Fully agree, Pat–the road to addressing health through outcrossing, not least trying to select an appropriate breed or breeds, seems very long and fraught, especially with SM known to be in so many of the toy breeds as is, with unknown rates of incidence. I have no idea how the kennel club would go about doing such a thing, but assume it would have to be tightly controlled and monitored. The very fact that they are even considering something like this certainly seems an indication of a pretty high level of exasperation by the kennel club with the mindset of the breed clubs -- I would not think the kennel club would approach any kind of consideration of an approach that would be so controversial for breeders without feeling options for breed survival were narrowing.
Many breeders though are being quite disingenuous in acting like they have not heard of this at all, as certainly word that there is some discussion along these lines within the KC has seeped out, and already appeared in the dog press and has been discussed by cavalier breeders themselves. .
I mentioned in an earlier thread that when I was being shown 'Mate Select' at Crufts I was asked what I thought about the idea of bringing new genetic material into the Cavalier gene pool by outcrossing to another breed.
I said I thought it could be a good idea if it gave us a healthier dog, but most breeders would be very opposed and there was no way the KC would agree.
I was suprised when told it was already being discussed within the KC.
I doubt whether anything like this is imminent or whether it could give even part of the answer to the overwhelming health problems that beset the cavalier, but it is something I would consider doing if properly run and monitored by geneticists.
I always feel surprised when breeders will argue that an outcross is unacceptable because they will not allow any compromise in looks or temperament.
These are the people that maintain they love their dogs as much as any pet owner, but they would prefer to see this very painful condition continue to take over the breed until no civilsed society can ignore the welfare issues, rather than do anything concrete to help the situation.
I do know that quite a few of the researchers I have talked to have long felt that the answer is not in outcrossing, but proper testing, sharing information, and using the programs that have been and are being developed to reduce incidence. But that doesn't seem to be happening or be very likely to happen..
You are right. Although quite a few breeders are now saying that what is needed is the DNA test rather than outcrossing, these are the same breeders that have blanked and ignored the only research project that was working to find CM and SM genes.
These 'current guardians' who are praying that "those genes that up until now which have been evading us will be found"
Those who would "fight tooth and nail to stop those who wish the introduction of another breed" ...."We need to find the DNA marker"
Those who say "The only positive way forward is to forget this silly talk about outcrossing and try to find a DNA marker"
If they really mean what they say then they need to start supporting & funding the Gene research.
If there had not been so many years of obstruction, that so needed DNA test may have been a great deal closer.
So many breeders have not helped with DNA research, they will not accept outcrossing, they do not condemn those that break the breeding guidelines.
They wait for pet owners to raise money, to pay for projects run by researchers they will not recognise, to produce DNA tests that they have at long last decided will be the saving of the breed.
. One of the reasons it is being seriously floated is because there is now a deep level of concern that breeders will not voluntarily test and submit test results to a degree that will ever significantly help the breed's health issues -- for example, to enable programmes like the Estimated Breeding Values to be adequate -- or that such programmes would be used by a meaningful number -- already there are complaints about sharing results, publishing results, costs etc.
