Jump to content
BC Boards

Your Opinion on Soundness


Recommended Posts

What is your opinion / understanding of soundness and how would you describe it? I'm interested to hear what you would say about a conformation (no, this is not an AKC rant) with regard to hind quarters, slope of back, hocks, shoulders, et al. I'm up on the genetics, or at least am reading up on them. This is not about the value of dogs with or without some issues or imperfections. I would just like to know what resources are out there that advise on physical characteristics that equip a dog for working and agility. Or perhaps you can answer from the approach of what in your mind qualifies as "unsound".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I look at it bass-ackwards--if they are able to work all day doing tough work, then I'd say they're built right. If they can't cut it, then they're not. I have to admit I have no ready descriptions of angles, etc., other than if they don't LOOK like they move right when I watch them, then there's a problem. Not much help, I know. I saw a yearling a while back that didn't look right on the hind end--that would be one, if he were mine, that I'd have examined by a vet to see what's what. Sorry to not be much help,

Anna

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^What she said. To me, a sound border collie is one that can work without falling apart due to poor structure. In my limited experience, I have yet to meet a dog that couldn't work because it didn't look right. There are dogs that can't work because of a condition like OCD or hip dysplasia but that isn't often due to structure.

 

My only concern is that a dog with some physical unsoundness might not show it while working. I have a friend whose tervuren broke a toenail completely off while working and never batted an eyelash - she didn't discover it until he limped off the field. I still think checking for things like hip dysplasia is important with dogs that have high pain tolerance.

 

My pup has sloping pasterns, tall cow hocks, a lot of rear angulation, a stick-straight front and hare-type front feet. She's spindly and feminine but she can run like the wind, take her spills and keep going in the Arizona heat. She's just a pup yet, but to me she is very sound. There are dogs on the other end of the spectrum with straight rears, east-west fronts, straight shoulders etc that can get around just as well. I don't think there is any one "right" build/type for the border collie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mentioned agility and there is a whole theory about rear leg/hock angles that are best suited for agility. I have read it online somewhere a couple of years ago and a google on agility structure or agility hocks might find it or similar articles/discussions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Soundness is as soundness does, eh?

 

It seems to me that people in persuits like agility have enough time on their hands to come up with rules and descriptions of the right set of hindquarters, the right height:length ratio, etc., etc. People who work dogs have noticed over the course of time that sometimes a cow-hocked, close-coupled dog can run just as fast and turn just as sharp as on that's "put together right." Plus, we tend to value what's in the head and heart more highly than the more objective stuff anyway. Nobody I know is ever out there clocking dogs on a 40-yard dash.

 

Agility is nearly all about training and handling. Sure, the dog needs a certain level of speed and drive, but I think you can take those pretty much for granted in most Border collies. How the dog is put together isn't likely to make the difference between winning or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question, and I echo Bill's and other's sentiments. My girl moves effortlessly - I suspect could do this all day. I look at dogs moving soundly when there is little "cost" to the movement. I don't care so much about things like angulation, or feet, or smaller details. I do care that when the dog is moving, it is easy and unencumbered.

 

I worked with horses for a looong time, and became quite adept at observing miniscule issues. So, when I look at a horse, I look at the whole picture- but also at the head rising and falling with each foot, closeness, hoof walls, you name it- I look at them differently.

 

With working dogs- I want to see that dog move easily- all day.

 

Julie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stories of dogs that work all day, into middle age, on large farms, with serious soundness issues, are, in my opinion, a load of something impolite to mention. We are a smallish farm and have here three dogs with very minor problems, and you can tell after a day's work, even with the dogs tag teaming chores like we do.

 

Doug the Dog has mild dysplasia in one hip, and he can't be worked more than one day straight. No, he doesn't limp while working, but his brain goes right out the window. Same for my dog with thyroid problems. Doug was a "reject" during his early training years - I believe now his training issues were pain related, until his growth plates had closed.

 

No Fuss Gus is unilaterally deaf. This is tricky subject, because this type of handicap is hard to spot without really high standards of work. But it's there - we know it's there because Gus misses commands beyond a certain distance away, when his bad ear is facing us. It's a loooong distance, about 400 yards. There's only a few trials that work a dog at that distance, other than the OLF. His handicap was discovered because he was working on a ranch where he needed to take direction at distances of nearly a mile away.

 

Again, it comes down to being very, very honest with oneself about choosing dogs that are breeding quality. Is "good enough" OK or are what seem to be minor faults overlooked without further investigation? Is the dog being pushed sufficiently to uncover potential problems both of soundness and training?

 

If I ever had a dog of breeding quality, I'd test ears and hips clinically because I don't believe I have the work or trials within reach to evaluate a dog sufficiently, to my own standards. Even then I'd choose, for the other parent, a dog that's been worked extremely hard. It's a good, classical pairing - the "hill" dog to the "competition" dog - but soundness must come from both sides.

 

I am in no way in favor of simply looking at a dog and evaluating potential soundness based upon standards of conformation. It takes all kinds. If the dog has family members that all work to a high standard, into old age, that's sufficient for me. Clinical testing is a backup process in my thinking, while visual evaluation by someone who knows nothing about the work these dogs do, is useless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... visual evaluation by someone who knows nothing about the work these dogs do, is useless.

 

I'll see that and raise you one: short of noticing that the dog has no hind legs at all and is pulling himself around on a skateboard using only his front legs, visual evaluation -- even by someone who does know the work -- is useless. Just that most people who know the work wouldn't bother with a visual evaluation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there was ever an "unsound" dog, it was Kate Broadbent's Decks. He lost a rear leg and an an eye to a guard donkey. Yet for at least two years running he was in the top 20 at the national sheepdog finals. So maybe even that crack about the skateboard is overstating the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mentioned agility and there is a whole theory about rear leg/hock angles that are best suited for agility. I have read it online somewhere a couple of years ago and a google on agility structure or agility hocks might find it or similar articles/discussions.

It seems this whole structure evaluation trend comes from the conformation world, where 'experts' have been offering their 'services' evaluating litters of pups at some ridiculously early age to determine which ones will have the best 'structure' (I think the pups are about 6 weeks old or something). It's probably not too hard a way to make money, come to think of it.

 

The thing about choosing an agility dog is that, for the most part, this dog will be with you for the rest of her life, even if she isn't the greatest, fastest, dog, or if even if she breaks down at 3. Therefore, the people I compete with are willing to spend lots up front for a pup to have passed the right 'tests', and will pay what I think are incredible prices (upwards of $1000 in some cases) for their next agility dog. Remember, no one really buys/sells 'started' agility dogs, so the most value that pup has is at the time of her initial purchase. After that, it's pure depreciation. :rolleyes:

 

What drives me nuts, though, is when said perfect puppy comes home and the training begins at 9 weeks. Pup is pushed to be ready to compete at 18 months, at a Masters level, so that they can be 'fastest to ADCH' or 'youngest dog in the finals'. Then when the dog starts to break down, either mentally or physically, people look at the dog and say "Well, you could have seen that coming. Look at the hocks! And the angulation - I would have never chosen that pup'. Meanwhile, many 'straight' or 'cowhocked' agility dogs are competing quite happily and successfully in their double-digit years, but I guess they are just lucky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find this funny as well. I get adoption inquiries from 'serious' agility people who want to see a bunch of photos of the dog in question from the side, as they seem to think they can determine something from this view. I am never sure what it is they think they are seeing.

 

My Tweed dog is straight/up and down, short torsoed, looks like he swallowed a barrel and has the funniest little side-to-side waddling run you ever saw. Visually, his physique does not hold a candle to the lean machine that is Piper. And he is not the fastest agility dog there ever was (though he sure isn't slow) BUT he can turn on a dime. He can hug a standard and never touch it, and he can change direction mid air if I want him to. Lots of people comment on how much time he can shave off a course by running it as lean as possible, if I handle him correctly. I am pretty sure most sport dog people looking at him would write him off right away. They sure change their minds when they see him run though.

 

RDM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting topic! I have a friend who has been looking for her next dog and she's brought up structural issues with several dogs. I'm not sure I understand exactly what she's seeing. Like, what does too "easty-westy in the front" mean? And "too straight through the stifle (sp?) area"?

 

*edited for clarity*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Easty-Westy in the front is toes that point outwards. "To straight through the stifle" is where a dog has hind legs that are more straight with very little curve if any at all.

 

"Squarish, husky like?" LOL Gwad, how far is it those Husky's run in their races anyway!? LOL :rolleyes:

 

Katelynn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question, and I echo Bill's and other's sentiments. My girl moves effortlessly - I suspect could do this all day. I look at dogs moving soundly when there is little "cost" to the movement. I don't care so much about things like angulation, or feet, or smaller details. I do care that when the dog is moving, it is easy and unencumbered.

 

I worked with horses for a looong time, and became quite adept at observing miniscule issues. So, when I look at a horse, I look at the whole picture- but also at the head rising and falling with each foot, closeness, hoof walls, you name it- I look at them differently.

 

With working dogs- I want to see that dog move easily- all day.

 

Julie

 

Hi Julie: I appreciate your input. i just discovered and read part of the Soundness thread in the FAQ's. What you have written here and in that FAQ make sense to me. I also learned to judge horses on their confirmation (but not to your level) and I believe there is reason to pay attention to the dog's gait. I'm seeing a lot of dogs that hitch when they trot/run....even at very young ages. Hailey had a beautiful gait as an adolescent dog--she reminded me of a very smooth and graceful horse. Unaware of her HD, we played lots of tennis fetch and other quick turn & sprinty games. She would moan at night, but I thought she was just being verbal. I have since had her xrayed, because the hitch appeared ~ 2 years of age. She indeed has mild to moderate HD. Her beautiful gait is different now, although she can still run like the wind--for a while. We no longer play those games, and she no longer moans at night. I think there's a strong connection. (I now monitor the types of activities we engage in.)

 

I realize that this topic seems to be a rehash, but I'd be interested in any more advice or observations you have to share.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I beleive that soundness can be seen only in real life. Misty aspars extremly sound, I mean she is full of muscle, built solid, can last forever, and hardly does anything but leap through the air, conformation wise, her gait looks great etc... but what about after? if she runs for 2 hours, only then do you see the problem. her hips get stiff, and she develops a terrible hitch in her gait. I had always assumed she stopped and layed down during fetch, just because she is being a dork and making Happy do all the work for her, and she would take the credit. the hip problems never showed at all until last fall; she was nearly 4 years old.

 

Happy on the other hand, is built like a sighthound, has little muscle(and doesnt seem able to build much) she extremly cowhocked etc.. she is nearly 7, and her trot is smooth, short, quick steps that require almost no effort, and covers a LOT of ground. she can run all day, jump almost anything she feels like, and run so fast your left going "what the heck just happend?". she has ripped out nails,and broken solid wood boards in half with her hips with abolutly no detriment to her body. I would call Happy a sound dog lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just that most people who know the work wouldn't bother with a visual evaluation.

 

Mmm, sorry, I intended to imply that thought in there. I shoulda stated it implicitly though. It did seem like I was saying visual evaluation was cool if you did know the work.

 

I think there is indeed cultural seepage from the conformation world into the sport world, and that is where this thought process comes from. It's amazing when folks who spend an awful lot of time fine tuning the performance of their dogs, don't get it, that form follows function, not the other way around. If it were the other way around, it would be the show collies who were dominating the sport world, not Border Collies with recent ties to strict working lines.

 

Another interesting point is that soundness in the Border Collie is very closely linked to the balance that is required from the work. I'm talking about both mental and physical soundness. Everything that makes these dogs what they are is the product of temperence - independence coupled with work ethic, keenness tempered by biddabiity, prey drive balanced by impulse control, eye controlled by practical stock sense, extremely flexible joints supported by highly adapted and strong connective tissue, great strength with a light frame for endurance.

 

This type of balance can only be evaluated "on the job" - and over time - and can't be thoroughly estimated without a high level of training. And it's what falls apart the quickest without being evaluated every generation. I'm no expert, but my sense is that when these things are ignored, they don't gradually disappear - they go to pieces catastrophically almost immediately. Then "working breeders" take the blame for producing unsound lines.

 

If I were looking for a dog right now, that I would depend on in the future to do agility, I'd go "shopping" amongst some of the western ranchers where the dogs spend hours every day busting brush, following sheep up and down to and from summer high pastures, working cattle in yards, PLUS go trialing fairly regularly. I'd pick a pup from parents who not only did well in trials (that indicates a trainable temperament), but had whole family histories of working to ripe old ages. I'd talk to the owners/handlers about how the parents and other family members were to train early on and what it took to finish them out.

 

After all that, I'd not only have a heck of a pup, most likely, but I'd also have some good friends in the Border Collie world, and additionally would have saved me some money. A LOT of money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a dog who is painfully straight in the back end. He never could run very fast and has totally fallen apart. Because he is so straight his knee caps slip out, now he has arthritis in his knees. Because his hocks are so straight too much stress was put on his tarsal bones, so now he has arthritis there. He also had HD and arthritis in his hips. Because of his poor conformation in his back end he overcompensated on his front so also has arthritis in his shoulders, elbows and toes. He is 8 years old and has been battling joint pain since he was a pup. I will never buy another dog built like him. He has so poorly put together that it stressed his joints to the breaking point.

 

For the most part, however, I agree that a sound dog is one who can work for many, many years. When I look for a dog I want to see that it is balanced enough to run all day. I don't like to see extremes, way too much angle or way too straight. If you want to know what ideal structure is I say look at wolves and coyotes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me? I want a working dog from say a dam who works every day, and this one of her last litters (as in she is not 2 yrs old), and has proven herself to be all that and a bag of chips when it comes to working ability and soundness. I want the sire to be a wise older gentleman, who can do what is asked almost without needing to be asked, has the grit to make things go where they should, and his soundness is revealed in his ability to work with impunity day after day- and not suffer for it at night.

This may be why I truly love watching the older dogs out there working- those who STILL trial while nearing double digits.

 

Julie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want to know what ideal structure is I say look at wolves and coyotes.

 

I'd tend to agree with you. Unsound wolves and coyotes don't generally get to reproduce. So how do you explain hip dysplasia in wolves?

 

(Yes, yes, I just had to go there.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd tend to agree with you. Unsound wolves and coyotes don't generally get to reproduce. So how do you explain hip dysplasia in wolves?

 

(Yes, yes, I just had to go there.)

 

I don't. We need more info. I think you are talking about a study that involved necropsies on a small number of wolves? Do we know if the dominant breeding pair ever have HD?

 

Some theories I could offer are...

 

overall small sample size

wolves were sampled from a small, inbred population so are not representative of the species

they have stronger muscles and ligaments which hold the joints together

we don't yet have a good understanding of how radiological evidence of HD and DJD are really related

wolves have a higher threshold for pain

 

I know a radiologist who thinks OFA and hip testing is worthless because he doesn't see a correlation between how good the hips look and whether or not the dog shows clinical signs of HD (pain). He believes we should be breeding dogs that work all day until they are old and rely on that more than hip testing. He is, however, in the minority.

 

That was a long winded way of saying I don't have a clue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we don't yet have a good understanding of how radiological evidence of HD and DJD are really related

 

BINGO! Thank you so very much. This is a very concise way of saying what I have been trying to say for at least five years.

 

I know a radiologist who thinks OFA and hip testing is worthless because he doesn't see a correlation between how good the hips look and whether or not the dog shows clinical signs of HD (pain). He believes we should be breeding dogs that work all day until they are old and rely on that more than hip testing.

 

A heretic among the priesthood! I love it.

 

He is, however, in the minority.

 

And how.

 

Here's a neat story about MD radiologists. Like all of us, they tend to see what they are looking for, and miss what they are not looking for.

 

A group of radiologists were shown a batch of chest X-rays. Some were normal, some showed heart and lung disease, and one showed a perfectly normal heart and set of lungs in a patient whose left clavicle had been entirely eaten away by bone cancer. The radiologists were asked to read the films -- nothing more, nothing less. I think it was two-thirds of them missed the bone cancer, saying the film was normal. Not one case of heart or lung disease was missed.

 

That sort of diagnostic imprecision is something that concerns me. Granted none of the docs saw anything that wasn't there, but they were clearly looking for something, and finding it. My sense of radiological evaluation of hips is that it is only a technological form of the very sort of thing we're discussing here: looking at conformation and making a prediction about soundness.

 

If that which we call hip dysplasia were in fact a disease per se it seems to me that we should not see it in wild populations, particularly in social canids like wolves where only one pair breeds per pack. The weak, unsound ones would not be the ones that would a.) survive and b.) live to procreate. Obviously something allows dogs with this bad hip conformation to survive, thrive, and work without clinical symptoms, while others with it are brought down and suffer from DJD. What I think we ought to be doing is looking at what those differences are, rather than condemning dogs with borderline (and in some cases OFA "Fair") hips to non-breeding status regardless of whatever other qualities they bring to the table.

 

Food for thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That sort of diagnostic imprecision is something that concerns me. Granted none of the docs saw anything that wasn't there, but they were clearly looking for something, and finding it. My sense of radiological evaluation of hips is that it is only a technological form of the very sort of thing we're discussing here: looking at conformation and making a prediction about soundness.

 

If that which we call hip dysplasia were in fact a disease per se it seems to me that we should not see it in wild populations, particularly in social canids like wolves where only one pair breeds per pack. The weak, unsound ones would not be the ones that would a.) survive and b.) live to procreate. Obviously something allows dogs with this bad hip conformation to survive, thrive, and work without clinical symptoms, while others with it are brought down and suffer from DJD. What I think we ought to be doing is looking at what those differences are, rather than condemning dogs with borderline (and in some cases OFA "Fair") hips to non-breeding status regardless of whatever other qualities they bring to the table.

 

Food for thought.

 

OFA is an evaluation based on conformation and it doesn't even look at muscle mass or ligaments (at least PennHIP measures how tight they are). While I am not advocating the abandonment of hip testing or excusing people who forgo testing because of the cost, I don't think we can assume that an OFA Excellent dog has "perfect" hips and will be sound well into old age. In an ideal world only dogs who had withheld the test of time would be bred. That is possible for males who can breed well into old age but much harder for females.

 

I don't think we have a good enough definition of HD to be able to say that any dog with a "failing" hip score automatically has it while any dog with a passing score does not. The heretical radiologist told me about a study that just came out conducted by the US military. They found that dogs with failing hip scores worked the same number of months before retirement as dogs with passing scores. They still only breed dogs with passing scores but they don't remove a dog from their working program just because it's hips fail.

 

When I buy a dog I ask about hip scores, but I also want to know how long the parents, grandparents and other relatives were when they were retired and when they died. I want longevity, and so far no test but time can show that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...