Prior to 1926 the breed now know as the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel was only seen in old paintings but after Mr. Roswell Eldridge, an American, visited Crufts and made his prize offer to the best “old type Toy Spaniel” in the style seen in those old paintings some interest in this style of Spaniel was revived.
The King Charles Spaniel with its shorter nose was made popular during Victorian Times and was probably a combination of the longer nosed flat skulled spaniel and shorter nosed, dome headed, stockier breeds such as Pugs. Occasionally a “throwback” (the longer nosed spaniel) would be born in a litter of Charlies and generally culled as undesirable.
Some breeders became interested in the idea of re-developing this old breed and started to look for dogs with which to work. They approached King Charles Spaniel breeders and asked and in some cases begged for their “throwout” puppies the ones with the bad “Charlie” heads. While some have denied this, there was most likely some mixing of other breeds in the early days. In fact it is said that the famous Ann’s Son, winner of the special “old type” class at Crufts 3 times and who was the living model when the breed standard was drawn up, was out of a tri King Charles Spaniel bitch but sired by a Papillon. Other breeds that have been suggested as being used in the earlier development of the breed were the Welsh Springer, Dachshund and English Cocker. One bitch who may have been a result of a mixed pedigree was “Rangers Nicky Picky” who came from a kennel that bred Clumbers, Springers and Cavaliers. By all accounts she was an odd looking Cavalier and though registered her pedigree is not given. A much used sired during the War years Cannonhill Ritchie goes back to Ranger Nicky Picky on both sides of his pedigree – his grandmother on his mother’s side and great-grandmother on his father’s side.
Prior to WW II there were 6 main sires used during this stage of the development of the breed:- Ann’s Son (Blenheim); Wizbang Timothy, Ann’s Son’s full brother (described as Black and White); Carlo of Ttiweh (Blenheim); Duce of Braemaore (Tri-coloured); Ariste of Ttiweh (Tri-coloured) and Kobba of Kuranda (Black and Tan). These dogs were extensively bred on as sires who produced the desired Cavalier type and all modern day Cavaliers would find these dogs in their pedigrees many generations back.
In the 2nd generation important noted sires were Peter of Ttiweh (Ruby), an Ann’s Son son. His litter sister was Lucy of Ttiweh who was to be the dam of the unbeaten Bridget of Ttiweh. Bridget was sired by Wizbang Timothy (Ann’s Son’s full brother).
Also another Ann’s Son’s son of note, Duke’s Son, who was sire of Belinda of Saxham, she being the winner of the 1st Cavalier Championship Specialty ever held and dam of Ch. Little Dorrit of Ttiweh (aka Lady Jane of Turnworth). Little Dorrit was a very important bitch for the Ttiweh kennels producing 2 Champions Ch. Harmony of Ttiweh and Ch. Jupiter of Ttiweh as well as Mars of Ttiweh who was the sire of 2 Champions including the Ch. Abelard of Ttiweh who then went on to sire 2 Champions for Mrs. Keswick’s Pargeter Cavaliers, Ch. Pargeter Anemone and Ch. Pargeter Bob Up.
Among the 3rd generation a sire of note was Ranger’s Bimbo (Blenheim) sired by the ruby Peter of Ttiweh. “Bimbo” was the sire of Plantation Robert. Plantation Robert was the sire of Plantation Banjo and grandsire on both sides of Cannonhill Ritchie (Ruby). Two other Peter of Ttiweh sons, Mark and John of Ttiweh were also important sires at this time.
During the War dog breeding was much curtailed, with food at a premium for human consumption many dogs had to be euthanised and gas rationing prevented breeders from travelling to more distant and different sires. It was the main reason the two dogs (Plantation Banjo and Cannonhill Ritchie) were so extensively inbred on through the war years.
Immediately after the war it was difficult to find unrelated Cavaliers to breed on as many important pre-war “Cavalier” bloodlines had been lost. In 1945 Cavaliers were given separate registration with The Kennel Club and the process of sorting those dogs that were eligible for the Cavalier registry was undertaken. For some years after this, The Kennel Club did allow a certain amount of interbreeding between the two breeds, King Charles Spaniels and Cavaliers due to the limited number of sires available. For example Celandine of Littlestream was an inter-bred, sired by a King Charles Spaniel called Flash Grenadier. She was the grand-dam of Ch. Pargeter Patron, top stud dog in 1956. In the 1950’s a Cocker, Suntop Joyful was bred to the Black and Tan Cavalier, Crest of Candlelight with The Kennel Club’s approval, with dogs of that mating in their pedigrees winning RCC in all four colours in later generations.
In 1945 Amice Pitt purchased Daywell Roger (Blenheim) a grandson and great-grandson of Ann’s Son through his dam Daywell Nell. His sire was Cannonhill Ritchie. He was to be the 1st Champion in the breed. “Roger” was the top stud dog in the breed from 1951 through 1954 and produced a total of 11 Champions. He was much linebred on and can be found many generations back in most, if not all Cavaliers’ pedigrees.
One of the few Cavaliers of that time not going back to Plantation Banjo or Cannonhill Ritchie was The Young Pretender of Grenewich. He was the foundation for Mrs. Green’s Heatherside Cavaliers producing the two champion littermates Ch. Heatherside Andrew and Ch. Heatherside Anthea. He also produced two champions for Mrs. H. Pilkington’s Hillbarn Cavaliers, Ch. Mingshang Corinna (aka Coraleen of Hillbarn) and Ch. Claudette of Hillbarn. His son Ch. Heatherside Andrew was a top stud dog in 1955 and his grandson Ch. Hillbarn Quixote (Andrew’s son) was top stud dog in 1963.
The original Cavalier gene pool was small and the War years made it smaller. In post-War Cavalier pedigrees one notes that breeders tended to opt for linebreeding rather than the inbreeding seen during the War years. There have been many important Cavaliers since the 1920s, many healthy and long-lived. Though the date of Ann’s Son’s death is unknown he sired a litter in his 12th year in which Daywell Nell was produced. Ch. Daywell Roger lived until he was 13 years. Many other top stud dogs have lived into their teens, just some examples of important stud dogs are:- Ch. Heatherside Andrew – 13 years; Ch. Pargeter Patron – 14 years; Ch. Crisdig Celebration – 13 years; Minstrel Boy of Maxholt – 14 years; Ch. Rosemullion of Ottermouth – 13 years; Ch. Homaranne Andy Capp – 13 years; Ch. Homaranne Caption – 15 years; Ch. Alberto of Kindrum - 15 years. Through linebreeding on some of these long-lived and healthy Cavaliers through the generations we should be able to hope for the same in the modern day Cavalier.
This is just a brief history of the early genetics in the breed. If you are interested in learning more about the origins and history of the breed there are many great books on the Cavalier such as “All About the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel” by Evelyn Booth and “The King Charles Spaniel” by Bruce Field. A great resource is the UK Club’s Cavalier King Charles Spaniel Champions which has pictures and pedigrees for all the UK Champions from the 1st into modern day. Unfortunately not readily available but one of my most cherished books about the breed’s history is the Southern Cavalier King Charles Spaniel Club’s Amice Pitt Commemorative Cavalcade which has writings by Amice Pitt as well as essays on the early top stud dogs.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Saturday, October 18, 2008
The Devil You Know - Dog Breeding Practices
Whenever an argument is made against some practice of purebred dog breeders some romantic reference is usually made to animals like wolves in the wild, along the lines wolves are much healthier because they eat raw food …. if it is a good year but what about in a bad year when there isn’t much game to catch about and what is isn’t particularly well-fed either. Ever seen pictures of wolves in a bad year when they are thin and mangy? Then there is the discussion of inbreeding practiced by dog breeders, what most fail to mention is that many wild animals that run in packs inbreed. There is usually an alpha male that tends to impregnate all the females in the pack, some being his daughters. Any other males in the pack would usually be related to the alpha male as strange males are not tolerated, so brother/sisters, mother/sons mate.
Thousands of years ago most dogs were simply a generic village type dog. Some might be bigger and some smaller. They had little purpose other than as scavengers and possibly an alarm system for villagers. The occasional one might be made more a pet though not as a modern person sees a pet, just a dog more attached to one family. The lifespan of these dogs was short … those that were good scavengers, fighters would survive a bit longer … if disease didn’t take them.
As time went by, man started to appreciate certain specialized traits in the dogs that might be of value to them. For example, one of the larger dogs might be good at keeping wolves away from their livestock such as sheep and cows. Another dog might be able to help them round up their livestock. Then there was that smaller dog that was exceptionally good at going down holes to get at the vermin who was getting into their grains or taking their fowl. What about that dog that had the ability to chase down the fox that was getting into the hennery?
We now have the idea of breeding dogs that would exhibit specialized traits of benefit to man. How to do this? Breed the dogs that exhibit the traits you want together …. for example you want a dog that has a particular size and shape to go down a badger hole, not too mention the temperament to take on the badger. You find two dogs that have those qualities and breed them together. One or two of the offspring might come close to having those traits that you needed to rid farm of the vermin. But that dog may only live a short time before succumbing to an untimely end. You need to breed replacements with those same qualities. In days past, life for the dog was often short … disease, little veterinary care, war …. For example, the Cavalier population was reduced to a handful of dogs during World War II which is one reason why the breed’s genetic base is so small.
The quickest and easiest way to lock in traits when breeding specialised animals was by inbreeding ie doubling up on those desirable genes by breeding mother to son, father to daughter, brother to sister. Running around the country hoping to find two non-related dogs with the traits you wanted and then breeding them together was a crap shoot because few if any of the offspring might exhibit the desired traits. So inbreeding was often done in the early development of a breed to get the desired results. All those pictures of the early dogs shown in the TV programme “Pedigree Dogs Exposed” as examples of what a breed looked liked in earlier days were actually more likely to be a result of inbreeding than our modern day dogs because inbreeding was used far more prior to 2nd part of the 20th century than it is today.
Through inbreeding and linebreeding (breeding together dogs with common ancestory) the desired traits would be locked in and a breed would be developed. The offspring would look very similar (ie have breed type) and hopefully function in the manner that the breed’s developers wished.
Later those dog breeders found that they would like to exhibit and compare their dogs to other breeders of the same type and so dog shows were founded. Dog shows would give breeders the opportunity to see other dogs which might exhibit traits they would like to include in their breeding programme and so they might go out to a different line to bring in a desired trait. Eventually Standards for each breed were written up which described the features that a particular breed should have to differentiate it from other dogs.
Moving into the late part of the 19th and early part of the 20th centuries new breeds were bred less for working purposes and more for companions particularly the smaller breeds. Fashions would change depending upon the times. For example during the Victorian era the longer nosed Cavalier was discarded for the shorter nosed King Charles Spaniel because the shorter nosed breeds were more popular.
It wasn’t until the later part of the 20th century that health became an issue in part because due to the lack of vaccinations and poorer veterinarian care fewer dogs would actually survive into old age. As dogs lived longer it became more apparent that some dogs would develop health conditions not formerly seen ….
Many genetic diseases are the result of some combination of recessive genes, in other words both parents must have all the necessary genes to express in the offspring. If you are carrying out a program of inbreeding and close linebreeding you are more likely to know what diseases your dogs carry the genes for as they will express in some of the offspring. The danger of going out to a different line in a breed (outcrossing) was that while bringing in new desired traits you also could bring in some very undesirable traits such as a genetic disease you formerly did not have in your lines. Inbreeding and linebreeding for many breeders are often a case of “the devil you know”.
To some breeders trying to eliminate health problems in their dogs, inbreeding was an old fashioned “health test” for a breeder’s dogs. The quickest way to find out if you had a genetic health problem in your lines was to do a test inbreeding. Breeders in days gone by were more pragmatic and when breeding, any dog that was sickly or exhibiting deformities were culled at birth.
Human moralities started to creep into dog breeding as dogs became more pets than functional, which made the idea of inbreeding somewhat distasteful among more modern dog breeders and instead many breeders would start to breed on common ancestors who would have the desired traits. Also some breeders would not necessarily cull sickly or deformed puppies de riguer, preferring to let those weaker puppies go as pet puppies.
The majority of modern day show dog breeders no longer inbreed, preferring to line breed on typey, healthy dogs in their dogs’ pedigrees. In some newer breeds still in the early days of development, it may be seen as necessary to develop type.
Some breeders view outcrossing (breeding two dogs from unrelated lines of the same breed) as a bit like playing Russian Roulette as those recessive genes are sneaky and can lie hidden for generations until two dogs who carry the necessary combination for many of the polygenic health conditions meet. It is often when breeders “go out” that they find themselves with problems never seen before in their dogs.
It has been suggested in some arenas that to improve health conditions in breeds they should breed out to other breeds. There are some major problems with this idea. You would end up with an entirely different type of dog – occasionally some might look and act similar to one of the parent breeds but often they look and act entirely different to either breed so you have lost breed type (how a breed looks and acts) which breeders have spent years trying to develop in their chosen breeds. Generations would be spent trying to bring back type in your breed.
And the bigger problem is, you may be adding more health problems to your breed! In dogs which have been cross bred many can have the health problems of both parent breeds, if not new ones. So double the trouble. Doodles are a great example of this as they have a tendency to have the health problems seen in both their parent breeds and it seems that they may even have a higher incidence of some diseases like Hip Dysplasia than even their parent breeds.
For the purpose of this article Terms:
Inbreeding – the breeding of direct family members, ie mother/son, father/daughter and brother/sister.
Linebreeding – the breeding of dogs with a common ancestor in their pedigrees.
Outcrossing – the breeding of unrelated dogs of the same breed.
Crossbreeding – the breeding together of two different breeds.
To be continued in a later blog … the genetic background of Cavaliers
Thousands of years ago most dogs were simply a generic village type dog. Some might be bigger and some smaller. They had little purpose other than as scavengers and possibly an alarm system for villagers. The occasional one might be made more a pet though not as a modern person sees a pet, just a dog more attached to one family. The lifespan of these dogs was short … those that were good scavengers, fighters would survive a bit longer … if disease didn’t take them.
As time went by, man started to appreciate certain specialized traits in the dogs that might be of value to them. For example, one of the larger dogs might be good at keeping wolves away from their livestock such as sheep and cows. Another dog might be able to help them round up their livestock. Then there was that smaller dog that was exceptionally good at going down holes to get at the vermin who was getting into their grains or taking their fowl. What about that dog that had the ability to chase down the fox that was getting into the hennery?
We now have the idea of breeding dogs that would exhibit specialized traits of benefit to man. How to do this? Breed the dogs that exhibit the traits you want together …. for example you want a dog that has a particular size and shape to go down a badger hole, not too mention the temperament to take on the badger. You find two dogs that have those qualities and breed them together. One or two of the offspring might come close to having those traits that you needed to rid farm of the vermin. But that dog may only live a short time before succumbing to an untimely end. You need to breed replacements with those same qualities. In days past, life for the dog was often short … disease, little veterinary care, war …. For example, the Cavalier population was reduced to a handful of dogs during World War II which is one reason why the breed’s genetic base is so small.
The quickest and easiest way to lock in traits when breeding specialised animals was by inbreeding ie doubling up on those desirable genes by breeding mother to son, father to daughter, brother to sister. Running around the country hoping to find two non-related dogs with the traits you wanted and then breeding them together was a crap shoot because few if any of the offspring might exhibit the desired traits. So inbreeding was often done in the early development of a breed to get the desired results. All those pictures of the early dogs shown in the TV programme “Pedigree Dogs Exposed” as examples of what a breed looked liked in earlier days were actually more likely to be a result of inbreeding than our modern day dogs because inbreeding was used far more prior to 2nd part of the 20th century than it is today.
Through inbreeding and linebreeding (breeding together dogs with common ancestory) the desired traits would be locked in and a breed would be developed. The offspring would look very similar (ie have breed type) and hopefully function in the manner that the breed’s developers wished.
Later those dog breeders found that they would like to exhibit and compare their dogs to other breeders of the same type and so dog shows were founded. Dog shows would give breeders the opportunity to see other dogs which might exhibit traits they would like to include in their breeding programme and so they might go out to a different line to bring in a desired trait. Eventually Standards for each breed were written up which described the features that a particular breed should have to differentiate it from other dogs.
Moving into the late part of the 19th and early part of the 20th centuries new breeds were bred less for working purposes and more for companions particularly the smaller breeds. Fashions would change depending upon the times. For example during the Victorian era the longer nosed Cavalier was discarded for the shorter nosed King Charles Spaniel because the shorter nosed breeds were more popular.
It wasn’t until the later part of the 20th century that health became an issue in part because due to the lack of vaccinations and poorer veterinarian care fewer dogs would actually survive into old age. As dogs lived longer it became more apparent that some dogs would develop health conditions not formerly seen ….
Many genetic diseases are the result of some combination of recessive genes, in other words both parents must have all the necessary genes to express in the offspring. If you are carrying out a program of inbreeding and close linebreeding you are more likely to know what diseases your dogs carry the genes for as they will express in some of the offspring. The danger of going out to a different line in a breed (outcrossing) was that while bringing in new desired traits you also could bring in some very undesirable traits such as a genetic disease you formerly did not have in your lines. Inbreeding and linebreeding for many breeders are often a case of “the devil you know”.
To some breeders trying to eliminate health problems in their dogs, inbreeding was an old fashioned “health test” for a breeder’s dogs. The quickest way to find out if you had a genetic health problem in your lines was to do a test inbreeding. Breeders in days gone by were more pragmatic and when breeding, any dog that was sickly or exhibiting deformities were culled at birth.
Human moralities started to creep into dog breeding as dogs became more pets than functional, which made the idea of inbreeding somewhat distasteful among more modern dog breeders and instead many breeders would start to breed on common ancestors who would have the desired traits. Also some breeders would not necessarily cull sickly or deformed puppies de riguer, preferring to let those weaker puppies go as pet puppies.
The majority of modern day show dog breeders no longer inbreed, preferring to line breed on typey, healthy dogs in their dogs’ pedigrees. In some newer breeds still in the early days of development, it may be seen as necessary to develop type.
Some breeders view outcrossing (breeding two dogs from unrelated lines of the same breed) as a bit like playing Russian Roulette as those recessive genes are sneaky and can lie hidden for generations until two dogs who carry the necessary combination for many of the polygenic health conditions meet. It is often when breeders “go out” that they find themselves with problems never seen before in their dogs.
It has been suggested in some arenas that to improve health conditions in breeds they should breed out to other breeds. There are some major problems with this idea. You would end up with an entirely different type of dog – occasionally some might look and act similar to one of the parent breeds but often they look and act entirely different to either breed so you have lost breed type (how a breed looks and acts) which breeders have spent years trying to develop in their chosen breeds. Generations would be spent trying to bring back type in your breed.
And the bigger problem is, you may be adding more health problems to your breed! In dogs which have been cross bred many can have the health problems of both parent breeds, if not new ones. So double the trouble. Doodles are a great example of this as they have a tendency to have the health problems seen in both their parent breeds and it seems that they may even have a higher incidence of some diseases like Hip Dysplasia than even their parent breeds.
For the purpose of this article Terms:
Inbreeding – the breeding of direct family members, ie mother/son, father/daughter and brother/sister.
Linebreeding – the breeding of dogs with a common ancestor in their pedigrees.
Outcrossing – the breeding of unrelated dogs of the same breed.
Crossbreeding – the breeding together of two different breeds.
To be continued in a later blog … the genetic background of Cavaliers
Monday, October 13, 2008
Exposing nothing
It has been a long time that I have posted to this blog. In the meantime I have started an international online magazine called The Universal Cavalier which takes up my time. This magazine should appeal to all who love the breed with articles ranging from breeders’ profiles, health articles, articles on Cavalier people who are artists, craftspeople and writers, historical and current events articles and up to date Cavalier news from around the World, with many beautiful colour photos of Cavaliers. The magazine is viewable by subscription at www.universalcavalier.com . It is published 6 times a year and up to 6 back issues are also viewable on the site to subscribers.
If you want to see samples of the articles in the magazine before subscribing you can visit the files section of http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/TheUniversalCavalierMagazine/ where listings and sample articles for each issue are located.
Currently in the Cavalier world, in fact the whole purebred dog world, is under attack after the broadcast of a BBC programme called “Pedigree Dogs Exposed” and the anti-purebred regimes are putting their own spin on things and strictly controlling what is said in public forums by removing or censoring any posts that are not in goose step with their message, so I felt it time to post to this blog.
The programme “Pedigree Dogs Exposed” exposed nothing that wasn’t already known but was merely a vehicle for the so-called animal rights groups (really they should be known as the anti pet ownership groups) to beat the drums for their anti-purebred dog campaign.
Personally I question whether the producers of this programme and the BBC should be up on cruelty charges. I have since heard that the Boxer usually only has seizures about once a month so unless the TV crew stayed with the owners for a month to get their “sound bites” it begs the question was the dog taken off his meds to induce a timely seizure? The Cavalier that was scratching while being dragged around the house on a leash – all owners of a Cavalier with SM are aware that using a collar and leash aggravates the condition and induces the scratching behaviour as seen in the programme. Did the owners initiate the scratching behaviour at the request of the producers? These same producers were approaching Cavalier people in the hopes to find a dog in the death throes of heart disease. Most Cavaliers can be made quite comfortable when in congestive heart failure through the use of very good medications, which is not quite as exciting as watching a dog thrash around in the throes of a seizure so I guess they gave up on that idea.
Are Cavaliers the “sickest breed” as the programme suggested? Certainly not! In fact from my experience as a professional dog groomer currently working at a vet clinic and ex boarding kennel owner I would say they are probably one of the breeds less plagued with health problems than many other breeds. Yes on average many do eventually develop Mitral Valve Disease at some point in their lives but many of those who do develop the disease still live out comfortable lives of average length (10-12 years). I currently live with 10 Cavaliers over the age of 9 years – 2 of the oldest are on heart medications but the rest have no or mild heart murmurs. This is really no different to the experience of many small dog owners, purebred and mixed.
The condition shown in the PDE programme - syringomyelia (SM) is actually rare in the breed with perhaps 2% of all Cavaliers actually being symptomatic for the disease, notwithstanding comments to the contrary in the programme. Some Cavaliers are indeed severely afflicted with this horrible condition and do need to be euthanised to prevent further suffering but other afflicted Cavaliers have it in a milder form and it can be managed through the use of medications or certain lifestyle changes such as using a harness rather than a collar on the dog to avoid aggravating the condition. Certainly I do not mean to trivialise the condition for those who own affected dogs as there is nothing more upsetting than to watch a beloved pet suffer and in a perfect world there would be no health conditions to afflict our dogs but these are living creatures and so, such is life.
The issue of health testing is not quite as simple as some would have you believe. Most of our current testing is inadequate with respect to preventing the health conditions being produced. And in fact some testing (eg MRIs for SM) is so much in its infancy that no one actually is sure what the results mean or how they can be used to reduce incidences of health conditions or if they can. Few health conditions in dogs have been mapped out with respect to mode of inheritance, environmental and other congenital factors which may be required to make a dog symptomatic for a disease. So even if a parent can be shown to be asymptomatic at the time of the testing it does not mean that 1) it will not later develop the disease 2) that it is not a carrier for the disease and can pass it on to the offspring. Only in the cases of diseases where DNA testing has been developed, can testing be made meaningful for a dog breeder to reduce actual incidences of health conditions in their breeds. At the moment the type of testing available is a bit like trying to put a finger in the dam wall. An example of this is the testing for Hip Dysplasia which has been going on in some breeds for nearly 40 years yet the incidences of HD in those breeds has barely decreased if at all. Some breeders having bred generations of cleared Hips still end up with affected offspring.
UK politicians, like politicians worldwide, when faced with truly difficult problems like a sinking economy, job lossess, growing welfare lines, etc. are doing what they usually do, involving themselves in these sorts of media induced “current event” where they can be seen to be “doing something” even though they don’t actually understand the issues. They will likely try to push through some legislation which will solve nothing but can be pointed to during the next election campaign when trying to deflect questions as to why the economy sucked and people lost their job and homes on their watch….
I’m not sure how they will try to get the puppy farmers/millers and those who breed their pet purebred dogs for some pocket money (those two groups probably actually produce the majority of pet dogs) in line, as any legislation that seems to be discussed, seems focused solely on show dog breeders.
The health problems and how to improve them in purebred dogs should be left to be resolved by The Kennel Club, breed clubs and unbiased specialists through careful study and consultation. If politicians want to be seen to doing something concrete to improve the health problems in purebred dogs they should set aside monies for research and development of meaningful testing like DNA tests.
There is a longer article on the November/December 2008 issue in The Universal Cavalier called “Exposing Pedigree Dogs Exposed” if you wish to read further about this issue.
I hope to have some guest authors add to this blog who have been unable to post their thoughts to other forums due to censorship.
If you want to see samples of the articles in the magazine before subscribing you can visit the files section of http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/TheUniversalCavalierMagazine/ where listings and sample articles for each issue are located.
Currently in the Cavalier world, in fact the whole purebred dog world, is under attack after the broadcast of a BBC programme called “Pedigree Dogs Exposed” and the anti-purebred regimes are putting their own spin on things and strictly controlling what is said in public forums by removing or censoring any posts that are not in goose step with their message, so I felt it time to post to this blog.
The programme “Pedigree Dogs Exposed” exposed nothing that wasn’t already known but was merely a vehicle for the so-called animal rights groups (really they should be known as the anti pet ownership groups) to beat the drums for their anti-purebred dog campaign.
Personally I question whether the producers of this programme and the BBC should be up on cruelty charges. I have since heard that the Boxer usually only has seizures about once a month so unless the TV crew stayed with the owners for a month to get their “sound bites” it begs the question was the dog taken off his meds to induce a timely seizure? The Cavalier that was scratching while being dragged around the house on a leash – all owners of a Cavalier with SM are aware that using a collar and leash aggravates the condition and induces the scratching behaviour as seen in the programme. Did the owners initiate the scratching behaviour at the request of the producers? These same producers were approaching Cavalier people in the hopes to find a dog in the death throes of heart disease. Most Cavaliers can be made quite comfortable when in congestive heart failure through the use of very good medications, which is not quite as exciting as watching a dog thrash around in the throes of a seizure so I guess they gave up on that idea.
Are Cavaliers the “sickest breed” as the programme suggested? Certainly not! In fact from my experience as a professional dog groomer currently working at a vet clinic and ex boarding kennel owner I would say they are probably one of the breeds less plagued with health problems than many other breeds. Yes on average many do eventually develop Mitral Valve Disease at some point in their lives but many of those who do develop the disease still live out comfortable lives of average length (10-12 years). I currently live with 10 Cavaliers over the age of 9 years – 2 of the oldest are on heart medications but the rest have no or mild heart murmurs. This is really no different to the experience of many small dog owners, purebred and mixed.
The condition shown in the PDE programme - syringomyelia (SM) is actually rare in the breed with perhaps 2% of all Cavaliers actually being symptomatic for the disease, notwithstanding comments to the contrary in the programme. Some Cavaliers are indeed severely afflicted with this horrible condition and do need to be euthanised to prevent further suffering but other afflicted Cavaliers have it in a milder form and it can be managed through the use of medications or certain lifestyle changes such as using a harness rather than a collar on the dog to avoid aggravating the condition. Certainly I do not mean to trivialise the condition for those who own affected dogs as there is nothing more upsetting than to watch a beloved pet suffer and in a perfect world there would be no health conditions to afflict our dogs but these are living creatures and so, such is life.
The issue of health testing is not quite as simple as some would have you believe. Most of our current testing is inadequate with respect to preventing the health conditions being produced. And in fact some testing (eg MRIs for SM) is so much in its infancy that no one actually is sure what the results mean or how they can be used to reduce incidences of health conditions or if they can. Few health conditions in dogs have been mapped out with respect to mode of inheritance, environmental and other congenital factors which may be required to make a dog symptomatic for a disease. So even if a parent can be shown to be asymptomatic at the time of the testing it does not mean that 1) it will not later develop the disease 2) that it is not a carrier for the disease and can pass it on to the offspring. Only in the cases of diseases where DNA testing has been developed, can testing be made meaningful for a dog breeder to reduce actual incidences of health conditions in their breeds. At the moment the type of testing available is a bit like trying to put a finger in the dam wall. An example of this is the testing for Hip Dysplasia which has been going on in some breeds for nearly 40 years yet the incidences of HD in those breeds has barely decreased if at all. Some breeders having bred generations of cleared Hips still end up with affected offspring.
UK politicians, like politicians worldwide, when faced with truly difficult problems like a sinking economy, job lossess, growing welfare lines, etc. are doing what they usually do, involving themselves in these sorts of media induced “current event” where they can be seen to be “doing something” even though they don’t actually understand the issues. They will likely try to push through some legislation which will solve nothing but can be pointed to during the next election campaign when trying to deflect questions as to why the economy sucked and people lost their job and homes on their watch….
I’m not sure how they will try to get the puppy farmers/millers and those who breed their pet purebred dogs for some pocket money (those two groups probably actually produce the majority of pet dogs) in line, as any legislation that seems to be discussed, seems focused solely on show dog breeders.
The health problems and how to improve them in purebred dogs should be left to be resolved by The Kennel Club, breed clubs and unbiased specialists through careful study and consultation. If politicians want to be seen to doing something concrete to improve the health problems in purebred dogs they should set aside monies for research and development of meaningful testing like DNA tests.
There is a longer article on the November/December 2008 issue in The Universal Cavalier called “Exposing Pedigree Dogs Exposed” if you wish to read further about this issue.
I hope to have some guest authors add to this blog who have been unable to post their thoughts to other forums due to censorship.
Thursday, December 14, 2006
Not just a Pretty Face
Perhaps because the Cavalier is in the toy group it does not seem to be expected to be sound, both by judges and some breeders. Yet the Standard (UK version) clearly calls for a well built, sound moving dog. The Cavalier is described as "active, graceful, well balanced" overall. Gait is described as "free moving and elegant in action, plenty of drive from behind. Fore and hind legs move parallel when viewed from in front and behind." The Standard then goes on to discuss the structure of a Cavalier.
It is often said that because all-breed judges can’t possibly understand the intricacies of all breeds they fall back on structure and movement as their criteria for awarding dogs in a breed. I wish this was true in Cavaliers as it might make their judging comprehensible in some cases however for the most part I find it rarely so. It seems once the judges reach the toy group their understanding of soundness and movement flies out the window. I don’t know why it should be accepted that a toy doesn’t need to be built right and move well.
I know that I am not the only breeder of a toy breed that is frustrated by this attitude from judges, that structure and movement is not important in the toy breeds. It is!! In my opinion it is totally unacceptable to award dogs that are hoping around on three legs because their patellas are out of place, that their toplines are so bad they have a resemblance to camels, that they can only do small circles or short “down and backs” because they can’t reach and drive and cover ground.
Some refer to the Cavalier as a “head breed” but it is far more than just that. If it is to be an active, graceful, well balanced dog then one must look past the head for it to fulfill this portion of the Standard. It is neither good for the breed to have pretty headed cripples or plain headed good moving dogs winning and then being bred from, so a balance between the two needs to be achieved.
It is often said that because all-breed judges can’t possibly understand the intricacies of all breeds they fall back on structure and movement as their criteria for awarding dogs in a breed. I wish this was true in Cavaliers as it might make their judging comprehensible in some cases however for the most part I find it rarely so. It seems once the judges reach the toy group their understanding of soundness and movement flies out the window. I don’t know why it should be accepted that a toy doesn’t need to be built right and move well.
I know that I am not the only breeder of a toy breed that is frustrated by this attitude from judges, that structure and movement is not important in the toy breeds. It is!! In my opinion it is totally unacceptable to award dogs that are hoping around on three legs because their patellas are out of place, that their toplines are so bad they have a resemblance to camels, that they can only do small circles or short “down and backs” because they can’t reach and drive and cover ground.
Some refer to the Cavalier as a “head breed” but it is far more than just that. If it is to be an active, graceful, well balanced dog then one must look past the head for it to fulfill this portion of the Standard. It is neither good for the breed to have pretty headed cripples or plain headed good moving dogs winning and then being bred from, so a balance between the two needs to be achieved.
Saturday, December 9, 2006
Essences
There are certain features in each breed that help make a breed special and different. In our North American culture of the all breed show dog we often see a more generic show dog with those features being discounted if not lost entirely.
Some of the features in the Cavaliers that we are in danger of losing are the large round eyes, the correct tapering and length of the muzzle, the arch of neck, silky coats and the correct sweet temperaments.
The eyes should be virtually the first thing that strikes a person when looking at a Cavalier. I am so used to looking at my own dogs and taking certain features for granted that it rather surprises me when I look at other Cavaliers in the show ring and realise that what I take to be normal is actually turning into a rarity. What I consider small eyes seems for many other breeders to be normal size eyes, yet I have breeders who admire my dogs for their large eyes. Having lost the feature breeders can still recognise them when they see them so surely they can bring them back into their lines if they cared enough.
Some of the features in the Cavaliers that we are in danger of losing are the large round eyes, the correct tapering and length of the muzzle, the arch of neck, silky coats and the correct sweet temperaments.
The eyes should be virtually the first thing that strikes a person when looking at a Cavalier. I am so used to looking at my own dogs and taking certain features for granted that it rather surprises me when I look at other Cavaliers in the show ring and realise that what I take to be normal is actually turning into a rarity. What I consider small eyes seems for many other breeders to be normal size eyes, yet I have breeders who admire my dogs for their large eyes. Having lost the feature breeders can still recognise them when they see them so surely they can bring them back into their lines if they cared enough.
This year I was discussing a Cavalier with an all breed judge and mentioned tapering in the muzzle. They expressed quite a bit of surprise that the muzzle should be slightly tapered as opposed to the blocky full muzzles often seen. The Cavalier was developed to be different from the Charlies (English Toy Spaniel) so both length of muzzle and the tapering was one way to make the breed different. The Cavalier was developed to look like the older "nosey" style spaniel seen in paintings of King Charles II times. While the shorter fuller muzzled dogs can sometimes look appealling - if not overdone into a "planet of the apes" head - it is incorrect. The "planet of the apes" head is also a head style that is being more commonly seen in the show ring and entirely incorrect if not gross. Yet it is rewarded by some judges. The “planet of the ape” head is a dog with a rather domed top skull occasionally with some bulging over the eyes, a deeper stop and a shorter broad muzzle that is or has the illusion of being somewhat tilted up. Earlier this year I watched one of the “planet of the apes” dogs being awarded points with the judge claiming that it had better “fill” than a more correctly headed Cavalier. This makes me believe that some judges don’t actually understand what or where the fill is supposed to be on a Cavalier. The fill is under the eyes not through the muzzle area.
Arch of neck is so rarely seen in Cavaliers anymore yet it is mentioned in the Standard (UK version). It so finishes the look of a Cavalier in a stacked position yet seems to be missing in most Cavaliers these days. A couple of years ago I imported a male from the UK and the one thing that he stamps on his puppies is arch of neck. I hadn’t really noticed it until we compared a bitch’s puppies from two different litters, one my import and the other another stud dog. In the one litter the puppies had a wonderful arch of neck and in the other litter it wasn’t there. Looking around at all the puppies I have out of my import we then realized they all had the same arch of neck. It seems to be something this dog is prepotent for and gives that added finish to his offspring.
A Cavalier’s coat is supposed to be long and silky and free from trimming. Yet I have heard of breeders requesting dogs that have a more woolly profuse coat. Is this because of the North American fashion in many breeds to have a coat that can be trimmed and shaped? I find it a bit ironic to see Cavaliers in the ring with big bushy feet but they’ve been stripped and trimmed elsewhere. How silly is that?
The true essence of a Cavalier is its sweet easy going temperament. A dog that happily and calmly greets people, lays quietly on the lap or sofa and is easy to live with. Unfortunately the rather frenetic show dog temperament is creeping into our breed. Do we really want our breed to turn into a neurotic, anxiety driven dog like has happened in other breeds? Even a campaigned dog might spend at best 10 % of his life in the ring but can you live with him in a home the other 90% of his life?
There are certain essences that make our breed unique. As breeders we should do everything we can to keep those essences in our breed or we will just be breeding a generic show dog without the “wow” factor.
Monday, December 4, 2006
Hair, please!
'Tis the season. For professional groomers this is the busiest time of the year. Everyone wants their dogs to look cute and clean for Christmas. We are going at full tilt trying to accomodate as many clients as possible and hoping we will manage to stay the course until Dec. 25th without collapse.
A good friend of mine and fellow groomer says that what goes out of the grooming shop is in direct proportions to what comes in. In other words, if the dog is regularly groomed and kept matt-free and the owners haven't done any self-grooming, ie. chopped important bits out that are needed to make the dog look good, then we can do great things.
The favourite refrain of owners at this time of the year is "hair, please", even though they know their dog is a solid matted mess which even the best groomer can't save. And no we don't believe that it matted like that overnight or they were fine until a couple of weeks ago when the appointment was booked so it is our fault that the dog is matted or any of the other multitude of excuses we hear on a daily basis. We often have no choice and can't put the dog into the hairdo they want or worse have to shave the dog right off. We aren't miracle workers!
There are also those dogs who absolutely hate the grooming process and fight tooth and nail to avoid have anything they don't like done. Trying to make these sorts of dogs look like anything is usually a battle royale.
Then we also have the owners who bring pictures and want their dogs to look just like the dogs in the pictures. Besides the more obvious reasons such as their dog is nothing like the dog in the picture both in shape and hair texture, those dogs in the pictures are often frequently groomed and have the hair to shape. Those dogs also tend to have a lot of "product" in their hair to hold the shape and will require bathing to remove it as soon as the picture shoot is finished. I have no doubt should one of the dogs in many pictures be out in a rain shower when they dry their hair would be like a rock with all the powders and sprays that were holding it in place congealing.
So when you take your dog to the groomers for their Christmas have realistic expectations. Sometimes the best we can do is present you with a clean dog wearing nothing but a Xmas bow!
A good friend of mine and fellow groomer says that what goes out of the grooming shop is in direct proportions to what comes in. In other words, if the dog is regularly groomed and kept matt-free and the owners haven't done any self-grooming, ie. chopped important bits out that are needed to make the dog look good, then we can do great things.
The favourite refrain of owners at this time of the year is "hair, please", even though they know their dog is a solid matted mess which even the best groomer can't save. And no we don't believe that it matted like that overnight or they were fine until a couple of weeks ago when the appointment was booked so it is our fault that the dog is matted or any of the other multitude of excuses we hear on a daily basis. We often have no choice and can't put the dog into the hairdo they want or worse have to shave the dog right off. We aren't miracle workers!
There are also those dogs who absolutely hate the grooming process and fight tooth and nail to avoid have anything they don't like done. Trying to make these sorts of dogs look like anything is usually a battle royale.
Then we also have the owners who bring pictures and want their dogs to look just like the dogs in the pictures. Besides the more obvious reasons such as their dog is nothing like the dog in the picture both in shape and hair texture, those dogs in the pictures are often frequently groomed and have the hair to shape. Those dogs also tend to have a lot of "product" in their hair to hold the shape and will require bathing to remove it as soon as the picture shoot is finished. I have no doubt should one of the dogs in many pictures be out in a rain shower when they dry their hair would be like a rock with all the powders and sprays that were holding it in place congealing.
So when you take your dog to the groomers for their Christmas have realistic expectations. Sometimes the best we can do is present you with a clean dog wearing nothing but a Xmas bow!
Sunday, December 3, 2006
The Great Divide
When I started in dogs nearly 30 years ago a breeder and exhibitor were usually one and the same. Sure you occasionally would come across a person who would just buy or lease a dog to campaign and had a "win at all costs" attitude but most exhibitors were breeders first. The point of dog shows to them was to show off their breeding stock and have them assessed by knowledgeable judges. One would get together at shows and discuss the merits or faults of a dog and how to correct them. Going to specialties were a must, both to compare your dogs to others in your breed and to view possible stud dogs for future use. Breeding future show dogs who embodied your closest vision of breed type and developing your own distinguishable line was the end goal of it all.
Now it seems there is a division between exhibitors and breeders. Yes many exhibitors breed litters but there is no longer such an interest in developing a breeding program or breeding a correct dog within the Standard. They breed to put something in the ring that the JUDGE will like, not what a breeder may consider correct.
You now see dogs in many breeds that deviate from what the Standards dictate as correct breed type. For example coats of the wrong texture, more profuse or longer than is required, appealing “baby doll” heads that are totally incorrect for a breed, sloping toplines when a Standard calls for level, too big or too small dogs, the wrong types of movement for a certain breed, show dog temperaments, and so on. The breeders in the exhibitors know that these things are incorrect but “for the win” they are willing to be faddish and even change the look and character of their breed.
For the good of our breeds we must close the divide between breeders and exhibitors. As breeders we are supposed to be the protector of our breeds and we cannot let Judges dictate the “look” for our breed, even if it means we will not win in the show ring because in the long run our breeds will win.
Now it seems there is a division between exhibitors and breeders. Yes many exhibitors breed litters but there is no longer such an interest in developing a breeding program or breeding a correct dog within the Standard. They breed to put something in the ring that the JUDGE will like, not what a breeder may consider correct.
You now see dogs in many breeds that deviate from what the Standards dictate as correct breed type. For example coats of the wrong texture, more profuse or longer than is required, appealing “baby doll” heads that are totally incorrect for a breed, sloping toplines when a Standard calls for level, too big or too small dogs, the wrong types of movement for a certain breed, show dog temperaments, and so on. The breeders in the exhibitors know that these things are incorrect but “for the win” they are willing to be faddish and even change the look and character of their breed.
For the good of our breeds we must close the divide between breeders and exhibitors. As breeders we are supposed to be the protector of our breeds and we cannot let Judges dictate the “look” for our breed, even if it means we will not win in the show ring because in the long run our breeds will win.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)