A One's
Cocker Spaniels
The Cocker Spanielklubben, Sweden, Annual Meeting on March
25, 2006 - Decisions made based on false and contradictory presumptions
Two main issues were on the agenda, Ingrid Olsson's, Brightwood's, Motion for
reactivating the resolution already passed to launch a full controll/health
program for FN/PNP (Motion 1), a motion supported by 97 cocker spaniel
breeders/members, and Anders Carlsson's (Vitahotellets), Agneta Olofsson (Guldkulans),
Anette Persson's (Tullebyns), Nina Waldeland's (Cobarn), Theres Johansson's (Allert's) and Elisabeth Gunnebo's
(Jazz Up's) Motion concerning dogs tested as carriers of canine prcd-PRA at
OptiGen to be accepted for breeding (Motion 3).
When the motions were published, on the homepage of the Cocker Spanielklubben only, five days before the annual meeting, the Appendix (Motion 1) with the 97 supporting breeders' signatures was not attached! The appendix appeared on the homepage on Saturday evening, the night before the meeting! Members had very little chance to inform themselves about the issue, especially those who do not have access to the internet, or prefer social events to surfing on the internet on a Saturday evening.
Motion 1
The committe recommends the annual meeting to decline Motion 1 entirely and to instruct the committee to actively obtain and continuously present information on the matter during the next 12 months. The committe motivates its recommendation as follows.
FN and PNP are not the same disease. Research regarding kidney diseases in the USA indicates that the disease FN is hereditary but that the the mode of inheritance of PNP is not known. Swedish veterinary experts also claim that the mode of inheritance has not been established. Hence the Committee thinks that in the present-day situation no changes concerning PNP should be made regarding central registration at The Swedish Kennel Club. It is essential that more information about the the two diseases is obtained
Motion 3
The committe recommends the annual meeting to decline Motion 3 entirely and to instruct the committee to actively obtain and continuously present information on the matter during the next 12 months. The committe motivates its recommendation as follows.
There are a number of varieties of PRA within the breed (???!!!). In the present-day situation OptiGen can only find the gene for prcd-PRA. In other words, a dog that is OptiGen-tested normal/clear (A) can still be a carrier of a different form of PRA. The Committee rejects the idea of acceding an OptiGen-test to the eye health program already in force at The Swedish Kennel Club.
The Committe further admits that The Cocker Spanielklubben was invited to join a central OptiGen registration program within The Swedish Kennel Club. This invitation was rejected in its entirety by the Committee. The Committee also wants to draw our attention to the facts that:
• you are not allowed to mate a B-dog/-bitch to an A-dog/-bitch OptiGen-tested in another country, or to a dog that has been OptiGen-tested A without having the admission form of the Swedish Kennel Club.
• all puppies from one litter with A- and B-parents must be OptiGen-tested. The puppies that turn out to be B from that litter are not to be bred with.
• OptiGen can not explain why PRA
in certain dogs, tested affected/C1, appears at the age of e g four
years, in others at e g eight years, or why some affected/C1-dogs retain
good vision throughout their lifetune. OptiGen has different theories,
one being that this subgroup also inherits an unidentified second gene
that modifies the onset of PRA, causing some "Affecteds" in the pedigree
to exhibit typical prcd-PRA, and some retain good vision throughout
their lifetime. OptiGen hopes it will be more clear with ongoing
research.
• The English Cocker Spaniel
Club reminds us in its Welfare Report, that we have to remember that
"AN OPTIGEN-TESTED DOG WITH THE RESULT
A
CAN STILL BE A CARRIER OF PRA"
• there are several different forms of PRA. If a dog/bitch with a breeding ban should be OptiGen B and be accepted to mate an A dog/bitch, how do we know that the eye-tested (clinically) dog/bitch had prcd-PRA?
With all these considerations in mind the Committee asserts that the breeding base would diminish considerably and that we should obtain more information and wait and see.
Our breed counsellor did not even talk to our PRA experts but called the Poodle Club the day before the meeting.
An other committee member has been lobbying around during the week before the meeting 'informing' members about OptiGen, later called 'Reflections about OptiGen' on the homepage. This very incorrect information was deleted from the website of the Cocker Spanielklubben immediately after the meeting was over! Several of those who wanted to support Motion 3 did not attend the meeting, why? Furthermore several of those members who had supported Motion 1 by 'signing' their names in the Appendix, voted against the motion at the meeting too.
It is incorrect information too, that you are not allowed to mate a B1-dog from another country or a tested dog without the SKK admission form, but you have to test all puppies from that mating.
The statement that 'all puppies from a
B1/A1-combination must be OptiGen-tested and that B1-dogs (carriers) from that litter must be banned from breeding is INCORRECT too!
Our club is supposed to suggest how WE want a 'sanitation' period to run, e g
the way they do in England, mate B1-dogs as you wish during a period of five
years and after that period only A1-dogs are to be bred with. Fair enough.
Both eye specialist L Garman and U-B Karlman (SKK) have confirmed during the last week that there is only one form of PRA among cocker spaniels, prcd-PRA, in Sweden, and elsewhere.
The Committee has neither gathered facts, nor have they informed members about the offer of the SKK to try out a central registration of OptiGen test results during a period of one year and after that period make decisions as to a health program. Nor have they invited veterinary specialists or experts from the SKK.
Why not test and find out if your dog is a carrier for
prcd-PRA, rather than not test and not know anything? Meanwhile clinical eyetesting is to be continued as usual.
No expert, no vet, no scientist, no committee, no so and so will make me change my
opionion. Call it FN, PNP, renal failure or even FUCKEDUP kidneys, it
makes no difference to me!
Cocker spaniels that have produced puppies that died because their
kidneys did not do what they are meant to do SHOULD NOT BE BRED WITH!!!
Puppies will die no matter what the Committee tries to tell us! How will
the next case be dealt with, if at all? Instead of claiming, that PNP has nothing to do
with FN (Of course it has! They are based on the same bloodlines, for
Christ's sake!), we should be highly
suspicious of ANY puppy which dies of renal disease at a young age.
It is about time we use the money that breeders donate to the future health of the cocker spaniel and get our OWN gadgets to perform the electronmicroscopy and immunofluoresence tests that are able to detect the abnormalities in the collagen which form the glomerular basement. It is the lack of a certain form of collagen, and the "substitution" of another form of collagen which causes the eventual breakdown of the glomeruli and the slow and relentless march towards irreversible renal failure. Why donate money to detect a disease that has nothing to do with our own problem?
I asked the Committee how the
owners of the dogs which have produced the 19 offspring that died of
renal failure will be compensated for the damages, economic and
goodwill, they have been caused by The Cocker Spanielklubben by being
condemned as carriers of PNP, approved by the same vet/PNP expert who now
claims the PNP mode of inheritance is not known??? The answer I received
was "These dogs have never been banned from breeding." Time to claim
DAMAGES! (On March 28, 2006, the following words can be read on the
homepage of The Cocker Spanielklubben, internal link PNP: "Föräldrar
= anlagsbärare" which means "Parents =
carriers". When/Where is the 'old evidence' presented, that both
parents are to be considered as carriers?) Dear cocker breeder friends,
who know what they are talking about, say it takes about TEN YEARS to 'recover'
after you have bred a puppy that died of FN. As if you and your kennels
were plague-infested! And now the Cocker Spanielklubben Committee claims
that the PNP mode of inheritance is unknown!
41 members, incl committee members, of the Cocker Spanielklubben attended the
meeting, several of which non-breeders and novices.
Stoppress! At the breeders' information meeting at Uppsala on December 7, 2005, arranged by the Cockerklubben Uppsala/Länsförsäkringar (insurance company), the attending breeders were informed by the lecturer, referred to above and considered Sweden's only PNP expert, that, quote cutting from the memoranda of one attending member of the Cocker Spanielklubben: "Ärftligheten är inte känd, tyder på recessivt anlag, vet inte säkert. Skydda sig mot recessiva sjukdomar. Föräldrar och helsyskon till en sjuk hund skall INTE användas."!!!!!!!!!!!!! Translation word for word: "Hereditariness is not known, indicates recessive disposition, does/do not know for sure. Protect oneself/oneselves against recessive diseases. Parents and full sisters and brothers to an affected dog are NOT to be used."
"Arvsgången är inte alls klarlagd för cocker spaniel och därför är det som står i Ingrid Olssons motion inaktuellt." framfördes som huvudargument för att avslå Motion 1 under årsmötet. Två medlemmar har lyssnat på samma expert men bara en av dem hör nyanser, "Arvsgången är INTE ALLS klarlagd ..." och "tyder på recessivt anlag", med den förstnämnda informationen som underlag fattar mötet ett för vår ras framtid enormt viktigt beslut!
"Mode of inheritance
is not explained at all with cocker spaniels, accordingly Ingrid
Olsson's motion is out of date." was presented as the main reason for
declining Motion 1 at the annual meeting. Two club members have attended
a lecture with the same expert but only one of them hears shades of
meaning. "Mode of inheritance is not explained AT ALL ..." and "indicates
recessive dispositon ...", the annual meeting made a decision, which is
extremely essential for the future of our breed, based on very
oversimplified information from one of the present members, not on
expert opinions!
Att jämföras med
Astrid Hoppe: "Under
årens lopp har dessa medfödda njursjukdomar givits olika beteckningar
som MED STÖRSTA SANNOLIKHET (!!!!) beskriver en och samma defekt. Som
exempel kan nämnas: njurbarkshypoplasi hos cocker spaniel, familjär
njursjukdom hos norsk älghund och samojed,
progressiv njursjukdom hos lhasa apso, shih tzu och soft coated wheaten
terrier." samt vidare: "...sjukdomen har en
enkel recessiv arvsgång."
The decisions made at the annual meeting on March 25, 2006, as to Motion 1 and Motion 3, should be declared void, since they were based on incorrect and misleading information, given at very short notice and to members with access to the internet only!