PDA

View Full Version : New information from advisory council



Bet
17th June 2011, 12:07 PM
This has just appeared in this week's DOG WORLD

The Key Item on the Agenda of the DOG ADVISORY'S COUNCIL Recent Meeting ,was the creation of a Breeding Assurance Scheme

This follows on what the Advisory Council Spokes-person said from Professor Sir P. Bateson's Report into DOG BREEDING ,was that there should be a Creation of a ROBUST BREEDER SCHEME.

That there should be Requirements with Regard to PRE-MATING Health TESTS ,and that NO MATING should take place if the TESTS indicate that this if this wouls be Inadvisable

This is also a further comment from the Advisory Council Spokes-Person,that the Assurance Scheme seeks to provide ASSURANCE to Purchasers ,that a Product(PUPPY) is Healthy ,Safe,and fit for the Intended Purpose.

Further comment from the Dog Advisory Council also said that ,the Aim should be to ensure that such a Scheme provides assurance of Good Standards of HEALTH and WELFARE for all Dogs Involved.











This should be read by Every-Body whether a Breeder or a Purchaser

This has now to be the FOCUS of the Next Stage of the Work of the Dog Advisory Council the Council Spoke-Person said.

Bet

Karlin
17th June 2011, 01:54 PM
That's great news -- if a truly robust scheme emerges that provides real motivation for breeders to test properly and breed for health and gives proper recognition to those who do. :D

Bet
17th June 2011, 07:47 PM
That's great news -- if a truly robust scheme emerges that provides real motivation for breeders to test properly and breed for health and gives proper recognition to those who do. :D


NEW INFORMATION FROM ADVISORY COUNCIL


Is the Bottom Line, do not Breed from a Dog who has not been Health Tested.

Take our Cavalier Breed ,the Gene/Genes for MVD have not been discovered ,this Research has been going on for over 20 years, we don't even know the Mode of Inheritance.

Look at the Cavaliers' SM Problem , it now looks as if CM has a bigger part to play than was first thought , so if thats the case does it mean that Cavaliers with CM should not be being Bred from ,because I believe I've read that CM leads onto Syrinxes forming.

Hopefully the Advisory Council will have the answer to this. Thank Goodness Dr C Rusbridge ,Neurologist is involved with the Advisory Council and will be able to advise them on the best way to tackle this Horrible Disease.

Bet

RodRussell
17th June 2011, 08:08 PM
... the Bottom Line, do not Breed from a Dog who has not been Health Tested. ...

Brilliant observation! But certainly nothing new! I would add, however, "and has passed those tests".

What, exactly, can this advisory council do, in the end? Whom does it advise? Can non-compliant breedings be Banned in Britain?

I used to say that nothing like this could ever happen in the US, but that was before Barry O'Bama came along.

Margaret C
17th June 2011, 08:18 PM
Brilliant observation! But certainly nothing new! I would add, however, "and has passed those tests".

What, exactly, can this advisory council do, in the end? Whom does it advise? Can non-compliant breedings be Banned in Britain?

I used to say that nothing like this could ever happen in the US, but that was before Barry O'Bama came along.

This is a high profile Advisory Council with a lot of influential animal welfare campaigners supporting its aims.
Presumably legislation is always a possibility if breeders prove incapable of self-regulation.

RodRussell
17th June 2011, 08:45 PM
This is a high profile Advisory Council with a lot of influential animal welfare campaigners supporting its aims.

Presumably legislation is always a possibility if breeders prove incapable of self-regulation.

I understand the council members' stati, but I don't understand their clout. While I joked a bit in my last message about it not happening over here, I really mean that I can not visualize any legislation passing the federal government here which would require specific health tests for specific breeds, and the consequences of not complying.

I guess the best example would be Sweden, where the kennel club and the CKCS breed club make passing certain tests mandatory. But even there, has the government mandated them?

anniemac
17th June 2011, 09:33 PM
Would this be breed specific legislation or for all breeds including mixes? I just don't see any promise with BSL from reading of what happens in regards to banning certain breeds for dog bites etc.

Bet
18th June 2011, 10:59 AM
Brilliant observation! But certainly nothing new! I would add, however, "and has passed those tests".

What, exactly, can this advisory council do, in the end? Whom does it advise? Can non-compliant breedings be Banned in Britain?

I used to say that nothing like this could ever happen in the US, but that was before Barry O'Bama came along.



NEW INFORMATION FROM THE ADVISORY COUNCIL


Rod,

For a start , Dr C Rusbridge ,Neurologist ,is on the Advisory Council, and I would think will be giving it all the up-to Date Information about the CM/SM Problem in Cavaliers. There are also a Couple of Geneticists , one who has been involved with the Finding of the Gene for Epsodic Falling and Curly Coat Syndrome in our Cavalier Breed.

You mention about Banning Non Compliant Cavalier Breeders, for a Moment the Lord has removed His Hand from My Mouth !!!,so I will say once more,this


this will be down to the Cavalier Buying Public not buying a Cavalier from a Cavalier Breeder who does not Health Check their Cavalier Breeing Stock and follow the Breeding Guidelines issue from the Researchers into the SM and MVD Problems in our Cavaliers.To delay the early On-Set of both those Diseases do not Breed from a Cavalier before 2.5 years of age, and has no MVD or SM Problem ,and know the Health Status of the Parents at 5.



Bet

penquite
18th June 2011, 12:23 PM
I understand the council members' stati, but I don't understand their clout. While I joked a bit in my last message about it not happening over here, I really mean that I can not visualize any legislation passing the federal government here which would require specific health tests for specific breeds, and the consequences of not complying.

I guess the best example would be Sweden, where the kennel club and the CKCS breed club make passing certain tests mandatory. But even there, has the government mandated them?


Hi Rod
A start here would be the Kennel club only registering puppies that come from fully health tested (where approved test are available) clear parents.
All the best
Sue

RodRussell
18th June 2011, 04:39 PM
Hi Rod
A start here would be the Kennel club only registering puppies that come from fully health tested (where approved test are available) clear parents.

Yeah, but ... Is the KC on board with this panel? Did the KC appoint it, or did Parliament or a department of the government? Or is it totally independent?

And: What tests? Who decides which tests to include? I can come up with a list of a dozen tests for cavaliers, covering items like diabetes, thyroid issues, various eye disorders, deafness, which I doubt any CKCS club would consider including in its list.

Over here, we have recommended tests under the CHIC program, but the AKC parent clubs decide which ones, and the recommended ones by the cavalier parent club, the ACKCSC, do not even include the MVD breeding protocol or the SM protocol. So, over here, if the decision remained with the AKC, it would defer to its parent clubs, and the ACKCSC's recommendations would be worthless.

Bet
18th June 2011, 07:33 PM
Yeah, but ... Is the KC on board with this panel? Did the KC appoint it, or did Parliament or a department of the government? Or is it totally independent?

And: What tests? Who decides which tests to include? I can come up with a list of a dozen tests for cavaliers, covering items like diabetes, thyroid issues, various eye disorders, deafness, which I doubt any CKCS club would consider including in its list.

Over here, we have recommended tests under the CHIC program, but the AKC parent clubs decide which ones, and the recommended ones by the cavalier parent club, the ACKCSC, do not even include the MVD breeding protocol or the SM protocol. So, over here, if the decision remained with the AKC, it would defer to its parent clubs, and the ACKCSC's recommendations would be worthless.



NEW INFORMATION FROM ADVISORY COUNCIL

Rod,

Just to put you in the Picture,the Council was set up at the Conclusion of an Independant Enquiry carried out by Professor Sir P.Bateson and commissioned by the Kennel Club and Dogs Trust

The Spokes-Person also said in the Advisory Council Article in DOG WORLD that the Council would be upon the the Good Work already done by many Orginizations ,including ,the Kennel Club,Rspca, the British Veterinary Assocation ,the British Small Animal Veterinary Association and Lantra.

Bet

Karlin
18th June 2011, 07:53 PM
The advisory council is independent. It would advise Parliament which could require changes over the head of the KC. There has been some indication that if the KC does not take greater action, the government will require mandatory change.

Sure lots and lots of tests could be included -- and vary by breed -- but for cavaliers I'd think a basic starting point many would agree on is MRI, cardiologist auscultation within 12 months prior to a mating (both of those because how widespread each health issue is, and how serious for the breed's survival it is to get some grip on them both), eyes (because simple to do and basic), dry eye/curly coat/EFS (because the genetic test exists and these are serious and in the case of the former, tragic problems). Some might argue for hip scoring. There could be recommended but not required testing too.

I think the US may before long going to have a far more serious problem with all these conditions in the breed than the UK because the likelihood is that the UK will have to address them... either via the KC or extrenal requirements... whereas most US breeders lobby against absolutely everything that would require any tests/oversight etc. There is a very strong push to address pedigree breeding issues in the UK post Pedigree Dogs exposed and there is public support for same.


A start here would be the Kennel club only registering puppies that come from fully health tested (where approved test are available) clear parents.

Agree: a very simple and effective start that could be done very quickly based on some basics such as the above. I think the KC's argument that doing so would keep many breeders from bothering to register then (and therefore somehow make them less likely to be open to the KC's 'influence' regarding healthy breeding -- which as is seems miniscule) -- is silly -- registration is widely seen as a basic quality mark by much of the puppy buying public and removing the ability to get it supported by a clear public information campaign highlighting why non registered puppies may be of very poor quality is a strong carrot/stick approach to such breeders.

RodRussell
18th June 2011, 08:43 PM
... for cavaliers I'd think a basic starting point many would agree on is MRI, cardiologist auscultation within 12 months prior to a mating (both of those because how widespread each health issue is, and how serious for the breed's survival it is to get some grip on them both), ...

Thanks for the background, Karlin, but what I quote above is where you lose me. There is no value to just auscultating within 12 months. If the additional requirements of the MVD protocol are not included, then the testing standard is as worthless as the CHIC "congenital heart" test for cavaliers is now. Breeding a murmur-clear cavalier before age 2.5 years is a waste of time. Ask Prof. Kvart about that.

If the KC is going to impose these tests as registration requirements, that would go a long way, but the tests have to be genetically meaningful.


... I think the US may before long going to have a far more serious problem with all these conditions in the breed than the UK because the likelihood is that the UK will have to address them... either via the KC or extrenal requirements... whereas most US breeders lobby against absolutely everything that would require any tests/oversight etc. There is a very strong push to address pedigree breeding issues in the UK post Pedigree Dogs exposed and there is public support for same. ...

Progress is being made in the AKC, but it depends upon which parent club you are talking about. One club at the forefront is the Rottie club. The cavalier club, ACKCSC, is a sad joke in the genetic health arena. Even its effort on its website to describe what SM is, is wrong. Whoever wrote it does not realize that there is a difference between CM in humans and the type of CM found in cavaliers. And, it may well be that by the end of this year, the AKC board of directors will cram down upon the Dalmatian parent club the registration of low-uric-acid Dalmatians.

anniemac
18th June 2011, 09:26 PM
Thanks for the background, Karlin, but what I quote above is where you lose me. There is no value to just auscultating within 12 months. If the additional requirements of the MVD protocol are not included, then the testing standard is as worthless as the CHIC "congenital heart" test for cavaliers is now. Breeding a murmur-clear cavalier before age 2.5 years is a waste of time. Ask Prof. Kvart about that.


Rod,

As someone reading this as a potential puppy buyer, I want to make sure I got this right. I know breeding before 2 1/2 years would not be a breeding I would look for a puppy from, however, I would want a CHIC certificate because I feel that is important to me as well as other things. I thought about this before looking at Ella's health certificates. She had the CHIC certificate and certificates from the cardiologist. So given what I am well aware of in looking at hearts, why do you feel it is worthless? I had her eye certificates, patellas, hearts, along with CHIC. Would you recommend all that on top of CHIC? I read somewhere (I believe) that it is important to send results even if not passed and even if you are a pet owner. Can you explain it one more time or send me a PM? I know not many breeders submit results etc. but I am strictly speaking as someone who is doing research to find a breeder or more important breeding that will one day fit what I look for (which is different than people other places and others). I know you are very familiar with CHIC so that is why I'm asking. Is it something that has same tests across all breeds? If so maybe that would be why different things would be wanted on top of that?

anniemac
18th June 2011, 09:29 PM
Just to add I did not include MRI certificates because Ella did not have them and very few breeders in the USA did in 2006. You know I would not overlook information on the lines along with MRI's to include CM/SM on my journey for a puppy. Throw on top of that I would want one that had the right temperment when I met the puppy and connection. Tall demand, I know, but I want as much research on things so I can make my own judgement and choice on a puppy that fits me. That is if I decide on that or a rescue. I am in no hurry.

tuppenlil
18th June 2011, 10:23 PM
Thanks for the background, Karlin, but what I quote above is where you lose me. There is no value to just auscultating within 12 months. If the additional requirements of the MVD protocol are not included, then the testing standard is as worthless as the CHIC "congenital heart" test for cavaliers is now. Breeding a murmur-clear cavalier before age 2.5 years is a waste of time. Ask Prof. Kvart about that.

.

My understanding is that the UK KC does have the power to restrict registration of puppies that don't meet some agreed requirement of the breed clubs. Quite a few breeds set minimum age for breeding parents, and others require DNA testing to be performed and specific results in the parents.

Therefore, if the UK Clubs really wanted puppy farmers to stop breeding underage parents so that appropriate age health testing is performed, they could make it happen. Of course they would then have to do it themselves....

Maggie

RodRussell
18th June 2011, 11:28 PM
...She had the CHIC certificate and certificates from the cardiologist. So given what I am well aware of in looking at hearts, why do you feel it is worthless? ...

All the CHIC certificate tells you about the parent of the litter is that the parent's heart was auscultated within the last year. Even if the dog's heart was found to be clear of murmurs, that information alone is worthless, as far as whether the dog should have been bred. If that dog was under 2.5 years when tested, and/or if one or both of its parents' hearts were not murmur-free at age 5 years, that dog should not have been bred under the MVD breeding protocol. That is because, as Dr. Kvart recently has attested, short-cutting the MVD protocol is a waste of time.

The CHIC registry does not require any of those things, in order to qualify for a certificate.

Therefore, the CHIC registry, as presently set up for cavaliers, is meaningless.