While I was away, the BBC showed a documentary entitled "Pedigree Dogs Exposed". This was bound to provoke a head-on clash with the Kennel Club, the organisers of Crufts. Confrontational diplomacy is not the best way to make friends but 'reductio ad absurdum' is a time-honoured way of bringing out a point clearly and starkly. I didn't see the programme but I cannot avoid seeing the backlash.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/sep/16/animalwelfare
The RSPCA, who hire a stand at the annual dog show, have now chimed in to chastise dog breeders. I do not wish to defend (or appear to defend) bad breeding practices but where has the RSPCA been until now, on this issue? Why does it only chime in when it sees the BBC flying a flag for animals? How many in the ranks of the RSPCA hierarchy have bought pedigree dogs with defects, thereby actually funding the criticised practice? Knee-jerk responses, holier-than-thou stances and worthy rhetoric will not do the job.
This is not a new problem and the massive resources of the RSPCA could have made a huge difference, over the years, for the sake of animal welfare.
There are some important points that maybe should be made, just now, in the wake of this simmering row.
Firstly, there are some lessons that the Kennel Club will no doubt take to heart. However, change cannot happen overnight.
Secondly, there is a difference between a bad breed trait (that may lead to animal welfare problems) and an accidentally bred-in breed susceptibility (which requires a trigger for expression). The article linked above cites "boxer dogs suffering from epilepsy". I would argue that they are probably not born with the disease but are prone to it if the necessary trigger is provided, which may be unsuitable diet or possible immune disturbances, such as may be created by routine vaccination. Possible ill-effects of vaccination are very poorly researched and monitored.
Thirdly, as with all arguments, there are grey areas and complexities that need unravelling. There is a positive note. Those who have dogs with a problem, who have been told that it is an inherited disease (or a genetic disorder), may be heartened to know that some of these will respond to homeopathy. Clearly, an inherited deformity will not respond (although secondary effects might) but a disease arising from a breed tendency, that has been triggered by some external factor, may well be reversible. Many so-called inherited immune and auto-immune disorders (e.g. lupus/SLE) of German Shepherds, epilepsy in many breeds and skin problems of West Highland Terriers (to name but a few) can often resolve. Even the distressing symptoms of hip dysplasia and syringomyelia in Cavalier King Charles Spaniels have been seen to be ameliorated, under holistic care.
Gregor Mendel made a start on learning about inheritance, in the 19th Century. Much more yet remains to be learned. If hip dysplasia, for instance, were a simple inherited disease, the Kennel Club/BVA scheme for identifying it and eradicating it from breeding dogs would have succeeded long ago, rather than still be running 24 years on, without clear victory. I would maintain that clinical expression of the disease depends upon both genetic and environmental / managemental / nutritional factors (i.e. both pre-natal [congenital] and post-natal factors).
http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/313
Hopefully, those in charge of breeding and welfare of dogs will take a grip on this issue and work together, for the benefit of future generations. Gunboat diplomacy has its place in history but may not provide the best long-term solutions. The Kennel Club and the BVA (British Veterinary Association) have a long history of cooperation on disease identification schemes. Education, not just of the dog-breeding community but also in schools and among the pet-buying public is also vital, to ensure real and lasting improvement. It is in the latter area that I see the RSPCA role, with their huge monetary resources.
[Why not take a look at www.alternativevet.org while you're here?]