aussielover Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 So it appears that ectropian is acceptable in the Clumber spaniel breed standard? Yet, the vets at crufts were under instruction to DQ any dog showing ectropian. I feel this is unfair to the exhibitors. The KC should change the breed standard so that ectropian or "haw" (assuming the 2 are the same?) is unacceptable before they go around disqualifying dogs for adhering to the breed standard which allows for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greytmate Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 (edited) Greytmate - according to the owner, the website, another exhibitor, and someone from the UK Clumber club, the Clumber has had all the appropriate tests, and has passed them. The owner admits on the video that the dog's eyes were red, but blamed the fact that the dog had been in a hot room for a few hours. So it seems that there is an issue there about whether inflamed eyes after heavy activity is normal or whether it is a health issue. I don't have high expectations of breed standards. Many of them have not caught up with genetic science and it seems that this type of vet testing is going to highlight any inconsistencies between breed standards and veterinary science. I can see how genuine the clumber spaniel owner is, but I disagree that inflamed eyes should be disregarded. Perhaps she could have used a cooling eye-pack on her dog during the day if she thought being walked around a hot room would cause her dog any discomfort. Edited March 11, 2012 by Greytmate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~Anne~ Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 I'll start by saying I haven't read the thread. I will. However, fwiw, at this point I'll give my own personal opinion just on my scant knowledge of the issue. The manner in which this was handled has not done anyone, particularly the purebred world, any favours. What the hell is the matter with the purebred world. It seems it is being run by people who lack skill and foresight. Yes, there ARE BIG issues in some breeds including the one I go in to battle for but there is a way of moving forward and seeing the forest as well as the trees. Another public affairs nightmare. Another negative message sent world wide about the purebred dog and the ineptitude of those who sit in positions of power and another negative mssage about the failure of the system as it currently is. Good thing the pug passed If you are happy to accept that the dogs DQ were done correctly then logic dictates you have to also trust the same vet who found no issue with the pug :D Dear Jo, it seems you are looking to provoke an argument that doesn't exist. Seriously, stop being so petty and grow a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~Anne~ Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 Do you mean when this was still a purebred forum, and there were numerous pure-bred-dog breeders to give an opinion? And, when you Steve, were in favour of purebred dogs, and not mongrels? No one could be bothered any more. :laugh: If the KC wants to slam a few nails in the coffin lid, it is not for me to naysay them. When the best of breed is a crock, it doesn't say much for the dogs that best of breed beat, does it? What a joke. No I don't think so - I think its since it became a forum where open debate from anyone including breeders and dog owners is no longer tolerated unless it suits a few who bully and attack people personally to get them to shut up when they have an opposing opinion. The person who was beaten up the most for daring to discuss what the rest of the world was thinking to the table for discussion is a purebred breeder. Now it would appear that even if someone is a purebred breeder its still likely to get them a personal swipe or two about something which has nothing to do with the topic just because you can. Re: bolded part - which is precisely what Jo has attempted in my quote above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jed Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 The owner said the temperature was over 100 degrees, which I know people who were there agreed with. And to be BOB, the dog would have been running about all day. Showdog. Having been to Crufts myself & i can certainly vouch it is the most airless & stinking hot place to spend a day .The lights are so hot & you can't go outside for any relief Who knows, there are a lot of different stories doing the rounds. Be interesting to see how the entries are next year. You don't simply enter either, you qualify. I suppose if the dog passed all the specialist testing, you would think the dog was healthy, would you not? Be a bit of a shock if he bombed out at the vet test. dog fan if you don't mind, you might check for photos yourself. There are plenty out there, some look like the modern pekingese, some don't, you can decide for yourself, and then I wont be seen to be guilty of slam dunking you. There is a big difference between good modern pekes and bad pekes of years ago though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSoSwift Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 HAve just seen on another forum that apparently one of the vets for crufts is an equine vet, not sure if it is true and if it is makes no sense at all. But if so why on earth would they do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirty Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 Just to clarify, an eye certificate doesn't really pass or fail a dog. There is nothing on there to say a dog can't be shown. Specialists can make comments to say a dog is unsuitable for breeding. Eyelid abnormalities are noted on the form but do not exclude a dog from the ring. A dog can have a current eye certificate - doesn't mean there aren't lots of negative comments on it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megan_ Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 HAve just seen on another forum that apparently one of the vets for crufts is an equine vet, not sure if it is true and if it is makes no sense at all. But if so why on earth would they do that? I'm sure there are a lot of rumours on a lot of forums - I wouldn't place much value on a rumor like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rysup Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 Its just plain sad. To go to Crufts, beat all those hundreds of dogs in your own breed, to then walk out and have your award stripped by a vet. I know myself a lot of vets are substandard when it comes to their general knowledge of dogs and dog breeding, let alone specific breeds. In the case of the Clumber......that was a terrible joke IMO. Unhealthy dogs simply dont get Titles in 13 countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheridan Posted March 11, 2012 Author Share Posted March 11, 2012 (edited) So it appears that ectropian is acceptable in the Clumber spaniel breed standard? Yet, the vets at crufts were under instruction to DQ any dog showing ectropian. I feel this is unfair to the exhibitors. The KC should change the breed standard so that ectropian or "haw" (assuming the 2 are the same?) is unacceptable before they go around disqualifying dogs for adhering to the breed standard which allows for it. Crufts is judged under UK breed standards. If the UK standard doesn't allow it then competitors whose dogs have it shouldn't enter the show. Its just plain sad. To go to Crufts, beat all those hundreds of dogs in your own breed, to then walk out and have your award stripped by a vet. I know myself a lot of vets are substandard when it comes to their general knowledge of dogs and dog breeding, let alone specific breeds. In the case of the Clumber......that was a terrible joke IMO. Unhealthy dogs simply dont get Titles in 13 countries. And my vet knows a lot about my breeds and I'd say a lot of breeds given how often I bump into pedigree dog breeders in the surgery. As to the clumber or any of the DQ dogs, I think lots of dogs that shouldn't get titles get titles. Judges should be more ready to non-award than they do. Edited March 11, 2012 by Sheridan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faytiges Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 Dogs have been "surgically" been "corrected" especially eyes for many years. Maybe the eyes have been able to be picked up by a Vet? Owners obviously wont admit this has happened?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faytiges Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 Agree Sheridan, Judges should not award.... will never do this...sadly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aidan3 Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 Unhealthy dogs simply dont get Titles in 13 countries. That seemed to be the crux of the owner's argument. I can think of stronger arguments she could have made, maybe in time she will, if able. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 Anyone remember the Judy Gard fiasco and how a vet told the new owner of one of Judy's dogs that it had problems with shyness and they PTS, most vets know bugger all about breed standards and what is and isn't an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 How come there is a discrepancy in the UK standard for the Clumbers which permits a bit of HAW yet ANKC do not? To me it does relate to a health issue so why would any country's standard permit it? And "not excessive" is a subjective description as well. The benchmark for that would be based on what one is used to seeing. I'm glad the ANKC doesn't permit HAW. And I'm glad to learn of the term "HAW" ..... saves me going back to check on the spelling for "entropia" . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 (edited) Anyone remember the Judy Gard fiasco and how a vet told the new owner of one of Judy's dogs that it had problems with shyness and they PTS, most vets know bugger all about breed standards and what is and isn't an issue. BUT .... If there is a Breed Standard that permits a health defect why allow it, especially at top level showing? Pardon me for thinking black and white on this - I'm not a breeder. Edited March 11, 2012 by Erny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 I'm not a clumber person but if it's healthy then why would it be a defect? I think the vet is overreacting and his/her decisions are overriding specialists, why should people bother spending a ton of money testing if a GP equivalent vet can rule all heath certificates void? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 I'm not a clumber person but if it's healthy then why would it be a defect? I think the vet is overreacting and his/her decisions are overriding specialists, why should people bother spending a ton of money testing if a GP equivalent vet can rule all heath certificates void? If it is healthy, why doesn't the ANKC permit it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megan_ Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 As statement and kirty have pointed out a vet certificate from a specialist doesn't mean the dogs eyes are okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebanne Posted March 11, 2012 Share Posted March 11, 2012 As statement and kirty have pointed out a vet certificate from a specialist doesn't mean the dogs eyes are okay. what does it mean then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now