Have just heard that the owner of the "failed" peke took her to another vet and had her given a clear cert, sois now in the process of litigation.
On FB Andrew Brace has organised a group to protest at The KC handling of this situation and is planning a meeting in the Midlands probably this Thursday. We have no way heard the end of this....


.

As I said when it started on Thursday "I can see another big hole being dug!" :-(

The way this has been handled beggars belief--the damage this does to the KC's reputation at home and abroad is just the latest legacy of knee jerk policy making.

The FB site gained over 1,000 members in its first 5 hours. I hope this will be a powerful force in reforming show management practice so that unhealthy exaggeration is not rewarded in the ring by anyone.

Do you have a link to the FB page please ?

The owner of the Clumber has just published a re-exam of her dog by a top opthalmic specialist ....all clear.

To Cavlover, sorry cant do a fb link.!
But just type in Exhibitor Choice and Voice and you will find it.
HTH.

Anna

News on Dog World website of the meeting -
http://www.dogworld.co.uk/product.php/67062

Thank you tigran ! :)

The facebook page membership is almost at 3000 now, in less than 24 hours!   Here is the link. http://www.facebook.com/groups/346236658750734/

There is some very interesting reading among the messages of support.  I was amazed to read (from Andrew Brace)  that after PDE1 the AKC offered PR help to the KC, offering the services of a top notch PR firm, and were refused as they were handling it!

Already been talk of a break away club affiliated to the FCI.

Thanks for putting the link on Gwen.
Have been following the thread on FB nearly all day and will be very interested to hear the outcome of the meeting on Thursday. Like many exhibitors/breeders I am seriously considering coming out of the ABS scheme as I feel that the KC is not supportive or interested in us the " ordinary" exhibitor and breeder. I have been showing dogs for over 50 years and bred less than a dozen litters. I do not own a "high profile" breed but agree with many people who are predicting that soon other breeds will be picked on.

Joined the facebook group earlier, that is a lot of members already !

"Already been talk of a break away club affiliated to the FCI."

The KC must be very concerned by all of this...
Where would the KC be without the breeder exhibitors ?
Without a trace of credibility, that is for sure.

The KC must be very concerned by all of this...
Where would the KC be without the breeder exhibitors ?
Without a trace of credibility, that is for sure.

I don't think they have much to worry about. The same happened in cats, clubs affiliated to FIFe (equivalent to FCI) appeared, organising shows, registering kittens etc. Some people preferred them and left the GCCF, others decided to show with both, most stayed with the GCCF. Been going on for many years now and the GCCF still has a good 90 % of the breeders and exhibitors if not more.

soon other breeds will be picked on

I think the KC addressing health problems in dogs is a good thing. BUT I do think doing it in such a high profile/dramatic way was totally unnecessary and crass in the extreme.  

If the KC were to write up a gradual improvement plan for unhealthy breeds, then fair enough - as I recall, non-docked dogs took years to become a reality. 

How can making a breed totally poisoned overnight in the public's eyes, having announced it LARGE at Crufts, be well conceived or sensible?  How can judges now judge the breeds?  How should the breeders change their breeding plans so as not to be disqualified in the future?  What will happen to the present dogs from the targeted breeds who exist now? 

I feel desperately sorry for the people in these breeds, they must be in total turmoil. 

>I feel desperately sorry for the people in these breeds, they must be in total turmoil.

My feelings exactly.  The Kennel Club have not thought this out properly.  And I see people in these high profile breeds just calling it a day.

just an idea imo,  the health checks should be across all the breeds as in most breeds there are  health issue or isuues.
I think once a dog qualifies for crufts and the owner goes to sumbit their entry online then the dog should be vet-checked as this would mean in theory- all showing on the day would already have undergone a vet-check meaning no "hoping" they will pass on the day. Although BOB should be again health checked to ensure their health has remained the same by a  panel as it will mean it is a shared decision to not award the BOB. (just my opinion though :) )

It makes you wonder why the KC could not have  trialled a soft start to a sensible, fair and across the board health testing regime which would have been supported by all exhibitors and breeders.  I can't imagine that anyone is against proof that their dog is healthy and fit to show (or compete in any other discipline) but the crass stupidity of this initiative is mind boggling.

I think once a dog qualifies for crufts and the owner goes to sumbit their entry online then the dog should be vet-checked as this would mean in theory- all showing on the day would already have undergone a vet-check meaning no "hoping" they will pass on the day. Although BOB should be again health checked to ensure their health has remained the same by a  panel as it will mean it is a shared decision to not award the BOB. (just my opinion though :-) )

As all vets have different opinions, and a health certificate is really only good for that one day it is issued (anything could happen the day after, the dog could go lame for instance), so it would be pointless to have anything done in advance. However I think the idea of a panel of vets being much more fair!! Rather like for hip scores! Good thinking!

In Aviculture we have cage checks upon entry to any show, every cage and bird is checked for signs of ill health, cage size and a clean cage.  This is done by committee members who are also bird keepers so know what to look for re potential health problems and of course no of birds to cage etc is pretty simple with the guidelines that have been given by Parrot Society.  There just aren't enough Avian specialist vets to do anything more but droppings are a great indicator of a birds well being which most have on the cage floor by the time they arrive.  As we have to check entry passes and number of cages plus birds anyway the little extra it takes to enforce the rules doesn't add a lot of time to entry.

All dogs to be checked obefore showing and a panel of vets would be preferred to a single vet having full control over an animals suitability

>All dogs to be checked obefore showing

This used to be routine at dog shows, but was abandoned decades ago because it took too much time even then.

Crufts is an exception with the number of entries; 5000 dogs per day, at 5 minutes exam (it couldn't be done quicker and have any meaning at all) each would take a single vet 416 hours - that's 17 days! You'd need an awful lot of vets to get them all done in a single day, let alone have time to judge them.

I was speaking to a lady who was showing her Basset at Crufts on Sunday and she said that the judge was being particularly stringent about eyes and thought this might be because they were a high profile breed - then the winning Basset didn't get through anyway - confused.com

though more about this and the lenght of time needed, will take far too long

I have been thinking about this and I think there could be wider ramifications (sorry if this has already been said on fb as I'm not on it).

If the dogs that have failed the vet check at Crufts are shown again at Ch. shows, what judge is going to risk putting them up for BOB again and having it withheld?

Even if they are given the BOB by the judge, will any vets now be prepared (at Ch Shows) to pass the dog as healthy against the desicion of the Crufts vet(s), bearing in mind that it sems most 'failed' on conditions that would not be transient?

Where similar checks are employed in other Fancies or abroad, how does that work? Do animals pass sometimes and fail others, I would be interested to know.

I know opinions differ but you would think if a condition was severe enough for the BOB to be witheld at Crufts on the criteria set out by the KC, then there supposedly ought to be no room for differences of opinion. It should be completely unequivical, but it seems with several at least of the dogs concerned that there are questions being asked about the desicion - by other specialist vets!

I have been looking at various reports and listening to podcasts etc again.  I think they KC were trying to look at 2 issues, or even 3, and it all came out a disaster.  They have rolled the health improvements of the 15 high profile breeds up with basic "fit to show on the day" inspection, and added the element of judges education.  Mix that up with the fact that they did not seem to realise no vets were appointed until just before the show and then not have clear guidelines  fro them.  End result, appalling!

Have a read of some of the posts at http://www.facebook.com/groups/346236658750734/  The behaviour of some KC representatives/staff is beyond belief.

If the dogs that have failed the vet check at Crufts are shown again at Ch. shows, what judge is going to risk putting them up for BOB again and having it withheld?


but why would this not work the other way around ? ...the Bulldog PASSED it's vet check at Bupa just a few months ago ( and presumably with the same scar from the old injury ) so which vet is right ?

Why on earth was this scheme allowed to go ahead without the full ramifications being thought through properly ...will these dogs now be disqualified from all further Champ shows ? -will they be allowed to be bred from ? - will the judges that awarded them BOB be banned from judging ? or will they get a rap over the knuckles and have to re-train ( I'd like to be a fly on the wall of when they tell Ferelith Somerfield, Bert Easdon or Zena Thorne Andrews that they need 're-training ' !!! - for goodness sake if WE can see the problems in rushing this scheme in  then why did'nt they ?

Personally I feel in despair at what happened at Crufts - I'm not sure of the way forward now - to outsiders it will look as if the show fraternity is simply closing ranks and refusing to focus on health  - the RSPCA is crowing that the disqualifications 'prove' that their new campaign against Pedigree dogs was right and our opponents are beside themselves  with glee at all the turmoil it has caused....it simply could not be any worse and heaven help Steve Dean in the months to come.

I cannot believe that someone ...anyone... at the Kc did'nt stand up and say " hang on a minute chaps,  humiliating our top breeders, exhibitors and judges at the most prestigious and public dog show in the world on the say so of a vet appointed just a couple of weeks before the job....  is a SERIOUSLY bad idea "

Yvonne

> " hang on a minute chaps,  humiliating our top breeders, exhibitors and judges at the most prestigious and public dog show in the world on the say so of a vet appointed just a couple of weeks before the job....  is a SERIOUSLY bad idea "
>

especially if that vet is an equine specialist as has been reported...

Certainly as late as Sunday evening Steve Dean was considering it a success!  Not sure how he felt by Monday.

I'm surprised that Emma Milne wasn't jumping to be one of the vets at crufts. she is so against pedigree dogs, or could she have tried and was refused? The vets that applied for the job of testing could be of the same ilk, anything to discredit the pedigree dog show scene.

Can't understand the vet check at BUBA comment as I thought Crufts was the first show to start this practice??

As far as I know the vet check was trialled at BUBA and the top winning Bulldog was passed there....!
Just seen on the FB page that a CH show judge of one of the HP breeds has pulled out of a judging appointment.
Will be very interested to hear the outcome of the meeting tonight, which is hopefully going to be shown on Dog WorldTV in due course

I'm kind of sitting on the fence a bit with this one. I believe it was a very stupid move by the KC to jump in without a proper trial at Crufts, as many have said a real knee jerk reaction and we have all seen the results of that with the DDA that has murdered so many innoscent dogs.

However I am firmly of the belief that many dog breeds do have serious problems that need addressing. Not just the 15 high profile breeds. As it has been made very obvious the Newfie had it needed to have a vet check may well have failed due to showing some Haw, My breed is not excempt from this and occasional dogs will show up with it but we do not have anything in the standard that would support it (no heavy facial skin) so not much of an issue in reallity. But we do have other problems, short life span being one and that is not something that any judge or vet can see in any way.
Cav's were one of the first breeds to be targeted by JH but are not a high profile breed, boxers too are now being targeted and no doubt others will follow. I see many Grt Danes with haw showing, Leonburgers too can have this. Nothing will ever get rid of the breed specific "problems" if we continue to have indiviual breeds.
Only nature culling the worst affected in a wild pack keep the breeding stock fit and healthy. On the one hand the KC jumped on the bandwagon by making the statement that "No healthy puppy could be culled" and now expecting breeders to get rid of problems in super fast time. Hmmm I do not and will never condone culling of pups but the KC seem to have double standards.
To breed enough pups to keep a gene pool large enough to breed out problems would necesatate a huge influx in breeding...not something any breed needs. I feel sure other better methods can be utilized to improve the defects in many breeds and keep the gene pools workable, restricting matings would help to improve gene pools and if a problem was found the damage to the breed would be narrowed. Judges and vets can only ever pick up on obvious problems leaving the hidden dangers to run riot..No Dalmation in a show ring can be judged as to have a problem only vets can diagnose in a surgery, no Bernese in front of a judge can be said as to be one that will live  beyond the breed average, No Boxer can be deemed fit by a cursory glance if JKF is lurking inside.
Yet again a totally over the top reaction which will do more harm that good.
Aileen

The BUBA Vet check was a practise run for Crufts and I think I am correct in saying all the dogs tested were volunteered by their owners.
Jeff.

Yes thats right Jeff.!

:-)

Merlot, I am strongly behind health testing and any imporvement necessary to ensure the health and wellbeing of my dogs, but those of us who are against this initiative  are not anti health testing, but anti the ludicrous way this rule was formulated, implemented and the spin and lies which have come out of the KC since, along with downright denial of any problem by those who are high enough up that they  have some sense of responsibility.

I have spent a lot of the last 24 hours transcribing the TV interview with Steve Dean and the Dogworld podcast with Caroline Kisko.  It is amazing how this can focus the mind of what is being said even more amazing that they seem to have a totally different view of the purpose of these vet checks - Steve Dean is absolutely clear that this is aimed at the Judges, seems genuinely surprised when asked how the exhibitors/breeders feel, the general air is that they will just have to lump it in order that the judges will be educated and brought into line.  He considered it had been very successful!  Caroline Kisko makes no mention at all about the judging aspect the focus of her interview is completely on the fact it is aimed at the breeders, she does admit that they will monitor and improve the system if necessary but is also of the opinion it has been a success.   If the 2 spokespersons of the KC have not even bothered to make sure they have the same goal in mind what hope is there, of course the did manage to agree that it was a great idea!  One of the most distasteful aspects of the recordings was Steve Deans response to a question about the Peke - it was just before the Toy group went in and he was asked what it's owner would do - his response was "Well they could stay and watch"...... then he laughed!  No sympathy, no apology, almost gloating, horrid.

The facebook page seems to have vanished?

Wasn't it Steve Dean who two years ago asked a lady with a 5 month GSD pup to leave the Good Citizen ring as he thought its back legs unsound? I read the other day that the dog now took part in trials and has a very good hip score.

The whole issue does seem to be a bit of a mess, as many have said we all want and strive to have healthy dogs.  With regards to haw showing, I have a breed which is quite loose skinned, by the end of the day my dogs can look tired and subsequently will show haw.  Earlier in the day there will be no haw.  Crufts is a show which always goes on far longer than any other champ show, are dogs going to be penalised because they are judged later in the day?  My dogs have clear eye tests so would disqualification take placeif haw showing late in the daybut if tested earlier a tighter eye would have been seen.  I can see this happening with the breeds such as the Clumber.  You only have to look at tired people to see they have bags under their eyes!  Just a thought!

Maybe there has to be a legal challenge to gain some definitive answers and guidelines, there are too many knee jerk reactions on both sides currently, the shame is both sides wish to see continuing healthy dogs.  Just my opinion.

Just heard that the meeting arranged by a FB group has over 800 people attending with more arriving all the time.!
Shows the strength of feeling that has come from all dog people, whatever their breed.

>

> The facebook page seems to have vanished?

the page is here:  http://www.facebook.com/groups/346236658750734/

The facebook page is up an active, meeting now in progress, and as Luna has posted over 800 in attendance (hall capacity) Dog World TV are filming it, it you join the FB group Exhibitors Choice and Voice the link will be posted as soon as it is available, the group has gained 4945 members since  Sunday night, which is amazing and shows the depth of feeling felt by exhibitors, breeders and judges.

Meeting being chaired by Martin Wyles, Mike Gadsby currently  discussing flawed process of Crufts vet checks.

On twitter too

https://twitter.com/#!/dogworldnews

Of course the vet on the day wont have done an opthalmic check so really a 'clear eye certificate' from an opthalmic vet is irrelevant here - the vet isn't looking into the eye but at other aspects - ones which currently aren't part of an 'eye certificate' although the opthalmic vets do make comments.  Apparently there's to be more of this in the eye test and I'm sure it's a 'watch this space' - this is the press release from the panel.

(BVA/KC/ISDS Canine Health Scheme news release) At Crufts 2012 the Kennel Club
introduced veterinary checks of the 15 high profile breed Best of Breed (BOB)
winners.

Although the individual reasons why six of the breeds failed the veterinary
checks will remain a private matter between the owner, the Kennel Club and the
vet, the Kennel Club has confirmed that the overriding issue was related to eye
conditions.

Some confusion has now arisen within the media regarding eye examinations that
the dogs may have undergone before attending Crufts.

The British Veterinary Association/Kennel Club (BVA/KC) Canine Health Schemes
operates a hereditary eye disease screening programme in conjunction with the
International Sheep Dog Society (ISDS).

The scheme covers 11 hereditary eye conditions in over 50 breeds of dog.

The conditions specified are those of the eye itself and not, for example, those
involving the eyelids, or those relating to tear production and drainage.

This means that eyelid problems such as entropion, ectropion and distichiasis
(extra eyelashes) are not certified under the Scheme but are noted in the middle
section of the certificate and not the bottom section where the inherited eye
disease status is recorded.

This information is sent to a consultant who collates the data on emerging
conditions.

In addition to a routine eye examination gonioscopy may be offered in
appropriate breeds. This is treated as a separate examination.

To help breeders tackle some of the breed-related eye problems that are not
currently certified under the Scheme, panellists are increasingly focusing on
providing additional information.

The Scheme is finalising a new design of the certificate to give greater
prominence to the list of conditions that should be noted.

Commenting, Ian Mason, Chief Panellist, said:

"Following the veterinary checks at Crufts some confusion has arisen regarding
the BVA/KC/ISDS Eye Scheme, which we would like to address.

"The Scheme does not currently certify adnexal problems such as entropion and
ectropion, although this information may be noted and discussed during the eye
examination.

"The Eye Panel Working Party is very keen to collect data on breed-related
ocular problems.

"We are currently finalising a new certificate to give this information more
prominence, and we discussed these changes with representatives of the high
profile breeds at a Kennel Club seminar in November.

"We hope that the increased attention on eye conditions as a result of the
veterinary checks at Crufts will allow us to educate more and more breeders and
owners."

I don't know about the dogs but know that places like Crufts can affect my eyes and throat due to the air conditioning, so after a long day at Crufts sure that many dogs could have the same effect too?

The page is not showing, well not for me not anymore?

This content is currently unavailable.The page you requested cannot be displayed at the moment. It may be temporarily unavailable, the link you clicked on may have expired, or you may not have permission to view this page.

Sorry it still working perfectly for me.  http://www.facebook.com/groups/346236658750734/    membership now over 5100.  Meeting has seen Howard Ogden examining the legalities, Geoffrey Davies, Lisa Croft Elliott,  and Joy Bradley have also spoken.  A motion to form a "Canine Alliance" had been put to the meeting.

Meeting has now closed, attendance was actually 320, still pretty amazing. Steering committee has been formed....

> Steve Dean is absolutely clear that this is aimed at the Judges

forgive me, as i do not show, but i would assume (perhaps foolishly) that the kc would have an idea as to which judges are moderate. could they not invite them to judge? just a thought...

> If the 2 spokespersons of the KC have not even bothered to make sure they have the same goal in mind what hope is there

alas little i fear

This is a link to a statement written by one of the Vets at Crufts, published by Dog World

http://www.dogworld.co.uk/product.php/67384/1/one_of_crufts_high_profile_check_vets_speaks_out/6e7922cd73007f84ef8b38f5e6cfeed5

very interesting read dill. nice to know that they were an experienced dog vet rather than an equine one etc. glad she praised as well as saying that she still felt she needed to fail the more moderate dogs.

Yes, that actually makes me feel better about the whole thing. I don't know if the owners of the dogs would be any happier, but at least she is acknowledging that even the failed dogs were more moderate than a few years back and should be praised.

And yet instead of being praised they were disqualified?   She is very luke warm about the breeding of pedigree dogs becasue so many dogs need homes?  I find this article self serving rather than comforting.