New information from advisory council

[Bet]

Yeah, but ... Is the KC on board with this panel? Did the KC appoint it, or did Parliament or a department of the government? Or is it totally independent?

And: What tests? Who decides which tests to include? I can come up with a list of a dozen tests for cavaliers, covering items like diabetes, thyroid issues, various eye disorders, deafness, which I doubt any CKCS club would consider including in its list.

Over here, we have recommended tests under the CHIC program, but the AKC parent clubs decide which ones, and the recommended ones by the cavalier parent club, the ACKCSC, do not even include the MVD breeding protocol or the SM protocol. So, over here, if the decision remained with the AKC, it would defer to its parent clubs, and the ACKCSC's recommendations would be worthless.

NEW INFORMATION FROM ADVISORY COUNCIL

Rod,

Just to put you in the Picture,the Council was set up at the Conclusion of an Independant Enquiry carried out by Professor Sir P.Bateson and commissioned by the Kennel Club and Dogs Trust

The Spokes-Person also said in the Advisory Council Article in DOG WORLD that the Council would be upon the the Good Work already done by many Orginizations ,including ,the Kennel Club,Rspca, the British Veterinary Assocation ,the British Small Animal Veterinary Association and Lantra.

Bet

[Karlin]

The advisory council is independent. It would advise Parliament which could require changes over the head of the KC. There has been some indication that if the KC does not take greater action, the government will require mandatory change.

Sure lots and lots of tests could be included -- and vary by breed -- but for cavaliers I'd think a basic starting point many would agree on is MRI, cardiologist auscultation within 12 months prior to a mating (both of those because how widespread each health issue is, and how serious for the breed's survival it is to get some grip on them both), eyes (because simple to do and basic), dry eye/curly coat/EFS (because the genetic test exists and these are serious and in the case of the former, tragic problems). Some might argue for hip scoring. There could be recommended but not required testing too.

I think the US may before long going to have a far more serious problem with all these conditions in the breed than the UK because the likelihood is that the UK will have to address them... either via the KC or extrenal requirements... whereas most US breeders lobby against absolutely everything that would require any tests/oversight etc. There is a very strong push to address pedigree breeding issues in the UK post Pedigree Dogs exposed and there is public support for same.

A start here would be the Kennel club only registering puppies that come from fully health tested (where approved test are available) clear parents.

Agree: a very simple and effective start that could be done very quickly based on some basics such as the above. I think the KC's argument that doing so would keep many breeders from bothering to register then (and therefore somehow make them less likely to be open to the KC's 'influence' regarding healthy breeding -- which as is seems miniscule) -- is silly -- registration is widely seen as a basic quality mark by much of the puppy buying public and removing the ability to get it supported by a clear public information campaign highlighting why non registered puppies may be of very poor quality is a strong carrot/stick approach to such breeders.

[RodRussell]

... for cavaliers I'd think a basic starting point many would agree on is MRI, cardiologist auscultation within 12 months prior to a mating (both of those because how widespread each health issue is, and how serious for the breed's survival it is to get some grip on them both), ...

Thanks for the background, Karlin, but what I quote above is where you lose me. There is no value to just auscultating within 12 months. If the additional requirements of the MVD protocol are not included, then the testing standard is as worthless as the CHIC "congenital heart" test for cavaliers is now. Breeding a murmur-clear cavalier before age 2.5 years is a waste of time. Ask Prof. Kvart about that.

If the KC is going to impose these tests as registration requirements, that would go a long way, but the tests have to be genetically meaningful.

... I think the US may before long going to have a far more serious problem with all these conditions in the breed than the UK because the likelihood is that the UK will have to address them... either via the KC or extrenal requirements... whereas most US breeders lobby against absolutely everything that would require any tests/oversight etc. There is a very strong push to address pedigree breeding issues in the UK post Pedigree Dogs exposed and there is public support for same. ...

Progress is being made in the AKC, but it depends upon which parent club you are talking about. One club at the forefront is the Rottie club. The cavalier club, ACKCSC, is a sad joke in the genetic health arena. Even its effort on its website to describe what SM is, is wrong. Whoever wrote it does not realize that there is a difference between CM in humans and the type of CM found in cavaliers. And, it may well be that by the end of this year, the AKC board of directors will cram down upon the Dalmatian parent club the registration of low-uric-acid Dalmatians.

[anniemac]

Thanks for the background, Karlin, but what I quote above is where you lose me. There is no value to just auscultating within 12 months. If the additional requirements of the MVD protocol are not included, then the testing standard is as worthless as the CHIC "congenital heart" test for cavaliers is now. Breeding a murmur-clear cavalier before age 2.5 years is a waste of time. Ask Prof. Kvart about that.

Rod,

As someone reading this as a potential puppy buyer, I want to make sure I got this right. I know breeding before 2 1/2 years would not be a breeding I would look for a puppy from, however, I would want a CHIC certificate because I feel that is important to me as well as other things. I thought about this before looking at Ella's health certificates. She had the CHIC certificate and certificates from the cardiologist. So given what I am well aware of in looking at hearts, why do you feel it is worthless? I had her eye certificates, patellas, hearts, along with CHIC. Would you recommend all that on top of CHIC? I read somewhere (I believe) that it is important to send results even if not passed and even if you are a pet owner. Can you explain it one more time or send me a PM? I know not many breeders submit results etc. but I am strictly speaking as someone who is doing research to find a breeder or more important breeding that will one day fit what I look for (which is different than people other places and others). I know you are very familiar with CHIC so that is why I'm asking. Is it something that has same tests across all breeds? If so maybe that would be why different things would be wanted on top of that?

[anniemac]

Just to add I did not include MRI certificates because Ella did not have them and very few breeders in the USA did in 2006. You know I would not overlook information on the lines along with MRI's to include CM/SM on my journey for a puppy. Throw on top of that I would want one that had the right temperment when I met the puppy and connection. Tall demand, I know, but I want as much research on things so I can make my own judgement and choice on a puppy that fits me. That is if I decide on that or a rescue. I am in no hurry.

[tuppenlil]

Thanks for the background, Karlin, but what I quote above is where you lose me. There is no value to just auscultating within 12 months. If the additional requirements of the MVD protocol are not included, then the testing standard is as worthless as the CHIC "congenital heart" test for cavaliers is now. Breeding a murmur-clear cavalier before age 2.5 years is a waste of time. Ask Prof. Kvart about that.

.

My understanding is that the UK KC does have the power to restrict registration of puppies that don't meet some agreed requirement of the breed clubs. Quite a few breeds set minimum age for breeding parents, and others require DNA testing to be performed and specific results in the parents.

Therefore, if the UK Clubs really wanted puppy farmers to stop breeding underage parents so that appropriate age health testing is performed, they could make it happen. Of course they would then have to do it themselves....

Maggie

[RodRussell]

...She had the CHIC certificate and certificates from the cardiologist. So given what I am well aware of in looking at hearts, why do you feel it is worthless? ...

All the CHIC certificate tells you about the parent of the litter is that the parent's heart was auscultated within the last year. Even if the dog's heart was found to be clear of murmurs, that information alone is worthless, as far as whether the dog should have been bred. If that dog was under 2.5 years when tested, and/or if one or both of its parents' hearts were not murmur-free at age 5 years, that dog should not have been bred under the MVD breeding protocol. That is because, as Dr. Kvart recently has attested, short-cutting the MVD protocol is a waste of time.

The CHIC registry does not require any of those things, in order to qualify for a certificate.

Therefore, the CHIC registry, as presently set up for cavaliers, is meaningless.