Joined
·
1,634 Posts
http://www.astraean.com/borderwars/2012/02/westminster-rewards-cruelty.html
SHAME ON THEM! SHAAAAMEEEE!!!
SHAME ON THEM! SHAAAAMEEEE!!!
^This, including the last line.How would the judge know that that dog had a double merle sire?
I don't have to say that I think producing double merles in most breeds is atrocious. I've posted enough anti double merle breeding posts that I'm sure people know where I stand on that. I did know that the collie was the son of that dog and was saddened by it when I saw him. But really there is no way to tell if a dog's sire is a deformed double merle. A double merle bred to a solid will produce perfectly normal pups.
RTA: Now, I do think there should be something done to prevent the registration of dogs like Avalanche and his progeny in the first place.
I totally agree, I think kennel clubs today should have rules in place to prevent unethical/unhealthy breeding practices. But time and time again I hear breeders say 'I know it's wrong and I'd never do it myself or agree with anyone doing it, but it shouldn't be a rule that we can't do it, nobody should tell me who I can and can't breed!'....RTA: Now, I do think there should be something done to prevent the registration of dogs like Avalanche and his progeny in the first place.
And finally THIS. Unless the judge knew the breeder, how would he know who the sire was.How would the judge know that that dog had a double merle sire?
I completely disagree with the title of the article.
Really? How do you know this?now that one person won with the offspring of a double merle, a lot more people are going to do it. Nice.
It's not useful for people to call the dogs of others "freaks" or "frog dogs" either, and then still expect those people to listen to what's being said. Still happens anyway.I don't think that's useful.
In all competitions, the people who win are those who are willing to do anything to win. If they see someone win by doing something unethical (and getting away with it), there may be some who will not follow suit. . .but many will. It's human nature.Really? How do you know this?
If they expressed their concerns in a less insulting manner, would those people listen then? Probably not. Nobody listens to what they don't want to hear.It's not useful for people to call the dogs of others "freaks" or "frog dogs" either, and then still expect those people to listen to what's being said. Still happens anyway.
Quoted for truth.I still fail to see how this is westminster's fault? The judges don't know the dogs, so how did "westminster reward cruelty"?
Maybe not. But they're more likely to.would those people listen then?