PDA

View Full Version : In Reply from another Cavalier Pet Owner



Bet
18th January 2010, 02:33 PM
I just was not going to reply to the post [name removed by admin -- people can go read the relevant discussion, if someone wishes to provide a link) :thmbsup:] in Norma Inglis' Breed Notes to-day.

Had a couple of Coffees and thought I am not going to take the Comments and not Respond.

She claims that it's us Cavalier Pet Folk who have not Bred a Cavalier Litter ,who are Self Styled Experts and Detractors ,that there are far too many Egos that are out of Control and we are Feeding on this Publicity and our 5 Minutes of Fame.


I am not going to get Personal ,but can only say .It is not us Cavalier Pet Folk who have brought the Breed to it's Knees as claimed, just think back to what was said a few months ago by the UK CKCS CLUB Chair -Person, and is still to be seen on Rod's Web-Site ,I think that Statement says it all.

Finally ,on the CC List, it was claimed by one Breeder ,that they would not be rushed into Decisions Based upon Incomplete and as yet Inconclusive Research and Opinions,when asked what they had done recently to improve the Expections of Cavaliers.

Does this mean that they do not Health Test their Cavalier Breeding Stock ,but Breed from Cavaliers who have not been Tested for either SM or MVD.

Surely not, this can't be what they are doing.

Marjorie
18th January 2010, 04:18 PM
Seems to me that it is the Cavalier pet owners (and the Cavaliers themselves) paying the ultimate price in heartache and vet bills, I think they have every right to demand better breeding. That breeder should realize that if there were no pet owners there wouldn't be much need for her!

Karlin
18th January 2010, 05:03 PM
That's a shame.

Given the atrocious and duplicitous approach to breeding that many of us KNOW some breeders take -- and I mean club breeders, not the puppy farmers in this case -- just how are they any better set to make responsible decisions for this breed than pet buyers, many of whom seem to have a much more informed understanding of genetics and scientific research and the meaning of 'peer review' than these same ladies and gentlemen? And who have no motivation besides loving the breed?

How many of the same breeders, some of them frequent posters to discussion on the issue, choose to ignore their pet owners with affected dogs while continuing to claim publicly that they are unaware of any problems in their lines, when they know full well some of their dogs have sired or given birth to affected dogs? And that their lines appear regularly in the pedigrees of people with affected dogs? How many of them have chosen to try and denigrate research or block funding to projects and researchers in the obvious hopes of suppressing the information they know will come out eventually? What about the prominent breeders on so-called 'health' organisations who privately refuse to fund the very projects they and others publicly demand -- which lets them conveniently keep claiming, for example, that there are no proper clinical samples to assess how widespread SM is in the breed... the very same people who have refused to fund just such a project in the US more than once? The breeders who claim no one should discuss any research project until the final results are in, and then when they are in, and they yet again confirm how dire the situation is with this condition, then take several months to very quietly post the research abstracts to the national club website and never once initiate that long-promised public discussion that was to come after the results were out?

And these are the members of the breed clubs who still for the most part, have minimal information on SM for their members on their websites (excepting the UK Club) and even after a decade of replicated research, could still allow someone to publicly state on the national breed club website that SM affects fewer than 0.002% of the breed population, a figure a ridiculous 30,000 times lower than every single research sample has suggested? THESE are the ones we are supposed to bow down to in trust? Give me a break.

But of course, health problems are all caused by puppy farmers and pet buyers. :rolleyes:

Maybe some of these breeders should actually ask the neurologists what is the ratio of pedigree dogs vs non-registered dogs that are scanned with SM. I am sure they will find (as I have asked) that there is NO DIFFERENCE in the rate of affected dogs. So let's stop setting up the straw man of the puppy farmers as the cause of all health issues -- the UK Club's own cardiologist has pointed out himself that due to apparent low levels of compliance with the MVD protocol and use of vets rather than cardiologists, the club member rate of MVD has not altered in over a decade. Where do puppy farmers figure in that statistic?

Watching the same ridiculous women and men in this breed and others recently claiming that they will now wait for 'proper scientific research' that is 'peer reviewed' and 'replicable' and then act on that, just shows how deceptive these people are in trying to fool others into believing such nonsense -- it is the oldest trick in the book when you have no premise for your argument, and utterly shameless when it affects the real lives of dogs they will breed and the families that will buy them. ALL the key research so far has been scientific, peer-reviewed (in some of the world's most prominent vet journals -- oh but I guess they just accidentally slipped through? Just check Rod's www.cavalierhealth.org website for the list of publications these papers have appeared in!)) and every single study has replicated the same rates of affectedness. The breed clubs have part-funded many of these very studies so these people are well aware they are proper scientific work. Clearly what these people want is to wait for the research that confirms their own point of view, but because that has not yet been produced and is unlikely ever to be produced, they use this as a delaying tactic for doing anything for the breed. Indeed what better proof of the desperation to find anyone to support their odd world view than that their only 'expert' so far to question all the studies is a human doctor who is married to, yes, a club cavalier breeder, who also just happens to own a sibling of the controversial dog at the centre of Pedigree Dog Exposed. Goodness, now THAT is clearly a neutral scientific opinion. :sl*p:

So Bet -- I'm with you on this one. The litany of lies, deception, and misinformation just goes on and on and sadly, the many decent, good breeders out there get dragged down in the mire with these people and meanwhile, as ANY reading of the many cavalier lists will show, people keep turning up with more and more affected dogs.

There are a lot of breeders out there who cannot say they have a clear conscience on these issues. They know who they are, despite their posturing on internet forums and discussion lists.

Karlin
18th January 2010, 05:28 PM
And maybe the breeders who do care should go demand of their clubs that basic research, such as doing MRIs on a large random clinical sample, be funded and ask why such basic research has been turned down for a funding grant?

Margaret C
18th January 2010, 06:20 PM
http://www.cavaliers.co.uk/ Click on to Breed Notes and scroll down.


We owe our present day breeders a lot.

We owe them a beautiful looking, health compromised dog.
In a very few cases we owe them thanks for doing all the health tests available despite the discouragement they received.


Fair enough we have health problems, but isn't hindsight wonderful? I have Rheumatoid Arthritis, so did my Aunty and Grandmother ....... shame on my parents eh?

It would have been a shame on the parents if the problem had been identified and there was a way to lessen the risk to their child, and at the same time providing information that would protect future generations.



Will we ever end up with a breed totally free from health problems? Of course not, no more than we can with the human race?

So should we just let MVD & SM continue unchecked?. Should we not bother to try?

Bet
18th January 2010, 06:23 PM
Karlin,

Thank you so much for your Post , this has been a rotten day for me.

[edited by admin to remove names and details -- apologies but I don't want a personal discussion here :thmbsup: -- Karlin ]

I was told I should be blaming the Puppy Farms and not Cavalier Breeders who are members of the Show Scene,and I do feel so sorry for the Dogs that are kept in those atrocious establishments,but I do know that it was not Puppy Farmers who did'nt give our Cherished Cavaliers the chance of a Healthy Life when they died at 7-8 years of age , it was Cavalier Club Breeders.

I do know that there could soon be in place a Standard Puppy Contract, which the RSPCA and the BVA AWF are involved ,this will mean I believe that any Dog Buyer whose Dog developes a Health Problem known to a Particular Breed ,such as SM or MVD in Cavaliers ,the Buyer can take the Breeder to Court if the Breeder has not carried the Health Rest on the Dog.

There is I am sure nothing better than this to Focus Breeders Minds about Health Testing for the Health Problems in Cavaliers.

All Dogs will benefit , but none more so than Cavaliers. There many Cavalier Breeders trying their best to save the Cavalier Breed ,but it's the others who have brought the Cavalier Breed to the appalling state it is in to-day, as to whether it can have a Future or not,only time will tell.

In my Post I must mention Margaret, so I am Proud to be linked to Karlin, Carol ,and Margaret in what we are doing to try and save any-more suffering for our Cavaliers .

sins
18th January 2010, 07:08 PM
I'm not interested in arguing with people.I have no personal issues with any individual.I love the cavalier breed,am fascinated by history of the breed etc..and have no interest in philately,trainspotting or related hobbies.I am a pet owner and want to have a healthy cavalier,would dearly love to own a healthy adult cavalier.
The bottom line is this...
Margaret Carter quoted an extract from an e mail from Geoff Skerritt some time back.I'm aware CM only is mentioned here:

To ignore CM and continue breeding of Cavaliers with no effort to exclude affected dogs is frankly irresponsible. The situation is almost irretrievable because of the high incidence, and success in saving the breed will take hard decisions and 100% cooperation by breeders.
Well, what if he's right?? What if the situation is almost irretrievable?
Keeping an open mind is all very well,but it could be an opportunity lost to turn the tide against SM.
Sins

Karlin
18th January 2010, 07:45 PM
Funny how so many are willing to use Geoff Skerritt's discounted MRI days he sets up for breeders, but no one wants to listen to his opinion based on the HUGE number of BREEDER OWNED cavaliers he scans day in and day out -- well over 1000 cavaliers in total now and many if not MOST brought to him BY BREEDERS...

So his must certainly be the most informed, on the ground overview on the situation with the UK club breeder cavalier gene pool.

For Geoff to say ALMOST IRRETRIEVABLE should have shocked people into doing more than say they are waiting to understand how bad the situation is (and remember some saying this are the very people who state they will not scan ANY of their cavaliers in published columns). But no.

RodRussell
18th January 2010, 07:49 PM
...I was told by R.Smith I should be blaming the Puppy Farms and not Cavalier Breeders who are members of the Show Scene,and I do feel so sorry for the Dogs that are kept in those atrocious establishments,but I do know that it was not Puppy Farmers who did'nt give our Cherished Cavaliers the chance of a Healthy Life when they died at 7-8 years of age , it was Cavalier Club Breeders. ...

Bet, as you mentioned at the start of this topic, the statement by Mrs. Jupp, chairman of the UK Cavalier club, only ten months ago is a very telling indictment of many breeders in that very club:

"There are many members who are still not prepared to health check their breeding stock, and of those who do, it would appear that many would not hesitate to breed from affected animals."

When I first read that sentence last March, I realized that the situation is far worse than I thought: that there are breeders who actually test their breeding stock, and if they find that the stock fail the tests, they nevertheless breed them anyway! That is not just ignorance and negligence; it is intentional and fraudulent.
--
Rod Russell

Murphy
18th January 2010, 08:42 PM
Sinead,
I have learned almost everything I know about SM from Geoff Skerritt. I respect him and always listen to anything he has to say. If he says "the situation is almost irretrievable" then I respect his opinion. I may not agree 100%, but I do believe that the situation is indeed very serious for breeders.

I also believe that every Cavalier breeder who is a member of any of the UK Clubs, knows this, and, as has always happened, has incorporated this knowledge into his/her breeding plan.
I do not know them all, personally, even 25 years on, but of those I do know,I cannot think of anyone who has not begun to MRI scan his/her dogs and will continue so to do, until we can find a better way of rooting out the cause of SM.

I began to MRI in 2004 but this does not single me out for special treatment.
I do not consider myself to be a 'better breeder' than those who have only recently begun to scan. Why would I? What another breeder does is not my affair, nor should it concern anyone else.
A few years back, I was, in my naivety, irked by the fact that I had a bitch with a perfect scan, and there was no MRI scanned dog available to mate her.
I say 'naive' because, although the same bitch has a perfect scan, she has, in fact, whelped 3 progeny who have SM. Yes, she has also whelped 5 progeny who do not have SM. I was naive enough to think that if I put her to a perfect dog, I could single-handedly 'save the breed'! I have learned since then.
You may be asking yourself if my scan results are any better because of the length of time I have been working on it? The answer to that is 'No'. Surprised? Then you shouldn't be.
Like everyone else, my results are 'up and down', which is to be expected because we still know so little about how the disease progresses towards manifesting itself.
We Cavalier breeders do not breed single progeny - we breed multiples in every litter. Those of you well-versed in genetics will be aware of the pitfalls in this.
Suffice to say, that, even breeding 2 grade A dogs it is unlikely we will produce 3, 4 or even 5 progeny with the same perfect MRI scan or perfect heart.
This is the reality of breeding. It is not an exact science. Such a situation is likely to continue for many years yet, long after I have ceased to be.

Those of you on Cavalier Talk who have been so unfortunate as to buy a puppy whose health is not 100% perfect have my sympathy and nothing I have writtern here is meant in any way to detract from the difficulties I know some of you are facing.
But I get confused when I read your posts: it would seem to me that some of you have the opinion, your own, or acquired, that the breeder of your particular puppy has done this, either deliberately, or because of lack of thought, care, testing, and etc.
Sad as this is for you and for your puppy, it is very unlikely that a breeder would deliberately saddle anyone with a defective puppy.
Before you start to post to tell me that this has, in fact, happened to you, let me add that, even with all the tests in place, breeders cannot give guarantees that a less than perfect puppy will not happen.
We do not deliberately breed unhealthy dogs - what on earth would be the point of that ?

Apologies for the lengthy post but I have tried to open your minds to what it means to be a breeder:
As a breeder you need to be strong; capable, mentally and physically to withstand the challenges and disappointments you must face on a daily basis. Like when a beloved dog dies, sometimes,for no apparent reason, or when a puppy you have fought for nights to save, simply drifts away before your eyes. Or when a whole litter dies, and all the Vet can say is:" fading puppy syndrome".
It is no easy ride, as those of you who have not yet tried it would discover, were you to dip your toe in the water.
Karlin has given her opinion that breeders like me are being 'dragged down' by those breeders who may not yet have begun to MRI their dogs .Not so Karlin.
I have NEVER had another breeder challenge me, or try to 'take me down' , nor do I feel dragged down by any other breeder.
The only place I ever feel uncomfortable about being a breeder is when I visit Cavalier Talk.
Sorry Karlin, but I cannot tell a lie.
I know that there are many Forum members out there who do not feel anti breeder, as some of you have been kind enough to mail me to tell me so, and thank you for that.
To the others, I would simply ask that you read what I have said and ask yourself, honestly, if you think you, if you were a breeder, could do better?
Good Luck to you all. Stay strong, for our breed because it needs all the positive strength we can muster.
Elspeth

Margaret C
18th January 2010, 10:19 PM
I have learned almost everything I know about SM from Geoff Skerritt. I respect him and always listen to anything he has to say. If he says "the situation is almost irretrievable" then I respect his opinion. I may not agree 100%, but I do believe that the situation is indeed very serious for breeders.

I also believe that every Cavalier breeder who is a member of any of the UK Clubs, knows this, and, as has always happened, has incorporated this knowledge into his/her breeding plan.
I do not know them all, personally, even 25 years on, but of those I do know,I cannot think of anyone who has not begun to MRI scan his/her dogs and will continue so to do, until we can find a better way of rooting out the cause of SM.

Elspeth, many if not most members of breed clubs may have started to scan, but they are not saying so, and in some cases have tried to obstruct the Cavalier Club's attempts to add the SM breeding guidelines to the Code of Best Practice.



I began to MRI in 2004 but this does not single me out for special treatment.

You may not like me saying this but you have been an example to others.



I do not consider myself to be a 'better breeder' than those who have only recently begun to scan. Why would I? What another breeder does is not my affair, nor should it concern anyone else.

When those breeders are influential in the breed, the owners of top stud dogs, and exporting many cavaliers as breeding stock world wide, then I think there should be great concern.



A few years back, I was, in my naivety, irked by the fact that I had a bitch with a perfect scan, and there was no MRI scanned dog available to mate her.
I say 'naive' because, although the same bitch has a perfect scan, she has, in fact, whelped 3 progeny who have SM. Yes, she has also whelped 5 progeny who do not have SM. I was naive enough to think that if I put her to a perfect dog, I could single-handedly 'save the breed'! I have learned since then.

Nobody promised perfect SM free offspring, and we did not expect that from MVD, the other polygenic condition, so perhaps that was a little naive.
You started scanning before there were many scanned dogs. Were all her "perfect" mates grade A dogs?



We Cavalier breeders do not breed single progeny - we breed multiples in every litter. Those of you well-versed in genetics will be aware of the pitfalls in this.
Suffice to say, that, even breeding 2 grade A dogs it is unlikely we will produce 3, 4 or even 5 progeny with the same perfect MRI scan or perfect heart.
This is the reality of breeding. It is not an exact science. Such a situation is likely to continue for many years yet, long after I have ceased to be.

I agree. It will happen, but that does not excuse breeders who do not try to breed away from the problem




it would seem to me that some of you have the opinion, your own, or acquired, that the breeder of your particular puppy has done this, either deliberately, or because of lack of thought, care, testing, and etc.
Sad as this is for you and for your puppy, it is very unlikely that a breeder would deliberately saddle anyone with a defective puppy.

As you say below, no breeder deliberately breeds a unhealthy puppy, but to cross fingers, and not test for fear of what may be revealed, or breeding too early for tests to be meaningful is negligent.



Before you start to post to tell me that this has, in fact, happened to you, let me add that, even with all the tests in place, breeders cannot give guarantees that a less than perfect puppy will not happen.
We do not deliberately breed unhealthy dogs - what on earth would be the point of that ?

Nobody is saying that testing is the be all and end all. Nobody is talking about guarantees, and after all the discussion that has taken place I am surprised you still feel that is a valid comment




It is no easy ride, as those of you who have not yet tried it would discover, were you to dip your toe in the water.

I have bred, in a very small way, both cavaliers & japanese chins and it can be heartbreaking, but nobody is forced to become, or remain, a breeder. If breeders are not willing to do everything in their power to produce healthy puppies, then they should not breed.



Karlin has given her opinion that breeders like me are being 'dragged down' by those breeders who may not yet have begun to MRI their dogs .

I believe that a very few breeders are dragging down the public reputation of those that are now scanning and breeding to the SM protocols.



Good Luck to you all. Stay strong, for our breed because it needs all the positive strength we can muster.
Elspeth

I most certainly agree with that

HollyDolly
18th January 2010, 10:19 PM
but this does not single me out for special treatment.
I do not consider myself to be a 'better breeder' than those who have only recently begun to scan. Why would I? What another breeder does is not my affair, nor should it concern anyone else.
Elspeth

I am sorry but have to disagree with you, YOU ARE A BETTER BREEDER. You obviously care deeply for Cavaliers and want to try and breed healthy dogs. Yes we all know that there are no guarantees, but YOU ARE DOING YOUR UPMOST TO HELP.
To say what another breeder does is not your affair, nor should it concern anyone else dispels what I have written above, that you care for the breed, it does not make sense to me. Pet owners need to know that breeders are doing what they can to save the cavaliers from what is a horrible horrible disease and you need to stamp that on the breeders that do not scan and health test.



Nanette

Murphy
18th January 2010, 11:19 PM
Holly Dolly, I would never dream of 'stamping' on anybody - nor should you or anyone else.
I was not brought up to do so, and I would hope neither were you?


Had you read more carefully what I wrote, you should have come to the conclusion that the whole business of breeding is a tad more complicated than it appears to someone who has never tried to do it .

As for the part about 'what another breeder does is not your affair', I will stick to that one!
I have the option NOT to use the dogs of a breeder who is not following the same protocol as I am. You have the option NOT to buy from such a breeder.
In either case, I do not have the option to bad-mouth them or their breeding practices. People who live in glass houses do not throw stones.
It is not yours, or anyone else's, prerogative to tell any breeder what they should or should not do, unless:
(a) you have bought from them a defective puppy
and
(b) they have refused to acknowledge same or support you.
or
(c) you have been misled as to the health of either parent of your puppy.

That does not mean that you or I do not care about cavaliers, it simply means that we confine ourselves to what directly affects us.
And, finally, I will give you permission to call me a 'better breeder' when I can hand you a gold-plated guarantee that everything I breed will be 100% healthy.
Until then I remain simply a breeder.
Elspeth

Murphy
18th January 2010, 11:21 PM
Margaret,
Your post is long and it is late. With your permission, I will reply tomorrow.
Elspeth

Tania
18th January 2010, 11:43 PM
(quote)
"We do not deliberately breed unhealthy dogs - what on earth would be the point of that ? "


I agree to a point. Some breeders (including KC Registered) simply don't care, these breeders refuse to communicate with the unfortunate new and sometimes inexperienced owner of a very sick puppy!
These breeders are in it just for the money. Decent and caring breeders pay the price for their lack of manners and greedy behaviour!

Margaret C
18th January 2010, 11:44 PM
Dear Elspeth,

There should never be any hurry in thoughtful debate.

Sleep well.:slp:

Murphy
19th January 2010, 08:34 AM
(quote)
"We do not deliberately breed unhealthy dogs - what on earth would be the point of that ? "


I agree to a point. Some breeders (including KC Registered) simply don't care, these breeders refuse to communicate with the unfortunate new and sometimes inexperienced owner of a very sick puppy!
These breeders are in it just for the money. Decent and caring breeders pay the price for their lack of manners and greedy behaviour!

Out of interest, Tania: when you use the words "Some breeders",to exactly how many breeders are you referring? Also, do these 'breeders' come from your personal experience or is this information you have acquired?
I would be interested to hear.
Elspeth

Murphy
19th January 2010, 09:35 AM
"
Elspeth, many if not most members of breed clubs may have started to scan, but they are not saying so, and in some cases have tried to obstruct the Cavalier Club's attempts to add the SM breeding guidelines to the Code of Best Practice. "

I and others, are very encouraged by the number of Club members who have started to scan. There has been no attempt to hide this fact from me or any other breeder. If such breeders do not wish to add the names of their dogs to the UK Club's List, then, for the moment, that is their prerogative.
I salute and appreciate their efforts since, they have told me that, in the present climate, support will give them more confidence than the opposite approach.
They wish to be left in peace to get on with it, quietly, and to allow themselves space to come to terms with the results of their labours.
I have 'been there' so can have no quarrel with this.

The Code of best Practice is simply that... it has, for now, no status in Law. I have always found it more productive to offer encouragement and example, than to concern myself with the finer points of the Code.


"You may not like me saying this but you have been an example to others."

See above.



"When those breeders are influential in the breed, the owners of top stud dogs, and importing many cavaliers as breeding stock world wide, then I think there should be great concern."

I wonder if the above should read 'exporting'?
Since the UK and the Netherlands are a few years ahead in testing and having the resources to test for SM and recognising the disease, it is not surprising that the criterion of buying from well-established UK breeders is still in place in other countries. It will take time for this to change, but change it will.
Be patient.



"Nobody promised perfect SM free offspring, and we did not expect that from MVD, the other polygenic condition, so perhaps that was a little naive.
You started scanning before there were many scanned dogs. Were all her "perfect" mates grade A dogs? "

Since I prefer to confine my posts to the results of my personal experience, I used my own bitch as an example of what can happen when mating with what was considered to be a 'perfect' animal.
She was past breeding when I scanned her, so neither of her mates was even MRI scanned, as, indeed, you already know.
However, I do have personal knowledge - as do you - that mating Grade A to grade A does not guarantee a perfect result.



"I agree. It will happen, but that does not excuse breeders who do not try to breed away from the problem"


Indeed, but I thought when I posted, and still do, that the genetic phenotype of any multiple litter ought to be considered.



"As you say below, no breeder deliberately breeds a unhealthy puppy, but to cross fingers, and not test for fear of what may be revealed, or breeding too early for tests to be meaningful is negligent."

I refer you to my first answer.



"Nobody is saying that testing is the be all and end all. Nobody is talking about guarantees, and after all the discussion that has taken place I am surprised you still feel that is a valid comment"

I had a reason for mentioning this: what pet-owning people profess in discussion, is not always borne out by what I read in their subsequent posts.
Karlin addressed this,very satisfactorily, I consider, in her post of a few days ago.




"I have bred, in a very small way, both cavaliers & japanese chins and it can be heartbreaking, but nobody is forced to become, or remain, a breeder. If breeders are not willing to do everything in their power to produce healthy puppies, then they should not breed."

I would agree that breeders should do everything in their power to ensure that puppies are healthy but neither I nor you can have the right to say that 'they should not breed'. Only the Law can do that, and, perhaps, we are now not too far from such a situation?

.

"I believe that a very few breeders are dragging down the public reputation of those that are now scanning and breeding to the SM protocols."

I and all Forum members hear this regularly from yourself and from the Moderator of the Forum.
I am fortunate to have the power and the ability to make my own mind up about anything I hear.



"I most certainly agree with that"

Good that we agree on one issue, Margaret.

Elspeth

Bet
19th January 2010, 10:02 AM
Because I can mention this about the Cavaliers' MVD Problem I was there !!!,that around 20 years ago Dr B.Cattanach ,Geneticist ,and Bruce Field ,who was the UK CKCS Health Representative at that time,were involved in trying to help Cavalier Breeders combat the MVD Problem, had to walk away in disgust at the abuse they were getting from some Cavalier Breeders.

Does this strike a Familiar Cord as to what is happening to-day with the Cavaliers' SM Problem.

It is all recorded in the Dog World Cavalier Notes at that time.

If only those Cavalier Breeders had not been in Denial about the MVD Problem ,would the Cardiologist now have to say at the recent UK CKCS CLUB that the Cavaliers' MVD problem is no better than it was 18 years ago.

What a Legacy has been left by them for the Cavaliers of to-day, when now there could be so many Cavalier Carriers of the MVD GENES around, that will the Cavaliers ever have the chance now of having Healthier ,Longer Lives.

Some Cavalier Breeders won't even abide by the UK CKCS CLUB's Breeding Guidelines ,and not Breed from a Cavalier before 2,5 years old.

( And we Cavalier PET Owners are being accused of Bringing the Cavalier Breed to it's Knees)

I think we all know where the Blame Lies. !!!

If I could also mention the SM Problem in our Cavaliers.

I was at a Seminar given by Mr Skerritt here in Scotland about the Cavaliers' SM Problem ,and can't remember his exact quote ,but it was along the lines that the Breed is in a terrible mess because of SM.

To me the SM Problem seems to be some-thing that is wrong with the Cavalier Breed .

That as Professor Sir P. Bateson said in his Report ,that there seems to be serious Short comings in the Cavaliers' Skull Bone and this is causing a Premature Growth Closure.

This has also been mentioned by Dr McGonnell and in Veterinary Paper recently published by Dr C Rusbridge and others.

If this is the Problem ,then how will it be over-come.?

This as had been said by different Researchers,and only is affecting Cavaliers.

I can't answer this ,but it seems to me if this is what is involved with Cavaliers and their SM Problem ,what a terrible thing for the Cavaliers has taken place.

How can it be solved? Will this be like, as has been mentioned , that so many Cavaliers have CM.

Any-body got any thoughts.

I am sorry for being so Pessimistic about this, but the more you think about it ,the more you begin to realize what this could mean for Cavaliers if this is causing their SM Problem .

MARK MARSHALL
19th January 2010, 11:09 AM
Two very pleasant mature ladies who have done much to help the Cavalier breed.

I enjoy reading your exchanges and learn much.

Elspeth defends her peers on both forums but during 2010 I hope that more of the CC names will mellow and come together, to move forward as a united team, with clear objectives.

Personally, I dont see that keeping quiet about matters brings about speedy change. We need to get issues out into the open.

Regards Mark.

Karlin
19th January 2010, 11:32 AM
The problem is that with the widespread serious disease in this breed, all breeders need to be working together. Little will change and the rate of affectedness is only going to get ever worse if many breeders continue to breed without getting and using scan information about their dogs. this is exactly the same as breeding dogs without ever listening to hearts and just hoping that from outward appearance you can tell how healthy a dog's heart is. Just as with SM, the disease can be very bad before you start to see outward signs with MVD. No intelligent breeder would ever accept that this is an ethical approach to heart health in cavaliers; why is it considered okay to do this for a serious neurological condition that seems to be just as widespread or heading towards being that way?

There is also the issue of fairness and commitment. It is all very well for a single breeder to state that she or he has the choice or not to use EBV's -- but the only reason any breeder has the opportunity to use them in the first place is that other people have scanned their dogs and submitted results, and any breeder that uses them is benefiting from what others have done. In other words every EBV is built on the cooperation of many breeders. Moreover, the breeders who choose not to scan and not to submit results are damaging the EBV system. Every time a breeder chooses not to scan, that detracts from the overall knowledge and big picture and the accuracy of every single EBV. In addition, if breeders only submit their good results, the EBV's will be skewed to present a far more positive picture than actually exists and all the effort and money and consideration that has gone into setting up the program to benefit breeders and the breed as a whole will be undermined to some degree.

I cannot stress enough how important it is for every pet owner who has had a dog scanned -- if that dog has a pedigree and is registered -- to submit those results to Sarah. Pet owners tend to scan because their dogs have problems and therefore they are far more likely to have the essential information on affected dogs that will make the EBV system more accurate.

Also, breeders and pet owners need to verify with the person doing the scans that they are submitting the information to Sarah. There is no organized attempt to do this, it is up to the individual doing the scan. If you have scanned dogs it would be worthwhile to check with the center that scanned them to make sure the results went to Sarah or to submit the results yourself making a note that you aren't sure if they were submitted.

Tania
19th January 2010, 11:56 AM
Out of interest, Tania: when you use the words "Some breeders",to exactly how many breeders are you referring? Also, do these 'breeders' come from your personal experience or is this information you have acquired?
I would be interested to hear.
Elspeth

My own personal two experiences!

We bought Molly first from a lady who claimed she only bred one litter a year, she is KC registered (which I thought was good). I had researched the breed but obviously not well enough! I kept in touch with the breeder sending photos etc. Molly has knee patella, hip dysplasia, her bones are crumbling, and finally she was diagnosed with SM. I contacted the breeder in a friendly manner as I knew Molly had a sister and I was hoping the other owner could be warned plus I was hoping the breeder would not breed from this stock again. I did not want compensation, I was devastated and needed some help and advice. I really did not know what to do!

It was because of PDE I contacted Margaret and Carol Fowler who suggested I went to see Clare Rusbridge. My vet had not heard of sm so with respect at this time he wasn't really a great help.

We bought Dougall at the same time from a resonably well known breeder, Dougall has in the main been reasonably healthy, once again I kept the breeder informed with photos and progress reports etc. Dougall developed some issues and eventually was diagnosed with cm. Once again I went back to the breeder only to discuss because I wanted to know more about his siblings and parents. Once again I have drawn a blank the breeder has refused to speak to me.

I have a bigger issue with the first breeder, I have found out since she advertises on Breeders Online constantly. A Friend has on my behalf made enquiries as recently as last night, she trots out the same story "I Only Breed One Litter a Year"! She is currently advertising Cavapoos!


Mollys breeder clearly does not know what she is doing and is churning out puppies purely for money!

I havn't judged the second breeder because I believe she is genuine and cares about the health of her dogs. I just feel disappointed!

It could be argued I should have researched better, at the time I thought I had. Everything looked right but in Mollys case it could not have been more wrong.

So I have had two experiences from two different breeders , both not good but I do not condemn Dougalls breeder.

If it had not been for PDE Molly would not be here now !

Murphy
19th January 2010, 12:23 PM
Karlin,
Not being of a Narcissistic nature I am unsure if your post is in reply to anything I wrote, but you do mention something I would like to take up, if I may?

I agree that all breeders need to work together. That goes without saying and is one of the areas which greatly concerns me. I would even add that breeders, pet owners, and indeed anyone who is involved in any way with cavaliers ought to be trying very hard to work together.
This will only be achievable if in the right atmosphere.

In a way, it is rather like some of the advice you regularly give to owners who are trying to resolve an issue with one of their dogs.
You often advise that a calm approach to problems works better than punishment?
If I am wrong, feel free to correct me.
You have also given much good advice on how to assess a problem, from both points of view (in this case the dog's point of view and the owner's).
This is where clear thinking is required so that each problem can be approached from the right angle which may not be the same for every dog,( or person).

Apologies for using such an allegorical approach, but it does seem to me to follow that such sound advice could serve us well in the resolution of the problems of disease currently identified in our breed.

We all work in different areas.Some are owners of cavaliers, others simply love the breed and have an interest in what happens to it, and, some are breeders.

This is a difficult time for everyone - no one is exempt.

Would this not be a good time for us all to try to work together?

I have been involved with Sm now for what seems a long time, and, after muych clear thinking, have come to this conclusion.

Elspeth

Murphy
19th January 2010, 01:49 PM
My own personal two experiences!

We bought Molly first from a lady who claimed she only bred one litter a year, she is KC registered (which I thought was good). I had researched the breed but obviously not well enough! I kept in touch with the breeder sending photos etc. Molly has knee patella, hip dysplasia, her bones are crumbling, and finally she was diagnosed with SM. I contacted the breeder in a friendly manner as I knew Molly had a sister and I was hoping the other owner could be warned plus I was hoping the breeder would not breed from this stock again. I did not want compensation, I was devastated and needed some help and advice. I really did not know what to do!

It was because of PDE I contacted Margaret and Carol Fowler who suggested I went to see Clare Rusbridge. My vet had not heard of sm so with respect at this time he wasn't really a great help.

We bought Dougall at the same time from a resonably well known breeder, Dougall has in the main been reasonably healthy, once again I kept the breeder informed with photos and progress reports etc. Dougall developed some issues and eventually was diagnosed with cm. Once again I went back to the breeder only to discuss because I wanted to know more about his siblings and parents. Once again I have drawn a blank the breeder has refused to speak to me.

I have a bigger issue with the first breeder, I have found out since she advertises on Breeders Online constantly. A Friend has on my behalf made enquiries as recently as last night, she trots out the same story "I Only Breed One Litter a Year"! She is currently advertising Cavapoos!


Mollys breeder clearly does not know what she is doing and is churning out puppies purely for money!

I havn't judged the second breeder because I believe she is genuine and cares about the health of her dogs. I just feel disappointed!

It could be argued I should have researched better, at the time I thought I had. Everything looked right but in Mollys case it could not have been more wrong.

So I have had two experiences from two different breeders , both not good but I do not condemn Dougalls breeder.

If it had not been for PDE Molly would not be here now !

Tania, I feel for you as I know exactly the problems you have had to face.
I was interested in asking you the question, because I wanted to know how many 'some' referred to,
As you have explained, it refers to 2 breeders, only one of whom, I think I am right in saying, you would describe as: " uncaring"?
So 'some' actually means 1.
The reason I asked was so that I could reply to the second part of your final sentence where you said that 'some breeders.............................are dragging the good breeders down"

Somehow, I can't see those statistics holding up, can you? One breeder who doesn't care and another who might be described as less than supportive, is simply not enough to drag down me, or any one of the other breeders who do care or do give support.

To be fair, I understand that such ideas are bandied about regularly, so it is all too easy to take them on board.
If the media, or anyone else, sees fit to use such amateur Psychology, be
ready to think for yourself. Form your own opinions, based on what you know.
BTW, I suppose you do know that Dougall is a very normal cavalier? So enjoy him!
Sadly, Molly is not, and will need much input from you. Be strong for her!
Kind reagrds,
Elspeth

If such was the case, then no progress whatever would have been made by the caring breeders

Bet
19th January 2010, 02:25 PM
I do hope that the Author of the Article in Norma Inglis' Breed Notes this week, making such disparaging comments about Cavalier Pet Owners who have never bred any Cavalier Litters ,only want 5 minutes of Glory ,and have brought the Cavalier Breed to it's Knees ,( and Murphy says we should not bother about what is being said about some of us for all the World to see on the Cavalier Internet Forums)!!!will take time to read the Comments at

www.dog magazine.net

The Comments are made about Carol Fowler by her MP,Mr Clifton-Brown,and I think that Carol will be one of the Cavalier Pet Owners R.Smith had in her mind when she made her Scurrilious Claims against some of us Cavalier Pet Owners.

The Comments by Carol's MP, mentions that Carol will be having a meeting with a Couple of Shadow Conservative MP's .

Carol's MP comments further, saying about Carol's work, that he was struck ,not only by her Compassion for Animals and her Dedication but by the Strength of her Case.

On behalf of all us Cavalier Pet Owners ,who have shed so many Tears because of the Suffering our Cavaliers have had to endure and their Lives being cut Short.

Thank You so Much.

Tania
19th January 2010, 02:46 PM
Tania, I feel for you as I know exactly the problems you have had to face.
I was interested in asking you the question, because I wanted to know how many 'some' referred to,
As you have explained, it refers to 2 breeders, only one of whom, I think I am right in saying, you would describe as: " uncaring"?
So 'some' actually means 1.
The reason I asked was so that I could reply to the second part of your final sentence where you said that 'some breeders.............................are dragging the good breeders down"

Somehow, I can't see those statistics holding up, can you? One breeder who doesn't care and another who might be described as less than supportive, is simply not enough to drag down me, or any one of the other breeders who do care or do give support.

To be fair, I understand that such ideas are bandied about regularly, so it is all too easy to take them on board.
If the media, or anyone else, sees fit to use such amateur Psychology, be
ready to think for yourself. Form your own opinions, based on what you know.
BTW, I suppose you do know that Dougall is a very normal cavalier? So enjoy him!
Sadly, Molly is not, and will need much input from you. Be strong for her!
Kind reagrds,
Elspeth

If such was the case, then no progress whatever would have been made by the caring breeders

Dougall is not a normal Cavalier he is also under the care of Clare Rusbridge.


TWO Breeders who have not sm screened their dogs and are still not willing to discuss or contributte to the well being of the future of Cavalier Breeding = SOME !! This is factual not based on my feelings !

Marjorie
19th January 2010, 03:02 PM
I agree on a calm level headed approach and that we all need to work together I think there is still a need for a lot of education on the subject for all parties. THis is a wide spread problem and resources can be very slim for some. WHere I live we don't even have access to animal MRI's and would have to travel out of province quite a distance (Canada is a BIG country) to have our dogs scanned. We also don't have a big population of Cavaliers so trying to get the necessary info and resources is challenging.

I can appreciate everyones concern, especially those with dogs affected. Unfortunately, the wheels grind slowly, but they do grind and I think more can be done in the spirit of cooperation, education and understanding than in mud slinging and blaming. It is going to be a long road out of this and if everyone is at war it's gonna make it a lot longer for our beloved Cavaliers. Better to ask how we can help one another through this.

WoodHaven
19th January 2010, 03:18 PM
Dougall is not a normal Cavalier he is also under the care of Clare Rusbridge.


TWO Breeders who have not sm screened their dogs and are still not willing to discuss or contributte to the well being of the future of Cavalier Breeding = SOME !! This is factual not based on my feelings !

And as Elspeth and I have both experienced-- you can MRI until you are blue in the face and SM will STILL smack you down. I followed the MRI protocol to the letter and got a whole litter of affecteds (2 out of 2). But I have no one to vent on-- no one to blame but the person in the mirror.

sins
19th January 2010, 03:40 PM
Bet,
I read the notes also and didn't feel that any scurrilous remarks or comments had been made.
If you considered this person a friend,then perhaps in the interest of conserving that friendship,it's better to say what you have to say off line and pick up the phone? or msn messenger?
That lady is also a member of this forum and has never been confrontational or offensive and is entitled to choose whatever medium she wished to vent the frustration that pet owners feel for whatever reason.
There's no doubt that all the anger,fighting and bitterness is demoralising.
Demoralising to small hobby breeders who are testing and trying their best to improve the health of future generations of cavaliers while keeping their heads above water.Demoralising to possible puppy buyers who aim to buy their pups from these small breeders.Demoralising to people like me who fear waking up one day and seeing a couchful of sick cavaliers all in a row.
How will the cavalier breed ever attract any new breeders to the ranks if current breeders lose the will to breed?If they lose the joy and delight of producing their latest litter,when it all becomes too much of a burden.
Then where do we think we'll get our pups from?
Yep,boot of a car in the local market or the latest trendy new petshop with stock from Cav-a-farm.
Yes it's true that breeding two Mri A dogs can still result in pups who will go on to develop SM.But at least breeders who deal with this can say they've done everything practicable to avoid this situation and there is nothing more that can be expected of them.Hopefully over coming generations and with the advent of the EBV scheme that the numbers of affected cavaliers across the "show population" will reduce with each successive generation.
This really seems to be the best that we can hope for but we know there's no quick fix solution.
Sins

Murphy
19th January 2010, 04:05 PM
Tania,
I am sorry to hear that Dougall is under the care of a neurologist. I have heard of a few cavaliers who have demonstrated symptoms of the disease, without the presence of a syrinx.
My mistake is understandable, as, from my own experience, I have seen the scans of only 2 Cavaliers with NO CM. So I was using that as a yardstick to suppose that Doigall was just like all the other cavaliers. I have heard anecdotal evidence of others, but have not seen their scans or certificates.
I did not intend to offend you by saying that Dougall was a normal dog, but was simply trying to encourage you to 'look on the bright side'.

As to your comments about ' 2 =some'. We must agree to differ there.
Thank you for your replies.
Kind Regards
Elspeth

Tania
19th January 2010, 05:00 PM
And as Elspeth and I have both experienced-- you can MRI until you are blue in the face and SM will STILL smack you down. I followed the MRI protocol to the letter and got a whole litter of affecteds (2 out of 2). But I have no one to vent on-- no one to blame but the person in the mirror.

My point is not directed at people like you or Elspeth, it is directed at people who do not want to help save this breed and they exist!

EddyAnne
19th January 2010, 05:35 PM
I have seen the scans of only 2 Cavaliers with NO CM.

I hope that DNA samples were sent to the Genetic Researchers as those 2 Cavaliers might be vitally important in finding the genes for CM in Cavaliers. Has anyone else heard of any scanned Cavalier that did NOT have CM?
.

Karlin
19th January 2010, 05:56 PM
Sandy, who read and graded the scans for the parents? Is someone in the midwest doing this now (I think only Dr Marino at LIVS was part of the panel using the actual grading scale?). I do know a lot of scans have not had the same interpretation given by the original neurologist when viewed by one of the panel of neurologists that have convened at the two international conferences and who agreed the grading protocol, and certainly have seen for myself scans where the dog owner was told no CM or herniation and even I could see CM and herniation, having looked at a fair few scans by this time. I also know neurologists within the scheme have seen presyrinxes and other concerns where neurologists and radiologists missed them on a dog. So there is a huge variation in interpretation, unfortunately, and I think many of the As out there in the US and UK are not verified As at all but non-experts interpreting scans (my best friend reads breast MRIs -- is actually the leading expert in the world at this at Sloane Kettering Cancer Centre in NYC -- and says reading MRIs is not a simple task and open to misinterpretation. There is a mistaken notion that scans are easy to read and syrinxes easy to see but actually they are not unless they are quite prominent, and CM is missed by many unfamiliar with what it looks like.

The other issue is the problem of when scans were done. The genome research for example is using only dogs clear and older than 6 to try and reduce/eliminate the issue of earlier-onset SM. Many breeders have been scanning at only age 1 rather than at a minimum of age 2.5 (with older being even better), and assuming a grade from that (again, with the majority never getting a proper grade but just guessing at one) and many dogs with those early scans will definitely go on to develop SM or may have the start of syrinxes which are missed.

The issue abut these guessed-at grades is very serious -- it is why breeders in the UK have pushed for the BVA/EBV scheme which will have two neurologists that are within the scheme and have an agreed approach to interpretation, issuing a grade.

It would be very helpful to researchers and the breed to interpret the scans of parents that are assumed to be A and go on to have affected offspring, or the reverse, I am sure. Contributing such information would bring research a step forward towards reducing the incidence of this condition and helping both breed and breeders.

The great thing about the incoming scheme for UK breeders is that they will have a guaranteed interpretation from within a structured scheme, for grades. Hopefully it will be extended to other countries too.

And to go back to the original point -- the scans and results of parents and offspring would be critical information for assessing the guidelines and would be helpful to so many other breeders when pooled with other results -- please do submit this information to researchers. And still: the overall results from several generations now of Dutch breeders MRIing and having actual grades and grade certs (so, verifiable) issued has been a great increase in A offspring even within a few generations. There will be exceptions and that may well be due to many things -- dogs MRId before syrinx development/ MRId too young / coming from parents themselves affected by asymptomatic etc. There are no easy answers but the definite wrong answer is definitely to just go ahead breeding dogs that are actually known to have significant syrinxes or not scanning at all, as surely they are much more likely to pass on the condition (as with dogs with actual heart murmurs).

Bet
19th January 2010, 06:03 PM
Sins,

Too late for that now.

I have taken enough from the Cyber Bullies, as you will no doubt know what has been hurled at me.!!!

I have read and re-read Karlin's yesterday's Post , that sure says it all about what is wrong in the Cavalier World to-day.

Will All Cavalier Breeders ever agree to Health Test their Cavalier Breeding Stock, MRI Scan their Breeding Stock, and send the Results to Dr S Blott,not Breed from Cavaliers before they are 2.5 years of age. ?

I can't talk about the SM Problem ,but the MVD Problem in our Breed is sure in the Mess it's in to-day because of some Cavalier Breeders.

I am not going to argue with you Sins, but for sure I believe that the Future of Cavaliers,if it has a Future, lies with Carol, Karlin, and Margaret.

You mention about Puppy Farms and BYB'S ,all I know is that , our Cavaliers who did not have the chance to live into an OLD AGE and died young because of the MVD Problem ,came from UK CKCS CLUB Cavalier Breeders.

I see that in the Bateson Report any Dog Breeder who is Licenced to Breed Dogs ,is called a Dog Farm.

HollyDolly
19th January 2010, 06:41 PM
more complicated than it appears to someone who has never tried to do it .

People who live in glass houses do not throw stones.
It is not yours, or anyone else's, prerogative to tell any breeder what they should or should not do, unless:
(a) you have bought from them a defective puppy
and
(b) they have refused to acknowledge same or support you.
or
(c) you have been misled as to the health of either parent of your puppy.

Elspeth


As to the first statement of yours, you have know idea who I am. As to the second statement again you have no idea what litters I have bred, what deffective puppies I may have bought or indeed if I have been misled as to the health of either parent of the puppy.

I am sorry you feel unable to confront your fellow breeders but until breeders unite in the whole procedure of health testing than there is little hope for this breed.

Nanette

Bet
19th January 2010, 06:49 PM
I have noticed in the Past couple of days comments about Cavalier Breeders thinking about not Breeding Cavaliers any-more because of all the Hassle and remarks about Cavalier Breeders.

Could just maybe the reason ,with the Publicity from the Bateson Report on the TV and Press about Cavaliers' Brains being too Large for their Heads , be that the Dog Buying Public could be steering clear of Cavaliers?

EddyAnne
19th January 2010, 07:11 PM
I do know a lot of scans have not had the same interpretation given by the original neurologist when viewed by one of the panel of neurologists that have convened at the two international conferences and who agreed the grading protocol, and certainly have seen for myself scans where the dog owner was told no CM or herniation and even I could see CM and herniation, having looked at a fair few scans by this time. I also know neurologists within the scheme have seen presyrinxes and other concerns where neurologists and radiologists missed them on a dog. So there is a huge variation in interpretation, unfortunately, and I think many of the As out there in the US and UK are not verified

Due to interpretational differences with MRI scans I think that the Proposed BVA Procedure will help address situations involving interpretational differences. The system utilises two approved panel members who both read the MRIs and if they do not reach a consensus decision where they disagree then the matter is referred to the arbitrator. I wonder when this proposed system will get under way.
.

sins
19th January 2010, 07:11 PM
Maybe Bet, there are breeders out there who care passionately about the welfare their dogs,who lie awake worrying about their health of their stock and worrying about their customers??
Who perhaps just can't do this any more because all the excitement and joy they felt at bringing new life into the world has been sucked out of them??
Could it be that they don't care as much about pursuing ribbons as you might think?
Sadly Bet these are exactly the people we should be buying our cavaliers from.:mad:
Sins

WoodHaven
19th January 2010, 07:13 PM
I have noticed in the Past couple of days comments about Cavalier Breeders thinking about not Breeding Cavaliers any-more because of all the Hassle and remarks about Cavalier Breeders.

Could just maybe the reason ,with the Publicity from the Bateson Report on the TV and Press about Cavaliers' Brains being too Large for their Heads , be that the Dog Buying Public could be steering clear of Cavaliers?

A number of good breeders are quitting. I know of a few in America-- far away from your Bateson Report or PDE program. IF you make any fun leisure activity (Hobby breeding) too onerous, people will quit-- or they will just breed for themselves and GIVE puppies away.
PDE gave ALL purebred dog breeders a bad name-- I feel like I am confessing a huge sin when asked what I do.

Murphy
19th January 2010, 07:38 PM
Nanette,
I am glad to be able to use your Christian name. You are quite right, I do NOT know who you are, but would be pleased to hear more about you,then, in the light of what you say, rephrase any remark which you feel may have been inappropriate.
Best Wishes,
Elspeth

Love my Cavaliers
19th January 2010, 08:14 PM
I don't know if this will add anything to the conversation, but I have an almost 9 year old neutered male Blenheim who has no syrinxes. He had an MRI in December for a disc problem and his neurologist found no evidence of SM. I have sent a copy of his MRI on a disc to Clare Rusbridge. I have also sent his DNA sample to Penny Knowler in Canada. He is the only one of my dogs who is from a backyard breeder. I never got papers because she drove the puppy to me and said she had forgotten them and would mail them. Eight years later and I still haven't gotten them even after repeated e-mails and phone calls. She just wanted my money to keep churning out puppies.

My 2 year old has a hear murmur and second degree A-V block and he is under the care of a cardiologist, but is stable and on no meds at the time. He had an MRI to see if his weakness could be neurologic in origin vs cardiac. He has the malformation but no syrinxes. My 7 year old had decompression surgery 18 months ago for severe and advanced SM. She is maintained on daily prednisone right now and is doing fair. My 6 year old (and half-sister to my 7 year old), is doing fine, but has not been MRI'd since there is no reason to put an asymptomatic spayed female under anesthesia for an MRI.

These three are all from the same breeder who was devastated by the news of Oz's heart murmur (diagnosed at 5 months of age) and Riley's SM (not diagnosed until she was almost 6). The breeder heart tests with a cardiologist before breeding, but does not MRI. She said she only knows of one other of her dogs with SM - but that is just all she is aware of. In defense of breeders, so many people don't keep in touch with their breeders and therefore breeders may not know the extent of SM in their lines. Mine was so upset with my news that she said she was going to stop breeding and she had Oz's mother spayed. Just my two cents worth for this discussion.

Margaret C
19th January 2010, 10:35 PM
A number of good breeders are quitting. I know of a few in America-- far away from your Bateson Report or PDE program. IF you make any fun leisure activity (Hobby breeding) too onerous, people will quit-- or they will just breed for themselves and GIVE puppies away.


One of the problems is that MRIs are available and relatively cheap in the UK and much more difficult and expensive in America. I know it is not easy for cavalier breeders overseas.

That does not however mean that the breeding of cavaliers with SM is any less of a welfare problem, whatever part of the world the litter is whelped.

Dog breeding, even on a small scale, is not an ordinary 'fun leisure activity' and in fact I find it difficult to comprehend that you can put it in that category.
Golf or model making are fun leisure activities.

When you take on the responsibility of bringing a living breathing being into the world then, I would suggest, you also take on the responsibility of doing all you can to try and give that animal a life that does not need increasing amounts of medication to control pain.

It is a tragedy that cavaliers have been so badly hit by this inherited problem, but it has happened, there is no magic wand, no easy fix. Things will never be the same and no amount of complaining will change that. If breeding to a protocol, to give the breed a chance of a future, is too onerous, then it probably is best to quit.

The researchers did not invent SM, they did not spread it. It is due to their hard work, and their determination in the face of breeder indifference, that gene research started so many years ago.

We have a lot to thank them for.

WoodHaven
19th January 2010, 10:55 PM
One of the problems is that MRIs are available and relatively cheap in the UK and much more difficult and expensive in America. I know it is not easy for cavalier breeders overseas.

That does not however mean that the breeding of cavaliers with SM is any less of a welfare problem, whatever part of the world the litter is whelped.

Dog breeding, even on a small scale, is not an ordinary 'fun leisure activity' and in fact I find it difficult to comprehend that you can put it in that category.
Golf or model making are fun leisure activities.

When you take on the responsibility of bringing a living breathing being into the world then, I would suggest, you also take on the responsibility of doing all you can to try and give that animal a life that does not need increasing amounts of medication to control pain.

It is a tragedy that cavaliers have been so badly hit by this inherited problem, but it has happened, there is no magic wand, no easy fix. Things will never be the same and no amount of complaining will change that. If breeding to a protocol, to give the breed a chance of a future, is too onerous, then it probably is best to quit.

The researchers did not invent SM, they did not spread it. It is due to their hard work, and their determination in the face of breeder indifference, that gene research started so many years ago.

We have a lot to thank them for.


IF the hobby breeders find the hoops too onerous-- you'll be looking for cavaliers from research scientists or byb doing it under the laws reach. You think that is better??

Margaret C
19th January 2010, 11:52 PM
IF the hobby breeders find the hoops too onerous-- you'll be looking for cavaliers from research scientists or byb doing it under the laws reach. You think that is better??

I would be looking and encouraging others to look, for a puppy from the responsible health testing breeders who, despite the hoops, love cavaliers enough to try and breed out this painful condition.

Karen and Ruby
20th January 2010, 12:55 AM
For the 1st time today I had a lady come up to me whilst out walking and asked 'is that them dogs with that brain problem'- yes i live in essex!LOL

I replied yes and informed that Ruby was infact one of those dogs.
She had seen the article on the news so Im very glad it was included on the main stream news.
I had a lovely conversation with her about puppy farms (she seemed oblivious) and why these dogs are so poorly.

She said that she had seen a puppy in the local pet shop that looked wike Ruby and Im confident that she will no longer be goig back to look at that puppy- esp when I informed her of our vets bills!!!

all im saying is that we can all do our bit even if it is one person at a time!

Bet
20th January 2010, 09:23 AM
Thanks Margaret for your Post.

When I read the Post you were replying to, no wonder some of us are wringing our Hands in Despair.

Breeding Cavaliers is not a Cottage Industry.

I only hope for the saving of our Cavalier Breed ,that Cavalier Breeding will only take place under the Guideance of the Resarchers.

Bet
20th January 2010, 11:33 AM
I just can't help having a bit of a Wry Smile after the Mention of Long Lived Cavaliers on the CC List ,I know I am thought of the Lowest of the Low by some Cavalier Folk, but I do have a List of about 2,000 Long Lived Cavaliers aged from 12 years upwards ,along with the ages of their Sires and Dams that I was able to find out about,held at the Kennel Club Library in London.

I think I would be about the only Person to find out about the Oldest Cavalier in the World ,who was TUPPENCE,who lived to 19 years -4 months - 3 weeks.

Her Sister ,Penny ,lived to 17.6 years

Their Sire was Ewecote Blue Blazer ,lived to 13 Years and their Dam was,Snowball Martini Mona

I also wrote to the UK CKCS CLUB suggesting that they might consider having a List of Long Lived Cavaliers on their Web Site ,which is now up and running.

I am proud of doing this Research ,but it still does not blind me to the fact that the Cavalier Breed has two Terrible Diseases ,SM and MVD,that could finish off Cavaliers .

On my Soap Box again, I really feel that this can only be being averted if All Cavalier Breeders Health Test their Breeding Stock.

I know it can be said that there are Cavaliers who do live to a normal old Age, I have proved it.

But there are here in Britain to-day around 100,000 Cavaliers living at 10 years of age .

About 50,000 of them will have a Heart Murmur at 5 years of age.

WoodHaven
20th January 2010, 02:14 PM
Thanks Margaret for your Post.

When I read the Post you were replying to, no wonder some of us are wringing our Hands in Despair.

Breeding Cavaliers is not a Cottage Industry.

I only hope for the saving of our Cavalier Breed ,that Cavalier Breeding will only take place under the Guideance of the Resarchers.

So you LIKE the idea of puppy farms??? That would be the opposite of a 'cottage industry'(tho it is truly about manufacturing- not breeding).


The definition of Onerous is that there is NO BENEFIT-- or that the work to get any benefit negates the desire to make it so.

Bet
20th January 2010, 05:33 PM
No ,I sure don't like Puppy farms, but if the Researchers into the SM and MVD Problems in our Cavalier Breed were to be involved in giving advice and in control of some Cavalier Breeders on Breeding Guidelines, then the Health of Cavaliers might have a chance of improving.

I do think though that the Pet Buying Public will now be having a say in what is happening in the Dog World.

The biggest benefit to us Pet Dog Owners is the Internet.

Suddenly the Dog Buying Public is paying attention .

We have the Hard Hitting Pedigree Dogs Exposed TV Program to thank for this .

As more and more information begins to get through to the Public ,those folk with Sick Dogs ,will no longer see their Expensive Vet Bills as a Stroke of Bad Luck ,but that the Bitter Truth is that many numbers of Pedigree Dogs are Diseased, Defective,and Deformed.

tara
20th January 2010, 07:30 PM
Just an example from a U.S. cavalier pet owner. If I needed / wanted to have Holly scanned, I would have to travel over 1500 miles (about a $400 plane ticket plus hotel and expenses) and pay at least $2500 for the scan and exam. I live almost smack dab in the middle of the United States. As Karlin has noted, there are people who scan and then there are those who are truly expert at interpreting these scans. Thus the need for travel.

I'm not making a comment on whether scans should be done by pet owners (unless there is a medical need, of course). I'm just trying to shed light on how truly onerous this is here.

Bet
21st January 2010, 10:15 AM
Could I just say that there may be others on the List who have been as confused about the SM Problem afflicting our Cavalier Breed as I have been.

Recently though , things are starting to fall a wee bit into place about the Problem , here are my thoughts .

In the Bateson Report ,it was said that the Cavalier Brain continues to grow after the Skull has Ossified .

This could link in with what was recently mentioned by Dr C .Rusbridge and Others in a Recently Published Veterinary Paper about what seems to be the Premature Growth Closure of the Cavalier Skull

Also this has been mentioned by Dr I. McGonnell,.

This only appears to be happening with the Cavalier Breed

This seems to be being involved with not enough space inside the Head of Cavaliers, as Karlin has mentioned.

This is just my thought ,I wonder in the Fullness of Time the Researchers will discover if Cavaliers who have a Bigger Space inside their Heads, in other words Larger Heads, will have more room for the Brains that are still growing after what seems to be the Premature Growth Closure of their Skulls.

Is this information all the more reason now for Cavalier Breeders to heed the SM Breeding Guidelines and not Breed from a Cavalier before 2.5 years of age.?

Will this be the age before it's known if what has happened , with what seems to be the Premature Growth Closure of the Cavalier Skulls ,that Syrinxes will have appeared.?

Surely if this is the case, and I don't know, but no Cavalier Breeder should be taking the risk of Breeding and MRI Scanning Cavaliers before 2.5 years old,and also Prospective Cavalier Breeders asking when buying a Cavalier Puppy ,at what age the Sire and Dam had been Mated.

Finally may I say ,it still Rankles with me to have been Accused of Bringing the Cavalier Breed to it's Knees as was claimed at

www.cavaliers.co.uk

in the Cavalier Chatterbox Notes this week.

I feel so distressed at what was said about me.

I love the Cavalier Breed ,and have done so for around 35 years, no we never were Cavalier Breeders only Cavalier Pet Owners,.

Bet
22nd January 2010, 10:04 AM
I don't know whether the SM Problem in our Cavalier Breed ,and as Professor Sir.P. Bateson has remarked in this week's Dog World, this is because the Cavalier Brains are too Big for their Skulls, is linked to very close In-Breeding ,I guess the Researchers will find this out.

In the 1930's to get the Cavalier Breed Established Mother was Mated to Son,Father to Daughter ,Brother to Sister .

Unfortunately the 2nd World War Started in 1939,to keep the Cavalier Stock going in the 1940's ,this same Cavalier Breeding Program had to be carried out ,but the problem was ,this In-breeding went back to the Original In-bred Cavalier Stock.

Mrs Pitt, the Founder of the Cavalier Breed in the 1920's ,wrote in the UK CKCS CLUB Magazine in1957,saying that ,No Thought had been given in the 1940's in Cavalier Breeding Programs to the Future of the Cavalier Breed

This is maybe where the Cavalier Breed differs from other Dog Breeds .

The Cavalier Breed just started in the 1930's from In-bred Cavaliers, then in the 1940's was further complicated by more In-Breeding.

It's all very well saying that it's OK in the Cavalier World to be Breeding Grand-Mother to Grand-Son, and Grand-Father to Grand- Daughter ,that the Geneticists say there will be no problem, but maybe in other Dog Breeds that advice is fine, but with the History of the In- Breeding Back - ground of our Cavalier Breed, maybe that advice is wrong.

Since Grand- Father to Grand- Daughter and Grand-Mother to Grand- Son Matings have been carried out in the Cavalier Breed for around the past 50 years, and with the Cavaliers' In- Bred Back-ground are to-days' Cavaliers paying the Price with their SM and MVD Health Problems?

It has been quoted or more than one occasion ,even by the Late,Great, Francis Pickett of the Welham Kennels, that if a Dog is the Grand-Father of a Puppy on Both Sides that Puppy Is In-Bred

There is a Saying ," A Weakness is Stronger than a Strength"

This means that Any Weakness will be Greatly Intensified.

This is what happens when In- Breeding is Carried out.

So should Cavalier Breeders really be paying attention to the Cavalier Pedigrees for their Breeding Programs.

Bet
23rd January 2010, 01:18 PM
As an up-date to my Previous Post about the In- breeding in our Cavaliers, in the 1930's-1940's, I have now contacted Professor Sir P Bateson with this information, who had mentioned that Grand-Father to Grand -Daughter and Grand-Mother to Grand -Son was In-breeding, in his Recently Published Report

Also asking whether because of this In-Breeding at that time, and that for the around the Past 50 Years ,Cavalier Breeders have been carrying out Grand- Mother to Grand-Son and Grand-Father to Grand-Daughter Matings,is the Cavalier Breed different from other Breeds because of this happening.

Will Geneticists be aware of these facts, and should different advice be being applied to Cavalier Breeders.?

Bet
24th January 2010, 01:02 PM
Just before I let the matter drop, about being accused of bringing the Cavalier Breed to it's Knees .

Could I say that I am not a Cavalier Breeder, have never Bred any Litters of Cavaliers, so if it has been brought to it's knees as has been claimed ,this must have been done by some Cavalier Breeders , and I don't think all the Blame can be put on the Puppy Farmers and BYB's ,since 20 years ago Cavalier Breeders in theUK CKCS CLUB were warned about the serious MVD Problem Afflicting Cavaliers, and that at the Recent UK CKCS AGM ,the Cardiologist said that 50% of Cavaliers will suffer from a Heart Murmur by 5 years of Age .

How can I be being blamed for that Statement.!!!!!

An Apology to me would'nt go Amiss, but as the Saying Goes

I WON'T BE HOLDING MY BREATH!