Puppy farms are definitely a welfare concern!

However there isn't any evidence I know of that, for example, heart problems are lower in UK Club-bred cavaliers versus puppy farm cavaliers. Club cardiologist Simon Swift has noted pretty much the same statistics for murmurs in club cavaliers as has been observed in random samples and also pointed out the systematic failure by UK Cavalier Club breeders to properly heart test and follow MVD protocols has meant no change in those statistics in over a decade.

(From my own position, the two of my five that have murmurs are the Irish and US club breeder dogs. The two with no murmurs are the puppy farm and backyard bred dog! One club bred one also has no murmur. The best option though is definitely the health-focused club breeder where you can see the test results and be absolutely sure they follow age and testing guidelines for breeding and where you know dogs are well cared for. There are so many, many reasons why people should never, ever get a dog from a puppy farm situation, a pet store or backyard breeder...)
However for breeders who actually DO follow the MVD protocol and do cardiologist auscultate their cavaliers (not vet test!), there are far better results with later onset.
Puppy farms are definitely an issue -- but to my mind, because of poor breeding practice amongst so many registered club and KC breeders generally across many breeds, the puppy farm issues are not health-related (ie the issue isn't that puppy farm cavaliers have more serious health problems necessarily than club bred dogs) but welfare-related as puppy farm dogs are generally kept in appalling conditions and badly overbred, too.
I too would hope the advisory council will consider all these elements. But at the same time, the council was actually established because of a *specific* concern around poor breeding practice and breeding welfare in pedigree dogs, so this is a major remit for it to tackle.
It is a concern that the head of the council has direct ties to the Kennel Club, just as it would be to me if they were a member of an animal rights group. I'd therefore question the neutrality of such a person but I would hope I will enjoy being shown there is no need for such concern by the eventual actions of the committee.

If little changes -- as some fear -- then I would assume the issue will be pushed back onto the political agenda as having been poorly addressed. The Council definitely was
not created with a mind to leaving the situation as is. It was set up because there was a tacit (and explicit, in earlier reports) recognition that neither the KC nor most individual breed clubs were effectively addressing breeding and health issues. Therefore a lot of eyes will be on Prof Crispin!
Bookmarks