ? Do they have to be Licensed and be Inspected by their local County Councils? My next Comment from Professor Bateson's Report ,is about In-Breeding. In the Cavalier Breed ,to get the Cavalier Breed Established in the 1930's Mother was Mated to Son ,Father to Daughter, Brother to Sister . Unfortunately the 2nd World came about 5 years later when this In-Breeding was carried out,but this In-breeding was on top of the Original In-Breeding. The Founder of the Cavalier Breed , Mrs.A. Pitt, mentioned in Cavalier Club Magazine in 1957,that no thought had been given by the Breeders as to the Future of the Cavalier by the In-Breeding. There was also in the 50's -60's -70's In -Breeding being done by Cavalier Breeders. Even in the 1980's there was Half Brother to Half Sister matings taking place. It is now Claimed because of this In-Breeding in our Cavalier Breed,that there is now no Genetic Variation ,this is so important ,that even if To-day's Cavaliers are not being In-Bred ,this does not matter ,because there is No Genetic Diversity in the Cavalier Breed.That the Breed now has a Very Narrow Genetic Base. Has this resulted in 50% of Cavaliers having a MVD Heart Murmur at 5 years of Age,and as was Recently said at the Cavalier Club AGM by the Cardiologist at the AGM, this is no better than it was 18 years ago. Bet Hargreaves If I may be allowed to reply to some of the above comments,in the Bateson Report .

DOG FARM

Any Establishment Breeding Dogs which ,by virtue of the Numbers of Bitches/Litters involved ,falls under the Licensing provisions of the Breeding of Dogs Act .
A Breeder who Breeds 5 Litters a Year is Termed a Commercial Breeder .

Do those Breeders come under the Breeding of Dogs Act. ?

Do they have to be Licensed and be Inspected by their local County Councils?

My next Comment from Professor Bateson’s Report ,is about In-Breeding.

In the Cavalier Breed ,to get the Cavalier Breed Established in the 1930′s Mother was Mated to Son ,Father to Daughter, Brother to Sister .

Unfortunately the 2nd World came about 5 years later when this In-Breeding was carried out,but this In-breeding was on top of the Original In-Breeding.
The Founder of the Cavalier Breed , Mrs.A. Pitt, mentioned in Cavalier Club Magazine in 1957,that no thought had been given by the Breeders as to the Future of the Cavalier by the In-Breeding.
There was also in the 50′s -60′s -70′s In -Breeding being done by Cavalier Breeders.

Even in the 1980′s there was Half Brother to Half Sister matings taking place.

It is now Claimed because of this In-Breeding in our Cavalier Breed,that there is now no Genetic Variation ,this is so important ,that even if To-day’s Cavaliers are not being In-Bred ,this does not matter ,because there is No Genetic Diversity in the Cavalier Breed.That the Breed now has a Very Narrow Genetic Base.

Has this resulted in 50% of Cavaliers having a MVD Heart Murmur at
5 years of Age,and as was Recently said at the Cavalier Club AGM by the Cardiologist at the AGM, this is no better than it was 18 years ago.

Bet Hargreaves

]]> By: Linda Flynn http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/4982/at-last-puppy-farmers-are-unmasked-thanks-to-the-bateson-report/#comment-88162 Linda Flynn Thu, 11 Feb 2010 15:53:19 +0000 http://www.dogmagazine.net/?p=4982#comment-88162 With all due respect Mrs Hargreaves the forum you speak about does not allow breeders a voice! it's membership is primarily pet owners, with the exception of one or two! those who were members, if they do make a comment regarding their peers, they are removed!!!!! With all due respect Mrs Hargreaves the forum you speak about does not allow breeders a voice! it’s membership is primarily pet owners, with the exception of one or two! those who were members, if they do make a comment regarding their peers, they are removed!!!!!

]]> By: Dr. Rosset http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/4982/at-last-puppy-farmers-are-unmasked-thanks-to-the-bateson-report/#comment-88161 Dr. Rosset Thu, 11 Feb 2010 15:52:55 +0000 http://www.dogmagazine.net/?p=4982#comment-88161 It is even more clear from the study's language that the authors did not do the correct job because they do not understand genetics or even the differences between breed litter numbers. This is not science or a proper study this is political hype and nothing more. It is even more clear from the study’s language that the authors did not do the correct job because they do not understand genetics or even the differences between breed litter numbers. This is not science or a proper study this is political hype and nothing more.

]]> By: Dr. Rosset http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/4982/at-last-puppy-farmers-are-unmasked-thanks-to-the-bateson-report/#comment-88160 Dr. Rosset Thu, 11 Feb 2010 15:50:45 +0000 http://www.dogmagazine.net/?p=4982#comment-88160 If you read this entire report you will realize that it is done from the animal rights philosophy whose ultimate goal is to end all use of animals. That means no more pets. One way to do that is to make dogs so expensive that most people cannot afford to buy one. How to do that is to restrict all breeding by lowering the numbers below the gene pools necessary to keep a healthy line going and secondly to make the number of litters count rather than the number of puppies. Some breeds only have two puppies in a litter. This is not enough to ensure a healthy gene pool. This so called study is a sham animal rights study that takes as its premise that we should not have pets. So lets make it impossible for people to have pets. If you read this entire report you will realize that it is done from the animal rights philosophy whose ultimate goal is to end all use of animals. That means no more pets. One way to do that is to make dogs so expensive that most people cannot afford to buy one. How to do that is to restrict all breeding by lowering the numbers below the gene pools necessary to keep a healthy line going and secondly to make the number of litters count rather than the number of puppies. Some breeds only have two puppies in a litter. This is not enough to ensure a healthy gene pool. This so called study is a sham animal rights study that takes as its premise that we should not have pets. So lets make it impossible for people to have pets.

]]> By: Dr. Rosset http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/4982/at-last-puppy-farmers-are-unmasked-thanks-to-the-bateson-report/#comment-88155 Dr. Rosset Thu, 11 Feb 2010 15:43:33 +0000 http://www.dogmagazine.net/?p=4982#comment-88155 HE was referencing a law on the books this is not a definition. Also, when you limit responsible breeders who doing so to improve the breed then you are damaging the breed. The difference between a responsible breeder and puppy farmer has nothing to do with numbers but with the ultimate care given to the dogs. Some people have the ability to care for more and others don't. This is so animal rights gibberish. HE was referencing a law on the books this is not a definition. Also, when you limit responsible breeders who doing so to improve the breed then you are damaging the breed. The difference between a responsible breeder and puppy farmer has nothing to do with numbers but with the ultimate care given to the dogs. Some people have the ability to care for more and others don’t. This is so animal rights gibberish.

]]> By: Mary http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/4982/at-last-puppy-farmers-are-unmasked-thanks-to-the-bateson-report/#comment-88152 Mary Thu, 11 Feb 2010 15:35:33 +0000 http://www.dogmagazine.net/?p=4982#comment-88152 The only legal definition of a puppy mill I have found in the United States is one that says when standards of care are not provided in order to maximize profits. (I'm paraphrasing here.) Numbers DO NOT define a substandard kennel. That is just totally irrational. We in the US have seen regulations for 'kennels' with numbers all over the place, from 5 intact dogs, 25, 50, 100, only intact bitches, intact bitches AND dogs, and including puppies over 4 months old, puppies over 6 months old. It's just insane to try to define a puppy mill with numbers. The old wonderful kennels had lots of intact dogs and multiple litters with people backed up on their waiting lists. All kept in spectacular conditions and health. We would label them as puppy mills (puppy farms in the UK) today. We MUST concentrate on standards of care, not numbers. It is the only fair method. I really hate these terms to begin with, puppy mills/puppy farms. To me a breeder/kennel either meets standards or doesn't. It is that simple. The only legal definition of a puppy mill I have found in the United States is one that says when standards of care are not provided in order to maximize profits. (I’m paraphrasing here.) Numbers DO NOT define a substandard kennel. That is just totally irrational. We in the US have seen regulations for ‘kennels’ with numbers all over the place, from 5 intact dogs, 25, 50, 100, only intact bitches, intact bitches AND dogs, and including puppies over 4 months old, puppies over 6 months old. It’s just insane to try to define a puppy mill with numbers. The old wonderful kennels had lots of intact dogs and multiple litters with people backed up on their waiting lists. All kept in spectacular conditions and health. We would label them as puppy mills (puppy farms in the UK) today. We MUST concentrate on standards of care, not numbers. It is the only fair method. I really hate these terms to begin with, puppy mills/puppy farms. To me a breeder/kennel either meets standards or doesn’t. It is that simple.

]]> By: Louise http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/4982/at-last-puppy-farmers-are-unmasked-thanks-to-the-bateson-report/#comment-88098 Louise Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:33:19 +0000 http://www.dogmagazine.net/?p=4982#comment-88098 I read it as being five or more. A person who keeps a bitch and breeds a litter from her then who breeds four or more OTHER litters in that year... I read it as being five or more. A person who keeps a bitch and breeds a litter from her then who breeds four or more OTHER litters in that year…

]]> By: bet hargreaves http://www.dogmagazine.net/archives/4982/at-last-puppy-farmers-are-unmasked-thanks-to-the-bateson-report/#comment-87935 bet hargreaves Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:03:32 +0000 http://www.dogmagazine.net/?p=4982#comment-87935 Yes Ryan ,I did notice Professor Bateson's Comment,and mentioned it on a Cavalier Forum. The Silence from Cavalier Breeders was Deafening . Bet Hargreaves Yes Ryan ,I did notice Professor Bateson’s Comment,and mentioned it on a Cavalier Forum.

The Silence from Cavalier Breeders was Deafening .

Bet Hargreaves

]]>