Friday, August 28, 2009

Why Cavill Was Cut from Pedigree Dogs Exposed



It turns out that David Cavill, the editor of Our Dogs, is a complete moron.

But don't take my word for it. Watch the video, above, for yourself.

Here's a man who says he can judge the health and suitability of a woman in 1/7th of a second. A dog? Two minutes is all that is needed.

Right.

And this is a man who claims he is good judge of a hunting breed? Does he actually hunt them?

Cavill then goes on to say that scientists are only interested in "breeding for physical perfection."

Eh?

Jemima Harrison, the interviewer, assumes Cavill has simply mis-spoken. It happens to all of us. "You mean for health?" she enquires, logically assuming that Cavill would then go on to note that in working dogs minor health issues in a sire or dam might sometimes have to be weighed against other factors such as bidability, nose, size, or gameness.

But no, Cavill, says, veterinary surgeons know nothing about canine health. And his evidence for this is his own breed, the Finnish Spitz, a dog so befouled with genetic problems that in Finland, where it is still used as a hunting dog, they have culled hard to get rid of the kind of serious health problems that Cavill is so eager to sweep under the rug.

A dog with a known inherited eye problem, that was voted Best in Show at Crufts is "absolutely fantastic" he says, and never mind the genetic wreckage.

And how does Cavill fob off the fact that this top Crufts winner is widely known as "the blind dog?" He simply says he knows an old man at Crufts who is blind and "he is having a wonderful time" at the show today. So no problem if a dog is blind as well!

Jemima Harrison cannot quite believe what Cavill is saying, and she gives him a chance to backtrack and clarify. Surely he does not mean a blind dog should be winning Crufts?

But no, Cavill, is as thick as brick and as stupid as a rock. He bulldozes right ahead with his confused logic. Who does he say is the model of health perfection in humans? Stephen Hawking!

Stephen Hawking? No! Surely I am joking? No one could put Stephen Hawking out as a model of health perfection.

But no, it's true. See for yourself at the video, above. The bit in question is right around 5:30.

And then, just to put a cherry on top, David Cavill describes the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel as "by and large a very healthy breed."

A very health breed? Over 80 percent of Cavaliers come down with heart problems, to say nothing of the neurological issues.

And when this is pointed out, what is Cavill's answer? He laughs it off. Well, "it doesn't show!"

One could not invent David Cavill. He stands as a monument to what is wrong in the world of pedigree dogs.

His only fault is that he is not very articulate and his logic train is so broken down that he seems to be a caricature of everything wrong in the world of pedigree dogs.

If Jemima Harrison had included this clip in Pedigree Dogs Exposed, she would have been accused of trolling to find the stupidest and most inarticulate person she could find.

And who could argue that she had? No one!

And so Cavill did not make the cut, but thanks to the Cold Wet Nose blog, this little bit of video has now made it out into daylight. This is what David Cavill has been demanding everyone should get an opportunity to see? Excellent!

Well played Mr. Cavill. You are well and truely a moron.

.

7 comments:

Gina said...

Brings to mind the Monty Python sketch on "The Upper-Class Twit of the Year" contest.

PBurns said...

I think Retreiver man has it right: the “Baghdad Bob” of pedigree dogs.

Perfect.

P

Pai said...

He compares judging a conformation show with ogling a hot chick? Wow, that really tells a lot about him and people in the fancy like him.

an American in Copenhagen said...

I used the google but no luck...which Crufts winner had the eye disease? That sounds like a juicy story

PBurns said...

The disease was this I believe >>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collie_eye_anomaly

I know a bit more, but this is not the forum

p

Seahorse said...

Dismissing serious and numerous genetic defects as "these particular difficulties" reminds me of those who refer to the Civil War as "The Recent Unpleasantness". This man has a "particular ability" to embrace and foment his own form of happy blind-guyness.

Seahorse

retrieverman said...

This man is a good example of someone who knows lots of things but actually knows nothing. He probably knows breed standards and "breed origin myths" inside out. I've read his stuff. He knows these things. He also knows about dog behavior very well. However, he doesn't know Jack Russell about how dangerous arbitrary genetic bottlenecks are.

He doesn't know that holding onto nineteenth century ideals is not a very good way to produce dogs for the long term. He's unaware that virtually no other species is bred according to a closed registry system. The reason why he doesn't know these things is because he grew up in dogs within this institution. And this institution has him totally blinkered.

He's got nothing but non sequiturs and canards.

When he was talking about about someone being blind and having a good time at a dog show, I thought he was talking about a dog-- until he said he was 85!