Comments on: RSPCA Responds to Our Dogs Newspaper

By: Philippa Robinson

Philippa Robinson — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 10:25:02 +0000

Ryan he has spelled my name incorrectly too. And he has posted a response to my remarks on his own forum. He got his facts wrong, as he accused Beverley Cuddy of printing my remark. He misrepresented me in suggesting I had changed my tune – when I haven’t. He has graciously apologised to Beverley. Quite rightly.
On that thread I am assumed incorrectly to be working in the media when in fact I am just a pet owner – albeit quite a vocal one. All in All David this whole experience does in my opinion justify the conclusions I have drawn regarding your journalistic standards and your forum. But why the views of one pet owner should upset you so I really can’t imagine.

By: Wendy

Wendy — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 21:14:14 +0000

“We’ve studied the scientific evidence and believe that ‘hundreds of thousands’ is a fair estimate of the numbers of dogs affected.”

What scientific evidence? The biggest survey of purebred dogs to date is the 2004 Health Survey conducted by the Kennel Club. It certainly didn’t indicate that “hundreds of thousands” of purebred dogs are affected with “illness, pain and disability or behavioural problems”. The overwhelming majority of purebred dogs are fit and healthy and therefore are not seen by veterinarians.

Wendy

By: David Cavill

David Cavill — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 13:14:40 +0000

My own name gets spelled in so many different ways I ceased to worry about it decades ago and I really never mind However, I know some people are very sensitive about it so I apologise but it was perfectly clear who the subjects of my comment were. If you have a name like ‘Cavill’ (or O’Meara for that matter) you have to expect some errors!

By: Real Dog handler

Real Dog handler — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 12:21:32 +0000

Why can David Chavill not spell people’s names correctly?

Surely as he is a publisher he would have a sub editor checking his copy for him?

By: Ryan O'Meara

Ryan O'Meara — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 09:14:53 +0000

DC writes: “We have given a considerable amount of space to Mr O’Mara, to Jemmima and to Beverly as well as many other individuals. ”

- Not wishing to get in to this debate in particular as I believe it has been done to death but I could not help but notice the irony of making a claim about publishing accuracy only to spell Jemima’s, Beverley’s and my own name wrong in one fell swoop!

By: David Cavill

David Cavill — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 10:11:28 +0000

I must take issue with Helen Briggs and Phillippa Robinson. I am delighted that Dogs Trust, the RSPCA and Dogs Today have realised that despite the Pedigree Dogs Exposed programme (where their contributions were significantly different to the statements they are now making) that the Kennel Club has not only long recognised but has done and is doing a great deal (including spending a great deal of money raised through registration fees and Crufts via its Charitable Trust) to solve these problems which affect a few breeds severely and some breeds to a lesser extent. This is not to minimise the issues or the distress this causes owners of dogs affected – just to put it in perspective. Perhaps it was necessary for the RSPCA and Beverly to make the comments they did to ensure the programme got the publicity it did, so that the true situation could be explained to the general public. The sad part and the downside is that the general public has now moved on with those distorted images in their collective minds – images which clearly told them that all pedigree dogs are diseased and and/or crippled and that breeders as a whole were thoughtless, greedy and cruel- which is total misrepresentation of the true position.

I also believe – as the publisher of Our Dogs – that we have been entirely even handed. We have given a considerable amount of space to Mr O’Mara, to Jemmima and to Beverly as well as many other individuals.

My own, personal contributions can be found on You Tube at http://uk.youtube.com/user/davidcavill where my talk has received over 2,500 visits and many comments from supporters of a sensible and balance view as well as from some who have views which are less sensible and balanced. You can find the texts of the talks at my web log http://davidcavill.wordpress.com/.

By: Laura Kennedy

Laura Kennedy — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 22:07:43 +0000

If the RSPCA are not against all dog shows, why did they call them “freak shows”?

By: Philippa Robinson

Philippa Robinson — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:32:58 +0000

I feel that Our Dogs is not a publication worthy of respect. I question its own editorial stance and calibre. Dog World is much more even handed and captures the wider range of views that actually exists in the breeder community. K9 Magazine and Dogs Today express even wider views because they also cover the pet owners pov and are both much more credible publications. I hope the RSPCA do not spend too many resources on Our Dogs or dealing with their particular media ethics. Their forum is no better.

By: Cynical

Cynical — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 06:27:25 +0000

Well said RSPCA, I really do not always agree with the way you do things, but you are right to respond to Mr Hogan after his letter to K9 Magazine.

I hope that you will acknowledge those organisations that have put their heads above the parapet and followed suit in supporting your stance by pulling out of Crufts too?

By: Simon Mulholland

Simon Mulholland — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 01:20:54 +0000

I apologise for quoting the RSPCA in my opinion piece on Pedigree Breeding Snobbery below without asking for their opinion. Would the RSPCA like to discuss the issue with me? I am always happy to talk.
simon@saddlechariot.com