For anyone who has enjoyed Crufts in the past while living in the UK, you can now watch it on line anywhere in the world

http://www.crufts.org.uk/news/crufts...treamed-online

Presumably that decision is not entirely unrelated to the spat the BBC has with the Kennel Club over concerns about some breed standards encouraging the inbreeding of physical deformity. The BBC still holds the broadcast rights to Crufts but has decided not to broadcast it; nor will they give up their exclusive right so nobody else can broadcast either.

A principled stand or a petulant overreaction? My vote's on the former.

The Daily Telegraph, not usually known for its support of the BBC on controversial topics, has an interesting article here

* the vet in question was Mark Evans, chief veterinary adviser to the RSPCA, which has also withdrawn its support of Crufts

What I find completely staggering is that it has taken media interest and controversy to bring the KC to its senses. They "have now said" that they'll change standards? They "will ban" the breeding of close relatives? FFS why wasn't this done years and years and years ago?

I have no time for the Kennel Club. I believe their "breed standards" have been responsible for more long-term animal cruelty and unnecessary suffering than any number of puppy mills and breeding factories.

I doubt that anyone will care, but I agree with you on this. One of the main reasons I chose to own a Border Collie is that there are no recognized breed standards for appearance. The dog's instinct, intelligence and ability for its work define quality.

I care and I agree. I saw the TV program aired last summer in the UK about UK breeding standards...some of the poor dogs on there were pitiful. Crufts have a lot to answer for IMO.

+1

Here's our recent addition.

But then, isn't it only stuck up breeders that give a flying monkeys about who wins Crufts anyway? The whole dog showing world is so "you scratch my back and I'll scratch your's" that a real outsider has no real chance of winning, even if their dog is, by freak of nature, the closest to the breed standard anyway.

Odd then that The Kennel Clubs of GB, Canada and the US all appear to have Breed Standards that include sections on appearance?

http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/130
http://www.canadasguidetodogs.com/bordercollie.htm
http://www.akc.org/breeds/border_collie/index.cfm
http://www.bordercollieclub.com/bordercollie_tns.aspx

That seemed odd to me too. We've just been offered a border collie, a sibiling of one the p-i-l are showing. My understanding is that it's on offer as a pet because it doesn't have the right colour for showing.

So far as I can tell, there is a standard for colour and type of coat etc. for the border collie, but not anything to do with size or how its body is constructed or whether its tail is docked or its ears cropped or things like that. I think those are the "traits" that people object to, not the colour of the coat and its temperament etc.

This following link is from the CKC:

http://www.ckc.ca/en/Portals/0/breeds/BRC.pdf

I think the breeding practises to which people object are those which impair the animal's ability to perform basic functions such as breathing and walking. One need not anthropomorphise in order to see that flat noses and wonky hips are affectations that impair quality of life.

I was watching The Westminster Dog Show and there was a Brussells Griffon there - a famous one - can't remember his name -- but he had almost no ears!! I mean to say, that I have actually helped a breeder dock tails on Airedale puppies when they were maybe a day old. They squeaked a bit but then went back to sleep. That to me is a lot different than cutting half a dog's ear off when its four months old!

A member of our kennel club was saying that she imported an Old English Sheepdog from Germany and it has a tail. She said it looks rather like a Bearded Collie, so its just that we are used to seeing certain breeds with no ears and no tails. We would get used to the change - just like we got used to not having to breathe other people's smoke in restaurants.

People whine for a while and then realize that things have changed - and they suck it up!

And that to me is no less defining of how the Border Collie should appear than is this http://www.ckc.ca/en/Portals/0/breeds/BRT.pdf on the border terrier.

I am in full agreement that certain breeds (eg the English Bulldog, the Peke) are bred to highlight and perpetuate what in the wild would be endangering physical characteristics or just blatant mutations. I also agree that ear Cropping is barbaric BUT that is not down to actual breeding rather the STUPIDITY of exhibitors.

Yes, I guess you are right. I went through quite a few breed standards on the Canadian Kennel Club site, and none of them said the ears had to be cropped. All the ones I read said they could be cropped or natural.

I had a bit of an argument with a fellow from my kennel club who has a Dobermann with cropped ears. I asked him why he did it, and his answer was that they were bred for fighting and long ears could be a target. But when I pointed out that this was then -- and now they are mostly family pets - I think he changed the subject. I can't see that there is any good reason for cropping ears nowadays, except because the owner thinks the dog "looks nicer" like that. Which to me is a ridiculous reason!

I wonder there hasn't been discussion in north America about banning the cropping of ears.