And as for breeding a male before or near age one, there are several reasons for that also - breeders like to "prove" a male at a young age - is he potent? Does he produce "better than he is"? Often a young dog will be mated with an experienced bitch. There is an opinion that if one waits too long to put a dog at stud, he "might not know what to do" whereas a young boy may be more eager. These are almost "test matings" in these instances. If a dog isn't potent or doesn't produce better than he is, decisions might be made about his future as a show dog - esp. since a breeder might only keep a limited number of dogs and will want to keep the best and most productive.
Before anyone flames me - I may not have this explanation exactly correct and I may have terms wrong; I just remember hearing these things long ago from friends that were breeders. Also, I have no opinion of the validity of these reasons as I am not and never have been a breeder. I do, however, have the opinion that there is no reason important enough to breed a Cavalier before the recommended ages in the health protocols.
I also know that years ago my breeder friends would have loved to place intact boys in my home, and I was never interested. Perhaps that was selfish of me.........
It is very common to breed male studs at 1 though many would be very concerned at breeding them younger than that when they are still technically puppies. The problem with doing this in cavaliers -- and why there cannot be any justification in doing so (after all, if a boy cannot figure out what goes where even if he hasn't been bred, doesn't that suggest a problem?! I know older neutered dogs only too happy to give a game girl a try and they have never been bred!) is that the two endemic and painful health issues are progressive and the ONLY way to get some grip on these diseases is to wait on breeding and test; ideally also to retest parents dogs after 5 to know did they remain heart clear? SM clear? Knowing the health results as these dogs age is really far more important in many ways than those initial tests at say 2.5, though any dog being bred needs to be scanned, of course. But breeders miss out on perhaps their most valuable information by not rescanning when dogs are 5+. Statistically, 6 seems to be a good age based on this research and similar done on a cohort of 800 cavaliers.
On revealing the names of the early bitches: Davecav, there were important privacy considerations involved as well. People gave pedigrees and scans for researchers to use on the basis of confidentiality. All the dogs named in the research were therefore identified only by letters. Nonetheless, there was much speculation on public forums by breeders claiming to have figured out all the dogs. Funny but some of the same breeders who demanded names of dogs and speculated publicly on dog identities have been the same who (utterly falsely) accused researchers of violating privacy by revealing dog names to others, something which was never done. Some of these people are unbelieveable: people with an obsession about discrediting researchers, who damned researchers for not revealing names, then have made false posts damning them for supposedly revealing names and scan results. Real bottom feeders, and they know who they are (the ones who continue to lie about the status of their own dogs, or let's just say, not be open about the truth). But I agree that the real damage has been done, as Margaret says, by the fact that so much is now understood with growing evidence to strongly back breeding approaches and still the same old, same old crowd ignore this and won't follow guidelines.
As others note too, was already way too late to try and breed away from the two early bitches; the lineages by even the 70s-80s permeated pretty much every pedigree and on top of that, many of the older lines that are known now to have likely been better in terms of SM, have also been diluted with 'popular sires' and known affected dogs, so the real need is to work to breed away from an already widespread problem and one that was widespread and worsening at the time of the original pedigree work...which by the way, would have been absolutely impossible without Bet's massive collection of thousands of painstakingly-collected pedigrees, which have been pivotal for both MVD and SM researchers -- breeders themselves failed to amass such a vital record! And for that all that care about cavaliers owe Bet a debt.
Cavaliers: Jaspar Tansy Libby Mindy Connie
In memory: Lucy Leo Lily
Cavalier SM Information site:www.smcavaliers.com
STUDY OF SM in 555 ASYMPATIOMATIC CKCS:70% Affected by AGE 6
Thank you so much about what you have just Posted about me.
It has Made My Day.
I know I some-times Lose The HEID as we say here in Scotland ,and I should keep my Mouth Zipped !!! but.......
This is why I keep going on about our Cherished Cavaliers , there are really in such a Mess Health Wise, and I believe their Biggest Worry could be the CM Problem, that to over-come this ,Fresh Genes have to found from some-where.
Dr C Rusbridge Neurologist, has said in her Recent News-Letter ,that it might not be possible to Breed away from SM in CKCS because of it's Link to CM ,which is Ubiquitious( Every-Where) in the Cavalier Breed
There must be Cavaliers that could be MRI Scanned not from the Show Scene, who will have those Fresh Genes.
Before the Out Crossing of Cavaliers is considered , maybe some-body will be put in charge to look for those Cavaliers who will have those Different ,New Genes to be able to give the Cavalier Breed a Chance of Survival.
Thanks again Karlin for what you have said about me ,I Appreciate it Very Much.
STUDY OF SM IN 555 ASYMPATOMATIC CKCS : 70% AFFECTED BY AGE 6
Our Poor Wee Cavaliers !!!!
Now we have some Cavalier Breeders Disputing the Figures from the Veterinary Record, Dr C Rusbridge ,Neuroloogist must Love our Cavalier Breed very Much , or she would just be walking away from all the Hassle she has to Suffer.
Dr Cattanach ,the UK CKCS CLUB'S Cardiologist ,and Bruce Field did just that in the Late 1980's when they had to put up with this same Treatment then.
The only thing that those Certain Cavalier Breeders are not Disputing ,is the Fact that 85 WHELPS were Researched for the FOETAL TISSUE RESEARCH and ALL 85 HAD CM.
This is Chacterized with Brains Too Big for the Skulls ,and can cause Problems for the Flow of the CEREPRO SPINAL FLUID which can lead to Syrinxes Forming and SM.
Do those Embittered Cavalier Breeders just have a Death Wish for our Cavalier Breed.???
I was so Disgusted by the Ill- Tempered Remarks made by some Cavalier Breeders on the Other Forum about this Veterinary Paper, that I have just sent my money for the Copy of this Paper to the Veterinary Record,.
Just received the Full Report by E-Mail , it makes interesting Reading,I think that those Cavalier Breeders who are disbelieving the Figures and what the Veterinary Paper says, should themselves, pay the Money for a Copy of this Veterinary Paper, then they just might believe what has been Stated in this Veterinary Paper.
Or is it a case ,of PIGS MIGHT FLY.
Unfortunately the most Vociferious of those Cavalier Breeders are on the CKCS CLUB COMMITTEE