The Story of Miles: A Tragedy with a Happy Ending ~ by Beth Coviello-Davis, Belco Boxers

The conversation started innocently enough – discussing the upcoming dog show with a friend who was traveling here from another state. My friend casually mentioned that she’d have an “extra passenger” for the ride home and me, being nosey, asked who that could be.

 It seems there was a puppy in a bad situation down here in southern Massachusetts whose breeder put out a plea for help on the SBL. I admit I don’t really pay attention to a lot of the “stuff” on there, so I missed the original post, but my friend from NY did not. She offered to bring the puppy part of the way home from the show. His breeder would meet her on the NY/PA border. I offered to pick the little guy up on Saturday morning and transport him the 2 ½ hours to the dog show on Sunday. Next step put the breeder in touch with me…puppy rescue coming up!!

I received an urgent email the next morning, Wednesday, from the concerned breeder:  could I take the puppy ASAP??  She was worried he’d be dumped at a shelter, in a rescue or even on the side of the road!! Whoa!! This situation has now gone from bad to desperate!!  What happened that made it impossible for the new owner to keep the puppy a few more days???  The outrageous answer: the puppy, 15 weeks old, is not housebroken yet…L

I immediately agree to take him. The owner is given my work number (this is closer to his home) and he calls before I get there. Luckily my boss is also a Boxer breeder and she happily gives directions to the owner. It’s about an hour and a half drive to the grooming shop from the Cape Cod town where the puppy lives.

The puppy owner arrives at the shop. We are four Boxer breeders working there, all show people, all with twenty years experience in the breed, all rescuers of many boxers in bad situations. This man walked in with an emaciated, lame, but happy puppy. He looked me in the eye and told me the pup was playing with a dog that morning and hurt his leg. He told me the puppy’s name was Rocky. He handed me a bag of food (crappy food), his vet records and a slip lead with a puppy attached. I couldn’t get him out of there fast enough.  We all had tears in our eyes. Rocky hobbled happily into the grooming shop. 

After a quick evaluation we all agreed – the injury was NOT new, Rocky was in serious condition and he needed veterinary attention immediately. I called his breeder and told her he was going. The leg was hot, swollen and atrophied and Rocky was a walking skeleton. Hip bones, spine, ribs all showing but tail wagging – a true Boxer.

 My vet is a saint and said, “Bring him right down.” Rocky had a very high fever, was dehydrated and had a serious infection of his joint…bad stuff. It hit me hard, I lost my beautiful BISS girl to the same thing. I was scared to death for this puppy I barely knew. Some digging on his breeder’s part revealed the owner had brought him to the vet five days earlier, lame, and had declined treatment!! What?? How could this happen???

Rocky stayed with my vet until 7:00 that night, when I picked him up he was hydrated, happy and bouncing! A new dog. His joint had been flushed and injected with antibiotics, he’d had fluids and he’d had pain pills. His prognosis was guarded but good, very important to continue the antibiotics and a promise to return in the morning if he wasn’t remarkably better.

 I brought him home to my zoo, 8 dogs of many shapes and sizes, horses, chickens, a teenage daughter and an extremely loud husband. Rocky walked in, peed on my floor and introduced himself to all, just your average, happy Boxer puppy!! He ate a HUGE dinner and fell asleep in his crate.

Through this all, I stayed in touch with his breeder. She was very concerned about the puppy, his vet bill and the fact that his owner had lied. I seriously contemplated filing charges against the man.

 Rocky, now called Miles, improved by the hour. He never missed a meal or a treat. He played with all my dogs and ran around the grooming shop and greeted customers. We told his story to all! His friendliness and cheerful personality endeared him to everyone. He had two collar changes as he gained weight, his bones disappeared, and he barely limped anymore. He started to play with toys and bark!! This “not housebroken” puppy had one accident in my house.

I think Miles’ story needs to be told, because there are lessons to be learned from his sad experience. In the end, Miles had a soft landing and a place to go, thank God!! But how did such a nice puppy end up five states away from his breeder with such an uncaring owner?? 

Please breeders, there are Boxer people everywhere. Give your puppies a cushion, contact the local Boxer club and let them know one of yours is coming their way. Give the new owners the contacts. People will say what you want to hear over the phone, they’ll write what you want to see online. Boxer people help their own, take advantage of that!! Thank goodness for the SBL and Miles’ breeder’s plea for help, but how many more Miles’s are there?? How many slip through the cracks and wind up dead or in shelters? Please, please, breeders, take advantage of us, your fellow breeders, and contact us so puppies like Miles have a safe place to land and their new owners have people to contact in case of need.  Remember, this could have happened to any of us.  Miles is a well-bred puppy with a champion dam and a major pointed sire. Miles’ breeder did right by the puppy after he got into trouble, but the trouble might have been avoided in the first place if Miles’ new home had been checked out beforehand.

 We will all wonder about Miles until he completes his journey back to his breeder. The four of us were just one step, one leg on the journey of an incredibly tough and resilient puppy.  A journey that could have ended very differently…

Editor’s note:  Miles’ story is to be continued, because unfortunately, his breeder was in an auto accident on her way to pick Miles up. She was not injured, but her van was not drivable. We’ll keep you posted, but  in the meantime please keep both Miles and his breeder in your thoughts and prayers.

Boxer JKD from My Side ~ Dr Bruce M Cattanach, Steynmere Boxers, UK

Since the recent PDE TV programme (27th February), comments on the content have been presented from all sides in the UK dog press and online – all except mine that is – and as one of the participants in the Boxer Juvenile Kidney Disease section of the film, and as I have since been the subject of some outrageous charges, I think it appropriate that I give “my side” of Boxer JKD.

Unfortunately, because the shocking developments at Crufts have dominated the news reported by the UK dog press, I can't give my response in the same media this week and maybe not for several weeks, so here I offer my story as it actually happened: 

I have for years monitored cases of kidney failure in UK Boxers and have seen no indication of it being inherited.  Therefore, when the subject was raised at a Breed Council Health Committee meeting a few years ago, I expressed little interest, although another member of the committee was eager to investigate.  

However, in late September 2010, I received a call from a vet seeking help for a client, Ms Sharon McCurdy, who had a number of cases of JKD and had failed to get any help from her previous vet. I was initially rather skeptical and took the news rather lightly, but a subsequent letter threatening me with legal action, received after I responded to Ms McCurdy’s vet but before I had any idea what was going on, did get my attention.

Examination of Sharon McCurdy's and further cases that quickly came to light revealed an extraordinary picture of litters with one or more kidney deaths occurring with very close inbreeding (father x daughter, half-brother x half-sister, g’father x g'daughter, etc, focusing on one dog).  But as more cases were found, some revealed close inbreeding on dogs that were further back in the first pedigrees.  There was therefore clear evidence of an inheritance that nobody could miss.  The close inbreeding suggested a recessive gene inheritance.  But there were also a few cases that derived from total outcrosses.  This meant either that they had a different causal basis (poisons, etc) or that the gene responsible was more widely spread than yet recognized.

Professor Bell, a specialist in Internal Medicine at Glasgow University Veterinary School, agreed to help devise a questionnaire on which the vets could enter their diagnostic evidence.  Retrospectively this was achieved for almost all cases. The cause of these deaths can therefore be ascribed to a juvenile kidney disease (JKD).  One of these familial cases died in Sweden and went to a full post mortem to get the more specific diagnosis of familial renal dysplasia. 

I reported the findings in Boxer Breed Notes as the cases emerged and, on request, subsequently (February 2011) exhibited the pedigrees to the Breed Council Executive and a new Health Committee.  I presented only my general conclusions and left interpretation to those present to decide for themselves. There were no questions on the pedigrees as I recall, only questions on the diagnoses.  Because of the perceived magnitude of the problem, I offered only one recommendation for breeders – “to try and avoid inbreeding.”  Judging from a subsequent report in the dog press by the new Health Committee, everything appeared to be accepted, including my aim to initiate a study to find the responsible gene.

I was lucky enough to find an interested molecular geneticist, Michel Georges from Belgium, who was using a new gene scanning method that seemed appropriate for our situation.  Week after week thereafter, I therefore put requests in the dog press for blood samples.  I needed samples from both affected cases and parents, but the response for each was very poor.  People seemed frightened.  Two owners actually told me that the breeder had told them not to cooperate.  However, I managed with great difficulty to get 5 samples from affected cases and 6 from parents.  All offers of samples were accepted and in fact I am still looking for more.  I also needed unrelated controls and managed to get enough contributions from concerned breeders to be able to select ones I hoped would be suitable for the gene screen. The screen started but it was not successful. Other investigations elsewhere in the world with other Boxers have likewise failed.

 Coming now to the film, when Jemima Harrison informed me that she had been besieged by Boxer breeders to take up the JKD problem and asked me if I would contribute and explain the genetics, I of course agreed.  I could not possibly stand back and let other brave souls fight alone.  I therefore told her the story much as above, but eventually had to produce the evidence – the pedigrees – and I know these were then carefully analyzed by two other geneticists.  The film makers also sought out other factual information on events which made my own efforts on the genetics seem puny. Believe me, there is so much more information, but only a small part was given in the 10 minute slot in the 1 hour programme, and I know that every word was scrutinized by a team of lawyers.

I do want to make it clear that what I actually said can be literally “seen” on the film. The remainder came from the narrator, not me.  It was selective, excluding much, but still accurate in content.  I was saddened that my comment on the exceptional past record of UK Boxer breeders on health matters was not given.  And I was annoyed that the narrator made it seem that the evidence that JKD was inherited was not definitive just because the gene had not been found (a lawyer issue, I'm told).  But let's be clear.  One needs breeding evidence before one searches for a gene, not the other way around. The evidence that JKD is inherited is absolutely firm, and two other geneticists agree.

Where do we go from here?  Further research upon JKD is needed but I hope it can be seen that this would be impossible at present.  Instead we are left with the one option of separately trying again to find the gene.  Here, I thought we might still get stuck because what research group would be willing to invest much time and a huge funding to look for a gene when there is not total positive breeder support.  

However, I was delighted to receive a message after the film from Swedish canine geneticist, Ake Hedhammar, who works with American/Swedish molecular genetics guru, Kerstin Lindblad-Toh, on JKD in Continental and American Boxers.  He suggested we collaborate with him in his effort to find the gene for JKD in Boxers internationally. This could be the way to go, but would we get full support from owners of cases and parents a second time around?  I actually had 5 possible JKD cases reported in the three days following PDE2 with blood samples promised, which is quite a change. Maybe the film has actually rescued the breed.

Postscript:  I have just had another offer of help to find the gene, this time from Professor Harvey of University College London.  His interests are medical, but he has taken an interest in disease genes in dogs that may have relevance for human disease. This route seems a very promising one, as collaboration with human researchers has worked very well for me with Boxer Cardiomyopathy as I hope will soon be seen.  So, if the Boxer breed in the UK wants to get itself together, face the problem, and do something, there could be a way forward.  And please note, it to be expected that any further research will require blood samples from additional affected cases and also from their parents, so all of you out there, please help.

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NEWS FLASH!!!   Dr Kerstin Lindblad-Toh of the Broad Institute at MIT, who has been collecting DNA samples for JKD in both the US and Europe for some time, has now also  expressed an interest in the UK investigations and collaborating in an extended search for the gene responsible for this fatal Boxer kidney disease!

How Many VPCs Are Too Many VPCs?

In the last BU Blog, I related a conversation I’d had with my cardiologist in which we discussed how frustrating it was for Boxer breeders to have one board certified veterinary cardiologist clear a dog of SAS with a flow rate of 2.21 m/s…and another equally qualified cardiologist grade the same dog with exactly the same flow rate as “equivocal.”

Alas – the upshot of that conversation was that although cardiologists all agree about grading very low flow rates (e.g. 1.2 m/s) and very high flow rates (e.g. 3.0 m/s), none of them can say for sure what the ranges in the middle mean in terms of SAS, if the dog doesn’t have any other sign of the disease, such as a fibrous ridge in the aorta or a turbulent blood flow.  

So we concluded the blog by saying that diagnosing SAS seems to be another area in which there’s a lack of black and white guidelines on Boxer heart disease; and another reason for breeders to try to get comfortable with using our own best judgment along with the opinions of the professionals when making decisions about our own breeding programs.

More recently, Boxer breeders have been expressing their frustration at the lack of guidelines to help us navigate through an even murkier gray area of Boxer heart disease – ARVC and the VPCs (Ventricular Premature Contractions) that often indicate the presence of cardiomyopathy in an individual boxer. Those breeders are saying, some of them in so many words, that since the ABC website provides us with guidelines on a range of flow rates that clear our dogs of SAS, why doesn’t the ABC publish guidelines that tell us how many VPCs it’s acceptable for our dogs to have at different ages?

Well for one thing, the ABC is not a medical research institution and the SAS flow-rate guidelines that appear on the ABC website represent the opinion of only one cardiologist with whom the leaders of the ABC Health & Research Committee happen to agree. What’s more, there’s a difference of opinion among cardiologists on those “ABC guidelines,” because they do not conform to the standards set by the ACVIM (American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine) for American board-certified veterinary cardiologists.

But back to ARVC and VPCs:

At the present time, the only absolutely surefire way a cardiologist can tell whether a non-symptomatic dog has BCM/ARVC is by doing a necropsy. And unfortunately, at that point the dog is dead and the question is academic, except perhaps for the owners of the dog’s offspring.

Of course, a reliable DNA test would also tell us whether a dog had the mutant gene(s) that causes ARVC and was therefore likely to develop the disease and reproduce it. But the ARVC-1 test has not lived up to its initial promise, and so we’re back to where we were before Dr Meurs made her announcement in April 2009 – holtering our breeding stock regularly and trying to figure out how many VPCs are too many VPCs. And the sad fact is that we don’t have any better an understanding of exactly what that number is now than when the late Wendy Wallner, DVM, proposed a set of very broad guidelines for Boxer Cardiomyopathy in an article on Boxer heart disease she wrote for the April 1999 issue of The Boxer Underground.

As chair of the ABC Boxer Health & Research Committee and a member of the board of the American Boxer Charitable Foundation (ABCF), Wendy devoted her tragically brief life to the cause of Boxer health and led the fight against what we then knew as Boxer Cardiomyopathy (BCM).  A read of the entire article at http://www.boxerunderground.com/apr_bu_99/dr.htm will give newcomers to the breed a good idea of what we were up against in 1995 when the ABCF was founded and the ABC membership voted in a survey to make BCM research a priority for our new foundation. In the meantime, based on experience and observation, I firmly believe the fact that breeders have been following the guidelines in the excerpt printed below has led to our seeing fewer Boxers suddenly “just drop dead” at 3, 4, and 5 years of age. RIP Wendy – your work continues.

“A few years ago, upon my appointment to the ABC's Health and Research Committee, I came up with a protocol for heart testing for boxers. These guidelines were published in the ABC News Bulletin in December of 1996. The recommendations were as follows:

“Minimum Heart Screening for boxers involved in breeding programs and/or performance events:
Age 1 year: auscultation by a board certified veterinary cardiologist (If arrhythmia detected - Holter exam; if murmur detected - Echocardiogram) 
Rationale: One year is the accepted time for clearance of sub-aortic stenosis. This auscultation screening could be performed at the national specialty and at individual breed club's specialty shows for a nominal fee. Any dogs with murmurs would be referred to a cardiologist in their area for further workup.

“Age 2 years: Holter monitor, auscultation (Echo if murmur detected)
Rationale: The 2-year check would occur before the animal was used for breeding (at least extensively) and would be useful in detecting dogs with early arrhythmias before they are bred. In some dogs, arrhythmias have been detected as early as 12 weeks of age.

“Age 5 years: Holter monitor, auscultation (Echo if murmur detected)
Rationale: By 5 years, many animals would show signs of arrhythmia if they were going to develop CM, since the arrhythmia often precedes clinical disease by several years.

“The main purpose of these screens was to develop a database which could be analyzed and related to causes of death in dogs so that some sort of standardized system of interpreting the holter results could be determined. Not only would it help to identify and eliminate dogs with SAS from breeding programs, it would also help identify and eliminate those asymptomatic boxers with very large numbers of VPCs. It was never intended to eliminate any and all dogs with VPCs from breeding programs. There simply is not enough information available to use the results in this manner. If large numbers of boxers are not holtered and followed over time, there never will be a database large enough to provide meaningful holter results. If this is the case, we are at the mercy of the only other test that will identify boxer CM - a genetic marker for the disease. Unfortunately, this type of test can take decades to establish. Since we know that the hallmark of boxer CM is arrhythmia and that the Holter is the best tool to detect arrhythmia, it is the only method we currently have to try to evaluate our breeding stock before they have produced offspring. While there currently are no concrete numbers to identify normal vs. abnormal dogs, the Holter is still extremely important in identifying those grossly abnormal dogs with hundreds or thousands of VPCs who are asymptomatic and would otherwise be unknowingly reproduced. Until many Holtered dogs have been followed into old age and their medical histories analyzed and causes of death determined, we will not know the true significance of lower numbers of VPCs. We can, however, use all information obtained through Holter testing responsibly by slanting a breeding program toward those boxers that seem less affected.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NEWS FLASH!!!  The Drawbridge Inn in Ft Mitchell, KY – the site of the 2012 ABC National Specialty – was sold this morning (March 6) to the mortgage holder, who intends to keep the property open as a hotel and start making major improvements. Kudos to ABC President Salli Moore-Kottas, who stayed on top of this situation as it developed and was prepared to proceed with a "Plan B" if the sale had not ended favorably.  Now...on with the show!!! 

SAS: A CONVERSATION WITH A CARDIOLOGIST

There’s been a lot of controversy and confusion about SAS (sub-aortic stenosis) in the Boxer community lately, due to the fact that different cardiologists assign different ratings – Clear, Equivocal, Affected – to the same aortic velocity (the speed of blood flow across the aortic valve), depending on whether or not they agree with Dr Kate Meurs that Boxers are “different” from other breeds and therefore can be graded differently – less stringently – than other breeds.

In a summary of the 2003 ABC Health Seminar in the old Boxer Underground zine (http://www.boxerunderground.com/bu2000/abc2003/health_seminars.htm), we reported that on the basis of a study she did in 2002, Dr Meurs concluded that Boxers have narrower aortas than other dog breeds and that therefore a higher aortic velocity – up to 2.5 m/s – can be acceptable in the absence of any other sign of SAS, such as a fibrous ridge or turbulent blood flow. So 2.2 m/s can be one cardiologist’s Clear…and another’s Equivocal. That being the case, it’s only natural for the owner of a Boxer that was rated Equivocal with a 2.2 to want a redo with a cardiologist who has a more liberal interpretation of Clear.  

My own experience was a bit different. My dog was echoed at 14 mos at the 2011 ABC with an aortic velocity (flow rate) of 2.21 m/s, and was rated Clear by the cardiologist who did the heart clinic there. He told me that his “personal cutoff” between Clear and Equivocal was 2.25 m/s.  However, because the cardiologist who has seen my dogs for years grades murmurs and flow rates according to the standards set forth by the ACVIM (American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine), whose guideline for Equivocal is a flow rate of 1.9 to 2.4 m/s, even in the absence of any other sign of SAS, that 2.21 m/s did NOT make me a happy camper, regardless of the fact that the cardiologist wrote “Clear” on the OFA report.  My Boxer’s breeder, whose cardiologist grades pretty much as mine does, was worried, too.  So we decided to have the dog tested again at closer to two years of age.

As luck would have it, my cardiologist offered a low-cost echo clinic at a show we attended recently, shortly before my dog’s second birthday. Since I had once had another of my Boxers test with a higher flow rate every time she was echoed until at 2 ½ years old she was ultimately diagnosed with a turbulent flow of 2.45 m/s and mild SAS, I’m not exaggerating when I say my heart was in my mouth as we entered the motor home in which the echo clinic was held. So you can imagine my relief – nay, elation – when my boxer echoed with only a low grade murmur and a flow rate of 1.7 m/s!

Naturally, I asked Dr “C” (“Dr Cardiologist” J) what might have caused the earlier higher flow rate. He explained, as Dr Meurs has, that excitement and stress can have a big impact on flow rate in a young dog.  My dog had never seemed particularly excitable, but I can certainly see where being hooked up to a strange machine in unfamiliar surroundings might have been pretty stressful for any young dog on his/her first trip away from home. 

After the exam, as Dr C was filling out the paperwork needed to register my dog with the OFA, I took advantage of having him all to myself for a few moments to “interview” him on the subject of SAS in Boxers:

First, knowing that he had a great deal of admiration for Dr Meurs, I asked him why he chose to grade Boxers on the basis of the ACVIM guidelines, rather than the guidelines she had developed for Boxers based on her study. He replied that the ACVIM guidelines were the result of a consensus of a group of different cardiologists, not just the opinion of one person.

Next I asked what the difference was between, say, a flow rate of 1.7 m/s and 1.9. His response was that while everyone agreed that a 1.2 m/s flow rate was good and everyone agreed that a flow rate of 3.0 m/s was not, no one could tell you for sure the meaning of the middle range of velocities, even in the absence of any other sign of SAS. “No one,” he repeated, “we just don’t know.”

Next, I asked Dr C about SAS vis a vis the Boxer breed. His answer surprised me:  he said, “Virginia, you know I see a lot of Boxers in my practice and at these clinics; and I rarely see a Boxer with a flow rate above 2.0 m/s. Based on my experience with your breed, I believe there are plenty of Boxers with a lower aortic velocity, without your having to use the dogs with a higher velocity to avoid restricting your gene pool. No other breed of dog has high flow rates like that, including mixed breeds.  No other breed.”  

So after bending my cardiologist’s ear for nearly half an hour, what did I take away from our conversation? Just this: With 52 ABC members living within the borders of the state, Florida is second only to California (71 ABC members) in terms of ABC membership. There are also four active ABC member clubs in Florida. There are a lot of Boxers in Florida and my cardiologist does see a lot of those dogs. I’m still not sure what I believe about whether Boxers are “different” from all other breeds because they have narrower aortas, but I do believe my cardiologist when he tells me that he rarely sees a Boxer with a flow rate above 2.0 m/s. And I do believe the cardiologists (all of them?) who believe that the lower the flow rate, the better. So in my own breeding program, I’m going to strive to keep the flow rates of my Boxers below 2.0 m/s.

Unfortunately, this seems to be another example of the lack of black and white information about Boxer heart disease; and another reason for us to try to get comfortable with using our own best judgment along with the opinions of the professionals when making decisions about our own breeding programs.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Next up on the BU Blog:  “How Many VPCs Are Too Many VPCs?”  Please tune in next week.

VZ

Boxer Herding Success Story

Once Upon A Time

The idea of petitioning the AKC to allow Boxers to compete in AKC herding trials first came up at the ABC Regional board meeting in 2009. This initiative was spearheaded by a group of Boxer fanciers who were already participating in herding events sponsored by the American Herding Breed Association and the Canadian Kennel Club, but because no one on the board (and few Boxer people) knew much about this increasingly popular performance event, the issue was tabled.

Boxer people are quick learners, though, and by the time the May 2010 ABC board meeting rolled around, the Boxer herding proponents had provided the board with a well-documented and illustrated draft petition based on the successful application submitted to the AKC by the parent club of another ‘non-traditional’ herding breed, the Kerry Blue Terrier; and they had also generated a tremendous amount of interest among Boxer fanciers in this ‘new’ performance event in which Boxers could further demonstrate their natural working ability and all-around versatility. At that meeting, the ABC Board of Directors listened to the arguments pro and con, and voted 10 to 1 to submit a petition to the AKC.

The story might have ended there with an application to the AKC, except for the objections of several board members at the 2010 Regional board meeting to the draft petition, which they felt did not accurately reflect the wishes and feelings of the ABC membership. So the board directed the ABC president to appoint an ABC Herding Committee consisting of 3 board members to put an ‘ABC stamp’ on the petition and to survey ABC members as to whether or not they were in favor of Boxers being allowed to participate officially in AKC Herding Events.

The Happy Ending

Working against a deadline, the ABC Herding Committee, consisting of Debbie Marshall, Korinne Vanderpool and Tina Truesdale, did a masterful job of building upon the original draft to create a petition that read like a NYT non-fiction bestseller (at least to Boxer fanciers :-) and illustrated both the Boxer’s historical role as a herding and cattle drover’s dog, and its present-day ability and success in AHBA and CKC Herding Trials and Instinct Tests (often beating traditional herding breeds at their own game!). More importantly, the survey designed by the committee and mailed to the entire ABC membership received an unusually large response, which demonstrated the overwhelming majority support of ABC members for the sport of AKC Boxer Herding.

The official ABC version of the petition, which included a fabulous video created by Reegan Ray and Diane Stevens of the San Fernando Valley Boxer Club, came up for a vote again at the May 2011 ABC board meeting, and despite continued opposition from a few board members, passed by a wide margin. The AKC approved the petition in November, and the last hurdle was passed early in December when the Boxer Club of San Fernando Valley was licensed by the AKC to conduct AKC Herding Trials.

Credit Where Credit Is Due

Kudos to Reegan Ray and Diane Stevens of the San Fernando Valley BC, who were THE major force behind the AKC Boxer Herding Movement; to the members of the ABC Herding Committee, who worked for countless hours to create the membership survey and finalize the ABC Boxer Herding Petition; to Pat Mullen, who created the statistical charts that illustrated the ABC membership’s huge support for Boxer participation in AKC Herding Trials; and to Judy Voran and Sandy Orr, who painstakingly converted the committee’s rewrite into the impressive and very professional PowerPoint presentation that went to the AKC’s Performance Department, complete with Reegan Ray’s and Diane Stevens’ breathtaking video of Boxers participating in various herding activities. (I am proud to say that this writer also had a part in editing the final petition.)

Also, a big round of applause for the San Fernando Valley Boxer Club (especially Dennis and Sheila Tomas – president and secretary of the SFVBC), whose members supported this initiative all the way and took on the responsibility of applying to the AKC to hold herding trials, in order to fulfill the AKC’s final requirement. And for all the ABC members and member club members who took the trouble to express their support for Boxer herding in the survey that was mailed to the entire membership. Last but not least, thanks to those members of the ABC BOD who voted in accord with the wishes of the majority of the ABC membership.

And the Moral of the Story Is…

As we noted in a previous series about the controversial issue of the location of the ABC National (http://boxerunderground.blogspot.com/2011/11/move-to-middle-or-rove-last-word.html), there are several different ‘philosophical viewpoints’ within the American Boxer Club about which direction the club should take on issues like this, and how much say the membership should have in making important decisions.    If you are an ABC member or ABC member-club member who has strong convictions about the present-day problems that confront the breed and the club and want ABC board members to represent *your* point of view, you need to become knowledgeable about the people running for a board seat. Read the ABC board meeting minutes in the ABC Bulletin (the May 2011 minutes have not been published in the Bulletin yet) and take note of how your representatives vote.  Beyond that, you need to nominate individuals who share your convictions, and most importantly, you need to VOTE! 

It really is as simple as that.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The photos below are of 'pups-in-training' bred by Reegan Ray, out of her history making herding boxer, "Pip," by Marc del Benicadell. Photo credits go to Tracy Mulrenen, Kandu's owner, and Cathy Modica.

                                                  Kandu on Ducks, by Tracy Mulrenen

                                                      Kandu, photo by Cathy Modica

                                                       Winnifred, photo by Cathy Modica

                                                        Kandu, photo by Cathy Modica

In Memory of Joan MacLaren, Braxburn Boxers, UK

The following is a tribute written by Dr Bruce Cattanach to his dear friend Joan MacLaren, a noted Boxer fancier who died on November 28 of cancer. As you read Dr Cattanach’s words, you will see that our breed has also lost a dear friend, who honored the traditions established by Frau Friederun Stockmann (see the photo at the bottom of this page), while at the same time, acknowledging and combating “modern-day” Boxer health threats like ARVC. Our deepest condolences to Joan's family and friends.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 “Death lies on her like an untimely frost
Upon the sweetest flower of all the field.”

Joan MacLaren

Joan MacLaren of the long-established Scottish Braxburn Boxer kennel died peacefully on the Saturday morning, 28^th November after a short but fiercely fought battle against lung cancer.  Only a few weeks ago she was hammering away about Boxer cardiomyopathy and the new kidney disease in the breed, while excitedly telling me about a discovery she had made about the origins of the Boxer in some writings of Frau Stockman, perhaps the most important person in the development of the breed in Germany.  But Joan’s main concerns at that moment were for her husband and family.  Such was Joan’s life, and her dedication to everything important to her.

Joan had an intense interest in animals and animal breeding from her school days.  Boxers quickly became her breed of interest, and she started showing in the early post-war period, but when she married Jimmy MacLaren of Viewpark Scottie heritage, Braxburn Boxers were surely set to make waves.  And they did.  Numerous champions and significant winners were produced, but it was really the breeding rather than showing, that attracted Joan.  Any visit to Braxburn kennels demonstrated dogs that never got near the show ring.  They commonly lacked the flashy white markings demanded for the show ring, but invariably were of such excellent type and conformation that one could never help but be impressed.  Presented free-standing as Continental practice, they showed a consistent picture of the archetypal Boxer.

And type was Joan’s watchword.   She was an ardent follower of Frau Stockman, and had absorbed all her teachings on what a Boxer was and what it should be.  Her friendship with Otto Donner, one of the main breed wardens for the German Boxer Club up to a few years ago was also a big influence.  As a consequence of this Joan had very clear views on Boxer type and was quite forth-right in expressing these views which very often were not in accord with those in the British show scene, but she always stuck to her guns.

Breeding animals invariably leads to unwanted defects at some time or another and Braxburn had its share.  It was touched by the neurological disease, progressive axonopathy, in the 80s and Joan did all she could to help the establishment and operation of a breeding controls scheme that ultimately proved totally effective.  When aortic stenosis was recognised as a breed problem, she had cardiologists from the Edinburgh vet school visit the kennels every year to test all her dogs as well as those of colleagues of like minds.  But it was an initially undefined heart condition in some of her dogs that caused her the most difficulties.  This was eventually found to be the heart disease, cardiomyopathy, that the breed is still battling today, but she never denied or tried to cover up anything.   Rather, she was immediately pressing the heart expert of the day, Professor Fisher of the Glasgow Veterinary School, to investigate the problem.    For Joan anything and everything untoward was investigated and not swept under the carpet.

Joan was one of the earliest members of the Scottish Boxer Club and thereafter served the club in various offices.  She and Jimmy were the core to the educational programmes on type and conformation that the club offered decades before current judges’ training schemes were thought of.  Joan was a leading speaker in the British Boxer Club’s judges’ conference in the 80s.  She was also the Scottish representative on the Breed Council sub-committee dealing with the KC’s drive to standardise all the breed standards, much to her total frustration.

While the Boxer was Braxburn’s breed of main interest, the MacLarens also showed a number of other breeds, these including Bostons, Corgis, Pugs, Scotties, and Whippets, and they also had some notably CC level successes with Beagles.  In more recent years bantam chickens became a serious show interest and gave the MacLarens many successes.  Breeding for type was always the key element.

The MacLaren household was unique.  A cockatiel and a free-flying parrot ruled the roost indoors, and collections of the artwork of the multi-talented Frau Stockman as well as many other beautiful models and pictures adorned the rooms, but incubators with hatching chicks could often be found in odd places.  Out of doors, masses of chickens of various varieties and geese were to be found, and in earlier times Joan kept milking goats and ponies and also rabbits, guinea pigs, and even fancy mice.  Joan was the ultimate animal lover and stock breeder and she was a fountain of knowledge on all things concerned with animal breeding and genetics. 

The Boxer breed has lost someone special with the death of Joan MacLaren.  Sympathies go to husband Jimmy, daughter Mandy and son Jimmy.  Joan will be greatly missed.

                                                                                       

DM & ARVC: A Tale of Two Tests

Because I was the secretary of both the ABC Health & Research Committee (HRC) and the American Boxer Charitable Foundation (ABCF) when Drs Joan Coates and Kate Meurs announced their gene discoveries and DNA tests in 2008 and 2009, respectively, I followed the research closely and published updates regularly as editor of the ABCF Messenger (www.abcfoundation.org).  Although I resigned from both the HRC and the ABCF Board of Trustees earlier this year, I have continued to research and write about Boxer health issues for this blog over the last six months, and have recently made an interesting observation: Even though there are still big holes in our knowledge of how DM “works” (e.g., no one knows what percentage of At Risk dogs will actually develop the disease), the DM test is being increasingly considered by North American Boxer breeders when they make breeding decisions; while the ARVC test seems to have fallen into a PR black hole. How did this situation come about? How did the DNA test that was going to enable Boxer breeders to breed away from ARVC instead become a lightning rod for controversy and disagreement among both breeders and researchers?    

In my opinion, the most important reason for the broad acceptance of the DM test is that even though we can’t predict which or what percentage of At Risk dogs will develop DM, we can be certain that a DM Clear or Carrier Boxer will never develop the disease. (Dr Coates says “highly unlikely to develop DM,” rather than “will never develop DM”; but In the 3+ years since the DM test became publicly available, there hasn’t been a single report of a DM Carrier or Clear dog that has developed DM.)  Furthermore, there have been no reports of Boxers that developed clinical symptoms of DM, without having tested genetically At Risk.** In other words, regarding the most important aspect of a DNA test – the ability to identify both the presence and the absence of the mutated gene that causes the disease – what you see seems to be what you get when it comes to the DM DNA test.

Unfortunately, the same can’t be said of the ARVC test. When the test was first offered to the attendees at the 2009 ABC, breeders and owners rushed to snap up the available test kits, and used the detailed list of breeding recommendations almost as a catechism.

As test results began to trickle in, many breeders in all corners of the globe were horrified to discover that their beautiful new litter – bred before the test was available – was full of Homozygous Positive puppies (two copies of the ARVC gene) that were going to be impossible to sell as show and breeding prospects and presented an ethical dilemma even when placed as pets. Outstanding stud dogs became pariahs overnight, and breeding arrangements that had been in place for months and even years were canceled. But no one questioned the need to adhere to those stringent breeding recommendations; after all, this was a dominant gene, which meant that even dogs with only one copy of the “bad” gene had the potential to develop ARVC, and would pass it on to an average of 50% of their offspring.

Only a few months later, there were reports of ARVC Negative dogs that had been diagnosed with ARVC by board-certified cardiologists; and a noted UK geneticist announced that the test results on the 22 DNA samples he had submitted to WSU were not consistent with the disease status of the dogs whose samples he had submitted. (A subsequent test of DNA samples from 84 UK Boxers, submitted to WSU by several leading UK cardiologists and prepared to Dr Meurs’ specifications, produced the same inconsistent results.)  In the face of growing evidence that WSU’s announcement had been premature, unquestioning belief turned to skepticism, and ultimately, to disbelief.

    

Fast forward through the next two years: In the January 13, 2010 issue of the ABCF Messenger, Dr Kerstin Lindblad-Toh wrote “…the current testing [for ARVC] is not comprehensive…but we are working to make it better.”

In the May 2010 issue of the Purina Boxer Update (Vol. 9, No. 1), Dr Meurs wrote, “…While our test is a valuable tool, it is clearly not predictive in all Boxer populations.”

In the November 22, 2010 issue of the UK “Veterinary Times,” leading UK researchers in genetics and cardiology published an informal paper in which they concluded: “From the UK results, it can be seen that cases of boxer cardiomyopathy occur in dogs without having the striatin [ARVC-1] genetic mutation. Conversely, some genotype-positive dogs lead a normal life without ever manifesting the disease. Both the UK and USA data indicate that the search for genes implicated in boxer cardiomyopathy should continue.” [Emphasis mine]

Finally, in the September 2011 issue of the ABCF Messenger, Dr Meurs was quoted as saying that she stands by her findings and believes the ARVC-1 gene she discovered is the major cause of ARVC; but because of the current controversy over the test, she is working on other aspects of canine cardiology and has discontinued her study of ARVC, at least for the present. [Emphasis mine]

At this point, I think it’s obvious that the ARVC test is not a reliable means of breeding away from this truly horrible hereditary heart disease that is so widespread in our breed. And though my opinion can be easily discounted because I have no scientific or medical qualifications, I haven’t heard any endorsements of the test from prominent NA board-certified cardiologists, either.

What really distresses me about this situation, though, is not that a definitive test wasn’t produced right out of the gate – given the complexity of present day genetics and this disease, that is perfectly understandable. No, what I find most frustrating is that ARVC research – at least in the United States – hangs in limbo while we ignore the clear evidence that there is still much more research to be done before conscientious Boxer breeders have a way to breed away from ARVC. 

Surely we can do better than this?


** Correction: Jennifer Walker just pointed out to me that the DM DNA test site now states, "of those cords submitted for evaluation, and where the cellular changes have been consistent with a diagnosis of DM, the dogs have had a DNA test result of A/A in all but 2 individuals." 
The quoted test is in the 4th paragraph under "Understanding the DNA Test for Degenerative Myelopathy."