PDA

View Full Version : The new BVA/KC CMSM Scheme grades and the new breeding guidelines



Margaret C
12th January 2012, 03:27 PM
The new BVA/KC CM/SM Scheme was promised in the New Year.As yet there has been no announcement from the Kennel Club but for those interested in the new gradings and the breeding guidelines, you can see them on Clare Rusbridge's website http://www.veterinary-neurologist.co.uk/Syringomyelia/BVA-kc-2/

anniemac
12th January 2012, 04:26 PM
I'm so confused. Am I reading it right? I take back what I said about having it say to breed at 1 year. Does it say 1>3 years do not breed?

RodRussell
12th January 2012, 04:59 PM
The new CM/SM breeding guidelines should not be released as presently drafted. They allow breeding cavaliers as young as 12 months, and they thereby undercut the MVD breeding guidelines. In the US, we would say that the CM/SM breeding guidelines have thrown the MVD breeding protocol under the bus.

sins
12th January 2012, 05:05 PM
No, Anne.
You can breed from stock younger than 3 years.
Assuming your cavalier has no SM or central canal dilation and is between the age of 1 to 3,you can mate that cavalier to an over 3 without SM and central canal dilation,or to an over 5, either with or without central canal dilation.
If your cavalier between the age of 1 - 3, has a central canal dilation,you must mate to an over 5,with or without central canal dilation.
If your cavalier has a syrinx,pre syrinx or dilated central canal of 2mm, under the age of 3,it's a Do not breed.
The major changes for breeders here is that a bitch who would have had a small syrinx at age 2.5 and could previously been mated to an over 2.5 year old dog without SM, is now a "Do not breed."
A bitch under 2.5 years with a small central canal dilation,previously a C,could have been mated to an over 2.5 year old dog, must now be mated to an over 5 with or without Central canal dilation.
Its not uncommon for Grade A bitches/dogs under the old guidelines to have a small central canal dilation. The old guidelines often reported SM and central canal dilation separately for breeders information and puppy buyers found it straightforward.
The new guidelines appears not to treat SM and CCD separately and is reported under a single SM heading .. graded from 0 to 2.
At least this is how I think it looks...
Sins

anniemac
12th January 2012, 05:08 PM
No, Anne.
You can breed from stock younger than 3 years.
Assuming your cavalier has no SM or central canal dilation and is between the age of 1 to 3,you can mate that cavalier to an over 3 without SM and central canal dilation,or to an over 5, either with or without central canal dilation.
If your cavalier between the age of 1 - 3, has a central canal dilation,you must mate to an over 5,with or without central canal dilation.
If your cavalier has a syrinx,pre syrinx or dilated central canal of 2mm, under the age of 3,it's a Do not breed.
The major changes for breeders here is that a bitch who would have had a small syrinx at age 2.5 and could previously been mated to an over 2.5 year old dog without SM, is now a "Do not breed."
A bitch under 2.5 years with a small central canal dilation,previously a C,could have been mated to an over 2.5 year old dog, must now be mated to an over 5 with or without Central canal dilation.
Its not uncommon for Grade A bitches/dogs under the old guidelines to have a small central canal dilation. The old guidelines often reported SM and central canal dilation separately for breeders information and puppy buyers found it straightforward.
The new guidelines appears not to treat SM and CCD separately and is reported under a single SM grading ..from 0 to 2.
At least this is how I think it looks...
Sins

Thank Sins

anniemac
12th January 2012, 08:03 PM
The new CM/SM breeding guidelines should not be released as presently drafted. They allow breeding cavaliers as young as 12 months, and they thereby undercut the MVD breeding guidelines. In the US, we would say that the CM/SM breeding guidelines have thrown the MVD breeding protocol under the bus.

I don't think just MVD because there are other breeds I have read that are suggested to follow the protocol but I think of other things accross the board. I think (in the USA) we have hips at 2 years and I'm sure other breeds do too. I think, overall, breeding a 12 month old is disguisting and they are just a puppy themselves. It makes me sick to ever see that (which I have sadly).

sins
12th January 2012, 09:14 PM
Ideally,the neurologists, taking into account the latest research are best placed to set the guidelines to breed away from SM.
We have to keep in mind that the BVA/KC SM scheme is not exclusively designed for cavaliers,but will very likely be used by other toy breeds,so therefore to take into account another condition for cavaliers which has no relevance in other breeds,would be unfair.
Likewise,it's a matter for the cardiologists to decide the best way forward for MVD in the cavalier breed.
At the end of the day,it's down to breeders to pull all the threads together as best they can,in order to make the best choice for their dogs,without totally decimating the genepool.
Those new SM guidelines are very severe Rod.
I was talking to a cavalier exhibitor a few nights ago who is quite new to the breed and she made the point that trying to follow those guidelines put her in mind of what it must have been like for the breed founders,post WW11,trying to find suitable sires for their bitches.
Sins

Brian M
12th January 2012, 09:25 PM
Hi Sins

Can you answer my two points on the other similar thread pls.

RodRussell
12th January 2012, 09:31 PM
Ideally,the neurologists, taking into account the latest research are best placed to set the guidelines to breed away from SM.
We have to keep in mind that the BVA/KC SM scheme is not exclusively designed for cavaliers,but will very likely be used by other toy breeds,so therefore to take into account another condition for cavaliers which has no relevance in other breeds,would be unfair.

I do not agree. First of all, this primarily is a cavalier disorder. The other breeds are tag-alongs, just like with MVD. Early-onset MVD is a cavalier disorder. It would have been just as easy to list the "1-3" year olds as "<3", like the same guidelines do for ">5" year olds. Alternatively, they could have had a footnote or asterisk about cavaliers, stating that they should not be bred unless they also meet the MVD breeding guidelines.


... At the end of the day,it's down to breeders to pull all the threads together as best they can,in order to make the best choice for their dogs,without totally decimating the genepool.

The fact is that, at the end of the day, nearly all of the breeders will use these new SM guidelines as one other excuse for not following the MVD breeding protocol.


... Those new SM guidelines are very severe Rod.

No, they are not. They are not severe enough!

anniemac
12th January 2012, 09:57 PM
Ideally,the neurologists, taking into account the latest research are best placed to set the guidelines to breed away from SM.
We have to keep in mind that the BVA/KC SM scheme is not exclusively designed for cavaliers,but will very likely be used by other toy breeds,so therefore to take into account another condition for cavaliers which has no relevance in other breeds,would be unfair.
Likewise,it's a matter for the cardiologists to decide the best way forward for MVD in the cavalier breed.
At the end of the day,it's down to breeders to pull all the threads together as best they can,in order to make the best choice for their dogs,without totally decimating the genepool.
Those new SM guidelines are very severe Rod.
I was talking to a cavalier exhibitor a few nights ago who is quite new to the breed and she made the point that trying to follow those guidelines put her in mind of what it must have been like for the breed founders,post WW11,trying to find suitable sires for their bitches.
Sins

I agree with it not being only Cavalier issue but MANY other breeds have Hip problems graded at 2, Eyes graded at 2, Patellas (not sure age) but having a recommended protocol that suggests an age younger than that is not good. I'm sorry. I really want to support this but how can I? Even welfare groups recommend the MINIMUM age of breeding to be 2 years of ANY breed (older for bigger ones) because they are not fully mature.

sins
12th January 2012, 11:05 PM
I don't agree with breeding from very young dogs ...
However,one big advantage of scanning dogs from a year old is to get data onto the EBV database and quickly.
If approx 25% of affected cavaliers are so at a year old,these early onset dogs can be eliminated from breeding programmes and the data sent for the EBV database.
So I think there are some very positive aspects to this.
It will of course also allow stud dogs to be scanned young and put to work...but even at the moment, the current guidelines are no deterrent.
Sins

RodRussell
12th January 2012, 11:15 PM
I don't agree with breeding from very young dogs ...
However,one big advantage of scanning dogs from a year old is to get data onto the EBV database and quickly.
If approx 25% of affected cavaliers are so at a year old,these early onset dogs can be eliminated from breeding programmes and the data sent for the EBV database.
So I think there are some very positive aspects to this.
It will of course also allow stud dogs to be scanned young and put to work...but even at the moment, the current guidelines are no deterrent.

I have no objection to scanning at any age. I'm not talking about scanning. I'm talking about breeding dogs as young as 12 months old. This set of guidelines will give the cretin breeders one more excuse.

Margaret C
13th January 2012, 01:00 AM
I have no objection to scanning at any age. I'm not talking about scanning. I'm talking about breeding dogs as young as 12 months old. This set of guidelines will give the cretin breeders one more excuse.

Cretin breeders don't need any excuse. They are still breeding 14 month old puppies ( and the breed into extinction ) because they are not going to let anyone tell them what to do.

These guidelines do not invite breeders to use young dogs or encourage them to ignore the MVD guidelines. they give breeders the information on what grade of cavalier to mate together to lessen the chance of the puppies developing early onset SM.

The SM guidelines show that a cavalier scanned within the age 1-3 should always be mated to a cavalier scanned over the age of three.

It is unrealistic to think that it is the duty of any one specialist to ignore the findings of their own research to accommodate the requirements of another health protocol.

A responsible breeder will need to juggle the SM guidelines, the MVD protocols, the advice on mating DD/CC & EFS carriers put out by the AHT and take into account the findings from the BVA/KC eye test.

As soon as the Kennel Club actually launches the BVA/KC CMSM Scheme that these guidelines are designed for, then I will need to sit down and revise my cavalierpuppy website.

I will still be saying that the parents of puppies should be at least 2.5 years before they are bred because that is what the MVD protocol demands, so nothing has changed there.

I will need to work out how best to describe the SM guidelines, but the one thing I will be pointing out is that for SM the older the parents are scanned the better, and that in every case at least one parent should be older than three years when scanned.

I will emphasis that cavaliers scanned over the age of five years have been shown to be the least risky parents when it comes to choosing a puppy.

Kate H
13th January 2012, 12:35 PM
Sadly, I find it all very depressing - not because people aren't doing their best by giving us these guidelines but because it seems to be getting less and less possible to find breeding stock that fulfils all these requirements. As a friend who is a small breeder of very healthy dogs said to me: Your dog has got to scan clear - preferably grandparents as well; you then have to find a dog or bitch for mating who has also scanned within the acceptable range. Both of them also need to be clear of MVD for at least two generations. You do the DNA tests for curly coat, dry eye and episodic falling; if your dog or bitch is a carrier of any of them, the dog or bitch they are to be mated to has to be tested clear. How many dogs are out there who fulfil all these criteria? The people who are going to carry on breeding are the ones who ignore guidelines, don't scan or test, and refuse to believe that their dogs have any problems - or know they have and carry on regardless. And that's not going to be very good for Cavaliers.

Even regular scanning is just the best we can do at the moment. I got Oliver when he was a year old; his breeder was very keen to use him at stud when he was two. I refused for practical reasons. Four years later he was diagnosed with SM, though he had symptoms of at least CM from much earlier. At two, he could well have scanned clear of SM, because four years later his syrinx was very small and might have only developed recently. If he had been mated, he could have fathered say 6 puppies, some of whom (all of whom, if the mother had also at that stage scanned clear for SM) would have either developed SM or passed the gene on to their own offspring. Because CM/SM is a progressive disease, scanning and breeding guidelines are only the best we can do at the moment - but we have to do something. Hopefully it won't be too long before we get a DNA test - we so need it.

Kate, Olivr and Aled

Margaret C
13th January 2012, 01:13 PM
It is depressing Kate, especially since most breeders are ignoring all guidelines, so looking at SM alone there will be more early affected SM cavaliers than unaffected produced from each litter bred by owners that do not bother to scan.

Breeders that use young parents, one or two unscanned parents, parents that are graded C or D are overall going to produce more than 50% affected puppies from each of those matings. They are adding to the problem with each litter they produce.

Seven years ago I was saying that if we did not do something to try and breed away from the problem, when we did get the DNA test we would find that there were no genetically clear cavaliers left.

I believe that we reached that point a while ago.

anniemac
13th January 2012, 02:02 PM
No I am depressed but not for the irresponsible breeders but for the ones that are trying to do the right thing. what do geneticists say?

Maybe breeders will scan at one to get an idea for breeding program and scan again later before they breed, but even with or without it, they would not breed at an early age. Others will just see the 1 year and thats enough. Oh well.

I edited this because I feel differently.

anniemac
13th January 2012, 02:06 PM
You know things were done in the past. We are still learning things about CM and SM. MVD, on the other hand, is a different story. What I would like to see is the breed clubs getting with Dr. Bell and consult with him or other geneticists and look at how to go forward with factoring all health.

There is no "perfect" dog and the more we know about the health, the better to make decision.

RodRussell
13th January 2012, 02:07 PM
Cretin breeders don't need any excuse. They are still breeding 14 month old puppies ( and the breed into extinction ) because they are not going to let anyone tell them what to do.

The consequence is not that the breeders need another excuse, it is that they will use it to convince otherwise ignorant buyers that such glaringly underaged breedings are okay, indeed "recommended by specialists."


It is unrealistic to think that it is the duty of any one specialist to ignore the findings of their own research to accommodate the requirements of another health protocol.

To the contrary, I consider it irresponsible to ignore the MVD protocol. All they had to do was change the "1-3" year category to "<3", or add a note that the "1-3" category was limited to no less than 2.5 years for cavaliers.

anniemac
13th January 2012, 02:13 PM
What I meant about scanning at 1 is, I believe there are breeders that scan at one to get an idea and then scan again before breeding, but the majority would only care about one scan.

anniemac
13th January 2012, 02:16 PM
Deleted... Let's hope for a better future.

RodRussell
13th January 2012, 02:45 PM
Keep in mind that the most recent research of SM in cavaliers (555 cavaliers, to be precise) concludes that "the optimum age for this early MRI screening is 36 months". So, breeding any cavalier under the age of 36 months risks producing puppies with greater than a 50% likelihood of being SM-affected.

How come the new guidelines don't incorporate those findings, instead of expressly contradict them?

RodRussell
13th January 2012, 03:12 PM
The consequence is not that the breeders need another excuse, it is that they will use it to convince otherwise ignorant buyers that such glaringly underaged breedings are okay, indeed "recommended by specialists." ...

I want to amend that "recommended by specialists" quote, to make it "recommended by specialists, the BVA, and the Kennel Club!"

kurtz
15th January 2012, 07:59 AM
Sorry for my poor english.

Every kind of protocol old or new is absolutely not efficient, if there is countries as my country (Italy) where the "mafia breed system" hidden everything, near the all dogs or puppies born in Italy there is unscanned for CM/SM, the age of mothers and fathers is only a glass water inside the ocean. I think that not only in Italy there is this problem, and everything you can try to do is very very small if all the world not collaborate.
It seems the war of Don Chishotte, I try to support your ideas, but i loose sure 100%.

RodRussell
15th January 2012, 05:04 PM
Sorry for my poor english.

Every kind of protocol old or new is absolutely not efficient, if there is countries as my country (Italy) where the "mafia breed system" hidden everything, near the all dogs or puppies born in Italy there is unscanned for CM/SM, the age of mothers and fathers is only a glass water inside the ocean. I think that not only in Italy there is this problem, and everything you can try to do is very very small if all the world not collaborate.
It seems the war of Don Chishotte, I try to support your ideas, but i loose sure 100%.

kurtz, you are correct that Italy is not unique in this regard. Maybe you call it the mafia breed system, but the same types of breedings take place everywhere. In the US, names for it include "puppy mills", "backyard breeders", and even "ethical breeders". Yes, "ethical breeders", or at least cavalier breeders who call each other that, ignore genetic health testing for CM/SM, as well as for MVD, eye disorders, luxating patellas, hip dysplasia; it goes on and on...