Rabies vaccine not approved for bengals?

http://www.sptimes.com/2006/06/08/So...lorida_f.shtml

Because of wild ancestry the rabies vaccine is not approved for bengals?? This could pose problems for the breed.

That seems odd. It might be that Bengals need the vaccine that is used on raccoons, foxes etc to vaccinate them. In Ontario we have a strict rabies control program and have successful developed vaccines for wild animals. I would have to check and see the difference in content between that and what is given to domestic animals. I'm not imagining there is much of a difference.

I'll check on that and get back to you.

Well that article also stated that because he had spots, he may be part or all Bengal. What? since when do spots make a cat a Bengal?

I would think that the many Bengal breeders all over the country would know if the rabies vaccine they pay for isn't "good" when given to their cats. And wouldn't you also not be able to transport them, as airlines require a current rabies vaccination?

I think the state was looking for reasons to euthanize the cat to perform the test and that's what they ended up coming up with.

Seems kinda fishy to me.

Julia

Because of wild ancestry the rabies vaccine is not approved for bengals??

Click to expand...

It looked to me more that the real problem was that the county was being unreasonable in not considering a Bengal a "cat". Semantics to be sure, but legally I think it makes a difference.

It said "Czar had received a rabies vaccine, but no rabies vaccines are approved for hybrids or wild animals."
So the cat was properly vaccinated, but was being judged a wild animal and not a cat.

In my opinion the National Bengal club should be all over this. They need to present an educated opinion as an accredited agency that officially declares Bengals as cats.

I saw no mention of the cats breeding- F2 or SBT??

Interesting case- Renny please keep up updated on how this plays out!

I do not have a Bengal, but I am very interested in what Bengal breeders have to say about this.

Originally Posted by Cearbhaill

In my opinion the National Bengal club should be all over this. They need to present an educated opinion as an accredited agency that officially declares Bengals as cats.

Click to expand...

Yes I agree. The bengal organizations need to figure out where bengals stand in this regard. For the most part they are domestic cats. So does the vaccine work any less on them? I'm also interested to know how different the wild animal vaccine is than the regular one, other than it would cover so many different species instead of a specific one. This needs to be addressed though so a situation like this will be backed by TICA or other bengal organizations with proof of what a valid rabies shot is and how it impacts the breed. I doubt they need anything different than any other cat but I would hate to ever see a cat euthanized over this.

I really don't think the vaccines are any different. I took the controversy to mean that the statutes regarding vaccination did not apply to wild animals, and that the county was insisting on rabies testing (requiring euthanasia) instead of a normal quarrantine as is done with vaccinated domestic animals that bite people.

They are following the letter of the law, but not the spirit of the law that gives consideration to "valued pet" status.

I can see it not approved for early crosses until you get to the generation that can be shown. Before that time, IMO they are hybrids and more "wild" blood then domestic.

Thoughts?

Originally Posted by GoldenKitty45

I can see it not approved for early crosses until you get to the generation that can be shown. Before that time, IMO they are hybrids and more "wild" blood then domestic.

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

I guess it really depends on how different a rabies vaccine is for a wild animal than a domestic cat. I could see maybe an F1 or EG having extra wild blood (usually 75% to 12%). At what degree do we consider them fully domestic? Usually around 6% (typical SBT). But how different do the vaccines work that they should not be covered? As far as I know rabies does not act so differently across species (and they are all felines in this case).

I don't see why this animal even has to be relocated. Perhaps a requirement to keep the cat inside, heck nowadays you can issue restraining orders against cats (see IMO)! But relocating is a bit silly. A quarantine is enough IMO.

I don't see it as a "vaccine" question per se, but more of a legal terminology question.
I think the laws that draw the distinctions between wild and domestic animals never took into account the possibilities that occurr in a situation like Bengals.
It is a law that needs revised or fine tuned more than anything.