Whats your stance on this months Great Debate? Can it be argued that dog shows COULD make dogs healthier? Dog shows have been criticised in the past for encouraging “extreme” breed traits that could reduce the dogs’ quality of life, and for putting dogs’ looks before their health and welfare. Could dogs shows reward the best improvements in dog health or for example give equal weight to temperament as to looks? Maybe insist that only health tested dogs can claim their Champion titles? Are they - or could they be with a tweak - be a force for good - or is it an outmoded system that will always unwittingly reward exaggeration? Could the KC introduce another set of awards that breeders compete for that show how healthy the dogs are and how well reared they are with a pet home in mind? What else could be done to make the dog show system fit for function? And can we learn anything from overseas KCs? The Kennel Club identified twelve breeds as Category Three on Breed Watch, due to visible conditions whose exaggeration may cause pain or discomfort; dogs on the list which are awarded Best of Breed must pass a veterinary examination before their awards are confirmed. Is that going far enough? What more could be done? The Dutch dog breeders’ association is planning on having vets present at all dog shows from 2016, to pick the ‘best of breed’ alongside the judges. Is that unnecessary or is it the best way to go about it? Send your answers and photos to [email protected] putting Great Debate in the subject line.
Posted on: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 10:05:50 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015