Angus Hydro Calves?

[sizmic]

Not really!

Sizmic

 

[Avalon]

No that is what I believe as does my genex rep. Maybe we are stupid but maybe we arent.

Nope its too much inbreeding and line breeding of these lines that created the problem. :cowboy:
If im correct most genetic defects will trace back to inbreeding and possible linebreeding.

 

[robert]

Nope its too much inbreeding and line breeding of these lines that created the problem. :cowboy:
If im correct most genetic defects will trace back to inbreeding and possible linebreeding.

You are incorrect, linebreeding / inbreeding didn't 'create' these defects, it exposed them, and none too soon! Imagine if, for example, that worthless sack of sh... 1680 had been bred to 35 of his own daughters, it would have EXPOSED the TWO defects that he was carrying, but that didn't happen, so that's the shape we're in today. Perhaps, in the future, a sire that has 1000 progeny registered to him has to be bred to 35 of his own daughters to determine whether the bull is carrying any deleterious recessive genes, before he goes on to sire 4, 8 or even 12,000 calves a YEAR!

 

[red angus shower]

Nope its too much inbreeding and line breeding of these lines that created the problem. :cowboy:
If im correct most genetic defects will trace back to inbreeding and possible linebreeding.

You are incorrect, linebreeding / inbreeding didn't 'create' these defects, it exposed them, and none too soon! Imagine if, for example, that worthless sack of sh... 1680 had been bred to 35 of his own daughters, it would have EXPOSED the TWO defects that he was carrying, but that didn't happen, so that's the shape we're in today. Perhaps, in the future, a sire that has 1000 progeny registered to him has to be bred to 35 of his own daughters to determine whether the bull is carrying any deleterious recessive genes, before he goes on to sire 4, 8 or even 12,000 calves a YEAR!

Robert- you're right. Inbreeding exposes the defects. I don't understand why semen distributors and/or breeders haven't been doing linebreeding tests, I hope now they will start. I've been digging up as much info as possible on this and have contacted the DVM studying this, Dr. Steffen. He said AM and this hydro is a genetic defect coming from 1680. Our operation has unfortunately become a statistic, the calf we had has been confirmed as a hydro calf. It was out of Dr. J Analyst, and the cow goes back to 1680.

 

[robert]

It was out of Dr. J Analyst, and the cow goes back to 1680.

interesting too that Analyst's dam Precision 706 is also the dam of King Kahn B100 also listed as a Hydro carrier. There are several prominent dams that are carriers of both AM and Hydro including the Blackbird 558H cow and the dam of Integrity (his flush brother is an AM carrier). It seems almost inconceivable that some of these cows, particularly the 558H cow, can have been sold and flushed and sold and flushed multiple times to multiple operations to multiple sires and not have turned up producing defective calves of one type or another before now.

 

[eric47847]

this is why i believe that we should just be breeding for functional, easy fleshing, phenotypical, milking, and easy going cattle. quit chasing these f-ing numbers and breed cattle for cattle. if you want to use a carrier bull, you should be able too, its just that you are going to be the person who suffers for doing so. this is my opinion

 

[red angus shower]

this is why i believe that we should just be breeding for functional, easy fleshing, phenotypical, milking, and easy going cattle. quit chasing these f-ing numbers and breed cattle for cattle. if you want to use a carrier bull, you should be able too, its just that you are going to be the person who suffers for doing so. this is my opinion

Just because I used an AMC bull doesn't mean I'm chasing numbers. I breed for moderate sized, easy fleshing, maternal cows with stayability. Numbers do come into play though, especially when you're breeding bulls to sell.

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

No "true cattle BREEDER" (not a multiplier) should EVER even consider using a carrier bull. It's beyond me to even imaging people willing to propagate genetic defects. Sure, you can breed a carrier to a non-carrier and never have a problem. BUT, you are propagating the genetic defect in the offspring, creating more carriers. Every animal that is a carrier should be destroyed. I realize that you can use that carrier cow/bull and breed to a non-carrier and every calf can go into the feedlot. But, again, there will always be a slip here or there and they end up in someones herd.
Robert is soooo right. This should have been exposed MANY MANY years ago. Someone slipped up big time. Some of these big breeders HAD to have known there was a problem and just swept it away.
There is no way that "all of a sudden" these defective calves are NOW being reported left & right. There had to be many calves born in the PAST that were not getting reported.
It looks like AAA is finally stepping up to the plate. From what I have read, I think they are handling the curly calf syndrome properly - giving breeders time to "regroup". I haven't kept up on these other problems. Looks like a long road ahead of Angus (and Red Angus) breeders.
Here's a report I received from the American Simmental Assn.:
"The Red Angus Association working on controlling Osteopetrosis (OS): Often called Marble Bone Disease, OS has been known as a bovine genetic defect for decades. Recently, Red Angus has documented carriers among their popular sires. Dr. Jon Beever, at the University of IL and other scientists have helped them develop a DNA test for carriers.
SimGenetic pedigrees carry the influence of some of these Red Angus carrier sires, so please be sure to review the sires on their website (www.redangus.org, then Genetics, then defects, then review the carrier list). If you have one of these popular sires in your pedigrees, call Marilyn here at ASA Headquarters to get information on how to test your cattle for OS. AgriGenomics is the service provider (just like TH and PHA testing). This lab requires either semen or blood. "

 

[Frankie]

No "true cattle BREEDER" (not a multiplier) should EVER even consider using a carrier bull. It's beyond me to even imaging people willing to propagate genetic defects. Sure, you can breed a carrier to a non-carrier and never have a problem. BUT, you are propagating the genetic defect in the offspring, creating more carriers. Every animal that is a carrier should be destroyed. I realize that you can use that carrier cow/bull and breed to a non-carrier and every calf can go into the feedlot. But, again, there will always be a slip here or there and they end up in someones herd.
Robert is soooo right. This should have been exposed MANY MANY years ago. Someone slipped up big time. Some of these big breeders HAD to have known there was a problem and just swept it away.
There is no way that "all of a sudden" these defective calves are NOW being reported left & right. There had to be many calves born in the PAST that were not getting reported.
It looks like AAA is finally stepping up to the plate. From what I have read, I think they are handling the curly calf syndrome properly - giving breeders time to "regroup". I haven't kept up on these other problems. Looks like a long road ahead of Angus (and Red Angus) breeders.
Here's a report I received from the American Simmental Assn.:
"The Red Angus Association working on controlling Osteopetrosis (OS): Often called Marble Bone Disease, OS has been known as a bovine genetic defect for decades. Recently, Red Angus has documented carriers among their popular sires. Dr. Jon Beever, at the University of IL and other scientists have helped them develop a DNA test for carriers.
SimGenetic pedigrees carry the influence of some of these Red Angus carrier sires, so please be sure to review the sires on their website (http://www.redangus.org, then Genetics, then defects, then review the carrier list). If you have one of these popular sires in your pedigrees, call Marilyn here at ASA Headquarters to get information on how to test your cattle for OS. AgriGenomics is the service provider (just like TH and PHA testing). This lab requires either semen or blood. "

I hope you feel better after that ignorant rant. If you had been paying attention, you'd know that:

1. Gardiners has been in touch with Kansas State University Animal Science and Vet school for years about the problem. They never attempted to sweep it away or under the rug or anywhere else.

2. If you had also been paying attention, you'd know that these calves aren't popping up all around. Considering the AAA has been registering over 300,000 head for each of the last several years, the percentage of dead calves is very small. That's why some Angus breeders are upset with the rules put in place by AAA. They think they're over reacting to the problem. Maybe they're right?

Interesting comment from the Simmental Assn. My question is: What happens if you don't have any of these known Angus carriers in your herd, but they're still black? Does that mean you're ok? Or you just don't know?

I do think the Angus breed may have a rocky road for a few years. But I think it will be a lot longer and much busier road than most other breeds.

 

[Frankie]

this is why i believe that we should just be breeding for functional, easy fleshing, phenotypical, milking, and easy going cattle. quit chasing these f-ing numbers and breed cattle for cattle. if you want to use a carrier bull, you should be able too, its just that you are going to be the person who suffers for doing so. this is my opinion

You can use carrier bulls and females. The AAA just won't register their calves without a test showing they're clean of the genetic defect. I think the rules are very sensible and will get this problem out of the breed pretty quick. IMO, a larger problem will be getting it out of the commercial herds and the other "purebred" breeds that have been using Angus genetics.

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

Frankie, I did not make any comment about Gardner. Don't know them or anything about them. What did I "rant" about that is not true?
The fact that: using a carrier "can" keep the genetic defect around? Sooner or later that carrier gets sold or her/his offspring gets sold. Even if they just get shipped to the market, there's always the chance another "breeder" will purchase them.
You should be pushing for everyone to destroy all carriers - in a timely manner.

I'm sure there are flush cows out there that produced defective calves in several differant herds. That's not inconceivalbe - right? If you purchased embryos & had a defective calf born, wouldn't you contact the owner of the donor? How many calls would it take for the owner of the donor to get suspicious that it really wasn't weed poison or other environmental issues????
I don't know any of the "big breeders" and I don't need to (well, I do know some). As a PB breeder, I understand how genes are spread out all over our nation if "you have a good one" and you have money to promote him or her, there are LOTS of offspring in many, many herds. Word gets around. I can't believe someone - anyone - wasn't "suspicious" long ago.

As far as my breed. The ASA has been testing the top 50 used bulls for genetic defects for a number of years now. Here is their latest ruling:

• ASA Board Sets Policy to identify Suspects for Genetic Abnormalities:
Note: ASA reserves the right to request DNA testing when necessary.
Effective June 1, 2009, the following policy will be set in place to describe a suspect animal for genetic defects and testing policies to identify carriers of genetic defects that have DNA tests available.

A. Identifiing Specific Animals
Any animal with a documented carrier in the pedigree, unless the intermediary ancestors are tested-free or designated pedigree-free.
Any sire or embryo donor dam with 1/8 blood or more of the defective- gene source (breed, line, herd), unless the intermediary ancestors are tested- free or pedigree-free.

B. Reccomendations for recurring testing:
50 most-used sires (managed and paid by ASA).
All suspect A.I. sires
All suspect natural sires
All progeny of suspect sires, if the suspect sire DNA is unavailable for
All suspect donor dams.

C. Managing these policies
Genetic abnormality designations will be real-time. Test completions (DNA determination of carrier or free) will affect animals in downstream pedigrees.
Progeny (of untested suspect sires or suspect donor dams) that has performance data submitted or request to be registered requires compliance (DNA testing) to satisfy B2, B3, B4, or B5.

I think our breed has acknowledged the possibility of defects getting into our breed through crossbreeding & upgrading, and has taken a very strong stand for many years now.

I would think a reputable breeder like yourself would be thrilled with AAA setting strict rules. As a breeder, I tried to put myself in your shoes and read their rules. I thought they were very "do-able".

 

[Frankie]

Frankie, I did not make any comment about Gardner. Don't know them or anything about them. What did I "rant" about that is not true?
The fact that: using a carrier "can" keep the genetic defect around? Sooner or later that carrier gets sold or her/his offspring gets sold. Even if they just get shipped to the market, there's always the chance another "breeder" will purchase them.
You should be pushing for everyone to destroy all carriers - in a timely manner.

I'm sure there are flush cows out there that produced defective calves in several differant herds. That's not inconceivalbe - right? If you purchased embryos & had a defective calf born, wouldn't you contact the owner of the donor? How many calls would it take for the owner of the donor to get suspicious that it really wasn't weed poison or other environmental issues????
I don't know any of the "big breeders" and I don't need to (well, I do know some). As a PB breeder, I understand how genes are spread out all over our nation if "you have a good one" and you have money to promote him or her, there are LOTS of offspring in many, many herds. Word gets around. I can't believe someone - anyone - wasn't "suspicious" long ago.

As far as my breed. The ASA has been testing the top 50 used bulls for genetic defects for a number of years now. Here is their latest ruling:

• ASA Board Sets Policy to identify Suspects for Genetic Abnormalities:
Note: ASA reserves the right to request DNA testing when necessary.
Effective June 1, 2009, the following policy will be set in place to describe a suspect animal for genetic defects and testing policies to identify carriers of genetic defects that have DNA tests available.

A. Identifiing Specific Animals
Any animal with a documented carrier in the pedigree, unless the intermediary ancestors are tested-free or designated pedigree-free.
Any sire or embryo donor dam with 1/8 blood or more of the defective- gene source (breed, line, herd), unless the intermediary ancestors are tested- free or pedigree-free.

B. Reccomendations for recurring testing:
50 most-used sires (managed and paid by ASA).
All suspect A.I. sires
All suspect natural sires
All progeny of suspect sires, if the suspect sire DNA is unavailable for
All suspect donor dams.

C. Managing these policies
Genetic abnormality designations will be real-time. Test completions (DNA determination of carrier or free) will affect animals in downstream pedigrees.
Progeny (of untested suspect sires or suspect donor dams) that has performance data submitted or request to be registered requires compliance (DNA testing) to satisfy B2, B3, B4, or B5.

I think our breed has acknowledged the possibility of defects getting into our breed through crossbreeding & upgrading, and has taken a very strong stand for many years now.

I would think a reputable breeder like yourself would be thrilled with AAA setting strict rules. As a breeder, I tried to put myself in your shoes and read their rules. I thought they were very "do-able".

You said:

[q]This should have been exposed MANY MANY years ago. Someone slipped up big time. Some of these big breeders HAD to have known there was a problem and just swept it away.
There is no way that "all of a sudden" these defective calves are NOW being reported left & right. There had to be many calves born in the PAST that were not getting reported.[/quote]

Breeders were trying to find out if there was even a problem, yet you suggest that "big breeders" were sweeping it under the rug. Since the breeder of the most responsible bull has been working with their vet and KS State to find the problem for years, that makes this an ignorant rant. You didn't know? Well, you should have before you jumped out and condemned Angus breeders without knowing the facts.

You said:

I'm sure there are flush cows out there that produced defective calves in several differant herds.

Again talking about something you really and truly don't have the facts about. I'd guess that you've even had a calf born dead at your place. Did you think it was an exotic, new disease or genetic mutation? Or just "one of those things"?

You said:

I can't believe someone - anyone - wasn't "suspicious" long ago.

Someone WAS suspicious a long time ago. For about the fourth time (please read carefully): Gardiners had been working with their vet to find out if there WAS a problem and, if so, what it was. The bull had been around for years. It wasn't until people started breeding him and his offspring back to other offspring that we started getting dead calves. The problem wasn't created overnight and finding it didn't happen overnight. :roll:

I do support the AAA response to these problems. When GAR Precision first came on the market, we used a cane on heifers. I think we paid $15 a straw. His WW EPD was terrible so we turned to other bulls. I was stunned 10-12 years later to see some of his semen sell for $500 a straw!

Looks like to me there are plenty of holes in the ASA's "strong stand".

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

So, Frankie, are you related to the Gardners? You sure seem to be "guarding" their reputation. Again, I will say, I was not referring to the Gardners.
And, again, I will say "someone" "somewhere" knew there was a problem. I don't have to KNOW any details. Just common sense.

Since the breeder of the most responsible bull has been working with their vet and KS State to find the problem for years

If Gardner had problems WITHIN their herd "for years" - they were having problems with customers' herds - common sense.
And, again, I will say - if someone was a top breeder - selling genetics all over the USA - it is hard for me to believe they did not get calls from CUSTOMERS having dead or deformed calves. And, again, I will say you can not blame them on poisonous plants or environment. If a vet was given the facts, it shouldn't be too difficult to put 2 and 2 together and decide there was a genetic defect.
I understand it is YOUR breed having these problems, and it is difficult for everyone. Hope you don't have any carriers.

 

[eric47847]

No "true cattle BREEDER" (not a multiplier) should EVER even consider using a carrier bull. It's beyond me to even imaging people willing to propagate genetic defects. Sure, you can breed a carrier to a non-carrier and never have a problem. BUT, you are propagating the genetic defect in the offspring, creating more carriers. Every animal that is a carrier should be destroyed. I realize that you can use that carrier cow/bull and breed to a non-carrier and every calf can go into the feedlot. But, again, there will always be a slip here or there and they end up in someones herd.
"

So if you believe that every genetic defective head of cattle should be destroyed, there would not be a single animal left on this planet. Every animal in this world has a genetic defect that they are born with, its just nature. One little mutation and its got a defect. Most of the angus breed would have to be killed just because of am, nh, fc, red carrier, white eye, etc. most of the animals in our breed go back to these carriers of these defects. My best cows both go back to 1680, one of them is amc, and one will most likely be nhc. this is just something that needs to be bred around. the shorthorn breed has defects like this, and they just breed around them. the same needs to be done with the angus breed. it is beliefs like this that you have Jeanne, that causes breeds to have to end due to the amount of defects. its just that there are so many regestered stock that these defects are exposed. not to long ago, even herefords had some defects like these.

 

[Frankie]

So, Frankie, are you related to the Gardners? You sure seem to be "guarding" their reputation. Again, I will say, I was not referring to the Gardners.
And, again, I will say "someone" "somewhere" knew there was a problem. I don't have to KNOW any details. Just common sense.

Since the breeder of the most responsible bull has been working with their vet and KS State to find the problem for years

If Gardner had problems WITHIN their herd "for years" - they were having problems with customers' herds - common sense.
And, again, I will say - if someone was a top breeder - selling genetics all over the USA - it is hard for me to believe they did not get calls from CUSTOMERS having dead or deformed calves. And, again, I will say you can not blame them on poisonous plants or environment. If a vet was given the facts, it shouldn't be too difficult to put 2 and 2 together and decide there was a genetic defect.
I understand it is YOUR breed having these problems, and it is difficult for everyone. Hope you don't have any carriers.

And you continue to blow hot air. I'm very, very disappointed in you.

And, again, I will say "someone" "somewhere" knew there was a problem. I don't have to KNOW any details. Just common sense. ,

No, it's hot air and ignorance. These people raise hundred of calves a year. They lease hundreds of cows to put embryos into. I don't doubt they have several dead calves every year. For the fourth time: They took calves to their vets and Kansas State for evaluation. Now I know that the Kansas State vet school might not rank up there with New York City University vet school, but it's a pretty well respected one. :roll:

again, I will say you can not blame them on poisonous plants or environment. If a vet was given the facts, it shouldn't be too difficult to put 2 and 2 together and decide there was a genetic defect.

So you're familiar with ALL the plants in Kansas, OK, West VA, Mississippi, TX, CO, etc., all the places Gardiner's sell bulls into? My, my, you must be so proud. :roll:

No, I'm not related to Gardiners.

Gardiners sell bulls to commercial cattlemen, not pampered show people. Calves are born in a variety of conditions across the country, not in a barn with a video set up. Did you haul the last calf born dead on your place to the vet or the vet school? When the problem became widespread and it was obvious there was a genetic problem, the Angus Assn got involved. Gardiners worked with them from the beginning to identify the problem.

Yes, it's a problem for MY breed. And we'll get it fixed. As for YOUR breed, Simmental, by their open registration, they've opened themselves up to every gentic defect known in beef industry. If a Simmental is black, it has some Angus blood. If it's solid red, it may have some Red Angus blood. It might have some Shorthorn or Maine defects: TH & PHA? And let's not forget the diluter gene. Yes, they can test the top 50 bulls, but how about the several thousand others that aren't sired by those top 50 bulls?

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

Eric - I see you are a little defensive because you might have a carrier.
I stand by what I said. If you have a KNOWN defect that is a problem in your breed, it is your duty to work to eliminate - not propagate the problem. I may have been a bit harsh, saying they should all be harvested, I'm sorry about that. But that is the only true way to nip the problem in the bud. You can continue to use a carrier cow, as long as you plan on harvesting or TESTING all of her offspring. But, again, as I said, there is always the "chance" a daughter or son that is a carrier ends up in someone else's herd if you aren't diligent at testing.
I think the way the Shorthorn breed has handled their genetic defect problem is horrific. Shut your eyes and it will all go away!! :shock:
If my flush cow turned out to be a carrier of some genetic defect, I would be hard pressed to send her to harvest. I guess I would breed her to a KNOWN clean bulls & test each offspring. My breed assn. won't let us register anything until tested if it is a suspect bloodline. They are working again at changing their requirements due to the latest Angus problems, with all the crossbreeding within our breed.
But the point I was trying to make is that you cannot hide your head in the sand and ignore the problem like the Shorthorn breed has done.

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

Frankie - well I'm dissappointed in YOU. If you would quit being so defensive about Gardner's and just listen. I am NOT complaining, pointing fingers or anything else about the the Gardner's. I don't know them & I don't care about them.
I think K-State is one of the BEST vet schools in the nation. My husband went there. We used to live in Kansas. :banana:
My comment is about ALL breeders that sell nation-wide. Just think about this. If you owned a bull and you were selling semen - or you owned a flush cow & were selling embryos, wouldn't you be getting concerned something was genetic if you received phone calls from multiple people that had your genetics and was reporting to you that they had a defective calf???? My point about the poisonous plants, is that you couldn't discount a possible genetic defect if calves were being born in different parts of the country. It is different if you personnally were having a few calves born over a number of years with a defect and your vet said it must be something environmentally wrong.
And by the way, yes, I had a few dead calves this year to an unknown problem - and yes, the vet put the 3rd one down and it went to Cornell for testing. It was Listeria. Ended up saving 5 that were affected.

 

[Frankie]

Frankie - well I'm dissappointed in YOU. If you would quit being so defensive about Gardner's and just listen. I am NOT complaining, pointing fingers or anything else about the the Gardner's. I don't know them & I don't care about them.
I think K-State is one of the BEST vet schools in the nation. My husband went there. We used to live in Kansas. :banana:

Ignorance tends to make the hairs on the back of my necks stand up. Yes, you are pointing the finger at Gardiners. Over and over, you say they should have known when you have absolutely no facts to back that up. None. Not a one. You make an assumption based on what you WANT to believe as opposed to the facts that have been reported.

My comment is about ALL breeders that sell nation-wide. Just think about this. If you owned a bull and you were selling semen - or you owned a flush cow & were selling embryos, wouldn't you be getting concerned something was genetic if you received phone calls from multiple people that had your genetics and was reporting to you that they had a defective calf???? My point about the poisonous plants, is that you couldn't discount a possible genetic defect if calves were being born in different parts of the country. It is different if you personnally were having a few calves born over a number of years with a defect and your vet said it must be something environmentally wrong.

Gardiners were NOT receiving phone calls from multiple people about dead calves. There, again, you're going off in la la land and making stuff up. Most of their bulls go to commercial cattlemen. They don't get too bent out of shape with a dead calf or two every year. Stuff happens. Calves are born dead, they die, they get struck by lightening, they drown, they fall into ditches, they get their heads hung in something, they eat something... Your own limited experience does NOT give you the background to say how Gardiners should have handled this. And they didn't ignore it. They took calves to Kansas State and their own vet! Why to you continue to say things that aren't true? GAR Precision 1680 was born in 1990. He had hudreds, probably thousands of calves on the ground before the first Curly Calf was noticed. Why in hades would anyone think it was a genetic problem? Because it's a simple recessive trait, it didn't start showing up until Precision genetics were bred back on Precision genetics. And, in spite of the uproar, there hasn't been an "explosion" of defective calves. But one is too many and the AAA is doing what they think best to get it out of the Angus breed.

And by the way, yes, I had a few dead calves this year to an unknown problem - and yes, the vet put the 3rd one down and it went to Cornell for testing. It was Listeria. Ended up saving 5 that were affected.

You had dead calves? Why do you think Cornell was right? Perhaps they overlooked some sort of new disease? You know, like Kansas State did for Gardiners?

 

[robert]

Every animal in this world has a genetic defect that they are born with, its just nature.

this seems to be the latest refrain from folks who wish to keep using and breeding carrier lines. Yes, many animals carry recessive traits but how many carry TWO LETHAL RECESSIVES? Red color, horns, HI are all non lethal, they have no bearing on the production value of the cattle, however a twisted up dead calf that requires veterinary help to be born or a hydro calf that has to have its head punctured in order to pass through can result in both cow and calf being lost, at the very least a worthless dead calf and a vet bill.

Even worse than the above scenario is to not deal with these problems and pass them onto the very people we like to claim our our most important customers, the commercial cow/calf guy or gal who rely on US to NOT sell them problems.

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

You had dead calves? Why do you think Cornell was right? Perhaps they overlooked some sort of new disease? You know, like Kansas State did for Gardiners?

Yes, I had SICK dieing calves with no symptoms - no diarhea, no respiratory, no nasal discharge, just got weak on hind quarters & ended up going down. Cornell had a "reasonable" answer, since they cultured Listeria in their brains. I didn't have deformed calves at birth - if I did, and they did have a parentage "link", I "think" I would be a bit suspicious. Seems reasonable that we are talking a different subject.
Your whole post is about GARDINERS. Hmmm, seems to me there are many breeders being affected by this problem other than the Gardiners. AAA isn't making rule changes just for or because of Gardiners.