Quote Originally Posted by sins View Post
I feel sorry for the truly health focused breeder caught in the middle of this mess.
On one hand they're being branded as zealots and mavericks for trying to do the right thing and told that they're destroying the breed.Then on the other hand they're told that their efforts to reduce the incidence of SM isn't good enough,even though they breed A to A and have had tangible improvements in their stock.They donate lost puppies to FTR,they take the remains of their much loved dog for post mortem and it's just not good enough???
No wonder breeders are walking away in despair.
Looking at things quite dispassionately the statement I have highlighted in red is the truth.
Their efforts are not good enough to outweigh the relentless production of puppies from non-scanned underage cavalier parents.
And I'm talking cavalier club members here......not a hope of changing things elsewhere when those that are suppose to ***"Maintain a high standard and act in a responsible manner with due regard to the welfare of the dogs under their control and to abide by the Club's Code of Ethics" sabotage health initiatives and make it increasingly unlikely that the efforts of the health focused breeders are enough to build a SM free nucleus of breeding dogs.

And to be quite honest, although these responsible breeders are doing all they can, while they let the people that are not scanning, or scanning only young dogs and pretending they have followed the protocol, or scanning and using dogs that are SM affected, sit on committees and health liaison councils and speak for them, then they must take some of the blame.

Why do these health focused breeders imagine the BVA/KC scanning scheme is dragging on for so long? Why do they imagine that the Cavalier Health Council oppose the publication of results?

If you scan and use your breeding cavaliers after 2.5 years in accordance with the guidelines, why would you object?

If you remove affected dogs from your breeding programme as you should, why would you object?

If you mate asymptomatic older affected dogs to Grade A dogs, as is allowed in the protocol, why would you object, unless you believe that you should be allowed to hide the information from the pet owner who buys the puppies from this riskier mating?

Non-publication of results allows use of affected dogs to remain hidden and most of these pairings are for the commercial interest of the breeder, not for reasons of genetic diversity.

Some of these matings may be justified if an affected dog from good heart lines or the 'D' Grade cavalier comes from less popular lines. If the reasons are genuine the breeder should be ready to explain and to be honest & accountable to the buyers, who has the right to know the health risks and advantages of such a mating before they buy their family pet.

* One of the objects of the UK Cavalier Club