First off -- I fully agree that crates and covers are not necessarily an issue unless dogs are sitting in hot weather overheating inside a covered crate. Many if not most of us have crate trained dogs who would find a crate an relaxing and comfortable place to be at a public event.
Also I do not think the price of a dog indicates anyone is breeding 'commercially' -- cavaliers in the US from good health-testing breeders cost in excess of 800 pounds and most are not producing commercial quantities of puppies. Many puppy farmers charge a fraction of that and they ARE breeding commercially.
On hearts: sadly almost no cavaliers avoid heart problems, so this will be an issue 99% of us will deal with. The problem is endemic, exists in all lines, and so few breeders, whether puppy farmers to show breeders, FULLY follow the long-standing MVD protocol that incidence in the breed has not declined at all in UK club cavaliers over nearly 20 years according to the club's own cardiologist. Any vet will tell you they see heart issues in pretty much the same level of incidence regardless of pedigree (or lack of one). I have had puppy farm and backyard bred rescue dogs that have come in with clear hearts at age 5+ -- and lots of nice pedigreed dogs that have murmurs. Of my own 5 -- the two with murmurs are from show breeders. One other from a show breeder is clear as is one from a puppy farm (now 7) and one from a BYB (now 5). Sm statistics are pretty much the same -- as likely to occur in show breeder or puppy farm dogs.
Puppy farmers are of course a major welfare and dog health issue BUT they are not something MORE important than the clubs' responsibility to address health issues in the breed in any meaningful and open way. Show breeders and clubs *must* lead the way on health issues and the fact is: they currently do not -- anyone can go look at club cavalier registrations for, say, the last three years and see the number of club breeders who have produced puppies from sires and in many cases dams UNDER the breeding age of the MVD protocol and a look at online pedigrees or checking registration records further back will show how many of the dogs that now are bred within protocol were initially bred outside protocol. Setting aside some dedicated individuals, the clubs as a whole have had a pretty feeble response on health. When there have been research programmes, many club members have not shown themselves wiling to follow the breeding advice or programmes that result and the UK CKCS Club's previous chairwoman made exactly this point on the front page of their website, in obvious frustration. Even when show breeders get an inexpensive genetic test for two horrible conditions known only in this breed -- episodic falling and dry eye/curly coat -- some are already posting to discussion lists that breeders are saying they never see these problems in their lines so why test (exactly what people said about SM for years, and many still do).
Many also continue to use vets for their heart clearances knowing full well that this is unacceptable for a reliable auscultation-- studies show that vets miss a full half of all early grade murmurs before dogs are 5.
Saying 'why not target puppy farmers instead of show breeders' with welfare campaigns implies these are somehow mutually exclusive problems when they are not. And many of those who care about what the clubs do on health issues, also campaign -- often rather more vigorously than the clubs and KC themselves! -- against puppy farmers. For example, in Ireland, nearly all (about 95%) the submissions to government on puppy farms, leading up to legislation, came from rescues, pet owners, vet organisations etc. Not one came from a breed club. Only a single breeder made a submission -- from the US, at my encouragement, to talk about the 'trade' into the US. In the US, it is breeders who mount the most vocal campaigns against every single piece of puppy farm legislation introduced by state, or federally. I regularly see breeders post to email lists opposing every bill, defending the 'rights' of show breeders with over 100 dogs in breeding kennels to be free from any scrutiny or inspections. These ARE clearly commercial breeders; how do they differ from a puppy farmer as they are churning out pups? Does anyone really think all these dogs are MRId? Cardio tested?
The issue is health -- whether the problem in addressing it originates with show breeders or puppy farmers or BYBs. But if the clubs and show breeders cannot lead on these issues, how can they possibly criticise the puppy farmer? How is their breeding programme different, except the dogs may conform better to a piece of paper with a breed standard on it? And, how many UK and Irish show breeders sell their dogs with no restriction and no spay/neuter cause, enabling the BYBs and puppy farmers to get their breeding stock easily? (the answer is, most). The clubs and show breeders have a long way to go themselves in constructively addressing puppy farms amd breed health, both, before they can ask others to focus criticism only on puppy farmers.