wildairbc Posted July 2, 2002 Report Share Posted July 2, 2002 Well, then, do you discuss deafness? How many BAER test litters, alond with eye checks? DO you eye test litters, or just the parents and how often? What DO you consider the worst genetic problem in the breed? Bonnie ------------------ What you believe has no effect on the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ikw Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 What DO you consider the worst genetic problem in the breed? Bonnie<<< Not willing to work. Bonnie, Why do you assume the working dogs are plagued by problems? Why do you assume that we (working folks) are out to create litters than can't see or walk or hear?Most valuable necessities in working dogs. Why do you assume that,we only look upon our dogs as breeding stock? As it's been said again and again,WE DO NOT have the same breed. If you wish to discuss non-working litters produced out of non-working parents with every certifications attached to them,kindly put your questions to other Border Collie forums. Very few within these boards do breed and their aims are strickly for working litters out of proven parents and none will look to sell pups to non-working homes. Almost all,at least the ones I'm aware of,are out to create their next possible Nursery dogs. Yahoo groups have a forum called Show Border Collies,you may wish to join them and exchange your worries for show dogs/pets and their genetic problems with them. ------------------ Inci Willard Clearville,PA 814-784-3414 ikw@pennswoods.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildairbc Posted July 3, 2002 Author Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 So, you are saying that working dogs have NO genetic problems? Why all the deaf "working bred" dogs then? I am trying to ask some legitimate questions on a forum called "health and genetics". Why the hostility? I am NOT excluding folks who have "show" BCs or "performance" BCs in these questions. If my questions sound like a personal attack, I am sorry that you feel that way, because they are not. Bonnie ------------------ What you believe has no effect on the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ikw Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 Bonnie, I've been around working Border Collies for over 16 years now and I buy most of my pups/dogs. I have yet to come across one which was BAER tested and not a single one suffered from deafness. So,could you kindly tell us about "Why all the deaf "working bred" dogs then?". Have you actually owned a deaf working dog to make such claim?or is it just a hearsay? It seems that, once again,we are dealing with different dogs. ABCA have a site where you can read all about "eye checks". Further more,any dog running at the Finals must have their eyes tested prior to their runs. I am not being hostile,however,I do want you to understand that,none of us are willing to create pups,put in loads of stock work on them within couple of years of their lives,only to find out the dog is not able to walk,see and hear. Do working Border Collies have genetic defects,you better believe they do and most who run in the same circle (working/trialling) knows exactly what it is and it is up to the individuals to make the decision on whether they wish to take their chances or not. We,the herding nazis,do not hide things. We can't.Proof is in the pudding. ------------------ Inci Willard Clearville,PA 814-784-3414 ikw@pennswoods.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
workindogs Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 Bonnie, I have never heard about all these deaf working dogs you refer to. I normally consider deafness problems more a problem of "color fanciers" who try to breed for rare colors...usually AKC oriented breeders. Nor did I know what CL was until you brought to light what a big problem it is in show lines. My number one concern is the working ability (and all the working qualities) of a dog. I am not a breeder but I have become involved with working dogs, am very interested in working lines and work and trial two of my border collies who both come from strong working lines. I have a third border collie (my first) who I was once told is from "strong working lines"...she is an unregistered farm bred dog (read BYB). From my perspective, there are two areas I would routinely assess in the breed I know as the border collie (which you refer to as working lines)...eyes and hips...and to a lesser extent OCD. I expect pups to be test tested for CEA by 7 weeks and the parents tested annually (if tested as pups, great!). A significant number of key working dogs compete or have competed in the National Finals where eye testing is routine and required. I do believe that there are certain lines that will throw more HD than others or when certain crosses are made. Since I'm not a breeder, my concern is more for the dog's well being and the long term investment I'm going to make in owning and training the dog. I do hear of HD cropping up from time to time, but it doesn't strike me as a widespread problem. For the most part, both HD and CEA can be avoided by educating yourself about the breed and working lines and dealing with reputable and experienced breeders (and now just "pedigree breeders") who are knowledgeable about lines of dogs and who routinely screen their breeding stock and offspring. Again, certain lines may have a higher propensity for OCD in pups. But, most of the problem is created by people feeding puppy food, letting their pups get fat and over exercising young dogs. Most OCD cases don't amount to much. Interesting enough my unregistered dog is the one with the most problems. She is epileptic, sensitive to chemicals and high strung. I also have alot of experience with German Shepherds....now that is a breed that you spend some time talking about genetic diseases. Of course, most occur in show lines. The German bred working lines seem to be much healtier. Just my impressions. Elizabeth [This message has been edited by workindogs (edited 07-03-2002).] [This message has been edited by workindogs (edited 07-03-2002).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Whiteman Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 "Why all the deaf working dogs then?" The only deaf BC's I know about are the result of merle-merle crosses...which every breeder should know is a fundamental no-no. CEA is genetic...HD may well not be. PRA and cPRA are probably not either...the jury is still out on the last two;you can't test for the latter until the dog is at least 2 years old so you have to ask about the parents if this concerns you. History has proven that diseases are generated by breeding poorly researched dogs too closely, not understanding dominant and recessive concepts in genetics and having concerns other than the health of the breed. Another reason why I would never breed with a show line. The healthiest dogs are those bred for working ability from proven clear lines...CEA, PRA and cPRA tested parents, and hips at least x-rayed. The first two are mandatory in holding an ISDS pink registration certificate so if you do, you know the parents are clear. Testing for HD is the responsibility of the owner as this can come out later in the dog's life. I don't see a problem as long as certain fundamentals are understood and followed. Sue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Fosher Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 Bonnie, Since collie eye anomoly is real, and is a simple recessive trait, I like to see litters have their eyes checked before they are 12 weeks old. This not only tells you about the pups, but also tells you something about the parents. For example, if you have CEA affected pups but both parents tested clear, you know they're both carriers. I believe that the current research shows that CEA is the only genetic eye disorder that is currently considered a problem in working dogs. If the pup is clear before 12 weeks, it is clear, so there's no need for annual tests, or testing before each mating. I disagree with the current ABCA stand on hip dysplasia, which is that dogs should be examined by radiograph and that hips should be found acceptable by OFA or some other method. I believe that the way to test a dog's soundness is to work him and watch him very closely, and check with radiographs if you see problems. In my limited experience, it seems to me that there's at least as strong a linkage between hip dysplasia and environmental factors as the linkage between CHD and the parents' hip status. The most common mistakes that puppy owners make are overfeeding (often based on the advice of veterinarians and dog food manufacturers) and encouragment of activities that involve leaping and twisting such as frisbee and agility at young ages (often based on the myth that Border collie pups have to be run into the ground to be managable). We also believe that there may be some cause for concern about epilepsy in the breed, and the ABCA is conducting research to try to determine what, if any, genetic components exist within the breed that contribute to this disease. You can read all about these concerns at the ABCA's website: http://www.americanbordercollie.org. Click on the "Health and Genetics of the Border Collie" link. The material there was put together by a committee that includes geneticists with backgrounds in working dogs, including C. Denise Wall, who is the voice of reason on these boards from time to time. While I may not agree with everything they've come up with, I appreciate the fact that they're working to improve the genetic health of the breed using facts and science, rather than fear and market-driven tests. I haven't been around working border collies as long as Inci -- only about 10 years -- but neither have I seen a single genetically-deaf working-bred dog. I have seen working dogs that have gone deaf at a ripe old age, or as the result of trauma. In the case of one imported dog, I'm told that the deafness was caused by exposure to chemicals used to treat sheep for external parasites in the UK. The fundamental difference in the genetic health of working dogs and the genetic health of non-working dogs is just as Inci said: we can't keep it a secret. If our dogs are unsound, it shows up on the trial field or on the farm or ranch. We have a much stronger incentive than the marketplace to avoid breeding unsound dogs. We require them to work. The biggest genetic problem in the breed at the moment is breeding of "working" dogs by people who don't work them, or who don't have a real understanding of how a sheepdog should work. Many of these folks breed for "versatility" (meaning dog sports) or "temperament" (meaning couch potatoes). They figure if they have Wiston Cap in the pedigree somewhere, ages and ages ago, that it's a working dog. It ain't necessarily so. They figure if it can pass an AKC herding instinct test, that it must be a working dog. It ain't necessarily so. So the short answer to your question about what tests do we conduct? We work our dogs. ------------------ Bill Fosher Surry, NH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PrairieFire Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 Bonnie - you need to define what exactly you are trying to do... It certainly doesn't appear as if you are truly looking for REAL answers to your questions...perhaps you should take to heart the words you have as part of your signature... What upsets you so much that people DON'T support your "new and improved", versatile definition of the Border Collie? What satisfaction do you intend to gain from (silly and misguided) attempts to "put down" working dogs and working breeders - have you forgotten where the seed stock of the dogs you own come from? Let's go back a minute to the CL problems you brought up - CL is DIRECTLY AND GENETICALLY traceable to show dog/conformation lines brought into this country by folks, presumably like yourself, who wish to breed these dogs for reasons other than working ability. These folks, again presumably like yourself, are extremely quick to attempt to point out - and DO point out with malicious gossip amongst themselves - that "working breeders" don't worry about genetic problems - not only a complete and self-serving falsehood - but one that TOTALLY IGNORES the fact that THESE SAME BREEDERS ARE THE ONLY BORDER COLLIE BREEDERS DELIBERATELY BREEDING DOGS WITH GENETIC FLAWS - dogs with a genetic history of CL... If conformation and versatile breeders truly care about the breed - they would simply not breed these "show champions" that have the clearly defined carriers of CL in their history - no matter what titles they carry... Remember - "what you believe has no effect on the truth", at least according to your signature. ------------------ Bill Gary Kensmuir, Working Stockdog Center River Falls, WI 715.426.9877 www.kensmuir.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pam Wolf Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 Bonnie, it seems to me that either you are deliberatly trying to pick a fight, or you are truely trying to learn. In either case, the info posted will help others, so here goes. One of the biggest problems with "working dog' breeders is that anyone who owns a BC and a farm can breed his dog and then say they are 'working dogs' (same as many of the show fraternity claim their dogs are working dogs). IMHO these folks are the "Backyard Breeders" of the working Border Collie world. Now, if you go to buy a golden retriever from someone who has Fluffy as their housepet and choose the neighbor's dog up the street as the sire so the kids could 'see the miricle of life' or to make money to compensate for the cost of Fluffy from the pet store, you have the exact same type of breeder many in the AKC world seem to think all working BC breeders are. I strongly suspect those on these boards would be more likely equated with the cream of the crop. Just because the person put together a dog and bitch and happens to own a farm does not mean they are a good breeder, nor does it mean their dogs actually work. I've seen many examples of 'border collies' on farms that were just nice pets, yet the farmer often bred them because there was a market for them--ofteb due to current popularity caused by movies or books. The point being that just because someone calls his dogs 'working' does not mean they are quality any more than calling them 'show lines' is an assurance of quality. The puppymillers are now holding dog shows within their new registries so that they can now produce Champion peekapoos etc. I take it that this ensures quality ? Many years ago (and I've had BC's since 1979) I had a discussion with Nyle Sealine regarding the need for testing the dogs. He said they weren't necessary because a stockman would know if there were eye or hip problems--and he is correct. The problem (as I told him) is that many in the breed today--and this was at least 10-15 years ago-- are NOT stockmen nor do they work their dogs hard enough to truely test the dogs nor are they knowledgable enough to tell. It is true that a person aware of structure and movement and behaviour (which the stockmen I admire are knowledgable of) WILL be able to see some sort of problem. I have trained many breeds for many people and I can't tell you the number of times I told the owner the dog ADR (ain't doing right) and wanted the dog checked for some problems. It ALWAYS showed up in the work--especially things like severe CEA, PRA (one BC ) Cataracts (several PWC"S) and CHD. The old time stockmen who developed this breed could spot these things from a mile away. they may not have been concerned about paying the vet for an expensive test,rather they would have just not bred the dog. they would not have bred the dog BECAUSE it didn't perform up to their expectations. As for deafness, I've seen many of the well bred working dogs hard of listening, but could hear a sheep breath half a mile away! What I have seen regarding deafness is comming fromt he show breeders. i strongly suspect they have a number of cryptic merles and when breeding two of these you WILL end up with the double merles. I also know many of the show breeders I've encountered have a very poor undestanding of the differences between double merle and white factor in coat colour. Testing on the hill, holding your standards for what is to be bred WILL improve the breed. Producers who just put two dogs together for whatever reasons--educate the kids, make money etc-- are NOT breeders, even if their dog does work on the farm. They are the backyard breeders of the working dog world. Pam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margaret M Wheeler Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 Oh yes indeed Pam, Bonnie is certainly trying to pick a fight. She has targeted a major achilles heel in the working dog community. It's been a terrible ongoing issue amongst terrier folks whether it pertains to deafness, blindness, crippling ortho problems or what have you. As I've said elsewhere, I consider myself responsible for the lives of my puppies and by association the satisfaction of those who buy them from me. One of the nicest young terriers that I have ever owned turned out to be a uni. I was very sad to find it out, but I took it in stride, spayed and placed her. By then, I knew the ropes well enough to take the good with the bad. Many individuals do not have the experience or the wherewithal to respond appropriately. The dog suffers, the breed suffers because of this. Therefore, over the years I have started to test for more things. Usually I pass this cost along to wealthy pet buyers, but never to the occasional new breeder that I get. They pay, but they pay by accepting the fact that if they mishandle my pups their own lives are valueless. Here's the deal with BAER testing, it's expensive and you have to take young puppies to places that are loaded with all sorts of nasty diseases (research hospitals and big show-dog clinics) to have them tested. Now how many of the people who work their dogs as a part of their daily life (sheep, cows etc.) have the cash floating around to test ten puppies? Bourgeois hobbyists like me, and showdog fanciers like Bonnie often have the cash, the time and the proximity to do this with relative ease. Folks who are just making a living, busting their asses 24/7 and living in the hinterlands do this at great expense to themselves and their livelihood. On the other hand, sensori-neural deafness is often hereditary and any one who has worked with a deaf dog can tell you it usually really sucks. If I BAER tested a litter and found a deaf puppy I would put it down, with great sadness but I would do so all the same. Now what to do about unilateral deafies? None of us can be absolutely certain that a dog is unilateral until its tested. Many times uni's are functional throughout their lives. That's good! Then they are bred. That's bad! What do they produce if they are bred to a uni? Well some percentages of carriers, uni's and bilaterally deaf. And again, if these pups are not tested a number of unis go out and reproduce themselves yet again. This pheomomonon is bad enough in russells who usually produce 4-6 pups. I have no idea what the numbers would be on 10. What to do? Well I wish our club had started a large scale effort to provide BAER testing on a contribution only basis at our trials and clinics. Then the hobbyists and other affluent folks in th community could dig down deep and foot the bill for the working folks who would find BAER tests a real financial burden. Of course, such a service would not be available to anyone who did not belong to the one and only true club, the working club in question. Margaret= pie in the sky radical Oh and Bonnie, if you start playing games on this issue you are a real asshole. Now I'm not saying you are one. I'm just posing a hypothetical. ------------------ Margaret retired terrierwoman, border collie wannabe drumlins@adelphia.net [This message has been edited by Margaret M Wheeler (edited 07-03-2002).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Bailey Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 What I want Bonnie to tell me is how real working BC's can be deaf? I have seen litters with to much white and pups being deaf, but the pups are put down the the breeding not repeated. As for being deaf in one ear, in the BC I know with hearing loss in one ear was at adulthood and the vets felt it was from a virus, still the bitch was spayed and never bred. When you work and trial your dog and have to whistle them from 400yds plus away, I find it hard that you would not know there was a hearing problem, no matter what the cause. My dogs on the other hand have be accused of being deaf on the trial field but then that is another thread! Bonnie go ahead and attack the real Border Collie owners we can handle it. Our dogs are proven in the work everyday, whether we breed them or not. And just to let you know I have owned Border Collies for 17 years now. Dawn Bailey Eatonville, WA [This message has been edited by Dawn Bailey (edited 07-03-2002).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildairbc Posted July 3, 2002 Author Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 Hi, Please, I am NOT attacking anyone! For crying out loud, I BELIEVE that deafness is a problem in the breed and I do try to live by my signature credo. YES, I have personally owned a deaf BC, which I did have put down and spayed the mother. I have a good friend who also produced a deaf puppy in a litter from"working lines".(these were ALL B&W dogs) Here, I give Pam Wolf credit for a very compelling arguement. Yes, there are Breeders and there are BREEDERS. I am NOT posing these questions to the BYB or the puppy millers, as I am assuming that you folks are NOT them! I only wish you could afford "show" breeders the same. All who breed AKC registered dogs are NOT the same. As Margaret points out, BAER testing is primarily to identify uni-lateral deafness. A totally deaf dog or puppy is pretty hard to miss. The percentages of bi-laterally deaf puppies goes way up when one or both parents are uni-laterally deaf. I wish I WERE as wealthy as Margaret assumes. BAER testing IS expensive and, I believe, traumatic for young puppies, especially if you have to go some distance to have it done, which, unfortunately, is the case for most breeders. Top that off with hauling them in for eye checks, too, and you do have to wonder what is "best" for them. But BREEDERS need to look at the BIG picture, not just that one individual or one litter. Is it worth the extra trauma to your puppies to try to ensure that deafness does not BECOME a major problem in the breed as a whole? I have yet to BAER test a litter. The test was not available to me until very recently and that is an hour or more drive. I wonder how I will afford it, but I believe that I can no longer rationalize NOT doing it. BTW, CHD AND PRA are most DEFINITELY proven to be hereditary. It is true that enviornment CAN play a role in the severity of CHD and that eye injuies CAN mimic PRA. This does not mean that we should not test for either one or that they are not genetic. Finally, I am NOT now, nor did I EVER "put down" working dogs. I have, however, heard my dogs called various names, none of them flattering. I hope you are not mistaking a difference of opinion for hostility. Bonnie ------------------ What you believe has no effect on the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ikw Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 Bonnie, Your arguments have more holes than a sieve. PRA for one,who should I believe? You or Cornell Eye Research? If you were talking to some dumbass which may have one Border Collie and came to you asking about the breed,they may just take your word since you seem to be so convinced that "working lines" are full of genetic defects. Working lines means just that,somewhere in their pedigrees,one or two names are familiar names and that's usually enough reason to claim working lines,hell with actual working dogs. As far as being able to afford creating a litter,no one ought to breed if they cannot bear the costs,seen or unseen. ------------------ Inci Willard Clearville,PA 814-784-3414 ikw@pennswoods.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pam Wolf Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 Bonnie, have you had any education in genetics and the factors which can influence phenotype regardless of genotype? In a litter of b/w BC's you said there was one deaf pup--It is possible, but is the cause genetic???? Flash feavers, injuries in utero, worms and many other factors can cause a phenotype to differ from a genotype. Mendelian genetics is pretty simple, but understanding molecular genetics and allt he enviornmental factors which can affect the outcome of genetics is mind boggeling. I don't pretend to have a firm grasp on molecular genetics and all the possible interactions, but I do have a small inkling. And because of this, I tend to no longer fly off (like I did in the early days) and shout that any defect is genetic and the dogs/animals producing them should all be destroyed --or at least eliminated fromt he genepool. Heck, if I believet that narrowminded attitude, I wouldn't be here today BTW, I suggest you study some of Hitler's ideas on Eugenetics and see where an extremist position can end . In the case of a single deaf puppy, could it be genetic, yes. Could there be some other cause, YES. Aside from the possibility of the parents being cryptic merles, there could be other factors which caused the deafness. All the tests in the world will not prevent defective puppies from occurring. And a knowledgable breeder uses the information he/she has on past generations to make an informed decision. I think there are far more critical problems to be addressed within the BC. And I still adhere to the attitude that the hill is the best test of the dog--but like any other test it has it's drawbacks. Pam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Bailey Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 Hi Bonnie, you still do not get it, the mere fact that our dogs do real work will keep the deafness out of your lines to some extent, if the dog cannot hear well it will not be used and will not be bred. Even if one ear is good the dog will be faulted as the dog will be handicapped to some degree. If the real Border Collie owners are diligent in the breedings of these dogs then only dogs that are good or great workers will be bred, if the dog is even partially deaf it would not be a good enough dog for even most farm work. Like greyhounds the BC will police itself, the good or great dogs get bred and everything else fixed. There is not a breeder of Real BC's that would want to produce anything less the great working dogs, and if they did we are small enough group to know it. Dawn Bailey Eatonville, WA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest borderkatahdin Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 For the record, I am not a breeder. I won't buy a puppy without an eye test, and parents checked for Hips. A breeder can check for a whole list of other problems. Sebaceous Adenitis, Patellar Luxation, Thyroid, Von Willebrand's Disease, elbows, ears, heart, where does it end? Though it is a good idea to check for hereditary problems for the breed, any pup I buy I figure is a chance that it might not work out for some reason or other. My first worry would be whether or not it will work. If I had a choice between two dogs to buy, first dog(we'll call him lucky) has three legs, is deaf in one ear, and blind in one eye, but can go out and bring me the sheep or cows from the field, work out any problems on his own, and do whatever other farm chores needed doing. 600.00 Second dog,(barbie) has been tested for every disease under the sun. Can't bring in the sheep. 50.00 I'll pick the first dog btw the second dog has allergies that showed up at about 2 yrs. old, to grass, cat hair , feathers, kochia. A year later got hit by a car. The first dog (Lucky) is still working. ------------------ Wendy Carlson Goldenoaks Farm carlson@qcconnect.com Aledo, IL. [This message has been edited by borderkatahdin (edited 07-03-2002).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest C Denise Wall Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 Here's my thoughts on all this: PRA and CHD are heritable diseases. This is not just my opinion or unproven theory. In the face of overwhelming scientific evidence, that people are still questioning if CHD is heritable makes me feel weary. There was a once common disease called central PRA (cPRA) that apparently doesn't exist anymore and is thought to have been related to a vitamin deficiency that was somehow remedied in modern feeding practices. Border Collies have not, at this time, been shown to have an inherited form of PRA. But be sure, there are inherited forms of PRA in dogs. There is a common acquired retinopathy that can look like PRA. It occurs in working Border Collies and other working dogs of different breeds. In other words, it occurs in the rural dogs of these breeds that work but not in the related non working urban dogs of these breeds. No one knows what causes it even though the pathology is well documented. No genetic component has ever been established. While forms of congenital and inherited deafness are likely to exist in working Border Collies, the incidence, according to my feedback from the registry and the working Border Collie community, is probably very low. I've had Border Collies for my whole life (I'm 48). My grandmother was a breeder. I have only known one congenitally bilaterally deaf Border Collie and this dog had a white head. In this dog, deafness was consistent with abnormal migration of neural crest cells and related to, or associated with, abnormal pigment production. Based on reports and my own experience, I'd guess deafness related to abnormal white patterns and merle breedings are the most common in our breed. And it does not appear to be common in the working Border Collie community. Degenerative deafness occurring after the age of two years was reported in the Border Collie by Kelly, cited by Burns and Fraser, in 1966. I have no more information on this, personal or published. I would think people would speak of it if it's causing problems. I concur with those saying even unilateral deafness is probably very hard to impossible to miss in a real working dog. Since most high profile breeding dogs in the working Border Collie community are functionally tested under very stringent hearing conditions, I don't believe uni's are getting missed in this group. Denise [This message has been edited by C Denise Wall (edited 07-03-2002).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
workindogs Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 Wendy wrote: < 600.00>> Sorry Wendy, but I'm sure Kate Broadbent will want alot more for Decks than $600 {insert smiley face here} Elizabeth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Whiteman Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 I would be interested to know why there is a correlaton between white headed BC's and deafness. I undersand it is markered by white hairs inside the ears but why is this so? What is the connection between white inner hairs and inner-ear problems? I ask because I am aware of a dog named Wisp (owned by a Mr. Bobby Dalziel) who did Rather Well in trialling competitions and who was twice in my bitch's pedigree (once each side) which resulted in one (amongst 7) pup this year with a Wisp -like head all but one black ear. And this little darling ws certainly not deaf. So how much white head is white head? (I know Wisp had two black ears..and heard those whistles rather well...(g) Sue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margaret M Wheeler Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 It doesn't surprise me that deafness is rare in working border collies. It does surprise me that you can identify unilaterals in work situations. I do understand that work on big hills and at great distances would give reliable feedback on the dog's work behavior far away. It's the human response to that feedback that I wonder about. You all have heard of people who assumed that the dog was deaf in one ear because it didn't work well at a distance, or is this a hypothetical scenario? Tell the truth, my uni just seemed stubborn and wild. I would never have guessed she couldn't hear me and I tested her just as a matter of course. Are all your trial courses big enough to be a valid test? Seems to me that on a quiet day a dog with one good ear would be able to run fine. Two ears are required to localize sound. A keen dog that used a number of senses together for locating it's sheep could probably compensate easily on the outrun. This is especially true if the dog is well bred and well handled. Denise, by "degenerative deafness" what do you mean? Chronic, undetected ear infections? I assume that dogs are akin to humans in that they can inherit defects of the middle ear that can cause mechanical hearing loss. I suppose most of these are visible atrisias (sp?). Hmmmm this conversation demonstrates reason #3,100 for my resolution to never, ever breed another litter. ------------------ Margaret retired terrierwoman, border collie wannabe drumlins@adelphia.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margaret M Wheeler Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 Oh and Wendy that was a good post and I wouldn't argue with it. I don't think folks should test for everything or that mild defects and injuries disqualify a good dog a from good work or that a physically healthy dog is necessarily a good worker. I get hung up on this stuff when I read the general discussion forum too much. That's where you see many of the broader consequences of poor breeding practices and it always makes me want to DO something. ------------------ Margaret retired terrierwoman, border collie wannabe drumlins@adelphia.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PrairieFire Posted July 3, 2002 Report Share Posted July 3, 2002 Margaret - "The hill" isn't a perfect test. So perhaps it isn't so easy to tell fo some...if all most folks do is work thier dog at home, on a few sheep, under familiar circumstances... But, many of the folks that "we" (the working dog posters on this board), would buy a pup from test thier dogs under more difficult circumstances - circumstances that approach a level of competition that rivals a human competing in the Olympics...ISDS style Open level trials. That takes a "near perfection" of dog, training, handler, that while it may not point out a specific issue, it usually will point out a "problem"...as Pam says, a dog that is, to other dog people (WORKING dog people who know what they are seeing) - "not quite right"... Many of the folks that I would put in this category are the same type of people that can look at several hundred head of livestock and point out one that is slightly "off" - isolate that one, and find out the hooves need trimming, or it has a cut in it's side, or something else that makes it "not quite right". No, none of that is the same as taking the dog (or sheep for that matter) into the vet and running the latest tests - BUT it does enable one to ask the questions that may lead them to the testing... A dog that is hard of hearing simply isn't going to respond at the level required of an Open dog on a strange course on strange sheep under strange circumstances - at one trial held near a fairgrounds the dogs needed to hear the whistles over the crashing noise of the helicopter rides...and high winds and rain are common. Again, these "tests" are not the same as laboratory testing of the dogs - but can lead knowledgable folks to decide whether more testing is necessary...or simply to move on to the next breeding. Over the years (several hundred) this type of selective genetic breeding has led to some pretty darn healthy dogs - dogs where a "sick one" will stand out - precisely BECAUSE these dogs are "exhibited" under the circumnstances they are...rather than simply paraded aroung a ring. This breed, up until the advent of the NON-working breeder, was not breed for anything except performance - and bred and bred and bred ONLY for performance - which is a very different thing than breeding for color, earset, spinal length, whatever... ------------------ Bill Gary Kensmuir, Working Stockdog Center River Falls, WI 715.426.9877 www.kensmuir.com [This message has been edited by PrairieFire (edited 07-03-2002).] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Margaret M Wheeler Posted July 4, 2002 Report Share Posted July 4, 2002 Yes, this makes sense to me. I think that this is the sort of detailed response that critics have no choice but to accept. One of the things that professionals in human deafness learn early: listen to the mother. Many times medical folks poo poo a mother's concerns that something is wrong. When they finally can't put her off any longer, they do some tests and find that the baby has a hearing loss. I think a good breeder has a commitment to his dogs and to the breed that leads them to the right decision in the end. If the dog won't work in an optimum fashion, the good breeder does not breed it and won't sell it into a situation where it will be bred. Like a mother with her baby, the breeder does know something is wrong. Maybe they don't know what, but the final outcome is the same regardless. The dog is not bred. Of course, their are all kinds of mothers (as the front page of the Globe told me yesterday: a woman slashed the throats of her two young children). And as we all know only too well, there are all kinds of breeders. ------------------ Margaret retired terrierwoman, border collie wannabe drumlins@adelphia.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue Whiteman Posted July 4, 2002 Report Share Posted July 4, 2002 Ummmm..;can I ask that question again? Bobby Dalziel's Wisp had a completely white head except for two black ears. Presumably (only a guess) those all-important inner hairs were also white but Wisp heard well enogh to win the Int. Supreme twice. So my question is "how white does the xhite head have to be to be suspect for deafness?" I ask particularly because my bitch has Wisp twice in her pedigree and she had one bitch pup with a white head all but one black ear. Sue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest C Denise Wall Posted July 4, 2002 Report Share Posted July 4, 2002 Sue W. From the web site: http://www.greatdanerescueinc.com/WhiteDeaf.html "The inner ear has small hairs in it. If these hairs are unpigmented, the dog is deaf. It is unclear whether pigment itself is the issue, or whether lack of pigmentation merely indicates that no neural crest cells are present. In any event, the lack of pigmentation of these hairs is linked to deafness, regardless of the actual cause and effect relationship. Both the MM gentotype and the swsw genotype can and do produce deafness. So, the lack of pigment in White Danes is indeed linked to deafness. The old "rule" that if a dog?s ears are colored, it can hear, white ears, it?s deaf, while not a hard and fast rule, does have some merit. Color on the ears certainly indicates that surviving neural crest cells are present in the ear area, making it more likely that the dog can hear." 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.