Interesting News Out Of Crufts

[Sheridan]

It seems very well written and very objective. It explained a few things for me and put the debate firmly in its place. I think sometimes we all lose sight of the points of discussion because of the emotions involved.

I feel sad that this Vet is bearing the brunt of all this.

Thanks for posting!

This vet has been very brave putting this in the public arena. It won't help, of course.

[Crisovar]

We have dogs that have Eye clearances from specialist Ophthalmologists both before Crufts and after. These same dogs were DQ'd at Crufts, as everyone has agreed this was for the health of the dogs, not the standards.

What does this say about Health Clearances, given we all bang on about ensuring you go to a Breeder that does this and that it is the way forward, the Breeders of these dogs certainly do and yet they despite having these clearances were DQ'd.

The Bulldog passed muster under the Crufts guidelines prior to the show then they DQ'd it,then it again was assessed and was cleared after the show.

Does it make much sense?

eta

The KC will happily register litters from non Health Cleared parents. The KC will accept registration for pups whose parents have failed health clearance. Yet the KC think they can fix the health of purebred dogs by stopping dogs competing for for BIG.

Sorry, but it makes no sense.

Edited March 18, 2012 by Crisovar

[Crisovar]

It seems very well written and very objective. It explained a few things for me and put the debate firmly in its place. I think sometimes we all lose sight of the points of discussion because of the emotions involved.

I feel sad that this Vet is bearing the brunt of all this.

Thanks for posting!

This vet has been very brave putting this in the public arena. It won't help, of course.

Won't help what Sheridan?

Won't help the health of purebred dogs? Too damn right it won't.

[RallyValley]

I have yet to comment but I can't help it. It seems the vets were given pretty clear instructions and acted with good intentions.

If you look at it like it is with the Bulldog - they saw a scar, they couldn't say for sure what the scar was from at preliminary examination, their guidelines states scarring on the eye is a fail so they had to fail the dog.

Yes the dog has clear eye certificates from specialists who WOULD have has the time, resources and expertise plus specialist equipment to examine the eye. This does not invalidate the certificate it just says the examining vet could not say with 100% certainty the dog was a healthy specimen due to a scar on the eye which they did not have the resources, possibly expertise or specialist equipment to examine.

[Evolving]

It is a little bit off though when they say they bought in generalists to do the examination instead of specialists because they did not want to go looking for things a judge could not be expected to see in the ring without a medical examination.

But it is also not part of a judging to pull down eye lids and shine torches into eyes. So they are looking for things a judge is not expected to see in the ring.

Edited March 18, 2012 by Evolving

[Sheridan]

This vet has been very brave putting this in the public arena. It won't help, of course.

Won't help what Sheridan?

Won't help the health of purebred dogs? Too damn right it won't.

Won't help calm things down or change minds already set that it's a huge plot, won't change the minds of the 'You can't do this to me!' brigade. Will it help purebred dogs? Well, if next time a judge pauses before putting up an extreme or next time a breeder pauses before breeding an extreme then it's done the job. But it won't do that.

Edited March 18, 2012 by Sheridan

[alpha bet]

As I have stated earlier, brave is the vet who is prepared to stand by their role and make the hard decisions.

Will it help - many here think not - I think it will as there are breeders and exhibitors out there hoping that someone will finally take a stand.

Perhaps we can take another step forward - We have our registration certificates from the Kennel Associations - they state whether the dogs are Ch or Gr Ch or whether they are Imported or have agility titles.... All very nice.... but what I really want to see on these certificates is:

Hip and Elbow Scores, DNA test results.... surely for breeders these health results are more important than whether a dog has a show title?

If the Dog world wants to get serious about improving the health, these are things that breeders should be proud to have on their puppies registration. I send in the Hip/Elbow certificate in as required..... it is then sent back.... but no alterations to certificates. The only way I can find out the health testing of any stud dog is if the owner chooses to disclose this..... Surely we should be more open and prepared to share these results for the good of our breeds.

Edited March 18, 2012 by alpha bet

[Kirty]

That's what I find baffling too alpha bet. Dogs get tested for things but then what? Ethical breeders of course do the right thing with that info, but other breeders will claim their dogs have eye certs (which might say they have problems), hip scored (high scores), etc. What is the point of testing if the breeders can still do what they want regardless of results?

[SkySoaringMagpie]

We have dogs that have Eye clearances from specialist Ophthalmologists both before Crufts and after. These same dogs were DQ'd at Crufts, as everyone has agreed this was for the health of the dogs, not the standards.

What does this say about Health Clearances, given we all bang on about ensuring you go to a Breeder that does this and that it is the way forward, the Breeders of these dogs certainly do and yet they despite having these clearances were DQ'd.

The Bulldog passed muster under the Crufts guidelines prior to the show then they DQ'd it,then it again was assessed and was cleared after the show.

Does it make much sense?

So it was passed and failed on exactly the same criteria?

[emgem]

We have dogs that have Eye clearances from specialist Ophthalmologists both before Crufts and after. These same dogs were DQ'd at Crufts, as everyone has agreed this was for the health of the dogs, not the standards.

What does this say about Health Clearances, given we all bang on about ensuring you go to a Breeder that does this and that it is the way forward, the Breeders of these dogs certainly do and yet they despite having these clearances were DQ'd.

The Bulldog passed muster under the Crufts guidelines prior to the show then they DQ'd it,then it again was assessed and was cleared after the show.

Does it make much sense?

So it was passed and failed on exactly the same criteria?

No, dogs with ectropion and entropion might be noted as part of an eye test but unless it had resulted in damage to the eye the dog wiuld still be given a clear certificate. However, both those conditions are disqualifying conditions under the Kennel Clubs new breed watch program.

[Diva]

We have dogs that have Eye clearances from specialist Ophthalmologists both before Crufts and after. These same dogs were DQ'd at Crufts, as everyone has agreed this was for the health of the dogs, not the standards.

What does this say about Health Clearances, given we all bang on about ensuring you go to a Breeder that does this and that it is the way forward, the Breeders of these dogs certainly do and yet they despite having these clearances were DQ'd.

The Bulldog passed muster under the Crufts guidelines prior to the show then they DQ'd it,then it again was assessed and was cleared after the show.

Does it make much sense?

So it was passed and failed on exactly the same criteria?

No, dogs with ectropion and entropion might be noted as part of an eye test but unless it had resulted in damage to the eye the dog wiuld still be given a clear certificate. However, both those conditions are disqualifying conditions under the Kennel Clubs new breed watch program.

I understand the eye certs have different criteria, but I can't get my head around the Bulldog passing at rehearsal under several vets, and then failing on the day. Not, apparently, for a new injury but for a characteristic that would have been evident first time around. That makes it seem like a very subjective process. I'm not against the principle of breeding away from extremes that cause health problems at all, but I find that disturbing.

[Sheridan]

We have dogs that have Eye clearances from specialist Ophthalmologists both before Crufts and after. These same dogs were DQ'd at Crufts, as everyone has agreed this was for the health of the dogs, not the standards.

What does this say about Health Clearances, given we all bang on about ensuring you go to a Breeder that does this and that it is the way forward, the Breeders of these dogs certainly do and yet they despite having these clearances were DQ'd.

The Bulldog passed muster under the Crufts guidelines prior to the show then they DQ'd it,then it again was assessed and was cleared after the show.

Does it make much sense?

So it was passed and failed on exactly the same criteria?

No, dogs with ectropion and entropion might be noted as part of an eye test but unless it had resulted in damage to the eye the dog wiuld still be given a clear certificate. However, both those conditions are disqualifying conditions under the Kennel Clubs new breed watch program.

I understand the eye certs have different criteria, but I can't get my head around the Bulldog passing at rehearsal under several vets, and then failing on the day. Not, apparently, for a new injury but for a characteristic that would have been evident first time around. That makes it seem like a very subjective process. I'm not against the principle of breeding away from extremes that cause health problems at all, but I find that disturbing.

Most things are subjective. What one vet thinks isn't an issue, another vet may think is an issue. Isn't that why we, as pet owners for example, change vets when we don't get the response we want? Judging itself is a subjective process which is why some people won't show under particular judges.

[Diva]

Most things are subjective. What one vet thinks isn't an issue, another vet may think is an issue. Isn't that why we, as pet owners for example, change vets when we don't get the response we want? Judging itself is a subjective process which is why some people won't show under particular judges.

Yes, but if this process is entirely subjective and outcomes vary wildy from vet to vet it will carry no credibility.

A show judge is looking to balance out the strengths and weaknesses of the whole dog, which leave lots of room for opinion.

The vet on the other hand is supposed to be looking at designated health watchpoints, not the whole package, and should be doing so against agreed standards - I assumed that's what the training and testing process was about, getting that standard calibration. Without some calibration the process is useless as a performance measure.

In Borzoi one of the watchpoints is excessive hind angulation. Angulation is objectively measurable, even if I doubt excessive has been defined as yet. Other vet breeders studying the breed for other reasons have measured front and hind angulation across a range of specimens (although I think they measured hock angle, rather than stifle). Specific physical characteristics are measurable and comparable with standard methodology. If it's just any old general practice vet's opinion of what is excessive, I can rate it no more highly than the judge's. I've dealt with too many vets who didn't have a clue.

Good process, and transparency of decision making, are SO important if any of this is to make a difference for the better and not just have a perverse outcome.

But maybe all the naysayers are right, and a health outcome is not really the point here. I don't know.

Edited March 19, 2012 by Diva

[SkySoaringMagpie]

Statement by the Chair of the KC:

http://www.dogworld.co.uk/product.php/67383

[becks]

We have dogs that have Eye clearances from specialist Ophthalmologists both before Crufts and after. These same dogs were DQ'd at Crufts, as everyone has agreed this was for the health of the dogs, not the standards.

What does this say about Health Clearances, given we all bang on about ensuring you go to a Breeder that does this and that it is the way forward, the Breeders of these dogs certainly do and yet they despite having these clearances were DQ'd.

The Bulldog passed muster under the Crufts guidelines prior to the show then they DQ'd it,then it again was assessed and was cleared after the show.

Does it make much sense?

So it was passed and failed on exactly the same criteria?

No, dogs with ectropion and entropion might be noted as part of an eye test but unless it had resulted in damage to the eye the dog wiuld still be given a clear certificate. However, both those conditions are disqualifying conditions under the Kennel Clubs new breed watch program.

The BVA/KC eye test certificates have a space for comments by the eye tester, here they will mention things that are not necessarily breed specific but still outside 'normal and healthy' so things like extra eye lashes (can never spell the real term!), entropian and ectropian etc in older dogs they may even mention the dog has 'old age' cataracts instead of just ticking the box for HC.

Copies of these certificates are sent to the KC (and include the dogs registered name, owner and microchip number)

[Sheridan]

Has anyone seen the bulldog DQ certificate?

[Crisovar]

For those that are still of the opinion that any criticism of the Health Testing procedure at Crufts 2012 is simply a case of crying over having their lollypop taken away.

Canine Alliance

Canine Alliance

PRESS RELEASE

24th March 2012

The steering committee of the Canine Alliance is concerned that some outside observers have misinterpreted the main reason for its formation.

Whilst the veterinary examinations of fifteen Best of Breed winners that were carried out at Crufts may have been the catalyst for this formation, the steering committee of Canine Alliance is keen to remind everyone of its main purpose.

Secretary Robert Harlow said, “It should be recognised that, far from being opposed to veterinary examinations, the alliance feels that basic veterinary examinations should become routine for all show dogs, but prior to entering the competition ring, not after they have been awarded any prizes.”

In his opening speech at the meeting where Canine Alliance was born Andrew Brace, now Vice Chairman and Press Officer of Canine Alliance, told all present “At the outset let me say that the purpose of this meeting is not to oppose the Kennel Club’s stance on health monitoring. Quite the reverse in fact; it is to discuss the methods that were employed at Crufts and to attempt to produce a set of recommendations that will actually HELP the Kennel Club progress in its quest to improve the health of our purebred dogs, whilst at the same time supporting the breeders, exhibitors and judges who fall under its jurisdiction.”

Furthermore, Canine Alliance feels that much more should be done to ensure the health of pedigree dogs. Robert Harlow said, “The overwhelming feeling of members of the alliance is that we work with the Kennel Club to ensure that the method for health testing and checks is in place, and carried out in a manner that is both fair and equitable for all dog owners. The Canine Alliance will campaign hard on behalf of its members to this end.”

[Crisovar]

[~Anne~]

Yes, before awarding and not after would have been the better way to do it.

[Sheridan]

Yes, it would. Aside from the cost which would make showing prohibitive. Wouldn't matter to some entrants though it might for others.

And I ask again if anyone has seen the bulldog DQ certificate?

Edited March 24, 2012 by Sheridan