<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.vetsurgeon.org/utility/feedstylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Involvement of vets in the new guidelines for pedigree dog breeding</title><link>https://www.vetsurgeon.org/f/non-clinical-questions/4035/involvement-of-vets-in-the-new-guidelines-for-pedigree-dog-breeding</link><description> Today&amp;#39;s publication of Sir Patrick Bateson&amp;#39;s report into the breeding of pedigree dogs is clearly a great step forward, however I straight away spotted some practical difficulties with some of the recommendations: 
 1) The requirement to microchip all</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>Telligent Community 10</generator><item><title>Re: Involvement of vets in the new guidelines for pedigree dog breeding</title><link>https://www.vetsurgeon.org/thread/11570?ContentTypeID=1</link><pubDate>Sat, 23 Jan 2010 09:15:51 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">146601cc-3922-4be7-9974-7e1d4e45a66b:9cb0f606-c98f-48ac-8a6b-5ccd7f828933</guid><dc:creator>Arlo Guthrie</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#39;d like to bump this back up the list, because it was originally posted straight into the controversial forums by mistake.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Headlines from the controversial section are not displayed on the main list, or the front&amp;nbsp;page, so others may have missed it. &amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Discussions should always be started in the main forums, and I move them into the &amp;#39;controversial box&amp;#39; if they become controversial/heated.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>