Early Takeoff Syndrome?

[ScoutTS]

Dear Doggers,

 

Can somebody explain how breeding Border Collies for agility and/or against "Early Takeoff Syndrome" differs morally from breeding them for conformation?

 

Donald McCaig

[Mark Billadeau]

Kristine's argument (her posts give this impression) is I should condone/accept the research & hopefully the development of a genetic test for ETS because a minority of the tests run will be used to ease some owner's minds as to why their dog no longer jumps clean even though the majority of the tests run will be used to breed a better agility Border Collie.

 

Kristine looks at this from the individual dog owner's point of view (based upon the impression her posts give) while I look at this from the point of view of the impact on the breed. This is a common conflict on this board, where some are primarily (or only) concerned about individual dogs while others are concerned about the entire breed first and then individual dogs. In this case (being able to diagnose why a dog no longer jumps clean), the integrity of the breed will always be of greater concern to me.

[ScoutTS]

Mr. McCaig asks: Can somebody explain how breeding Border Collies for agility and/or against "Early Takeoff Syndrome" differs morally from breeding them for conformation?

 

In terms of the "moral" aspect, I think breeding for sports is very similar to breeding for conformation. In terms of impact to the breed, my opinion is that such breeding may be even more deleterious. The biggest reason for this is that there are far more border collies being bred for agility than for conformation, so the impact of the breed from sports will be far greater. That is not a good thing for the border collie.

 

After being very active in agility (not with border collies, but other herding breeds), my thinking has evolved on this issue. There was a time when I didn't appreciate or understand the danger that these types of breedings can do. Although I'm not an expert, I have seen too many examples of border collies that seem to have lost the "talent" for herding after even one generation of unfocused breeding. I now firmly stand on the side of breeding only those border collies that excel in stock work as defined by the herding community. I also now have my own border collie bred from working stock, and we are hoping to partner up to run border collie herding trials.

 

As far as ETS goes- I've done some reading on this subject and I wonder if anyone has considered that dogs weren't meant to do the extreme jumping and other maneuvers required on today's international agility courses? If it doesn't impact the health of the dog or the purpose (herding) for which the breed was developed, it doesn't seem to merit much priority in my view.

[Root Beer]

Kristine's argument (her posts give this impression) is I should condone/accept the research & hopefully the development of a genetic test for ETS because a minority of the tests run will be used to ease some owner's minds as to why their dog no longer jumps clean even though the majority of the tests run will be used to breed a better agility Border Collie.

 

A great example of where attributing motive to another person can be just plain wrong.

 

My point is, and has never been, that you should condone it.

 

My point is, and has always been, that you, in fact, do not know the minds or the motives of all who wish to see these tests done and that such studies may well yield results that are helpful to those who are struggling with the issue. And, that the application of the results of such studies may well have benefits that go far beyond breeding (although, yes - some will use the results to make breeding decisions) or seeking placements (although, yes - some will use the results to attempt to make progress in that regard). My point is, and has always been, that the applications and benefits of such studies may go well beyond either of those two possibilities, and that I can certainly relate (from the perspective of an owner/trainer/handler of a dog with a different issue that does bear some similarity in its practical effects on the dog's ability to participate in competitive sports) to those who want to see such studies done.

 

I see the potential for great value in these studies. You do not. We disagree, and I am fairly certain that we will continue to disagree on this matter.

 

Kristine looks at this from the individual dog owner's point of view (based upon the impression her posts give) while I look at this from the point of view of the impact on the breed.

 

Correction - I look at this from both points of view. I would say that you and I agree that ETS in certain lines should not be a consideration in breeding working Border Collies. Where you and I appear to differ (based upon the impression that your posts give) is that I do not exclude the individual dog owner's point of view in my consideration of the matter, and if study of the issue can benefit individual dog and handler teams who are dealing with the issue in practice, then I would maintain that such study absolutely should be done, given that there are those interested in undertaking such study, as there are in this case.

 

I consider this a matter of both/and, not a matter of either/or.

[Ooky]

Ok, say this is a both/and. Say research into this and development of a genetic test benefits some individual dog/handler teams, and also is to the detriment of the border collie as a breed at the same time. If the net result is negative to the breed, would you still condone it? Meaning, should the benefit to that group of handlers, who are not even engaging in an activity that requires border collies at all, be considered worth the damage to the breed in your view? I guess my other question is since you agree with the viewpoint that such a test would be used in breeding decisions, do you think such a practice would cause further harm to the breed in general? I mean even worse than the harm the sport breeders do now. If not, why not?

[Root Beer]

Ok, say this is a both/and. Say research into this and development of a genetic test benefits some individual dog/handler teams, and also is to the detriment of the border collie as a breed at the same time. If the net result is negative to the breed, would you still condone it?

 

Do I condone research, study, the pursuit of knowledge on a particular issue?

 

I'll be honest - that strikes me as an odd question.

 

My point of view is this: The fact that there are breeders who will use the information in a detrimental way is a not justification for out and out opposition to research that has the potential to provide insight into an issue that affects those who are dealing with it now, and will deal with it in the future.

 

The problem of breeders making choices that will be detrimental to the Border Collie breed does not lie with the information being gained, but with the breeders themselves.

 

Those breeders who are committed to breeding Border Collies to be working dogs are going to do so, regardless of the information that is out there about ETS.

 

I do not condone misuse of information that is gained from any kind of research, and this is true of matters that are far more important to me than anything dog related.

 

At the same time, if there are facts to be learned and those who care to study a matter, I absolutely support that endeavor.

 

I do not consider the fact that there are those who will choose to misuse the information to be a reason to keep that information away from those who will benefit by it.

 

Meaning, should the benefit to that group of handlers, who are not even engaging in an activity that requires border collies at all, be considered worth the damage to the breed in your view?

 

Whether Border Collies are "required" to do Agility or not is irrelevant to the question of whether or not research should be done on ETS. There are Border Collie and handler teams who are affected by this issue, just as there are teams that include dogs of other breeds.

 

I guess my other question is since you agree with the viewpoint that such a test would be used in breeding decisions, do you think such a practice would cause further harm to the breed in general? I mean even worse than the harm the sport breeders do now. If not, why not?

 

I do not know exactly what choices the sport breeders would make as a result of more available information about ETS, so that is not really a question to which I can give an answer.

[Ooky]

I could see how you could think that. As a researcher myself I am probably way more used to thinking about a lot of research that really does NOT need to be done. Because the hypotheses are useless or negative effects could outweigh potential positives. OR because in a world of limited resources and funding, the question is not of use to enough people. And that's exactly how I think of this condition. As you have said many times, other may, and apparently do, disagree.

 

I wasn't trying to make these questions about research and freedom of research in general though. I'm trying to talk about capital B Border Collie. The breed. And consistently, throughout the entire year this thread has been going, you are not. You are talking about individuals - individual dogs, individual teams, individual handlers, just like Mark is saying. Trees vs. forest I guess, so OK. I'll take your word for it this really could help someone feel better about their dog somehow, but I can't agree that has nothing to do with handler ego IF it is true. So, sure, who am I to try and take away these people's happiness? That's the best argument I can think of against the good of the many outweighing the good of the few-type arguments. But when I think of individuals, I personally think of ranchers having a harder and harder time finding a well-bred border collie, and dilution of some traits, skewing of others out of balance. Then I get really mad and think of ME the individual, 20 years from now unable to find a border collie like Odin and many of the other wonderful dogs I've known - like the german shepherd people today. I will be cursing this Meckleburg woman's name! (joke, btw - I am sure she is the best trainer and also a super nice lady. to SOME. ha.)

 

As you say the responsible working breeders will always be out there making decisions based on work regardless, but that's completely ignoring the dartboard theory, the quality of the pool of B-level workers you have to draw from. The base of the main population influences the level of the B-players which will eventually influence level, health etc of the A players. Not to mention the behavioral characteristics of the general pool of dogs most of us who are pet owners will mainly have access to. Is this the thing that's going to do it? Obviously not this alone but it's extremely unlikely to help the by-all-accounts worsening situation either.

 

There are Border Collie and handler teams who are affected by this issue, just as there are teams that include dogs of other breeds.

 

Exposing my ignorance here, ARE there other breeds of dogs they think have this? If so why are they so sure it is genetic?

[terrecar]

Is it really completely inconceivable that another person may well be motivated by something else?

 

Your point is well made here, but these are individual differences, not general tendencies in the psychological dynamics of competition. I absolutely agree with you that the motivation of individuals may differ, ergo it is possible that ego is not a motivator in a particular competition for a particular person.

 

However, possibilities do not create probabilities.

 

We are talking about competition, after all, with all that it implies, and ego is undoubtedly a component (though again, not a necessary component) of competition (if psychological research is to be believed). I think sometimes people see "ego" but think "overblown ego".

 

Since we are talking about supporting research within the larger context of a competitive endeavor, I would have to question the justification for such research. If it is to aid in a competitive effort with no other redeeming value, it makes little sense to me. If it is research for the sake of research, I see no point to it.

 

Like many discussions here, it comes down to what we value; either individually or collectively.

[Mark Billadeau]

A great example of where attributing motive to another person can be just plain wrong.

 

My point is, and has never been, that you should condone it.

But you do what me to accept it (not oppose it).

although, yes - some will use the results to make breeding decisions

Based upon my experience with genetic testing in dogs, you appear to be grossly underestimating how many people will use this test for breeding, as compared to other reasons for using the test.

 

Linda Mecklenburg thinks ETS has a genetic cause and advises against breeding affected dogs. How do you think she will advise people to use a test for ETS if one is developed?

 

The fact that there are breeders who will use the information in a detrimental way is a not justification for out and out opposition to research that has the potential to provide insight into an issue that affects those who are dealing with it now, and will deal with it in the future.

Actually, this is precisely why to oppose the research; but then I'm considering the breed as a whole. I will be just as opposed to finding the genetic markers for ear set, tail carriage, eye color, etc; because they will be used in the same way show ring wins are used for breeding selection. As we have discussed in the past, research time of those able and willing to do the genetic studies is not unlimited; studying ETS takes away time from epilepsy, EOD, and other health issues.

 

 

At this point I have made clear to all other readers why this research/test is not in the best interest of the breed as a whole and that the test will primarily be used to breed a better agility Border Collie. The benefit for individual dogs & owners accounting for a small percentage use of a genetic test for other purposes than breeding selection cannot be justified relative to the harm the majority of the test usage will do to the entire breed.

 

[brndlbc]

"ARE there other breeds of dogs they think have this?"

 

Yes there are. ETS is not just an issue for Border Collies. At trials I have seen various breeds other than herding breeds that have shown the "symptoms" most notably a PWD who struggled with 16 inch jumps. I have personally worked with a Cairn Terrier who is progressively getting worse in his ability to negotiate spread jumps and is now having issues with single jumps. We have done all sorts of grid work with him and this dog has never been a speed demon so I have to rule out recklessness as a reason yet at the same time he is not lacking confidence. He weaves just fine.

[Blackdawgs]

Not to mention that ETS has yet to be described in the peer-reviewed scientific literature.

[jdarling]

My point is, and has always been, that you, in fact, do not know the minds or the motives of all who wish to see these tests done..

 

With all due respect, Kristine, neither do you.

 

In one of the last marathon threads, you were talking about how much you and your dogs enjoy video competition because your dog can't handle live competition, so that tells me you're not on the circuit much. I understand that you feel that the very small sampling of the people you know at the local competitions you go to gives you a good idea of what's out there in relation to this discussion, but I think it's a case of you don't know what you don't know. I understand you're on a lot of the discussion boards, but what comes out of people's mouths, and what they actually do, often times are two very different beasts. Many novices trial "just for fun" or to "work" their dogs in different places, etc., because attempting to be competitive at that level would be a waste of time. Those aren't the folks that are being discussed here. The impression I'm getting is that the folks being discussed here are the highly competitive folks who are trying to breed the better dog, want that winning edge, and are trying to find something to give them that. Seeing a dog knock a bars down repeatedly, they want to fix that. So they'll breed against it. Sure, that will help the agility dog (I guess?) but you're no long breeding working dogs.

[Mark Billadeau]

So how does a provider of canine genetic tests market their tests? Do they market them to help owners figure out why their dogs are not performing as well as they could or do they market them for breeding?

 

Below are the business models for 3 canine testing companies. These business models are geared towards financial success of the companies and therefore target the highest volume of tests. ALL are geared towards genetic testing for breeding.

 

I offer these as support of my assertion that the majority of genetic tests run will be used for breeding; and other motivations for testing a dog are a small percentage for the use of genetic tests.

 

 

Animal Genetics offers a variety of canine genetic testing services. Coat color and length testing allows breeders to anticipate the phenotypes of potential offspring[, maximizing the potential to produce the most favorable coat types. Also, many canine genetic disorders are recessive, meaning that a dog can be a carrier of a potentially devastating disease and not show any signs. DNA testing helps breeders to ensure the health of a litter by screening for genetic disorders. Genetic testing is an extremely accurate and reliable way of determining a dog's genotype and screening for possible genetic disorders.

 

VetGen:The plan they formed was to create an exhaustive body of canine genetic markers which would saturate the canine chromosome. It was theorized that these markers would be extremely useful in researching genetic diseases and in the development of disease detection tests. Through this strategy, the team intended to attack canine genetic diseases and thus enhance the health of purebred dogs.

 

OPTIGEN provides the highest diagnostic accuracy available, minimum turn-around time for report and interpretation, and full confidentiality. Each test is read independently by two staff scientists. Our interpretive report and website pages include information on:

- preventing genetic disease

- how to safely eliminate undesired genes from breeding stock

- how to maintain desired breeding lines if critical dogs are carriers or even affected

- trends in disease frequency derived from our confidential database

[Root Beer]

With all due respect, Kristine, neither do you.

 

I do know that there are most likely those who have motives that I most likely haven't considered or taken into account.

 

But I do know for a fact, from talking to fellow sport participants, and watching the way that they interact with their dogs during competitions in the face of every outcome imaginable, that there are those who have chosen to be there for reasons that go beyond ego and breeding.

 

If you choose not to believe it, that is certainly your perogative. However, that choice in no way changes the true motivations of those folks. Attributing motives to others that are, in fact, not in play, is only a guess at best.

 

In one of the last marathon threads, you were talking about how much you and your dogs enjoy video competition because your dog can't handle live competition, so that tells me you're not on the circuit much.

 

A false assumption.

 

There was exactly one year when I participated in video events more than live events because my Agility dog was dying and could no longer compete at all. That after 4 years of only live competitions where she moved all the way from the first level into the highest (point being - we attended quite a lot of live competitions). She never did any video work. After retiring my Freestyle dog from live events, after 5 years of only live competitions, because his arthritis had progressed to the point where being at live events all day was causing him to be stiff, he moved into all video work. My young girl was not yet ready to compete that year. We were still working foundations at that point.

 

Yes, there was one year - 2011, when I attended only a few live events. "A few" being 6 that I can recall off the top of my head. That was after 5 years of trialing - live - sometimes 2 or 3 times a month.

 

This year I have done very little video work because my newest girl has begun live events, so this year was a very fun "comeback" year for me, as we attended quite a few Agility events, in two venues, and Freestyle events.

 

I have exactly one dog out of four with whom I do primarily video work - the noise phobic one. However, I do take him to limited live events.

 

So, the assumption that I haven't been "on the circuit much" is false. Percentage wise, my experience has been about 90% live and 10% video.

 

I understand that you feel that the very small sampling of the people you know at the local competitions you go to gives you a good idea of what's out there in relation to this discussion,

 

Again, incorrect presumption.

 

Unless you can tell me exactly how many people I have talked to across 3 competition venues, you really have no idea how large or small the sampling of people I have spoken with is.

 

It is certainly enough that I can say with certainty that there are reasons that go beyond breeding and ego why people compete.

 

but I think it's a case of you don't know what you don't know.

 

I would say the same of those who claim, absolutely, that there can be no other motives beyond breeding or ego for choosing to compete.

 

You most certainly don't know what you don't know.

 

I understand you're on a lot of the discussion boards, but what comes out of people's mouths, and what they actually do, often times are two very different beasts.

 

On that, Jodi, you and I completely agree.

 

The demeanor that I see some people have toward their dogs, in the face of continual "failure" on a purely surface level in competitions speaks far louder than words.

 

There are many who get angry with their dogs. There are many who reach a certain point and quit. There are others who move from one dog to another.

 

Yet, there are those who treat their dogs with respect and appreciation, even when they NQ in the worst way. There are those who come back year after year, always peaceful and pleased to be there, in spite of bringing back a dog who never makes it out of the lowest levels.

 

I see these people - they stand out to me. I have more admiration for them than I do for those who get the championship titles.

 

These people aren't breeding, and they are certainly not earning accolades. They could be doing what they are doing in their backyards, yet they choose to come out, again and again, to competitions where they display obvious joy at being out there with their dogs, regardless of the outcome.

 

That absolutely speaks louder than the words alone of anyone in any discussion group.

 

And when they say something like, "My dog and I do this for the enjoyment of being out there accomplishing something together", I take them at their word because their actions attest to that fact.

 

Could information on ETS help some teams who fall in that category? It is possible. Therefore, I support the efforts to learn as much about it as possible.

[Root Beer]

But you do what me to accept it (not oppose it).

 

No, I don't.

 

I have said a number of times that we will have to agree to disagree on this.

 

Obviously, we oppose one another's point of view on the matter. That is what it is.

 

Unless someone can produce concrete evidence that shows that there is absolutely no way that research on ETS (which may include, but is not limited to, genetic testing) can ever benefit dog and handler teams who are currently dealing with this issue, or will in the future, I will continue to hold the position that this research should be done, for the sake of those teams.

 

Presumptions of competitor motive, psychological journals, the choices of breeders, the fact that the issue affects dogs other than Border Collies, claims that it is a training issue by those who have not actually worked with ETS dogs, the fact that it is an Agility issue, not a stockwork issue, etc., do not serve to prove that such benefits are not possible.

[Smalahundur]

In my humble opinion the above debate is not so much about ETS. It is about whether or not one thinks breeding for a sport/agility purpose is acceptable.

[Mark Billadeau]

So what if an ETS test could benefit a few if the majority of the tests will be used to harm the entire breed.

 

We are back to which is more important, the integrity of an entire breed or the possibility of a genetic defect that impacts a dog's ability to jump clean and an owner learning this. You clearly feel the needs of a few agility teams are more important than the preserving the integrity of an entire breed (because you're willing to accept how the test will be used to adversely impact the breed).

 

I would not be against a possible ETS test if it is only available to altered dogs.

[terrecar]

I am not clear on how these tests would hurt the entire breed. If a genetic test is used to rule out affected animals, that would mean fewer litters of affected animals. If it were used to continue the use of unaffected animals, why would you assume that those dogs would not otherwise be bred anyway, or that they would perhaps be bred more often? I guess I am assuming the test would be used to decide which dogs to breed, and would have little impact on the number of dogs bred. That may not be a correct assumption.

 

Or, are you speaking in terms of a test of this sort being a stamp of approval for breeding sport collies in general, and ergo an encouragement of such practices? This isn't a challenge (the ego is in check, I swear). It is an honest question. It could be that I haven't thought it through. From now on I will be blaming my lapses in critical thinking on my physical ailments

 

 

Still, from what I am reading, I find ETS of insufficient remarkableness (is that really a word?) to warrant a genetic test.

[Mark Billadeau]

ETS is an agility specific "syndrome"; it is not a stockdog issue (dogs are not required to cleanly jump hurdles to manage livestock).

 

A test for ETS would have no benefit for the breeding of stockdogs.

A test for ETS would facilitate the breeding of sport border collies.

Breeding for something other than livestock damages our breed.

[terrecar]

ETS is an agility specific "syndrome"; it is not a stockdog issue (dogs are not required to cleanly jump hurdles to manage livestock).

 

A test for ETS would have no benefit for the breeding of stockdogs.

A test for ETS would facilitate the breeding of sport border collies.

Breeding for something other than livestock damages our breed.

 

 

Now that's a(n) (implied) syllogism that I can understand. Thanks Mark

[Ooky]

I think the example of development AND marketing of genetic tests for ear sets, candy coat colors, conformation, etc., are a very good analogy. It may be much easier to see why those would do NO good to the breed and would likely do much harm.

 

I think with ETS, if you believe it is a physiological and also genetic condition, its easier to imagine this "syndrome" being something that really might be bad for the dog in a more general sense. First of all, there is the very strategic use of the word "syndrome", which already implies disease. Secondly, you might be thinking these dogs have neurological problems, they are looking into vision issues etc.

 

However, this all seems like hype to me. First of all, the best and brightest of agility didn't even recognize this "syndrome" themselves until somewhat recently - like less than 10 years ago. So, that says to me this isn't even a big problem FOR most agility UNLESS this was a very recent mutation and that's tyhe reason no one identified it until recently. Which it can't be a recent mutation, if it affects other dog breeds. So, I agree a good hypothesis is the game has changed so much that it is able to now isolate these dogs that just aren't the greatest for agility in this very specific way, or this thing really really does not affect the life of dogs not doing agility. Or maybe it just isn't real at all.

 

So, funds that may have been used to research epilepsy, BCC, noise phobia, or even more general health issues like OCD, cancer treatments, whatever, will go to studying this. How does that help this breed really? Kristine may feel that any research that MIGHT benefit SOME is worth it, but we do live in a real world with a finite amount of funding and time. What bugs me is that if you are into agility, of even just know more about agility than other dog issues and pursuits, this apparently seems SUPER sexy and it has a lot of push from these famous agility types.

 

Finally, just a basic genetics lesson. If you disproportionately breed dogs that have a random trait, not related to ANYTHING that was originally selected on to develop these dogs in the first place, you don't know what else you are excluding from the genepool. You also don't know what else you are inflating within the genepool. All you can be sure of is that the exclusions and inflations will have nothing to do with stockwork or the type of balancing selection that gave us this breed in the first place.

 

Basically, Mark said it way better, but these are the specifics of why I think such a test and even serious effort into trying to see if you can develop such a test would be predictably Bad For The Breed.

[terrecar]

Finally, just a basic genetics lesson.

 

 

Oh gee, thanks for the basic genetics lesson, 'cause gosh ya' know, I didn't 'get it' when Mark explained it without the snark.

[Smalahundur]

 

 

Finally, just a basic genetics lesson. If you disproportionately breed dogs that have a random trait, not related to ANYTHING that was originally selected on to develop these dogs in the first place, you don't know what else you are excluding from the genepool. You also don't know what else you are inflating within the genepool. All you can be sure of is that the exclusions and inflations will have nothing to do with stockwork or the type of balancing selection that gave us this breed in the first place.

 

 

All fine and dandy, but I consider agility/sports/conformation breeding as relevant for the stockdog world as the breeding of chihuahuas.

I am not gonna buy a pup that has agility parents that never saw a sheep, and no one that wants to work stock with his dog would.

 

Those individual dogs that went into sports whether they have landed there from a stockwork breeder or as agility bred are removed from the part of the population that is used for working stock. They might as well have been culls.

 

If breeding for sports produces certain problems, well that is the problem of the sporting world isn´t it? How could these dogs and their faulty genes have an adverse effect on the working dog population as nobody in his right mind would use a any sportdog in stock work breeding?

 

Maybe someone can point out the mistake in my reasoning ...?

[juliepoudrier]

I don't think it was directed at you Terrecar.

 

J.

[juliepoudrier]

How could these dogs and their faulty genes have an adverse effect on the working dog population as nobody in his right mind would use a any sportdog in stock work breeding?

 

Maybe someone can point out the mistake in my reasoning ...?

Because there are plenty of folks apparently "not in their right minds" who would breed from their crossover agility dogs that they've decided to try in the novice levels of sheepdog trialing (i.e., there are people who do both agility and stockwork with the same dog). Would that affect people who use working stockdogs and should know better? Probably not. Could it affect the working gene pool as a whole? Possibly. In other words, those sport dogs might not be completely and irrevocably removed from the working dog gene pool. It's a free country after all, and folks can breed from their dogs if they want to, no matter what the larger picture implication might be.

 

J.