Samoyeds at Crufts
The Telegraph (UK) reports:
The future of Crufts is in doubt after the show's sponsor, Pedigree, pulled its sponsorship after 44 years.
The move could spell disaster for the show, which has been embroiled in controversy since a BBC documentary claimed that Crufts supports unhealthy breeding practices which lead to disease and deformities
Last month, the RSPCA severed its ties with the event, claiming that Crufts' emphasis on pure breeds was "morally unjustifiable". The BBC may not cover next year's show.
The Pedigree deal was worth £1,500,000 per year. A brief statement from the brand's parent company, Mars, said: "After careful consideration, Pedigree has decided to withdraw its sponsorship of Crufts. The Pedigree brand has evolved and we are prioritising initiatives that support the broadest possible community of dog owners such as our successful programme to help homeless dogs - The Pedigree Adoption Drive - and our online service for breeders. We look forward to working with The Kennel Club on other projects in the future."
Pedigree's one-time slogan was "top breeders recommend it", but the BBC documentary, Pedigree Dogs Exposed, highlighted the life-threatening genetic conditions in many of Britain's five million pedigree dogs including popular breeds as the bassett hound, German shepherd, bulldog and pug.
All I can say for Forest Mars and family (who happen to live up the road in Arlington, Virginia, and who own Mars which owns Pedigree) is God bless, and "Thank You."
Taking a pass on Crufts is not only good business sense, but it puts Pedigree in the forefront of the New History of Dogs which is being written right now.
Let the record show that Pedigree dog food put dogs first when the facts where brought to them.
Let the history show that instead of stuffing there hands in there pockets, this venerable dog food company said "Enough is enough; let's change the way things are done."
Instead of saluting only the narrow, cramped and inbred world of show dogs, Pedigree has decided to market to the larger world of dogs which includes pets, muts, working dogs, and yes homeless dogs too. Is there a better dog food ad in the world than this one? I think not!
The BBC is another company that will make it into the history books.
They have already done a lot by commissioning Pedigree Dogs Exposed (click here for the links to the documentary loaded up to Youtube), but they can still do more, by pulling out of Crufts alltogether (the best idea) or requiring an alternative narrative to announce the show if it must go on due to contractual considerations.
The idea here is simple: Instead of the tired, and almost entirely fictional, prattle that is repeated ad nauseum about the dogs, let's hear the truth for every breed. Let's hear about the the incredible inbreeding coefficients, the cancer rates, the breathing and whelping problems, the skin conditions, the liver diseases, and the epilepsy.
Let's also note that none of the working breeds actually work.
The lady parading a Finish Spitz around on a string lead not only cherishes a breed with frightening levels of epilepsy, but she also does not hunt birds with that dog, nor does she even own a shotgun!
The fox terrier may have been a working terrier 150 years ago, but it has not been since the day the Kennel Club got hold of it in 1873. The modern dog has a chest as deep as the keel of a war ship. The only time a show ring fox terrier will go to ground will be its last day on earth when a headstone is slipped over the top.
The true story of what has happened to dogs, thanks to shows like Crufts, is so much more interesting than what we have been told!
If "the show must go on" due to the two-year contract the BBC has already signed, let it at least go on as a teaching tool.
If the BBC thinks it must sponsor this travesty for at least once more year, let them at least "teach the controvery" and not in some sideshow tent where it will not be heard, but on air as part of the main television broadcast event!
- Related Links
** BBC: Pedigree Dogs Exposed
** Making and Breaking Dogs in the Show Ring
** Inbred Thinking
** The Kennel Club: When Truth is Incovenient, Lie
** BBC Considers Cutting Crufts Coverage
** Kennel Club Inbreeding: Data Revealed
** The AKC, Facing Extinction, Banks on Misery Pups
** The Kennel Club's Ham-Fisted Power Grab
.
18 comments:
I certainly hope this trend in discreditting conformation shows(as they are run now) continues, and more and more emphasis is placed on FUNCTION, and all the breeds that CAN, be required to perform their original function before being allowed to show in conformation. Even toy and companion breeds could have basic, physically functional tests that they must perform, to encourage breeding dogs for good health and temperment, so travesties like that wheezing Pekingnese that won "Best-In-Show" never happen again--we can at least dream.....L.B.
Note that Pedigree also sponsors Westminster. One has to wonder if Westminster is far behind, and how will the Westminster announcers handle to controversy in England? Will they be content to ignore it? And is Pedigree now essentially saying they think the situation is better in the U.S. by continuing their sponsorship of Westminster?
I wonder if Pedigree will change its name now that it's supporting dogs of mostly unknown lineage.
Terrierman, do you have a comment about the news release from Ron Menaker, chairman of AKC, asserting the AKC's commitment to health issues? (Gee, wonder what prompted that?) This after years of saying "AKC is only a registry" when asked about breed health. The list of reasons to think AKC cares about health seems very weak, doesn't it? There's nothing there at all about monitoring breed standards, encouraging breed clubs to be responsible, closed gene pools, or instructing judges to prioritize breed health.
A couple of points:
1. ALL dog food (Pedigree dog food is no exception) is mostly fed to dogs that are merely pets. That has always been true, and will always be true.
2. All dogs have pedigrees, whether they are Kennel Club dogs or not, and whether those pedigrees are written down or not. Most of the great historical dogs that Kennel Club pretenders get misty-eyed about were dogs fresh off the hills with no paper trail behind them.
3. The Kennel Club only counts dogs registerd to them and born within a closed registry system, but such dogs are not "pure bred" so much as "inbred." What is counted as a "pedigree" dog by the Kennel Club is a very narrow definition which gives NO nod to the actual origin of the breed (almost always outside of the Kennel Club system), or the work it was designed to perform, or the health of the dog. Time has shown the end result to be dogs that are too often deformed, disabled, and diseased. For Pedigree to shrink from some association makes complete sense.
4) Pedigree dog food's pull out out of Crufts clearly reflects a business decision. For Pedigree dog food the issue was no doubt a combination of facts: a) that a SERIOUS odor was developing around Crufts even as; b) a very real and very good public-image opportunity was developing in the area of re-homing pound dogs. In the end, dropping Crufts sponsorship (a targeted marketing campaign known and appreciated by very few dog owners) to support a mass-marketing campaign for canine adoption which is appreciated and appealing to all dog owners (and even non-dog owners) was a no-brainer.
I suspect it may be harder than they imagine for Crufts to find a new sponsor for their show. Not everyone in the world of dogs has $500,000 to throw at a single event!
The short story is that the bloom is off the rose as far as "purebred" dogs are concerned. The public has gotten wise. While once owning a "purebred" dog might have suggested you were a smart consumer and had special knowledge about dogs, it now suggests the exact opposite: you have probably brought into an expensive sack of genetic disorders, and you are probably know so little about dogs you are not even aware that this is the case.
You have a Bernese Mountain Dog? Do you know the cancer rate for that breed? Surprise! You have a Cavalier? Do you know the heart disease rate for that breed? Surprise! You have a German Shepherd? Do you know what has happened to their hips? Surprise!
Smart consumers are simply doing with Kennel Club dogs what they have done with fancy cars that have defective engines and require specialized mechanics to work on them; they are going for the cheaper car that has a reliable drive train which will give them less headache in the long run. In the end, a Totoya will get you to work better than a Bentley. It would be one thing if the Kennel Club were offering healthier dogs that actually did the work for which the dog was famed, but they are not.
Patrick
Hi Fred:
Is the missive you are referring to the November letter from Menaker? I did not see much knew there. He basically says if there's a problem it's the breed clubs to fix, and (by the way) we give money to fund research on diseases. The fact of the matter is that this is the very same program that got us the wrecked dogs we have now. Look at the health issues of the dogs, talk to canine health experts, and you will see the AKC is not addressing the twin roots of the problem for health: 1) exagerated and narrow breed standards, and; 2) a closed registry.
Patrick
I don't live in the Philly area, but I'm told that in preparation for a large upcoming show cluster AKC and Pedigree jointly placed a large ad and article in the newspaper there extolling their support of canine health and announcing a grant for a university research site nearby. Is it possible they think they can get out of this by throwing money? How dense are these people? I suspect they don't even understand what is being said, they just go where the wind takes them.
Please join me in sending a message to Pedigree asking them to drop sponsorship of Westminster too. Just go to pedigree.com and click on contact us. I got a nice note back saying my opinion is noted and would be forwarded to the proper department, whatever that means.
Patrick,
Just FYI - Many news sites reference the Pedigree support of Crufts at 1.5 million pounds, not the half million you mention. I did a bit of nosing around, and it looks to me like the first articles about it mentioned a 1.5 million contribution to an event that only profits half a million pounds. So possibly in their haste, some subsequent articles grabbed the wrong number?
Sorry - forgot to give you the link to a site referencing 1.5 million punnds. here's a couple:
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article-1080430/Pedigree-longer-chums-Crufts-pulls-1-5m-sponsorship-dog-show.html
http://dogs-a-z.blogspot.com/2008/10/crufts-pedigree-pull-out-of-their.html
I know I saw it several other places.
Patrick, maybe I'm more cynical than you, but I don't think Pedigree's decision to drop Crufts had anything to do with an alternate marketing plan for "re-homing pound dogs" as you say. Geesh, you'll believe anything these guys say :). I can only suppose the reason it doesn't seem to have ripples in America so far is that the two national Pedigree marketing entities are very separate, as is common in the corporate world.
Give it time, still simmering.
[Do you know how to tell when a marketing guy is lying? Answer - When his lips are moving.]
Everyone is pulling out of Crufts -- the RSPA, Dogs Trust, Pedigree, PDSA and eventually I think the BBC. Clearly, people do NOT want to be associated with something that harms dogs. But to the extent that all of these groups and companies want to be associated with HELPING dogs, they are doing so through re-homing. Pedigree has gotten on to that bandwagon, and it has done them a lot of good already; they are getting props in the canine blog-o-sphere even from folks who do not like their food. In marketing, that's called success. And, for the record, Pedigree is one of the brands of Kibble I recommend, alone with Purina. Now, however, I can point to the GOOD work they do, rather than the ugly suppor they give to canine disease, defect and deformity.
P.
Well Terrierman .. I can see that your postings are much like Wayne Pacelles at the HSUS.. only what you want the public to see.. not what people really think as neither of my postings have made it through your "moderation". I would guess that if you don't agree that Pedigree has made the right choice to semi drop out of Crufts.. or any pro pure bred positive comments are made your post will not be seen very sad.. I have enjoyed many of your articles as I have terriers myself but why bother to read something that is so one sided.. I understand it is YOUR blog and you can do as you like.. but no thanks.. if i want to read one sided articels I will go to PETA.. ot the HSUS..both bent on taking ALL of our dogs away from us....
Sad to think that someone who states that they love dogs allows just one side of the story.
Actually Betuval, I do not allow ANONYMOUS posts that say nothing. Since both of your posts (and this one too) fall in that catagorey, they were deleted. The comments box has pretty clear instructions about what happens to anonymous posts. Apparently reading instructions is not something you do. In the future use a real name and a real email address. Only cowards and fools hide behind anonymity.
Patrick
I see that the animal rights movement is making serious headway in the UK, the birthplace of the movement.
Be careful what you wish for, folks. It's breeders they want to shut down - and they don't care if they're purebreds, show dogs, working dogs or down-home mutts.
That's what this is about.
Does anybody know who funded the study? And of course animal rights and media go together like a dog and a bone. Wayne and Ingrid are practically writing the news where animals are concerned.
To that crowd, every breeder is a 'puppy miller' and every dog should be neutered. Anybody who doesn't adopt a mutt from the pound is supposed to feel guilty.
As I say, be careful what you wish for - the liberation crew is very successful at dividing dog owners, that's how they slide up the middle and shazam! They win again.
Off to polish my hat now :>)
This from the KC website:
"The Kennel Club welcomes the outcome of the Pekingese Breed Club meeting held in October at which the revised breed standard for the Pekingese, which is set radically to improve the health of the breed, was accepted without reservation by all breed clubs present."
Gee, I guess they didn't consult the Pekingese breeders who have been complaining all over the internet about being forced to change their standard - lots of reservations there. But then I guess this was written by a marketing guy? And if they admit this radically improves the health of the breed, then why did they need a bang on the head to do it? And what's going on with other breeds with the same issue?
Caveat:
Funded WHAT study? I am not aware of any study related to Pedigree dog food's funding and sponsorship of Crufts.
As for the push to get the Kennel Club to change the way it does business by changing standards to reduce intentional selection for defect and to allow outcrosses to reduce genetic defect, it is not being pushed by the Animal Rights crowd (whoever that is), but by folks who deal with the genetic wreckage of show dogs.
In any case, is a logical fallacy to think all things are black and white. The "Animal Rights" crowd inlcudes a pretty broad swatch of folks ranging from those who are merely humane (I agree with those who think maybe pigs and chickens should have a little more room) to those who would ban the consumption of all meat. Because I disagree with someone on tail cropping, for example, does not mean we cannot find common ground on inbreeding or hunting (and yes, agreement can go both ways).
Similarly, the notion that "we are all in this together" in the dog world is also flawed thinking.
As you know, that line is used by those who fight dogs, but I suspect neither you nor I have had problem telling those folks to go fish. By the same token, I have no problem with saying the same thing to those who pray at the alter of blue blazers and rosettes.
If you care about dogs, there is only one question: what is best for the dog? All the rest is the pack politics of humans on both sides of the coin.
Patrick
Sanm you are right and the article wrong -- the deal with Pedigree was worth 1.5 million pounds (over $2.2 million US dollars), and I have corrected the article in the post on this point. Thanks!
Patrick
Wayne Pacelle is not an AR nut... last I checked, he didn't believe pets should be killed rather than adopted out, as Ingrid does. Being a No-Kill proponent is not the same as being a PETA member, and he's never said anything that I'm aware of that even -sounds similar- to anything PETA believes in. He's for shelter reform, not the abolition of pets. Researching his work clearly shows that.
Post a Comment