http://www.dogworld.co.uk/News/13-cav-health-plans

Not sure whether there's already a thread?

Very sad :-(  Perhaps they should abandon the lot of them and start a new club for breeders that test.

Well from an outsiders point of view, its practically impossible to understand what on earth they think they're doing.

Is it permissable to spit on this forum?

It's either that or chew off my own leg.

Sorry, have I upset you?

> Sorry, have I upset you?

No not you CC, just my frustration at the subject matter.

Think miles of white sand, the sound of a jade green sea lapping gently on the shore line, your lounging in an air-con cooled cabana awaiting an ice cold cocktail served by a willowy creature in white muslin .............

....................... and Dweeb knocking it out of your hand a la Joan Collins and Leonard Rossiter :-D

Better?  there, there, there ;)

I thought so, just wanted to clarify!

> Dweeb knocking it out of your hand

ma precious lil man....naw...his mum - definately...........that's him at 8 weeks by the way...............>>>>

The jade green sea thing is working......I've stopped hyperventilating at least, now I just need to stop the twitch :-(

The twitch, hmm ................

....................... def move on to the cocktail ;)  Remember, onwards and upwards - it's just sometimes we have to accept baby steps.

Only spit IF it is your computer monitor :-)  Otherwise said computer monitor owner may not be happy at the gloopy mess on his/her screen.

I'm ashamed to say that if it were me spitting, then it would only land on my shoe - a Glaswegian that can't gob, how shameful.

Anyhoo, Dweeb us cute and what a fab name :-)

As a fellow Glaswegian, who also can't gob, I've seldom found it a drawback :-)

But my Mother always used to say " you've got a good Scottish tongue in yer heed" and I have always taken her advice.......... except that time when she warned me about those 'clackers'...oh and also that green maxi-dress...oh and there's more..sorry Ma  :-(

Thanks for the appreciation of the Dweeb..aka 'The special one'..' Light of my life'..I could go on and frequently do :-)

I read this this morning with such sadness. I cannot believe that a club (Or group of people) can be so stupid as to reject a move that could ultimatly erradicate this horrendous ailment given time. It is no shame to acept that your breed has a problem but "shame" on those who cannot or will not put health before money and do something about it. They have thrown away a real chance to do the right thing by thier breed and in my opinion have now show everyone that "that program" was right in regards to certain breeds having breeders who practice irresponsible breeding.
Please accept my appologies those of you who include this health test in your breeding programs and work towards ridding the breed of it you are shining examples of good breeders...but to anyone on here who does not...SHAME!
Aileen

Apparently do not believe everything printed in the dog press! I have had the breeders of the cavaliers on to our paper very upset at the report in Dog World which they say is not a true and accurate picture of what happened. So until more is known from the people who actually attended the meeting I don't think we should be judging the breeders or what happened. I can't say any more at present but I do think articles like this do tend to "slice, dice and then serve up all dog breeders" to the likes of Jemima, the timing is poor with the sequel in the pipeline too.

I cannot believe that a club (Or group of people) can be so stupid as to reject a move that could ultimatly erradicate this horrendous ailment given time. It is no shame to acept that your breed has a problem but "shame" on those who cannot or will not put health before money and do something about it. They have thrown away a real chance to do the right thing by thier breed and in my opinion have now show everyone that "that program" was right in regards to certain breeds having breeders who practice irresponsible breeding.


From the article and without being able to understand any logical reason for the rejection (I was rather hoping that by posting here, someone might be able to provide one) it would appear to be bunker fever at it's very worst.  I doubt that Jemima Harrison could have asked for a better scenario for the sequel.

A very sad time for the breed and after PDE 2 is shown, again all pedigree dogs will be damned by association.

The meeting, as I understand it happened some days ago, surely this is more than long enough for them to have been able to put their reasons forward.  The internet is teaming with opportunities to do so.

I agree the timing is absolutely awful with PDE the sequel on it's way, that's way it's even more important that those members are as transparent as humanly possible about why they rejected the scheme.  The way things appear to be panning out, it's becoming increasingly hard to feel any sympathy for them at all.

This is the statement from the Club Chairman (click on 'A Benchmark weekend'). Her account of what happened seems to be fairly clear.

I had already seen the statement,which can only be read as damning.  Without a statement from those who rejected the move (where they so naive as to think they wouldn't need to do so?) then it would seen outright condemnation would be justified.  It's just not good enough to expect folks to wait around playing devils advocate until they get their act together.  Personally, I'm loathe to jump to conclusions but it would seem we're being given no option.

Polly I would love to know who told you that the account in DW is inaccurate. Were they mainly from the againsts or from the fors?

Now that would be interesting.

I do believe many wish they could rewind :-(

"I doubt that Jemima Harrison could have asked for a better scenario for the sequel....A very sad time for the breed and after PDE 2 is shown, again all pedigree dogs will be damned by association."

Actually, I'd say it's a wonderful moment for the breed and if this story was to make it into PDE2, it would be to celebrate it. It is enormously brave for Mrs Jupp to have stood up and called time on those in the breed who put politics and personal gain above dog health. I think - and hope - that this represents a corner-turning moment for cavaliers.

Jemima

> Polly I would love to know who told you that the account in DW is inaccurate. Were they mainly from the againsts or from the fors?

I was told by a number of cavalier breeders both for and against that the story in Dog World contained inaccuracies. As I pointed out earlier, I was not at that meeting and to be honest unless I was at the meeting or was able to hear from those involved ON BOTH SIDES what went on I would not be prepared to judge either sides arguments. If anyone is interest Lesley Jupp has put a statement on the Cavalier website. Had I written that article I would have interviewed breeders from both sides of the vote and reported both sides as accurately as I could then readers would have been able to make their own minds up.

Infact the first person to contact me wanted the motion to go through. I would agree with you, that it would be good to rewind from the whole mess. While Jemima says here it good be a good starting point for the club, it could also cause divides which never heal. I sincerely hope that the club will be able to move forward in a positive way from this point.

> if this story was to make it into PDE2,

Hi Jemima,

How is the new programme coming along? Are you going to feature breeds this time or feature the responsible breeders who have been working hard doing health testing for so many years?

Your invitation to the eye testing which I run (I might add is in it's 28th year), is still there.

Regards
Polly

>> Actually, I'd say it's a wonderful moment for the breed and if this story was to make it into PDE2, it would be to celebrate it. It is enormously brave for Mrs Jupp to have stood up and called time on those in the breed who put politics and personal gain above dog health. I think - and hope - that this represents a corner-turning moment for cavaliers.

Glad to hear it.  Though taking into account your own words  "We have been criticised for not including the good things in the first film, but we did that for a reason - it would not have had the impact it's had" I imagine that it would be highly unlikely that's the slant you'll go for.  I'm being unfair, you could perhaps use this as an example of exactly what you'd managed to "bully through"?