Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk
Gracie's breeders are a good example. They are too busy blaming each other for her SM, instead of doing anything differently with their breeding practices. There are some affordable options in the USA for MRIs for breeders and if the breeders wanted it, they could negotiate for lower rates for a group deal. But they spend too much time competing with each other and whining about costs... if too pricey, then DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!! Raise a fuss!!! Get organized and start demanding it from vet schools and other places that could help. Enlist vets in your cause.
Sorry... just had to vent. I am tired of excuses about cost of MRIs. They could make cheaper options happen if they wanted to.
As I do follow genetics discussions and have a good understanding of population genetics I would suggest that those that are suggesting outcrossing (and I have been told by one zoologist that there have been these suggestions since 1998 re MVD in the breed) are doing so with the thought that the population numbers, with regard to Cavaliers produced by conscientious breeders, might end out too small to support the breed - the thought is that a population bottleneck has been created through illness in Cavaliers.
That is a situation that can be helped through judicious outcrossing. Better that than a lost breed. I know others are of the hope that there are enough in number to continue forward without the outcross. Those of us (and I am one) that are experienced in livestock breeding have less resistance to the idea of outcrossing while still retaining a breed, as in most livestock this is a regularly used tool.
I understand that the thought of outcrossing is unpalatable to many as they seem to understand that option as 'losing the breed'. I have difficulty understanding that and I don't believe I am alone. If someone could explain that way of thinking (why there would be 'upset' about outcross comments), I'd love to understand it a bit better, as I have wrestled with trying to get it for a number of years now.
When they introduce any other new BVA/KC scheme are the UK KC now going to now ask for a mandate to publish the results ? So can we expect no more new health BVA/KC schemes with fully published results in any breed then ? Or are some Cavalier breeders unique in their unwillingness to be transparent and open about health test results ?
What use then for the KC's new toy the "Health Test Results Finder" ?
What use then for the KC Accredited Breeder scheme ( relaunched yesterday as the KC Assured Breeder scheme ) ?
People talking of outcrossing is throwing out this scheme. If people talk about that then why are they even wanting this? I am just asking a hypothetical question. Things will take time and there are other breeds with SM. For people wanting to buy and support the breeders doing their utmost to scan and help the breed, when people talk of the solution of outcrossing, it just gives me an upsetting feeling. Why bother if everyone already gave up.
Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk
From your other post I believe that you read into it something it did not say. On the blog comments I am waiting for the original poster to get back on and explain.
In my mind saying/asking "Why is all this MRI-ing and research seen to be more sensible than an outcross and the elimination of the flat back of the head?", as rmholt did in that comment does not equate to suggesting that breeders give up on MRIs, research and heart testing. There is not mention of 'instead of' in the comment, but it seems to have been perceived that way.
'an outcross and the elimination of the flat back of the head'
If only it was that easy! (And incidentally my SM dog doesn't have a flat back to his head...)
Kate, Oliver and Aled