PDA

View Full Version : Dog World Article 11/9/08



Jan Bell
12th September 2008, 03:54 PM
Has anybody seen the Dog World Article from yesterday relating to a second programme by Passonate Productions. There are several comments following it and I would be interested to know your opinions.

http://www.dogworld.co.uk/News/37-follow-up-programme

sins
12th September 2008, 06:02 PM
That documentary well and truly set the cat among the pigeons! A follow up is sure to be a ratings winner seeing how controversial the original was.
I suspect that the cavalier breed will be revisited in the next one!
Isn't it amazing that the cavalier breeders are the ones having to battle the storm in the wake of this?
Possibly their response hasn't been calm or measured enough, or have tried too hard to defend the indefensible.
It's not the programme which is causing damage to the breed,rather it is the perceived implosion of the organisation as it breaks into factions,each one opposing the other more bitterly?
The comments at the bottom of the articles illustrate this very clearly.
This SGM has the potential to become a kangaroo court( I in no way would dream of pre empting it's outcome.)
The author states that some forums where untruths and gossip are bandied about. I've not seen untruths on any forum(apart from a non cavalier forum where Dr Ingpen was described as an eminent vet) but goodness knows the behaviour of Club as a body will feed gossip for months to come.
I think over the coming weeks the breeders who appeared on the first part of the programme should approach the ridgeback breeders and see if they have any spare Ridgebacks(ridgeless or otherwise) to chase the reporters from the roses.

Margaret C
12th September 2008, 06:40 PM
Has anybody seen the Dog World Article from yesterday relating to a second programme by Passonate Productions. There are several comments following it and I would be interested to know your opinions.

http://www.dogworld.co.uk/News/37-follow-up-programme

Thank you for flagging this up.

There is one particularly nasty comment and I have reported it as inappropriate with the following message:-

'I am Margaret Carter, the owner of the stud dog described in this comment.
The description of my dog has no basis in fact, as his veterinary records will show.
He was first diagnosed with SM in 2004 when he was eleven years old.
Please remove this comment or I will take legal advice

Margaret C

diddy
13th September 2008, 12:58 AM
So have I. It was spiteful and unnecesary in my opinion. I did not send in my application to join - so glad I didnt - I might have had the misfortune to meet some of these nasty people in the flesh.

*Pauline*
13th September 2008, 01:05 AM
Thank you for flagging this up.

There is one particularly nasty comment and I have reported it as inappropriate with the following message:-

'I am Margaret Carter, the owner of the stud dog described in this comment.
The description of my dog has no basis in fact, as his veterinary records will show.
He was first diagnosed with SM in 2004 when he was eleven years old.
Please remove this comment or I will take legal advice

Margaret C

I would join and make your reply public as comments are there for everyone to see and no one is contesting it.

Cathy Moon
13th September 2008, 01:26 AM
So have I. It was spiteful and unnecesary in my opinion. I did not send in my application to join - so glad I didnt - I might have had the misfortune to meet some of these nasty people in the flesh.
I reported it as inappropriate also. I'm fairly certain I know who posted that comment. icon_devil

Jan Bell
13th September 2008, 07:36 PM
The following 'comment' was posted today on the Dog World article. Who is Bet Hargreaves? One of the other people adding comments seems to know her well. Perhaps if you see this Margaret you could respond to her.



Just curious. Did Margaret Carter's Stud Cavalier sire any Litters after he was diagnozed with SM ? Does any body know ? Bet Hargreaves
Posted at 17:56 on 13 Sep 2008 by
bolshie | Report as inappropriate (http://www.dogworld.co.uk/report?commentID=577&commentno=23)


http://www.dogworld.co.uk/News/37-follow-up-programme

Cathy Moon
13th September 2008, 07:58 PM
Thank you for bringing that to our attention. The comment is inappropriate, and amounts to defamation. I've lodged a complaint.

Who is she? I'm afraid I don't know any more.:mad:

*Pauline*
13th September 2008, 08:37 PM
I'm afraid I don't know any more.:mad:

Same here. :( I don't get it, they both want better health for Cavaliers. Why all the conflict?

On the issue of confidentiality, Bet says, "Margaret Carter broke the Golden Rule KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT !!!! Never ever divulge what you know."

But if Beverly Costello broke MVD and SM protocol, Margaret had a moral obligation do the right thing and speak up.

Cathy Moon
13th September 2008, 09:09 PM
On the issue of confidentiality, Bet says, "Margaret Carter broke the Golden Rule KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT !!!! Never ever divulge what you know."

But if Beverly Costello broke MVD and SM protocol, Margaret had a moral obligation do the right thing and speak up.

Just about everyone reaches a point in their lives when they have to make a life-changing choice. Margaret did have a moral obligation to do the right thing. We stand beside her in spirit.

I have to ask the question - Who is behaving as though they really do care about cavalier health?

Claire L
13th September 2008, 10:28 PM
On the issue of confidentiality, Bet says, "Margaret Carter broke the Golden Rule KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT !!!! Never ever divulge what you know."



I'm absolutely APPALLED :mad::mad::mad:

It's because of this *golden rule* that so many animals, not just Cavaliers, are suffering excrutiating health problems :(

diddy
13th September 2008, 11:07 PM
Totally agree with you clare.
Has anyone managed to figure out why it is that WE,the public, who are the very people these breeders/exhibitors NEED to sell their pups to can understand that there needs to be more openess within the breed and welcome it with open arms,whlist THEY seem content to huddle whispering in small groups and as we now know KEEP THEIR MOUTHS SHUT.
In my humble opinion they have a moral duty not to keep quiet about such matters, as inevitably their puppies will end up in our hands.:eek:

I dont belieeeeeeeeeeeeeve it. It really saddens me.

Margaret C
13th September 2008, 11:50 PM
The following 'comment' was posted today on the Dog World article. Who is Bet Hargreaves? One of the other people adding comments seems to know her well. Perhaps if you see this Margaret you could respond to her.


http://www.dogworld.co.uk/News/37-follow-up-programme

I have posted the following comment, although I dout whether it will stop these malicious people:-

"Just to put the record straight.

Ch Mareve Indiana sired his last litter at the age of eight.
He was diagnosed with SM at the age of eleven.

He is on the heart over five list, he first developed a murmur when seven years old.

I saw the BIS dog's scan at a show where it was shown to me and other exhibitors by his owner.
There was nothing confidential about it and this was six months before I started receiving scan certificates for the voluntary MRI list
There has never been any request to put this dog's name on this list.

I have not actually been the Cavalier Club Health Representative since 2005.

After five years of working to raise awareness of SM, I realised that nothing would change unless the puppy buying public knew that they should ask for health certificates when buying the family pet and so I decided to give an interview to the documentary makers.

When they heard of my decision the Cavalier Club committee and the regional cavalier club representatives insisted that I must not suggest that I represented the Cavalier Clubs in any way.
It was this decision that stopped me from talking about the club health schemes, and fund raising projects ( most of which I initiated )"

Margaret C

frecklesmom
13th September 2008, 11:59 PM
Margaret, I'm sure it was distasteful to go over the same ground again but your comment in Dogs World should end this particular segment of comments. I have to think Bet Hargreaves will continue to press because of her own vested writings about SM and her opinion that SM is only in a few Cavaliers.
Ironic tho' because she wrote this in her writings a few years ago

[quote]Surely the way forward at the moment for the future of the Cavalier breed is for Cavalier breeders to remove from their breeding stock any Cavalier who has Syringomyelia, or Epilepsy, until such time as when Cavaliers will be blood tested and those found to be carrying the genes causing the health problems in the Cavalier breed. quote]

Jan Bell
14th September 2008, 09:47 AM
Margaret,

Thanks for posting that. As Frecklesmom says, I am sure it's unpleasant to have to keep on going over this, but I didn't like the tone of the lady's comments. Still have no idea who she is, thought that doesn't really matter.

I don't understand why these people keep attacking you instead of addressing the very real health problems within the breed, it is so infuriating and frustrating. I am hanging on to the thought that due to people like yourself, Carol, Jemima and Beverly Cuddy the pressure is really on them.

The CKCS club could do with a good PR person I think. They are fast losing all credibility, having shown that they are more concerned with a small (I hope) group of breeders who are more concerned with themselves rather than the health of their dogs.

About time they realised that they are a relatively small group of breeders, and their view does not represent the vast majority of dog owners - I don't doubt this, having read every blog, comment and editorial I can find. Not to mention the support of all the eminent doggie geneticist, RSPCA, Dogs Trust etc.

Incidentally I wrote to the Dogs Trust (who I pay a monthly donation to) in regard to the 'message of support' mentioned on the Kennel Club website. This was their reply:



Your comments have been noted and we appreciate your concerns.

We here at Dogs Trust believe that the way forward is to work with such organisations as The Kennel Club in order to promote best practices and encourage productive and succinct change. By working with organisations such as The Kennel Club and DEFRA we hope to be able to reduce the suffering of some pedigree dogs. I Have attached our press statement, which we sent to The Kennel Club just before the BBC expose was aired but they decided not to include it on their website.

The main points we wish to address are as follows:


Existing legislation needs to be changed to prevent inappropriate breeding practices such as those highlighted in the programme.
There needs to be genetic screening of all breeding stock and the assured integrity of such a process
Breed standards need to be reviewed and where necessary revised to ensure they are firmly focused on the health and well being of the dog, not the aesthetics of the breed. Breeders and show judges must adhere to these revised breed standards
When people buy a dog, they need to think about where they are buying it from. Although we always urge people to first consider a rescue dog, if they do want a pedigree, people should buy from a Kennel Club accredited breeder. They must find out the dog’s genetic heritage and get a screen test before buying.
Hope this clarifies matters.




So the Kennel Club claim they are being misrepresented, but they don't mind doing a bit of misrepresentation themselves!

You have all of our support and best wishes, Margaret.

Rj Mac
14th September 2008, 11:13 AM
I have deliberately stayed away from the debates that have arrised since the documentary, as I feel a little out my depth.....due to lack of knowledge, but what I wanted to say is that I am absolutely disgusted by the way, good decent people with the breeds best interests at heart....such as yourself Margert C are beeing hounded and villified, by such small minded bitter people,who obviously only have THEIR own interests at heart!!!!!!

I also wanted you to know that howevere small a contribution ours is - we have wrote to the Cavalier club - that Myself and my family are firmly behind yourself,and all the like minded people who only want what is best for the longterm of our Cavs,

Jan Bell
14th September 2008, 12:38 PM
Ryan, Lisa and Kieran,

Well done on the letter. I didn't know too much about all this until a few weeks ago, but oh boy am I learning fast.

I am still a little careful about posting on other sites (I have posted in defence of Margaret et al on the Cold Wet Nose blog and written umpteen letters to everybody that it has been suggested to write to) but I am aware that my knowledge isn't impeccable.

I am just about to post a question to Bet Hargreaves on Dog World though, as she now seems to be saying that all this publicity is going to hinder the research into SM. Don't understand why this would be the case. I actually find her postings a bit scary as she is somewhat aggressive!

diddy
14th September 2008, 02:25 PM
I'm not convinced any more that the majority of the breeders really do have the welfare of the breed at heart. :bang:

As you say BH seems to come across as a very scary person - I wouldnt like to meet her down a dark alley at night. For some reason she cant understand the public needs more openess before they can make informed decisions.

Jan Bell
14th September 2008, 02:31 PM
OK, so this was probably going to be my first and last posting to Dog World to Bet Hargreaves as the lady does seem to be on the attack - don't think I am up to the task. Ms Hargreaves said:



...that if a few folk can put Dr Blott's Research in jeopardy,then they will have a lot to answer to for


My comment:



I don't see why Dr Blott's work is now in jeopardy. The Kennel Club statement says "we will continue to research new ways of improving health of dogs ... and will continue in the future to carry out and develop its current health and welfare policies".


I have now added, due to her response that she said it COULD, not it WOULD:


OK, my apologies. Still I ask, why COULD Dr Blott's research still be in jeopardy. Perhaps you could respond please. Sorry, but I don't understand why you have to attack back at what was simply a response that I didn't understand why you were saying that it COULD (I have noted my error)be in jeopardy. I assumed that as you were saying this, that you had some grounds for saying it. I rather regret taking the bother now.

I feel that to keep replying to Ms Hargreaves comments is a bit pointless, however much I am upset by them. Is this a cop out?

PS I am not sure if I am allowed to copy somebody else's post, but assume a moderator will delete this if no appropriate.
All can be found under link:

http://www.dogworld.co.uk/News/37-follow-up-programme.aspx