JaderBug Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 I just picked up the September/October issue of The Bark magazine and was excited to see an article on the subject I'm doing my class presentation in. The article talks about the backlash from the BBC documentary "Pedigree Dogs Exposed", discussing how outraged the public is, how Crufts is now a damaged name brand, and talked about the idiocy of the people in charge of the kennel clubs. Towards the end of the article, they talk about the Swedish Kennel Club and all the wonderful things they do as a dog organization. I just wanted to share a little of that here: Excerpts from "The Cost of Perfection" by Beverly Cuddy Long ago, the Swedish KC decided to make health testing mandatory. For example, back in 1992, 80 particularly afflicted breeds have to have both parents hip-tested if the breeder wanted to use the KC registration system; they'd already seen huge improvements in Newfoundland hips. They also decided to simplify the scoring system so it was clear to everyone how to interpret the results. They created three bands to encourage improvement: If your dog scored a grade 2, you couldn't breed on. If your dog got a 0, you could choose a mate with either a 0 or a 1 score. But if your dog had a 1, he/she had to be mated to a dog with a 0. As more and more health tests became available, they were slotted into the existing system and again made conditional for breeders sing the system. How wonderful!! What is so wrong about this that the AKC can't adopt a program like this?? How many fewer health problems would there be and how many more responsible breeders would there be? Well, considering they don't cheat around the system... there's got to be some loop-hole proof system the Swedes are using. The Swedish KC also produces tables showing how inbred each breed was and charting trends, which allows the viewer to see if a breed is improving or not. It set bands for acceptable levels of inbreeding, and started limiting number of times a stud dog could be used in his lifetime. ...They made dog showing and breeding as meaningful as possible by adding temperament tests for some breeds before they could claim their titles, and required Border collies to pass a herding test before being bred. They discussed how to reduce exaggerations caused by fashion and educated their judges without being provoked to do so by a national television expose. Again, fantastic! I wonder, though, what this herding test for the Border Collies requires... anyone know about this? More good work: The Swedish Kennel Club worked closely with its government to pass a significant piece of consumer law, one that ensured that health and welfare were always at the top of every breeder's agenda. In Sweden, if anything goes wrong with the health of a pup in the first three years, the breeder is financially responsible. With a system like that, who is going to have a litter from an untested pet Labrador just to fund a summer holiday? How would want to be a puppy farmer if the breeder pays for a pup's ill health? WHY DOESN'T THE AKC OR THE US ADOPT STUFF LIKE THIS?! The article also mentions that the few shelters that exist in Sweden are practically empty... with breeding laws and legislation like this, I can certainly understand why. I also wonder if this still only applies to the responsible breeders and that there are still garbage breeders who don't follow the rules. Is this the rule or the exception? If this was adopted in the US, would people follow the rules or simply ignore the KC? The rest of the article (and the magazine!) is really great, I recommend picking it up! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tranquilis Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 WHY DOESN'T THE AKC OR THE US ADOPT STUFF LIKE THIS?! :: Warning: Unfounded speculation ahead :: I don't think the current crop of AKC leadership are concerned enough or strong enough leaders to tackle the entrenched interests, nor are they willing to jeopardize their own interests. Even if they were, I don't think the AKC is set up to suport such sweeping changes - The necessary supporting structure simply isn't there. With competing registries in the US, especially the UKC, people who don't want to play along have other ports, and can (most likely will) run to them. Lastly, commercial breeders supply a HUGE percentage of the AKC's operating funds - Putting them in line would cut the AKC's finacial throat. Frankly, the AKC needs an enema, and until it gets one, there's no hope of meaningful sweeping reform. The best that I hope for is small incremental changes. I also wonder if this still only applies to the responsible breeders and that there are still garbage breeders who don't follow the rules. Is this the rule or the exception? If this was adopted in the US, would people follow the rules or simply ignore the KC? Americans are intensely disrespectful of authority - It's one of our defining national characteristics. Of course there'll be garbage breeders ignoring any rule you care to contemplate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desertranger Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 Reform the AKC, Ask them to change their politics and set new standards. That's like asking congress to agree on the health care package. ROFL A herding test for BC? Would that apply to KC dogs only. After all not all BCs herd and not all of them are suitable to herding. Fact is out of all th BCs I ever had only three were suited for herding, Augie, Glynniss and Jin. The rest had not interest in sheep but they still made good working dogs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Journey Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 The rest had not interest in sheep but they still made good working dogs. How can this statement be possible? If they have no interest then how can they be good working dogs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sea4th Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 WHY DOESN'T THE AKC OR THE US ADOPT STUFF LIKE THIS?! The article also mentions that the few shelters that exist in Sweden are practically empty... with breeding laws and legislation like this, I can certainly understand why. As long as there is a single dollar to be made, nothing will change. The majority of AKC's income comes from registrations. (I need to find the reference for that) - and the majority of those registrations come from puppy mills. Why on earth would they cut their own financial throats by imposing stricter rules and regulations that must be met before a dog or litter can be registered. Peel away all the layers of lip service that uses words like "reputable" "standard" etc, you'll get what it all boils down to. $$$$. ACK might gasp and "tsk tsk" about backyard breeders and puppy mills or treat the subject like the crazy relative locked in an upstairs room who no one is supposed to see, but there's no denying that the "relative" exists and might even be a cash cow. It got to be one hell of an enema to reach the brains of ACK to fundamentally change their way of operation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tranquilis Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 How can this statement be possible? If they have no interest then how can they be good working dogs? There are other forms of work, besides sheep... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lrayburn Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 Fact is out of all th BCs I ever had only three were suited for herding, Augie, Glynniss and Jin. The rest had not interest in sheep but they still made good working dogs. I don't that would matter as long as you weren't planning on breeding them. (I'm assuming he's referencing SAR work or some other form of "work" but not stockwork.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaderBug Posted October 3, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 WHY DOESN'T THE AKC OR THE US ADOPT STUFF LIKE THIS?! The article also mentions that the few shelters that exist in Sweden are practically empty... with breeding laws and legislation like this, I can certainly understand why. As long as there is a single dollar to be made, nothing will change. The majority of AKC's income comes from registrations. (I need to find the reference for that) - and the majority of those registrations come from puppy mills. Why on earth would they cut their own financial throats by imposing stricter rules and regulations that must be met before a dog or litter can be registered. I guess I knew the answer before I even typed that... I also guess I just keep waiting for some integrity to kick in with these people Disappointing, really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tranquilis Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 I guess I knew the answer before I even typed that... I also guess I just keep waiting for some integrity to kick in with these people Disappointing, really.Nope. If they haven't previously, it won't grow overnight. Nor over years. The current leadership was raised up in the corrupt culture of the AKC, and to them, what they are doing is the 'way things are done.' They need an external reason to change. The Swedes have a much smaller organization, so the documentary had a much greater impact, providing the needed external reason. I also don't think they're nearly as beholden to commerical breeders as the AKC is, so are more free to vote their conscience without the almighty Kroner getting in the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debbie Meier Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 How wonderful!! What is so wrong about this that the AKC can't adopt a program like this?? How many fewer health problems would there be and how many more responsible breeders would there be? But does Sweden really have it right? Does Sweden have the same set up as Germany, if they do, then I don't think you would want that system, let alone really think it was the right way of doing things. Maybe it seems "Right" as far as the lack of dogs in shelters, maybe is seems "Right" as far as creating healthy puppies now, but what about 20-50 years from now, do the policies allow for diversity? What happens when the breeds get so closely inbred that they begin to implode? What happens when we discover that breeding a certain gene to entire dominence also contributes to the perminent recessiveness of something that we needed? I can hear someone say, import!!! But if every country has the same types of policies, or if importing is subject to the same policies as the native population how long before there is no where to import from? I think it is just another level of closing a breeding population. Cross breeding is not allowed, unregistered dogs are not allowed, multiple registries are not allowed. It's great to skip through the flowers and under the rainbows dreaming of a perfect world where every dog is breed to the highest of standards and every dog has a home, but ultimately you gotta consider the unintended consequences. Thinking about, who's standard is being imposed on all breeders and if AKC was to want to adopt the plan simular to Sweden, what would the first thing that they would want? The government to limit registries, require that all dogs that are bred to be registered, and any dog not approved for breeding be spayed or neutered . If they don't when the breeder restrictions came about the breeders would bail to different registries. Don't think that AKC would not want to do it, it would be great for business. You can't forget that when we want "Them" to do something it usually effects "Us" too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desertranger Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 How can this statement be possible? If they have no interest then how can they be good working dogs? I don't that would matter as long as you weren't planning on breeding them. (I'm assuming he's referencing SAR work or some other form of "work" but not stockwork.) Out of any given litter there will be dogs with a medium or low amount of drive and little interest or no in stock of any kind. I've always looked for these dogs because they're great for SAR, trail and camp work and drayage. Over and above the intelligence level of a BC they have strength, stamina and agility something needed on a long days hike or patrol. You need that for certain kinds of work. Unfortunately Barbie collies also fit that bill in many respects. I used to breed BCs working on dogs better bred for the type of work I do. My dogs have always been in the public eye. They need to be a lot more passive and friendly than a regular BC yet still to be able to perform jobs that calls for the IQ and abilities of a BC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS Cressa Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 I just picked up the September/October issue of The Bark magazine and was excited to see an article on the subject I'm doing my class presentation in. The article talks about the backlash from the BBC documentary "Pedigree Dogs Exposed", discussing how outraged the public is, how Crufts is now a damaged name brand, and talked about the idiocy of the people in charge of the kennel clubs. Towards the end of the article, they talk about the Swedish Kennel Club and all the wonderful things they do as a dog organization. I just wanted to share a little of that here: Excerpts from "The Cost of Perfection" by Beverly Cuddy How wonderful!! What is so wrong about this that the AKC can't adopt a program like this?? How many fewer health problems would there be and how many more responsible breeders would there be? Well, considering they don't cheat around the system... there's got to be some loop-hole proof system the Swedes are using. Again, fantastic! I wonder, though, what this herding test for the Border Collies requires... anyone know about this? WHY DOESN'T THE AKC OR THE US ADOPT STUFF LIKE THIS?! The article also mentions that the few shelters that exist in Sweden are practically empty... with breeding laws and legislation like this, I can certainly understand why. I also wonder if this still only applies to the responsible breeders and that there are still garbage breeders who don't follow the rules. Is this the rule or the exception? If this was adopted in the US, would people follow the rules or simply ignore the KC? The rest of the article (and the magazine!) is really great, I recommend picking it up! um no offence but WOW! Does ABCA enforce any of their dogs to be heath tested to breed? or To prove their dogs can herd before they can be bred? No need to just focus on AKC since we already know most people feeling on AKC and I am also pretty sure most people on these board don't even own an AKC border collie. Why not focus this type of thread on the registry that most people are part of on this board? That way you can have a intelligent conversation instead of just repeated bashing AKC. I think if a law was pass stating all dogs must be heath tested and proven to be bred only the good breeder will abide by it but most good breeder already prove their dogs worth and test them. The bad breeder won't care and keep on breeding. Think of how well the spayed/neuter laws are holding up or how well they are enforced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alchemist Posted October 3, 2009 Report Share Posted October 3, 2009 I have no problem in bashing the AKC - reading "The Dog Wars" this summer was a real eye-opener. In all fairness, though, and at the risk of issuing a somewhat provocative challenge... how much better is ABCA? I note that ABCA doesn't allow registration of "Dogs and pups which are themselves or are offspring of any dog having PRA or CEA". So in that respect they're clearly a huge step ahead of AKC and deserve a warm pat on the back. I also applaud their refusal to register any offspring of any dog (or bitch) awarded a "conformation" championship. But ABCA doesn't have a similar ban for the other (and more prevalent, according to http://www.americanbordercollie.org/Health...%20Collies.htm) heritable condition in BCs - canine hip dysplasia. The ABCA website recommends "breed only hip tested, unaffected parents" - but doesn't seem to put any "teeth" to this by requiring proof of OFA (or equivalent) certification. (Please correct me if I'm wrong; I'm not a breeder, nor do I ever intend to become one. I feel I'd have to start by owning sheep, and I don't see that in my near future). I'm sure it is tricky, trying to decide what health issues should merit refusal of registration. And I know that the heritability of CHD is nowhere near as straightforward as that for CEA. I'm not a canine geneticist so any opinion I may have on CHD is probably worth the cost of free advice - nothing. I am certain, though, that if you were to rigidly screen out all health problems, you would find yourself at risk of losing some of the qualities that make BCs the wonderful working dogs that they are - with all the intelligence and desire to please that's associated with their working talents. That being said, in my opinion, it would be hard to justify breeding two severely dysplastic dogs, given the chances of their offspring developing CHD. Is importing BCs the solution? I was startled to learn that it's hard to find an ISDS dog these days that don't descent from Wiston Cap (born in 1963): by 1990, there were almost no dogs registered by ISDS without him in their pedigrees (see http://www.bcdb.info/article2/wsn2.htm if you want more information). Seems to my uneducated eyes like a lot of gene transmission in less than 27 years! I would hope that anyone looking to purchase a BC puppy would have done enough research to realize, first, that they should run - not walk - from an AKC (only) registered pup. Second, that they should ascertain the status of the parents with respect to CEA, PRA, and CHD. That's only the very beginning (parents' temperament and working ability, how the pups are raised and socialized also rank high), but it's the sort of things that are easily quantified and that ABCA could monitor and use as a metric for granting registration privileges. What do the rest of you think? How far should ABCA go in setting the standard that AKC should follow (assuming AKC were to really care about the quality of the dogs it registered, which I concede is moot?) - Lynn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Journey Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 WHY DOESN'T THE AKC OR THE US ADOPT STUFF LIKE THIS?! The article also mentions that the few shelters that exist in Sweden are practically empty... with breeding laws and legislation like this, I can certainly understand why. Do you really want the Government running and controlling the breeding of dogs? Something like this imo would be asking and giving permission for PETA and H$U$ to step right in and abolish all ownership of pets. Registries in this country are a dime a dozen. The first one to implement something this drastic will be broke before the end of the month. While it sounds good and looks good on paper in reality I doubt it would work. Sure it would be nice for ACK to clean up their end of it but as others have pointed out....ain't gonna happen and why only them? Here's a case where I might agree with the famous phrase "we're just a registry" I'd prefer that over government control anyday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoloRiver Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 Americans would never go for this level of control from any registering body (a registering body is not the same thing as the government, even if it cooperates with the government at times on legislation). If the AKC, or any other registering organization, attempted to put regulations like this in place, breeders would leave in droves for another registry or just start one up themselves. My guess is that if ABCA tried something like this it would be dead in the water inside of six months because working Border Collie people are even less likely to put up with this kind of regulation than conformation breeders would be. America has a "you're not the boss of me" streak that just doesn't characterize most European countries, and definitely does not characterize Sweden. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tranquilis Posted October 4, 2009 Report Share Posted October 4, 2009 Americans would never go for this level of control from any registering body (a registering body is not the same thing as the government, even if it cooperates with the government at times on legislation). If the AKC, or any other registering organization, attempted to put regulations like this in place, breeders would leave in droves for another registry or just start one up themselves. This has been the situation with the Shiloh Shepherd - The breed founder and warden is draconian in her control of the breed's genetics - With good, sound scientific and empirical backing. The genepool is too narrow to allow breeding to NOT be centrally regulated. Never-the-less, breeders who knew this beforehand have still jumped ship in pretty significant numbers when told that their particular bitch or stud couldn't mate with that specific other dog, or that their favored dog had a disqualifying fault, or that they couldn't breed back-to-back heats. Now there are nearly a half dozen off-shoot registries, and the breakaway dogs are markedly different from the main line dogs - And generally not in a favorable way, either. Imagine if the AKC were to try this across all breeds, given the current climate withing the dog world? It would be beyond chaos. The current system sucks, but I really don't see a way forward in the US short of a complete brainwipe of not only the AKC, but also of many of the 'big hat' breeders in the various breeds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlegirl Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 I am more interested in this from the genetics standpoint. We all know that 2 dogs that are OFA good can still produce a dysplastic pup. So, while you perhaps can reduce the dysplasia by only selecting those who receive good hip ratings, that doesn't guarantee anything. Additionally, the OFA system cannot differentiate between an injury and a truly dysplastic hip. So, there are flaws right off the bat. And what do you do with dogs that are carriers ( not affected) of CEA for example ??? Does that system automatically throw them out of the genepool ? What about things like missing teeth ? Does the inspector come & look first before you are issued a breeding pass ? There are just too many intangibles when breeding dogs. Its a lot more than just throwing 2 OFA certified dogs together and calling it a breeding ....... JMO....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alchemist Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 The genetics of CEA are pretty straightforward: see http://www.americanbordercollie.org/Health...r%20Collies.htm for details. It's "autosomal recessive", which means the dog will only display CEA if they have two copies of the gene (one from the mother, the other from the father). If he or she has one copy, they'll be "carriers" but won't be affected. They should not be bred to other carriers as their pups will have a 1 in 4 chance of receiving two copies of the gene. The way the ABCA registration goes, they won't register "Dogs and pups which ... themselves [have] CEA" - i.e., which have two copies of the gene. They also won't register progeny of affected dogs (who might well be unaffected carriers), which on the surface seems a bit unfair given that they'd register CEA carrier pups of unaffected dogs who are themselves carriers. I think the logic is that if they wouldn't register the affected parent for health reasons, then they shouldn't register its progeny. Note that all offspring of an affected dog would be (at a minimum) carriers. As far as canine hip dysplasia goes, the heritability is nowhere near as straightforward (see link above for a nice summary). For one thing, the condition seems to be polygenetic (it's controlled by more than one gene); this increases the chances that any particular dog can be asymptomatic and still be a carrier. I'm pretty sure that I've read that the incidence of CHD does decrease (albeit slowly) when breeders select against it. I wish I could lay my hand on that paper at present. Maybe someone else has the references to those studies? It is indeed possible to breed two unaffected dogs and still end up with an affected pup. I was digging through the topic at one point and spotted an interesting table that gave percentages of pups with CHD that originated from litters in which two dogs rated "good" or "excellent" had been bred, vs. the outcome if a "good" were bred to a "fair", and so forth. While there are no guarantees of unaffected pups, the incidence of affected pups rose sharply the lower the rating of the parents, to the point where (as I recall) the odds were greater than 50% of an affected pup from breeding two affected parents. That was why I concurred with ABCA's recommendation to "breed only hip tested, unaffected parents", and suggested that perhaps more "teeth" might be warranted. Though I'm willing to concede, as Melanie suggested, that this might put a registry out of business. Wish I had time to keep digging to see if I could find that table, but it's getting late here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Journey Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 The way the ABCA registration goes, they won't register "Dogs and pups which ... themselves [have] CEA" - i.e., which have two copies of the gene. The policy changed. Here's how it read now (from the ABCA website). The ABCA has rescinded its policy of denying registration to dogs and pups which have Collie Eye Anomaly (CEA), or are offspring of a dog having CEA. This exclusionary policy was introduced at a time when there was no way short of test breedings to determine whether a dog was a CEA carrier. In that situation, barring registration of CEA affected dogs was the only way available to control spread of the mutation in our population. Now that a DNA test is available to determine Normal, Carrier, and Affected status, and we have had several years of experience with the accuracy and effectiveness of the test, a more sophisticated breeding strategy can be used to ensure that affected pups are not produced and to gradually reduce the percentage of carriers in the population (see Health and Genetics of Border Collies for the ABCA’s CEA breeding recommendations). Consequently, the ABCA believes it is no longer necessary to exclude CEA affected dogs and their offspring from registration, and that the abolition of this policy will remove a factor which may have discouraged some members from testing their dogs. The PRA ban, of little value because PRA has been found to be virtually non-existent in our population, is also rescinded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tranquilis Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 I'm pretty sure that I've read that the incidence of CHD does decrease (albeit slowly) when breeders select against it. I wish I could lay my hand on that paper at present. Maybe someone else has the references to those studies?Studies, no. Empirical evidence, yes. The splits in the Shiloh community provide a good case study. In those registries where strict breeding control is exercised and dogs with CHD are down-checked and not allowed to breed, CHD is diminishing. In those registries wherein breeding control is less rigidly enforced, it's progressed. One registry conducts extensive surveys of all littermates in each breeding, so that potential latent faults of breed-worthy pups can be identified. As generation follows generation, extensive maps of particular faults are built, leading to identification of which ancestors contriubted to that fault. It's possible now, for at least some faults, to read a potential stud or bitch's pedigree, and predict in detail which landmines lay in wait, allowing selection of best-suited pairings. But this is again that drastic, despotic breed-warden controlled breeding regimen which is anathema to many, never mind the good results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlegirl Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 Exactly my point ....... I have studied that hip table extensively , there is a direct link from the OFA website. But I repeat that OFA does have flaws. I had a male that I bred whos parents were both OFA Good. When said male was a pup, he sustained an injury. When I submitted his hip xrays at 2 years old, one came back borderline. I immediately took him to an orthopedist specialist who assured me that his hips looked good. This ortho was very interested in OFAs opinion and contacted them . The OFA vet that he spoke with explained that they obviously could not determine if this issue was due to an injury or genetics. Now this goes back almost 10 years. After much research and a second opinion, I did use this dog for breeding. I bred from this dog twice and he has not produced a dysplastic pup. His offspring have all come back OFA good or excellent. In the above scenario , this dog would not have been allowed to be bred . It is also interesting to note that the DEPTH of a hip pedigree is a much better indicator of what may be produced. And lastly, there is much debate as to whether there is even such a beast as unilateral hip dysplasia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Journey Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 It is also interesting to note that the DEPTH of a hip pedigree is a much better indicator of what may be produced. While depth is good you also need to look lateral even more so imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Billadeau Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 food for thought while you're discussing CHD in Border Collies..... So why, after all the years of strict selection for herding work, do Border Collies still have hip dysplasia? Why have they not naturally gravitated toward the perfect hip status over all these generations like the racing Greyhound? Perhaps, in our breed, one of the risk factors for HD, laxity, is something that has been inadvertently selected for in their performance. The good news is that although it appears Border Collies may, as a breed, have somewhat lax hips, predisposing them to HD, many also have the protective factors such as increased pelvic muscle mass and good hip formation and fit. Increased pelvic muscle mass and good hip formation are factors not taken into account during PennHIP laxity measurements and not always measured accurately in the standard OFA view. So perhaps the goal should be to find a breed specific test to determine functional soundness in our dogs rather than to put total stock in an all breed, one-size-fits-all approach or in procedures tested in breeds whose primary functions are unlike ours. The identification and selection for those HD protective factors prevalent in the Border Collie breed may well be the most effective strategy to preserve the working characteristics in our breed while lowering the incidence of HD. source: My Thoughts on Developing a Wider View of Hip Dysplasia in the Border Collie by C. Denise Wall, Ph.D. I agree that testing hips for "within normal limits" (good formation and fit) is a prudent part of breeding decisions; but I'd be careful about setting too restrictive of a hip status as part of the breeding selection process. Another thing to keep in mind is our gene pool of sufficiently talented working dogs is quite small (in terms of genetic diversity); genetic diversity helps reduce the prevalence and rate of inherited diseases. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenajo Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 While depth is good you also need to look lateral even more so imo. The only breeding program that OFA has had real impact with (impact, not total solution) is ones like th guide/service dog breeding programs where they look at breadth of pedigree. Also called "Lateral" as Karen describes it, or "sides" Depth means pretty much nothing sadly. You can have parents/grands/greatgrds/gg etc all clear and if all their littermates have problems then you are likely bringing forward the bad genes with each generations. What I don't like about absolute systems is the potential to loose good dogs through these arbitrary rules. For example if you had an excellent working dogs that was proven late age functionally sound but couldn't pass OFA, yet was from a litter and a set of parents who's littermates were all hip healthy....that dog could still reasonably be considered for well selected breeding. He would be a far better dog genetically than an equal worker who was not late age functionally sound or who came from a breadth of pedigree that showed signficant hip problems. What so many of these rulebound breeding systems (both national ones and the ack minded "good" breeder) is that none of these genetics tests like OFA or CEA-dna was supposed to be used a a culling tool or a way to blackmark lines as "bad" or "good". They were supposed to be used a part of a selection process. As long as we continue to use genetic testing as a weapon of arbitrary culling, instead of a tool for knowledgable breeding, we aren't going to get anywhere we want to be with these dogs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlegirl Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 While depth is good you also need to look lateral even more so imo. Yes, I think we are speaking the same language. IE, looking at the pedigree laterally means depth to me. I look for consistency . I would rather see 3 generations of fair to good hips than 1 generation that may contain an excellent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.