Can anyone tell me what an accredited breeder is?

Information about the Accredited Breeder Scheme.

thank you
does this mean that a non accredited breeder cannot test their dogs for potential problems or can anyone?

Any breeder can (and should) test the dogs, whether breeding pedigrees, crossbreeds or mongrels. All are susceptible to hereditary conditions.

my pug is from a non accredited breeder and has has virtually every problem (other than pug dog encephalitis) that you could list. This breeder says she cares about the health of her dogs and is also a show judge for pug shows.

I wouldn't worry too much about the non-accreditation; many excellent breeders haven't bothered with it because they exceed the requirements anyway.

Is the breeder a member of any of the breed clubs? Their criteria are usually much stricter. Club website

Unfortunately just like us, many dogs can still end up with illnesses no matter how hard the owner tries to irradicate things.

I personally feel my dogs problems are down to the breed in general.
Her eye problems and hence the medial canthoplasty op she had was down to the fact her eyes were too exposed and she has no nose to protect them.
Her slipped disc in her back was quote"typically seen in this breed"
Her funny turns were down to sleep apnoea caused by her soft palate collapsing during sleep
And finally her brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome and grade 3 laryngeal collapse explains itself.

dont breed with the poor thing!!!!

the breeder should really not be breeding, if it is > typically seen in this breed then it should be bred out (if a problem)
my breed used to have a lot of problems, being revived in eth 40's from a very small no. of dogs (a bitch and 2 dogs, to begin with)

after 30 years of testing, the major problems are gone and it is just patella and cataracts, which are pesent in nearly all breeds, but this doesnt meen we are not going to breed it out.

pugs are lovley dogs with such a great personality. i cant wait for teh next few generations to see teh new pugs with longer muzzles and straight backs.

http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/eGallery/object.asp?collector=12763&display=acquired&object=2107790&row=75&detail=magnify
look at this pugs face.

i do hope your pug is well, i hope her life is comfortable

> I personally feel my dogs problems are down to the breed in general.

So what made you choose such a flawed breed.  I am pretty sure I have seen many healthy specimens of the breed.

Olive1
So sorry to hear of so many problems for your girl.

Stamboom and JeanSW, she's alot more comfy now shes had all the ops.
She is spayed as I never had any intentions of breeding from her to start with. I agree their personalities are unbeatable!
If you look at the old picture of the pug it's unbelievable how breeders have chosen to squash their muzzles shorter and shorter.
Brainless, we all make mistakes and one I will never make again. Sadly the popularity of the breed is on the increase. You only have to look on that awful site epupz to see any Tom Dick or Harry are breeding them.
Mine was from a "reputable" breeder, one also that judges.

If you look at the old picture of the pug it's unbelievable how breeders have chosen to squash their muzzles shorter and shorter

Not sure I understand why you would buy a breed you have such concerns over, or the way it has evolved through time.

we all make mistakes and one I will never make again

Does that mean you wont ever buy a Pug again, or you will buy your next one from a reputable breeder.

Will you still feel its unbelievable  the way breeders have taken the  breed to what it is today.

I would assume anyone who had such strong feelings about the way a breed had  evolved, would  vote with their pockets, and  not buy  said breed!!

> I would assume anyone who had such strong feelings about the way a breed had  evolved, would  vote with their pockets, and  not buy  said breed!!

Hear hear.

Not many people are forced to buy dogs......

Those who do their research before buying stand a much greater chance of a healthy pet.

The emphasis seems to be on the breeder only, when infact, the buyer shares the responsibility to look for the healthy option.

> Does that mean you wont ever buy a Pug again, or you will buy your next one from a reputable breeder.

The post makes it clear that this WAS from a 'reputable' breeder and judge.

> I would assume anyone who had such strong feelings about the way a breed had  evolved, would  vote with their pockets, and  not buy  said breed!!

It sounds as though the OP has been very unlucky and has had a whole collection of potential pug problems in one dog, which I think would be unexpected from a reputable breeder. You can love a breed but still wish that breeders had not exaggerated certain aspects of it, and perhaps be surprised when you look back and see just how it has changed.  I think the attitude of if you don't like it don't buy it is a) not helping the breed (any breed with health problems) to improve and get away from some of the problems, and b) is an extraordinarily defensive attitude. It would be really refreshing if someone were to simply agree that years ago the pug did indeed look very different, and yes, some of the health problems could be resolved by breeding back to a similar type, and who knows this may be the way the breeders decide to go in future. But that would mean admitting that some breeding choices may not have been the right ones. What is wrong with acknowledging some of these things?

> It sounds as though the OP has been very unlucky

It does not sound from the OP that this is what is being said, the poster assumes the breed is the problem not the dog having problems.

> some of the health problems could be resolved by breeding back to a similar type,

who says the breed is unhealthy as a whole and that earlier dogs did not have these same problems even if they looked different.

> What is wrong with acknowledging some of these things?

Some dogs are unhealthy in any breed but I do not think the breed as a whole is unhealthy.  I see a lot of pugs that appear to be happy healthy animals.  I do see some at shows that to me seem very overweight in order to get that small heavy animal the standard mentions, and I don't think that can be healthy, but there are a lot of overweight dogs in all breeds, especially in pet homes.

I still ask why would someone buy a puppy if they consider the breed exaggerated and unhealthy, surely they knew what they were buying????

I bought my dog in 2003.
I read at least 4 books on pugs that listed the potential problems.
There were NO accredited breeders on the KC web site back then, therefore I went through the Pug Dog Club and found a reputable breeder, one that shows at crufts and is heavily involved with the Pug Dog Club.
Yes, I WOULD NEVER BUY ANOTHER!
I know 3 other families who did the same as me and have pugs with problems. So yes, I do believe that its a problem with the breed and the breeders.
There are in fact NO listed recommended tests on the KC website for pug health and DNA screening.
I still love pugs purely for their wonderful personalities.
Sadly, there are no plans in the future recommendations of the breed standard to increases the length of muzzle for example which is just awful for the future of the breed. With a longer muzzle earlier example of the breed would be less prone to eye injuries and brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome.
Yes pugs do appear to be happy, mine does too, but look what has happened to her.

There are no health tests for some of these crosses with daft names but many of them have severe health problems but people are still buying certain types for around double the price of a pedigree.

I've also seen many fit, healthy Pugs. Just because someone goes to Crufts does not mean that their dogs are the best, although Pugs do usually have largish numbers at shows so many will have beat some really good ones to qualify.

It does upset me when people are fooled into thinking that just because a dog is shown at Crufts that the breeder has the best dogs.

> I still love pugs purely for their wonderful personalities.
>

I assume you chose the breed initially for the way it looked as unless you knew a lot of Pugs already then it wouldn't have been just their characters that drew you.

So wouldn't you say that those who like the less natural characteristics of short faces (I personally do not which is why I have a breed of natural /primitive construction), be they breeders or owners are equally to blame if things have gone too far?

The breeders for failing to realise problems will arise if they go for ever more human flat faces etc, and new owners for wanting this.

Who says that the breeders are not addressing the health issues, the fact that the KC does not demand them makes no difference, reputable breeders will ever be looking to minimise the risks of producing unsound pups, but inherit acne is not a simple mater, things can crop up from way back in pedigrees, some things are environmental/acquired, and there is always spontaneous mutation and things going awry during foetal development due to outside influences (drugs/pesticides) to contend with.

This page http://www.pugdogclub.org.uk/start.html certainly mentions health issues, so I don't believe the breed clubs are burying it's head.

I think this: Life span: Pugs are a long lived breed and normally reach a good age. 15 or 16 year old pugs are no rarity. speaks for itself.

I wouldn't look for an accredited breeder.  It actually means very little and many responsible breeders don't apply for various reasons.

The thing that appears to be overlooked is that breeders don't want to breed unhealthy dogs either because the one that they keep would also need a lot of expensive veterinary treatment!  And if you look here http://www.pugdogclub.org.uk/start.html the Pug Club has a Health Committee, which is composed of members from all the five breed clubs with a Vet Dr Andreas Schemel MRCVS is representing The Pug Dog Club.

When you are dealing with nature and genetics, nobody knows definitively what will be produced because all the genes are thrown into the air at every conception and it's in the lap of the gods if all the good ones, bad ones or a sprinkling of each, will fall into each puppy.  Sometimes unexpectedly things appear from generations back that you thought had been sorted.  That's what breeding is all about and it happens with all animals, including humans!

I go to Champ Shows on toy days and have only met the occassional obviously poor quality, unhealthy Pug, always bred by the novice exhibitor themselves.   I have a friend here with 3, aged 2, 5 and 7, all bred by different (good) breeders who have never been to a vet in their lives.  The only precaution that she takes is that she doesn't walk them on the sand because of their eyes.  Apart from that, they lead normal dog lives.

think the attitude of if you don't like it don't buy it is a) not helping the breed (any breed with health problems) to improve and get away from some of the problems, and b) is an extraordinarily defensive attitude. It would be really refreshing if someone were to simply agree that years ago the pug did indeed look very different, and yes, some of the health problems could be resolved by breeding back to a similar type, and who knows this may be the way the breeders decide to go in future

Sorry, but I disagree, by the simple fact, if   there is no demand for a "flawed" breed, there will be no reason to supply, and maybe then the breeders of  "flawed" breeds will rethink  their breding practices!

Not that I personally think Pugs are flawed... I know plenty of healthy ones.

Why would it be refreshing to say  that breeds  looked different yrs ago, I think mos people who breed know that already, and who's to say they were healthier, simply because they looked different...  were health tests the norm,  a 100/50 yrs ago??

It does upset me when people are fooled into thinking that just because a dog is shown at Crufts that the breeder has the best dogs

Wholeheartedly agree with this...  a ethical breeder does not  always go hand in hand with a  breeder who shows and judges!!

Yes, I WOULD NEVER BUY ANOTHER

One wonders if you would take that attitude if your  dog was healthy...

You obviously did your research  before you bought, you know the dynamics of the breed, you obviously liked the look of them, as unless you had had experience of the breed, character would have been something unknown to you.

Yet with all its facial and breathing flaws, you still went against something you disagree with and bought one.

Hi Olive1
my little dog has had different problems to yours.
my pug is 6 years old she is the sweetest little thing and has a good pedigree, however she had a slipped disc at just over a year, following from this I was told she had hip problems and had to have a piece removed from the bone, since which the leg is shorter and useless she drags her little foot along an all the claws have worn away. Next came pyometra at 18 months resulting in emergency spay. 14 months ago she had her 1st bladder stones resulting in an operation, she now has bladder stones AGAIN but because she is still young and they cant do the operation more than 3 times we are trying to treat with diet and medication so she walks around weeing everywhere. I am a responsible dog owner and researched the breed before getting her and although she is a wonderful dog I dont see her making old bones and will not get another pug. when problems are written like this they dont sound so bad but the reality is a constantly ill dog and endless vet and physio trips.

> she had hip problems and had to have a piece removed from the bone, since which the leg is shorter and useless she drags her little foot along an all the claws have worn away.

My last dog had the top of his rear leg bone, inlcuding the ball for the hip joint, removed (prior to me getting him, so I'm not 100% sure why), it meant his leg was only held in place with muscle and that leg was 1.5 inches shorter than the other. He ran a bit funny, but he could run before old age took it's toll. He suffered with ear problems, skin problems, food allergies and flea allergies. However he was NOT a pug, he was a cross-breed (lab cross).

Brainless; your absolutely right! I made a mistake! I chose a breed that I now realise is not fit to live a normal life. Have you never done anything in your life and then regretted it? You could call it a learning curve. Yes I went on looks and on their personalities. Yes I am (or was), part of the demand. I have at no point denied this so you can stop banging on about it.
I will say AGAIN that I went to a reputable breeder. NOT because she showed or judged, but because she was on the Pug Dog Club Web site. It is only SINCE that I have found out she is a judge. Oh and by the way she was also on the Pug Dog Club health committee.
All I want to do is educate people about the breeds problems.
Yes some pugs live long lives and I hope mine will too. However, it is only since owning one that I have realised that it is like looking after a dog with disabilities, and that is BEFORE we even address her health issues.
You can knock me all you want for getting her in the first place but DO NOT knock me for now trying to educate people about the potential problems.
If my dog had not had all the three medical conditions she has had, then YES I would still never get another as their normal lives have to be so adapted to prevent potential problems.
I believe the breed clubs ARE burying their heads as they seem to not want to change much in the breed standard.

I have a friend who has wanted a pug for a long time & now has one . He's three years old & as fit as a fiddle, he comes from a good breeder & although not a breed I would own myself, he's a lovely character & very clever.

I've seen lots of Pugs at shows(when I showed my Cavaliers)& apart from one or two that could have done to lose a bit of weight, they were fit little dogs.

Did you notice the eye problem when you saw her in the nest ?

I do think that people should ensure that they have seen lots of the breed & research health issues etc before buying a pedigree puppy.

All I want to do is educate people about the breeds problems

But I think what you are doing is "educating"  from a totally biased point of view.. and  NOT  with an open mind towards a breed.

I chose a breed that I now realise is not fit to live a normal life.

Statements like that are nothing but scaremongering...  you have had a bad experience.. thousands of pug owners would disagree with you , about a "normal life"

Its a shame you have not had a good experience, but dont tar all breeders or  the breed with the same brush.

I've seen many fit Pugs that live long and happy lives, for you to put what you have said is totally uncalled for.  Oh and no, I don't and have to say I wouldn't own the breed myself but I love their characters, they are a great fun breed.

Moon maiden and Jackbox please don't judge my feelings on a breed you have never owned.
My point of view is far from biased. Its real. I know many pug owners. ALL have had eye problems, one also has a dog with sleep apnoea. Another has back problems (including one on the post above). And I could go on.
Are you all breeders?
Why are knocking someone for trying to point out potential problems?
Its not scaremongering, just education, so that people can keep an eye out for problems before its too late. Sorry for that.
So you all think its right to shove a normal dogs anatomy of the head into a head that it  doesn't fit into?
All I really want is for pug breeders to reverse some of these issues by, for example lengthening the muzzle (so that they can breath better in hot environments and have some protection for their eyes), and breed out the screw tail, that leads to back problems such as scholiosis and hemivertebrae.
ie; improve the dogs life and not follow demand for cuteness.

Maybe a labrador would do you next time - a nice balanced looking dog with a good length of head and no corkscrew tail.

But maybe not because they can suffer from hip dysplasia, elbow displaysia, General Progressive Retinal Atrophy, Hereditary Cataract, Total Retinal Dysplasia, Multifocal Retinal Dysplasia, Centronuclear Myopathy, and they're now investigating mast cell tumours, melanomas, and soft-tissue sarcomas.

My point is that all breeds can have problems.  As I've said before how many each dog has depends entirely the way that the genes fall on conception.  One puppy may get no problems, another in the same litter may get all of them.  And then of course a lot depends on the new owner's feeding and environment.

I know many pug owners. ALL have had eye problems, one also has a dog with sleep apnoea. Another has back problems (including one on the post above). And I could go on.
We all know many Pug owners too but the ones that we know all have healthy dogs.  ALL the ones that you know have problems ...........

Your attitude of blaming the breeder for all your Pug's problems is just not fair.  Are you sure your name's not Jemina?

My point of view is far from biased. Its real. I know many pug owners. ALL have had eye problems, one also has a dog with sleep apnoea. Another has back problems (including one on the post above). And I could go on.

How many Pug owners do you know ? 100 ? 200 ?

I'm not a Pug breeder, I have bred GSDs & Bearded Collies from fully health tested dogs, but I have been around pedigree dogs for a long time.

What you are trying to do is say the majority of Pugs have major health problems, they don't. Yes there are breeders who breed dogs that develop severe health problems, some of which are obvious when the puppies are young, which is why I asked you why you didn't notice your dogs eye problems before you bought her ? I know I would have done.

I do intend to breed from at least one of my dogs, I've already spent over £1,500 on health testing & still have more to do & I have to pay for another bitch as the bitch I have now has too high a hip score to be bred from. She'll be spayed next year & I will be buying a puppy bitch, who will hopefully be suitable to breed from.

The change in the shape of dogs is not something that can be done in the wink of an eye, nor in one generation as the general public & pet owners believe, neither is it solved by crossing two breeds together. Pugs pre the Victorian era(along with King Charles Spaniels)did have longer muzzles & the Victorian ladies bred them to look more human with flatter faces. If you look at paintings of the companion dogs of the 18th century(ie 1700s)they, KCS & Pugs, did not look as they did after the Victorians had finished with them.

Change takes time, so instead of condemning all Pug breeders, why not join the Pug Club & work from the inside to improve the breed.

I know many pug owners. ALL have had eye problems, one also has a dog with sleep apnoea. Another has back problems (including one on the post above). And I could go on.
Are you all breeders?

How many pug people do you know, do you go on Pug related  chat rooms...  where do you get your information on all these "ill" Pugs??

Do you show or attend shows..  ??   Pugs are still not a very common breed, you dont see many walking the streets. so it would be interesting to know where all your pug owners come from, as they all seem to have  unhealthy ones??

No I am not a breeder, nor do I own a Pug, but they are one of my favorite breeds, and I spend many an hr at  the ring side watching them, I know  a fe breeders and people who own and show them.. so you could say I have a fair idea of the breed,... its a shame that every Pug you come across is unhealthy...  statistics being what they are, that a little unusual, to say the least.

My own breed suffers a few health problems,  but thankfully most I know or meet are healthy...  funny though, those I see with major health problems, usually come from the not so knowledgeable breeder.

Olive1

I dont breed Pugs but have bred many Boxers.
You could have come to this forum saying that your Boxer has epilepsy and the whole breed should be changed, breeders are at fault etc etc.

In the nearly 30 years of breeding boxers I've never had a case of epilepsy so what should I say to you?

Can you begin to see why people are taking issue with your sweeping generalizations? 

ps I'm not an accredited breeder - I'm a reputable one....not always the same thing.

I guess none of you feel that there is a need for change in this breed, to improve it's health and welfare. My comments and concerns are justified.
No my name is not Jemima. Jemima Harrison has done some brilliant work and continues to do so.
Considering the pug gene pool originates from around only 50 dogs, without improvement, surely we could be looking at a possible mutational meltdown ahead.
If everyone like me (and Im sure there are more out there)  had the guts to come forward and highlight  concerns over the breed, then maybe more could be done to help improve the breed.
I am not a breeder, I am simply Jo public. This does not mean my concerns and comments are any less important than yours. Moonmaiden, even Jo public understands that changes to the breed do not happen over night or by one injection. Its sweeping generalisations like that that do nothing to improve Jo publics view of dog breeding and breeders.
Moonmaiden in response to your persistent question about noticing my dogs eye problems. Distichiasis was impossible to pick up without the use of specialist veterinary opthalmologist magnification equipment. So no I wouldnt have been able to pick it up, and nor would you have.
So please stop attacking me for attacking ALL breeders. My concerns are for improving the breed. Yes in the past pugs had longer muzzles. I have mentioned this in my own post above. Im not just talking about inherited problems. Im just concerned that given the general skull shape, with no protection from a muzzle, and normal soft tissue of a dogs skull forced into an area far too short for it, there is room for improvement.
I have been in touch with The Pug Dog Club with regards to future recommendations which are to be released in the next few weeks. They are no recommendations made on muzzle length and there are no recommendations on stopping the double "twist" in the tail, but it will no longer be called a twist. (I was told by my vet that this can lead to back problems such as slipped discs spaces).
Yes I only know a handful of pugs and sadly all have problems. How many do you all think I need to know to make my views heard?
Pugs are now in the top 20 most popular breeds so demand is on the increase. So education about them should also increase. I feel that I am part of that education, or maybe I should just go away and hide.
If I was a pug breeder myself who wanted change to the breed standard, how would you treat me then?

This is an interesting post and i dont breed any dogs...just the very average "Jo public" American cocker owner..but i do wonder what Gwens point of view is on this as she is a breeder of pugs...Calling Gwen..calling Gwen...where are you Gwen ???

>So please stop attacking me for attacking ALL breeders.

Why attack all breeders? Why not just attack the ones who repeatedly produce unhealthy animals, not the ones who do their best to produce the many sound, happy, healthy dogs (including pugs) that there are around?

> Yes in the past pugs had longer muzzles.

How far back do you mean?? Over a century ago they had extremely short muzzles - the head is now rounder and the ears smaller, but the muzzle length appears the same.

> Moonmaiden in response to your persistent question about noticing my dogs eye problems. Distichiasis was impossible to pick up without the use of specialist veterinary opthalmologist magnification equipment. So no I wouldnt have been able to pick it up, and nor would you have.

My father's first Cavalier had Distichiasis & I told his vet this. Distichiasis causes irritation and tearing, and corneal abrasions and ulcerations. Distichiasis is the growth of extra eyelashes (cilia) from the glands of the upper or lower eyelid. A follicle develops deep within the glands rather than on the skin surface of the eyelid. As the follicle grows, it follows the duct of the gland and grows out of the gland opening along the eyelid as a set of eyelashes

Why would it need an specializt to see this ? You can see the effects this has on the eye.

> I am not a breeder, I am simply Jo public. This does not mean my concerns and comments are any less important than yours. Moonmaiden, even Jo public understands that changes to the breed do not happen over night or by one injection. Its sweeping generalisations like that that do nothing to improve Jo publics view of dog breeding and breeders.

You would be surprised what "Joe Public"believes. They(thanks to PDE)believe that only KC registered dogs have health problems(don't write they don't-I see non KC reg pedigree every week at training, bought because only KC dogs have problems) Look at the BYB, puppy farmers, "pet breeders" adverts-healthy, non KC registered, not inbred"appears in so many adverts since PDE last year, now why would that happen if it didn't sell puppies for these people ? I get phone calls for Cavaliers(I don't breed them & don't have a stud dog either)that are not KC registered as the KC reg dogs' brains explode !!

I will ask you this"why not join the Pug Dog Club & work from the inside ?"

even Jo public understands that changes to the breed do not happen over night or by one injection.

And yet newspaper articles after Crufts (including ones quoting Jemima) said "nothing has changed" -despite the changes to the breed standards only having came in force at Crufts!! Yep, Joe Public really gets breeding and how long it takes to change a look.

I guess none of you feel that there is a need for change in this breed, to improve it's health and welfare. My comments and concerns are justified.

Your concerns are justified for your own dog, and the few  that you seem to know who suffer the same problems..

But they are not justified  in condemning the whole  breed , because you have had a bad experience.

There's always room for improvement in any breed... that what reputable breeders do,  I dont think you will find any reputable breeder who would disagree with that.

Of cause your voice should be heard, and speaking to the breed club with your concerns is open to ALL....but just a little advice,  please dont go in demanding change,  with the same attitude you have shown here for the breed... you wont make many friends or allies that way..there will be people in this breed who have been in them for many many yrs.and to be told by a first time buyer, that the breed is flawed and decrepit , is not the way forward.

It still amazes me that someone with such knowledge of a breed (with all the research you did)  who has such strong feeling  against all  breeders , would contribute to the market of buying a flawed breed.!!!

Out of interest, what breed would you choose next time..???

This thread is deteriorating as always when any criticism is levelled at any aspect of breeding/breeding practices.

Olive1 seems to have done everything right, and has it seems to me a good understanding of the variety of problems that her chosen breed has along with some understanding of the gene pool involved. I don't think that it is unreasonable to expect to get a dog that is fit for function.  If she had have wanted to buy a pug that was similar to those from years back she wouldn't have been able to buy one anyway because they no longer exist.

What is in question here, mostly hidden among some of the hereditary health problems of many breeds is construction. Construction is determined only by breeding. Construction and it's fashion for exaggeration is led by Judges and Breeders. If judges start putting up dogs with the flatter face, extra bulging eyes and very short stocky body etc etc, you can bet your life that this is what breeders are going to aim for. It isn't led by 'Joe Public'. According to most breeders on here, you don't breed to satisfy the pet market - that's the preserve of puppy farmers, you do it to improve the breed, so let's not blame JP. You are the ones that have the opportunity to improve the breeds. Outcrossing is sometimes necessary, especially in a limited gene pool or to alter/mitigate/dilute unwanted or unhealthy characteristics. It's how all the varieties of breeds came into existence. Significantly altering some of the construction may (or may not) also help to reduce or eradicate some of the hereditary health problems - we just don't know.

No MM, it doesn't happen overnight but unless someone starts it's never going to happen. If some enlightened breeders had taken a modicum of action years ago, this would not be such a big issue now. But, the breeder that took 'the road less travelled' would certainly not have had a show winning dog, so there would not be much incentive to change. The 'damage' was done by breeding for selective traits/features, and of course it can be undone.

Changing the breed standard as the KC have done appears to be the only way to resolve the construction issue. If it isn't firmly upheld by judges it will fail.

I commend the breed clubs and reputable breeders for the health tests and screening that they do, and only breeding from health tested stock. However the issue of construction which is such a determining factor is not one that it appears anyone genuinely wants to address.

> I guess none of you feel that there is a need for change in this breed, to improve it's health and welfare. My comments and concerns are justified.
>

The breed clubs are already working or watching out for emerging problems (you don't know if an issues a breed problem unless it crops up more than statistically expected for the species as a whole) and any breeder worthy of the name tries to avoid problems, with the information collted by breed clubs and their own and other breeders experinces. 

If I didn't research and keep a weather eye on potential problems I too would run the risk of having unhealthy companions that apart from anything else would cost me a fortune at the vets.

It is those who breed dogs just for sale and don't keep any dogs past their most productive age who can afford to not care about health.

Lets face it the average pet owner owns one or two dogs at a time, msot breeders are likely to have quite a few more to look after and care for.

The breeder can see the bigger picture owneign and knowing many more dogs.  The pet owner can only judge from their much more limited standpoint and if they ahve a dog with problems they think this is common.

For example we have the eye disease PRA in our breed, but vewry few dogs have been tested as affected in the eyars I have been in the breed.  In fact just four, and at least 20% of all registered stock was eye tested. So that would be four dogs out of probably 400 over 20 years (of course there may have been unreported cases in the 80% of untested dogs, but no reason to beleive it was a higher proportion than from the tested ones.

Breeders for years have for years doen what they can to breed out issues,a dn we are fortuante that we at last can get rid of one condition altogether because of a DNA test, without having to throw out all related stock.

If a breeder avoided every dog that was in a pedigree of a dog that wasn't well then there would be no dogs pedigre or otherwise.

Olive1 seems to have done everything right, and has it seems to me a good understanding of the variety of problems that her chosen breed has along with some understanding of the gene pool involved. I don't think that it is unreasonable to expect to get a dog that is fit for function.  If she had have wanted to buy a pug that was similar to those from years back she wouldn't have been able to buy one anyway because they no longer exist.

Yes , she does, but thats not the point , the point is, she is condemning the WHOLE breed, to the point of, you will never get  a healthy Pug!!

Which we know is not true... she has had a bad experience, yes she has done her homework, and knows the health issues that can arise in a breed..but it is not justified to condemn and attack the whole breed and ALL breeders!!

And that is why she has got the response she has.. its important to educate about potenal health issues, but it is also important to educate, NOT  all pedigrees are "flawed"  which sadly is the way her posts are coming across!!

> Yes , she does, but thats not the point , the point is, she is condemning the WHOLE breed, to the point of, you will never get  a healthy Pug!!
>

Thank you, far more succinct than I can manage.

As for fundamental construction.

I would never choose to own a breed that is too far removed from the primitive template, which is why I own a Spitz breed, which is smaller in size than a wolf, more square, and has a curly tail, so already some fundamental changes.

How far would people want the clock turned back?

Should we breed out all toy breeds, all short faced breeds, all short legged breeds, all long coated and short coated breeds (surely they should have double medium length coats), all drop eared breeds etc.

Breeders breed to what they interpret along with judges as the ideal, but the majority of dogs bred by show breeders end up in pet homes and without people wanting them the breeds would die out.

In fact there are quite a few breeds that are at dangerously low numbers with only a few enthusiasts keeping them going, and strangely these tend not to be the exaggerated or cute ones, it is often the primitive or those with strong working/hunting drives, which many critics of pedigree dogs say we should be breeding.

> This thread is deteriorating

Yet again many posts on this forum turn out like this sadly.

>> This thread is deteriorating

I thought we were having an interesting discussion regarding perceptions.

Maybe I'm not as thin skinned as some people seem to be.

I thought people posted to get responses.  Or do they only want responses that agree with their own viewpoint?

I thought people posted to get responses.  Or do they only want responses that agree with their own viewpoint?

It seems that way, if the majority have a different opinion, then it seems the thread  "deteriorates!!!

My comments and concerns are justified.
They are related to your very limited experience, not the the breed as a whole.  It's like drawing the conclusion that in a class of 30 x 7 year olds, half of them have nits.  As half of them wear white ankle socks, and so white ankle socks must cause nits!  If you know 6 Pugs with problems, then you cannot assume that the whole breed is the same.

even Jo public understands that changes to the breed do not happen over night or by one injection.
Jo Public knows absolutely nothing about genetics and breeding.  That's why the world and his wife who own a bitch think that producing pups is just about finding a male of the same breed!

Distichiasis was impossible to pick up without the use of specialist veterinary opthalmologist magnification equipment.
I have frequently spotted it in dogs in the grooming parlour and pups brought in to show to me at 8 weeks.  It often sorts itself out as the pup's skull grows.  Sometimes it doesn't.

Im just concerned that given the general skull shape
And I've explained that even with a dog like a labrador with a longer head, they also have problems, just different ones!  There IS no such thing as a perfect dog.

I was told by my vet that this can lead to back problems such as slipped discs spaces
Unfortunately, unless they breed themselves, very few Vets know anything about breeding.  And again they only see the sick examples, not the healthy ones so they don't see a complete picture either.

How many do you all think I need to know to make my views heard?
Probably as many as a Pug Club committee member, who will come across hundreds each year at their shows and from their friends in the breed.

Pugs are now in the top 20 most popular breeds so demand is on the increase. So education about them should also increase. I feel that I am part of that education, or maybe I should just go away and hide.
So go and try to educate the pet owners who are mating their bitches to any male they can find with no knowledge whatsoever, and stop attacking sincere serious breeders who are doing their best for the breed and because of genetics, may occassionally produce a pup with more problems than they would like.

But your aim appears to be a vendetta against pedigree dogs, just like the person who you so much admire.   You have not taken on board even one of the many different comments that have been put to you, just that you limited experience is more relevant that those who have much more experience, so there is no discussion to be had.

As for fundamental construction.

> I would never choose to own a breed that is too far removed from the primitive template, which is why I own a Spitz breed, which is smaller in size than a wolf, more square, and has a curly tail, so already some fundamental changes.

Nor I, but for my chosen breed, the GSD, construction is at the heart of an emerging health problem which the supporters of the 'modern' shape do not wish to acknowledge may be caused by the 'new' construction. As a result, CCs may not be allocated to the GSD breed in 2010.

> How far would people want the clock turned back?

I don't think this is the issue per se. It is an observation of the change of shape, which is quite dramatic and perhaps a suggestion that allowing for a longer muzzle, larger skull, whatever - may result in healthier dogs.

> Should we breed out all toy breeds, all short faced breeds, all short legged breeds, all long coated and short coated breeds (surely they should have double medium length coats), all drop eared breeds etc

Of course not. It should merely be recognised that some elements of construction are detrimental in some breeds and breeding initiatives could be directed towards improving those areas.

> Breeders breed to what they interpret along with judges as the ideal, but the majority of dogs bred by show breeders end up in pet homes and without people wanting them the breeds would die out.

I didn't say nobody wanted them, I said the drive behind the breeds features is driven by judging and breeding. If someone really does love a particular breed they have to have what is out there. If pet homes are so important to the breed, why not acknowledge JPs concerns and address them. By attacking any criticism you are reinforcing the opinion that pedigree dog breeders are not going to produce healthy dogs, further driving them away from you and into the arms of BYB and puppy farms. So instead of laying all the blame for that at JH's door, perhaps you need to accept some yourselves. The OP could very well walk away from this exchange with the view that all breeders are indeed as depicted in PDE. We also have to accept the health problems that go with some dogs within that breed. It shouldn't stop anyone from voicing an opinion that overexaggeration is causing some problems, so perhaps it should be changed. I can understand that breeders feel that criticism should not be levelled by people with far less knowledge in that breed than they. However, each and every breeder takes on the mantle of the guardian of that breed and the responsibilities (and criticism) that goes with it.

Regarding the thread deteriorating. Just go back and re-read the early responses to the initial poster. They are not constructive at all, they are, at best defensive and attacking. In the later part of this thread some of the 'heat' has disappeared and a much healthier balanced dialogue is taking place. Long may it continue

Why is it deriorating.  We all know that all breeds, all crossbreeds etc. can have health problems that's accepted but for the original post to call ALL Pugs is what many of us are against.

Yes we want the breed to improve, but you are always going to get, not matter what happens in the future some dogs that will end up with problems.