Any chance you can let us know what happen at the meeting tomorrow?
Cheers Mim
--- In ozeyescheme@yahoogroups.com.au, "Pauline Freeman" <sunfire@...> wrote: > > In case anyone has missed it there will be a public meeting - open to all - after the management meeting tonight at 7 pm approx - see you there Pauline Freeman >
No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus
Database: 269.14.13/1074 - Release Date: 10/16/2007 2:14 PM
Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free unlimited storage. Get it now.
Any chance you can let us know what happen at the meeting tomorrow?
Cheers Mim
--- In ozeyescheme@yahoogroups.com.au, "Pauline Freeman" <sunfire@...> wrote: > > In case anyone has missed it there will be a public meeting - open to all - after the management meeting tonight at 7 pm approx - see you there Pauline Freeman >
No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.13/1074 - Release Date: 10/16/2007 2:14 PM
Subject: Fw: Please forward, it has been confirmed by Telstra &
Australia Police
-------Original Message-------
From: Dennis Gorman
Date: 10/05/07 10:33:28
To: Donny Maxwell; Ian Byrnes; John Donnelly; John Haas;
John Kerr; judy; laurence falconer; michael; Neil Winterton;
Olsen, Bruce; Wassell, John
Subject: Fw: Please forward, it has been confirmed by Telstra
& Australia Police
Subject: Fw: Please forward, it has been confirmed by Telstra
& Australia Police
Please pass this on, it has been confirmed
by Telstra & Australia Police.
I got a call last night from an individual identifying himself as an
AT&T Service technician who was conducting a test on our telephone
lines. He stated that to complete the test I should touch nine
(9),zero ( 0), hash (#) and then hang up.
Luckily, I was suspicious and refused. Upon contacting the telephone
company, I was informed that by pushing 90#, you give the requesting
individual full access to your telephone line, which allows them to
place long distance telephone calls billed to your home phone
number. I was further informed that this scam has been originating
from many of the local gaols/prisons.
DO NOT press 90# for ANYONE. PLEASE pass this on to your friends. If
you have mailing lists and/or newsletters from organisations you are
connected with, I encourage you to pass this on.
Stephen Cooper
Detective Senior Constable 29748
Victoria Police State Crime Squad
Level 12, 412 St. Kilda Road , Melbourne
(03) 9865 2663 or 0414644499
stephen.cooper@...
mailto:stephen.cooper@...
Hi Pauline
Any chance you can let us know what happen at the meeting tomorrow?
Cheers Mim
--- In ozeyescheme@..., "Pauline Freeman" <sunfire@...>
wrote:
>
> In case anyone has missed it there will be a public meeting - open to
all - after the management meeting tonight at 7 pm approx - see you
there Pauline Freeman
>
In case anyone has missed it there will be a public meeting - open to all - after the management meeting tonight at 7 pm approx - see you there Pauline Freeman
In case anyone has missed it there will be a public meeting - open to all - after the management meeting tonight at 7 pm approx - see you there Pauline Freeman
Subject: [ozeyescheme] Dr Robertson's Statement re Vic Legislation
I hope everyone has seen the excellent letter/statement written by Dr Bruce Robertson to Mr Doug Ford in regard to the proposed Victorian Legislation.http://www.vca.org.au/index.asp
I hope everyone has seen the excellent letter/statement written by Dr Bruce Robertson to Mr Doug Ford in regard to the proposed Victorian Legislation.http://www.vca.org.au/index.asp
I am hoping that his statement is heard loud and clear and fully understood by the politicians.
I do find it ironic that Dr Robertson's statement is exactly the sentiments many of us have tried to express in regard to the documentation and implementation of ACES.
e.g. ANKC has the power to insist on an `unaffected' test report as a prerequisite to litter registration.
It appears now Dr Robertson understands why the ACES documentation is so horrific as at the end of his Statement he says " Those responsible for enacting animal welfare law would see the sense in allowing the dog breeding industry to be proactive and self-regulating….as it has both the capacity and willingness to do so". Of course I would like to see that ACES sees "…the sense in allowing the dog breeding industry to be proactive and self-regulating….as it has both the capacity and willingness to do so"too.Maybe there is hope?
ANY scheme/system/legislation that tries to impose restrictions or forces us into certain positions or indeed insists we risk reducing diversity within our breeds, and possibly even spelling the demise of certain breeds - especially when we do not know the total genetic inheritance of the disease involved ,- should be totally rejected.
We would all agree, I think, that testing for genetic problems where possible should be fully embraced. After that, I believe it is the breeder's responsibility to use that information wisely.
It would be great if we can get all these problems sorted so we can get back to being what we want to be – dog breeders, not lobbyists.
Thank you Dr Robertson for writing to Mr Ford in support of breeders.
This is scary, no doubt it will make its way to Tassie, I have forwarded on to other dog people, now is the time to stand together before its too late, goodluck tomorrow at the meeting hope you get a good turnout, let us know what happens.
Hi,
I was sent this contact via a cat site - sounds like a person to get a
hold of for more info on how the US people have banned together to
help fit this kind of legislation
Kerry
Just got an email from one of my cat lists I am on about the animal
bill they are talking about.
You have to get in touch with
<mailto:dbolton@...>dbolton@...
Doug Bolton is so well informed about what has already been happening
in the USA you wouldn't believe it. He also had informed us about
every move and because cat and dog fancy was equally united they could
defeat this idiots.Doug is in Canada...
--- In ozeyescheme@..., "Pauline Freeman" <sunfire@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi all just confirmed with the Greensborough club- there will be a
meeting tomorrow at lunchtime at the Park - this is going to affect
everyone and could some kind person or people please print out a copy
or two of the legislation as my printer has decided to go on the blink
(something to do with 9 yo son l think !) Pauline Freeman
>
Hi all just confirmed with the Greensborough club- there will be a meeting tomorrow at lunchtime at the Park - this is going to affect everyone and could some kind person or people please print out a copy or two of the legislation as my printer has decided to go on the blink (something to do with 9 yo son l think !) Pauline Freeman
Subject: RE: [ozeyescheme] new victorian legislation
Hi Carol,
Do you mind if I cross post this to Sheltie lists that I’m on.
This is terrible and if passed will give more support and credence to the ACES scheme. Definitely need to lobby against as much as we can.
Cheers Julia,
Sunland Shetland Sheepdogs.
No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1064 - Release Date: 10/11/2007 3:09 PM
PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO READ.........as it does or will concern you......
Permission to cross granted
It has come to my attention early this evening that a new Animal care bill,had its first reading in state parliament. If this bill is allowed to proceed ,and become law ,it will be the beginning of the end for the dog world as we know it. This bill is not only Draconian in its aims to control dog breeding, but is also meant to effectively cease and destroy any enjoyment we have as pure bred dog owners.
This bill will stop anyone who owns any Docked tail breed or has a De-barked dog from being OWNED or SHOWN . This is only the tip of the iceberg,as it will also allow any one who owns any breed of dog with a docked tail or de-barked to be legally prosecuted,to the full powers of the law. If we all sit back and wait for someone else to do something about it,than it will be too late.We must step up and contact our local member of parliament, to let them know resoundingly of how we feel about this extreme prejudice against us,otherwise we will surely become as extinct as our breeds will become. We need to mobilize anyone who owns a docked tail breed of dog,and anyone who owns one of our puppies to write and e-mail their local member, and let them know that they will not get away with this.
These people only understand one thing,and that is VOTES.If we contact them and flood their offices with mail and phone calls to let them know their JOBS are on the line if they support this bill,than we stand a chance,but we must stand UNITED in this as a single dog body,both breeders and owners alike. If you believe that this is scare mongering, than you better think again,as this is already going on around the world.in the U.S.A just a few months ago in California a similar bill was defeated only when pet owners joined forces with members of the police department to help drum up support to defeat that bill. We are surely becoming a Police State with the government dictating on how and when and where, we can legally own a Pet.
This is only the start,,already there are plans to introduce more breeds to the dangerous dogs list,amongst them, my own breed the Rhodesian Ridgeback. It's no secret that Hugh Worth has a distinct dislike for certain breeds and he now has the Department of Primary Industry behind him to introduce legislation into parliament, to bring it into effect. I have had to fight in the past to keep ownership of my firearms,when both state and federal governments wanted to take them away from me. As a member of the Sporting Shooters Association with thousands of other members like myself,we managed to hold back that tide and still have the right to own a firearm.
We cannot afford to sit back and watch this unfold,as every minute counts.Call all your friends or email them where ever they may live this will not stop here in Victoria.Once this bill goes through parliament it will surely be only a matter of time before other states follow . Every bit of hard work and sacrifice that you have put into your loving breeds, the search to cure hereditary diseases and the amount of data collated to prevent Hips and Elbow displaysia as well as many other yet genetically known ailments that have been found,through DNA researching by you the Dog World ,will be worth nothing.These breeds as well as many others, will end up in the hands of Back yard puppy farmers or worse puppy mills who care absolutely nothing about the health or happiness of the dog,just the dollars they can get for them by the pet stores. I ask you all to act as one and contact as many people who will support us , and will help us to defeat this bill ,and is prepared for a lot of hard work .
Do you mind if I cross post this to
Sheltie lists that I’m on.
This is terrible and if passed will give
more support and credence to the ACES scheme. Definitely need to lobby against
as much as we can.
Cheers Julia,
Sunland Shetland Sheepdogs.
From:ozeyescheme@... [mailto:ozeyescheme@...] On Behalf Of Carol & Steve Eastley Sent: Friday, 12 October 2007 5:28
PM To:ozeyescheme@... Subject: [ozeyescheme] new
victorian legislation
this item is being discussed on dogzonline
Carol Eastley
Cloudforest Bernese Tasmania
"The Animals Legislation (Animal Care) Bill has been released by the
Minister for Agriculture, the Hon Jo Helper MLA, in his second reading
speech on 11 Oct 2007."
In amongst all the changes was amendments to be made to other Bills of
Parliament namely the AMENDMENTS TO THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ACT
1986
15C Breeding of animals with heritable defects
(1) A person must not, intentionally or recklessly, allow an animal with a
heritable defect to breed.
Penalty: 60 penalty units, in the case of a natural person.
300 penalty units, in the case of a body corporate.
(2) A person must not sell or dispose of an animal with a heritable defect,
if the person knows or is reckless as to whether the animal has a heritable
defect, unless the person who sells or disposes of the animal advises the
person to whom the animal is sold or disposed of (before the sale or
disposal) that the animal has the heritable defect.
Penalty: 60 penalty units, in the case of a natural person.
300 penalty units, in the case of a body corporate.
(3) In this section-
heritable defect, in relation to a species of animal set out in Column 1 of
the Table in the Schedule, means a heritable defect that is known to cause
the disease set out opposite the species of animal in Column 2 of the Table
in the Schedule.".
FURTHER AMENDMENT OF THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ACT 1986
For the Schedule to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1986
substitute-
"SCHEDULE
Section 15C
TABLE OF DISEASES CAUSED BY HERITABLE DEFECTS
Column 1
Species Column 2
Disease
Dogs Von Willebrand's Disease (VWD)
Progressive Retinal Atrophy (PRA)
Neuronal Ceroid Lipofuscinosis (NCL)
Collie Eye Anamoly (CEA/CH)
Hereditary Cataract (HC)
Cats Polycystic Kidney Disease (PKD)
Mutations causing aplasia or hypoplasia of any long bone
Folded ears due to osteochondrodysplasia
.".
Permission to cross granted
It has come to my attention early this evening that a new Animal care
bill,had its first reading in state parliament. If this bill is
allowed to proceed ,and become law ,it will be the beginning of the
end for the dog world as we know it. This bill is not only Draconian
in its aims to control dog breeding, but is also meant to effectively
cease and destroy any enjoyment we have as pure bred dog owners.
This bill will stop anyone who owns any Docked tail breed or has a
De-barked dog from being OWNED or SHOWN . This is only the tip of the
iceberg,as it will also allow any one who owns any breed of dog with a
docked tail or de-barked to be legally prosecuted,to the full powers
of the law. If we all sit back and wait for someone else to do
something about it,than it will be too late.We must step up and
contact our local member of parliament, to let them know resoundingly
of how we feel about this extreme prejudice against us,otherwise we
will surely become as extinct as our breeds will become. We need to
mobilize anyone who owns a docked tail breed of dog,and anyone who
owns one of our puppies to write and e-mail their local member, and
let them know that they will not get away with this.
These people only understand one thing,and that is VOTES.If we contact
them and flood their offices with mail and phone calls to let them
know their JOBS are on the line if they support this bill,than we
stand a chance,but we must stand UNITED in this as a single dog
body,both breeders and owners alike. If you believe that this is scare
mongering, than you better think again,as this is already going on
around the world.in the U.S.A just a few months ago in California a
similar bill was defeated only when pet owners joined forces with
members of the police department to help drum up support to defeat
that bill. We are surely becoming a Police State with the government
dictating on how and when and where, we can legally own a Pet.
This is only the start,,already there are plans to introduce more
breeds to the dangerous dogs list,amongst them, my own breed the
Rhodesian Ridgeback. It's no secret that Hugh Worth has a distinct
dislike for certain breeds and he now has the Department of Primary
Industry behind him to introduce legislation into parliament, to bring
it into effect. I have had to fight in the past to keep ownership of
my firearms,when both state and federal governments wanted to take
them away from me. As a member of the Sporting Shooters Association
with thousands of other members like myself,we managed to hold back
that tide and still have the right to own a firearm.
We cannot afford to sit back and watch this unfold,as every minute
counts.Call all your friends or email them where ever they may live
this will not stop here in Victoria.Once this bill goes through
parliament it will surely be only a matter of time before other states
follow . Every bit of hard work and sacrifice that you have put into
your loving breeds, the search to cure hereditary diseases and the
amount of data collated to prevent Hips and Elbow displaysia as well
as many other yet genetically known ailments that have been
found,through DNA researching by you the Dog World ,will be worth
nothing.These breeds as well as many others, will end up in the hands
of Back yard puppy farmers or worse puppy mills who care absolutely
nothing about the health or happiness of the dog,just the dollars they
can get for them by the pet stores. I ask you all to act as one and
contact as many people who will support us , and will help us to
defeat this bill ,and is prepared for a lot of hard work .
John Cassar
Kinshasa Rhodesian Ridgeback
1. Animals Legislation(Animal Care) Bill 2007
http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/domino/Web_Notes/LDMS/PubPDocs.nsf/ee665e366dc\
b6cb0ca256da400837f6b/2AF75CFABA65BE5FCA2573700009C592/$FILE/561056bi1.PDF
2. Explanatory memorandum
http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/domino/Web_Notes/LDMS/PubPDocs.nsf/ee665e366dc\
b6cb0ca256da400837f6b/2AF75CFABA65BE5FCA2573700009C592/$FILE/561056exi1.pdf
this item is being discussed on dogzonline
Carol Eastley
Cloudforest Bernese
Tasmania
http://users.bigpond.net.au/cloudforest/cloudforest/
"The Animals Legislation (Animal Care) Bill has been released by the
Minister for Agriculture, the Hon Jo Helper MLA, in his second reading
speech on 11 Oct 2007."
In amongst all the changes was amendments to be made to other Bills of
Parliament namely the AMENDMENTS TO THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ACT
1986
15C Breeding of animals with heritable defects
(1) A person must not, intentionally or recklessly, allow an animal with a
heritable defect to breed.
Penalty: 60 penalty units, in the case of a natural person.
300 penalty units, in the case of a body corporate.
(2) A person must not sell or dispose of an animal with a heritable defect,
if the person knows or is reckless as to whether the animal has a heritable
defect, unless the person who sells or disposes of the animal advises the
person to whom the animal is sold or disposed of (before the sale or
disposal) that the animal has the heritable defect.
Penalty: 60 penalty units, in the case of a natural person.
300 penalty units, in the case of a body corporate.
(3) In this section-
heritable defect, in relation to a species of animal set out in Column 1 of
the Table in the Schedule, means a heritable defect that is known to cause
the disease set out opposite the species of animal in Column 2 of the Table
in the Schedule.".
FURTHER AMENDMENT OF THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ACT 1986
For the Schedule to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1986
substitute-
"SCHEDULE
Section 15C
TABLE OF DISEASES CAUSED BY HERITABLE DEFECTS
Column 1
Species Column 2
Disease
Dogs Von Willebrand's Disease (VWD)
Progressive Retinal Atrophy (PRA)
Neuronal Ceroid Lipofuscinosis (NCL)
Collie Eye Anamoly (CEA/CH)
Hereditary Cataract (HC)
Cats Polycystic Kidney Disease (PKD)
Mutations causing aplasia or hypoplasia of any long bone
Folded ears due to osteochondrodysplasia
.".
Mutations causing aplasia or hypoplasia of any long bone
Folded ears due to osteochondrodysplasia
.".
The link to the legislation is:
http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/domino/W...a256da400837f6b
I am cross posting the following from an American site. I am doing
this as I beleive that we are already facing the same problems eg.
the desexing issue in Qld, the tail docking and not discounting the
way ACES has been implemented and the implications of rejecting dogs
from the gene pool on one genetic fault. Sure it is politiclaly
correct not to breed a dog with ANY health issues, but is it
practical? Could it impact on the gentic diversity within breed - YOU
BET it will. Do you think what we can and can't breed might end up
being legislated - like tail docking? I am NOT saying we should
automatically wage war on any suggestion that is put forward - but we
do need to understand full implications, impacts, and whether it
reduces our rights as breeders. I can't help but think we are all
facing a slippery slope. For those who have not been watching what is
happening in America - take note. It is more than scary and most of
this is being run by the Animal Rights people. These people are alive
and well in Aust too. Check out the following. We all have to be more
than "fence sitters" if we want to continue to be breeders.
Cheers Mim
a message dated 10/9/2007 10:46:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
HoneyPotHounds@... writes:
PERMISSION TO CROSSPOST.
This is the story of the founding of the Missouri Federation by their
president Karen Strange. I can closely relate to a lot of this story,
especially
the parts about the indifference or the criticism by the do-nothings
and then
they expect you to ride in and save their bacon. It does wear thin.
I thank God frequently that my club "gets it" and is very supportive
of my
efforts.
Elizabeth Brinkley
Legislative Liaison TRSSCGP
Karen Strange <kjeeper@...> wrote:
Several things really get under my skin also, and my line of sympathy
grew very dim a number of years ago. I remember when Anne and I
started
MoFed nearly sixteen years ago, we spent our own money and countless
hours of our
time driving all over our state talking to various groups about the
pending
animal rights movement. We were met with big yawns, eyes rolling and
eyebrows
raised in total boredom. Not much has changed in a number of circles.
We
trudged onward.Legislation was introduced, each year more devastating
than the
last, and we tried to enlist help in killing the bills. Not much
came, so we
did it ourselves. People were too busy; there was a show to go to;
they needed
to groom; they had laundry to do, dinner to fix and shopping to do.
So did
we. We spent all our extra time killing legislation and talking to
groups who
didn't care.
We built strength, membership and a reputation for taking no
prisoners where
animal rights was concerned. We were criticized, ignored, punched in
the gut
for our efforts and even called on the carpet for not being
sympathetic
enough to the rights of bleeding hearts. I even received a call from
a "wannabe"
who told me we really needed to soften MoFed so that the show person
and the
everyday, middle of the road people would like us better. I can't
repeat what
I told that person! Devastating legislation passed right after that
in their
state; we killed ours! We attended fundraisers, worked on campaigns,
helped
get AR sympathizers out of office and ones on our side in. We spent
hours and
hours on the road talking to more groups, and were excited if one or
two of
their members joined our fight. We walked the halls of the capitol,
day and
night, testifying to unfriendly committees who literally put us on a
pedestal
and made us dance with snickering animal rights activists filling the
committee rooms behind us as we answered question after question from
legislators
trying to trip us up. We were called into legislative offices and
told to
back off and sell our members down the river but we refused at all
costs,
regardless of the threats or outcome.
We made deals, wrote letters, hand delivered testimony and factual
information, plotted strategies, answered countless phone calls,
explained
legislation over and over and over to those who didn't understand,
and went
home so exhausted we couldn't sleep only to start over the very next
day
because we had no choice.
We watched the animal rights movement grow more wealthy and powerful,
and
shook our heads because no one seemed to care. "Someone else will
take care of
it", they said. "Besides, I don't have time." And we did?!!!!! While
my
national breed club worried about health issues, specialties and who
would judge
the next show, the AR's were sneaking in the back door. I wrote
an article for their national magazine well over a decade ago,
warning them
about what was coming and that our breed was in grave danger. The
article was
published but was totally ignored. Now that breed is being banned
altogether
in some places. Rather than worrying about health issues and type,
they
needed to worry about the breed becoming extinct through legislation.
Now it's
too late.
I now receive calls wanting help. One asked me recently what it would
cost
for me just to come to their state and kill that awful bill. I told
her
it didn't work that way. THEY had to do it in their own state.
It's like someone opened the gate and let the wolf in with the sheep.
The sheep scurry around in a panic, not knowing what to do or where
to turn.
For nearly sixteen years, we have said that each state needs a MoFed
or a
like organization. How many states have an organized group to fight
pending AR
legislation? How many of you on this list belong to a group actively
working
to protect your rights? How many of you hide your head in the sand
and think
it will go away? Many of you do nothing, give nothing, and yet you
want us to
ride in on a white horse and save the day, all at our own expense, of
course. If only I had a dollar for every call I have received from
someone wanting
help who says they are not a member of MoFed, never were a joiner,
heard of
us but never got around to joining, or have never
heard of us at all, but they "sure would like us to pay for them a
lawyer
and get them out of trouble". And , when we don't, they slam us
because "we
never do anything for anybody. All we do is take their money and do
nothing with
it."
After awhile, the old sympathy towards complacency wears mighty thin!
Karen Strange, President & Lobbyist
MoFed
Thank Heavens New Hampshire founded our association in 1976. Dog
Owners Of The Granite State DOGS
Barbara L. Schwartz
IMPROMPTU' COLLIES
We had Dr Robertson give a seminar on his ACES scheme here a couple of weeks ago. Given that he faced his computer just about the whole time and talked to his computer rather than to the people gathered one has to wonder if he truly believes in his own scheme. Surely if he believed in it he could face the people as he spoke about it, there's alot to be said for body language.
Also when issues were brought up at question time, his answer seemed to always be that they had changed the wording since the documentation that we have all seen, yet none of us have seen the new documentation or change of wording and had to rely on what he was telling us.
Must admit though given the poor turn out of members, his scheme will succeed regardless of whether it will benefit the dog world simply because of members apathy. Although given that the seminar was not that informative perhaps members will still make an effort to cast a vote if required. Still too many
inconsistencies for ACES to get my vote.
Regards Maureen
Pawfx Australian Shepherds
Shelbrae Kennels <tanksalot@...> wrote:
Why should anyone have to pay Dr Robertsons costs, he is the one that has promoted the scheme, his scheme.
Therefore if he wants more people to understand it and to accept it, then he needs to promote it and pay for the promotion.
After all, if this scheme gets through, he will have plenty of money in his coffers.
--- In SheltieWorld@yahoogroups.com, "Wendy Pfeiffer"
<blacklusset@...> wrote:
Hi Carolyn
This is by no means a personal attack on you.
It is the SSCNSW that I am interested in - as a then current
financial member and it is my right that as a member I have a say -
only a few of the SSCNSW members can attend meetings. How many were
there and decided this?
We were all told to sit back and wait. No discussion on the lists
was to our advantage - yes someones advantage but sure as hell not
mine!!!
Further, I think a copy of the ACES Petition should be sought from
Mim Bester and those members who were current financial members of
the SSCNSW 2006/2007 should be checked off so to speak. This should
be then forwarded to DogsNSW.
What gives the right of a few members to blatently go against our
views.
We signed a Petition - we voted - AGAINST ACES.
All this documentation I am not forwarding to Mim Besters ACES list
and back to Leslies InternationalSheltie,
bfn
BIGW
http://blacklusset.net
--- In SheltieWorld@yahoogroups.com, Carolyn Vicary <cazamyau@>
wrote:
>
> Wendy I could only do as instructed by members PRESENT at the
meeting. My personal views have nothing to do with this, I was acting
as the secretary of the club and following directions of the members
present. I WAS instructed by the members present at the meeting to
write that letter and I did so.
>
> Carolyn
>
> Sheltalyn Shetland Sheepdogs.
> Sydney.Australia.
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Wendy Pfeiffer <blacklusset@>
> To: SheltieWorld@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, 2 October, 2007 3:39:01 PM
> Subject: [SheltieWorld] Re: [InternationalSheltie] ACES
>
> Then I suggest that a copy of the letter tabled at the Board
Meeting
> that Leslie refers to should be obtained promptly, Carolyn.
>
> This statement written below by the SSCNSW:-
>
> > > > Several of our members were present on the evening of
> > > > April 12, 2007 and found the Scheme was clearly
> > > > explained and was basically satisfied.
>
> I was a financial member in May and there was a HUGE HUGE amount of
> members that signed the ACES Petition against ACES was written by
you?
>
> I was not "satisfied" - they were not "satisfied".
>
> bfn
> BIGW
> http://blacklusset.net
>
> > > > Several of our members were present on the evening of
> > > > April 12, 2007 and found the Scheme was clearly
> > > > explained and was basically satisfied.
>
> --- In SheltieWorld@yahoogroups.com, Carolyn Vicary <cazamyau@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Every word in that letter EXCEPT FOR "We need to get this through
> to the people who could not be present
> > and are unfortunately falling prey to "internet gossip". is word
> for word the letter I sent to Dogs NSW.
> >
> > Carolyn Vicary
> > Sheltalyn Shetland Sheepdogs.
> > Sydney.Australia.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Wendy Pfeiffer <blacklusset@>
> > To: SheltieWorld@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Tuesday, 2 October, 2007 3:05:33 PM
> > Subject: [SheltieWorld] Re: [InternationalSheltie] ACES
> >
> > Hi Carolyn
> >
> > As I said I have no idea who whote the letter, I just stated I
have
> > had a copy of this letter since late August.
> >
> > I am sure since the letter was tabled that any member of DogNSW
> > should be able to gain access to it? So I think that a copy of
the
> > letter tabled at the Board Meeting should be obtained.
> >
> > Never once Carolyn have I said you wrote the letter, the letter
> was
> > undated and not dated in May.
> >
> > All I said was this letter was sent to DogsNSW and I am pretty
> > disgusted in all its contents.
> >
> > It clearly supports ACES and the way it is worded borders to
> slander
> > in my direction as the owner of SheltieWorld:-
> >
> > ______________________________________________________
> > > > We need to get
> > > > this through to the people who could not be present
> > > > and are unfortunately falling prey to "internet
> > > > gossip".
> > _______________________________________________________
> >
> > I also WAS a member of SSCNSW and I DO NOT SUPPORT ACES
> >
> > bfn
> > BIGW
> > http://blacklusset.net
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In SheltieWorld@yahoogroups.com, Carolyn Vicary <cazamyau@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Wendy you are not listening - The only letter sent to Dogs NSW
> was
> > written by me as secretary of the SSDC of NSW, the one you have
is
> > PURE FICTION.Your source has changed the wording to suit
> themselves.
> > The official letter on club letterhead was sent in May 07. And
> there
> > have been replies from both Dr Hedberg & Dr Robertson.
> > > I will take it further too as I am being misquoted and
bordering
> on
> > slander and believe me that is against the law.
> > >
> > > Carolyn Vicary
> > > Sheltalyn Shetland Sheepdogs.
> > > Sydney.Australia.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message ----
> > > From: Wendy Pfeiffer <blacklusset@>
> > > To: SheltieWorld@yahoogroups.com
> > > Sent: Tuesday, 2 October, 2007 2:10:09 PM
> > > Subject: [SheltieWorld] Re: [InternationalSheltie] ACES
> > >
> > > Hi Carolyn
> > >
> > > I have no idea what letter you wrote Carolyn to DogNSW as I do
> not
> > > have the authors name - this letter went to DogNSW on Shetland
> > > Sheepdog Club of NSW letterhead and I am disgusted in the
> comments.
> > >
> > > I have been in receipt of this since late August and from my
> > sources
> > > it has been tabled by DogzNSW at the Board Meeting.
> > >
> > > I have been seriously considering taking this matter further.
> > >
> > > bfn
> > > BIGW
> > > http://blacklusset.net
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In SheltieWorld@yahoogroups.com, Carolyn Vicary <cazamyau@>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I am sorry Wendy but that was not the letter I sent to
> Christina
> > > Rafton,Dr Hedberg & Dr Robertson. At no time did I mention
> internet
> > > gossip. I have a copy of the letter here with me now but as I
am
> no
> > > longer secretary I don't have the authority to place it on the
> > > internet. I would love to know who sent this to you as it is
> > > misinformation & obviously trying to stir up trouble.If Jenny
> > Tolley
> > > wants I can send a copy or possibly place it in the club
> newsletter.
> > > >
> > > > Carolyn Vicary
> > > > Sheltalyn Shetland Sheepdogs.
> > > > Sydney.Australia.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message ----
> > > > From: Wendy Pfeiffer <blacklusset@>
> > > > To: InternationalSheltie@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Cc: SheltieWorld@yahoogroups.com
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, 2 October, 2007 1:03:15 PM
> > > > Subject: [SheltieWorld] Re: [InternationalSheltie] ACES
> > > >
> > > > Hi Leslie
> > > >
> > > > This correspondence was sent to me from an unknown
> > > > source and is part of a correspondence sent by the
> > > > Shetland Sheepdog Club of NSW and is the one referred
> > > > to in the Minutes of DogsNSW.
> > > >
> > > > I am absolutely disgusted as to the wording of this
> > > > letter and think all the members now not renewing and
> > > > present of the SSCNSW should know what correspondence
> > > > is being sent on their behalf.
> > > >
> > > > I am now not rejoining the SSCNSW because of this
> > > > letter, however was a member up until this current
> > > > financial year. I was a member when Dr Robertson
> > > > asked us to chose and I as did MANY MANY MANY members
> > > > signed the ACES Petiton against ACES and was a current
> > > > financial member at that time.
> > > >
> > > > We were all "warned" as owners of SheltieWorld and
> > > > InternationalSheltie not to enter into any internet
> > > > discussion on ACES and NOW the SSCNSW has sent this
> > > > showing their support for the ACES Scheme !!!!!!!!!!!!
> > > > __________________________________________________
> > > >
> > > > SSSCNSW LETTERHEAD
> > > >
> > > > undated
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To Christina Rafton
> > > > Senior Deputy Chair
> > > > Dogs NSW
> > > > Cc Dr Karen Hedberg and Dr Bruce Robertson
> > > >
> > > > Dear Mrs Rafton
> > > >
> > > > I have been instructed by the Shetland Sheepdog Club
> > > > of New South Wales to write to you in regards to ACES.
> > > >
> > > > Several of our members were present on the evening of
> > > > April 12, 2007 and found the Scheme was clearly
> > > > explained and was basically satisfied. We need to get
> > > > this through to the people who could not be present
> > > > and are unfortunately falling prey to "internet
> > > > gossip".
> > > >
> > > > We feel that if the misinformation in the AVA
> > > > Information for Owners was adjusted and placed in
> > > > print most people would feel more confident in the
> > > > Scheme. In particular in regard to the control of
> > > > breeding which we feel is causing most concern for the
> > > > majority of breeders.
> > > >
> > > > Members are also concerned that the puppy results are
> > > > not being entered on the database so why should they
> > > > have to pay the extra costs to get them tested. Also
> > > > why do breeders have to go through ACES to have hip
> > > > score results placed on the ANKC Database."
> > > > _________________________________________________
> > > >
> > > > regards
> > > > Wendy
> > > > http://blacklusset.net
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- Shelbrae Kennels <tanksalot@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > We all need to stand together on this & vote NO as a
> > > > > united body
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Sue with regards to your comments above - it
> > > > > seems that the Shetland Sheepdog Club of NSW will
> > > > > not stand united on this and vote NO.
> > > > >
> > > > > In the August Board Minutes of their meeting, they
> > > > > stated that had received an undated letter from
> > > > > them, received on 8/8/2007 and noted their support
> > > > > for the ACES Scheme.
> > > > >
> > > > > I for one would be interested to know how many voted
> > > > > in support for the scheme they got and how many
> > > > > negatives.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free
> unlimited
> > > > storage.
> > > > http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/unlimitedstorage.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free
> > unlimited
> > > storage.
> > > > http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/unlimitedstorage.html
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free
> unlimited
> > storage.
> > > http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/unlimitedstorage.html
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free
unlimited
> storage.
> > http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/unlimitedstorage.html
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sick of deleting your inbox? Yahoo!7 Mail has free unlimited
storage.
> http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/unlimitedstorage.html
>
--- End forwarded message ---
Hi all,
I've just spoken to the VCA and been told that the seminar has been
cancelled, as there were only 25 responses and that was not enough to
warrant spending the money to cover Dr Robertson's travel and accommodation
costs.
This issue of paying for Dr Robertson's attendance at ACES related functions
has developed a life of its own. Dr Robertson expressed to me and my breed
council colleague his outrage that this topic had ended up in the public
domain. This had occurred after the Labrador Breed Council declined to pay
for his travel and accommodation costs to our meeting in May. I said to Dr
Robertson then and will repeat it now, that I do not believe Dr Robertson
should be personally out of pocket through attempting to promote and/or
clarify ACES, however I also believe that we as individual breeders, breed
clubs and breed councils should not have to pay his costs. The Labrador
Breed Council had delegates in attendance from Perth, Brisbane and Adelaide
who were not entered at the show and who came solely to attend the
conference and paid their own way.
I believe the costs incurred by Dr Robertson in attempting to clarify ACES
should be borne by the AVA, however I guess some of the problems that exist
do so because the ANKC and hence the state bodies have allowed them to
exist, so maybe some proportion of the costs should be at their doorstep.
What a can of worms this has become! Where are we heading and what are the
answers?
Depressed and disillusioned,
Sylvia
Thanks for posting Jacqui. Does anyone know if border collie breed surveys were done or is this something the ANKC health committee has instigated?
Barbara
I believe that we still don't now the full story on CEA. I will cut and paste two pieces of information on CEA that I have in my folder. One is obvioulsy from a chat site - and I guess American, that I must have been following at some stage. Unfortunately I don't know who the author of that email is. However I do know that Greg Aclund is an ophthalmologist involved in CEA research. He is based at one of the big Unis - in California - I think. He is actually an Australian but thanks to the brain drain is now working in the US. The other document is by Greg giving an update on some of his work. I think you will find both documents interesting, but will probably leave you with more questions than answers. I am wondering if we can get an update on this research as these docs are a couple of years old now? Might see what I can track down.
No 1 Doc by unknow author:
Date: Sat Apr 16, 2005 2:37 am
Hi all,
I just got the reply email from Dr. Aclund today and he expressed his deep interest in getting some breeders to send in blood samples. I wrote back asking for the details and all but promised my wonderful friends in collies would be happy to help! lol I had a feeling at least some of the list would be interested. His email was VERY interesting. The modifiers we have been speculating about ARE there but they ONLY control the expressivity of Choroidal Hypoplaysia, NOT whether or not a collie has colobomas. Colobomas are on a seperate autosomal recessive gene at a locus not even close to the locus for CH. Those modifiers are not what is causing colobomas in litters where go normals are introduced. Both sire and dam have to be carriers in order for colobomas to appear. SURPRISE!! There are TWO recessives in collie eyes we are going to have to select against in order to truly have great eye checks.
Anyway, they are getting close to pinning down some of the loci for colobomas and the modifiers (of which there appear to be several). There will be another DNA test available when they get it pinned down.
As soon as the Dr. A. sends me the particulars, i'll post to the list since it seems many people may be interested. He's particularly interested in related collies with varying forms/expressions of CEA being sent in.
It would be terrific if CHF could cough up some $$ to help breeders with costs from collecting blood samples. The testing itself is FREE while it's part of their research.
The big push in their research, of course, was to locate the marker for CEA...well, it didn't turn out to be that simple with colobomas not even being at or even near that locus and the modifiers busy modifying CH but not the severity of expressivity in the other forms of CEA as previously proposed. SO, they are on the trail of the modifiers and the seperate gene for colobomas. Not nice to know there are two ugly recessives to worry about, not one. GOOD to know there will be a test before too much more time goes by. In any case, I think it's neat to be able to help.
One bit of useful information is already available now, just from this info. if colobomas are a separate recessive gene, you know that if a pup has a coloboma both parents must carry the gene, and offspring of any dog with coloboma will always carry that gene. So the question is no longer, which side did a coloboma come from.. it came from both sides. The gene would be masked in a n/e dog, even if both copies of that gene were there? So a n/e dog could be pure for coloboma and no one would know until it's bred to a CEA dog who then produced puppies in a CEA-CEA breeding. Interesting, and could explain some unhappy oddities people have seen in trying to bring n/e dogs into their lines.
No 2 Doc by Gred Aclund:
February 8, 2005 Message from Dr. Gregory Acland posted to ACVO Diplomate List and VOPH List "Collie Eye Anomaly Genetics"
As genetic testing for CEA is now a reality, it has been suggested to me that I should bring folks up to speed on what we know about Collie Eye Anomaly genetics.
In 2003, we published a mapping paper, locating the primary CEA locus to canine chromosome 37. (see: Lowe JK, Kukekova AV, Kirkness EF, Langlois MC, Aguirre GD, Acland GM, Ostrander EA. Linkage Mapping of the Primary Disease Locus for Collie Eye Anomaly. Genomics 2003 Jul;82(1):86-95). (Ed.note: Abstract is appended below.)
In that paper, apart from the central result, we also clarified some of the basic aspects of CEA genetics. Some of these issues are still not widely appreciated, and may cause confusion as CEA genetic testing becomes more frequent.
Prior to the work we undertook, 2 aspects of CEA genetics had become abundantly clear. First, some dogs that were clinically affected (by ophthalmoscopic exam) at a young age, subsequently appeared to be nonaffected. These dogs, generally referred to as "go-normals", have been clinically recognized since at least 1989 (see, e.g. L.F. Rubin, Inherited Eye Diseases in Purebred Dogs, Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, 1989.) It is fair to say that there has been an informal consensus that these dogs seem to behave genetically as affecteds. Second, there is strong data documenting segregation distortion in the transmission of CEA (see: B. Wallin-Hakanson, N. Wallin-Hakanson, A. Hedhammar, Collie eye anomaly in the rough collie in Sweden: genetic transmission and influence on offspring vitality, J. Small Anim. Pract. 41 (2000) 254-258; and B. Wallin-Hakanson, N. Wallin-Hakanson, A. Hedhammar, Influence of selective breeding on the prevalence of chorioretinal dysplasia and coloboma in the rough collie in Sweden, J. Small Anim. Pract. 41 (2000) 56-59). (Ed. note: Abstracts of these two reports are appended below.)
In the work we undertook prior to the 2003 mapping paper, I investigated these 2 questions, and established that the "go-normal" problem was the primary cause of the segregation distortion. (Ed.note: "Segregation distortion" means that the proportion of affected to non-affected is not as expected according to rules of Mendelian genetics.) However, first of all, you have to examine pups very carefully from a very young age (starting by 5-6 weeks postnatal) to detect all the ones that "go normal", as some pups exhibiting unmistakeable choroidal hypoplasia by 6 weeks old, will have no ophthalmoscopically detectable lesions by 9 weeks old. Having done that, if you then count all dogs clinically exhibiting CH, even temporarily, as affecteds, the segregation distortion problem goes away, and we were able to map the CH locus. Having done that, we found that a small percentage of the "go normals" were in fact not homozygous for the CH mutant allele, but were heterozygous. This data was published in the 2003 Genomics paper.
Now, as a reliable CEA DNA test becomes more widely implemented, several issues will impact veterinary ophthalmologists. The test classifies dogs as affected, carrier or normal, based on their genotype at the CH locus. However this can cause some unexpected results and reactions.
1.The test will detect all homozygous mutant dogs, regardless of whether they were ever observed to be affected clinically. That is, it resolves false negatives. A significant percentage of dogs thought to be nonaffected (based on clinical exam at ages greater than 9 wks), will prove to be homozygous for the mutation.
2.The test will discriminate true affecteds from false positives. The most common cause for a false positive diagnosis is clinical confusion between an albinotic or subalbinotic fundus (most usually merle) and choroidal hypoplasia.
3.In rare cases, it is possible that a dog diagnosed correctly as clinically affected (or "go normal") may prove to be a carrier, i.e. heterozygous for the CH mutation.
ABSTRACTS:
Linkage mapping of the primary disease locus for collie eye anomaly. Genomics. 2003 Jul:82(1):86-95. Lowe JK, Kukekova AV, Kirkness EF, Langlois MC, Aguirre GD, Acland GM, Ostrander EA. Division of Human Biology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, 1100 Fairview Avenue North, D4-100, Seattle, WA 98109-1024, USA.
Collie eye anomaly (CEA) is a hereditary ocular disorder affecting development of the choroid and sclera segregating in several breeds of dog, including rough, smooth, and Border collies and Australian shepherds. The disease is reminiscent of the choroidal hypoplasia phenotype observed in humans in conjunction with craniofacial or renal abnormalities. In dogs, however, the clinical phenotype can vary significantly; many dogs exhibit no obvious clinical consequences and retain apparently normal vision throughout life, while severely affected animals develop secondary retinal detachment, intraocular hemorrhage, and blindness. We report genetic studies establishing that the primary cea phenotype, choroidal hypoplasia, segregates as an autosomal recessive trait with nearly 100% penetrance. We further report linkage mapping of the primary cea locus to a 3.9-cM region of canine chromosome 37 (LOD = 22.17 at theta = 0.076), in a region corresponding to human chromosome 2q35. These results suggest the presence of a developmental regulatory gene important in ocular embryogenesis, with potential implications for other disorders of ocular vascularization.
Collie eye anomaly in the rough collie in Sweden: genetic transmission and influence on offspring vitality. J. Small Anim. Pract. 2000 Jun;41(6):254-8. Comment in: J. Small Anim. Pract. 2001 Apr;42(4):204. Wallin-Hakanson B, Wallin-Hakanson N, HedhammarA.ReferralAnimalHospitalBagarmossen, Sweden.
Between 1989 and 1997, 8204 rough collies were examined for collie eye anomaly (CEA) at up to 10 weeks of age. All dogs were positively identified and the results were registered under the Swedish Kennel Club genetic health programme. A significant decrease in litter size occurred if one of two affected parents had coloboma (3.8 pups) compared with litters from two chorioretinal dysplasia- (CRD-) affected collies (5.2 pups) or litters by two normal collies (5.0 pups), indicating an influence of the coloboma genotype on offspring vitality. The prevalence of CRD in pups from normal x normal matings and CRD x CRD matings was significantly different from that expected under simple autosomal recessive inheritance (43 per cent versus 25 per cent and 85 per cent versus 100 per cent). The results are compatible with polygenic inheritance but not with simple autosomal recessive inheritance. CRD prevalence in offspring of CRD x coloboma matings was significantly lower than in pups of CRD x CRD matings, reflecting effects of the coloboma genotype on vitality. These results have important implications for breeding programmes and the genetic control of CEA.
Influence of selective breeding on the prevalence of chorioretinal dysplasia and coloboma in the rough collie in Sweden. J. Small Anim. Pract. 2000 Feb;41(2):56-9. Comment in: J Small Anim Pract. 2001 Apr;42(4)204. Wallin-Hakanson B, Wallin-Hakanson N, Hedhammar A. Bagarmossen Referral Animal Hospital, Sweden.
A total of 8204 rough collies, representing 76 per cent of all collies registered by the Swedish Kennel Club between 1989 and 1997, were examined before 10 weeks of age for collie eye anomaly (CEA). All dogs were permanently identified and examination results were registered and computerised. The policy of breeders during the study period was to select against coloboma in breeding stock, but to allow breeding of chorioretinal dysplasia (CRD) affected animals. The prevalence of CRD increased significantly from 54.2 per cent to 68.1 per cent (P < 0.001) from 1989 to 1997, while the prevalence of coloboma did not (8.3 per cent to 8.5 per cent, P = 0.4). These results are not compatible with a simple, recessive, autosomal inheritance for the entire CEA complex
NOTE: I am sure they are my highlights. I usually highlight bits in articles that I keep that interest or are important to me. Cheers Mim
--- In ozeyescheme@..., Barbara B <bosmans@...> wrote: > > Hi Jacqui, > This is scarey. I thought it was commonly accepted now that coloboma is > NOT part of CEA. I believe DNA tested clear for CEA dogs can still have > a coloboma. What is the understanding of other people please? > Barbara B > > >In relation to CEA > > > >CEA is an eye disease which presents in various forms, the most > >serious of which is coloboma, an absence or defect of parts of some > >eye tissue affecting vision which may lead to blindness. The > >veterinary ophthalmologists recommend that Border Collies with > >colobomas are not used for breeding. Only a small % of affecteds > >have the coloboma form of CEA. The various forms of CEA all have the > >one common causative gene. The incidence of CEA affecteds is > >approximately 3.3%, with carriers approximately 36%. The program > >allows the use of carriers and affecteds for breeding within a 15- > >year time frame for elimination of the CEA genes from the breeding > >pool. > > >
Hi Jacqui,
This is scarey. I thought it was commonly accepted now that coloboma is
NOT part of CEA. I believe DNA tested clear for CEA dogs can still have
a coloboma. What is the understanding of other people please?
Barbara B
>In relation to CEA
>
>CEA is an eye disease which presents in various forms, the most
>serious of which is coloboma, an absence or defect of parts of some
>eye tissue affecting vision which may lead to blindness. The
>veterinary ophthalmologists recommend that Border Collies with
>colobomas are not used for breeding. Only a small % of affecteds
>have the coloboma form of CEA. The various forms of CEA all have the
>one common causative gene. The incidence of CEA affecteds is
>approximately 3.3%, with carriers approximately 36%. The program
>allows the use of carriers and affecteds for breeding within a 15-
>year time frame for elimination of the CEA genes from the breeding
>pool.
>
Thank you for posting that, I thought the National Border Collie Council had been advised by the ANKC health Sub Comm. that this particular proposal/ draft was now being held in abeyance.
Since then the NSW BC Club has put forward a draft survey to all member clubs. !!!
I saw this come up on another list and thought I would post it here as well for info. Jacq
Proposal ANKC has agreed to survey all Border Collie owners relating to the diseases Neuronal Ceroid Lipofuscinosis (NCL), Trapped Neutrophil Syndrome (TNS) and Collie Eye Anomaly (CEA) and introduction of Litter Registration Limitations directed at reduction of their incidence in the breed.
The National Border Collie Council and the ANKC Canine Health Committee recommend the following program directed at progressive disease prevention and eventual eradication of the disease-causing genes:
In relation to the disease NCL
1. The disease NCL be designated as a problem in the breed, requiring that all breeding stock have genetic status for the disease determined.
2. Litter Registration Limitations should apply, requiring that for the litter to be eligible for registration evidence must be presented to show:
(a) as from July 1, 2008, at least one parent must have clear genetic status for the disease
(b) as from July 1, 2013, both parents must have clear genetic status for the disease
Litter Registration Limitations A majority of registered owners within the breed and responding to this survey must be in favour before approval is given by the ANKC. Each of the above six items will be considered separately.
If litter registration limitations are approved for any one, two or three of these diseases, breeders of litters whelped on or after July 1, 2008, will be required to comply as a prerequisite to registration of any Border Collie litter.
Rationale The ANKC Code of Ethics requires breeders to breed only for improvement of the breed, and requires that members will take responsible action to reduce the incidence of hereditary diseases within their breeds. The additional implications of designating these diseases under the Code of Practice for Hereditary Diseases are directed at reducing the incidence of the diseases and to ensure that: -
* the genetic status of all breeding stock is determined for the specific diseases
breeders are fully informed in relation to the diseases.
Litter registration limitations are to ensure that breeders comply.
The mode of inheritance of each of the three diseases is autosomal recessive. For each of the three diseases there is a genetic test that allows determination of the genetic status of any Border Collie as clear, carrier or affected. This provides the basis for breeding strategies directed at disease prevention and eventual elimination of the causative gene.
The basic principles of the program for each disease are : -
Stage 1: Prevention of production of affected offspring by having at least one parent with clear genetic status for each disease, i.e.
one parent clear for all three diseases, or
one parent clear for one disease and the other parent clear for the other two.
Stage 2: Elimination of the disease-causing genes from the breeding pool by having both parents with clear disease status. This is directed at avoiding further risk of disease and removing the need for further testing.
In relation to NCL
NCL is an extremely distressing disorder characterised by blindness, mental dullness, and abnormal behaviour due to abnormal storage of ceroid bodies in nervous tissue causing atrophy of the brain. Animal welfare considerations rule out the use of NCL affected animals as breeding stock (less than 1 %). The incidence of NCL carriers is approximately 8%, and, while in the interest of eliminating the disease, many breeders have elected not breed from carriers, a time frame of 5 years is provided for breeders to include carriers in their breeding programs and to select against carriers in the next generation of breeding stock.
In relation to TNS
TNS is a seriously debilitating and eventually lethal disease. Animal welfare considerations rule out the use of TNS affected animals as breeding stock (approximately 2%). The incidence of TNS carriers is approximately 22%, and while many breeders will not breed from carriers in the interest of eliminating the disease, a time frame of 10 years is provided for breeders to include carriers in their breeding programs and to select against carriers in the next generation of breeding stock.
In relation to CEA
CEA is an eye disease which presents in various forms, the most serious of which is coloboma, an absence or defect of parts of some eye tissue affecting vision which may lead to blindness. The veterinary ophthalmologists recommend that Border Collies with colobomas are not used for breeding. Only a small % of affecteds have the coloboma form of CEA. The various forms of CEA all have the one common causative gene. The incidence of CEA affecteds is approximately 3.3%, with carriers approximately 36%. The program allows the use of carriers and affecteds for breeding within a 15- year time frame for elimination of the CEA genes from the breeding pool.
Priorities
The key aspect of the program is to prevent further incidence of these diseases by requiring that at least one parent is genetically clear for each disease for the specified time frame, after which the disease-causing genes are to be eliminated from the breeding stock. The time frame allowed to reach the point of both parents to be clear of the disease varies according to the seriousness of the disease and the current incidence. Due to the lethal nature of NCL and TNS, top priority must be given to elimination of these disease genes. The time frames are designed to allow time for breeders to breed from the great majority of current breeding stock and to select against carriers while still selecting for desirable breed characteristics.
The program proposed should have little effect on the breed's gene pool.
The Genetic Tests
The following procedure will apply to DNA tests for NCL and/or TNS and/or CEA
positive identification is required, i.e. the dog to be tested must be identified by microchip or permanent tattoo number, and that number must be scanned or sighted by an approved, independent collection officer at the time of collecting a DNA sample
the DNA sample may be taken at any age
the appropriate form will be completed by the collection officer and the identification number included on the form at the time
the DNA sample and form are forwarded to the testing laboratory for disease testing
results are provided direct to the owner by the testing laboratory.
The following will apply for disease clearance by parentage for NCL and/or TNS and/or CEA as applicable:
where both parents have clear genetic status for the disease(s) and a DNA profile, their offspring may be cleared for the relevant disease(s) by DNA profiling, i.e. the offspring must be DNA profiled and parentage proven
positive identification is required, i.e. the dog to be DNA profiled must be identified by microchip or permanent tattoo number, and that number must be scanned or sighted by an independent collection officer at the time of collecting a DNA sample and the number included on the appropriate form
the DNA sample and form are forwarded to the testing laboratory for DNA profiling
results are provided direct to the owner by the testing laboratory.
Note: Significant cost savings are available through disease clearance by parentage as the one parentage test may be used to clear for any or all diseases, and profiling is at a lower cost than any one disease test. The disease tests can be a one-generation event. Note also that the testing required applies only to present and future breeding stock.
Breeding Plans
Breeding plans from the above discussion are given in Table 1 below.
A. Years 1 to 5
The possible combinations of the three diseases for breeding stock for years 1 to 5 are put into Categories 1 to 12, with approximate percentages in the breeding stock shown for your information. Then, to consider the selection of suitable matings for a particular bitch, determine her category according to her genetic status from genetic test results. Suitable partners are shown in the right hand columns. Based solely on limiting the proliferation of the disease genes, Category 1 is preferred in each case, however there may be a situation where other factors come into play, such as special qualities that are highly desirable in the mate to be selected. The same principles apply in which categories of bitches may be mated to a male in a particular category. The over-riding factor is that to be eligible for litter registration, at least one of the parents must be clear for each disease.
Years 6 to 10
All breeding stock to be NCL clear, which means all parents must be in Categories 1 to 6. The column on the right of Table 1 no longer applies, i.e. 3rd. Preference for Partner.
Years 11 to 15
All breeding stock to be NCL clear and TNS clear, which means all parents must be in Categories 1 to 3. The 3rd. Preference for Partner no longer applies.
Examples
The following examples may help to clarify the situation:
A brood bitch is NCL carrier, TNS clear, CEA clear. She is in Category 7.
(a) It is preferable to mate her with a Category 1 male (clear for the 3 diseases) so that all offspring would be TNS clear and CEA clear, with an expected ratio of 50% NCL carriers and 50% NCL clears, allowing a range of offspring for selection against the NCL gene over a 5-year time frame. Promising offspring could be profiled and parentage tested to prove clear status for TNS and CEA, requiring only a NCL test to complete the disease status for selection purposes.
(b) If the bitch is mated to a Category 2 male, all offspring would be TNS clear, with the expected ratio of
25% NCL clear, CEA clear
25% NCL carrier, CEA clear
25% NCL clear, CEA carrier
25% NCL carrier, CEA carrier,
reducing the opportunity for selecting those clear for all three diseases in one generation or requiring further generations to do so.
A stud dog is NCL clear, TNS clear, CEA carrier. He is in Category 2.
(a) If he is mated to a bitch in Category 1, the offspring would all be NCL clear, TNS clear, with the expected ratio of 50% of those CEA clear and 50% CEA carrier. Again, for promising offspring, parentage testing could be used to clear for NCL and TNS, with a disease test only required for CEA.
(b) He could possibly be mated to a Category 10 bitch, but promising offspring would need disease tests for each of the three diseases for genetic status, and probably a number of generations of testing to remove the disease genes.
A reminder to all WA canine members that the ACES seminar with Dr Bruce Robertson is being held tomorrow night - Wed 19th September, 7.30pm in the members lounge of the Canine Association.
Offline 
Send Email
