Hi Peter,

> There are a number of sections in the agenda and attachements that
> cover CEA/ACES in a variety of ways. In particular two attachements
> from Karen Hedburg that relate to control of CEA are of huge
> significance to those of us with CEA affected breeds and should be
> read and digested by all! If I get confirmation of the public nature
> of these documents I will attempt to provide them here.

Yes, the BBPs (Best Breeding Practice) documents are dynamite. These
documents are actually more or less what was submitted to the Victorian Govt
dept as the suggested Code of Practice in order for Dogs Victoria breeders
to gain exemption from the legislation. They need to be stripped down to
their bare bones and discussed by all breeders that have a stake in any
breeds affected by the proposals; diseases referred to include CEA, PRA,
vWD, HC.


> In relation to concern in VIC that CEA affected breeds should have
> all litters checked I personally cannot see why this is a problem.
> Frankly anyone breeding with a CEA affected breed who is not breeding
> DNA Clear to DNA Clear (and that possibility does not exist for most
> of us!) should test all pups? Most of us do already as collie rough
> breeders? Let's fight the big battles we need to and not the ones
> that are not winable?

I totally agree that all collie breeders should be litter screening, however
the concern regarding the proposed Code of Practice in regard to the
Victorian State legislation is that the use of the word "must" makes it an
offence under the Act to not have all puppies screened prior to 8 weeks of
age by an ACES authorised ophthalmologist. As stated in the Dogs Victoria
response, it appears to be a restraint of trade to dictate that only one
particular group of specialists are authorised to litter screen under the
Act. I also believe that due to the low number of ACES authorised
practitioners available, it may be physically impossible to fulfill these
proposed requirements within the time frame allowable.

Regards,

Sylvia