Having doubts about the advisory council

[Bet]

I have just read Jemima Harrison's Article about her Interview with Professor S Crispin in Dogs Today Magazine ,I really feel that after reading it, it will really be up to us Cavalier Folk who are so concerned with the Cavaliers' Health Problems, not to depend very much on the Advisory Council.

The Breeding of Dogs and their Health Problems does not seem to be going to be the Advisory Council's First Priority.

It was mentioned about Advice being Given from the Council, it is not Advice that is needed after all the years of Lip Service being Paid about Health Problems, to mention one Breed our Cavaliers, it is Action.

Will we who want to see the Cavaliers' SM and MVD Problems improve, just have to Broadcast the Facts, to the Cavalier Buying Public ,that if they want a Cavalier ,then ask to see a Health Certificate from the Cavalier Breeder, to Prove that the Cavaliers' Sire and Dam have been Health Tested, also the Cavalier Breeder to show that no Cavalier is Bred from Parents before they are 2.5 years ,and the Grand- Parents are 5 years of age with no signs of these Two Diseases.

Bet

[sins]

I really feel that after reading it, it will really be up to us Cavalier Folk who are so concerned with the Cavaliers' Health Problems, not to depend very much on the Advisory Council

You might be right there Bet!

There's a transcript of the entire interview on Beverly Cuddy's Blog
www.coldwetnose.blogspot.com

Sins

[RodRussell]

I have just read Jemima Harrison's Article about her Interview with Professor S Crispin in Dogs Today Magazine ...

What did she write?

Nevermind. I found this link to the entire interview with Dog World. http://coldwetnose.blogspot.com/2010...with-prof.html

[sins]

Try this link Rod,

http://coldwetnose.blogspot.com/2010...with-prof.html

Sins

[RodRussell]

Try this link Rod,

http://coldwetnose.blogspot.com/2010...with-prof.html

Sins

Thanks. I wrote too soon.

I have to add, having read only the first question, that if that question is the tenor of the entire interview, there is little reason for the interview to have gone very well at all. This below first question is not particularly objective, kind of like a "when did you stop beating your husband?" question.

Question: "You're a KC member. The KC appointed you to be chair of their Dog Health Group. Are you not part of the establishment that has been partly responsible for the mess that dogs are in?"

[Kate H]

Professor Crispin was interviewed on Woman's Hour on Radio 4 last week and I thought how sane and sensible she sounded (but then the interviewer had no private axe to grind). She listed as her first priorities: amending the Dangerous Dogs Act so that the emphasis is on irresponsible owners rather than particular breeds; identification of all dogs (probably by microchip) to reduce fraud and unnecessary rehoming; and regulation of puppy farms. Obviously as a public body the Advisory Council has to give priority to the concerns of the majority of dog owners; the show scene is a very small part of dog owning and breeding in the UK. And almost every breed has health problems - naturally we are particularly concerned about the dreadful diseases of Cavaliers, but I spent a lot of time on Saturday at an obedience show listening to Border Collie owners discussing the vastly more numerous (though not necessarily more serious) health problems of their breed (most of whom, in obedience, come from working stock, not show stock). I'm sure Professor Crispin and her Council will in time get round to health problems in general (obviously, Cavaliers won't be singled out for special treatment when so many breeds have problems) - meanwhile, proper regulation of puppy farms will certainly help to reduce health problems for a lot of Cavaliers!

Kate, Oliver and Aled

[Bet]

Professor Crispin was interviewed on Woman's Hour on Radio 4 last week and I thought how sane and sensible she sounded (but then the interviewer had no private axe to grind). She listed as her first priorities: amending the Dangerous Dogs Act so that the emphasis is on irresponsible owners rather than particular breeds; identification of all dogs (probably by microchip) to reduce fraud and unnecessary rehoming; and regulation of puppy farms. Obviously as a public body the Advisory Council has to give priority to the concerns of the majority of dog owners; the show scene is a very small part of dog owning and breeding in the UK. And almost every breed has health problems - naturally we are particularly concerned about the dreadful diseases of Cavaliers, but I spent a lot of time on Saturday at an obedience show listening to Border Collie owners discussing the vastly more numerous (though not necessarily more serious) health problems of their breed (most of whom, in obedience, come from working stock, not show stock). I'm sure Professor Crispin and her Council will in time get round to health problems in general (obviously, Cavaliers won't be singled out for special treatment when so many breeds have problems) - meanwhile, proper regulation of puppy farms will certainly help to reduce health problems for a lot of Cavaliers!

Kate, Oliver and Aled

HAVING DOUBTS ABOUT THE ADVISORY COUNCIL

Could I mention that many of the Cavalier Breeders have had since 1983 to get the Cavaliers' MVD improved, and it's not much better than it was then ,according to the MVD Figures 50% 0f Cavaliers have Heart Murmurs at 5-6 years of age, these Figures will I think will have come mainly come for Cavaliers Heart Tested at Cavalier Shows, not from Cavaliers born in Puppy Farms.

The comment I would like to make is ,I am dreadfully sorry for the Dogs in Puppy Farms, but....in the Cavalier World most of the Statistics for the Cavalier MVD Problem ,I don't know about their SM Problem ,the MVD Figures will have come from Cavaliers at Cavalier Shows, not Cavaliers from Puppy Farms.

Will not most of the MVD Data have come from those Shows,I maybe wrong but over the years will Vets have been sending this Cavalier Information for the MVD Data Scheme.



As I said before ,it's just going to be the concerned Cavalier Breeders who are going to be able to give the Cavalier Breed a Future.

As I said in my Post ,the Advisory Council seems only to be be giving Advice, so really what Clout will it have ,and I will mention our Cavaliers again, the Answer for the Cavaliers' SM and MVD will come from finding SM and MVD Gene/ Genes.

It is marvellous the Help this Research is getting from Rupert's Fund.

It really does not matter what Advice the Advisory Council gives for our Beloved Cavalier Breed's Health Problems, the only Answer is to find those SM and MVD Gene/Genes.

Bet

[Karlin]

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!

[Bet]

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!

Maybe we all should think that the Advisory Council is the Best Hope that Dogs will have, other than for our Cavaliers ,finding the SM and MVD Gene/Genes.

I just don't know of any other way that those Two Diseases can be solved.

I know that at the moment the advice is to push back the Onset of those Two Problems ,but if the Genes can't be found and there are a number of Carriers around, what then.

So I hope it is understood how vital it is to discover those Genes.

I don't know ,but maybe the Researchers will find them in the not too distant future.

In the mean-time , I think we will just have to be patient and be Guided by the Advisory Council,having read the Transcript of of Jemima Harrison's Interview with Professor Crispin,my doubts have now gone,I think the Advisory Council will be doing what they think is best for all Dogs.

Bet