In an article on Ytring, biologist and dog owner Per Espen Fjeld writes about dog breeding, the Norwegian Kennel Club (NKK) and the non-legal ruling on a breeding ban on the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel breed. He continues the classic myths and simplifications: Some breeds are sick, the NKK and breeders prioritize appearance, and such breeds should be banned. Problem solved, why isn’t everyone seeing this? Those of us who know dog breeding in detail, for better or for worse, know that it is unfortunately not that simple. For over twenty years, the Norwegian Kennel Club has worked systematically to register health challenges in dogs, and initiated screening programs and investigations to map and systematically breed out hereditary disorders. Breed standards have, also internationally, been corrected so that extreme features that may predispose to health problems are not to be rewarded, but punished. But why not just ban the breeds? And why should NKK get involved in them, even fight for their continued existence? Because registered, responsible breeding is the best guarantee that something really happens, and controlled breeding on a registered population is the only viable path. A ban on certain dog breeds will be almost impossible to enforce in practice. This will primarily require enormous capacity from the police and the Norwegian Food Safety Authority. It is also no easy task to identify a dog breed with certainty based on appearance. If the dog is not registered in NKK, the task becomes completely impossible. If the NKK renounces all responsibility for the most stigmatized dog breeds, this does not mean that the breed will disappear. As long as there is a market, this type of dog will be bred, imported and sold. And there is a market, because the vast majority of individuals are healthy and functional, and have a number of qualities that make them popular. Cavalier is one of the world’s most popular dog breeds. It would hardly be if the majority lived a short, dysfunctional life in pain. NKK believes that the best solution is a mapped, systematic breeding of a registered and traceable population, where breed clubs in consultation with geneticists and veterinarians can work to get rid of the challenges. The alternative is release of breeding outside of any registration and overview. When NKK decided to appeal the judgment from the district court, it was not primarily about “saving” one or two breeds, but a principle that it should be the administration’s professional body, the Norwegian Food Safety Authority, which enforces the Animal Welfare Act. Moving the administrative responsibility from the Norwegian Food Safety Authority to the court is, as we see it, the main problem with the judgment, both in the district court and the court of appeal. Then one could wish for such a simple scenario as Per Espen Fjeld outlines. The reality is more complicated. We want healthy and well-functioning dogs both physically and mentally, and that is what we work for and give the highest priority to. This means that we must seek realistic, workable solutions. A ban on breeding on the controlled part of the population is no such solution, either in the short or long term. FOLLOW THE DEBATE:
ttn-69
Breed bans do not solve any problems – Statement
