Hi,
I think this dog breeding thing is immoral ,it is animal cruelty, and it should be banned.These dogs have all kind of diseases and handicaps and they suffer. Same thing for the dog shows.It is completely ridiculous.The dogs spend hours being brushed , powdered ,treated like beauty pageant.They don't ask to be there.
I never did and will never buy a breed dog.

wow! finally, someone has spoken up about such an important animal welfare issue. watching several people that i know struggle with health issues with their pedigree dogs makes me really sad. having extensive experience with animals as a result of working at an animal shelter, i can confidently say that the rampant inbreeding of dogs is a deadly practice...
nothing is better than a great shelter animal!!!

20 years ago, my veterinarian commented on dog breed problems, from in breeding. But, the hype of having a very expensive dog, from a long line, winning awards far outweighs sense. Those poor animals. A german shepherd that can't walk? all those dogs that can't breathe? and on and on. They wouldn't last one day on their own. I don't actually like the look of these animals. The RSPCA vet said it best when he called them 'mutants'.

This documentary was excellent -- and extremely disturbing. I am simply astounded that people who claim to love these dogs can perpetrate such obvious cruelty on them. They should ask themselves if they would want to live with legs so short that they could barely walk, breathing so compromised that they can't run or play without risk of collapse, excruciating pain from their skull being too small for their brain -- or any of the other horrors they have created for their "cherished" breeds. For SHAME!

We urge every dog lover to email this link to all their family and friends. This cruelty must stop now. It is our duty to take-up this noble cause and assist those (Jemima Harrison)who have laid the ground work to stamp out the untold suffering that our dear friends endure as a result of this cruel and utterly selfish practice. Let us unite and be their voice.

I watched this doc. last night with horror.
To see that breeders and Kennel Club officials would allow the perpetuation and furtherance of genetic faults to the detriment of the animals was a disgusting condemnation of man's approach to the 'perfect pet'.
I knew that some breeds were 'disposed' to medical issues but never imagined that it could have resulted from the actual selective breeding process itself.
I know now and will never support any 'beauty pageant' dog show again!
Any dogs in my future will come from a shelter and have as many odd bits as possible!!!
Thanks for the insight!

I watched this program last and and I am still angry and upset. I knew that getting a pedigreed dog is NO GUARANTEE of getting a HEALTHY dog. That is why I have crosses, in an attempt to get a more genetically healthy dog. The way these idiots breed should be a crime. What they have done to the different breeds is horrible. I fully understand why different breed groups do not want their working dogs (e.g. Border Collies) put into a beauty content (referred to as Barbie Collies). The #1 breed standard for all dogs in this beauty contest should be that the winners should be able to go out and do the job they were bred for. If they can't because they can't move right, or breath, they should be banned from breeding. Any dog carrying genetic illnesses should be ruthlessly removed from the gene pool by spaying and neutering. We need National legislation to force breeders to breed, first HEALTHY dogs, then pretty ones. Yes, it will be expensive to the breeders, but they are the ones who should pay the price, not the dogs.

The Canadian version of the program edited out the eugenics part of the Kennel Club history, which is fine, but for folks that are interested in learning about that, see this link >> http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2008/12/eugenics-man-at-kennel-club.html

It's pretty eye-opening!

I am so glad this information has been brought to the forefront, For years I have noticed a dramatic decline in pure bred pet health here in Canada. I myself have only owned mixed breeds which are healthier due to a more diverse gene pool. However this too is starting to change ,animal health is on the decline due to poor genectics making its way into mixed breeds and another important factor poor diet.
It seems when man thinks they know better than nature these our the outcomes of such arrogance.
Even animals in the wild know the importance of broadening the gene pool. That is why males are kicked out of its pack, herd, pride etc so it finds other females not related to them to mate with and this doesn't even guarantee breeding rites. Females in the wild only choose a healthy male to breed with, so this eliminate a weak species. Plus wild animals are true to their diet and are not eating dried kibble formulated by man....but now they too struggle as they are being exposed to toxic environments, reduced food supply which now threatens the health of all wild animals
Yes this is quite a mess man has created, all for the sake of feeding the ego and making a buck!!!

Unfortunately, work commitments prevented me from seeing this documentary. I do know a lot about it though, when it first aired on the BBC.
I breed and show purebred dogs. I do agree it is a terrible shame that some dogs are bred simply for the colour of a ribbon, regardless of the health of the animal. But realize also, that many of these Breeders dealing with these issues are just as devastated as those buying puppies. Breeders LOVE their dogs too !
Most dogs do not do what the breed was originally bred for now. Dog shows continued and yes, unfortunately things like 'popular sire' syndrome (using a popular dog over and over, has likely caused genetic issues to come forward faster). It has been realized by many that everything in life needs some form of 'genetic diversity'. Even with all the testing that can be done, it will not quarantee that the offspring produced by those dogs will not produce issues. Genetic testing, unless a DNA test, can only tell us that that particular dog does not have the disease, it cannot tell us it cannot be produced. Heavens, look at the genetic issues within the human race, yet most are not told to NOT have children.
Do not think that those cross-bred dogs cannot have issues as well. They are products of other breeds, many with issues in common. Labradoodles, for example, could have eye issues, as both Labs AND poodles can have eye issues. This is just one example.
I am not defending the practice of other Breeders. I am not telling anyone to get a Purebred. Pound/rescue dogs need homes too. What I am telling you is I think it is totally unfair to lump every Purebred Breeder and Breed into the melting pot this show has done. There ARE healthy Purebreds out there, one need only do their homework. And when buying from a reputable breeder, you are gaining a friend who will stand by you. Where will the pound be if something happens?
Nothing in life can be 'quaranteed', even in those cross-breds where, to the best of my knowledge, NO statistics are kept. Again remember, those cross-breds are all products of other breeds. ALL the genetic issues could come forward.

There are alot of undisputed facts in this piece but one that was not touched on was that in the UK, they have been breeding animals in an isolated existance from their strigent quarantine and import rules. Until recently, it has been to prohibitively expensive to import animals to invigorate specie population and it isn't just affected dogs. Breeding for extremes in any specie is detremental to it's existence.

WOW, I watched the show last night and I am still in shock. I have never watched something so biased and one sided. Yes this is a small percentage of what dog shows can attract. What about all those devoted breeders that care for a puppy right till the end and provide loving support for each owner? What about focusing on how so many other breeds and their problems have been corrrected over time and by those same devoted breeders. They focused majorily on 3 breeds on the show??? There are so many more positive impacts dog showing sport has contributed to so many breeds. LIke so many other sports, there are always cons... and alot more pros otherwise so many people wouldn't be involved in the actual sport??? NO DOG I HAVE WITNESSED IN THE SEVERAL YEARS I"VE BEEN IN DOG SHOWING HAS EVER SUFFERED - These dogs are priveledged, supremely taken care of and put on pedestals. I challenge each person that doesn't think this is true to attend a local dog show and spend a few hours... watch how these animals are treated.. you will have your answer ..... too many people make these assumptions and accusations without becoming educated... SMART PEOPLE Educate themselves before judging or making a decision.

I am a breeder of purebred dogs and I like to think of myself as ethical. I am very conscious of the problems in breeding at this time. Many of the friends and acquaintances I have are just as familiar and driven as I am.
I have none of the problems referred to in this program. I do show, I do track and even a bit of performance in Rally. I have multi champions and even tracking certified dogs.
I like to think I am working with my dogs to the best of their abilities as well as mine. I am very health conscious and feed and treat my gang natually. In the 10 years I have been breeding and showing and tracking I have had none with health problems. I am in constant touch with my puppy people and encourage them to work with their dogs. Firstly I want healthy dogs myself and dogs with good minds as they live in my home with me, all 6 of them . Temperament wise I would stack them against any crossbred. We have no health issues but I am very aware of how they should be treated healthwise. I have puppies all over the world and wonderful letters from those owners. I stay current. None of my puppies have issues. My dogs are first in my life as friends and companions. They're thinking active dogs. I socialize them well.
Just to answer some of your statements I have been told by animal control people that the cross bred dogs have both health and behaviour issues at a much higher ratio than purebreds.
ALTHOUGH I am very glad that many of you feel that cross bred dogs are the way to go as it will help to reduce the populations in shelters.
I also know breeders of the breeds explored in your expose and I have never seen any of these examples as shown. Obviously though they are out there. I am a member of our local kennel club and our Canadian Kennel Club and I do rescue dogs (Cockers) and I feel I am a responsible breeder.

I think it's terrible how these dogs have been bred. But is it just the breeders at fault here or the dog show judges as well. Also remember these dogs are from the UK where they had a very small gene pool due to quarantines. I love my purebred dogs. I can tell temperment, size and personality before a pup comes into my house. My dogs have been health tested and so have their parents and their parents. My dogs also do what they are bred to do. They guard livestock. From there they go for a bath and into the show ring. And the dogs just love the shows. I think the general public doesn't realize just how much health testing is done on purebred dogs in North America. If we loose our purebred dogs we loose part of history

So where is the other side of the story? Where is the filming about those breeders who do remove genetic defects from their lines? Where is the filming of truly sound animals winning in shows? Did you know if you have a dog from a REPUTABLE breeder that they should (and the majority do) offer guarantees on their dogs genetics?
I was sadden, angered, repulsed at this dribble of Animal Rights BS. I too have had mixed breed dogs and in no way were they healthier than my purebred, genetically tested, sound dogs.
When should we expect a documentary about those who actually do care about the dogs they breed, the genetic tests done, the removing of genetic defects from lines? Probably never, but then again what should we expect from those who pretend to "be our friends" (Animal Rights groups like PETA and HSUSA) and continually work to have our rights to own and exhibit dogs, taken away.

Seriously. Who wants an ugly dog? The dogs are bred for looks, yes, but it's not like if they aren't perfect the breeders drown them in the bathtub before they blind the world with it. Think about it. All the testing that goes into even making sure a dog is HEALTHY enough to BE bred is extensive. As for the "I have mixed breeds so my dogs are healthier" crap, that's eaxactly what it is CRAP. To breed a "crossbreed" there is NO REQUIRED TESTING. I have a 3 pure bred dogs, all from breeders, they are all super healthy, extremely happy and vary like crazy in age DUE TO HOW HEALTHY THEY ARE. This is simply and obviously, as stated by someone else, tabloid trash. Why not go after something real, like child molesters? How about we do a new story on that? Or the reality of what happens in other countries? Ohh right, because truth doesn't matter when it comes to media. Enjoy the ratings CBC. Congratulations on successfully, and insanely ignorantly, ruining another amazing thing

This show was completely one sided! I have had Border Collies since 1998, I have been showing for quite a while now too. So many facts were blew out of proportion. Yes certain family lines in certain breeds are plagued with certain diseases BUT MOST REPUTABLEI think alot of facts were left out and should be set straight. Maybe the percentage of sick mutts should be brought tot he surface, especially all those little BYB mix breed things from puppy mills maltipoos etc. They are the worst deformed dogs I have ever seen and health problems galore. By buying mix breed dogs, no matter where you get it from, you are supporting a person who bred or let their dog be bred irresponsibly.

Laur

Dear CBC-Passionate Eye:

I have spoke to many people who have posted comments from last evening and still don't see them posted. What is the sense of commenting and voicing your opinion if it is never seen. Are you screening the feedback in some way? What are the requirements for a comment to be posted? If someone has not used vulgar language, for example, what other reason would their be for their opinion not to be shared?

Thank you,
Bonnie

MODERATORS NOTE: So far all comments about this story, perhaps with the exception of one, have been published. Please see our guidelines here.
http://www.cbc.ca/aboutcbc/discover/submissions.html

I own a Purebred Cavalier King Charles Spaniel. I have become a member of the CKC and the local This documentary is very biased against breeders as it does not show the years and money spent on testing and outbreeding in order to try to eliminate the genetic problems. All breeders and owners of purebred dogs are more interested in producing healthy dogs and not just "pretty" dogs. Cross breed dogs (mutts) have their own problems and by combining 2 different breed problems you are only creating more health issues. It is the puppy mills that are causing these health issues that this program is portraying not the reputable breeders who interests lie in the health and longevity of their breed not just for show dogs.

Only those disconnected to reality would brush off the countless valid criticism of the dog showing world and concentrate on the "bias" of the program. Yes, good ethical breeders exist. And the program did mention them. You are projecting if you think that the program paints all breeders as unethical.

If owning a mixed breed dog was an absolute guarantee of lifelong health, the vast majority of dog owners would buy mixed breed dogs. It doesn't, and they don't.

This documentary is extremely one-sided, histrionic, and bitter and I feel bad there are so many people who are going to swept away by their EMOTIONS and have a knee-jerk reaction to purebred dogs. The people shown in this program were not the norm- I have been involved in the dog community for over 20 years and I do not know even ONE person who shows such a blatant disregard for the health and wellness of their animals.

They showed these things because the absolute extreme makes much more of an impact than the reality, which is that the majority of dog fanciers do this because they love dogs and having a dog that is unhealthy tears them apart.

Please think of this documentary in the way that you would if someone set out to write a hack job on your hobby and specifically set out to prove something and then found the tiny majority of people who abuse it. If you are a responsible snow-mobiler- imagine a documentary that shows people disregarding the laws of private property and driving while intoxicated? IF you fish- imagine a person with an anti-fishing bias out showing the person who takes 10 times the legal limit. If you are a hockey fan- imagine the HS or college coach who encourages steroid use. In all these examples, the abuse is NOT THE NORM.

I find it absoultly appalling that CBC is holding court over the Comments. Funny that I wrote a comment as well as others that I know did and they do not appear.

Guess freedom of speech does not enter into your comments as much as freedom of press.

One sided that is what you are, whatever you do, do not show the other side because it would be a shocking to the general public would it.

Disgusted that CBC sees fit to only post negative comments regarding this film.

Oh by the way, I wrote my comment before those that are shown above

MODERATOR'S NOTE: All of the comments for this story, with the exception of one so far have been posted.
Please see our guidelines here.
http://www.cbc.ca/aboutcbc/discover/submissions.html

I sincerely hope the viewers watched this program with a critical eye. It was quite biased in its presentation of pure bred dogs and breeders. There are many, many reputable breeders out there working to produce the happiest, healthiest puppies they can. Reputable breeders test for health issues and make breeding decisions to reduce or eliminate health problems in their dogs. When they do produce a problem they deal with it. Responsible breeders (and their breed clubs) fund expensive health research to help them understand and eliminate the health issues that face their breed. Many people state cross-bred dogs are healthier...but please show me the evidence of this. People producing mutts (or "designer" breeds) do absolutely no health testing. Where is the actual scientific evidence that these animals are any healthier? Your best bet is to do your homework, find a reputable breeder and buy a pup from him/her. If something does go wrong you will at least have someone who cares about the animal to stand behind you. You will not get any help or support from a pet store or even a shelter if problems arise...but a reputable breeder will be there for you (and your dog) for the dog's lifetime.

For those of you complaining that this documentary was an inaccurate look at the dog breeding community:

How do you explain the genetic aberrations present in ALL of a given species? Did pugs naturally evolve to have trouble breathing? Yes, some pure breds are fine, and I'm sure breeders don't need to inbreed them to get the 'look' the customer wants, but there are plenty of these deformed designer dogs out there as well. How you can defend the breeding practices that have brought us these clearly crippled dogs is beyond me.

I have had Labrador Retrievers most of my life as working and companion dogs.

I am very biased against proliferation of breeders who have little or no genetic knowledge whatsoever, promoting freaky, ugly looking abominations that they call dogs...pugs, bulldogs, crazy Irish setters, labs that look like Rottweilers, Rottweilers that look like four legged gorillas, German Sheperds that can hardly walk...it goes on and on, the "purebred freak show!"

Time for an end to it all, breed clubs need to start to promote dogs that can do what the breeds were intended to do! Breeders need to pass a certified course on genetics and ethics!

Hello,
Your site was drawn to my attention with regard to a response from Leaha Swatko (item 2). I am Dr Clare Rusbridge's Research Assistant and I feel this comment “Yet the Not so good Dr. C Rushbridge deliberately falsified her studies..” is libellous and legal action can be taken for defamation of character. I can appreciate that many breeders are frightened and angry about CM/SM but slamming the very person who has been investigating Syringomyelia for the last 12 years and dedicated to helping dogs and breeders, is not the best way. Leaha should either apologise or provide evidence for her statement/s.

I can't believe how easily people's opinions are swayed. You watched ONE story and now think you're experts on the matter. You've never personaly talked to a Responsible breeder or been to a dog show, but this story precludes anything you would learn there anyways right?

I own two purebred dogs and plan to breed one of them if she meets all of her requirements. This includes Health Testing, as well as Field Trials (hunting) to prove that she is adept to do the job her breed was created for. Not to mention that various parts of my Breed Standard were derived to make sure function is not lost in the show ring.

Too bad all the people flying off the handle at how horrible Dog Show people are aren't reading any of the comments here.

Does anyone else appreciate the irony here? A film that focuses on criticizing extremism (in dog breeding) is guilty of the same thing itself.
For me the most problematic thing about this "documentary" (in quotes because I think documentaries are normally assumed to show truth, while in this case the truth has been systematically distorted to support a pre-selected position) is that instead of pushing the pure bred dog world ahead with making positive changes, it merely polarizes the discussion. Both sides use the rampant exagerations in the piece to firmly entrench themselves in their own positions.
I've been in pure bred dogs all my life, and I KNOW there are a FEW individual breeders that are extreme, and there are some breeds that need to re-think their breed standards and pull them back from the extremes that are causing their dogs health (and temperment) problems. Unfortunately that message gets lost because the film has over-stated its case; everybody is throwing the baby out with the bath water. Dog fanciers feel they can't admit to any problems without being lumped in with the breeders in the film. Anti-pure bred dog folks use this "evidence" to call for the elimination of all pure bred dogs and breeding programs. Neither position is realistic or helpful.
The most important contribution of pure breed dogs is predictability. Aside from the fact that producing working dogs (guides dogs, detection dogs, police dogs etc) would be impossibly expensive without pure breeds to select from,, shelters would see a hundred- (thousand?)fold increase in abandoned dogs--that got too big, drooled, howled too much, shed too much. Why? Because nobody could predict how those cute little mixed pups would turn out because nobody knew what was behind them... People who purchase pure bred dogs have the advantage of knowing what their adult dog will look like, have an idea what the temperment will be and should also know UP FRONT what diseases to watch for/test for and plan for. They get to make an informed choice. There is a reason different breeds exist--different owners have different requirements based on lifestyle, climate, age etc. Owners with very specific requirements need pure bred (predictable) pups, others who have more flexibilty are fine with the surprise element inherent in mixed breed pups.
SO let's everyone take a deep breath, step back and pick out the kernels of truth from this expoitative film. Nobody in the program suggested eliminating pure breed program.s. They leveled criticisms at the idea of pushing those breeding programs to extremes that are detrimental to the dogs health--not unreasonable I think. Now the real questions: Where should those limits be? How should they be determined? And who gets to make the call? Should there be rules on how many litters an idividual sire can produce? What should that limit be? Who should set it? Should it be different with each breed? Should conformation shows be more closely associated with performance shows so that the dogs being shown also have to DEMONSTRATE their abilty to perform the functions for which they were bred? (Ii.e. add a talent portion to the beauty contest?) Who should pay for research into genetic diseases? What about the ethical issues of the live animals (dogs in this case) that have to be used in the conduct of that research?

Regardless of our visceral reaction to this film, can we agree that we have room for improvement in the world of dog breeding, and begin to look at howto move towards producing even healthier, happier dogs?

There seems to be an assumption that people base their whole opinion of the dog fancy - well if it is negative - on this one show. I think that is absurd. Many of us have disapproved of SOME of the goings in the dog show world long before this show was ever aired. What was revealed was not new to most of us. At no time watching Pedigree Dogs Exposed did I get the message “All purebred breeders are bad,” however the ranting, defensive diatribes and complete dismissal of the complaints put forward by this program certainly reek of complicity and lead one to think in that direction.

Of course there are good and caring show breeders. That was stated in the show. The health studies that are supported by kennel club also were spoken of, but this was an EXPOSE. It was not a documentary on the KC or for the benefit of the KC, nor, as an expose, was it obligated to show the other side.

As far as I am concerned there is already a lot publicized about puppymills and BYBs, but annually Crufts is watched by millions of people who are led to believe that everything is hunky dory in the dog world and that what is being presented is the creme de la creme of the dogs world. It was about time the public was made aware to watch out for some in the dog fancy who are “ribbon chasers”, valuing too highly the worth of the ribbon.

The leadership of the KC is shown publicly defending questionable breeding practices and rejecting the idea of required health standards. Breed club leadership and respected judges are shown condoning these breeding practices, and these people are winning ribbons unchallenged. THAT IS THE REAL ISSUE HERE.

If you honestly don't think that's a scandal that deserved to be held up and criticized publically, shame on YOU. If you are a breeder in the show world and aren't part of the solution, then you are part of the problem.

I watched your show last evening with great disgust that you would produce a show so bias against any one group of people. No dog breeders are not all bad and do not all breed just to ruin a breed. Mongrels have just as many problems as do Registered stock you just do not hear about it the same. It seeme all the News Media can think to do is try to put scare tactics out to keep the world scared to even try to live and enjoy life a bit. Why don't the news media try to be more honest instead of always the bad and twisted story's. There are a lot of healthy dogs being raised to because as a dog breeder and show person I have purchased many healthy dogs, that have lived good lives no seizures or big vet bills. I have sold lots to and do stand behind what I sell. Now maybe you could do a story on why not to buy a pup from the pet stores that is one of the biggest problems we have in the dog world is the fact pet stores can sell puppies which creates the hugh disgusting puppy mills do you think they would breed if they had to market there own pups themselves.

This was a very good documentary. Just looking at what the Kennel Club standard has done to the German Shepherd breed makes one feels sad for that wonderful breed of dog that has done so much work for humans. And the change to the skull of bulldogs through the years was also quite disturbing. It is high time that this issue is publicized and a serious attempt to change things is made.

I have always been uneasy with dog owners who find it desirable to own dogs that are bred to possess particular characteristics. They can fall in the same category as those who could just as well desire to have perfect children. This practice of genetic selectivity is akin to the Nazi's program of human eugenics. It's sick and unnatural and inhumane!! What is so amazing is that the defenders of breeding selectively have no background in science or medicine, and spend so much time refuting the REAL experts! People who desire creatures to look a certain way and behave a certain way have no moral grounds to base their arguments. It comes right down to human desire and stupidity and all that is left are alot of sick animals who don't have the power to speak up for themselves.

Retards. How you can breed brothers and sisters for there looks is beyond me. People pay thousands of dollars for these dogs and then pay thousands more to literally keep them alive.
My younger sister wanted a dog and got one from a breeder in the uk that costed around 3 thousand canadian dollars. It was a old english sheepdog whom she named macy. The dog has dislocated hips, teeth problems and eventually died of bloat which was also a cayse of death for at least 6 other owners who got dogs from the same mother. I can't believe even after knowing this dog no matter how supposedly beautiful still had many hereditary chronic and/or fatal diseases and became a mother to over 6 litters. Also we were not alerted of any of this when she first purchased her puppy.
I own a shelter dog that is a purebreed mutt and has one blue and one brown eye, spots, splotches and dozens of different colours, three and a half real legs, and a fake bit to make the fourth full. Zeus is also huge and was found on the street. I neutered him and so far he has had no health complications or other surguries. I love him and believe shelter dogs are more gratefull for a home and there are so many that if you look you will find a soul mate.

This "documentary", if you can call it that, had an purpose- to push the extreme Animal Rights agenda that wants all animals illegal to own. They gave out incorrect info and padded the film to their ends. There has been an uproar against this film, yet the CKC has to put it on, probably to increase their tumbling ratings. What better for ratings, then accusation, sensationalism, and mud slinging.

Every living thing, whether purebred or not, has health issues. The good thing about purebred dogs is that we can follow these problems and take steps over a long period of time to decrease them and/or eliminate them. My breed, for example, has a registry to provide more information to breeders. Each year at the US national speciality, there are breeder seminars to educate and keep breeders up-to-date on what is happening in their breed, there are clinics to collect blood samples to research genetic problems that inundate our breed, there is genetic testing available to breeders on-site, and so on. Millions of dollars are collected yearly and donated to research groups to increase our dogs health over time.

Every living thing, whether purebred or not, has health issues. The good thing with purebred dogs is that we can track problems, determine where the bad genes lie in our pedigrees and take steps over a long period of time to decrease them and/or eliminate them. Our breed, for example, has started a registry of information to begin the process of providing more information to breeders. And yes, more needs to be done, but that will take time and coordination. Technology has much to offer dog breeders, and over time, changes will be forthcoming to the benefit of breeders, their dogs, and owners alike. Given that ethical breeders don't get rich on breeding, this will take time, and as usual, much volunteer work on the part of the dog fancy.

This "documentary", if you can call it that, had an purpose - to push the extreme Animal Rights agenda that wants all animals illegal to own. They gave out incorrect info and padded the film to their ends. They neglected to show the reality of the dog fancy, picking out a few breeds that are easy to criticize. How easy it is to show the problems; what they didn't show was what the dog fancy is doing on the positive side. And I can tell you, that it is substantial. A large percentage of people in the dog world are dedicating all of their spare time and waking hours working to improve the purebred dog. Yet none of this was shown. There has been an uproar against this film, yet the CKC has to put it on, probably to increase their tumbling ratings. What better for ratings, then accusation, sensationalism, and mud slinging.


The Animal Rights people are great a criticizing, but have no intention to aid. They are always looking for the boogy-man and when he isn't found, they create him out of any bits and pieces they can find. Then they call themselves the savours of dogs against the bad breeder. This is the same tactics that the vets are using with their new animal rights department. Rather than looking at their own unethical practices, like housing dogs for their vets to practice on and then destroying the dogs when they are finished, they want to blame ethical breeders for this, that, and the other thing.

Our family has diabetes, back problems, knee problems and heart problems. That is life; every family has genetic problems. The good thing about purebreds is that it offers us a way to track and try to prevent problems, something that is impossible with mutts and people.

Instead of going after back yard breeds, these people go after the only group that has organized to try to improve the quality of their animals. Shame on the CBC. Maybe the CBC should take steps to follow what ethical dog people have really been doing with their time.