• If you're a past member of the board, but can't recall your password any more, you don't need to set up a new account (unless you wish to). As long as you recall your old login name, you can log in with that user name then select 'forgot password' and the board will email you at your registration email, to let you reset your password.

In Reply from another Cavalier Pet Owner

Bet

Well-known member
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) (y)] 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.
 
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!
 
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.
 
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?
 
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?
 
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 (y) -- 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 .
 
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
 
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.
 
...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
 
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
 
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
 
Last edited:
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
 
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
 
Margaret,
Your post is long and it is late. With your permission, I will reply tomorrow.
Elspeth
 
(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!
 
(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
 
"
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
 
In Reply from Another Cavalier Pet Owner

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 .
 
Elspeth -v- Margaret

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.
 
Back
Top