PDA

View Full Version : In- Breeding and CKCS.



Bet
27th January 2010, 07:23 PM
I hope it's OK starting this as a New Thread,.

I contacted Dr Helmuth Wachtel in Austria to-day about the In-Breeding in our Cavalier Breed. I had been involved with him a number of years ago ,when he was comparing the Pedigrees of the British Cavaliers with MVD with those Cavaliers' Pedigrees in Austria with the same Problem .

At that time he replied to me ,saying that he was convinced that the In- Breeding in Cavaliers had caused their MVD Problem.

I had asked him to-day ,what were his views about the In-Breeding in Cavaliers ,and giving him the details about it in the 30's and 40's etc.

Here's his Reply.

To attain New conformation needs More line/In-breeding

Dog Breeds are a Cultural Heritage and should not be subjected to such changes

If Population Genetics would have known Earlier .

A Breeding System such has the Present One would not have been possible


In -Breeding and Line Breeding leads to loss of Genetic Diversity ,meaning lacking tools to keep an Organism Healthy,Vital and Enduring owning to many Genes(Allele) providing Enzymes and Proteins that are tools for that Goal.

Loss of Diversity produces Short Life-Spans ,Increased Infections ,and often Horrible Inherited Diseases .

Mrs A. Pitt, the Founder of the Cavalier Breed ,were her comments made in 1957 also slighter later, that the Cavalier Breeders in those early days of the Cavalier Breed ,were Breeding Cavaliers with no thought as to the Future of the CavalierBreed,had this information maybe been learned from her Father ,who was a Geneticist.

Bet(Hargreaves)

Soushiruiuma
27th January 2010, 08:51 PM
Bet,

This in no way advances any useful argument. The negatives effects of inbreeding are well established.


Mrs A. Pitt, the Founder of the Cavalier Breed ,were her comments made in 1957 also slighter later, that the Cavalier Breeders in those early days of the Cavalier Breed ,were Breeding Cavaliers with no thought as to the Future of the CavalierBreed,had this information maybe been learned from her Father ,who was a Geneticist.

This makes an interesting point, although not the one you intend. You are saying that in 1957 a daughter of a geneticist (who presumably had better understanding than the general public about these matters) had sufficient knowledge of genetics to criticize the breeding methods from past decades. It isn't fair to judge the past based on today's knowledge.

I don't believe that early breeders had no thought of the future of breed, I do think that they may have inadvertently created dogs who were not as healthy due to inbreeding. Only the most basic knowledge of genetics and inheritance would have been available to early breeders, any traits influenced by multiple genes, or with atypical modes of inheritance would have been impossible for breeders to account for. If you refer back to discussions about a book published around the turn of the century, I made a comment about how baffled breeders were by coat color inheritance in the book. Coat colors are determined by simple Mendelian genetics, this is taught to gradeschool children now. MVD and SM don't have known genes even today, because these don't follow simple modes of inheritance.

Karlin
27th January 2010, 09:02 PM
Did you see the post I made that quoted from Amice Pitt back in 1962? She herself said that breeders unfortunately bred "with no thought for the future" after WWII when there were few dogs remaining from the original kennels. They would have known at that time that breeding solely to two sires for pretty much an entire generation -- all bred to just a father and son -- was highly problematical for the future of the breed, but they chose to do it anyway; she also laments that breeders stopped bringing in King Charles inbreeding programmes and said this was decided too early because it was to the advantage of showing. That is why she was arguing in the early 60s that outbreeding would likely be of benefit to the breed -- to papillons or King Charles spaniels. Unfortunately KCs these days have their own very serious problems including hydrocephalus and SM so would not be a good choice for what Mrs Pitt calls "fresh blood".

There's actually a pretty good idea of which clusters of genes are likely responsible for SM and hopefully that problem will be cracked. But there is good evidence that certain approaches to breeding greatly reduce the incidence and onset age of MVD -- certainly no one would ever recommend breeding affected dogs with heart murmurs before age 5, for example.

sins
27th January 2010, 11:06 PM
click here (http://www.universalcavaliermagazine.com/universalnew/PDF/amicepitt.pdf) to view an article on Amice Pitt written By Ann Marie Rasmussen in Universal cavalier magazine.
It contains a lot of early history of the cavalier breed and has references to the source material if anyone wishes to research it.

Sins

Margaret C
27th January 2010, 11:27 PM
A clever breeder and one with foresight.

Those breeders were left with very little choice for their breeding programme.
Now of course, with the knowledge of how tightly bred the original cavaliers were ( only two stud dogs throughout the war ), it is difficult to see how close line breeding can be justified.

MARK MARSHALL
28th January 2010, 09:39 AM
Yes the War Years were dreadful but lets not forget that Amice PITT started off as a BREEDER before 1927 and seemingly did not, initially really enjoy the Showing aspect. She was all to do with experimenting with dogs to see which specimens produced puppies of type - with the desired longer nose ! One only has to look at the early pedigrees to see how close the IN-BREEDING was and how Mums were repeatedly mated with their Sons etc etc. One example is FRECKLES OF TTIWEH who is said to have had seven litters.

It therefore follows that if her (and others) attempts to create the Breed were focused on unhealthy dogs - then the CKCS breed was destined to failure and by the time the War came about, what was left, was possibly very contaminated and to use them over and over again, may have caused even more harm.

So, its all very well making comments in the 60/70's but she had had over 30 years of attempting to get it right.

No doubt a dear and lovely Lady but this is what happens when humans mess about with animals and try to create a certain style of specimen ? Her Grandfather was a renowned Artist so perhaps it was in her genes, to capture that perfect vision of perfection ?

YES, she and others may well have kept the Breed going - but at what cost to the dogs of today ?

Bet
28th January 2010, 11:18 AM
,Sins, Thank -you for the Link, I had never seen it before. I do hope I am being a Pain in The Neck!! to the others on the List, but the History of the Cavalier Breed is of such interest to me.

Can I through this Thread maybe give some more Snippits about our Cavaliers.

There are still AMICE PITT RALLIES, held here in in Britain in her Memory. At one time she stayed in Scotland with Mrs Keswick who had the Pargeter Affix.To add a wee bit History to our Cavalier Breed ,at one time Margaret Barnes was Kennel Maid with the Pargeter Kennels .

Later in her life Margaret and her Mother mated ,which I believe would be the first mating between a Cocker Spaniel ,SUNTOP JOYFUL. and a Cavalier Spaniel ,CRESTBY CANDLELIGHT.This was in the early 1950's .

I'm rambling now ,so back to the Foundation Cavaliers.in our Breed,I will reiterate again what Karlin mentioned that Mrs A.Pitt said .

ALL PEDIGREES GO BACK TO ANN'S SON,unfortunately the Breed can wander a.little to the Right or Left ,but every time you arrive back at Ann's Son.

The Cavalier Breed was formed by 6 Stud Dogs.

Ann's Son,I do wonder about him though, in his Life-Time he only seem to have Sired 11 Litters.born 29-4-1927...?

Wizbang Timothy .Ann's Son 's Litter Brother Ditto

Carlo of Ttiweh Born-- 5-6-1929

Duce of Braemore BORN 4-8-1930

Aristide of Ttiweh born--28-1-1936.

Kobba of Korunda Born-30-5-1928

I really do wonder how many of to-day's Cavalier Breeders have been interested enough to go back to the early In-Breeding of those Days when planning their Breeding Programs,

Certainly ,there was a shortage of Cavalier Breeding Stock during the War, but was the In- Breeding in the 1930's a part to play of the Cavaliers' Health Problems of to-day.

Mrs A. Pitt ,would no doubt be aware of the In-Breeding being done at time, and maybe that was why she made her Comment in later years about the Cavalier Breeding being done in the 1940's .

What should be being considered I believe, is it not the Cavalier Breeders who were Close Breeding in the 1960's -70's -80's, who are more involved than any-body for the Health Problems in Cavaliers, in that they did not Study the Early In- Breeding of the Cavalier Breed .

If they had taken the time to check back on those Early In-Bred Cavalier Pedigrees,maybe the Cavalier Breed would not be in the mess it's in to-day, Health Wise.


Bet (Hargreaves)

Kate H
28th January 2010, 11:35 AM
If an outcross is ultimately the only answer, the best one might be the Kooikerhondje from (I think) Holland - they are derived from the same medieval spaniels as the Cavalier, and are still very like the larger spaniels seen in old paintings. They also have a similar temperament, though being gundogs they are more energetic. There aren't huge numbers of them in this country (I have met a couple, and liked them), but I think there are still a lot in Europe - though I don't know how big their gene pool is, as continental breeds suffered badly in WW2. They also suffer from luxating patellas and cataracts (and a couple of other things that Cavaliers don't yet have!) - but outcrossing to any breed is going to complicate the health scene!

Kate, Oliver and Aled

Bet
28th January 2010, 11:49 AM
Yes Kate H , out -crossing might be the way the Cavalier Breed might have to go , if the Purists don't like that, well tough , but for the rest of us ,who only wan't our Cavaliers to have the Chance of Healthier , Longer Lives , now that so many of us now know about the In- Breeding that has been involved with the Cavalier Breed,out-crossing maybe will be the Answer.

Any-Body got any thoughts about this. ?

I know we all love the Cavaliers the way they are, but if they have to have a Future ,maybe this could be the only this way this can happen.

Bet(Hargreaves)

sins
28th January 2010, 01:09 PM
I would think an outcross would be an absolute last resort.
I think it was you Bet who mentioned the Suntop cockers in the early 1950s.Is there any evidence to suggest that descendents of the Suntop breeding have a lower incidence of SM or MVD? I've never seen or heard it being discussed.
However numerically,the cavalier is a "strong" breed and even though the genepool is relatively narrow there's every chance that enough truly healthy cavaliers exist to enable the breed to improve healthwise over the coming generations.I'd love to see CM free cavaliers being identified and hopefully some with excellent heart status being incorporated into the genepool even if they're not very good show specimens.
If as Karlin says,the clusters of genes responsible for SM are being narrowed down,hopefully it will lead to the development of testing kits to predict the likelihood of syrinx formation.Yes it detracts from the sporting aspect of dog breeding but what else is there to help solve the problem?
One recent example is the development of test for scoliosis.Traditionally children who developed spinal curvature in adolescence either wore a back brace or had extensive spinal surgery to correct the defect.Now after decades of research medical science has taken the scoliosis screening process even further, down to the genetic level. In September 08, a research group in Utah announced that they had discovered specific genetic markers that could predict the occurrence and severity of scoliosis.The kit was developed by utilizing a genome wide association study that identified a panel of 53 genetic markers associated with severe curve progression. This scoliosis research involved collecting DNA samples from over 9,500 patients from 85 clinical sites throughout the world.Basically it can predict the likelihood of developing a severe deformity occurring based on the number of specific markers being present.Adolescent scoliosis is also a complex multifactorial disorder so I refuse to give up hope that cavalier breeders will need to outcross and lose any of the cavalier characteristics.
Sins

MARK MARSHALL
28th January 2010, 01:12 PM
Bet,

When you say OUT- CROSSING, you actually mean CROSS BREEDING a Cavalier with another Toy Breed - Yes ?

It seems well decided, that within our Breed one cannot really Out - Cross as the stock is too closely related and therefore all breeding is basically Line - Breeding to one degree or another and some can be so close as to become In - Breeding ?

In my opinon Crossing with another Breed is a hugh decision and not one for you, me or other beginners to make.

Mark Marshall.

Bet
28th January 2010, 01:55 PM
If I could go back to Mark Marshall's Post about Mrs Amice Pitt .,The Founder of the Cavalier Breed.

I .am sure like other Lovers of the History of our Cavaliers, will have been so distressed to have read his Comments.

I had been involved a few years ago in a wee bit of Research helping Bruce Field write his Book,

The Cavalier King Charles Spaniel.

In -fact Bruce had been given many of Mrs Pitt's Personal Papers and Letters from Mrs Jane Bowler ,Mrs Pitt's Daughter,to Research for his Book. I was also able to see them ,that was when I discovered the Letter from Mrs Pitt saying that ANN'S SON was born in 1924. In contrast to the Kennel Club 's Breed Supplement date 27-4-1927.

For me it was great Privilege to read at first hand , information about Mrs Pitt,.and about the back-ground of what was involved in trying to get the Cavalier Breed established.

So Mark, I really do think you should give an Apology to all of us , and particularly to the Memory of Mrs A Pitt.

Bet (Hargreaves)

MARK MARSHALL
28th January 2010, 03:04 PM
Bet, which part has offended you - I am keen to know ?

EddyAnne
28th January 2010, 03:46 PM
Yes Kate H , out -crossing might be the way the Cavalier Breed might have to go , if the Purists don't like that, well tough , but for the rest of us ,who only wan't our Cavaliers to have the Chance of Healthier , Longer Lives , now that so many of us now know about the In- Breeding that has been involved with the Cavalier Breed,out-crossing maybe will be the Answer.

Any-Body got any thoughts about this. ?

I know we all love the Cavaliers the way they are, but if they have to have a Future ,maybe this could be the only this way this can happen.

Bet(Hargreaves)

Well Bet my thoughts are towards what Sarah Blott mentioned rather than what you mentioned, and the following is from this address.
http://www.thecavalierclub.co.uk/health/ebv/genetic_study.html

Early estimates of the heritability of SM suggest it is around 0.7-0.8* or that 70-80% of the variation between individuals is genetic in origin and about 20-30% is environmental. In the case of SM not much is known about the environmental influences and these may include in-utero or developmental effects. The heritability is sufficiently high, however, that genetic selection against the disease should be very successful. Heritabilities for Chiari Malformation, Cerebellar Herniation and Medullary Kinking are also very high. Genetic correlations between these traits and SM are positive and, interestingly, less than one. This suggests that different genes may be controlling SM and CM and that it will be possible to select against SM even if dogs have the malformation (CM).
.

Marjorie
28th January 2010, 03:55 PM
Interesting posts, I love this breed and hope that it can survive and have a much healthier future. I'd be interested to hear what breeds people would consider to be most suitable for out/cross breeding with the Cavalier. Any suggestions?

Karlin
28th January 2010, 06:36 PM
Bet, I think maybe there's just some misinterpretation on both sides going on here, rather than a major difference of opinion. :thmbsup:

Mark, wouldn't most see a difference (at least in the context of this conversation) between outcrossing (bringing in another breed to broaden genetic diversity) and crossbreeding (making a single mating between breeds, producing crossbreed puppies)? At least, that has been how I would understand the difference in the context of the discussion -- noting that Amice Pitt talks about outcrossing and clearly means bringing in KCs or Papillons. Of course, every dog breed alive started from outcrossing -- starting with one breed and introducing one or more other breeds until they breed true -- including cavaliers. It is as you note a very complex issue with a lot of inbuilt prejudice too -- which Amice Pitt noted herself was experienced too by the breeders who tried to create a new CKCS breed from KC spaniels and some others mixed in. I think it is interesting that some breeders will selectively choose what they like about Amice Pitt's opinions on the breed -- but she very definitely was stating she thought outcrossing to papillons would help diversity and was quite alarmed by what she knew were real genetic bottlenecks in the CKCS breed history. On the other hand, my understanding is that Sarah Blott feels there is enough diversity to rescue the breed through selective breeding to reduce SM incidence -- and that this can be done for the reasons EddyAnne notes.

Thus there is a positive outlook IF people are scanning, submitting scans for the EBV work, ready to share information and use EBVs, and help toward the completion of the genome work. Scanning older cavaliers at the moment is a critical part of understanding early and late onset and finding promising lines for the EBVs, too. So there is much that every breeder can do towards a positive outcome.

I know many of the researchers feel that even with the narrow genetic confines of cavaliers, it is still far easier and faster to breed towards reduced incidence than to try and outcross to other breeds or start again to reconstruct the breed -- not least because over the decades so many breeds have run into genetic issues through the same constricted breeding practices. But looking to diversify the blood in the breed, as Amice Pitt puts it, remains a large picture, longer term issue. I just find it interesting that she already thought there was a serious issue half a century ago.

Some of the researchers familiar with the 10,000 pedigree collection say that sadly many of the older lines that had good diversity and likely would have been better for SM are now gone and that it is very hard to find dogs that have not had all the common recent lines bred into them at some point, which makes the overall SM problem much more difficult to reduce and eliminate. I wish more Irish breeders would scan as some would have remained more isolated -- indeed I know some researchers feel it is the non-show breeders who may have some of the really good dogs because they would not ever have bred their dogs to the popular sires, etc.... it is an interesting argument. You wonder if, as at the start of the breed, it might be needed to make exceptions and bring in non-pedigreed dogs - to start scanning the dogs without pedigrees and search for those that are clear, see if there are even dogs without CM amongst them, and get them brought back into the breed as Mrs Pitt said happened with an early cavalier ancestor.

Bet
28th January 2010, 07:42 PM
Yes Karlin,

This is sure an interesting discussion.

What would maybe help in the Cavaliers 'SM Problem ,if it could be found out if any Cavaliers who went back to the Cavalier... Cocker Spaniel Mating had the Malformed Bone.

I know that there were some Pargeter, Maxholt ,McGoogans, Cavaliers who did.

I did contact Dr Blott to make her aware about the In-Bred Early Back -Ground our Cavalier Breed has, I expect she knows about it ,but just maybe she did'nt .

Who-ever would have thought ,that we would be discussing Mrs Pitt's words and thoughts to-day. Mark ,I guess were at cross purposes. I had got my heckles up. Sorry.

Just a wee bit more Cavalier History.This is about Cavalier Dogs who had Sired the Cavalier Winners of Challenge Certificates

Ch Daywell Roger ....73

Ch Homaranne Caption ...67

Ch Aloysius of Sunninghill ...67

Ch Pargeter Mc Bounce ...30

Ch Rosemullion of Ottermouth....38

Minstrel Boy of Maxholt ....35

Maybe It should be seriously thought about, go out -with Cavaliers that are winning in the Show Ring, and introduce Cavaliers who have different Pedigree back-Grounds.

I know this is what Dr B. Cattanach ,Geneticist ,has mentioned , MRI Scan a number of ordinary Cavaliers, and see if they have SM.

This could be so easily done.

Bet(Hargreaves)

Soushiruiuma
28th January 2010, 07:46 PM
One of the things that is absolutely forbidden in dog breeding is crossbreeding to other breeds. Puppies are not purebred, and can't be registered, shown...

This is less the case in the horse industry (thoroughbreds are a closed registration, but quarter horses are allowed if they are quarter horse/thoroughbred mixes; draft horses are routinely mixed to improve quality), and the cattle industry. Although there are exceptions in both industries, overall there has been an acceptance that preserving breeds may be at some point become detrimental to the breed, at which point crossbreeding becomes a better option.

I don't know that cavaliers necessitate crossbreeding at this point, however, it should be something that persists as an idea, because crossbreeding can have huge benefits. Unfortunately, it is well known that the cavalier breed suffers from having originated from a small population. And that means that all cavaliers are descended from a highly inbred population.

Perhaps a less extreme option than simply allowing crossbreeding would be to open a category for Register of Merit Cavaliers, so that interested parties could essentially recreate the breed from new lines, and only the successes would be added to the existing gene pool.

Kooikers I've never heard suggested as a breed for crossing cavs to, however, as an "old type" spaniel I think they are a potentially interesting option.

Bet
28th January 2010, 07:53 PM
Just noticed the above Post ,I don't know whether it's still allowed here in Britain or not by the UK Kennel Club, but at the time of the Cavalier mating between the Cocker Spaniel and the Cavalier,I think it was after Two generations, the Off-Springs were allowed to be called Cavaliers. It's maybe different now .Any-body know.?

Bet( Hargreaves)

Oreo
28th January 2010, 08:38 PM
I would think an outcross would be an absolute last resort.
I think it was you Bet who mentioned the Suntop cockers in the early 1950s. Is there any evidence to suggest that descendents of the Suntop breeding have a lower incidence of SM or MVD? I've never seen or heard it being discussed.
However numerically,the cavalier is a "strong" breed and even though the genepool is relatively narrow there's every chance that enough truly healthy cavaliers exist to enable the breed to improve healthwise over the coming generations. I'd love to see CM free cavaliers being identified and hopefully some with excellent heart status being incorporated into the genepool even if they're not very good show specimens. . . . .
Sins

Karlin just made excellent points, that I don't want to take away from, but I have done some looking into the lines coming from Suntop Joyful (Cocker crossed in), and where they are. I find this stuff interesting, and wanted to share.

Her daughter is Suntop Franconia, and can be found on the AENA pedigree database. The reverse pedigree is not really complete, though, and World Pedigrees, if one has signed up (for free) shows more lines coming from her including one that produced, 6 generations on, Startop Timothy.

AENA doesn't show this, but the grand-dam of Startop Timothy, Suntop Chestnut, is daughter to Suntop Tuffet, who is the great, great grandson of Suntop Joyful.

Many of the descendent of this girl are in Australia, but some made it back to European lines that I can see. Currently she is behind many dogs of the Gaycrest and Cavashon affixes, as well as a huge number of Cavaliers from Australia.

Interestingly enough, Suntop Joyful, through Franconia, and a sixth generation descendant, Startop Timothy, is many times behind all eight great grandparents of Elvenhome Charmeuse. Elvenhome Charmeuse was the female Cavalier from Australia, scanned by Clare Rusbridge, who showed no signs of CM or SM.

If you care to look at the pedigree of Elvenhome Charmeuse it is here: http://dhvg.ckcs-kcs.dyndns.org/cgi-bin/geneal_EN.pl?op=tree&index=Abw7921&gens=5&db=CKCS.dbw

You can find Suntop Joyful's daughter, Suntop Franconia, behind Aust Ch McGoogans Abighaoil through McGoogans Sheenagh and Startop Timothy.
She is behind Aust Ch Prestonville Giv'm Beans through Aust Ch Elvenhome Tilt, and again back through Startop Timothy.

Abighaoil and Giv'm Beans are behind Charmeuse's great grandparents Elvenhome Glen Buck, Elvenhome Betula Lutea and Elvenhome GaIlardia.
Suntop Franconia is behind Braganzar Phrankincense through Braganzar Hunter and back again through Startop Timothy.
Suntop Franconia is behind Braganzar Chapeau and NZ Ch Prestonville Countably through Braganzar Hermione (and Sadie), McGoogans Mayfly, and Startop Timothy.

Just some interesting pedigree trivia.

Oreo

Oreo
28th January 2010, 08:47 PM
Although it is in many breeds and clubs, crossbreeding is not absolutely forbidden in ALL dog breeding and breed clubs. These clubs still do call their dogs purebreds, so that definition is not set in stone as being pureblood by ancestry.

The Jack Russel Terrier Club of America allows in first generation crosses, as long as they have passed evaluation, as do some of the American Border Collie clubs and registries. I'm sure there are others.

I'm in no way suggesting, at this time, the crossbreeding of Cavaliers, not when so much has been put into the EBVs, but wanted to point this out.

Oreo

Clairelou
28th January 2010, 09:00 PM
Noting that Sarah Blott feels the Cavalier breed can be rescued through selective breeding (for health). My question is can both MVD and SM be eliminated following this protocol? or is it more a case of the best the breed can hope for is a reduction in MVD and SM?

Soushiruiuma
28th January 2010, 09:02 PM
Although it is in many breeds and clubs, crossbreeding is not absolutely forbidden in ALL dog breeding and breed clubs. These clubs still do call their dogs purebreds, so that definition is not set in stone as being pureblood by ancestry.

The Jack Russel Terrier Club of America allows in first generation crosses, as long as they have passed evaluation, as do some of the American Border Collie clubs and registries. I'm sure there are others.


Oreo,

You're absolutely right. The American Border Collie Association's open studboook was a main reason why they refused to join the AKC as the parent club of the breed. I was referring to large KC's UKC, AKC, and others where purebred dogs can only come from 2 registered parents.

Soushiruiuma
28th January 2010, 09:22 PM
Noting that Sarah Blott feels the Cavalier breed can be rescued through selective breeding (for health). My question is can both MVD and SM be eliminated following this protocol? or is it more a case of the best the breed can hope for is a reduction in MVD and SM?

The way these protocols are set up is by selecting the dogs to breed for the future generation from the current generation (I realize that is a no-brainer), if you can imagine the current population as being represented by a bell curve (animals at one end are of lowest breeding quality, animals in the middle are mediocre, and animals at the other end are of highest breeding quality). By choosing dogs who are of the best quality currently available and breeding those we can shift the entire curve so that the animals who were of highest quality before are now of mediocre quality.

This is the exact same principle used for breeding for looks, but applied to health. MVD and SM will not be eliminated quickly (if ever), but prevalence of the diseases can be reduced. If half as many dogs were affected would it be worth doing? Yes (in my opinion). And what's more, those dogs who are half as likely to be diagnosed can be used to further reduce these diseases.

What's important to avoid is a situation where you are so restrictive about which dogs are bred that the population hits a bottle-neck and the potential for new genetic diseases to crop up is high.

EddyAnne
28th January 2010, 10:17 PM
One thing to note is along with Health Test Results that also Cheek Swabs are being sent in and stored. Later when DNA Researchers find the genes and develop a cost effective DNA test, it is then that all the stored DNA Cheek Swabs will be tested and the results entered into the Program as Genomic Breeding Values (geBVs). It is only then that the heritable diseases can be eliminated from the breed and by still ulilising the Program will take into account the gene pool and help avoid potential problems.
.

Bet
29th January 2010, 10:35 AM
Oreo,I just can't thankyou enough for this information.I got the Files from Margaret Barnes who did the Cavalier, Cocker Spaniel Mating, a few years ago, along with photos etc.

I know I can't say ,I rest my case, but for ages I always wished if only a Cavalier with the Cocker Spaniel and Cavalier Mating could be MRI Scanned ,to see if there was a Problem

Now there is one with ,with no CM and SM.

I know this is early ,early days, but it is sure food for thought.

Thanks again

Bet(Hargreaves)

Kate H
29th January 2010, 10:56 AM
As far as the UK KC allowing outcrosses is concerned, there was some interesting history of the Affenpinscher in last week's Our Dogs breed notes. A group of people in this country started trying to establish the breed in the UK in the 1970s. In 1975 a champion bitch was imported from the US; it was hoped she was in whelp when she arrived, but she wasn't. Because there was no male Affenpinscher in the UK, the KC gave permission for her to be mated to a Miniature Pinscher, and she produced one bitch puppy. I think the rule is that if an outcross is made, the offspring of the resulting puppies are considered purebred within 3 generations as long as they are mated back to the original breed and conform to the breed standard. There is a lot of discussion in the breed notes and articles at the moment about outcrossing other breeds to avoid health issues - dalmations are one.

The real problem with outcrossing, of course, is the risk of introducing new diseases into the Cavalier gene pool, or while trying to avoid SM, doubling up on other existing diseases. Cockers, for instance, overlap with Cavaliers on patellas, progressive retinal atrophy and (yes!) heart disease. Papillons, another possibility as they too are descended from medieval spaniels (very obvious in the drop-eared phalenes), share patella and eye problems.

The frying pan and the fire come to mind!

Kate, Oliver and Aled

sins
29th January 2010, 11:36 AM
Good for you Bet on getting the files from Margaret Barnes.
I've no doubt you thoroughly enjoyed seeing the photos etc...
As for the bitch who had the excellent scan,while it is fantastic,be mindful of the old saying
"One swallow doesn't make a summer"...
Sins

Karlin
29th January 2010, 12:09 PM
The frying pan and the fire come to mind!

Yes, indeed!

Marjorie
29th January 2010, 02:30 PM
Some people have mentioned the "Kooikerhondje" as a possible out-cross. Although they have the "look" of a Cavalier they have the exact opposite temperment of a Cavalier. These dogs were used to create the Nova Scotia Duck Toller and unfortunately the Kookier temperment was passed along. It would be a shame to sacrifice the beautiful Cavalier temperment.

Margaret C
29th January 2010, 02:36 PM
Some people have mentioned the "Kooikerhondje" as a possible out-cross. Although they have the "look" of a Cavalier they have the exact opposite temperment of a Cavalier. These dogs were used to create the Nova Scotia Duck Toller and unfortunately the Kookier temperment was passed along. It would be a shame to sacrifice the beautiful Cavalier temperment.

A very good point.

Bet
29th January 2010, 07:19 PM
This is what I have wondered for a long time ,if only a Cavalier going back to the Cocker Spaniel --Cavalier Mating could be found and MRI Scanned, what could it tell.

Well now we know ,this particular Cavalier going back to the Mating I mentioned, had no CM or SM.

The question now is ,is this because the Cocker Spaniel Genes this Cavalier must still have , there must still be some in the Cavalier

Elvenhome Charmeuse and,had no CM, yet I think the figure has been given that about 90% of Cavaliers do have CM.

At least though , it can now be said that a Cavalier going back to the Cocker Spaniel---Cavalier rmating had no SM or CM.

This is all I ever wanted to find out about....And it has been proved.No CM or SM

I would guess it's now up to the Researchers to make what they can of this information.

Oreo mentioned that there could be a good number of Cavaliers in Australia with the Genes from this Mating, it's also been mentioned that Cavalier Breeders in Australia,have not seen much CM/SM in their Cavaliers ,could this be the reason.

Bet(Hargreaves)

Karlin
29th January 2010, 07:26 PM
Some other problems with kooikerhondje -- sounds a bit too familiar!


Health



A kooikerhondje
Kooikers have good appetites and a tendency to put on weight easily. They have a relatively small genetic base, so hereditary diseases are somewhat prevalent. These include:
von Willebrand's disease, a blood clotting disorder
Cataracts
Patellar luxation
Epilepsy
Hereditary Necrotizing Myelopathy, a degenerative disease similar to Multiple sclerosis

from Wikipedia. They are clearly one of the general spaniel breeds related to the historical version of the CKCS... wonder if cavaliers were used in the 40s to rebuild/reconstruct the breed? They are very pretty.

Karlin
29th January 2010, 07:29 PM
I guess not:

http://kooikerhondje.9f.com/rich_text.html

But certainly must share some common blood. They are like larger cavaliers with a different shaped head! They also have an undercoat.

Bet
29th January 2010, 08:17 PM
I'm not going down the avenue about what Breed could maybe help Cavaliers and their SM problem , just so Pleased a Cavalier has been found going back to the Cocker Spaniel ----Cavalier Mating.

This is always what I hoped could be found out about.Now it has ,and I can always say ,that there is a Cavalier from that Mating and has no CM/SM.This is for my own satisfaction.

Bet(Hargreaves)

Oreo
29th January 2010, 10:14 PM
Many breeds have an undercoat, including Cocker Spaniels. That is one of the things that makes Cavaliers unique. IF a breed were to be considered as a "crossing in" prospect, the color and undercoating could be worked out in a few generations. Good competent knowledgeable breeders would get this figured out, and no-one but these would have any business attempting such a project. Temperament is a taller order and would pose more difficulty as that is the true perfection of the Cavalier breed.

I think the EBV program should be fully and completely explored before any more drastic type decisions are made.

Bet, from what I can see Suntop Joyful (amongst many others) is behind many in the Elvenhome line of cavaliers. Many Elvenhome have been MRId, and I know they are included in the information which determines EBVs. I agree, it would be interesting to see Australian MRI results, but that Cocker female was soooo far back her genes would be well mixed with all others by now. I'll link some reverse pedigrees of her descendents, and you'll see she contributed to pedigrees that went back to Europe as well. On World Pedigrees I noticed she goes into some Maxholt and Charlottetown dogs.

http://dhvg.ckcs-kcs.dyndns.org/cgi-bin/reverse_EN.pl?op=tree&index=e2bI9709&gens=5&db=CKCS.dbw

http://dhvg.ckcs-kcs.dyndns.org/cgi-bin/reverse_EN.pl?op=tree&index=2Yr2s783&gens=5&db=CKCS.dbw

http://dhvg.ckcs-kcs.dyndns.org/cgi-bin/reverse_EN.pl?op=tree&index=G6Zc044&gens=5&db=CKCS.dbw

http://dhvg.ckcs-kcs.dyndns.org/cgi-bin/reverse_EN.pl?op=tree&index=41eD8f6&gens=5&db=CKCS.dbw

I'm curious, Bet, cuz you mentioned the information and photos you have, what was her coloring?

Oreo

EddyAnne
29th January 2010, 10:16 PM
Just out of interest about Kooikerhondje I'll chip into the topic.

William of Orange had Kooikerhondje and he did some military campaigns with John Churchill (First Duke of Marlbourgh and of Battle of Blenheim fame), and as both had a common interests in dogs and hunting I feel they may have spent some time together doing that. Back then cross breeding was common and breeding tended to be mostly aimed towards function, and who knows what might have happened between some doggies.

Here is some timelines for some thought.

28 December 1688
William Of Orange rode in London with John Churchill (later to become The First Duke Of Marlborough).

22 January 1689
English Parliament formally invite William Of Orange and his wife Queen Mary to become joint sovereigns of England. This was the date of the Declaration Of Rights.

1690
In Ireland under King William Of Orange, John Churchill brought all south western Ireland under English control.

19 March 1702
King William III of England, and he at the same time was also King William Of Orange ruler of The Netherlands, died today after a fall from his horse whilst riding at Hampton Court. His successor in England will be Queen Anne sister of the late Queen Mary. His death threw The Netherlands into turmoil as nobles battled for the thrown.

13 August 1704
The French were on the march to take Vienna by force. John Churchill at a small Bavarian town called Blenheim stopped them and inflicted a crushing defeat to the French, this was so devastating that it was the turning point in The War Of Spanish Succession. English Queen Anne after this gave John Churchill the title of The First Duke Of Marlborough and commissioned a palace for John to be built in England and was to be known as Blenheim Palace, and where the palace name came from the Bavarian town where the Battle Of Blenheim took place.

Well I think this doggie looks interesting.

http://members.wideband.net.au/safcav/1A/Kooikerhondje.jpg
.

EddyAnne
29th January 2010, 11:20 PM
I think the EBV program should be fully and completely explored before any more drastic type decisions are made.

Oreo I go along with what you mentioned and with what Sarah Blott mentioned about her EBV Program which includes the following from this address.
http://www.thecavalierclub.co.uk/health/ebv/genetic_study.html

Early estimates of the heritability of SM suggest it is around 0.7-0.8* or that 70-80% of the variation between individuals is genetic in origin and about 20-30% is environmental. In the case of SM not much is known about the environmental influences and these may include in-utero or developmental effects. The heritability is sufficiently high, however, that genetic selection against the disease should be very successful. Heritabilities for Chiari Malformation, Cerebellar Herniation and Medullary Kinking are also very high. Genetic correlations between these traits and SM are positive and, interestingly, less than one. This suggests that different genes may be controlling SM and CM and that it will be possible to select against SM even if dogs have the malformation (CM).
.

Karlin
29th January 2010, 11:35 PM
Oreo I go along with what you mentioned

Yes me too; I think this is the first task.

Bet
30th January 2010, 12:21 PM
Thank you Oreo, for the links for the Pedigrees.

Suntop Joyful , Cocker Spaniel was Black and White, Bitch, Crest by Candlelight,Cavalier, B/T.

How my interest in this started was ,as I have mentioned ,I all the Kennel Club Breed Supplements from 1920 for Cavaliers ,but at that time they were known as King Charles Spaniels. I believe the Cavaliers were registered in 1945 separately by the KC .

When I was looking at the Breed Supplements, I noticed the Name of SUNTOP PEGGOTY ,was given as a Cross Breed, was able to trace out her History and met up with Margaret Barnes.

Margaret Barnes and her Mother were keen to improve certain Characteristics in the Cavalier Breed.

Such as Soundness, Mouths, Flat SKulls , Dark Eyes and Pigment.That was why they carried out this mating with Suntop Joyful and Crest by Candlelight

It must have had success ,because 4 Generations Later ,4 Winning Cavaliers in all 4 Colours had won Researve Challenge Certificates.

The Desired Characteristics having been achieved and fixed

I know of only this one Mating between a Cocker Spaniel and a Cavalier.

I was told though by a Geneticist ,that if you take a Pinch of Sand ,it does not matter how often it is diluted ,there will still be a Grain of Sand Left.

Could this be why the Australian Cavalier we have been discussing ,going back to this Mating still has some-thing in the Gene Make-Up going back to the Cocker Spaniel .

What would be interesting now ,is for other Cavaliers going back to the Cocker Spaniel Mating ,being MRI Scanned , and see if they are carrying this Cocker Gene. ,that is maybe producing no CM/SM

Does any-body know if Cocker Spaniels are suffering much from SM to-day?

Bet (Hargreaves)

wotton12000
30th January 2010, 03:11 PM
I have a few wonderful photos of some of the early Cavaliers, and including one of Suntop Joyful (Cocker),

Thank you very much, Bet, for entrusting them to me.

I'll scan them and send to Karlin.

Carol

Bet
30th January 2010, 04:50 PM
My Pleasure Carol, I'm having a Great Afternoon ,a long time since I 've done this ,there 's a Cavalier in the Australian Cavalier's Pedigree, Australian Ch McGoogans Abighaoil this is
a British Cavalier, that I am tracing back through the Kennel Club Breed Supplements, to the Cocker Spaniel Cavalier Mating, when I've got it finished,I'll put it on the List .

Bet( Hargreaves)

Karlin
30th January 2010, 06:45 PM
2049

Here's the dog Bet is referring to -- cocker on the left. You can enlarge the image by clicking on it.

Bet
31st January 2010, 03:24 PM
I have had a lovely couple of days looking at the Kennel Club Breed Supplements.

This was because of Oreo's Post about the Australian Cavalier having been MRI Scanned and was found to have no CM/SM ,and the Pedigree going back to the Cocker Spaniel /Cavalier mating.

In Elvenhome Charmeuse ' s Pedigree is a British Cavalier on both sides of her Pedigree

Australian Ch Mc Googans Abighaoil .

Her Dam

McGoogans Sheenagh, is linked to Startop Timothy,who is closely linked to

Suntop Chestnut

Whose sire was Suntop Tuffet ,and Suntop Tuffet's Dam was

The Crossbred Cavalier

Suntop Pegotty, who was the result of the Cocker Spaniel ,Black and White, and the B/T Cavalier,Crest by Candlelight Mating.

I hope the others on the List have been able to follow this.

Finally could I mention that Freckles of Ttiweh ,is also in the Kennel Club Breed Supplements ,as having had 7 Litters from her Son, Plantation Banjo.

Bruce Field has also mentioned this ,in his Book

Bet (Hargreaves)

The Cavalier King Charles Spaniel

Bet
31st January 2010, 03:55 PM
I sure am needing a Coffee !!!!

it's been a long two days, going over the Cocker Spaniel/ Cavalier Mating, ,Should have done this before I posted it, !!!!

It was a Cavalier called Plantation Banjo Freckles of Ttiweh had 7 litters to .

Plantation Banjo was not her Son.Sorry for the Slip Up,I was thinking about Cannonhill Richey and Plantation Banjo being Father and Son,who Mrs Pitt had mentioned ,that Cavalier Breeders at that time , had given no thought for the Future of the Cavalier Breed,using them so often.

At least with this Thread I think Cavalier Breeders are at long last realizing the In-Bred Early Pedigrees of our Cavaliers.

Are Cavaliers now paying the Price because of their Health Problems.? Maybe the Researchers will be able to answer this question.


Bet (Hargreaves)

MARK MARSHALL
31st January 2010, 04:25 PM
Bet,

If Banjo was NOT Her Son, what relation was he please ?

What did this man FIELD write in his book please ?

Can you do a list of ALL the matings please, as some over on CC are keen to learn the facts.

Mark Marshall.

Karlin
31st January 2010, 05:09 PM
Mark, surely they are not waiting on Cavalier Chat for this all to be revealed? Cannot YorkySue answer this quetion for everybody, as she told us all here that ALL the breeders know ALL the details of the early history of the breed and it is only people like me who might find it "all new"... ? :roll:

The Field book is the out of print classic The Cavalier King Charles Spaniel by Bruce Field.

Karlin
31st January 2010, 05:23 PM
For those who do not know this or do not have YorkySue to inform them :):

Field, page 20:


After the war "there were some extreme examples of repeat matings and some close 'in-breeding'. For instance between Aug 1939 and Dec 1943 Mme J Harper Trois-Fontaines' blenheim bitch Freckles of Ttiweh had seven litters, totalling 39 puppies, by the same dog, namely Plantation Banjo, her own black and tan. Banjo also sired two litters, totalling 13 puppies, by his own daughter, Princesse Celia de Fontenay, in March and October 1943. Another of his daughters, Princesse Bianca de Fontenay, had one puppy by him in Jan 1943. A full brother and sister mating, namely Prince Carol de Fontenay and Princesse Bianca de Fontenay, produced three puppies in May 1944.

It has to be clearly pointed out that close inbreeding such as this should only be practised by breeders with considerable experience and who know their stock's genetic makeup very thoroughly. Whilst there can be advantages, the dangers are considerable. One can understand in those early days in the breed the need to try and 'fix' particular features by in-breeding. Less understandable is the frequent mating of poor Freckles...

Of course no one understood the severe genetic problems that seem to have been waiting and biding their time... but those decisions taken back then almost surely set the stage for the problems we have now.

Karlin
31st January 2010, 05:28 PM
Moreover he then quotes Amice Pitt who said of this inbreeding that it created serious problems for her when she started to look around for a sire after WWII:


I saw and heard of many but so many had been so inbred on both sides to both Plantation Banjo and Cannonhill Richey that they were of little use to me. Both these sires were influential in the breed but were used to every bitch, ad this before the Kennel Club divided the King Charles Spaniel from the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel, so that any amount of good blood that could have been used was neglected leaving us with a very inbred line.

He also has the picture posted previously and one of Suntop Spilliken and notes Amice Pitt's hope in 1962 that the KC would lift its rule and allow "new blood' from another breed into the cavalier lineage.

MARK MARSHALL
31st January 2010, 05:42 PM
I am now, very keen to go back onto CC to read their views on this, Mr field ?

I am of course, trying to post replies to their knee-jerk questions and abuse but so far only one has got through Sandra.

Thank you again Karlin.

Mark Marshall.

Karlin
31st January 2010, 05:57 PM
I just went downstairs to check the CKCS Champions 1928-1999 published by the CKCS Club in the UK. By my count every single champion for the 1940s and then going into the 1950s has either Cannonhill Richey or Plantation Banjo as parent, grandparent or great-grandparent and usually appearing more than once. Presumably all these champions were then being bred quite a bit as they were the top dogs of those years... bringing us to champions by 1950 like Armourer of Ttiweh, where three of his four great grandfathers are... Cannonhill Richey. :eek: Or Champion Pargeter Thundercloud of Ttiweh, whose grandfather on one side is Cannonhill Richey and GGF is of course Plantation Banjo and on the other side, the GGFs are... father and son, Plantation Banjo and Cannonhill Richey. :eek:

Bet
31st January 2010, 07:04 PM
Here are the Matings Freckles of Ttiweh had with Plantation Banjo.

She was born

29-9-1937.

1 November 1939 ......4 Puppies

13 July 1940 ......6 Puppies

23 March 1941 ......7 Puppies

19 November 1941 ......7 Puppies

23 July 1942.........6 Puppies

12 December 1942.......2 Puppies.

22 March 1943 ........7 Puppies. This is a bit Fishy

Poor Wee Soul !!!!! She Sure helped with the War Effort!!!

That was 39 Cavalier Puppies she had.

There were some matings carried out on her Consecutive Seasons.

Look at the Number of Puppies she had , I sure have a Word for the Treatment she got.

Now we are being told this to save the Cavalier Breed .

These Figures have come from the Kennel Club's Breed Supplements.

Bet(Hargreaves)

Karlin
31st January 2010, 07:19 PM
Poor Wee Soul !!!!! She Sure helped with the War Effort!!!


:lol:

Even though yes, it is awful, isn't it? All those litters, many of them quite large. :(

MARK MARSHALL
31st January 2010, 08:19 PM
Seems that the first 5 litters were all back to back at 8 month cycles.

Why was I so horrified that a bitch in recent times was mated back to back on 3 occasions - all via a CS !

Seems that the KC still condone such behaviour.

Freckles had another litter dated 23/8/44 - please see CC thread.

They suggest that the Father of 1/11/39 was Flash Grenedier ?

Mark Marshall.

Oreo
31st January 2010, 09:12 PM
Mark it is interesting, as I just read a list of dogs on the other site with a "puzzle" type challenge about what they have in common - noting it (the why) has to do with their appearance "(Why they have been doing it is only apparent if you know the dogs by sight)."

Well, nothing to do with appearance, because I have no inclination towards noting those things past some basic recognition, but the first thing I noticed is that the vast majority of the dogs listed were from half sibling pairings. Pageant of Homerbrent, b. in 1987, in fact, shares three great grandsires (and as well both great grandmothers are doubled up on), just as Armourer of Ttiweh did in the 50s.

I also laughed out loud when I read this assumption worded in the form of a question.

"a. Would you agree that phenotype was principally responsible for your attraction to the breed?"

Although it was aimed at Mark, I thought, excuse me, but that is assuming a lot, considering the long ears and shorter boxy muzzle of the Cavalier had it struck off my list as a breed to own for years. I'm sure others have been won over by temperament in this breed.

I do live where there are very few purebred dogs . . . about 1 in 10.

So I'm going to ask, is this "choosing by phenotype" more a thing that goes on where purebreds abound?

I would think that what pet owners appreciate most in a pet is temperament and good health, far, far above exact predictability of phenotype. I would think that GREAT appreciation would be given to breeders who strove for preserving health in a full breed, which takes looking far forward, and also great health in their own breedings, far and above all other considerations.

Oreo

sins
31st January 2010, 09:39 PM
Just had a look a while ago.Fascinating puzzle but not sure what the answer is...
Judyland Beautiful had two different Lymrey grandsires, reflection and scandal which bucks the trend of the half sibling pairings..
Good challenge though,although probably best conducted between the two lads while holding up a bar after downing about 12 pints.
Sins

Oreo
31st January 2010, 09:58 PM
The half sibling pairings are just notable. As those of us on this side of the Atlantic can't know dogs by sight, the 'why' of the puzzle can't be done.

Of the 15 dogs listed, 13 are from half sibling pairings. The other two - Judyland Beautiful and Peakdowns Fantism - paired up grandfathers that were full siblings to each other.

Oreo

MARK MARSHALL
31st January 2010, 10:00 PM
Sins,

You are so right.

I shall invite Gorgon down to Devon for a wee quart of Devon cider !

Being from up North he will think it's tame but many a Geordie found out otherwise. (CID Course, Leeds 1986 !)

Mark Marshall.

MARK MARSHALL
31st January 2010, 10:18 PM
Post number #91 by Dennis shows a wonderful picture of the Defontenay Dogs.

Number two from left is Banjo the Father of so many puppies and who sired so many litters of Freckles !

She is the last on the right, keeping away from Banjo. She has possibly had enough of him.

Sadly out of the five, she does look knackered - but perhaps we know why ?

Who can see which breeds from the shape of the heads ?

Mark Marshall.

sins
31st January 2010, 10:19 PM
Devon Cider? Dear God NO!
Many years ago a poor little girl only used to Tipperary spring water discovered Devon Cider in 1987 while learning all about veterinary diagnostics.
Still not recovered fully and probably never will.
Sinsicon_blshing

MARK MARSHALL
31st January 2010, 11:12 PM
QUOTE FROM CC " Would you agree that phenotype was principally responsible for your attraction to the breed?"

QUOTE OREO "So I'm going to ask, is this "choosing by phenotype" more a thing that goes on where purebreds abound?

I would think that what pet owners appreciate most in a pet is temperament and good health, far, far above exact predictability of phenotype. I would think that GREAT appreciation would be given to breeders who strove for preserving health in a full breed, which takes looking far forward, and also great health in their own breedings, far and above all other considerations.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A very good question and one I can answer with ease.

I first met Cavaliers via my kennels when three girls came in from a family. They were the most unfit dogs and could hardly walk being so overweight.

However I loved their big round eyes and willingness to please with wagging tails. Therefore I got them onto grass each day and enjoyed their company.

Months later I was told of two who were not wanted and following a phone call went and bought them unseen. They were both Tri girls and are with us now. One is the Grandmother of my present pups and still going strong.

In between, we started to show for fun - just to see if we liked it ?

Quickly you see many other Cavaliers that win and have to conceed that whats on your lead needs to improve. There is no real point in paying a lot of money to enter shows, knowing the probable outcome.

This is when one changes. You suddenly start viewing Cavalers with a critical eye and look for what Judges tend to go for. Now I cannot look at a Cavalier without silently going through the breed standard and putting ticks or crosses in boxes.

In the past I would go for the runt or the one with a funny face or strange markings - and love was never an issue. Because I didnt look at any dog to find fault.

This in my mind is the negative side of Showing but par for the course may be ?

When Breeding pups, the resultant style is parmount for showing but overall second to health issues. I would rather have 4 healthy pups and no show puppy than 1 show pup and 3 puppies with issues.

Mark Marshall.

Karlin
1st February 2010, 12:21 AM
She is the last on the right, keeping away from Banjo. She has possibly had enough of him.

:rotfl:

I'd say so.

On phenotype: I would say 99% of puppy buyers actually would not know a show quality dog or typey dog if they saw one. Some might recognise a dog WAY off breed standard, eg with a long nose, but other than that it takes a long time to learn what is considered good or bad about any given cavalier in terms of appearance, movement etc.

I have seen many, many people get a cavalier and believe it is show quality (duped by some BYB or broker) or worth breeding because it is 'so beautiful' and must therefore be show quality -- when the dogs are absolute backyard breeder/puppy farm type dogs. But I understand the sentiments of the owners because that one dog is absolutely beautiful in the owner's eyes and they are right. Probably 75% of my rescue dogs are not great breed examples but I can tell you they are cherished more than some of the dogs I've seen or been told about outside in show breeder kennels.

I am sure there can be far greater convergence of type and health. But type should match some health standards as well, and type varies over time, as old pictures of any breed shows -- what is desireable can change a lot from generation to generation.

When I got Jaspar he was the most perfect cavalier specimen on the planet, and remains so for me. :lotsaluv: I can still remember the shock I felt when his breeder told me, when I went to collect Leo, that Jaspar hadn't had a great head as a puppy and still didn't but it was a bit better now... :eek: Whereas Leo was considered the much better dog, and a daughter was considering showing him. That got me interested in just what constituted a show quality dog, and sure reminded me that though everyone will tell you what a beautiful dog you have, this is not the same as having a beautiful show quality dog.

The personality is indeed what sells you and in several years of doing rescue now, I can say that no matter what the cavalier looks like, the personality is very consistent, and special.

When my parents had Lucy they left her in to the kennels once when they were away for a week, and when they went to collect her she was lying in a dog bed behind the (gated) counter with the kennel owner. Turns out he took her home each night too. They have a way of winning people over... but then I don;t have to explain that to anyone here. :)

Bet
1st February 2010, 10:29 AM
If it's OK with you Folks, could I mention Freckles of Ttiweh again.

When I first found out about Her when looking at the Breed Supplements ,I have some-times wondered did her wee Body give out after all those Consecutive Seasons from being Mated .

I have never found out any-other Mention of Her.

We are often told about how there is much to thank the Cavalier Breeders in the War Years for keeping the Cavalier Breed going.

I'm going to be finding out about this , how many Cavalier Bitches were really around at that time, was Poor Wee Freckles just being made use of.

Bet(Hargreaves)

MARK MARSHALL
1st February 2010, 11:03 AM
Bet,

during the much research and comments about this girl, it was said on CC that during this time period, many many puppies failed to make it for health reasons or were discarded for phenotype or other reasons.

Also, it seems that they wanted more and more puppies to be registered so that the popularity of Cavaliers, could be evidenced I suppose.

As there seems to be little or no evidence of her (39 or so) progeny could it possibly be that FALSE litters were created and recorded with the KC to facilitate the establishing of the Breed ?

Just a thought for you to ponder with ?

Thank you,

Mark.

Kate H
1st February 2010, 11:29 AM
I sometimes think Cavalier breeders are trying to do the impossible producing a Toy Spaniel - it really is a contradiction in terms, and in practice Cavaliers tend to fall into one category or the other, according to fashion. The early dogs were definitely spaniels! Modern show dogs tend to be toys - smaller in size but also lighter in bone, silkier in coat, lacking in muscle. My Oliver did moderately well at show in his youth, but is a very unfashionable type - solid bone (and teeth and nails - his mum obviously produced plenty of calcium!), good muscle, a chunky dog - just within the acceptable height range for show, but well over 18lb because of all that bone and muscle.

Perhaps the best thing healthwise for Cavaliers would be to reclassify them as Spaniels and remove them from the Toy group - they could remain the smallest breed of spaniel (instead of the largest Toy breed) but the psychological change of attitude towards them could be enormous - potential working dogs rather than ethereal couch potatos! And I do have a friend who has trained one of her Cavaliers to be a very efficient gundog.

Kate, Oliver (who would love to be a gundog!) and Aled (who would not like guns!)

Karlin
1st February 2010, 11:50 AM
Really interesting post, Kate. There seems to be a bit of a split with show dogs -- in Ireland I've seen some very small -- ridiculously small and fragile -- dogs competing at the national show; meanwhile, some of the show breeders I know have fairly large solid dogs, all coming in at the top of the breed standard or over, and they like a solid type of dog. I have seen quite a few breeder debates in the past about where CKCS belong in the dog groupings -- whether they should be moved from toys. I would agree with your idea at this point -- they are the largest in the toy group anyway, aren't they? If people want a smaller spaniel type there are several breeds with spaniel heritage in the toys. I know there's a general feeling amongst some researchers that the small size has a link to the health issues and moving up the chain slightly could be good for the breed on several fronts.

Jaspar is still in breed standard at about 17lbs but is slightly longer legged and very muscular and fit. The difference between him, as a working dog, and the others is quite noticeable. The others have fun doing a kind of mini-agility, but Jaspar is definitely a working dog and his build certainly enables him to do things, and at speed. I've been told several times by serious agility competitors that he's a great working dog and should be competing -- but for me there aren't enough hours in the day... :). Incidentally he is also a clear-scanned dog, remaining absolutely clear between his first MRI at 1 and his second at 5.

It certainly seems the breed standard isn't adhered to at the top weight end though anyway, as I've been told few show males would come in at under 18lbs any more. If that is the case then surely the breed standard needs review? As you say if the breed standard and the classification of the breed changed this creates a different environment of expectation and might help nip the tendency of some trash breeders to produce very undersized cavaliers as if this was some ideal, rather than a health risk and sign of poor quality breeding dogs? :( Also might be overall, good for the breed.

Karlin
1st February 2010, 11:52 AM
PS I have NO idea why some posts end up with narrow margins and some are wider but expect these and other bugs -- such as the fact that you are not taken to the last post, after posting -- will be addressed in the next release, which is scheduled for the end of this week....

Bet
1st February 2010, 12:30 PM
Yes Mark,

I have wondered this, about maybe the Litters being False.

Coming from Other Cavalier Bitches who were around at the time.

So if this was the case where does it now leave Geneticists Researching the Cavaliers' Health Problems' Mode of Inheritance.

If they can't depend on the Pedigrees , will this information only come from DNA Research.

Just another thought about the Cocker Spaniel Mating with Cavalier, Crest by Candlelight.B/T

He was born 1-11-1949.

Sire

Crownjem by Candlelight...... Ruby

Dam

Curlylocks by Candlelight ......B/t

Back to the In- Breeding of

Plantation Banjo born 19-4-1938. Dog B/t

His sire

Plantation Robert 's

Sire ....Ranger Bimbo

Rangers Bimbo 's Sire ....Peter of Ttiweh ,

Plantation Robert's

Dam.... Plantation Pixie

Plantation Pixie 's Sire ...was Mark of Ttiweh,the Son of Peter of Ttiweh

Plantation Robert 's Dam

Plantation Twinkles.

Her Sire

Kobba of Korunda

and Dam

Rangers Nicky Picky were Half Brother and Sister ...

Hentzau Buck's Hussar was their Sire

It has been mentioned that Ch Daywell Roger's Pedigree is spread like Confetti in Cavalier Pedigrees .

And we wonder why the Cavalier Breed is in a Mess Health Wise.

ANN'S SON'S Pedigree is in doubt, and maybe the Cavalier Pedigrees could also be in doubt during the War Years.

Finally ,the Cavalier Mentioned by Oreo ,no SM/CM,can be traced back to the Cocker Spaniel/ Cavalier Mating,

This mating took place in the early 1950's , and would have nothing to do with the Alteration of the Cavalier Skulls in the 1930's when the Dome Shape of the Skull of the King Charles Spaniels was altered to get the Flat Shape Skull required for the Cavalier Breed.

Did the Cavaliers' Malformed Bone start then ,but in the Cocker /Cavalier Mating ,because of the Cocker Spaniel there would be no Malformed bone involved.

Could this be why in this mating this Cavalier mentioned has no Malformed Bone.

Bet (Hargreaves)

sins
1st February 2010, 12:42 PM
Could it be possible Bet that Freckles' offspring were found unsuitable for the breeding programme as they didn't have the desired look or perhaps tragically culled during the war years?It's also likely that during the pre vaccination years that canine disease carried off a fair few and they were large litters anyway?
Sins

Bet
1st February 2010, 01:05 PM
Sins ,

All Freckles' Litter Puppies were given names.

I mentioned that I am checking on how many Cavalier Bitches were really around during the War, it's going to be surprising .

Even Cavalier Bitches having Litters at One year Old .

Is this one of the causes why Cavaliers are Unhealthy To-Day. ?

Breeding from them at such a young age, and on Concecutive Seasons.?

It has been claimed recently that the Cavalier World has much to thank the Cavalier Breeders during the War for keeping the Cavalire Breed going.

Just One Question ,WHY did Mrs Pitt see fit to say ,that at that time the Cavalier Breeders were giving no thought to the Future of Our Cavalier
Breed!

Bet(Hargreaves)

sins
1st February 2010, 01:12 PM
I looked on worldpedigrees and there are six Freckles offspring listed.
There are no dates of birth listed for any of the pups or for Freckles herself.It's easy to assume that all six were from the same litter but of course they may not have been.
Estelle de Fonetnay
Eureka de Fontenay
Prince carol De Fontenay
Princess Bettina De Fontenay
Princess celia de Fontenay
Princess Deanna de Fontenay
Can you trace the dates of birth for those Bet?
It may have been that only a handful of her offspring or even one from any litter was bred from.
Sins

Karlin
1st February 2010, 05:50 PM
Sounds like Princess Bianca was also one of her daughters?

I think that kind of intense breeding must have been common in many breeds back then, Bet, maybe especially after the war when so few dogs were around in many kennels. That period seems to have been when a lot of breeds were reconstructed after almost disappearing over the two world wars.

Certainly the dogs seem to have been viewed more like livestock and many must have lived pretty dire lives especially when there were large numbers kept -- just breeding machines and a life in kennels. I was thinking about this after watching the Horizon programme on dogs recently where they showed the current Russian work on domesticating foxes and the poor things spend their lives in wire/box kennels...

Bet
1st February 2010, 06:33 PM
Iv'e been back to the Kennel Club Breed Supplements this after-noon.

What I found out was ,that between 1940- 1943,

There were 130 Bitches.

What was noticeable was that were a numberof Litters from Bitches who had consecutive Seasons.

Bet (Hargreaves)

HollyDolly
1st February 2010, 07:09 PM
I would be cautious of trusting what you read on world pedigrees, I looked up a pedigree of one of my dogs from years ago and discovered major mistakes



Nanette

sins
1st February 2010, 07:15 PM
That's true Nanette,
That's why Bet is dusting off her old BRS collection:)
Of all the howlers on worldpedigrees,this is my favourite....

http://www.worldpedigrees.com/pp_pedigree.aspx?id=49786

Sins

Karlin
1st February 2010, 07:34 PM
The direct link won't work (even when logged in), Sins -- because it is a database application I presume?

sins
1st February 2010, 07:35 PM
Drat, look up Homerbrent Wanda ...
Sins

*Pauline*
1st February 2010, 07:36 PM
Sign in first then try the link. I always forget my user name when making fascinating discoveries on that site. A brother and sister mating was the last thing I found :eek:

Bet
1st February 2010, 08:03 PM
If it's OK here is the List of Freckles of Ttiweh's Names in her Litters

Freckles was born

10-10-1937 .She was a Blenheim..

Her Sire

Peter of Ttiweh born 15-7-1928 He was a Ruby

Her Dam

Clarissa of Ttiweh....born..11-9-1932.....She was a Tri.

Her Litters to

Plantation Banjo


1 November 1939.

Prince Angus de Fontenay B/T

Princesse Ariette de Fontenay B/T

Prince Alex. Tri.

Princesse Annabella de Fontenay..Tri


13 July 1940

Princesse Bettina de Fontenay ,B/T

Princesse Belle de Fontenay..Blenheim

Prince Boris de Fontenay..Blenheim

Prince Barri de Fontenay..Ruby

Princesse Berril de Fontenay..Ruby

Princesse Bianca de Fontenay...Ruby


23- March -1941.

Prince Carlos de Fontenay

Prince Carol de Fontenay

Prince Cesar de Fontenay

Princesse Caprice de Fontenay

Princesse Caroline de Fontenay

Princesse Cecile de Fontenay

There were no Colours given for these Cavaliers


19- November- 1941

Prince Chilko de Fontenay

Princesse Celia de Fontenay

Prince Charmy de Fontenay

Princesse Cheri de Fontenay

Princesse Cleo de Fontenay

Prince Conrad de Fontenay

Prince Christian de Fontenay

No Colours given


23-July -1942

Prince Donald de Fontenay

Prince Douglas of Fontenay

Princesse Dariel de Fontenay

Princesse Deanna de Fontenay

Princesse Derna de Fontenay Still no Colours


22- March -1943

Edwina de Fontenay Blenheim

Eddy de Fontenay B/T


Etna de Fontenay..B/T

Edwin de Fontenay..Ruby or Red

Elmina de Fontenay Ruby or Red

Endor de Fontenay..Tri

Estelle de Fontenay..Tri


12 December 1943.Think I gave a wrong date for this Litter.Should be '43 not '42

Ewart de Fontenay ..B/T

Edmonda de Fontenay ..Blenheim

Elgina de Fontenay ...Tri

Eltera de Fontenay....Tri

Eurika de Fontenay ...Tri


There were some Plantation Banjo matings to his Daughters in this List.


Bet (Hargreaves)

Bet
1st February 2010, 08:14 PM
I vowed I would never be drawn into another Argument, but I just have to respond to this accusation of Spreading Doom and Gloom about the Early Cavalier Pedigrees.

These are Facts about the In-breeding that was carried out in our Cavalier Breed in the Early Days not so long ago.

Are our Cavaliers now paying the Price because of this with the Health Problems now Afflicting many of them. ?

These Facts cannot be covered up , as some would wish to happen.

Bet (Hargreaves)

sins
1st February 2010, 09:55 PM
Thanks for taking the time to put that together Bet.
It's interesting too to see the colours of the early litters.
It appears that a bitch was kept from each litter (male from the 1941 litter).I guess there wasn't the luxury of keeping more during tough times.
Sins

Karlin
1st February 2010, 10:04 PM
Pauline, I was logged in, still wouldn't work. I think each search is unique to that session.

Thanks for the info on the litters, Bet; really interesting. What a set of names though! I cannot imagine having dogs named Donald, Elgina. Elmina and Ewart though. :eek:

Certainly some of that early inbreeding must be some of the source of today's problems but an equal or greater contribution is likely choices made later on that set some of the problem genes into aspic -- maybe that would have been different had Amice Pitt's suggestion out outcrossing been heeded nearly 50 years ago. The pedigree work that was done using your collection indicates that many, perhaps most of the once potentially really good (for SM), more isolated lines are now gone or have been bred back to share the common genes now, so that it is far harder to find the elusive clear/clear dogs. EBVs will be so important to help the situation and gBVs even more so.

Karlin
1st February 2010, 10:12 PM
Ah, I see what you mean Sins; elderly mum syndrome! :lol: You are obviously skeptical about a 29 year old mother.... :cool:

sins
1st February 2010, 10:24 PM
Yep,happily it's all easily explained....two bitches with the same name from same breeder,born decades apart.
Database must have recognised the data on the pre existing bitch,thus giving the unlikely pairing.The other bitch was three:D..
Sins

Kate H
1st February 2010, 10:30 PM
Someone asked whether any of Freckles offspring were used in breeding. Looking at Ruth Smith's fascinating CD, 'CKCS of the Past', which has lots of photos of Cavaliers betwen 1936 and 1970 and pedigrees of all the dogs mentioned, Princess Celia appears in the pedigree of Pargeter Athos (mated back to her father Plantation Banjo!) and Estelle de Fontenay was grandmother of Ch Amanda Lou of Ttiweh. But because so few people were showing before the war and there were so few classes for Cavaliers, most puppies got sold as pets.

The thing that struck me most in the early photos was how tall the Cavaliers were - very long legs. It's not until the 1950s that they start getting smaller and a lot of that is shorter legs - which nowadays occasionally go to extremes: a six month old puppy shouldn't have neat legs in proportion to its body, it should still be a bit leggy; and I have seen show black and tans with long coats who are so low to the ground they look like dachsunds!

Kate, Oliver and Aled

Karlin
1st February 2010, 10:46 PM
I quoted a little bit about Celia from Bruce Field, who had noted that father to daughter mating, as well as a sibling mating and some others. :eek:

I know what you mean about the B&Ts that look like dachshunds. One of the really small cavaliers that I saw at the Irish national show a few years ago was like that -- I was standing with a breeder who was quite annoyed that breeders were aiming for such dogs and that it was even allowed in as it was undersized already. Tansy, the little rescue B&T that I have now, is also quite small and somewhat short-legged. As her coat has gotten longer I sometimes think she looks like a long legged dachshund from a distance if you don't see the shape of her head! :lol: But she is pretty too - so she gets away with it. :)

Brian M
1st February 2010, 10:58 PM
Hi Karlin

How is Your almost my Tansy comapared pic wise to tose of lily who is quite long but slight in build and weighs 6.60 kilo , in the pics just posted

Tks
brian

Bet
2nd February 2010, 11:18 AM
Karlin.

Can I just say I am so grateful to you for allowing me letting the Cavalier World know how In-Bred our Cavalier Breed has been.

It is only really a new Breed ,originated about 70 years or so ago, whereas other Breeds have been on the go for far ,far longer.

The other Breeds would start just like the Cavalier Breed,with just a few Dogs, but they were slower in getting going and took a lot longer .so did'nt lose their Genetic Diversity.

The Cavalier Breed was so rushed at their start ,in the 30's ,and then the War came so soon at that time to complicate their In-Breeding ,that I don't know , but maybe they had much of their Genetic Diversity lost.

Karlin is so right when she says that the only hope the Cavalier Breed has of any Future is through EBV Scheme.

If this is not grasped by all Cavalier Breeders , then Cavaliers are finished.

Some Folk can Huff and Puff all they want ,but these are Facts that I have given about the Beginning of our Cavalier Breed, .

They cannot be altered. ...nor be disbelieved.

Our Cavaliers are different from others Breeds

Bet( Hargreaves)

MARK MARSHALL
2nd February 2010, 01:30 PM
Bet,

We must be careful to not totally alienate ouselves from ALL breeders because the hugh majority are dedicated to their dogs but not always as perhaps you, I and others might want. 2010 is a whole New World linked to the WWW. Everybody is more aware today and this can be detrimental if not controlled.

Of course Cavaliers were INBREED in the beginning and some health issues of today must stem from their breeding ethos.

However, It must be remembered that we Humans have treated our 'Mothers' as breeding machines over the years - a point that was wisely pointed out on 'CC' by a senior owl !

Even personalities that I am at variance with, are not BAD people ( nasties maybe) but they do believe in a pastime, with great passion and are now on the change. Slowly but surely.

It's a bit like a Police Officer going to a home and telling a parent that their Child has been arrested for a criminal offence. The first reaction is invariable disbelief and denial without even hearing the evidence. Some react verbally and some even physically. But later, if the evidence is good and reliable - an admission of the facts must be made and life goes on. Granted some will appeal and appeal, even to the highest Courts but the end result is the same. Something happened, it was wrong and perhaps not intentionally, someone says so and I repeat, life goes on, with of course reflection.

This is what is happening with Cavaliers, some get it straight away, some later, some tomorrow and the last few dinasours will go to their graves still kicking and screaming.

What is so very important is that we ALL, being the Custodians of the Breed work together and do today what is necessary for the future breeders,Pet owners and Showers of tomorrow.

I would hate to think that my bashing of some today, leads to the downfall of our beloved Cavaliers.

The Dogs are paramount NOT you, me or some others who have more to say.

Mark Marshall.

PS - what can be a shame is that some of the wisest, do stay silent, when by sharing their thoughts openly - many would take note and do something ?

Bet
2nd February 2010, 03:30 PM
My aim was to make the Lovers of our Cavalier Breed have a bit of History about the Beginnings of Cavaliers ,probably many won't have known about it.

As some who know me will have known that for years Cavalier History has been a great Interest of Mine.

I was so proud to have been asked to do the Pedigrees for the Display orginized by Mr G .Jupp for the Cavalier Championship Show a few years ago.

For a Cavalier Pet Owner ,I felt this was such a Privilage.

I know that I get Jeered at by some Cavalier Breeders ,but I just don't bother any-more.

Bet(Hargreaves)

Marjorie
2nd February 2010, 04:56 PM
I don't believe any breeder has worked to intentionally harm the breed. I also believe that so much more is gained by patience, understanding, education and compassion. Trying to evoke change through shaming is very negative and never works, it just alienates people and drives the problem underground.

MARK MARSHALL
2nd February 2010, 05:20 PM
QUOTE = I don't believe any breeder has worked to intentionally harm the breed. I also believe that so much more is gained by patience, understanding, education and compassion. Trying to evoke change through shaming is very negative and never works, it just alienates people and drives the problem undergroud.

REPLY = Of course some will bash for ever and some will go underground because that's their nature ?

So It's a bit like Judging in some sports. Knock off the highest and lowest marks and go with what's in between.

However, we do need a new beginning and someone or a collective body - needs to provide that catalyst ?

Mark Marshall.

Marjorie
2nd February 2010, 05:37 PM
For the sake of the breed I sure hope that happens soon.

Karlin
2nd February 2010, 06:08 PM
Marjorie, I wish what you say were the case but it is not. Sadly there is solid proof (and many of us have it in paper and electronic form) that some have intentionally hurt the breed - by hiding health information they had, or which they discovered later, that meant descendents should not be bred from. Some have bred knowing they have ill dogs (medicating is handy for keeping this hidden in the show ring... but some don't even bother there and others have been quick to use those dogs in breeding programmes anyway as they can then list the CH in pedigrees - shame about the truncated life of pain ahead for many of the offspring). Some publicly say to do one thing, yet a quick check of pedigrees shows there are matings breeders know would not be acceptable in this day and age, and widespread indifference to the MVD protocol (the latter is simply fact - any basic check of puppy registers and pedigrees online proves this). Publicly, some advise buyers should only ever remotely consider breeders who strictly adhere to the MVD procol - which has been known for well over a decade -- but privately try to get people to buy puppies from acquaintances where no health testing is done and the dogs are underage. And those are club breeders 'of repute' and well known affixes. Many are or have been committee members and could have used their influence for the good of the breed.

Naming and shaming is actually a very effective tool, and perhaps the most effective -- in any area of life, most of the time fundamental and needed change has ONLY happened because of brave whistleblowers who name and shame and then bear the brunt of the fallout, though later they are inevitably acknowledged to have been right. Naming and shaming on cavalier breed health issues via Pedigree Dogs exposed has created the most change ever seen in public awareness about and root and branch rethink of breed health problems, including more change in 18 months from the KC in the UK than has been seen in decades. If further proof is needed, the Cavalier Club's own chairwoman posted on the front page of the UK Club's website her own disgust with the continued practice of ignoring health advice and protocols and in some cases, deliberately choosing to flout those protocols and knowingly breed health compromised cavaliers.:


"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. This weekend was proof, if proof is needed, that there is no point in deluding myself, or others, that self-regulation is possible.” "
-- Mrs. Lesley Jupp, Chairman, 24 March 2009

Those are HER words, and she is widely known as a quiet and committed cavalier breeder, very supportive of the club and breeders. Note she states MANY not SOME as well.

There is a long history going on here - it might be useful to search for threads relating to Pedigree Dogs Exposed or PDE here to get a flavour of what has happened and what has been exposed.

Marjorie
2nd February 2010, 06:48 PM
Sorry Karlin, but I still attest that energy put into education is better than shaming. I'm not saying what some breeders have done is right and that they should not be held accountable, but shame is a very negative trap that prevents a way forward. Was it conscious intention to harm the breed? For the most part I suspect not, but perhaps more ignorance and greed in runing their own agenda.

I'm just saying that in my opinion so much energy spent in negative blame takes valuable energy away from the work that needs to be done. It's better to try and have people willingly engaged in participation than trying to beat them into submission...kinda like positive dog training.

Bet
2nd February 2010, 07:18 PM
Can I say Karlin is so right in what she has Posted.

I have mentioned this before ,and here goes again ,that 20 years ago Dr B. Cattanach, Geneticist, and Bruce Field, the UK.CKCS CLUB. Health Representative, who were trying to help the CKCS CLUB get answers to the MVD Problem ,had to walk away in disgust at the abuse they were receiving from some Cavalier Breeders.

This is never mentioned, by the Vociferous Few.

This is why the Pedigree Dogs Exposed TV Program was a God Send to our Cavaliers in High -lighting the Cavaliers SM Problem to the Public.

It is us folk who keep talking about the Cavaliers' Health Problems, who are to Blame,according to some Cavalier Folk, not some of the Cavalier Breeders who still refuse to accept the Cavaliers have two Serious Health Conditions.SM and MVD.

What is it with some of the Cavalier Breeders' Problem, Loss of Money, will their Egos suffer if they don't win at Cavalier Shows , why don't they want the Cavaliers' Health Problems discussed .?

Back to the History of our Cavalier Breed .

The Mention of Poor Wee Freckles of Ttiweh has even upset some.

The only thing I know ,that the Lovers of the Cavalier History ,will always remember the Name of Freckles having had 7 Litters, some on Consecutive Seasons, to the Same Cavalier, Plantation Banjo, and that from some of those Litters ,he was mated to his Daughters ,all this information can be found in the Kennel Club Breed Supplements.

This information cannot be hidden away, it is a Fact.

Bet(Hargreaves)

EddyAnne
2nd February 2010, 08:04 PM
This information cannot be hidden away, it is a Fact.

Bet I really don't know about Freckles but about old pedigrees I sometimes wonder what is fact as maybe old pedigree records were not exactly impeccable. Here is an interesting article about "King Charles" and Cavalier old pedigree records, interestingly I noted the following comments that I put together and include below. The article is at this address for those who want to read it.
http://members.wideband.net.au/safcav/1A/interbreeding.pdf

The older Records were not exactly impeccable; the precomputer area showed a lot of mistakes. Furthermore there were mistakes in colour (Black & Tans born from two Blenheim parents), missing colours, switched sexes, dates of birth (littermates whelped with intervals of one or two months); the most frustrating part were the missing dogs; dogs that were listed to be transferred from one owner to the other. There was the problem of re-naming; some dogs that were transferred to a new owner received a completely new name; for example I had three males in my DB: Marmaduke of Thatchend, Marmaduke of Lavenderway and Vandyke of Oldrowley; each of them had registered offspring; going through the records I found out that these three dogs were in fact 1 dog; Marmaduke of Thatchend. I made a long list of errors and sent it to the Kennelclub; they admitted there were mistakes but were not prepared to look into the archives.
.

Margaret C
3rd February 2010, 12:25 AM
The information being shared on this thread is really fascinating

Karlin
3rd February 2010, 01:58 AM
Marjorie, sadly several decades of trying to work through 'education' and 'motivation' has done diddly-squat for the breed which has a lifespan many years shorter than it should be already from MVD (se most breed encyclopedias which point this out) and which now also faces SM. As the cardiologist for the UK CKCS Cub stated last year, in 18 years despite 'education' there has been absolutely NO improvement in the MVD statistics for UK *club* cavaliers. Note, not puppy farmer cavaliers, but club member cavaliers. This despite a very clear outline of what would help: cardiologist testing and following the MVD protocol.

But as I said, don't take my word for the *deliberate* use of affected dogs even by 'many' of those who health test -- the CKCS Club chairwoman made this statement herself and posted it to the front page of the cavalier club in what was obviously extreme frustration. No one would know better the realities of what breeders say they do and what they actually do. It is not accidental breeding, or ignorance - it is deliberate decision taking by people who definitely know exactly what they are doing, and happens in every country.

I would love to think that by using positive training methods and holding out the reward of healthier cavalier (surely that alone should be motivation enough?), breeders would be motivated to do more. But the facts over nearly two decades on MVD alone - a well identified, highly publicised problem highlighted by most national clubs (except of course Ireland and its woeful health record) demonstrate that unless you legislate for the problem, nothing changes. But again, don't take my word for it -- the fact that two public committees were set up to examine the problems, and the club chairwomen highlighted the issue, and the fact that the KC has had to scramble to show they are doing something is evidence enough.

But I do welcome you to try and persuade in a positive way, all those breeders to do something that makes a difference. Why not start by researching the Canadian club statistics on these issues? The SM genome research is taking place in Montreal -- how many Canadian breeders are supporting it? To my knowledge most of the funding for scanning some Canadian dogs for this research has come from a Canadian pet owner with SM-affected dogs, Sandy Smith (of For the Love of Ollie). Any ideas on how to encourage Canadian breeders to follow the MVD protocol, get involved with MVD and SM research? The dogs need all the help they can get and any more work on the ground to change minds has to be encouraged, in whatever form. Many have struggled for years to persuade and gotten nowhere, and know the reality -- scratching dogs in the show ring that all see and judges award anyway; dogs bred at 9 months and 1 year and 18 months, outside the MVD protocol, dogs with dire MRI scans bred anyway because they are winning in the show ring and make a nice income from stud fees, people defending the indefensible, and always, at the end of the day, dogs suffering from this appalling self-interest, and sad families left spending thousands to address SM (average cost of surgery: $4500 before you get into lifetime medications, $1000-2000 for an MRI) and MVD in their pets (typical monthly cost once a dog is on vetmedin and other drugs - $50-70 a month). Some of the more vociferous and defensive breeders know full well they are the ones who do not even answer the letters from their puppy buyers who ended up with very ill dogs. No one blames the breeders who do their best and end up with problems and are fully supportive of their pet buyers who end up with sick dogs. It is the people who willfully do nothing - the 'many' breeders mentioned by the CKCS Club chair -- who deserve no sympathy. They are no better than the worst of puppy farmers.

Bet
3rd February 2010, 10:44 AM
Doing a wee bit more checking up on the Kennel Club Breed Supplements.

EddyAnne ,I don't know whether you have Breed Supplements in Australia.

Here in Britain we have ,this is all we Lovers of Cavalier History have to go on .

I have never used information from Cavalier Pedigrees ,always from the Breed Supplements .In fact this is where Dr S Blott is getting her EBV Information from. I think though only back to 1980.

I wonder if we have been led astray about the mention of

Judy of Ttiweh being one of the 3 Cavaliers used to keep the Cavalier Breed going during the 2nd World War.

She was born 16-4-1933,she was a Ruby.

Anyway as I mentioned ,there were 130 Cavalier Bitches producing Litters from 1940-1943.

I will find out how many were involved 44' -46'


If I could say how upset I have been made by a Post I have just read on the Chat Forum this Morning, I really do hope it's not what I think it means.

If I am right ,thank Good-ness I Resigned from that Forum ,the Reason I gave the Administrators was ,that I had no wish to be Associated with the type of Folk who were on it.

If I am wrong in the meaning I have taken from the Post ,then I Apologize, if have taken the Innuendo in the Post rightly ,then some folk should be ashamed of themselves.

Bet(Hargreaves)

MARK MARSHALL
3rd February 2010, 12:04 PM
Bet,

When I supervised others. On practically a daily basis, officers would approach me with moans and groans and all manner of perceived problems.

Wheras it was my role to send some further up the 'chain of command', I would tell those with issues - to put it down on paper and also give me their ideas of how their problem could be turned into an OPPORTUNITY ?

Usually I could think of solutions myself but every know and again an individual would put forward a radical idea and one that they got credit for because they owned it ?

So here is my point - Lets have your ideas of how the lovers of Cavaliers can come together and move forward.

We will not ALL agree, because Humans do not work like that. But most want to comply and move forward.

As it is, you can say the same things until you are 100 but will you be effective and help Cavaliers ?

Let's see what you come up with ?

Mark.

Karlin
3rd February 2010, 12:21 PM
I can sure consolidate lots of past recommendations :):

Breeders/clubs could:


identify MRI scans from cavaliers 5 and older to send to researchers along with cheek swab DNA
raise funds to scan further age 5-6+ cavaliers, as many as possible, and collect DNA samples (not a very expensive but very important project)
provide more informative and detailed information on SM & MVD in particular on club sites, some of which have nothing or next to nothing or incorrect information. These sites should be health resources and could have a clearer call for information needed for research
the breed health trusts/groups that exist could coordinate to support or augment rather than argue about duplicating existing research
fundraise to help the completion of the DNA work
establish and use a health registry
coordinate an educational and honest campaign for puppy buyers so people understand what to look for in a good breeder and why paying for puppies from TRULY health focused breeders is so important
no longer accept vet heart tested dogs as being heart screened for breeding purposes
make a clean bill of health part of awarding championships
require microchipping of all puppies and move to establish a DNA register
require that all breeding dogs be microchipped, club or otherwise
require use of EBVs once scheme is in place in the UK
dovetail an EVB programme in all other countries with cavalier breeders: Europe, US, Canada and Australia being the key regions


I am sure others will have other ideas too. 8-)

Bet
3rd February 2010, 12:52 PM
Karlin has put in a Nut-Shell all my Thoughts about what should be being done to save the Cavalier Breed.

I did'nt realize I was moaning about the Suffering of our Cavalier Breed .only Stating a Fact about their Health Problems, which I think other Cavalier Pet Owners don't wish to being discussed on Cavalier Forums.

It was mentioned that other Breeds have Health Problems ,and Pet Owners don't go on and on about them.

The answer to this ,No other Dog Breed other than Cavaliers have an early incidence of MVD or 50 % having a Heart Murmur at 5 Years of Age.

Nor as is now being suggested ,and mentioned by Professor Sir P Bateson in his Report about the SM Problem in Cavaliers ,that their Brains are too Large for their Skulls. That it seems they have a Premature Closing of their Skulls.

Bet(Hargreaves)

Karlin
3rd February 2010, 01:03 PM
Maybe the concerned cavalier breeders don't spend enough time looking at what dog owners say about other breeds? Most dog forums are full of discussions on their particular breed health issues, whether it be higher rates of spinal bifida, cancer, skin problems, eye problems, disk diseases, bladder problems, deafness, hip dysplasia... Also many of these issues do not cost as much to diagnose and treat as something like syringomyelia, and aren't as inevitable in their breed as MVD is for cavaliers... hence the constant highlighting of those two issues for CKCS owners.

Bet
3rd February 2010, 02:11 PM
Here is another thought I have Had

That because of the Aproaching UK CKCS Committee Vaccancies

All Cavalier Candidates wishing to be Nominated for Selection for the CKCS CLUB Committee.

State on their Application Form for All to see ,that they have Current Health Certificates for their Cavalier Breeding Stock , MRI Scans for SM,and MVD.

Bet (Hargreaves)

MARK MARSHALL
3rd February 2010, 02:19 PM
Would it be possible to set up a monthly DRAW - say £1 each, payable yearly in advance.(£12 or perhaps more)

A small prize for the winner(s) and the rest minus costs to go to SM/MVD research.

Not sure about the legal side but maybe an idea to think about.

Should raise thousands over the year ?

Mark.

EddyAnne
3rd February 2010, 04:20 PM
Doing a wee bit more checking up on the Kennel Club Breed Supplements.

EddyAnne ,I don't know whether you have Breed Supplements in Australia.

Here in Britain we have ,this is all we Lovers of Cavalier History have to go on .

I have never used information from Cavalier Pedigrees ,always from the Breed Supplements .In fact this is where Dr S Blott is getting her EBV Information from. I think though only back to 1980.

Bet I'm still learning about things in the UK where maybe you and others can help me. A question, what records might the author of that article be referring too when they mentioned this?

being an english breed, the english registrations would have to be the base of my database. From the Kennelclub website I learned I could take a subscription to the Breedrecords appearing four times a year. That was the first step; the Kennelclub Library told me I could buy copies of older breedrecords in periods of max 10 years in one purchase; that was the next step. Together with the latest entries I worked my way back in 10 year periods; each period, continuing roughly between 100 and 300 King Charles a year, took several months to work through. ....... I made a long list of errors and sent it to the Kennelclub; they admitted there were mistakes but were not prepared to look into the archives. Maybe I should go to London and ask if I may check it myself; I am not at all sure whether they would let me. With todays pricefighting airlinecompanies a trip to London might be cheaper than buying all the Cavalierrecords.
.

HollyDolly
3rd February 2010, 07:21 PM
Bet have sent you a pm.


Nanette

Bet
3rd February 2010, 07:34 PM
Now that the History of the Cavalier Breed has been brought into this Thread,could I mention the Name of Katie Eldred.

I contacted her a number of years ago when I discovered the information that Mrs A, Pitt gave about ANN'S SON being born in 1924, and the Kennel Club Breed Record Supplements giving his D.O.B, as 29-4 -1927, wondering if she could throw any light on this mystery.

She replied back to me saying,,that no , she could'nt help to solve in trying to solve this mystery.

She is I would think the Oldest Living Cavalier Owner to-day.

Here is a bit of her Back-ground that she sent to me at that time,

This is all about the Early Days in our Cavalier Breed.

Katie Eldred's Sister ,Daphne Murray ,of the Crustadele Cavaliers,was involved by Mrs Pitt as her Kennel Maid in 1933.

That as Katie Eldred said ,when she wen't to visit her Sister ,was her introduction to Cavaliers.

She was given a Cavalier Puppy for her 21st Birthday by her Sister, she was called ,Josette , but sadly she died a few weeks later from Distemper.

Happily LINOOGA came into Katie's life shortly afterwards ,but was alwas known as LULU.She was a Blenheim.

Her sire was

Aristide of Ttiweh .Tri.

dam

Selina of Aucott. Blenheim

Linooga was mated to Duke's Son Blenheim,who was the Son of Ann's Son

She was the Mother of

Belinda of Saxham.Blenheim.

Belinda of Saxham won the First Bitch Challenge Certificate offered for the First Cavalier Specialty which was held at Stratford -upon -Avon in August 1946.

Mrs B. Jennings was the Judge ,Belinda also wen't Best in Show.

At that Show, Ch Daywell Roger ,who was owned by Mre Pitt's Daughter ,now Mrs Jane Bowdler ,took the Dog Challenge Certificate

Belinda of Saxham was mated to Bouncer Rupert ( he lived to 12 years of age) ,this Mating priduced

Ch Little Dorrit of Ttiweh, Blenheim

The Cavaliers and King Charles Spaniels were all Registered at first as King Charles Spaniels.

By 1945 after the War had ended ,the Kennel Club agreed to the separation .

The Cavalier Folk at that time did'nt want to lose the name King Charles, since they felt it was the Original Type ,so it was agreed to add the the Word CAVALIER ,in front of King Charles Spaniel

Katie Eldred , goes on to say .Mrs Pitt ,Mme. Harper Trois Fontaines ,and she, spent an Entire day in the Kennel Club at Clarges Street ,London,going through many Years of Enormous King Charles Spaniel Registers ,picking out Dogs that they knew were the Cavalier Type ,or that Sired or produced Cavalier Type Spaniels ,to compile the New Register.

Katie Eldred concludes by saying,all the Cavaliers in the World to-day are descended from that Register.

I was sent this information by Katie , in 2001, and I am sure she won't have minded me sharing it with all you Lovers of our Cavalier's History

Bet (Hargreaves)

Bet
4th February 2010, 10:24 AM
I forgot to mention in my previous Post about Belinda of Saxham.

Katie Eldred has mentioned in an Article ,that Belinda of Saxham never got her Third Challenge Certificate which would have given her the Title of Champion,because she died from a Heart Problem .She would be about 8 years of age.

There were other Cavaliers who died from Heart Problems in the 1950's at 7-8 years of age ,so the Heart Trouble has been in our Cavalier Breed since the Early Days.

Could this be the reason that it's been said that the Heart Problem in Cavaliers is no better than it was 18 years ago.

That because some of those Cavaliers in the 1950's ,known to be suffering from a Heart problem were being used at Stud ,are there now so many Cavalier Carriers of the MVD Gene/Genes around t0-day.

As Professor J.Bell ,Geneticist. at Tufts University, America, recently mentioned, that the only hope for the Cavalier Breed ,is to follow the Breeding Guidelines given by the Researchers into the Cavalier MVD Problem.

Not to Breed from a Cavalier before 2.5 years of age.

That was why I mentioned in reply to Karlin's Post ,thoughts about what could help Cavaliers.

I really do feel for the Forth-coming Election of Committee Members that they should mention on the Form we CKCS Members get to vote for those Folk wishing to be on the Committee,whether they hold a Current Health Certificate for their Cavaliers.

Bet Hargreaves

Bet
4th February 2010, 10:56 AM
Could I mention again ,that due to Tired-Ness I did say on one of my Posts I think it was Sunday ,31-1 10, about Freckles Of Ttiweh being Mated to her Son Plantation Banjo, but within minutes I came on the List and said that I had made a mistake when I reread what I had Posted ,that Plantation Banjo was not her Son.

Sorry Folks ,who are following this Saga ,but much is being made of this on the CC List, if only they would make sure of their facts before contacting Katie Eldred about this.

I am glad to see though, that Katie Eldred has confirmed every-thing else I have mentioned even to the fact that poor Belinda of Saxham had died from a Heart Condition in 1947 , so the Heart Trouble has been in Cavaliers for over 60 years.


I think that is the Problem that should be concerning some of the Vociferous Few on the CC List , not the Mistake I made and immediately corrected

I really do wonder ,now that I am letting Rip ,sorry Karlin, ,!!!

How many ot the Vociferious Few follow the Cavalier Breeding Guidelines and have not Bred a Cavalier before 2,5 years of age.

Bet( Hargreaves)

Karlin
4th February 2010, 12:29 PM
Very interesting, Bet; it is certainly depressing though to know that there were clearly some early onset heart issues fixed so early in the breed - no wonder, with casual breeding, breeding of young dogs and improperly screened dogs, the breed is in the state it is half a century later despite the hard work of some dedicated people.

On the other issues: I believe another older member of the breeder fraternity there made a prominent and rather embarrassing pedigree mistake as well, indicating perhaps less knowledge than originally proclaimed,or (let's be generous!) a similar momentary but unintentional lapse of memory similar to what you experienced, so perhaps as he is associated with a well known kennel, the others should not be throwing stones? :lol: Or if they are, it must only underline his own clumsy mistake and be a bit painful to have his breeder colleagues making the same issue into a big deal -- ouch. I am sure some would be happier if others would let such a petty issue drop.

What still baffles me is how it could have been proclaimed here by a breeder with such certainty that absolutely NO ONE in breeding circles was not full of detailed knowledge about the history of the breed and pedigrees. Yet those conversations elsewhere indicate this wasn't true at all, and many, even those who have been breeding for decades, find the topic interesting and meaningful which must to be learned. Some even perhaps stand to be educated and even corrected from time to time. I would be worried however that such trust in what others 'definitely' know and recall might reveal a serious flaw if breeders generally (as so many clearly do) rely on memory, or assumptions on health and pedigree issues, or what others know or said, when making far-reaching individual breeding decisions.

On the other hand and on a more positive note, I am delighted such august breeders have found they are still open to learning and so many realise they don't know as much as they thought they did -- that means there is still hope that many who currently ignore research work may someday be persuaded that there are serious issues to be tackled in this breed, and that breeding practice must change to reflect this.

However, having come across the so-called 'health' page of a well known breeder also supposedly involved in health issues, which does not once tell readers that an MVD protocol exists and has existed for over a decade, and inexplicably revises ages DOWN so that we have age 2 and 4 for breeding, not 2.5 and 5 (as everywhere else in the world and in the MVD protocol), fudges the issues of MVD and SM by implying they are actually very common (gee -- failed to note that cavaliers have massively 20-times-higher incidence than other purebreds and that while MVD may be a common problem in dogs, that means *elderly* dogs in almost every other breed, not 6 year olds) -- and oddly when giving figures, dismisses SM research populations as 'small' (yet the very trust such folks are part of actually turned down funding proposals for a proper clinical, random sample of older dogs that would satisfy this concern. Funny how some people dismiss current research - or fails to mention the research results they actually funded - yet no one wants to fund the research that they claim they urgently need and want to give a 'true' picture... icon_nwunsure). But then again, when you had a US national club posting information that stated, beyond all belief at this point, that the incidence of SM in cavaliers is less than 0.002% (http://www.cavaliertalk.com/forums/showthread.php?33087-ACKCSC-Claims-Less-Than-0-002-of-CKCSs-Have-SM%21) and only in late 2009 finally publicly acknowledging that MVD is a serious issue in the breed (http://www.cavaliertalk.com/forums/showthread.php?33064-ACKCSC-Finally-Recognizes-MVD-As-A-Health-Problem-in-Cavaliers) -- any tiny incremental movement toward greater enlightenment has to be applauded.

Officially, the bar is already set so low thanks to some individuals and some clubs.

Bet
5th February 2010, 10:45 AM
I think because of this Thread ,we now know how In-Bred our Cavalier Breed has been from the 1930's ,and it was not all due to the War Years.

As Katie Eldred has just mentioned ,she remembers Mrs A. Pitt,the Founder of the Cavalier Breed,saying that she was worried ,after the War ,about how Narrow the Cavalier Gene Pool was .

Katie Eldred has also gone onto say,and made this interesting further Comment.

That the Breeders of Cavalier Breeders at that time being not being Particulary Panicked about the Narrowness of the Cavalier Gene Pool.

Looking back now ,that they Should Have Been she has said.

We also know that there were Cavaliers suffering from Heart Trouble at that time,as Karlin, mentioned , was the Heart Problem Gene fixed at that time because of the In-Breeding being carried out.

I do think that it would have been of such a benefit to the Cavalier Breed ,if the Cavalier Breeders from then on had bothered to understand the In-Bred History of Cavalier Breed ,and unfortunately this attitude seems to be continuing to-day by some Cavalier Breeders.

That with both the Health Problems in Cavaliers of SM and MVD ,the Cavalier Breeders have got to take the time to know about the In-Bred Back-Ground of Cavaliers, because it's such a Young Breed

The Cavalier Breeders have been given Breeding Guidelines by the Researchers, not to Breed a Cavalier before 2.5 years of age.

As the saying goes , the Ball is now the Court of a good number of Cavalier Breeders.

It won't be us Cavalier Pet Owners who , as has been claimed,could finish off the Breed,but those Cavalier Breeders who just will not follow the Breeding Guidelines.

What a Legacy those Breeders could leave for the Cavalier Breed.

Bet(Hargreaves)

Bet
6th February 2010, 04:21 PM
Is there any-body else who thinks that a good number of Cavalier Breeders are to blame for the Plight the Cavalier Breed is in to-day caused by their Health Problems?

For at least 10 years many have ignored the UK CKCS CLUB and Researchers Breeding Guidelines, that as has frequently been mentioned ,the Cavalier MVD Problem is no better than it was 18 years ago.

How can many Cavalier Breeders be giving themselves a pat on the Back when this has happened.?

Also I believe that the 2008 Cavalier Cavalier Points Winners were being used in Breeding Programs before they were 2.5 years of Age.

The Cavalier Breeders have known about the MVD Problem in our Breed for well over 20 years, where is their evidence that they have improved the Health of Cavaliers.

Maybe the Breeders have now got Cavaliers who are a more uniform size for the Show Scene, but we Cavalier Owners are not really bothered about that.

All we want is a Cavalier who could have the chance of a Healthier ,Longer Life.

Not Screaming in Pain from SM, nor having difficulty in Breathing because of MVD.

As Katie Eldred,who must be one of the Oldest Living Cavalier Owners,and was involved in creating the Cavalier Breed in the 1930's -40's, has just said on another Cavalier Forum that the Cavalier Breeders at that time should have been far more concerned about the In-Breeding that was taking place at that time ,which was Narrowing the Cavalier Gene Pool.

This was also said by Mrs A.Pitt ,the Founder of the Cavalier Breed ,at the same time.

It is now known that there were Cavaliers dying from Heart Trouble in the 1940's and 50's , that In-Breeding can Fix a Bad Gene, and in a Dog Breed a Disease can spread through-out the Breed and cause such Big Trouble for the Breed.

Does the Cavalier Breed spring to Mind .

Bet(Hargreaves)

Karlin
6th February 2010, 04:52 PM
I've merged this into the previous thread as it is in the same general topic and don;t think it needs to be restarted again.

I think there are always some breeders who deliberately create problems because they don;t care about anything but short term goals, some that accidentally cause problems because not enough was known at the time when they made breeding choices, some who believe they are doing their best but still make exceptions in this case or that which end up causing or perpetuating problems (too many breeders seems to have their 'just this one little exception' case), and many 'breeders' are people who breed outside the club circles (eg casually, or for the pet market) and make absolutely no effort and continue the problems that were created in most instances due to problems that arose from club breeding and making choices that brought forward potential problems. Then there are people who are really dedicated and work to address issues honestly and forthrightly. There is a mixed bag -- it would be wonderful to see more moving into the latter category.

I think there are many who think they are in the latter category and forget some of the choices they have made and continue to make, because in their own minds they think of themselves as health-focused breeders. It is easy to start to believe what you feel should be true, regardless of whether it is the case or not.

So: of course it is 'breeders' who created problems because they, whether club affiliated or BYB, are the people making the decision to mate dogs and therein lies the source of problems. Certainly 'a good number' caused and continue to cause problems but they come from all walks. That's why the issue is larger than the clubs or the KC and why some, including me, feel the answer has to be bigger than either of those institutions. I am glad there is a greater public awareness now and focus on these issues but at the same time I would emphasise as did Prof Bateson that a large part of the problem also remains with puppy *buyers* who do not buy from health-testing breeders and do not adequately question or ask for proof of breeding practice even when they do go seeking a pup. There isn't a person on this board who shouldn't be well aware of how to find a good breeder and what to ask about but too many accept the word of the breeder that they 'test' (that could mean anything!) or just go for the cheapest/nearest/most quickly available/colour that they want puppy from god knows who.

Buyers need to practice what they preach or they demolish the breed as readily as poor breeding practice. Poor breeders, be they puppy farmers, BYBs or club breeders, continue to exist because WE buy from them. the answer is cutting off the income and things will change. That is still a more effective remedy than legislation!

sins
6th February 2010, 04:54 PM
No Bet,
I don't like the word blame.
Let me ask this question!
Did cavalier breeders do anything differently from other breeders?
If the answer is No,then they're not to blame.
There is a very grave responsibility on the shoulders of cavalier breeders to try and reverse the fortune of the breed.This responsibility is shared by pet owners,the Kennel Club,the BVA and probably many others.
It's not necessary to allocate blame at a sensitive time,it would be more appropriate to educate pet buyers to steer clear of breeders who do not accept or are not aware of the health issues and the tests that clubs are rolling out to aid breeders.
I don't blame anyone for my pet's illness.I underestimated the risk of SM as the true level of the condition had not become apparent.
Webmasters have a responsibility to maintain the most current up to date information regarding cavalier health issues.
looking for someone to blame is of no benefit to the breed.
Sins

Bet
6th February 2010, 05:45 PM
Sins ,you asked me a question,did Cavalier Breeders do any-thing differently from other Breeders.

I will answer your question and also ask the Cavalier Breeders who were around 20 years ago, why did Dr B. Cattanach ,Geneticist ,and B. Field ,the Cavalier Health Represenative of the UK, CKCS CLUB,who were trying to help the CKCS CLUB with the MVD Problem in the Cavalier Breed., walk away in disgust at the abuse they were having to take from some Cavalier Breeders.

If only those Cavalier Breeders had listened to the advice they were being given then, there might have been more Cavaliers over the Past 20 years had a Healthier, Longer Life.

So yes I do blame some Cavalier Breeders for not heeding the warning they were being given about the MVD Problem by those Two Gentlemen and Dr P. Darke, the Cardiologist, at that time who was also warning the Cavalier Breeders about the MVD Problem in Cavaliers.

Is it too late now to try to save the Cavalier Breed. ?

I just dont know, all I know is that there now could be many Carriers in the Cavalier Breed with the MVD Gene/Genes, and as I have mentioned ,Professor J .Bell ,Head of the Genetics Department at Tufts University,America,

His words not Mine. The only chance the Cavalier Breed now has ,is not to Breed from a Cavalier before 2.5 years of Age.

I really do think that ,if Cavalier Buyers know that they could sue the Cavalier Breeder in court , if their Cavalier developes a Health Problem that is known about in Cavaliers, and the Cavalier Breeder has not carried out a Health Test for that condition ,that could help the MVD and SM Problems more than any-thing in our Cavaliers.

Bet(Hargreaves)

cavs r us
6th February 2010, 06:37 PM
So many are wasting so much time and energy arguing about past mistakes.
I understand the phrase “You study history to avoid its mistakes, and you can’t truly know where you are going if you don’t know where you have been “(this last part a bit debatable IMO). However, I see the same arguments on and on and on to the point of ad nauseum.

This blaming of the breed founders is such a waste of time. I like the analogy that…if all the people who are church-goers spent the time they currently spend in church talking about their religion instead actually out doing what their religion tells them to do, then they would be able to make a real difference!

We have no idea what the hardships were like in the first half of the 20th century. Europe was ravaged by wars. Even without the wars, communications were done mostly by letter. Travel was much more difficult and so getting dogs together would have been way more difficult than today. People didn’t have databases to study potential sire’s pedigrees. Those things were held by few, accessible to few and handwritten. Can you imagine trying to do all that we are trying to do today with the communication and travel technology available then?
It is wonderful to study the breed history. We can see where it went right (wonderful tempered, beautiful dogs) and where it went wrong (inherited diseases). It is also very interesting! But arguing about breeding practices of old (# of litters) and whose to blame (what on earth does that solve now?) isn’t fixing anything.

Do you want to sit around blaming your 20-generations-removed grandparents for being cousins and therefore being responsible for your heart disease or rheumatoid arthritis, or do you want to find out how to fix it? I say lets come together and fix it. To those who are not breeding and want to make a difference, then offer your dog’s health records, dna and other helpful information to those who are compiling the databases and doing research and then have some faith that the people who are working on it have the future of the breed in mind.

And for gods sake, don’t do anything that supports the “animals rights” people. They do NOT have the breed’s best interest in mind. In fact, all the fighting is more ammunition for THEIR causes. They LOVE this stuff, and it is fodder for their campaigns. Don’t help them further drive nails into the cavalier (as well as all purebred dogs) coffin.

Marjorie
6th February 2010, 08:20 PM
Couldn't agree more....as I have said many times in the past, the negative blame game only obstructs progress. However, there are those who continually insist on beating a dead horse.

Bet
6th February 2010, 08:44 PM
No it's some of the Cavalier Breeders of to-day who are at fault.

As our UK Chairman of the CKCS Club said on the 24-3-2009, and was quoted as recently on the List as this week by Karlin.

I think this says it all.

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.

Bet(Hargreaves)

Bet
6th February 2010, 08:51 PM
Forgot to say, that yes ,I have been doing some-thing over the years to help with the Cavaliers ' MVD Trouble .

I have collected around 400 Pedigrees of Cavaliers suffering from the Problem and they are now with the Researchers.

Bet(Hargreaves)

Marjorie
6th February 2010, 09:17 PM
Now that's wonderful, a positive step forward!

Karlin
7th February 2010, 02:24 AM
Marjorie, you might find it useful to read some of the past threads on breeding issues to become more familiar with the issue and ongoing problems -- and the background of some of the people discussing these issues.

For example, Bet, who is in her 80s, has undoubtedly the most extensive working knowledge of cavalier pedigrees in the world and is internationally recognised for this. It was her pedigree work that underlies much of the initial work on MVD and inheritance, and that collection of work also remains a critical part of current research, including having been invaluable to SM research and the Canadian genome project (the first indications of inheritance in SM came from studying Bet's collection). You will see she has contributed many articles over the years on the UK club website. You can also probably watch Pedigree Dogs Exposed on YouTube if you missed it when on in Canada. These may provide some additional useful connections and context. :thmbsup:

As for dead horses -- those of us living with, and paying quite a lot of money caring for, SM-affected dogs don't see a dead horse, sadly, but a lot of living, suffering dogs where inaction and deliberate obstruction guarantees more dogs are going to suffer and more families struggle with trying to care for them at a cost that is often prohibitive. Affected dogs are also the growing nightmare for rescue -- forcing those in rescue to have to make very difficult decisions. Diagnosing a single SM dog would wipe out most of what I fundraise in a year, for example, and to what end -- who will adopt them? I kept the one dog I suspected had SM (and she does) but people in rescue cannot keep all of them. A couple of my rescues have been diagnosed since and are fortunately with owners who care deeply about them but I don't know if any of those great owners would have knowingly taken on such dogs. I fully agree with Sins that there is no initial 'blame' for why this breed ended up with this problem, but there are definitely some absolutely appalling, informed, deliberate choices made in breeding today and in the immediate past when people knew the potential result of the choices they were making -- eg affected dogs are used or no proper testing is done -- and until that changes there is no dead horse being beaten, there are critical, living issues and a lot to answer for. This isn't a question of guessing or supposing, it is absolute fact as the breeding record itself shows. The positive steps in breeding need to come from breeders themselves -- not pet owners, though pet owners have been significant donors of money, scans, pedigrees and DNA for research worldwide.

On bringing in 'animal rights' -- there is a major difference between animal welfare and animal rights that I think most if not all recognise, and remaining silent on issues just incase some group that is disliked decides to give their own spin on the issue -- well, that sure would put an end to working for any steps toward better welfare. The same argument could be made to not publicly raise concerns about puppy farming. On the other hand, I don't think anyone could drive more nails into coffins for purebreds than the Kennel Club and some members of the breed clubs as is... :rolleyes: There are many long miles to go there.

The issue isn't and shouldn't be *blame* about what happened 100 or 50 years ago (though there is an ongoing attempt by some to present this history as full of glory rather than some of the shame and worry founding breeder Amice Pitt herself highlights and expresses concern for) -- it is whether people are making any positive effort going forward. The answer is -- not nearly enough. Lots of arguing, lots of bluff, but scant support for research and little actual action on the ground regarding testing and using the results properly, as UK CKCS Club chair Lesley Jupp herself pointed out less than a year ago. This isn't ancient history, it isn't pet owners v breeders -- it is the head of the leading cavalier club in the world noting publicly and loudly that she does not believe her own members do the testing that is needing or refrain from using affected dogs when they do test. It is *today's* ongoing lack of action that affects today's and tomorrow's cavaliers.

If breeders want to take on one single positive issue: why not press the US health trusts to fund that proposed clinical study of 200 randomly selected cavaliers, as this is one of the studies everyone claims to want and believes is badly needed -- but the health trusts are choosing so far NOT to fund it! Or: why not fund 10 cavaliers age 6 or older to be scanned for the DNA research, to help understand onset? This is really, really important information as very few breeders scan dogs older than 3. In the UK, 10 scans could be done for 1000 pounds -- a pretty paltry sum to raise. We have raised more than that just on this board in the past. Surely the clubs could do this? Or both? One is a fast action item, the other a lobby effort; both would be enormously positive and productive for the breed. :)

Bet
7th February 2010, 11:19 AM
Karlin ,thanks for your Comments, Age is just a wee bit wrong ,but I am knocking on,.....!!!!!!

If I could say the Reseachers into MVD, now know about the Early History of our Cavalier Breed and have the Pedigrees of those Cavaliers I sent who died young from Heart Trouble in the 40' s and 50's, .

I recently received word back from the Researchers both here in Britain and the LUPA Researchers, that because of the Cavaliers who suffered from Heart Trouble in those early days ,that there could be many Cavaliers around to-day who are now Carriers of the MVD Gene/Genes.

They are now looking into the aspects of this.

Surely ,many of to-day's Cavalier Breeders can have NO Excuse of Breeding from Cavaliers before they are 2.5 years old.

They have been told by the Experts that this will help to delay the on-set of the MVD Problem.

Why are they Dragging their Feet about this?

Unfortunately SM also comes into this, the Excuse being given by a number of Cavalier Breeders, OH NO ,we won't be MRI Scanning till there is the Evidence and Gene/Genes,etc, found out about the Problem.

Well according to the Bateson Report the Evidence is there for the SM Problem in Cavaliers .

Their Skulls are too Small for their Brains.

That there is a Premature Closing of their Skull ,yet their Brain is Still Growing.

This has also been confirmed by Dr C. Rusbridge and Othes in a Recent Veterinary Paper ,and Dr I. McGonnell.

So why won't they,some are ,but a good number not, MRI Scan their Cavalier Breeding Stock, to discover whether there is SM there or not?

Will it be a case of in 20 or 30 years time ,when there are no Cavaliers around , it will be being said , how I wish we'd listened to the Experts and followed the Breeding Guidelines we had been given by them.

The Researchers know the Cavalier Breed is in a Mess Health Wise, No Glossing Over by some in the Cavalier World will Hide this Fact.

Bet(Hargreaves)

sins
7th February 2010, 03:25 PM
It is *today's* ongoing lack of action that affects today's and tomorrow's cavaliers.

And this is where we move forward from.According to the cavalier health website www.cavalierhealth.co.uk (http://www.cavalierhealth.co.uk)
a health survey was conducted where the conclusions state that approx 30% of respondents scanned.
Conversely this would suggest that 70% of respondents didn't.If you can extrapolate this result to the general population of club breeders then a great many people carry on regardless.
Which comes back to the issue.Can you force compliance?
We all seem to be holding out great hope for the EBV scheme.But again it depends on breeders to make use of it.
There seems to be a divergence of opinion,those who feel breeding is an art and others who feel it is a science.
But for a lot of pet owners here,cavaliers with SM is a fact and we're the ones who live with the burden of a dog with a serious medical condition.I'm astonished that the Kennel Club can allow things to continue as they are,accepting money from puppy farmers who churn out cavaliers,only stipulating Eye testing as a criteria for acceptance to the ABS.
In the meantime we see people signing up to this site,week after week, My dog has SM, what can I do?
Sins

Bet
7th February 2010, 04:49 PM
Sins,Just had a look at the Survey Site you mentioned.

There were 350 Cavalier Folk questioned, 209 said they had not MRI Scanned their Cavaliers ,124 had.

I was at a Seminar about a couple of years ago given by Mr Skerritt here in Scotland, maybe longer.

I could maybe be wrong about his SM figures .

I think he mentioned that he had MRI scanned around 1,000 Cavaliers ,this would be at least about 2.5 years ago.

That 25% were OK but the rest had SM.

Has any-body else any SM Figures from Mr Skerritt's Lectures?

I think those SM figures will be more conclusive than those on the UK Cavalier Survey Site

Bet(Hargreaves)

cavs r us
7th February 2010, 05:41 PM
In the meantime we see people signing up to this site,week after week, My dog has SM, what can I do?
Sins

A truly sad fact. Unfortunately, for many of these people, it is hindsight. They SHOULD have bought from someone who health tests and checked the reputaton of the breeders. Did they do any homework at all other than price of the puppy? Unfortunately, even with health testing, they might wind up in that situation, though the chances should be much less. I say this because puppy buyers should be aware of the researcher's into SM's own cautionary words:
The aim of these recommendations is to reduce the incidence of symptomatic syringomyelia in the breed -- not to create litters of puppies guaranteed not to have SM -- as the chance of producing an affected dog cannot be predicted without knowing the inheritance. (quoted from cavalierhealth.org)
So there again...back to NOT KNOWING. It is scary for breeders, too. These animals are their family members as well (if they are reputable) and they don't want to watch the animals they have bred, raised and loved suffer and die young either.

I concede, there are show breeders who are not doing right by the breed, too. Word gets around, though, and when their lines are producing affected dogs, they don't find much demand for their stud dogs outside their own kennels.

Scanned dogs are still producing affected litters, too, much to the frustration of the breeders scanning them. I do not say this to advocate lax breeding practices, but to illustrate the frustration for those trying to keep the breed alive, prevent further harm and help solve the problem in the midst of this upheaval.

As with heart disease, it can be a frustrating journey for a breeder to remove a dog that developed a murmur at age 2 from their breeding program, only to watch that dog or bitch live into their teens with no further progression of that murmur. And then, there is the heartbreak of breeding a dog who is clear at 5 that then has a murmur by six and dead at 7 or 8. Which dog should have been in the breeding program? Personally, I'd rather have no murmur, but given the two situations, I'd rather have an early, non-progressing murmer.

With SM, MVD, eye problems, hip displaysia and patellar luxation to deal with, how many dogs are left to breed from if you only breed ones who are clear of EVERYTHING? Granted, that is the goal, but not the reality right now. How long until the new health issues would start cropping up due to the bottleneck in the gene pool? Do you work with something like a luxating patella if the dog is excellent everywhere else and try to mate them with a dog with excellent patellas to preserve the good genes and work towards diluting out the bad? (again, it isn't quite that simple...but nothing ever really is) or do you remove him/her as well even though they are from long-lived lines with good hearts? There is so much to consider.

Even Claire Rusbridge cautioned to not just start eliminating dogs based on their scans at this point.
I quote: As the incidence of syringomyelia is so high in the breed there will be severe depletion of the gene pool if only clear dogs are used (i.e. other problems will develop). (quoted from cavalierhealth.org)
I don't say this to advocate lax breeding principles.

Even if all the modes of inheritance are determined for SM (and like MVD which is polygenic, they may be very complex and there may be no way to just "poof"...eliminate it), it will be a long haul to winnow it out of the breed.

Just like buying a car, you expect someone to do their homework. If someone falls prey to the unscrupulous dealer, they can't whine about it if the information was out there and they didn't check into the place they were buying from. Something that is going to be a part of someone's life for many years deserves homework. If someone does their homework then they will not only be armed with what makes a reputable breeder, but they would also have become aware of the health problems that they might very well be taking on by getting a cavalier. If they didn't do their homework, then they bear the responsibility for a shoddy decision and for supporting the problem that needs eliminating.

Reputable breeders will do their part, but the puppy milllers will keep on churning out pups...and uneducated pet buyers will buy these "bargain pups" and then wind up here saying "help". In the meantime, donate to research and provide your own dogs dna (healthy or not) and their records for databases and analysis....and educate others to the problem of millers and shady breeders.

Mindysmom
7th February 2010, 06:01 PM
Thank you for one of the most sensible, well thought out posts I have had the pleasure of reading. All I can say is ditto.

Oreo
7th February 2010, 06:09 PM
Cavs r us, that was an excellent post.b*n*n*

I do want to add another thought, though, and it IS about doing homework. I so much agree that that is one area where a big difference could be made.

While helping a friend look for a Cavalier 5 years ago we stumbled across the news that SM was in the breed. Every sight that mentioned it said it was rare. One sight finally gave a risk as about 0.002%. I remember this very clearly as we got our calculators out and figured out what that meant in odds.

I found out on this forum a few weeks back that the AKC had this same misinformation up (it is now down).

So, for puppy buyers to do their homework they require honest information about the breed from the breeders.

Most people I know are in their 60s. They generally do not use the computer as some of the young'uns do, and aren't about to troll around for hours looking for information. They do a simple search to look where they think the information should be found. This info should be offered when people phone the puppy register where the homework starts. This info should be at the breed club web sites. It should be on the breeders brag sites, if they have them. Purchasers should not be expected to troll the web until they stumble across it.

I do applaud that the ACKCS Club has finally moved forward - a bit - in this area.

And thank you, Rod, for Cavalierhealthorg.

Oreo

Karlin
7th February 2010, 06:24 PM
I concede, there are show breeders who are not doing right by the breed, too. Word gets around, though, and when their lines are producing affected dogs, they don't find much demand for their stud dogs outside their own kennels.


What evidence do you have for believing this? I know your own background, and with all due respect, you would not be in any position to know what decisions breeders are making. I can definitely state this absolutely is NOT true, unfortunately, and that comes directly from breeders on the ground, involved in clubs themselves, not from suspicions or gossip. It is fact. Only the same small circle of health focused, scanning breeders would definitely avoid such dogs. Others knowingly use them and turn a blind eye.


I'm astonished that the Kennel Club can allow things to continue as they are,accepting money from puppy farmers who churn out cavaliers,only stipulating Eye testing as a criteria for acceptance to the ABS.

Yes, that is extraordinary, Sins. The ABS bar is still so low, with little indication of how it would guarantee minimal compliance. Lots of work to do there.


Even Claire Rusbridge cautioned to not just start eliminating dogs based on their scans at this point.
I quote: As the incidence of syringomyelia is so high in the breed there will be severe depletion of the gene pool if only clear dogs are used (i.e. other problems will develop). (quoted from cavalierhealth.org)
I don't say this to advocate lax breeding principles.


Well, no, this is out of context and Clare is saying just the opposite to what you claim. You are taking a footnote that she places after the neurologists' agreed breeding guidelines -- where the whole point of them is that you DO start eliminating dogs based on scans. First off the guidelines mean you would need to remove ANY UNSCANNED DOG from a breeding programme, full stop, as it is an automatic F/do not use. Then you remove all that scan with SM and are symptomatic as determined by a NEUROLOGIST not what the owner thinks they see -- eg are they clinically symptomatic? She is noting that breeders won't to be able to use only A dogs. She says dogs should not be used for breeding if they are symptomatic, and ideally not to use dogs with syrinxes at all. There is evidence that breeding A to D does decrease incidence and starts to produce more and more As over time. Breeders in the Netherlands using the guidelines significantly increased the number of As in all lines within a few generations, which then enables them to avoid using Ds. But according to neurologists, half of breeder dogs are scanning with syrinxes (this has been stated by two breeders on their own forums), so that means to retain genetic diversity, asymptomatic dogs will need to remain in the gene pool. However the older they are bred the better, and I think few breeders would use a dog with a lot or with large syrinxes. A concern is that breeders may miss symptoms, just as pet owners and vets often do, of course, or a dog with lots of syrinxes may appear asymptomatic (I know of such cases and they tend to start to show symptoms by age 3-5), but this is the best approach possible at the moment. More info here (http://www.veterinary-neurologist.co.uk/syringomyelia/docs/breeding%20guidelines.pdf) and here (http://www.veterinary-neurologist.co.uk/part5.htm#52).

A critical issue remains that many club breeders -- most outside of the UK -- don't scan to begin with, and in effect, breed blind for a devastating health issue.

And I really have to question your analogy -- buying a dog is not at all like buying a car. First off, buying a dog from breeders who breed regardless of whether they have affected dogs or whether they do basic testing on their lines is more akin to the car MAKER using shoddy parts and putting poorly built cars out on the road. And even if the analogy is accepted at face value, it is still false: buyers are not expected to research a merchant to avoid being duped or sold poor quality merchandise! The law protects buyers who buy from unscrupulous dealers or manufacturers (you would have all sorts of legal recourse if you bought a faulty vehicle or a dealer didn't meet a whole range of requirements; no one is expected to research and winnow out the bad dealers or suffer the consequences! The merchant/manufacturer can be fined or put out of business on the basis of such lack of responsibility); the law right now does NOT do anything to guarantee that breeders breed in a health-focused way and gives owners very little recourse even if the breeder knowingly uses affected dogs. A change in legislation is what many feel is needed.

PS Hi Suzie... 8)

Karlin
7th February 2010, 10:21 PM
Also you seem to already come to the table disbelieving Clare's approach anyway, as you have posted elsewhere:


I have to question the whole approach of the new SM breeding protocol. Is it working? I don't really know except for what I read on the forums, but it doesn't seem to be making any real difference.

Maybe you should read some of the research papers or ask some of the researchers?

Also it isn't exactly 'new' -- it has been around for over half a decade, and in current format was approved by a broad neurologists' panel in 2006.

Margaret C
7th February 2010, 11:22 PM
Can you force compliance?

Only legislation that is enforced will do this, but public and peer pressure can start to effect a change.
Puppy buyers can be a great force for change if they will only ask for health certificates and walk away if they are not forthcoming.
Breeders that refuse to use stud dogs that do not have MRI certificates could help to ensure that things change, but unfortunately there are still too many who use unscanned dogs because they produce the puppies that win in the show ring.



There seems to be a divergence of opinion,those who feel breeding is an art and others who feel it is a science
Probably a bit of both with a lot of luck thrown in. Trying to factor in health as well as type and beauty is a very difficult undertaking, and some breeders seem to think it is beyond their artistic capabilities.


I'm astonished that the Kennel Club can allow things to continue as they are,accepting money from puppy farmers who churn out cavaliers,only stipulating Eye testing as a criteria for acceptance to the ABS.
Now this is one of the 'Bees in My Bonnet'. The KC is going to drag their feet about doing anything that will reduce their income from puppy farm registrations.


In the meantime we see people signing up to this site,week after week, My dog has SM, what can I do?

I get these phone calls and emails so often, and it does seem that young dogs are showing up more and more. Unfortunately this is likely to continue unless breeders recognise the extent of the problem and make a genuine concerted effort to save what is the most wonderful little companion dog.

A little history............By 2003 it was known that two top stud dogs ( For five years they had swopped first & second places ) had sired SM offspring, and puppies from these dogs were scattered all over the world.

If only the breed as a whole had accepted what was so glaringly obvious. Those faulty genes must be spreading throughout the cavalier population & we had a really serious problem.
For six wasted years a very few people tried to tackle the problem & a very few brave and determined breeders scanned their dogs.

Most top breeders' reaction was to deny the problem, ridicule the researchers and ostracise those working to publicise the issue. Most of them knew they had seen the problem in their dogs, but their response was to suggest that pet owners of affected dogs had Munchaussens syndrome by proxy.
Exhibitors who scanned their dogs feared, rightly or wrongly, that they were made to pay when showing their dogs.

The film Pedigree Dogs Exposed highlighted the problem and changed the cavalier world for good, but possibly too late for this breed to have a chance of producing SM free cavaliers.

The decisions that breeders now need to make are not easy, and it is not surprising that there is a considerable drop in the number of Club members registering puppies this year.
I'm not sure whether this is because they run the risk of producing some MVD & SM affected puppies even if they follow the health protocols, or because scanning has shown they have only D grade cavaliers to breed from. ( For newcomers to the discussions .......Grade D cavaliers have SM but do not have any obvious pain symptoms )

Although the guidelines allow for D grade cavaliers to be bred, and it probably is necessary to maintain what genetic diversity there is in the breed, there may be more difficulty selling the puppies to a public now alert to the problem of SM, and I know that some breeders would not want to risk mating a D grade bitch in case the act of pushing to give birth to puppies triggers painful symptoms.

It is a dilemma, the caring breeders may be scared to breed, but that will then leave only the uncaring opportunists, puppy farmers and BYB still producing cavaliers.

The Kennel Club really need to take decisive action and give more advice and support to cavalier breeders, but I have no hope that they will do so.

Tania
7th February 2010, 11:53 PM
Just like buying a car, you expect someone to do their homework. If someone falls prey to the unscrupulous dealer, they can't whine about it if the information was out there and they didn't check into the place they were buying from.

The Puppy Pet buyer have every right to "whine" ! Most responsible pet buyers will research the breed to make sure the dog is right for their life style and look into general health issues. Why would they ever suspect and even believe these horrific health issues are knowingly in practice for so many years.


Reputable breeders will do their part, but the puppy milllers will keep on churning out pups...and uneducated pet buyers will buy these "bargain pups" and then wind up here saying "help".

I totally agree, maybe the term puppy farm /mills need to be changed to "Battery Farmed Puppies" everyone will know what this means and the consequences!

Margaret C
8th February 2010, 01:51 AM
They SHOULD have bought from someone who health tests and checked the reputaton of the breeders. Did they do any homework at all other than price of the puppy?

This is blaming the victim.

Buyers have the right to be informed about health problems in the breed. Breeders cannot escape their responsibility to be honest by blaming the unsuspecting and trusting buyer.

How do you know that there are health problems in the breed if no one tells you?

There may be slightly more information available now, but that is very recent. Try going to the KC site and tell me if you would really know, from the information shown, just how serious the health issues are?


I concede, there are show breeders who are not doing right by the breed, too. Word gets around, though, and when their lines are producing affected dogs, they don't find much demand for their stud dogs outside their own kennels.

But that is a great many puppies produced before the word spreads, and by that time those puppies are already producing their own puppies............ and so it goes on.

How many of this year's UK top stud dogs have been scanned?


Scanned dogs are still producing affected litters, too, much to the frustration of the breeders scanning them. I do not say this to advocate lax breeding practices, but to illustrate the frustration for those trying to keep the breed alive, prevent further harm and help solve the problem in the midst of this upheaval.

We have to deal with it or the breed goes under.

It is not the puppy buyers that are doing the 'whining' here. It is for those who ignored what was happening for years to bear the responsibility of doing something about the problem they allowed to develop.


With SM, MVD, eye problems, hip displaysia and patellar luxation to deal with, how many dogs are left to breed from if you only breed ones who are clear of EVERYTHING? .

Difficult decisions to be made if the health of the breed is really as bad as you suggest?

In all this, let us not forget it is not the breeders, or even the owners, that bear the pain of these conditions. The breeders make the decisions, the dogs suffer the consequences.


Reputable breeders will do their part, but the puppy milllers will keep on churning out pups...and uneducated pet buyers will buy these "bargain pups" and then wind up here saying "help". In the meantime, donate to research and provide your own dogs dna (healthy or not) and their records for databases and analysis....and educate others to the problem of millers and shady breeders.

Perhaps the dog breeding organisations will do what Bateson has suggested and start a programme of education and information for puppy buyers.
More honest and up to date information on regional club websites and from puppy coordinators would probably help too.

Bet
8th February 2010, 11:23 AM
I don't want to say any-more at the moment about the Lecture given on Saturday about SM, but it sure was an Eye-Opener.

And Thanks Karlin and Margaret for your Posts, you also have put in a Nut- Shell the abuse some Cavalier Lovers have had to take.

If I could include my-self in this.

On the other List ,there was Post ,questioning my state of Mind.

Because this Post was from a UK CKCS Club Member,in the Club Rules, Club Members should not use any Method of Communication what-so-ever ,that could be considered .

Defamatory

Insulting

or Detrimental

To another Club Member.

Because I am a CKCS CLUB Member ,I contacted the Kennel Club about this matter , who in turn contacted their Legal Departmentment.

The advice I got back is now with the UK CKCS CLUB COMMITTEE to see what action they are going to take about this matter.

To say that I was Distressed by this Comment ,is putting it Mildly.

So ,I say again Thank -You ,both Karlin and Margaret for your Posts.

I really do wonder why do we Lovers of the Cavalier Breed have to take all the Sneering and Snide Remarks from a Cetain Few ,where we Dare mention the Health Problems of SM and MVD in our Cavalier Breed.

What are they Scared of?

Bet(Hargreaves)

Bet
8th February 2010, 12:42 PM
I was just going to ignore ignore Norma Inglis' Spin Breed Notes, but just had to mention ,that all you Cavalier Folk who have Cavaliers suffering from SM.

The Cavaliers who are Rubbing their Faces along the Ground ,Scratching.

They are only doing this because they are showing Pleasure.!!!!

God Give Strength!!!!

Bet( Hargreaves)

Karlin
8th February 2010, 12:58 PM
On rubbing faces: this would be true of some dogs -- but it is certainly one of the key signs of discomfort as well, as every neurologist dealing with this condition will confirm. Rubbing in evident distress has been one of the most commonly reported early signs of SM. The difference is quite obvious when you watch videos of SM dogs doing this and a non-SM dog. It is a shame any responsible person would claim this only indicates pleasure as it may well cause owners of affected dogs to not bother to seek help for a dog in pain, allowing the dog to suffer and the condition to grow worse, which can in turn affect treatment options.

The advice should be that excessive face rubbing or face rubbing along with other suspected symptoms should always be discussed with your vet as the incidence of SM is so high in this breed (the figure just reported back from scans submitted for EBVs is just shy of 50% of all dogs scanned with pedigrees -- which would be primarily, breeder dogs brought to scanning days -- scanned with syringomyelia.

That is an absolutely shocking figure, especially as breeders are almost all scanning younger breeding age dogs under age 5, and most would be scanning dogs around age 2-3. This level of incidence incidentally exactly coincides with what neurologists doing club scanning days have told several breeders over the past two years, as reported by those breeders on other boards/lists.

If such a high level of SM is the norm in this breed -- that one in two YOUNGER cavaliers almost certainly has SM -- then one really has to advise that face rubbing may well be one indicator of problems, not a sign of joy.

Personally, I would not go on face rubbing alone as a symptom indicating SM, unless it is odd or excessive. Some of the videos posted by people have shown exactly that distressed face rubbing. But a lot of face rubbing would indicate that the owner should keep an eye out for other signs or consider talking to their vet and checking for discomfrt in typical SM-affected areas, for example. When Leo face rubs in an SM-sense, it is after he has a scratching session then will rub his face on the ground -- the two are clearly tied together. This is different from my clear dog Jaspar, who will rub his face and roll on his back after a meal or a walk.

Bet
10th February 2010, 11:23 AM
Could I go back to the discussion on IN -Breeding in the Cavalier Breed

I would like to quote a letter ,it was Letters in those days,from Dr Hellmuth Wachtel, 10-10-2000.

It was about the Cavalier Pedigrees I had sent with Heart Trouble. The Researchers in Austria at Vienna University ,wanted to compare them with the Austrian Cavaliers with Heart Trouble.

Dr Wachtel said, the In-Breeding was Ruthless and really shocking .

That this In-Breeding reduces a Breed's most important Heritage ,it's Genetic Diversity.

Jemima Harrison ,is also commenting in an Article this week on the same subject,and mentions about the dangers of In-Breeding, but the reason it is used by Breeders ,is because In-Breeding enables the Breeders to successfully reproduce Champions to put their Stamp on a Breed.

I know that Dr Lewis had said last week that there was little In-Breeding in Cavaliers to-day,all I know is that in the early 1980's there was quite a lot of Half Brother to Half Sister Matings taking place ,particularly in Whole-Colours.

I also was speaking to Dr Lewis on the Phone last week, mentioning about the Early In-Breeding in creating the Cavalier Breed in the 1930's and 40's, but he said that was not on their Remit. Only from 1980.

Also I believe that the thought of an Out Cross for Cavaliers had been mentioned at the Seminar last Saturday and a discussion took place.

Bet(Hargreaves)

Bet
11th February 2010, 12:43 PM
Could I add these comments from this week's Dog World about In-Breeding?

I am sorry if I am boring some of you by continually mentioning the In- Breeding that has happened in our Cavalier Breed, but I really feel it's so important to make the Cavalier World aware that this is ,according to the Research Experts ,is where the Cavalier Health Problems Lie.

That it's no use some Cavalier Folk trying to hid or cover up this fact.

The DW Article States that ,the Basic Principle ,that the more Genetically Diverse a Population ,the Lower the Risk of Health Problems

To understand this Fundamental Fact ,then it has got to be Accepted that the Ideas of Close Line Breeding are essentially Wrong

OK there are those who will say ,that they know of Dogs who have been closely Bred and have Remained Healthy .

Close Breeding does not Guarantee Disease but it sure does Stack the Odds against Good Health .

We Should Recognize it for what it is, ....an Avoidable Risk

The DW Article goes onto say ,that at least it is in an avoidable risk in most Breeds .

This is where our Cavaliers could being involved .

That in some Breeds the Level of In-Breeding is already so High that any Two Individuals are going to be Genetically Closely Related.

This can go back to what both Mrs Pitt ,the Founder of the Cavalier Breed has said ,and more recently Katie Eldred ,who was involved with the Early Days of getting the Cavalier Breed established in the 1930's and 1940's.

The DW 's Article also went onto mention,that the only way to to Preserve the Essential Character of Genetically Compromised Breeds ,is by Creating Programs of Controlled Out-Crossing .

Bring in New Genes from Related Breeds ,while Preserving the Original's Breeds Identity .

Back to my thoughts.

I know that it was said at the SM Seminar last Saturday , that the Researchers, had found not much In-Breeding in To-days Cavaliers ,but because their Pedigree information only goes back to 1980, does this mean that the In-Breeding carried out in the Cavalier Breed in the Early Days, also 1950's-60's -70's , when Mother was mated to Son , Father to Daughter does not apply to To-Days ' Cavaliers.

I think this is some-thing we should be trying to find out about ,in light of the DW Article about In- Breeding affecting certain Breeds of Dogs.

Bet (Hargreaves)

Karlin
11th February 2010, 01:30 PM
I think there's no doubt that people are more careful about making the close matings that might have occurred more frequently in the past. But the original lines were very narrow, and early arbitrary choices have surely affected the health situation in the breed, as have the use of so few studs for example -- as was also pointed out at the EBV seminar, in one period only 6% of all registered UK males were used for breeding. With another seminar coming up, hopefully many more will attend and ask additional questions.

Growing awareness and good research will hopefully help avoid many genetic bottlenecks in the future. I would like to see genetic diversity to be part of the overall health focus of the breed, with perhaps the US Icelandic Sheepdog breed club's approach being an interesting blueprint for what could be done.

Maybe, Bet we can shift focus to what could be done and how it might be done rather than looking backwards? You have made some strong points several times, that people can consider privately. :thmbsup:

Bet
11th February 2010, 03:01 PM
I would guess that by now I have got the Message across about how In- Bred our Cavalier Breed has been.

That's all I want to do. I would think that by the 6,000 Views ,Ill have planted some Seeds and given Food for Thought .

Just have to Contact a Geneticist about this.

Bet (Hargreaves)

Bet
11th February 2010, 04:52 PM
As a PS to my Previous Post about the In-Breeding Problem in our Cavalier Breed

Yes, I have just phoned the Geneticist this after-noon,really for my own satisfaction to find out if what I had been right or wrong in what I had been saying

Yes, I was told ,I was right ,that because of the Early In-Breeding to get the Cavalier Breed Established in the 1930's and 40's ,the Cavaliers ,do now have a Very Narrow Genetic Base.

There is now no Genetic Variation and this Matters an Awful Lot ,even although To-day's Cavaliers are not being In-Bred ,this does'nt Matter since there is no Genetic Diversity in the Cavalier Breed.

I am not really bothered now about what some Cavalier Breeders do in their Breeding Programs ,they have been told about the dangers the Cavalier Breed Faces because of their IN-Breeding Problem in their Back-Ground.

The Geneticist said that about the only thing that could help the Cavaliers now ,was for the Cavalier Breeders to find out about the COI in their Breeding Stock.

As I said , I have got to the Stage when I am past caring about what some Cavalier Breeders now do.

You can only Bang Your Head Against a Brick Wall for so Long.

I have passed on this information.

If some Cavalier Breeders feel they know more than a Geneticist about the In-Breeding Problem in Cavaliers, that's up to them!!

Bet (Hargreaves)

Karlin
11th February 2010, 04:57 PM
Thanks for making the call and getting a bit more info. I'd think a programme that combines scanning/cardio testing for data, EBVs (eventually, geBVs) nd awareness of COI and an effort to ensure diversity across national stock and international, would be a good way forward. :thmbsup: An international effort would be of great benefit to the breed especially if there are broader pockets of diversity out there.


I would guess that by now I have got the Message across

Yes I should think so, Bet! :lol:

Bet
11th February 2010, 05:05 PM
Karlin,

I sure love your Sense of Humour.

You gave me Big Giggle ,all the way from Scotland.

Bet(Hargreaves)

Bet
15th February 2010, 04:17 PM
I have just noticed a PDE Response from the Dean of Veterinary Medicine,at the University of Pennsylvania,America.

I have just contacted her making her aware about the In-Bred Cavalier Back-Ground.

Also what I felt were other Relevent Cavalier Health Problem Facts that she should also be being made aware of.

Bet

Margaret C
15th February 2010, 06:18 PM
I have just noticed a PDE Response from the Dean of Veterinary Medicine,at the University of Pennsylvania,America.

I have just contacted her making her aware about the In-Bred Cavalier Back-Ground.

Also what I felt were other Relevent Cavalier Health Problem Facts that she should also be being made aware of.

Bet

This statement by Joan C Hendricks has caused some comment already....See
http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/search?q=pimping

There has been some interesting discussion on other forums and I am surprised and appalled how dangerous the attitude of some breeders ( and through them some of the cavalier clubs they control ) is to the efforts that other breeders are making to try and give the next generations of cavaliers a pain free future.

These few very vocal and fairly influential breeders seem determine to punish any specialist that helped to raise awareness of SM in cavaliers.

These people are so shortsighted and selfish that they are prepared to organise and encourage boycotts of the all important gene research, the only scheme that offers the possibility of identifying the CMSM genes and finding a gene test that breeders could use.

One breeder, formerly a regional club health representative until she publicly slated a highly respected cardiologist on an internet list, is well known for her attacks on any specialist that highlights breed health issues in cavaliers.

She has consistently attacked both of the leading UK neurologists that work on this problem.

This person is now misquoting Dr Rusbridge, who was interviewed on PDE, by alleging she said.........

"Breeders taking a stick to beat a dog"

Dr Rusbridge actually said.............

“My human response to that is just overwhelming sadness. Because I know as a consequence of that dogs are going to be in pain.
You know, if you took a stick and beat a dog to create this pain that you can get with Syringomyelia, you’d be prosecuted. But there’s nothing to stop you breeding a dog that can be painful"

A little different in style and meaning to the misquote above?

It is time that these few breeders stopped saying one thing and doing another. If they have a genuine love for this breed they would do whatever it takes to reverse this rapidly developing disaster.

If they really want to be breeding healthy cavaliers in ten years time then they need to stop posturing and start working with the leading researchers, the real experts.

After all what is most important, the dogs or hurt pride?

Bet
15th February 2010, 07:04 PM
After I had contactet Dr Joan Hendricks ,the Gilbert S Kahn Dean of Veterinary Medicine, University 0f Pennsylvania, America,this after-noon I Thought that pehaps the List Members here were due a mention of what I had tried to explain to her about our Cavalier Breed.

I first of all gave her the details of the Cavalier Breed's In-Bred Back-Ground ,and how I had just been told Last Week by a Geneticist ,that because of this In-Breeding ,,the Cavalier Breed would have no Genetic Variation,that this is so important ,even if T0-Day's Cavaliers are not being In-Bred ,this does not matter , because there is No Genetic Diversity in the Cavalier Breed .

That the Cavalier Breed now has a Very Narrow Genetic Base

I also mentioned about Professor Bateson's Report , which had been Commisioned by the Kennel Club here in Britain ,where he said that the SM Problem and the Cavalier Breed is probably caused by the Premature Closing of their Skull and their Brain still Growing,their Skulls are too Small for their Brains. That this had also been confirmed by other Researchers into the Cavalier SM Problem.

Finally I mentioned about the Lack of Cavalier MRI Scans, the Researchers had said at a Cavalier SM Seminar Last Week, their Research into the EBV Scheme for SM in Cavaliers,that their Labrador Breed 's Research would now take Precidence ,be taking over the Cavalier SM Research would now.

Bet

Karen and Ruby
15th February 2010, 07:12 PM
This person is now misquoting Dr Rusbridge, who was interviewed on PDE, by alleging she said.........

"Breeders taking a stick to beat a dog"

Dr Rusbridge actually said.............

“My human response to that is just overwhelming sadness. Because I know as a consequence of that dogs are going to be in pain.
You know, if you took a stick and beat a dog to create this pain that you can get with Syringomyelia, you’d be prosecuted. But there’s nothing to stop you breeding a dog that can be painful"

A little different in style and meaning to the misquote above?

It is time that these few breeders stopped saying one thing and doing another. If they have a genuine love for this breed they would do whatever it takes to reverse this rapidly developing disaster.

If they really want to be breeding healthy cavaliers in ten years time then they need to stop posturing and start working with the leading researchers, the real experts.

After all what is most important, the dogs or hurt pride?
[/QUOTE]

As you know I was with Dr Rusbridge last week getting Charlies scan done and we did touch on the subject of mis-quotes.

She mentioned one of being quoted to have said that it is normal for the Chiari to be found in dogs-!!!
And that what she had actually said was around the fact that- It is very rare and could be said to be abnormal for Cavaliers to not have the Chiari Malformation and that it saddened her greatly to say it. It doesnt make it right and certainly doesnt pull away from how horrific and painful it is for these dogs to have to live with such a condition.

Of course in a perfect world we would only breed from dogs with no Chiari at all but I shouldnt have thought any one has come accross such a dog in recent times.

Its an extrememly sad situation to be faced with and one which upsets very many of us on a daily basis im sure xx

Bet
16th February 2010, 11:55 AM
Just noticed Folks, that I had forgotten to mention the name of the Geneticist who told me that the In- Breeding of the Cavalier Breed in the 1930's and 1940's ,that this In-Breeding would mean that there is now no Genetic Varation , that this is so Important ,that even if To-Day's Cavaliers are not being In-Bred ,this does not atter ,because there is No Genetic Diversity in the Cavalier Breed .

That the Cavalier Breed now has a Very Narrow Genetic Base.

The Geneticist who told me this ,is Dr B. Cattanach.

Also I also spoke to Dr T .Lewis,SM Researcher, a couple of week's ago, and he had not known about the In- Bred Back-Ground of our Cavalier Breed.

Bet

RodRussell
16th February 2010, 04:24 PM
... With SM, MVD, eye problems, hip displaysia and patellar luxation to deal with, how many dogs are left to breed from if you only breed ones who are clear of EVERYTHING? Granted, that is the goal, but not the reality right now. ...

The reason that is "not the reality right now" is too many short-sighted, self-interested breeders breeding too many Cavaliers without following breeding protocols. What does it matter to you how many breedable Cavaliers are left?
--
Rod Russell

Bet
18th February 2010, 11:08 AM
Just wondered if this could be of a wee interest.

There was a Study about the Extent of Inbreeding in Pedigree Dogs, by the Imperial College London Researchers in 2008.

The Researchers included Professor D.Balding and Dr J .Sampson.

The Study mentions In-Breeding puts Dogs at Risk of Birth Defects and Genetically Inherited Problems.

Inbreeding in Pedigree Dogs arises because certain Dogs ,Prized for Exhibiting the Characteristics desirablefor that Breed ,are used to Father many Litters of Puppies .

When Dogs from those Litters come to be Mated ,some will be Paired with Dogs having the Same Father from other Litters .

Over Generations ,more and more Dogs across a Particular Pedigree are Related to one another and the chances of Relatives Mating Increase.

The Study also says that the Problems Associated withIn-Breeding have been known for Many Years ,Prior to this Study ,it had not been Systematically Measured .

For this Study ,the Researchers from the Imperial College,used Mathematical Modelling to analyse how Dogs were related to one another in certain Breeds

The Researchers mention that those involved in Breeding Dogs, should encourage Breeding from a Larger Pool of Potental Mates in order to create greater Genetic Variation and Lessen Dogs' chances of Inheriting Genetic Disorders

The Researchers believe this Study is the First Scientific Study to Explore this Issue and Analysethe Extent of Inbreeding in a Systematic way across many Breeds .

The Study concludes in saying ,that as a Result of the Study it is hoped,Dog Breeders will make it a HIGH PRIORITY to Increase the GENETIC DIVERSITY within different Breeds ,otherwise ,we will see growing numbers of Dogs born with Serious Genetically Inherited Health Problems.

Finally ,I have mentioned this in a Previous Post.

I spoke to Dr T. Lewis one of the SM Researchers at the AHT, on the Phone a couple of weeks ago, mentioning about the In-Bred Background the Cavalier Breed has, he said that he was not aware of this, since their Pedigree work Research only goes back to 1980.

Bet.

Bet
22nd February 2010, 11:11 AM
For those who are interested in the In-Breeding in our Cavalier Breed ,here is an update.

Last week I contacted Professor D .Balding about this subject , he is now at the Institute of Genetics, University College ,London, just got back his Reply.

He had done an Analysis on the In-Breeding of the Cavalier Breed a Couple of years ago.

Unfortunately he mentioned that this Analysis that was done, only went back to the Kennel Club's Electronic Records to about 1980, this seems to be the same ones that are avaliable to Drs Blott and Lewis, the SM Cavalier Researchers at the AHT

What those Records did show was that during this Period ,6-8 Generations up to 2007 , that the average In-Breeding Coefficient was lower than in many other Breeds ,and the over -use of Popular Sires at least no worse than in other Breeds.

This could be a concern,that there are Some VERY IN-BRED CAVALIERS.

The WORST had an IN-BREEDING COEFFICIENT of nearly 50%, over 7 GENERATIONS ,which almost corresponds to the TWO PARENTS BEING GENETICALLY IDENTICAL.

This ,I would think could be of great concern to the Present Day Cavalier Breeders,how will they know which Cavaliers will be having those alarming In-Bred Co-Efficients.

This will be being involved I would think in some of TO-Day's Cavaliers.

Is this where the EBV Research will be of such a Benefit to help in Preserving our Cavalier Breed ,the Researchers will be able to have the information for the EBV's for Cavalier Breeders about those In-Bred Cavaliers and be able to steer the Cavalier Breeders away from them.

There is surely now ,for Cavalier Breeders knowing about how In-Bred Some Cavaliers are ,and could be be influencing their Breeding Programs, no reason for not co-operating with the EBV Research.

Bet

sins
22nd February 2010, 12:29 PM
What those Records did show was that during this Period ,6-8 Generations up to 2007 , that the average In-Breeding Coefficient was lower than in many other Breeds ,and the over -use of Popular Sires at least no worse than in other Breeds.

As I've said before Bet,How can you blame cavalier breeders for decisions made in the distant past when in reality, they did nothing different from other breeders...
My 3 yr old Bitch has a COI of 7% which isn't extraordinarily high and didn't prevent her from developing SM.
There are other breeds who have been resurrected from a handful of post war survivors.
Leonbergers for example.

Only five Leonbergers survived World War I and were bred until World War II when, again, almost all Leonbergers were lost. Leonbergers today can have their ancestry traced to eight dogs that survived World War II
So the cavalier breed isn't completely unique in the challenges that it faces.
It takes time for attitudes and culture to change.There are breeders who have done everything they possibly could to breed healthy pups and there are customers who have taken every effort to buy from those who test.
The single biggest group who can effect change are the pet owners who buy the cavaliers..
The biggest single group who can assist research are actually cavalier pet owners.
How many of us here have had our cavaliers scanned?
Ok, So how many here have not sent in a copy of their scan/cardiac results to the AHT?
Then there's absolutely no point indulging in wailing and gnashing of teeth about what breeders do and don't do....if we're not prepared to do it ourselves.
Dr Sarah Blott
CKCS Health Breeding Programme
Animal Health Trust
Lanwades Park, Kentford
Newmarket
Suffolk CB8 7UU
She'd love to get copies of the Mri scan results or heart test results.
How about trying to do something positive and constructive to help matters?
So perhaps for Lent Bet, put away the blunderbuss and take a break.
Sins

Bet
22nd February 2010, 12:50 PM
Sins, if you read my Latest Post you will see I have just received from Professor D .Balding, Institute of Genetics ,University College ,London,this morning, what I have tried to explain about a Genetic Analysis he was involved a couple of years ago into the Cavalier Breeda couple of years ago,.

That the 6-8 Pedigree Information from 1980 for Cavaliers from the Kennel Club's Electronic Records ,did show that there were some Very In-Bred Cavaliers ,that the Worst had In-Breeding Coefficient of nearly 50% over 7 Generations ,which almost corresponds to the TWO Parents being Genetically Identical.

I was trying to make the point that only by using the EBV Scheme will Cavalier Breeders be able to find out about those Very IN-Bred Cavaliers ,and be being guided away from using them.

The Cavalier Breeders will have no other way of finding out about this,I would think.

Bet

Bet
22nd February 2010, 12:56 PM
Sorry forgot to ask you Sins ,what was the advice from Dr Blott ,about your Cavalier's EBV yet your Cavalier still got SM, which I'am so sorry to hear about.

Bet

PS Lent does not come into my Religion .

Bet

Karlin
22nd February 2010, 01:04 PM
Thanks for a good post, Sins.

Bet, you have made many points that give the evidence of the early narrow gene pool. As was noted from the extracts from Amice Pitt, some early breeders did indeed recognise that for many reasons, poor choices were made at the start, some of them by breeders clearly more interested in short term convenience and show success rather than medium to long term health of the breed -- Amice Pitt herself laments these choices.

But I think that issue has now been well documented and you've made many useful points in that regard. Let's set that aside and look at what is happening or could or should happen now, and look forward.

I think there are some great suggestions here:


The single biggest group who can effect change are the pet owners who buy the cavaliers..
The biggest single group who can assist research are actually cavalier pet owners.
How many of us here have had our cavaliers scanned?
Ok, So how many here have not sent in a copy of their scan/cardiac results to the AHT?
Then there's absolutely no point indulging in wailing and gnashing of teeth about what breeders do and don't do....if we're not prepared to do it ourselves.

Sad but true. I am really exasperated of seeing over and over, how many when they do go looking for a puppy, clearly do NOT go to any of the great breeders who are health focused, or when they do, decide they won't pay for quality and their health efforts -- which are very costly for many of them -- and instead go for the cheap, quick puppy or just take a breeder's word on heart and other testing when actually the parents dogs may only have been to the local vet and 'no SM' means the breeders 'has never seen it in my dogs'. Not good enough, ever! In so doing, pet buyers are no better than the breeders who continue to not use cardiologists and who have all sorts of reasons not to scan or to contribute to EBV research. If pet buyers only think about their short term satisfaction in getting the cheaper, faster puppy, then you too damn this breed to shortened lives and increasing levels of pain. It is one thing not to know about such issues when getting your first cavalier(s); it is another to be a member here, to know what to do, then opt to do otherwise 'just this once'. Please support rescue instead or ALWAYS be a responsible buyer and help this breed have a healthy future.

I do agree that pet owners should please if at all possible, scan their dogs if they have that ability and their dog is registered. In the UK, that one act can do more than any other as it helps the EBVs and also may help your own dog if it has a syrinx but no symptoms -- getting such a dog onto a CSF inhibitor may save it from a future of pain as there is good evidence that syrinxes can sometimes be limited and even reversed by early treatment with something like frusemide or omeprazole. On the other hand if you truly do not wish to know the result, just ask not to be told and have the certificates put in a sealed envelope which you can then send in a larger envelope to Sarah Blott.This can also be done for Rupert's Fund older dogs. :)

If you have a scan for a registered dog and live anywhere in the world, and are a pet owner OR a breeder, those scans are now accepted by Sarah Blott and Tom Lewis. In 99% of cases, DNA is not really needed but can be taken. Info here:

http://cavaliercampaign.com/appeal-health-data.htm

If you have a dog aged 6+ that has been scanned, PLEASE send the scan to Clare Rusbridge and Penny Knowler as this is critical data for the accuracy of the genome work which should finish this year. The more older dogs, the more accurately they can pinpoint the genes and how they work and understand onset. Syrinx-clear dogs over 6 are especially valuable, as are closely related dogs. The contact details for Clare and Penny are at the above link.

However it would not quite be right to say pet scans are more important -- but they are as important as breeder scans :). The researchers badly need pet scans though because the majority will be from definitely symptomatic, affected dogs -- this will be why they were scanned in the first place -- and thus are really, REALLY important for the EBVs. The worry is that EBVs for all will be less accurate if some breeders may avoid handing over bad results for fear of how it affects their EBVs. Make this effort as accurate as possible and give this breed a good chance of survival by ACTIVELY supporting research and health focused breeders.

I'd also again stress that breeders that are making assumptions about the grades of their dogs' scans, especially when they consequently seem to get affected puppies from what they think are AxA litters, surely should have Clare Rusbridge, or another neurologist who is part of the original group that agreed scanning protocols, read the scans -- as noted on her website, she will do a report and grade for just 35 pounds -- or put it through the BVA panel when it launches at Crufts. Some of the scans may not be clears, head positioning may be poor, scans may have been too brief, subtleties may have been missed -- there are many reasons why even less experienced neurologists or those using short scans or not following head positioning suggestions may miss a diagnosis, much less breeders who are not radiologists or neurologists self-assigning grades (often to dogs that are actually Ds because they are too young for a proper grade when scanned, In some dogs, status can change in months and this seems far more likely in young dogs).

Also it is important to note that Chestergates amongst others does NOT send scans on to Sarah Blott for the EBV work -- and breeders need to do this themselves. There are likely hundreds of scans done on breeder dogs that have not been sent on for the EBVs though well-intentioned breeders assume they have. Breeders need to make sure this has been done by contacting Sarah Blott. A shortage of scans and subsequent lack of data has meant the whole EBV effort has been severely set back as Tom Lewis noted at his recent presentation to breeders, and unless those scans come in nd continue to be done, it has been said it could be 'years' before the cavalier EBV scheme is up and running :( .

sins
22nd February 2010, 01:27 PM
Dr Blott didn't give any advice about my cavalier's EBV.She has the information I sent and may not even have processed it yet.
I was referring to the Coefficient of Inbreeding being 7% over 10 generations.This was calculated for me by a breeder who has the necessary software programme.
I take your point about the extremely in-bred cavalier,but surely a breeder wouldn't need access to the EBV scheme to know about these dogs?
Most capable breeders know the dogs behind almost every cavalier in the ring today and they'd know immediately how inbred it was.I'm sure they examine the BRS as well and know what litters have been recently whelped.They wouldn't need an EBV scheme to know if a dog was that inbred??
Perhaps I'm still missing the point....:confused:
Sins

Karlin
22nd February 2010, 01:46 PM
Sins to be honest, actually I think you have had a good example set by your breeder :), but a lot of breeders don't really realise how inbred many dogs are -- breeder Laura Lang for one has made this point many times on breeder lists for many years, for example. From posts on the L-list asking for explanations of COIs it has been clear that many breeders do not understand them or know what they are breeding and don't sufficiently take this into consideration. Others continue to trumpet that high COIs and incest matings are not an issue. Only recently when an incorrect pedigree seemed to indicate a long lived cavalier was the result of a mother-son mating, one well known breeder was quick to highlight this as wonderful example of how such matings can be beneficial and do not harm, a rather startling indication that some breeders still support such very close incestual matings regardless of statements from some that no one does them or supports them anymore.

It has also been noted that many breeders make incorrect assumptions about levels of inbreeding because, with the very limited early lines and then the heavy use of a few studs in later years to this day (I have spoken to some with genetics background who believe the latter is more the problem for the breed, not the early inbreeding), many dogs that on pedigree -- even 10-gen pedigrees -- appear to be distantly related are actually very closely related.

It would be great if more used COI software but from breeder discussions on their own breeder-focused lists, they don't seem to.

EddyAnne
22nd February 2010, 01:52 PM
or put it through the BVA panel when it launches at Crufts.

I wonder who the Specialist will be at Crufts to talk to people and the launch sounds interesting.
.

Karen and Ruby
22nd February 2010, 03:05 PM
As I've said before Bet,How can you blame cavalier breeders for decisions made in the distant past when in reality, they did nothing different from other breeders...
My 3 yr old Bitch has a COI of 7% which isn't extraordinarily high and didn't prevent her from developing SM.
There are other breeds who have been resurrected from a handful of post war survivors.
Leonbergers for example.

So the cavalier breed isn't completely unique in the challenges that it faces.
It takes time for attitudes and culture to change.There are breeders who have done everything they possibly could to breed healthy pups and there are customers who have taken every effort to buy from those who test.
The single biggest group who can effect change are the pet owners who buy the cavaliers..
The biggest single group who can assist research are actually cavalier pet owners.
How many of us here have had our cavaliers scanned?
Ok, So how many here have not sent in a copy of their scan/cardiac results to the AHT?
Then there's absolutely no point indulging in wailing and gnashing of teeth about what breeders do and don't do....if we're not prepared to do it ourselves.
Dr Sarah Blott
CKCS Health Breeding Programme
Animal Health Trust
Lanwades Park, Kentford
Newmarket
Suffolk CB8 7UU
She'd love to get copies of the Mri scan results or heart test results.
How about trying to do something positive and constructive to help matters?
So perhaps for Lent Bet, put away the blunderbuss and take a break.
Sins

I did send Rubys results in to the AHT but when I thought to send Charlies also I read that there wasn't any point as he has no papers whatsoever being a rescue.
Should I send them anyway??

Karlin
22nd February 2010, 03:16 PM
No, that's OK; the dog must be registered or there's no way results can be used for EBVs and research projects at present. :thmbsup: I scanned Lily the last time I went for scans and hers couldn't be used either as she's a rescue with no papers/registration number. But I had a syrinx confirmed and got a much better sense of where she is at and how things might progress.

Bet
22nd February 2010, 03:41 PM
Karlin,

Just looked at the Thread you gave, and a modern Day Cavalier Pedigree was displayed on it,

All I can say is JINGS!!!!!

Bet

Karlin
22nd February 2010, 03:48 PM
You might also be interested in this (http://www.petfriendlyworld.com/chatforum/showthread.php?t=33350), too --shows how related to herself one dog was, and includes Cannonhill Richey... :eek: really gives a sense of the inbreeding of those Post WWII dogs. You do wonder what some of these people were thinking (and doing): no wonder Amice Pitt was so alarmed and worried about diversity in the breed. Each individual dog is marked with its own colour so you can see how the same dog might be almost every single grandfather/greatGF for dogs in a mating!! :yikes

But now work needs to go forward to try to address 1) health and 2) improve diversity as what was done, was done.

Bet
22nd February 2010, 04:01 PM
Yes Cannonhill Snip ,was the Pedigree I'd sent to Dr Willis.

I still think though ,that my Post From Professor D. Balding, should be heeded ,since this concerns present Day Cavaliers.

It's the same Data Information as Drs Blott and Lewis will have, there must be some very In-Bred Cavaliers in it, that this why I really do think ,that To-Days ' Cavalier Breeders have to listen to the EBV Information ,just look at one of the Pedigrees that was mentioned ,on the Link you gave

Full Brother to Full Sister Mating.That was I think 8 years ago.

Bet

Bet
22nd February 2010, 08:19 PM
The Pedigree Link Karlin gave is sure an Eye Opener !!!!about In-Breeding in To-Days' Cavaliers,

I am not going to be being dragged into more fights with others who know nothing about me, or the Experts I have contacted over the past 20 odd years, and have used the Pedigrees I have sent them about the In-Breeding in our Cavalier Breed.

Even Liverpool University , who used some of the Pedigrees when looking for some of the Cavalier Genes that had caused a Problem with the In-Breeding in Cavaliers.

Just to say I will be taking no Lectures from some of the Vociferous Few.

They will just have to continue with their Sanctimonious Spinning, that the Cavaliers have no Health Problems,but so many Cavalier Owners just don't believe that any-more.

For example look at Karlin and Tania's Sites ,and if further Evidence was needed have a Look at Carol's Campaign for Cavaliers' Site.

Bet.

Bet
23rd February 2010, 11:24 AM
I have been Printing Off the Pedigrees on the List given from the Site yesterday about some of the In-Breeding of Cavaliers mostly in the 90's .

Neither wonder some Cavalier Breeders are having the Vapours and have wanted to keep their Cavalier Breeding Practices hidden.

John Armstrong has said in an Article ,that Many Breeds have been Established with Too Few Founders or ones that are already too closely Related.

The Cavalier Breed is involved in both Counts

He also goes onto say ,almost no-one knows how their Genetic Contributions are DISTRIBUTED AMONG THE PRESENT DAY POPULATION

Back to the Present Day, surely it must be understood by the Disbelievers in the EBV Scheme, that the SM Researchers will be the only ones who will know about some of the Cavaliers being IN-Bred ,and could be causing a problem in Breeding Programs.

They must realize that the EBV Scheme is the only way to try and save our Cavalier Breed.

Bet

Bet
23rd February 2010, 07:36 PM
Just to say I do hope that this Thread has made some of you Folk aware about the Problem In-Breeding can cause.

In-Breeding does not cause the Problem, but if it's there ,it can be brought to the Fore by In-Breeding.

I just wonder if this could maybe be a reason why the MVD Problem has been mentioned in our Cavalier Breed, that it's no better than it was 18 years ago.

Finally it was great to read just now that the Die Hards are now going to leave me alone.

Hope they keep their word on this.

Finally ,Finally , all my Posts are all my OWN VIEWS , I am what you would call ,a Thinking Woman.!

Bet

Bet
25th February 2010, 10:47 AM
This is sure a co-incidence and links in with my Previouus Posts.

The Head-Lines in To-Day's Dog World.

KENNEL CLUB NEW DATA BASE TO IMPROVE GENECTIC DIVERSITY

The KC says that from this Data Base will develope a Mate Select Program which will be accessed via the KC Web-Site ,and will be the first of it's kind to allow both Occasional and Regular Breeders to Assess the Impact a Proposed Mating will have on the Genetic Diversity within their Breed.

As new Health-Screening Tools are developed they will be incorporated into Mate Select ,so that in future Breeders will be able to Select Mating Pairs which will Maximise the Chances of Producing Healthy Puppies ,while having the Optimum Impact on the Breed's Genetic Diversity the KC said this week.

Professor Jeff. Sampson ,the KC'S Scientific Advisor said,the KC has been working with Scientists for many years to develope Estimated Breeding Values .These are based on very complicated Calculations such as the Prevelance of Certain Diseases in a Particular Breed(MVD Springs to Mind In our Cavaliers, I just don't know about SM )or the size of the Gene Pool.

This must surely be the Best News possible for our Cavalier Breed.

Bet.

Bet
25th February 2010, 06:22 PM
Had another read at the Dog world Article , does any-body know if this different from the Drs Blott and Lewis, EBV Scheme for Cavaliers.

Bet

EddyAnne
26th February 2010, 12:29 AM
Had another read at the Dog world Article , does any-body know if this different from the Drs Blott and Lewis, EBV Scheme for Cavaliers.

I have mentioned several times before that I read that the KC wanted to expand the EBV Program to include other breeds regarding their health issues, so today's news is no surprise to me.

I'd say that the most likely probability is that it is Sarah's and Tom's EBV Program and which could be available and linked to the KC website from the AHT.

BUT, I'd say the less likely probability is that this is another program which Jeff Sampson and the KC purchased and there are several EBV software programs available out there. Jeff is a Geneticist where he would know about EBVs and be able to operate such a software program, and today's software programs are more "user friendly" than they were years ago. Also he has been working with Sarah and Tom regarding the EBV Program and seeing them setup the software program where later he might have said "I could easily do that".

Maybe you could wait to find out more information about this and I think that the KC may want to promote it as THEIR health initiative to help breedS and it is the Kennel Club Charitable Trust that is funding Sarah and Toms EBV Program. But if you want to know now then why not try contacting Jeff, Sarah or Tom and ask them.

On DogWorld I also noticed this article where it might be interesting to watch that documentary and I noticed this.
Contributors include Professor Bateson, the Kennel Club’s Caroline Kisko, former British Veterinary Association president Nicky Paull, Dogs Today editor Beverley Cuddy.
More4’s head Hamish Mykura said the programme would not shy away from the controversies raised by BBC1’s Pedigree Dogs Exposed, which led to the corporation severing its ties with the dog show.
"More4 to screen breeding and welfare documentary after Crufts".
http://www.dogworld.co.uk/News/08-More4
.

Bet
26th February 2010, 11:26 AM
Just done that.

Bet

Bet
27th February 2010, 10:39 AM
Now that the Kennel Club have become involved about warning of the dangers of In-Breeding,and have newly introduced a Data Base to Improve Genetic Diversity,could I mention further comments from John Armstrong.

Many Breeders still cling to the idea that In-Breeding is the only route to success ,that they can use it as a Tool to Identify and Weed out Genetic Problems in their Line.

They will cite the success of certain Breeders who In- Bred Extensively ,unaware or conviently ignoring that the most successful litters from these Kennels were often the least In-Bred

Those Breeders also seem to be unaware that Many Studies on a Wide Variety of Species have demonstrated that Highly In-Bred Individuals frequently live Shorter lives and have fewer Progeny.There has been mention that Cavaliers are now Living Shorter Lives ,their Average Life Span is down, I can't Comment on the Cavaliers' Litter Sizes ,any-body know.

In-Breeding Depression results, in part, from bringing to-gether of Deleterious Recessive Genes ,inherited via Both Parents from a Common Ancestor.

We know that some of our Cavaliers' Ancestors were suffering from Heart Trouble in the 40's- 50's etc, that there has been In-Breeding in Cavaliers carried out for a long time ,is this now why it's being said by the Researchers into the MVD Problem in our Cavalier Breed ,that there could be Many Cavaliers around to- day Carriers of the MVD GEne/Genes.

Bet Hargreaves

Bet
28th February 2010, 12:01 PM
Since Professor Bateson made his strong views known about In-Breeding in his Recent Report, even that he considered Grand- Father to Grand Daughter ,Grand-Mother to Grand-Son as In-Breeding,could I mention that a Meeting has just been held with the British Veterinary Association ,British Small Animal Veterinary Association ,Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons ,along with other Welfare Orginations ,the KC ,DEFRA anf the Scottish Government ,to consider the recent 3 Breeding Reports.

This Group agreed to work on a Proposial to set up an Advisory Council on Welfare Issues of Dog Breeding as Recommended by Professor Bateson.

The BVA also said it strongly supports the idea set out in Professor Bateson's Report that an Advisory Council should be independant.

I would think ,Interesting Times Lie Ahead in the Dog World.

This is all due to Jemima Harrison and her PDE TV Program.

Bet

Nicki
1st March 2010, 02:17 PM
There has been discussion recently about the brother/sister mating which took place a few years ago.

I would like to assure people that this mating was an accident - we are all human and make mistakes sometimes...

The breeder did the responsible thing by registering the puppies.

The puppies were MRI'd, heart and eye tested and went to carefully vetted homes where they were all castrated or spayed so could not be bred on from.

This breeder has been heart and eye testing for 20 years and all her breeding dogs are also MRI scanned.




It is very difficult to keep dogs and bitches together, however this is often necessary for breeding programs. Both sexes can be very clever and determined when a bitch is in season - I have a dog here who escapes from a 30" high puppy pen, has been known to jump over a baby gate, and even clear a 5ft fence in the garden :eek:

I have known other Cavaliers clear higher fences, also climb up wire netting and force their way through hedges...dogs have even been known to mate through wire fences etc.

Karlin
1st March 2010, 03:43 PM
Yes I have had this confirmed as well. Situations like this are regrettable, but happen. I think the general consensus is that very close matings are quite rare nowadays as deliberate acts -- though there are still those that defend them, but they are increasingly thin on the ground.

I think that larger issue is that early deliberate matings of that sort may have created genetic bottlenecks that mean many cavaliers these days, though they seem distant relations on a 5 or even 10 generation pedigree, actually have a very close level of relatedness. I think many don't realise the COI is actually very high as they go on too few generations.

Working towards greater genetic diversity as part of the larger health picture, as some national and international breed clubs are doing, seems an important way forward.

Bet
1st March 2010, 03:47 PM
All I know is and have passed the information on from Professor D .Balding ,Institute of Genetics,University College ,London.

I don't know the names of any Cavalier Breeders involved, except some in the early 80's ,who had carried out Half- Brother to Half -Sister Matings, and these were Whole- Colours. These Pedigrees ,I passed onto the Researchers.

What Professor Balding said ,was that ,he had been involved in an Analysis on the Cavalier Breed,1980-2007.What those Records showed that the Average In-Breeding Co-Efficient from 6-8 Generations in those years is lower than in many other Breeds,and the over-use of PopularSires is at least no worse than in other Breeds

How-ever ,there are some Very In-Bred Cavaliers ,the worst had an In-Breeding Co-Efficient of nearly 50% over 7 Generations ,which almost corresponds to the Two Parents being Genetically Identical.

Professor J. Bell has also mentioned ,that there are Two Factors that must be considered when Evaluating Genetic Diversity and Health Issues in a Breed

The Average Level of In-Breeding ,and Detrimental Recessive Genes.
The Founding Population ,Professor Bell, goes onto say ,if the Founding Population of a Breed produces a High Frequency of a Deleterious Recesive Gene,then the Breed will have Issues with that Disorder.

This can be as Smaller Litter Size, increased Neonatal Death ,High Frequency Genetic Disease ,or Impared Immunity

He further mentions ,if these issues are Present then the Breed needs to seriously consider limited
Genetic Diversity.

Bet

Karlin
1st March 2010, 04:07 PM
Yes, I think this kind of close breeding was far more prevalent in the 80s than now.

Bet
3rd March 2010, 07:34 PM
Just a wee update ,I am still trying to find out whether To-Days ' Cavaliers will be Influenced by the In -Breeding in the Past when the Cavalier Breed was being Established.

I know that the MVD Researchers are now looking at what happened to the Cavalier Breed in the early days , who were suffering from Heart Trouble, whether this means that there could be many of To-Days' Cavaliers around now who are Carriers of the MVD Gene/Genes.

Bet

Bet
5th March 2010, 07:10 PM
Just had a Reply to my Question.

Breeding from a Small Number of Dogs will likely Result in less Genetic Diversity as opposed to,say

a Breed that developes 20 Years,from Hundreds of Individuals.( The Cavalier Breed as we know was not like this, as has been said by both Mrs A. Pitt the Founder of the Cavalier Breed , and Katie Eldred )

However , technically ,there is still Genetic Diversity in the Cavaliers ,if there was,nt all the Cavaliers would be Genetically Identical ,i,e, Clones.

With the EBV Research ,it will be found out how much Genetic Variation there is with respect to Disease.

The In-Breeding Coefficient is a useful but Retrospective indicator for each Individual Dog .

Geneticists tend to look more at the rate of In-Breeding in the General Population,which is indicitive of the Proportional rate of loss of Genetic

Diversity ,( i.e 5% per Generation),in the Recent Past.

I would think from this explanation ,the EBV Scheme, for our Cavaliers , will be the only answer that will come from the EBV's to combat the Cavaliers' Two Serious Health Problems ,SM and MVD

Bet.

Bet
10th March 2010, 11:04 AM
I think this information will be allowed on this Thread.

I have just noticed this Web Site which gives such an amount of Information about the Pedigrees of our Cavalier Breed, including INBREEDING.

cavalierpedigrees.com

The one thing though that struck me was ,the In-Bred information is there ,but ,and this is a big BUT,it is only through the EBV Information from Drs S.Blott and T.Lewis, who will have the knowledge of the Cavaliers' Health to Link in with the In-Bred Information that will be of any use for Cavalier Breeders for their Breeding Programs gained through the EBV Scheme.

Bet

Bet
10th March 2010, 07:18 PM
Could I add that to-day Jemima Harrison , the Producer of the PDE TV Film, has written an open Letter to the Kennel Club,which has appeared in some News Papers and a Dog Magazine,accusing the KC of failing not doing enough for Pedigree Dogs.

She has mentioned that the KC was still allowing In-Breeding and animals continue to wither genetically

Cavliers were still mentioned by one News Paper, the Independant, as having Brains too Big for their Skulls.this News Paper also mentioned about the Independant Inquiry funded by the KC and the Dogs Trust and of the recommendations to tackle In-Breeding made

The KC has set up a Breed Information Centre on it's Web Site, but Jemima Harrison has said in her Letter ,that these Measures were inadequate and Condemned In-Breeding with Second Degree Relatives ,such as Grand -Father with Grand-Daughter or Uncle and Niece.

In Jemima Harrison's Letter ,she also accused the KC of promising to tackle Genetic Diversity ,but they are not doing enough to truly Deal with this Key Issue,

She further says ,it is time now to Properly tackle this Bigger Issue ,because until the KC does , the Dogs will continue to be INBRED into OBLIVION.

Bet

EddyAnne
10th March 2010, 10:12 PM
I have just noticed this Web Site which gives such an amount of Information about the Pedigrees of our Cavalier Breed, including INBREEDING.

cavalierpedigrees.com

The one thing though that struck me was ,the In-Bred information is there ,but ,and this is a big BUT,it is only through the EBV Information from Drs S.Blott and T.Lewis, who will have the knowledge of the Cavaliers' Health to Link in with the In-Bred Information that will be of any use for Cavalier Breeders for their Breeding Programs gained through the EBV Scheme.

Bet I think that the EBV Program is the way to go for the Breed.
All the In-Bred information back to 1980 is included within Sarah Blott's EBV Program and I think that they already have what they need regarding this.
Health testing information is also included within Sarah Blott's EBV Program but they really do need MORE health testing results plus cheek swabs to be sent to the AHT.
Dr. Tom Lewis (Quantitative Geneticist, AHT) recently talked about the Cavalier EBV Program at a UK Cavalier Club and where he mentioned - The official BVA/KC Heart and CM/SM Schemes (SOON to be introduced) will help a great deal and hopefully speed up the flow of health data to the AHT.

In regards to the Schemes I noted that Specialists will be talking to THE PUBLIC at Crufts "Health Zone" and where even the visiting media might decide to have a chat with them, and I think that the proposed new schemes may start SOON.
I noticed the following update news at this link address.
http://www.thecavalierclub.co.uk/start.html

UK Cavalier Club
Updated 09.03.10

CRUFTS 2010: Proposed New BVA/KC Screening Schemes CM/SM and Hearts

CM / SM
On Saturday 13th March (Toy Day) there will be a Specialist available in the ‘Kennel Club Health Zone’ for consultation on the proposed new scheme. Owners of Cavaliers and Griffon and some other toy breeds are invited to visit the Health Zone for discussion on the subject.

HEARTS
On Thursday 11th (Working and Pastoral Day) and on Saturday 13th (Toy Group Day), there will be a Specialist available in the ‘Kennel Club Health Zone’ for consultation on the progress towards setting up of a new heart screening scheme that will involve several breeds, including Cavaliers.

We hope that as many members as possible will take this opportunity to find out more about the proposed scheme procedures, costs and breeding advice.
The ‘Health Zone’ is situated in the Main Kennel Club stand in Hall 3/3A.
.

Bet
11th March 2010, 11:17 AM
Could I say that I do agree with EddyAnne, that the EBV Scheme is the only way to go to try and save our Cavalier Breed .

I have just checked on the cavalierpedigrees.com Web Site.

Our Cavalier who had Epilepsy ,had an Inbred % of around 4,now if her condition had not been known to the EBV Scheme, just think of the Health Problem this would have caused to the Scheme, she did make Crufts, and was also Best in Show at an all Breed Show, so she could maybe been considered by some Cavalier Breeders that she would be OK to have in a Cavalier Pedigree Back-ground Breeding Program.

This is why I think it's so important for the Health Status and In-Bred %'s to go Hand in Hand.

I have also checked out other Cavaliers that I know who have died from Heart Trouble ,and in quite a number of cases they also had low In-Bred %'s

Bet

Bet
12th March 2010, 12:37 PM
Could I add to my Previous Post.

I have around 35 Pedigrees of Cavaliers with SM.

I have just worked out their In-Bred Percentages,from the cavalierpedigrees.com

The %'s have sure given me food for thought.

One was 13.6% ,the other 10.3%.

The rest were all under 7%.

So maybe this shows how important it is ,for Cavalier Breeders ,for their Cavalier Breeding Programs, not just to depend on In- Bred %'s ,but it is more important to know about the Health of the Cavaliers as is given in the Information from the EBV Scheme.

Bet

EddyAnne
12th March 2010, 06:52 PM
Bet here is something to think about regarding inbreeding/diversity. Note that in this particular case low genetic diversity may help rather than hinder. An Australian icon the Tasmanian Devil and where there has been a lot of Research done and the following is from this link address.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/special-devils-may-save-species-from-extinction-in-wild/story-e6frg8y6-1225839496036

The Australian
March 11, 2010
'Special' devils may save species from extinction in wild

NEW research has raised hopes for the beleaguered Tasmanian devil, finding that 20 per cent of the species have a genetic make-up that should allow them to resist the deadly devil facial tumour disease.

DFTD, a unique communicable cancer, has wiped out about 70 per cent of the carnivorous marsupial, and it is feared the species could be extinct in the wild within 25 years.

However, work by the universities of Tasmania and Sydney, released yesterday, has found that the devils' low genetic diversity may help, rather than hinder, the fight against the disease.

Scientists found about 20 per cent of devils, focused mostly in Tasmania's northwest, have only one or the other of two types of immune genes -- not a mix of both. This means their immune systems should be able to recognise DFTD cancer cells -- which have both types of the genes -- as "foreign".

These devils' natural defences should then be able to fight the disease, which in other devils would slip under the immune system's radar.

"It gives us all a little ray of hope or sunshine to keep us going," said Kathy Belov, a University of Sydney scientist and lead author of the work. "It buys us some time."

The "special" devils with the less diverse immune genes are concentrated in Tasmania's largely disease-free northwest, while the remaining 80 per cent are in the disease-ravaged east.

Most of the "special" devils in the northwest have not yet been exposed to DFTD, but there is evidence that those that have so far, have not succumbed to it.

At West Pencil Pine, west of Cradle Mountain, a research field site has recorded no noticeable change in devil numbers almost four years after DFTD arrived.

Compared with northeastern areas, where devil populations have dropped 94 per cent after the arrival of DTFD, this has stunned scientists. "It's really remarkable and it offers the first hope that we've seen that devils may not go extinct in the wild," said co-author of the new paper Menna Jones.
.

Bet
12th March 2010, 07:22 PM
EddyAnne, with the SM Cavalier Pedigrees I mentioned , does that mean that they have a Low Genetic Diversity.Is this what Dr T Lewis also mentioned about at the Recent SM Seminar ,about Cavaliers and their Genetic Diversity being not too bad.

Bet

EddyAnne
12th March 2010, 09:35 PM
Bet maybe contact Tom Lewis and ask him what he mentioned at the recent Cavalier Club Seminar, and someone mentioned he had some sort of graph and which I would like to see in case you get your hands on it.

Bet I think that Sarah Blott and Tom Lewis are keeping an eye on the inbreeding/diversity since 1980, and also keeping an eye on all the health test results they have obtained so far and what they obtain in the future. From this I think they may have a idea of what may be best for the Cavalier breed and their particular problems. Even if the genes are found for CM/SM and MVD they will still be keeping an eye on the inbreeding/diversity, for if the inherited disease genes have spread far and wide they may decide it best to "gradually breed away" this in relation to the inbreeding/diversity that presents at that particular time.

Where DNA testing is already available there are breed clubs and breeders who experienced a revelation, and here is something to think about.

Where I am we have Government Legislation and Government Codes of Practice regarding Heritable Diseases and where DNA testing is available. Where applicable Breed Clubs have already been asked to submit a Breeding Program using DNA testing to "breed away" from the Heritable Diseases, and the submitted Breeding Programs may become "Approved Breeding Programs". Think about this also regarding legalities and which involves Government "Approved Breeding Programs" and who also utilise the Veterinary Authority.

In Breeds where Heritable Disease Genes have spread far and wide even those DNA tested as Affected could be utilised, BUT breeders MUST comply to the "Approved Breeding Programs". To get some idea I have included a copy and paste of a couple of sections from the Government Codes of Practice.

Affected x Clear

1. Breeding prohibited unless as part of an approved breeding program and only with the purpose of establishing sufficient breeding stock for the breeding program to develop Clear animals.

2. The severity of the disease in progeny must be assessed by a veterinary practitioner and the animal managed in accordance with the instructions of a veterinary practitioner.

3. A diseased (Carrier and Affected) animal’s must not be disposed of to another person without advice of the animals’ heritable disease status.

4. Diseased (Carrier and Affected) animals must be de-sexed unless they are to be used in an approved breeding program, must not be permitted by their owner to suffer from their condition and must be under the supervision and monitoring of a veterinary practitioner.

6 APPROVED BREEDING PROGRAMS AND APPROVED ORGANISATIONS

6.1 Approved breeding programs must be reviewed every 3 years by the approved organisation to evaluate progress in reducing the prevalence of the heritable defect and the disease it causes and to ensure that there is compliance by its members with this Code.

6.2 A breeder must be a member of an approved organisation to undertake its approved breeding program.

6.3 Organisations should aspire to develop breeding programs that reduce the prevalence of the heritable defect in their breeding stock.

6.4 Approved Organisations.

Cats and dogs - An ‘applicable organisation’ approved by the Minister for Agriculture in accordance with the Domestic (Feral and Nuisance) Animals Act 1994.
.

Bet
14th March 2010, 07:08 PM
Trying to get an answer why the SM Cavalier Pedigrees I had collected mostly had low In- Bred Percentages.

If I can find out about this, I'll let you know.

Bet

Bet
19th March 2010, 12:32 PM
This might be of a wee bit of interest to some of you, this is the Reply I have been waiting for.

A Genetic Disease is caused in the Simplest case by a Faulty Copy of a Gene.

This is not Uncommon,it is ventured that all Individuals have a few Faulty Copies occuring in Various Cells at some point in our Lives .

Sometimes these Faulty Copies occur in Sex Cells (Sperm and Eggs( ,if they are involved in conception ,then they act as the blurprint for one Copy of that Gene throughout all Cells in that Foetus and then the Animal.

( I now understand the Importance of the Foetal Tissue Research ,sorry I was wrong in my Comments about it)

To carry on with the Reply.

This may not be a Problem if the Gene in the Other Cell involved in Conception is a Normal Healthy Gene,(But the Animal is a Carrier Despite appearing out-wardly Healthy)

However ,if both Inherited Copies are Faulty ,then the Individual will Express Disease .

High Levels of In-Breeding (When Parents have Common Ancestors )make it much more likely that Animals will Inherit TWO COPIES of Faulty Genes ,One From Either Parent .

Highly In-Bred Individuals are likely to have a Higher Proportion of Genes where Both Copies are from the Same Ancestral Source .

The GENETIC DIVERSITY or VARIATION is IMPORTANT as this Helps tell us how Succesfull Selection will be .

For Example say for Disease X all Animals have TWO COPIES of the Affected Gene ,ie . all Animals are Affected .

There is no Variation at that Gene .

If however ,there were 6 Varients of the Gene ,only One is Disease Causing and this was at a Frequency of 5% ,then the Genetic Diversity is Higher and we have many more Animals from which we can Breed from in the hope of Reducing the Frequency of the Disease Causing Varient.

So In-Breeding may Explain how a Genetic Disease is Spread throughout a Breed ,but it is not much help in finding a Solution.

I hope this Reply has given as much Interest to others as it has to me.

Bet

Bet
22nd March 2010, 10:59 AM
Just another wee update from Professor D Balding ,Institute of Genetics, University College,London, this time.

He starts off by saying that the cause of SM is unknown .

That although it can be said that In-Breeding is bad for Health and Genetic Diversity is good ,it does'nt apply the same way to all Diseases and can't explain Disease in Particular Dogs .

That there are different Genetic Mechanisms that cause Different Diseases ,and he thinks the Mechanism is unknown for SM .

He also mentioned that ,in general Genetic Diversity applies to the Breed as a whole ,not particular Dogs. So I would think that with this comment and what was said before, the Cavaliers from 1980 , on the whole, have quite a bit of Genetic Diversity.

I would think that from this Reply ,it must be evident how important it is for the SM Gene/Genes in the Cavalier Breed to be found, and all help be given to the Researchers in carrying out their Research for this.

I don't think that any-body can deny that both for the SM and MVD Cavalier Problems, those Faulty Genes have got to be found ,to give the Cavalier Breed a chance of Survival.

Bet

Nicki
22nd March 2010, 12:51 PM
Thanks for sharing this informaiton Bet - it is really helpful.

EddyAnne - I was fascinated to read about the Tasmanian Devils - we knew that there were huge problems for them, but this does give hope.

Bet
21st April 2010, 06:47 PM
Thanks for sharing this informaiton Bet - it is really helpful.

EddyAnne - I was fascinated to read about the Tasmanian Devils - we knew that there were huge problems for them, but this does give hope.



IN-BREEDING and CKCS.

Could I add this further thought about In-Breeding in our Cavalier Breed as a result of the information concerning the Search for the Post of the Founding Chairman for the UK Independant Advisory Council on Dog Welfare .

This Independant Advisory Council was first mentioned by Professor Sir P.Batesonin his Report published in January 2010,when he also said that Breeding Grand-Mother to Grand-Son and Grand-Father to Grand-Daughter ,was IN-Breeding to a Marked Extent, Page 15.

Since Professor Sir P.Bateson is Emeritus Professor of Ethology at Cambridge University and is President of the Zoological Society of London, I think his Credentials speak for themselves.

It is a fact that a number of Cavalier Breeders have claimed that they have been Breeding Cavaliers for over 25-30 years and have always carried out this Policy for Breeding Cavaliers, mating Grand-Mother to Grand-Son and Grand- Father to Grand -Daughter,but in view of Professor Sir P. Bateson's Statement,should the question now be being asked ,were those Cavalier Breeders wrong in believing that this type of Breeding is not In-Breeding.

Will there be Recommendations that might come from the Independant Advisory Council about this ,and maybe could give our Cavaliers the better chance of a Healthier Future.

This Type of In-Breeding has been carried out when Cavalier Pedigrees are traced back to the Cavalier Breed being Establishedat least 70 years ago by Cavalier Breeders.

Bet

diddy
21st April 2010, 10:49 PM
Bet. Thanks for posting the pic of the Suntops. I've often wondered what they would have looked like.:)

EddyAnne
22nd April 2010, 12:31 PM
This Independant Advisory Council was first mentioned by Professor Sir P.Batesonin his Report published in January 2010,

Bet I’ll add a wee bit of information.

The APGAW Inquiry Report published in November 2009 mentioned an "Independent Advisory Body".

The Bateson Inquiry Report published in January 2010 mentioned an "Independent Advisory Council".

Both of the Inquiry Reports use slightly different names for this "independent advisory group" and both Reports recommend basically the same things in what this group comprises of and what it should do.
.

Bet
27th April 2010, 11:33 AM
IN-BREEDING and CKCS.

Could I add this further thought about In-Breeding in our Cavalier Breed as a result of the information concerning the Search for the Post of the Founding Chairman for the UK Independant Advisory Council on Dog Welfare .

This Independant Advisory Council was first mentioned by Professor Sir P.Batesonin his Report published in January 2010,when he also said that Breeding Grand-Mother to Grand-Son and Grand-Father to Grand-Daughter ,was IN-Breeding to a Marked Extent, Page 15.

Since Professor Sir P.Bateson is Emeritus Professor of Ethology at Cambridge University and is President of the Zoological Society of London, I think his Credentials speak for themselves.

It is a fact that a number of Cavalier Breeders have claimed that they have been Breeding Cavaliers for over 25-30 years and have always carried out this Policy for Breeding Cavaliers, mating Grand-Mother to Grand-Son and Grand- Father to Grand -Daughter,but in view of Professor Sir P. Bateson's Statement,should the question now be being asked ,were those Cavalier Breeders wrong in believing that this type of Breeding is not In-Breeding.

Will there be Recommendations that might come from the Independant Advisory Council about this ,and maybe could give our Cavaliers the better chance of a Healthier Future.

This Type of In-Breeding has been carried out when Cavalier Pedigrees are traced back to the Cavalier Breed being Establishedat least 70 years ago by Cavalier Breeders.

Bet

IN-BREEDING and CKCS


I hope it's still OK to mention again the subject of IN-BREEDING and how it could involve our Cavalier Breed.

Cavalier Breeders look to enhance the Breed , improve the quality ,this means ,Physical ,Mental and Conformance to the Breed Standard.

This takes time ,and some-times requires decisions to be made regarding the Acceptable level of IN-BREEDING

By Mating a Cavalier to one of it's Relatives certain Features are being tried to Enhance a Trait of that Line

Usually this means out-wardly Visible Signs like Bone Structure ,Ear Positioning, or Physical Size.

What cannot be seen are the Internal Traits ,like Immunodeficiency etc, by the time those Health Problems appear ,it is too late.

There are certain combinations of Genes that to-gether cause Problems and IN-BREEDING Reinforces and Magnifies these Adverse effects since they have a Stronger Presence.

The Problem arises when TWO OFF-SPRING with COMMON ANCESTORS both have a COMMON DESCENDANT ,maybe following a Mating between Cavaliers who Share a Common Sire.

The Gene contributed by the SIRE ,the Probability that IDENTICAL COPIES of the Same Gene will be passed on to BOTH OFF-SPRING is 50%,since there is only a Choice of Two.

Similarly ,the Probability that the OFF-SPRING from a Mating between these TWO Siblings will receive Identical Copies of the Gene from each Parent is also 50%,making the Overall Probability of a Cavalier having TWO Identical GENES 25% ,that is 50% of 50% .

In this example the INBREEDING CO-EFFICIENT is 25%.

This information is fine ,but the Problem for Cavaliers ,is we know that the Inbreeding of many Cavalier Ancestors is HIGH and this is so Important when working out In-Breeding Co-Efficients.

What this means ,is that when Breeding Cavaliers ,Breeders should be looking for Few or No Ancestors appearing in the Pedigrees of Cavaliers who are to be Mated.

This is all about Reinforcing Defects over Several Genreations ,and how much Cavalier Breeders are willing to accept in weighing up the ODDS.

Bet

Bet
27th April 2010, 03:25 PM
IN-BREEDING and CKCS


I hope it's still OK to mention again the subject of IN-BREEDING and how it could involve our Cavalier Breed.

Cavalier Breeders look to enhance the Breed , improve the quality ,this means ,Physical ,Mental and Conformance to the Breed Standard.

This takes time ,and some-times requires decisions to be made regarding the Acceptable level of IN-BREEDING

By Mating a Cavalier to one of it's Relatives certain Features are being tried to Enhance a Trait of that Line

Usually this means out-wardly Visible Signs like Bone Structure ,Ear Positioning, or Physical Size.

What cannot be seen are the Internal Traits ,like Immunodeficiency etc, by the time those Health Problems appear ,it is too late.

There are certain combinations of Genes that to-gether cause Problems and IN-BREEDING Reinforces and Magnifies these Adverse effects since they have a Stronger Presence.

The Problem arises when TWO OFF-SPRING with COMMON ANCESTORS both have a COMMON DESCENDANT ,maybe following a Mating between Cavaliers who Share a Common Sire.

The Gene contributed by the SIRE ,the Probability that IDENTICAL COPIES of the Same Gene will be passed on to BOTH OFF-SPRING is 50%,since there is only a Choice of Two.

Similarly ,the Probability that the OFF-SPRING from a Mating between these TWO Siblings will receive Identical Copies of the Gene from each Parent is also 50%,making the Overall Probability of a Cavalier having TWO Identical GENES 25% ,that is 50% of 50% .

In this example the INBREEDING CO-EFFICIENT is 25%.

This information is fine ,but the Problem for Cavaliers ,is we know that the Inbreeding of many Cavalier Ancestors is HIGH and this is so Important when working out In-Breeding Co-Efficients.

What this means ,is that when Breeding Cavaliers ,Breeders should be looking for Few or No Ancestors appearing in the Pedigrees of Cavaliers who are to be Mated.

This is all about Reinforcing Defects over Several Genreations ,and how much Cavalier Breeders are willing to accept in weighing up the ODDS.

Bet



I forgot to say what I mentioned this morning about IN -Breeding was from a Paper on In- Breeding Explained

Just passing onto those who might be interested this Information,also maybe I was not explicit enough in saying ,that Breeders should be reminded what they should be looking for , is No Same Ancestors appearing in the Pedigrees of the TWO Cavaliers who are to be being Mated.

Sorry if I did not make this clear.

Bet

Bet
28th April 2010, 11:02 AM
I forgot to say what I mentioned this morning about IN -Breeding was from a Paper on In- Breeding Explained

Just passing onto those who might be interested this Information,also maybe I was not explicit enough in saying ,that Breeders should be reminded what they should be looking for , is No Same Ancestors appearing in the Pedigrees of the TWO Cavaliers who are to be being Mated.

Sorry if I did not make this clear.

Bet


IN-BREEDING and CKCS


Could I just mention that there is a Survey taking place in Australia at the moment on the IN-Breeding Problem in Pedigree Dogs.

I contacted those involved in this Research explaining that the Cavaliers in Australia would probably have been exported from Britain in the early days ,and presumeably will have many of the same Genes and had had the In-Bred Back-grounds

Also that the 6 Founders of the Cavalier Breed ,themselves ,were closely In-Bred.

That in the 1930's Mother was mated to Son , Father to Daughter , and unfortunately the 2nd World War came just about 5 years later when this type of Breeding was being carried out to get the Cavalier Breed established ,and these Breeding Programs had to be still carried out.

Also that Mrs A. Pitt,the Founder of the Cavalier Breed had mentioned in 1957, that no thought had been given by the Breeders as to the Future of the Cavaliers by the In-Breeding.

I have just received an E-Mail ,thanking me for this information , that it will be of interest .

Bet

Bet
28th April 2010, 07:40 PM
I forgot to say what I mentioned this morning about IN -Breeding was from a Paper on In- Breeding Explained

Just passing onto those who might be interested this Information,also maybe I was not explicit enough in saying ,that Breeders should be reminded what they should be looking for , is No Same Ancestors appearing in the Pedigrees of the TWO Cavaliers who are to be being Mated.

Sorry if I did not make this clear.

Bet

IN-BREEDING and CKCS

Just to apologise again for my mistake, I have a wee Problem, I am an Epileptic , some-times get a bit confused when I'm Typing my Posts.

Bet

Karlin
28th April 2010, 07:54 PM
That's OK Bet, many of us are aware of this and I know you generally take the time to post a correction if you realise there's been an accidental error. :) Thanks for the many pieces of information too!

RodRussell
28th April 2010, 10:24 PM
... Cavalier Breeders look to enhance the Breed , improve the quality ,this means ,Physical ,Mental and Conformance to the Breed Standard.

This takes time ,and some-times requires decisions to be made regarding the Acceptable level of IN-BREEDING

By Mating a Cavalier to one of it's Relatives certain Features are being tried to Enhance a Trait of that Line

Usually this means out-wardly Visible Signs like Bone Structure ,Ear Positioning, or Physical Size.

What cannot be seen are the Internal Traits ,like Immunodeficiency etc, by the time those Health Problems appear ,it is too late. ...

I think that some Cavalier breeders mate close relatives, not just for externally visible physical traits, but also for those less visible internal traits, particularly such as temperament and even genetic health (such as, an older sire with a healthy heart). So, I do not agree that the rule should be to never breed Cavaliers with ancestors in common within the most recent generations.

When you criticize breeders solely because they may line-breed or select mates with recent common ancestors, I think you may not be giving some of them credit for actually giving a lot of thought to their selections and trying to improve their bloodlines.


... Also that Mrs A. Pitt,the Founder of the Cavalier Breed had mentioned in 1957, that no thought had been given by the Breeders as to the Future of the Cavaliers by the In-Breeding. ...

As for Mrs. Pitt's quote, I see a lot of Cavalier breeders not giving thought as to the future of the breed, but line-breeding per se should not be universally condemned.

EddyAnne
29th April 2010, 02:18 AM
Could I just mention that there is a Survey taking place in Australia at the moment on the IN-Breeding Problem in Pedigree Dogs.

I contacted those involved in this Research explaining that the Cavaliers in Australia would probably have been exported from Britain in the early days ,and presumeably will have many of the same Genes and had had the In-Bred Back-grounds ........................

I have just received an E-Mail ,thanking me for this information , that it will be of interest .

Bet you probably would have contacted Researchers in Australia. I think that the reply email you received might have included something like this:-
"The early indications of the research into the coefficient of inbreeding indicates that we have a low COI in Australia".

You may have read the following which I posted elswhere and I may as well post it here as some may be interested. In the following I noted this and I think that some time after that date I may post some more information on what may be happening in Australia.
"This form also sets a target for all clubs to develop a breeding practices policy by June 2010."

Also Dr Frank Nicholas mentioned below is actually an Emeritus Professor and apparently is doing some sort of heritable diseases database for the UK RSPCA, this where veterinarians around the UK can input information into the database, also I think that at Sydney University Associate Professor Paul McGreevy may also be involved with this. I think that the UK AHT and BVA just might also be involved, and remember a while back some comments were made after some UK Cavalier breeders arranged for question forms to be sent out to veterinarians so as to find out from them how many SM cases they may have seen in their practice. The APGAW and Bateson Reports both mention the importance of collecting health information and to have a database.

Anyway the following is from the DOC format document at this address.
http://www.dogsvictoria.org.au/assets/coi-research.doc

IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING
RESEARCH INTO COEFFICIENT OF INBREEDING IN PUREBRED DOGS.

In 2008, Dr Frank Nicholas, from Sydney University, approached the ANKC for approval to be granted access to the pedigree data from the ANKC national database. The reason for having access to this data was for research purposes in setting up a heritable diseases database. This was agreed at the ANKC conference held in October 2008.

It is important for all members to realise that the data supplied does not include any member’s personal details and is, in fact, totally non-identifying data that is given to anyone making pedigree enquiries into the database. The only difference is that the entire database was released rather than the normal practice of only releasing those details pertaining to a specific enquiry.

Part of the process of this research project is that two postgraduate students from the University of Sydney are using the data to conduct research into the coefficient of inbreeding (COI) of purebred dogs.

Considering the situation that arose in the United Kingdom as a result of a BBC television program concerning breeding practices amongst dog breeders in the UK, DOGS Victoria believes there is a possibility, that once the research students’ work is published, some public focus may arise in Australia about inbreeding of purebred dogs.

DOGS Victoria believes in being proactive and will be taking a leadership role on this issue. We are strongly recommending that all breeders, national breed councils, and breed clubs establish and implement an improved breeding practices policy with consideration for the overall health and welfare of your particular breed.

DOGS Victoria acknowledges that quite a number of national breed councils, breed clubs and breeders already have responsible breeding practices in place, and it is requested these breeding requirements, or litter registrations limitations (LRL), be forwarded to the DOGS Victoria office by emailing office@dogsvictoria.org.au .

If you, your club, or your national breed council requires assistance in developing a breeding practices policy, please feel free to contact DOGS Victoria by emailing office@dogsvictoria.org.au or the DOGS Victoria canine health committee by emailing zenchel@westnet.com.au .

All clubs will have received a survey form from the DOGS Victoria office to assist in listing their breeding requirements or LRL. This form also sets a target for all clubs to develop a breeding practices policy by June 2010.

The early indications of the research into the coefficient of inbreeding indicates that we have a low COI in Australia, so the results of this research should show purebred dogs in a positive light in Australia, and as such we will continue to support this important research.
.

Bet
29th April 2010, 10:46 AM
[QUOTE=RodRussell;359521]I think that some Cavalier breeders mate close relatives, not just for externally visible physical traits, but also for those less visible internal traits, particularly such as temperament and even genetic health (such as, an older sire with a healthy heart). So, I do not agree that the rule should be to never breed Cavaliers with ancestors in common within the most recent generations.


In-Breeding and CKCS


First of all could I just say thank you Karlin for understanding about my Problem ,for some reason my brain seems to go quicker than my mind some-times when I am Typing or Thinking.I will for sure after all this Carry-on watch out for this in Future Posts.

To the IN-BREEDING in our CKCS Breed.

Any -thing I have Posted has been from the information I have collected from Geneticists or other Experts and the Papers they have written about this Subject.

As an Example, in the recent Bateson Report ,Professor Sir P. Bateson said most emphatically that, Breeding Grand-Mother to Grand-Son, and Grand-Father to Grand -Daughter is NOT LINE BREEDING ,it is IN-BREEDING.

I am only quoting what he said.

I can only say ,that because of my interest in collecting Cavalier Pedigrees over many years, that seems to have been common Practice in our Cavalier Breed's Breeding Programs.

Whether that was right or wrong ,I am not qualified to say, but just have to take the word of Professor Sir P. Bateson about this.

Also I was told by Professor J Sampson from the Kennel Club ,a few years ago that ,IN-Breeding ,will not cause a Hereditary Problem in a Dog Breed ,it will just bring it to the Fore.

I am just stating a Fact here ,I collected Cavalier Pedigrees in the 1980's when Half- Brothers were being Mated to Half-Sisters, those Pedigrees were sent to Liverpool University, for their Research into Cavalier Health Problems, I do know that a Particular Gene was found that was giving the Researchers some interest and this Gene seemed to be be being involved with the Cavaliers' In-Breeding.

Bet

RodRussell
29th April 2010, 02:56 PM
[QUOTE=RodRussell;359521]... As an Example, in the recent Bateson Report ,Professor Sir P. Bateson said most emphatically that, Breeding Grand-Mother to Grand-Son, and Grand-Father to Grand -Daughter is NOT LINE BREEDING ,it is IN-BREEDING. ...

I do not know anything about Prof. Bateson's qualifications to differentiate between line breeding and in-breeding, but if mating a grandmother to a grandson or a grandfather to a grandson is not line breeding, that what IS line breeding?

Bet
29th April 2010, 04:26 PM
[QUOTE=Bet;359558]

I do not know anything about Prof. Bateson's qualifications to differentiate between line breeding and in-breeding, but if mating a grandmother to a grandson or a grandfather to a grandson is not line breeding, that what IS line breeding?

IN-BREEDING and CKCS



Professor Sir P.Bateson, is Emeritus Professor of Ethology at Cambridge University,Britain

He is President of the Zoological Society of London

Is a Research Scientist.

Has written many Books and Papers amongst them,. the Developmental Biology and also Genetics.

Was also asked by the Kennel Club to Chair an Independant Inquiry into Dog Breeding .

His Report was Published in January 2010.

All I know is that in Page 15 of his Report and also in Chapter 6,

If a Breeder Mates Grand- Father with Grand-Daughter ,Grand-Mother with Grand-Son , ,he or she is In-Breeding and doing so to a Marked Extent.

From Chapter 6 of the Report .Professor Sir P Bateson quotes Calboli et al ..2008.
About the Small Number of Animals that Founded a Breed.

In our Cavalier Breed ,there were 6 Founders .














Ann's Son

Wizbang Timothy, Ann's Son's Litter Brother

Carlo of Ttiweh

Duce of Braemore

Aristide of Ttweh

Kobba of Korunda

This was written by Mrs E. Booth in her Book , published 1983 ,from these 6 Stud Dogs the Breed was formed.

Some of these Dogs were also In-Bred them-selves.

Professor Sir P.Bateson also continues to explain that In-Breeding tends to Fix Recessive Deleterious Traits and thereby Increase the Number of Animals in which the Disease is apparent

Can any-body deny that the MVD Problem in Cavaliers is not apparent ,when it was said at the UK CKCS CLUB's AGM last years that 50% 0f Cavaliers will have a Heart Murmur at 5 years of age, and this is no better than it was 18 years ago.

Bet

RodRussell
29th April 2010, 04:53 PM
... Professor Sir P.Bateson also continues to explain that In-Breeding tends to Fix Recessive Deleterious Traits and thereby Increase the Number of Animals in which the Disease is apparent

Can any-body deny that the MVD Problem in Cavaliers is not apparent ,when it was said at the UK CKCS CLUB's AGM last years that 50% 0f Cavaliers will have a Heart Murmur at 5 years of age, and this is no better than it was 18 years ago. ...

I don't doubt that in-breeding (or line-breeding, which is what we really are talking about) could fix recessive traits, but the assumption being made here is that in-breeding only makes a bloodline worse and cannot improve it.

For example, I would seriously consider mating a grandfather with a clear heart at, say 8 years, with his granddaughter with a clear heart at 2.5 years. That would be line-breeding, but what would be wrong with it?

You may answer by suggesting a "parade of horribles", such as hidden recessive genetic immune problems in the bloodline, which allegedly only line-breeding would bring to the fore. But, I don't agree. You don't have to line-breed to find out if your Cavaliers have immune problems or may be carriers of hip dysplasia, etc. You know that from your experiences with your breeding stock and their siblings. And if they have genetic immune problems or are HD carriers, then you also should take that knowledge into account when deciding whether to breed or not.

Oreo
29th April 2010, 06:11 PM
Rod, I don't believe there has been an assumption put out that inbreeding/linebreeding only makes lines worse, although I do believe there are some breeders that are defensive about this and that are possibly reading that assumption into every post on the topic. We all know that inbreeding/linebreeding has also been what has helped fix desirable traits.

Throughout the thread what has been mentioned is that "risks" are involved when using linebreeding/inbreeding, and that they have to be acknowledged instead of glossed over. I don't believe acknowledging those risks and how they have also negatively impacted dog breeds is a universal condemnation.

Prof. Bateson is well qualified and is very correct in bringing attention to this. These words of his, when speaking of disease, are spot on.

"In-Breeding tends to Fix Recessive Deleterious Traits and thereby Increase the Number of Animals in which the Disease is apparent"

(Geneticists, BTW, tend to call any mating of animals with known shared relatives inbreeding, and they don't differentiate between linebreeding and inbreeding as some breeders do in some species.)

You mention that for experienced breeders, knowledge of health of breeding stock and their ancestors are important indicators of what might crop up and should be taken into account. That is fantastic advice. It is, I believe, the backbone of good breeding whether a breeder is linebreeding or deliberately favoring the assortative breeding method (breeding like to like but not closely related).

Knowing background health is unfortunately not fool-proof especially in regards to conditions with polygenic modes of inheritance with any breeding method used. When linebreeding/inbreeding are used the risks DO increase. That is a lesson that should be learned when polygenic conditions that are normally incredibly rare in a population become widespread - like SM.

In an earlier post you mentioned that "line-breeding per se should not be universally condemned" and I happen to agree, but I believe there should be a much greater understanding of its impact on population genetics within the full breed, and greater cautions used around it than I have seen.

As a member of the Canine Genetics list for many years now I have read many breeders that avoid linebreeding to the extent that it has been mentored in many breeds through the last century. That does not mean that they universally condemn it. They still understand its use. They also offer suggestions of alternative breeding methods that already have proven themselves to fix desired traits but with less risk of doubling up recessives common ancestors.

As a former stock breeder I understand those.

This is one Welsh Corgi breeder that has made an excellent blog post on the topic speaking, from a dog breeders point of view, to all the considerations. I highly recommend reading through it as it covers the topic well.

Some excerpts:

"The breeders of production species have managed to create very high-quality breeding programs without using a high COI. . .

. . . That’s an important lesson, I think. They did it, and continue to do it, by pairing animals that move toward a desired look and a desired production level, without using close breedings.

I do want to be clear on this, now that I’ve made everybody mad: COI tells you nothing about whether the two dogs are going to produce high-quality offspring. I could get a really low COI by breeding to an entirely different breed, but that doesn’t mean it’s a good move. You still have to choose a stud dog or bitch based on his or her quality and health testing and so on. And a low COI shouldn’t trump the more immediate issues of temperament or disease. COI is one more tool you use to structure a breeding program, especially a long-term breeding program, and it helps you understand how your prospective matings will or will not support your efforts and what I hope are the efforts of your breed club.

Committing to a lower COI as much as you possibly can – not to the detriment of the dogs, but as a general rule – will create a breed that is substantially more sustainable over the long term (I mean decades or centuries here, which is–I hope–an important part of how breeders are planning their breedings)."
http://rufflyspeaking.wordpress.com/2008/10/21/inbreeding-and-using-coi-to-analyze-potential-pairings-yet-more-on-pedigree-dogs-exposed/


And this is from Dr. Hellmuth Wachtell, and I believe, as well acknowledges that inbreeding/linebreeding has its uses, but also speaks to the current situation. It is NOT a condemnation of inbreeding, as some might read it, but a condemnation of the HABIT of inbreeding.

"Inbreeding was once a valuable tool in shaping today’s breeds. As these have now reached a high degree of homogeneity, it has lost its importance and turned into a fatal and disastrous habit."
http://www.canine-genetics.com/Price.htm

If dog breeds are to survive, the impact of individual's breeding programs, and how they relate to and impact on the population genetics situation within the full breed, have to be understood. COI is a tool that helps with that, and yes, lower COI litters (with members bred forward on) help to sustain genetic diversity in a closed gene pool breed, where as higher COI litters help to diminish it.

Oreo

Bet
29th April 2010, 07:43 PM
Rod, I don't believe there has been an assumption put out that inbreeding/linebreeding only makes lines worse, although I do believe there are some breeders that are defensive about this and that are possibly reading that assumption into every post on the topic. We all know that inbreeding/linebreeding has also been what has helped fix desirable traits.

Throughout the thread what has been mentioned is that "risks" are involved when using linebreeding/inbreedin

Knowing background health is unfortunately not fool-proof especially in regards to conditions with polygenic modes of inheritance with any breeding method used. When linebreeding/inbreeding are used the risks DO increase. That is a lesson that should be learned when polygenic conditions that are normally incredibly rare in a population become widespread - like SM.

If dog breeds are to survive, the impact of individual's breeding programs, and how they relate to and impact on the population genetics situation within the full breed, have to be understood. COI is a tool that helps with that, and yes, lower COI litters (with members bred forward on) help to sustain genetic diversity in a closed gene pool breed, where as higher COI litters help to diminish it.

Oreo


IN-BREEDING and CKCS


Thank you Oreo for your Post, I have just printed off the Ruffly Speaking Article and will be having a good read with a few Coffees.

You mentioned Dr Hellmuth Wachtell ,just about scared to say this ,since I'm not the Flavour of the Month at the Moment,but a number of years ago he was interested in the Cavalier Pedigrees I had collected of Cavaliers here in Britain who had Heart Trouble and wanted to compare them with the Cavaliers in Austria with Heart Trouble.

When he saw the Pedigrees ,he got back to me saying how IN-Bred they were , that no wonder there was Heart Problems in the Cavalier Breed.

You mentioned in your Post about Line/In-Breeding and SM .

All I know is that in the early 1980's there was quite a bit of Half/Brother ...Half/Sister Matings taking place in the Cavalier Breed.

The SM Problem was not being noticed really in Cavaliers till I think about the early 1990's ,so did the IN-Breeding in the 1980's contribute to the Spread of SM

There had been Mother to Son and Father to Daughter and full Brother to full Sister matings in the 1970's and the early 1980's as well.

Was all this In-Breeding involved in the SM Problem. I just don't know, the only thing I know about are the Cavaliers who were being In- Bred at the time I have mentioned.

I do know that when Liverpool University saw the Cavalier Pedigrees I'd sent them,the Researchers particularly mentioned about the High Degree of Homogeneity in the Pedigrees.

There is no getting away from the fact that Cavaliers are suffering from Two Serious Health Problems SM and MVD.

The fact just can't be denied that Approx 60 Cavaliers were MRI Scanned in Australia by Dr Child ,Neurologist , for Cavalier Breeders and at the February Sydney Club Meeting , and she had given a Presentation on SM and she had said that she had Screened approx 60 Dogs ,These were Breeding Screenings ,

None of the the Dogs Screened had any Clinical Symptoms . They were not Cases referred to her .

Of these Dogs 50% proved to a Syrinx on MRI ,in other words had SM.These Cavaliers were non-symtomatic.

I wonder how IN-Bred those Cavaliers were?

Bet

Oreo
29th April 2010, 08:03 PM
I wonder how IN-Bred those Cavaliers were?

Bet

Bet, I am a great admirer of Dr. Wachtell. As a geneticist he has gifted dog breeders on the Canine Genetics list his time, and has, as well, learned to read and write in English to do so.

On the topic of how in-bred any single Cavalier at this moment is, that is or is not affected by SM or MVD . . . it would be interesting to know but it really would not speak to the point.

SM and MVD have been "set" in the breed accidentally while trying to achieve other (probably wonderful) traits. This seems to be long ago, and as they are already set and have now been shown to be breedwide, then high and low COIs in litters can not be relied upon to effectively predict chances of either of these conditions. They can crop up in either as the genes that cause them are higher in concentration in the full breed and we cannot yet tell in which exact dogs . . . . if only we could SEE genes.

The best predictor is going to be the health of the ancestors to the litter - including 'sideways' ancestors such as Uncles and Great Uncles (and Aunts). Unfortunately testing for SM has just recently begun in any amount, so particulars about health in ancestors (SM wise) are often not known as SM often remains non or barely symptomatic. I understand that in regards to MVD breeders have probably been keeping better track.

That still doesn't take away from the fact that a lower COI litter helps to sustain genetic diversity in a closed gene pool breed. This is beneficial for the full breed.

Helmuth Wachtell mentioned this point, and you posted it in your first post on this thread. It is an important concept.

Oreo

RodRussell
29th April 2010, 08:14 PM
Rod, I don't believe there has been an assumption put out that inbreeding/linebreeding only makes lines worse, although I do believe there are some breeders that are defensive about this and that are possibly reading that assumption into every post on the topic. We all know that inbreeding/linebreeding has also been what has helped fix desirable traits.

Throughout the thread what has been mentioned is that "risks" are involved when using linebreeding/inbreeding, and that they have to be acknowledged instead of glossed over. I don't believe acknowledging those risks and how they have also negatively impacted dog breeds is a universal condemnation.

Prof. Bateson is well qualified and is very correct in bringing attention to this. These words of his, when speaking of disease, are spot on.

"In-Breeding tends to Fix Recessive Deleterious Traits and thereby Increase the Number of Animals in which the Disease is apparent" ...

Thank you, Oreo, for all of this helpful information. My comments were in response to what seemed to be a one-sided viewpoint, attributed to Professor Bateson, that in-breeding universally only brings out the worst of the recessive traits. So, I don't dispute what you say, as much as state that I was not responding to that.

I certainly have no expertise. As everyone knows (and most are quick to remind me), I've never bred a Cavalier in my life. Although I have involuntarily mid-wifed the births of a few litters of piglets. Believe me, youngsters on farms soon become slave laborers, and it can be a messy, eye-opening experience. But I digress...

I had alway thought of line-breeding as a form of in-breeding.

I don't quite see how in-breeding explains CM and SM in this breed. To the contrary, one theory is that CM/SM and possibly MVD can be attributed to out-crossing, particularly to popular sires. Nevertheless, I can see how in-breeding could make existing CM/SM and MVD worse in later generations.

Oreo
29th April 2010, 08:23 PM
I was a child farm "slave" laborer myself Rod . . . and it has given me a lifetime of wonderful memories along with very unladylike cow milkers hands.:)

I have to ask what you mean by "outcrossing" when you use it in this sentence. "To the contrary, one theory is that CM/SM and possibly MVD can be attributed to out-crossing, particularly to popular sires." Are you talking of to a different breed, or are you talking of simply breeding to a different line, within Cavaliers?

Oreo

RodRussell
29th April 2010, 08:53 PM
I... I have to ask what you mean by "outcrossing" when you use it in this sentence. "To the contrary, one theory is that CM/SM and possibly MVD can be attributed to out-crossing, particularly to popular sires." Are you talking of to a different breed, or are you talking of simply breeding to a different line, within Cavaliers? ...

I did not mean a different breed; I meant other blood lines.

Oreo
29th April 2010, 09:00 PM
I've not heard this theory and cannot imagine what the basis of it might be. Could you explain it?

I have read Clare Rusbridge's full thesis which does indicate, in words and diagrams, how some suspect recessives can be traced back to a couple of relatively early Cavaliers.

Oreo

RodRussell
29th April 2010, 09:59 PM
I've not heard this theory and cannot imagine what the basis of it might be. Could you explain it?

I have read Clare Rusbridge's full thesis which does indicate, in words and diagrams, how some suspect recessives can be traced back to a couple of relatively early Cavaliers. ...

Well, sure. The disease, CM/SM, now is so widespread in the breed, as Dr. Rusbridge acknowledges in her thesis (page 167, for example) that it would appear that in-breeding now would have no greater affect upon CM/SM in future generations than would out-crossing to other bloodlines. This is not based upon anything that I recall reading on the subject. It is just that if 95% of Cavaliers really have the malformation, and 50% of those also have syrinxes, the breed is well past the detrimental affect that in-breeding would have on CM/SM in a bloodline.

Oreo
29th April 2010, 10:54 PM
I think we are singing from the same hymn sheet when speaking to the fact that CM/SM and MVD are already too well established in the breed. At this point a breeder's knowledge of ancestral health history is of the most importance.:)

Clare Rusbridge goes into more depth on heredity on page 153 of her thesis (diagram on page 152) where in the discussion portion she speaks to the inheritance of occipital bone hypoplasia and how it can be traced through to a key bitch. The diagram shows how it was possible for genes from this girl to match up in linebred progeny.

That is why I wondered about the explanation that CM/SM might be attributed to outcrossing. Maybe we are misunderstanding each other.

Oreo

RodRussell
30th April 2010, 04:18 AM
... That is why I wondered about the explanation that CM/SM might be attributed to outcrossing. Maybe we are misunderstanding each other. ...

If "Bitch G" in Dr. Rusbridge's dissertation (pages 153-154) was the -- or a -- founder of the recessive CM gene(s), in-breeding of her progeny certainly could have doubled-up the offending gene(s) by the time "Dog V" was produced, seven or more generations after Bitch G. But it would have been Dog V, who sired 57 litters in three years (1989 to 2001), who would qualify as the Popular Sire which sent the gene(s) "viral", so to speak. Mere in-breeding does not explain the widespread existence of CM. A lot of out-crossing needed to occur, as well, once the in-breeding set the stage. I would say that siring 57 litters in three years qualifies Dog V as a Popular Sire.

As bad as CM/SM is, I think there are merits, as well as demerits, to line-breeding. Bitch G, and the in-breeding which followed her, could have been a fluke, a horrible fluke, which started the CM gene(s). But that doesn't mean that every line-breeding creates only monsters. My role in this discussion started because Professor Bateson reportedly condemned all line-breeding. I just don't agree with that conclusion.

Bet
30th April 2010, 11:02 AM
If "Bitch G" in Dr. Rusbridge's dissertation (pages 153-154) was the -- or a -- founder of the recessive CM gene(s), in-breeding of her progeny certainly could have doubled-up the offending gene(s) by the time "Dog V" was produced, seven or more generations after Bitch G. But it would have been Dog V, who sired 57 litters in three years (1989 to 2001), who would qualify as the Popular Sire which sent the gene(s) "viral", so to speak. Mere in-breeding does not explain the widespread existence of CM. A lot of out-crossing needed to occur, as well, once the in-breeding set the stage. I would say that siring 57 litters in three years qualifies Dog V as a Popular Sire.

As bad as CM/SM is, I think there are merits, as well as demerits, to line-breeding. Bitch G, and the in-breeding which followed her, could have been a fluke, a horrible fluke, which started the CM gene(s). But that doesn't mean that every line-breeding creates only monsters. My role in this discussion started because Professor Bateson reportedly condemned all line-breeding. I just don't agree with that conclusion.


IN-BREEDING and CKCS

As far as I can understand it ,Professor Sir P.Bateson, only mentioned that Grand-Mother to Grand-Son, and Grand-Father to Grand-Daughter was In-Breeding.

I am wondering ,when Breeders talk about LINE BREEDING ,what do they mean.

I think I am right in saying that IN-BREEDING means in matings where a Common Ancestor does not occur behind Sire and Dam in 4-5 Generation Pedigree.

Is that right?

Could I add to my Post to thank Margaret for Posting on another Thread, mentioning that in the BBC Trust Complaint ,it was reported that it was probable that there were some Cavaliers affected with the Heart Disease in the 1950's and 1960's and that they were used extensively at Stud,

Also the Committee felt that , while the cause of SM was not known ,there was a Broad Concesus that IN-BREEDING play a Role in Spreading SM

Bet

RodRussell
30th April 2010, 02:46 PM
...I am wondering ,when Breeders talk about LINE BREEDING ,what do they mean.

I think I am right in saying that IN-BREEDING means in matings where a Common Ancestor does not occur behind Sire and Dam in 4-5 Generation Pedigree.

Is that right?

Apparently at least three different definitions of in-breeding, and two of line-breeding, are being used in the current discussions on this board as well as CC. The one I have been using for in-breeding is mating closely related breeding stock, while line-breeding is mating stock within the same pedigree, such as grand-father and grand-daughter.

So, to me, line-breeding is a form of in-breeding.

Added link: I just came upon this perfect example of line-breeding in today's issue of The Sun: "I'm In Love With My Grandson -- And We're Having A Baby!", at http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2954310/Gran-and-grandson-to-have-baby.html#ixzz0maSV2FzO


...Also the Committee felt that , while the cause of SM was not known ,there was a Broad Concesus that IN-BREEDING play a Role in Spreading SM ...

I really don't see how in-breeding could possibly spread SM beyond one bloodline, since only one bloodline is involved in in-breeding. I can understand how in-breeding could bring SM gene(s) to the fore by doubling up on the recessive, but if you don't breed outside of your bloodline, you're not going to spread the genes to other bloodlines.

Margaret C
30th April 2010, 04:08 PM
Apparently at least three different definitions of in-breeding, and two of line-breeding, are being used in the current discussions on this board as well as CC. The one I have been using for in-breeding is mating closely related breeding stock, while line-breeding is mating stock within the same pedigree, such as grand-father and grand-daughter.

So, to me, line-breeding is a form of in-breeding.



I really don't see how in-breeding could possibly spread SM beyond one bloodline, since only one bloodline is involved in in-breeding. I can understand how in-breeding could bring SM gene(se) to the fore by doubling up on the recessive, but if you don't breed outside of your bloodline, you're not going to spread the genes to other bloodlines.


Since the demise of the really big kennels, that had perhaps up to 60 dogs, all cavalier breeders have needed to introduce new blood in to their lines on some occasions.

The dogs are usually not shown, they are bought in, bred from and it will be their offspring, bearing the kennel name, that will
be seen in the show ring. The line continues to look completely inbred.

There is undoubtedly those that have carried out extremely close matings over very many generations. The problem is that when inherited problems have shown up they have been hidden, denied and ignored, nor were the affected cavaliers removed from the breeding programme.

Many, if not most, of these inbred lines had very serious issues with MVD or SM but their breeders have been the people that were, and in some cases still are, the loudest in denying the extent of the health problems in the breed.

They are the people who, perhaps unwittingly, have brought this breed to the state it is in now. They need to see what a desperate state cavaliers are in and, if they truly love the breed, they would cooperate with all the researchers and try and give this breed a future.

Line breeding or inbreeding is not now going to make a lot of difference in the case of MVD & SM, they are too widespread within all lines, but to maintain what little genetic diversity there is these practices should stop.

Bet
30th April 2010, 06:40 PM
IN-BREEDING and CKCS

Line breeding or inbreeding is not now going to make a lot of difference in the case of MVD & SM, they are too widespread within all lines, but to maintain what little genetic diversity there is these practices should stop.[/QUOTE]


Can I mention about Margaret's Post.

I just can't remember whether I have mentioned this before or not, but maybe it's worth repeating again.

I had contacted the MVD Cavalier Researchers at Edinburgh University, telling them about how it's known that the Heart Problem had been in our Cavalier Breed since the 1940's, also that Cavaliers ,known to have Heart Condition were being used at Stud in the 1950's.

I asked ,if because of this there now could be many Cavaliers who were Carriers of the MVD Gene/Genes around to-day.

The word I got back ,was yes ,that they thought this was very probable,

Also I contacted Professor J .Bell , Geneticist at Tufts University ,America, and he also agreed about this, and said that the only way the Cavalier Breed could have a Future was not to Breed from Cavaliers before they were 2.5 years of age.

The Cavaliers are the only Toy Breed with an early On-Set of MVD, and the best chance for Cavaliers is to try and delay this early On-Set.

Unfortunately there are still some Cavalier Breeders making the excuse , OK you can MRI Scan for SM or Test for Heart Trouble at 2.5 years ,but those Problems can happen to the Cavalier at 4-5 yeras old.

I just don't know how to answer this attitude.

Any-body got any answers?

RodRussell
30th April 2010, 08:07 PM
... Unfortunately there are still some Cavalier Breeders making the excuse , OK you can MRI Scan for SM or Test for Heart Trouble at 2.5 years ,but those Problems can happen to the Cavalier at 4-5 yeras old.

I just don't know how to answer this attitude.

Any-body got any answers?

MVD Breeding Protocol

I have an answer regarding MVD, but that doesn't mean that anybody will listen to it. The goal of the MVD breeding protocol is to push back the age of onset of MVD to after the 5th birthday. The way the drafters of the protocol recommend doing that is to not breed any Cavalier until after its 5th birthday, and only then if it did not have a murmur prior to its 5th birthday and neither of its parents had a murmur prior to their 5th birthday. THAT is the real MVD breeding protocol. And THAT means no breeding at all before age five years.

The drafters recognized that very few breeders would be willing to wait for a dog to reach age five years before breeding it. So, they allowed an exception to the protocol: You may breed the Cavalier before its 5th birthday if it is at least 2.5 years old and has no murmur. The part of the protocol about the parents not having murmurs before age five years still would apply.

So, if breeders complain that a 2.5 year old with a clear heart could be bred, and then before its 5th birthday it could develop a murmur, tell them to wait to breed the dog until after its 5th birthday.

SM Breeding Protocol

As for CM/SM, the SM breeding protocol is trying to make the best of a miserable situation. We suspect that possibly up to 95% of the breed has CM and half of those Cavaliers have SM. An objective breeding protocol for that situation would include bringing in new blood from other breeds. But we can't do that, for a variety of reasons. So, we try to deal with this miserable situation as well as play by the breed standard and kennel club rules. So, we follow the existing SM breeding protocol, all the while recognizing the SM could progress later on.

If breeders sincerely are concerned about that SM protocol not working, then they should not breed Cavaliers at all. It certainly makes no sense for them to grouse about the SM breeding protocol not being enough, and then to ignore it and continue breeding CKCSs.

Margaret C
1st May 2010, 12:14 AM
I do not think that the full consequences of the MVD protocol was ever spelt out.........

1. If you have cavaliers that are clear of murmur at 2.5 years, they should not be used for breeding if their parents are not both at least 5 years old.

2. If either parent develops a murmur before they are 5 years old, the offspring should not be used for breeding even if they are free of murmur themselves at 2.5 years old or over.


The situation now can be that a nice puppy is whelped and used at stud at 1 year old. His heart is MVD clear.

By the time he is 2.5 years old he has produced quite a lot of litters and is Granddad to a few promising puppies. His heart is MVD clear.

At 4 years old he has sired a great many more litters, his children are producing well and so are his Grandchildren, so he is a multiple Great Granddad. A cardiology check shows he has developed a heart murmur.

Most of those many descendants would not have existed if the MVD protocols had been followed. None of them, even the offspring produced after he was 2.5 years old, should be bred from under the MVD protocols.

The protocols suggested by the Cardiologists had to be draconian if they were to make any difference, but they were accepted by the Cavalier Clubs without any real discussion with the breeders that were expected to implement them.

The responsible breeders checked the hearts but most still used underage dogs and ignored the MVD status of the Grandparents.

The majority ignored the whole idea of heart checks and did not bother about the breeding guidelines at all, except to indignantly point out that the breed had a MVD protocol to anybody that criticised irresponsible breeders.

Nobody, Cardiologist, Kennel Club or Cavalier Club took stock of the true situation and asked whether something else should be done, a mistake that we need to learn from.

RodRussell
1st May 2010, 06:02 AM
I do not think that the full consequences of the MVD protocol was ever spelt out.........

...

The protocols suggested by the Cardiologists had to be draconian if they were to make any difference, but they were accepted by the Cavalier Clubs without any real discussion with the breeders that were expected to implement them.

Nobody, Cardiologist, Kennel Club or Cavalier Club took stock of the true situation and asked whether something else should be done, a mistake that we need to learn from.

I did not find any of this to be the case when the MVD breeding protocol was introduced in the USA. The announcement was made by a panel of four cardiologists (from the UK, Scotland, and USA) and a geneticist (from Sweden) at a meeting of a large group of Cavalier breeders at the May 1998 national show of the CKCSC,USA in Atlanta, Georgia. The meeting in the crowded hotel auditorium was lengthy. After each veterinarian made his or her separate presentation, there was a question-and-answer session, The entire meeting was tape recorded, and a verbatim transcript was prepared and sent to every member of the club. That transcript is still available for anyone to read. An abridged version of the transcript is on a webpage of the CKCSC, USA's website --
http://www.ckcsc.org/ckcsc/formsdocs.nsf/filelookup/98heartsymp.PDF/$file/98heartsymp.PDF

The transcript establishes the rationale for the protocol, due the polygenic nature of MVD. The geneticist, Lennart Swenson, was a breeder himself, who had personal knowlege of the success of similar protocols for polygenic disorders, including one which reduced hip dysplasia in Rottweilers in Sweden from 36% to 11%. The questions asked at the end of the meeting were very probing and skeptical. The researchers' answers were direct and candid. Read the transcript.

In the end, the board of the CKCSC,USA endorsed the protocol as a recommendation to its breeders. Granted, there was no negotiation with the researchers as to what was necessary to eliminate early-onset MVD, but there certainly was extensive discussion about it, and give-and-take with the specialists who designed the protocol. The reason given by the geneticist was that doing anything less would not work. The following 12 years of most breeders doing less has proven him to have been spot on correct.

So, I disagree that "Nobody ... took stock of the true situation and asked whether something else should be done." At least, that was not the case in the USA. That very question was asked at the 1998 meeting. The end result was that the CKCSC,USA's board endorsed the protocol as written, and the ACKCSC has ignored it, treating it as if it never happened. You could argue from the ACKCSC's denial that somebody did ask whether something else should be done. The ACKCSC's answer to that question has been to do nothing at all.



...The responsible breeders checked the hearts but most still used underage dogs and ignored the MVD status of the Grandparents.

The majority ignored the whole idea of heart checks and did not bother about the breeding guidelines at all, except to indignantly point out that the breed had a MVD protocol to anybody that criticised irresponsible breeders. ...

I disagree with this characterization, too. Once the MVD breeding protocol was introduced to the USA breeders in May 1998, the definition of a "responsible breeder" changed. No longer was it "responsible" to breed under-aged Cavaliers and to ignore the grandparents.

Margaret C
1st May 2010, 11:26 PM
Hello Rod,

I was talking about the UK breeders. I do not know the situation in the USA and so never meant for my comments to apply to them.



So, I disagree that "Nobody ... took stock of the true situation and asked whether something else should be done." At least, that was not the case in the USA. That very question was asked at the 1998 meeting. .

I was referring to the fact that nobody in the UK assessed the effectiveness of the protocol after it had been in place a certain number of years, & admitted it was failing due to non-compliance by breeders.

18 years with most of the top breeders not even having annual heart checks from their vet. To be fair, there was an attempt to limit the stud dog list in the back of the year book to those that submitted certificates. At that, many of the most important breeders boycotted the list and it was eventually discontinued.




I disagree with this characterization, too. Once the MVD breeding protocol was introduced to the USA breeders in May 1998, the definition of a "responsible breeder" changed. No longer was it "responsible" to breed under-aged Cavaliers and to ignore the grandparents.

I agree that the definition of 'responsible' should have changed in the UK, but within the breed it didn't. These were the breeders that thought they were being responsible because at least they checked hearts and eyes before mating their dogs.
I was one of them, I took the advice of older experienced breeders, followed their example, and bought into all the excuses that a dog needed to learn stud work at an early age.

I thought I was responsible when I would not accept a bitch to my stud dog unless she had an eye and heart certificate that I saw before the mating took place ( and there were a few breeders that changed their mind about using my dog because of this ) but I did accept bitches that were less than 2.5 years and used my dogs from a very young age.

The Breed Clubs are run by volunteers with no experience in veterinary matters and an inbuilt reluctance to believe that there was really any problem in the breed. It was thought almost disloyal to talk about health, and it was frequently said that vets and researchers were only suggesting health tests because it was good for business.

The UK Kennel Club knew there were really grave health issues in pedigree dogs for many years. It was headed by old time breeders and so next to nothing was done to address the problem.

RodRussell
2nd May 2010, 12:42 AM
... I was talking about the UK breeders. I do not know the situation in the USA and so never meant for my comments to apply to them.

I think a similar symposium was held in the UK about four or so months before the May 1998 symposium in the USA. I have a copy of a transcript of a UK symposium at my office, which I will check when I return there later this weekend.


... I was referring to the fact that nobody in the UK assessed the effectiveness of the protocol after it had been in place a certain number of years, & admitted it was failing due to non-compliance by breeders.

There may not have been any formal, published analysis of the effectiveness of the protocol since its implementation, but I know of at least three reports since 1998.

The first was in 2000, by Dr. James Wood of the Animal Health Trust. His team studied 4,255 Cavalier heart exam records and concluded:

• MVD is the major killer of Cavaliers under 10 years of age.

• Veterinary cardiologists were better able to identify early mitral valve murmurs than were non-specialist veterinarians.

• The parent's heart status can predict the offspring's future heart status.

• The offspring were ten to twenty times more likely to be free of MVD murmurs if the sire's heart was clear of murmurs at ages nine to eleven years.

Then, in an oft-repeated 2009 report by Simon Swift to the UK Cavalier Club, he stated that 50% of Cavaliers still are developing MVD murmurs by their fifth birthday.

And, of course, there is Ms. Jupp's statement of a year ago: "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."

If she was correct, then when you combine her observation with that of Mr. Swift, given at about the same time, the reason that 50% still are developing murmurs by their fifth birthday may well be because of a lack of health testing and compliance with the protocol.

Finally, there are UK breeders who profess to following the protocol and who insist, also, that the Cavaliers they produce are not developing early-onset murmurs.

Bet
2nd May 2010, 11:57 AM
[QUOTE=RodRussell;359854]I think a similar symposium was held in the UK about four or so months before the May 1998 symposium in the USA. I have a copy of a transcript of a UK symposium at my office, which I will check when I return there later this weekend.



There may not have been any formal, published analysis of the effectiveness of the protocol since its implementation, but I know of at least three reports since 1998.

The first was in 2000, by Dr. James Wood of the Animal Health Trust. His team studied 4,255 Cavalier heart exam records and concluded:

• MVD is the major killer of Cavaliers under 10 years of age.


In-Breeding and CKCS


I hope those of you with Cavaliers suffering from SM will realize how the Cavalier MVD Problem is linked in with the Cavalier SM Problem, in that ,in 1983 Cavalier Breeders were warned by Dr P.Darke, the UK CKCS Club Cardiologist about how serious the MVD Problem was in the Breed.

To-day it is Dr C. Rusbridge ,Neurologist , who is warning the Cavalier Breeders about the seriousness of the SM Problem in Cavaliers.

If I could mention a Talk that was given at the UK CKCS CLUB'S AGM ,please note the DATE ,1991,that is almost 20 years ago.

This was given by Dr .B.M.CATTANACH,BSc. PhD. DSc. FRS, who is a Geneticist.

I am quoting from his Lecture.

He mentions that it is clear from the HEART SURVEY RESULTS published in the VETERINARY RECORD by DR P.DARKE ,Cardiologist,that CAVALIERS are particularly prone to the MVD Disease ,and noteably ,develope the Symptoms early in Life,rather than in Old Age ,as in other Breeds

Please note I am still quoting from the Lecture , the HEART MURMURS which Identify MVD have been found in Cavaliers of less than One Year Old ,and about 40% of Adult Cavaliers between 2-5 years HAVE MURMURS ( This has now risen to 50% of Cavaliers will have Murmurs at 5 years of age, as was mentioned at last years UK CKCS CLUB'S AGM)

Back to the 1991 AGM Lecture.

It may be concluded from these findings that this Early Onset of MVD is a Major Problem of Cavaliers and is Widely Spread throughtout the Breed

When such a Specific Condidition is found within a Breed,occuring in Different Areas ,in Different Kennels ,and Pet Home Situations with different Rearing ,Housing ,Feeding and Exercise Regimes it may be reasonably inferred that the Condition has some form of Heriditary Basis.

Cavalier MVD therefore almost certainly has a GENETIC COMPONENT

Some Cavaliers suffering from the Disease probably played a Significant Role in the History of the Breed

The Consequence has been that the Condition became widely Spread and Prevalent.

Dr B .Cattanach also said , ( this should be of Great Interest for the Proposal at the Forth Coming CKCS'CLUBS AGM,)

To Improve the Heart Situation in Cavalier SHOW STOCK ,it is inportant to ensure that the Animals which have the Greatest Influence on the Breed have the Best Hearts .

It is of of ABOSLUTELY PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE that the TOP SHOW CAVALIERS ,The TOP CAVALIER STUD DOGS , and the TOP CAVALIER BROOD BITCHES ARE HEART TESTED

Finally my own Comments. surely Cavalier Breeders must see that this also will apply to the CKCS SM Problem.

Dr B.Cattanach's Comments were made around 20 years ago about the MVD Problem in the Cavalier Breed, don't let it be being said that in another 20 years time, the warnings now being given about the CKCS SM Problem were being ignored ,and the SM Problem is Rife in Cavaliers,this has to be accepted by a number of Cavalier Breeders, that the Cavaliers have Two Serious Health Conditions ,SM and MVD, and all the Spinning in the World WILL NOT ALTER THIS FACT!!!!

Bet

Bet
3rd May 2010, 07:13 PM
Finally my own Comments. surely Cavalier Breeders must see that this also will apply to the CKCS SM Problem.

Dr B.Cattanach's Comments were made around 20 years ago about the MVD Problem in the Cavalier Breed, don't let it be being said that in another 20 years time, the warnings now being given about the CKCS SM Problem were being ignored ,and the SM Problem is Rife in Cavaliers,this has to be accepted by a number of Cavalier Breeders, that the Cavaliers have Two Serious Health Conditions ,SM and MVD, and all the Spinning in the World WILL NOT ALTER THIS FACT!!!!

Bet[/QUOTE]


IN-BREEDING and CKCS


I just had to Post this which has just appeared on an SM SITE.

Dr J Sampson ,who is the KC Geneticist , said at yesterday's SM Seminar.that LINE BREEDING is IN-BREEDING.

This is such a Co-incidence ,in a News-Paper to-day in an Article about Charles Darwin ,who is the Father of Evolution ,who Revolutionised our Understanding of GENETICS ,he had said that Cousin to Cousin Marriages was In-Breeding.

I hope that some-body who was at the Seminar can comment on what was said at it.

I don't want to say any-more at the moment , but to hear what Professor Sir P Bateson and Dr J Sampson and last but not least Charles Darwin on the subject of In-Breeding ,surely no-body can be in any doubt any longer that IN-Breeding could be having a part to play in the SM Problem and MVD problem in our Cavalier Breed.

Bet

RodRussell
3rd May 2010, 07:48 PM
... Dr J Sampson ,who is the KC Geneticist , said at yesterday's SM Seminar.that LINE BREEDING is IN-BREEDING.

Line-breeding obviously is a form of in-breeding. Hopefully, he also said something else.


... This is such a Co-incidence ,in a News-Paper to-day in an Article about Charles Darwin ,who is the Father of Evolution ,who Revolutionised our Understanding of GENETICS ,he had said that Cousin to Cousin Marriages was In-Breeding.

We don't need to quote Darwin to establish that fact. Cousin-to-cousin breeding is a form of in-breeding. Darwin said a lot of things that have been proven to be completely wrong, but he was correct about the in-breeding comment. But, what is and what is not in-breeding has never been a mystery.

Remember, but for in-breeding, there never would have been a Cavalier King Charles spaniel breed in the 1920s. There are good things about in-breeding, and there are bad things about it. To demonize it in its entirety is a bad thing, too.

Bet
4th May 2010, 09:59 AM
Line-breeding obviously is a form of in-breeding. Hopefully, he also said something else.



We don't need to quote Darwin to establish that fact. Cousin-to-cousin breeding is a form of in-breeding. Darwin said a lot of things that have been proven to be completely wrong, but he was correct about the in-breeding comment. But, what is and what is not in-breeding has never been a mystery.

Remember, but for in-breeding, there never would have been a Cavalier King Charles spaniel breed in the 1920s. There are good things about in-breeding, and there are bad things about it. To demonize it in its entirety is a bad thing, too.


IN-BREEDING and CKCS

What I have found out about this IN-BREEDING Subject, is that it seems to be that it was used mainly for the purpose of setting the Type for the Show Scene.

At first ,IN-BREEDING proved beneficial.

Breeders learned that by Mating Related Individuals of the Desired Type,the Resulting Quality and Uniformity of the Off-Spring improved.

In recent years years ,Pure-Bred Dogs have experienced increasing problems with Hereditary Diseases and Defects ,also Genetic Bottle-Necks, Closed Gene Pools ,Gene Pool Fragmentation, and Genetic Drift ,but all are Attributable to In-Breeding.

It is becoming more and more apparent that the Short -Term Gains of In-Breeding are Out-Weighed by it's Long Term Costs

If Two Dogs share no Ancestors for 4 Generations ,but share many in the 5th ,6th,and so on this would be In-Breeding.

We now know that that Professor Sir.P. Bateson has said that Grand-Mother to Grand-Son and Grand-Father - to Grand-Daughter is In-Breeding.

This has been the Norm for our Cavalier Breed for years and years.

IN-BREEDING gave us the Cavalier Breed , but it's time is Past .

If Cavaliers are to have a Future , then there has to be more Emphasis on Over-All Health and Concerted Efforts to Reduce the Level of In-Breeding in our Cavalier Breed.

Bet

Bet
22nd August 2010, 04:49 PM
IN-BREEDING and CKCS

What I have found out about this IN-BREEDING Subject, is that it seems to be that it was used mainly for the purpose of setting the Type for the Show Scene.

At first ,IN-BREEDING proved beneficial.

Breeders learned that by Mating Related Individuals of the Desired Type,the Resulting Quality and Uniformity of the Off-Spring improved.

In recent years years ,Pure-Bred Dogs have experienced increasing problems with Hereditary Diseases and Defects ,also Genetic Bottle-Necks, Closed Gene Pools ,Gene Pool Fragmentation, and Genetic Drift ,but all are Attributable to In-Breeding.

It is becoming more and more apparent that the Short -Term Gains of In-Breeding are Out-Weighed by it's Long Term Costs

If Two Dogs share no Ancestors for 4 Generations ,but share many in the 5th ,6th,and so on this would be In-Breeding.

We now know that that Professor Sir.P. Bateson has said that Grand-Mother to Grand-Son and Grand-Father - to Grand-Daughter is In-Breeding.

This has been the Norm for our Cavalier Breed for years and years.

IN-BREEDING gave us the Cavalier Breed , but it's time is Past .

If Cavaliers are to have a Future , then there has to be more Emphasis on Over-All Health and Concerted Efforts to Reduce the Level of In-Breeding in our Cavalier Breed.

Bet


IN-BREEDING AND CKCS

I have just read this Interesting Article about Human Cousins Marrying Cousins .

Over 70 Scientific Studies have Proved that their Off-Springs are 10 Times more likely to be born with Recessive Disorders.

That if this did not happen , this could prevent Avoidable Suffering.

Some Doctors are now doing Carrier Testing ,to prevent the Children of such Marriages,to try and stop Children being born with Terrible ,Disabilities that are Devasting their Lives.

I just wonder in our Cavalier Breed how many Cousin to Cousin Matings have taken Place over the Generations, and is this Type of Mating still taking Place in To-Days 'Cavaliers.

Bet