Friday, November 06, 2009

Bi-Partisan Criticism for Airing Dog Show


American Cocker Spaniel at Crufts. This was once a working bird dog. No more!

Broadcast Now magazine in the U.K. notes that Members of Parliament are criticising cable channel "More4" for showing the Crufts dog show on television:

A cross-party group of MPs has criticised More4 for picking up next year’s Crufts in a report prompted by BBC1 documentary Pedigree Dogs Exposed.

The Associate Parliamentary Group for Animal Welfare found there was a “serious welfare problem” in pedigree dogs and said it was “disappointed” More4 was airing the event.

“Until the problems of health and welfare are dealt with, the showing of certain dogs with problems associated with inappropriate breed standards is wrong,” the report said.

However a Channel 4 spokesman said: “More 4’s coverage will place a particular emphasis on health and welfare issues, providing a high profile platform to keep these issues in the public eye – something that has been welcomed by the British Veterinary Association.”


I am a little unclear as to how More4's coverage will "keep these issues in the public eye."

The only way that could be done is if a very serious dog show critic was allowed to provide color commentary on the breeds.

In fact, I have suggested just this sort of thing be done in the past. In a post entitled "A Dog Show We Need to See," I imagine what a proper voice-over might sound like:

What a breath of fresh air it would be to hear:

"The German Shepherd was never much of a herding dog and is never found herding today. A herding German Shepherd -- ha - what a notion! In fact this dog is a relatively new breed, created around 1900. Today the genetic stock of this dog is so racked by chronic hip dysplasia that many lines of German shepherds can barely walk. Anyone with an ounce of sense stays away from show lines today, and imports their dogs from working stock overseas."

The Bull Dog would be properly introduced as:

"A game dog once used to catch stock for altering or slaughter, the bull dog was reduced in stature and mutated by intentionally breeding in achondroplastic dwarfism, which is why the legs on these dogs are so bent they can barely walk. The pressed-in-face means the dogs have chronic breathing problems, while the digestive tract is so wrecked that these dogs pass more gas than a Mexican restaurant. You will learn to light matches with a bull dog!

"The heads on these dogs are so enormous that all the dogs are born Cesarean, and in fact this dog would be extinct within 10 years if it were not for veterinarians helping these little mutants into the world.

"Notice that nice little pig tail? That is a source of chronic skin infection, and most of the dogs in the ring today will have their tails completely cut off after they are retired from performance -- a way of making it easier to keep this breed after a show ring career."


But of course I am dreaming to think television cares about dogs.

TV dog shows, after all, are simply the "filler" around the real product which pays all the bills on TV. I am, of course, referring to advertisements for cars, feminine products, dog food, and prescription medications.

Advertising is the real business of television, and that's true whether it's the nightly news or a soap opera, a sitcom or a documentary. Money makes the world go around.

Dog shows are popular fodder for television because they cost almost nothing to produce and have a ready audience of romantics, dog lovers, and freak-show voyeurs who do not have to give 100% of their attention to the show. Need to cook, do some ironing, or make a grocery list? A TV dog show is a perfect background for that; a little white noise and a few interesting pictures that do not tax the mind too much.

Of course every dog show is exactly the same as every other dog show, so maybe the time has come for someone to try something different.

And why not? It's not like telling the truth about dogs would be any more expensive than mindlessly repeating puppy-peddler puffery.

And surely a differently voiced dog show would attract a different kind of audience and generate its own "buzz" on the Internet and in the dog world. Hmmmmm. Maybe, if done right, a dog show with a little controversy around it could be "must-see TV" for a year or two or three.

Quick -- someone call a television producer!

6 comments:

Jonzie said...

Excellent post, I've been checking your blog for a while.
I totally agree with your point. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be such a popular stand among breeders.

an American in Copenhagen said...

I would like to see a welfare group organize an anti-dog show. People would bring their deiseased and/or crippled purebred pets and compete for last place. It would be a good way for people to help highlight breed specific issues and show the public what a wheezing pug sounds like, what a lame GSD looks like, and that these problems are widespread. COlor commentary welcome! Extra points would be awarded to those who had failed health screening tests for things like eye disorders and VWD.

an American in Copenhagen said...

I would like to see a welfare group organize an anti-dog show. People would bring their deiseased and/or crippled purebred pets and compete for last place. It would be a good way for people to help highlight breed specific issues and show the public what a wheezing pug sounds like, what a lame GSD looks like, and that these problems are widespread. COlor commentary welcome! Extra points would be awarded to those who had failed health screening tests for things like eye disorders and VWD.

PBurns said...

Jonzie, asking dog breeders to weigh in on canine welfare is a bit like asking the fox to weigh in on hen-house security.

My suggestion is that we ask the dogs. After all, they are the REAL experts in canine health.

All we have to do is listen to how they breathe, look at how they walk, listen to their failing hearts, look at their cancer and live-failure mortality rates have risen. All we need to do is watch the dogs pacing and barking in their kennels.

The time has come to listen to the dogs -- and to speak for them. Breeders will only rarely do that, as too often they are more interested in green cash and blue ribbons than they are in the welfare of the dogs themselves.

P.

Retrieverman said...

I think it's funny, but I haven't really watched a dog show in maybe ten years.

I used to get really excited when they would recognize a new breed, and it would appear at Westminster.

No more.

I can actually remember when the golden retrievers shown at Westminster looked like golden retrievers and not some species of really shaggy bear, which is only slightly better than turning them into polar bears, which is what the Europeans seem hell-bent on.

I recently got a comment on how the golden that won BOB in goldens at Crufts was a used as a working retriever on an estate. To which I say, "So what?"

I like field-line dogs, and I don't make any excuses about it. I have no interest in owning a show-line golden. None. I don't care if the dog that one BOB at Crufts picks up game 3 days a week. He's not the same kind of dog I like. I like the dogs as they once were, not how they have been distorted in the ring.

Lots of bone and lots of hair are antithetical to proper working conformation in a retriever. It looks good in the ring, but you'll notice that all working forms of retriever, including working British Labradors, don't have that sort of heavy bone.

The fact that this dog can retrieve is nice, but I seriously doubt that he's being worked against the best Labradors. The working Labrador on both sides of the Atlantic is the gold standard for retrievers. If you want your breed to be taken seriously, they have to have something to offer that might make them equal to or superior to that dog.

And if you're going for the dual purpose dog (that can be shown and trialed), you're just handicapping yourself.

Here are some working goldens being used on pheasant in South Dakota (lots of Topbrass dogs):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzWos7R-_vI&feature=fvw

This is the type I prefer, because they can MOVE. And they aren't big and lumbering.

Viatecio said...

Anyone with a video editing program and a microphone want to take a clip of Crufts, "color-comment" over it with the REAL deal, and post it on YouTube?

As for television running on money? I've given up on watching any sort of news between 5 and 7p. It's about 1 minute of news to every 3-4 minutes of commercials. Maybe it's me, but it's gone way downhill over the past few years.