[Jack's Dad]

I'm not a breeder but this is not really that complicated to me.

Lets say you have a dog that has it "all" except for hips. You don't want to lose the "all" just because of the hip issue. So if you really understand pedigrees and bloodlines the way Chris, Robin and others do, you don't throw the baby out with the bath.

By selective breeding you can save the "all" and hopefully minimize or fix the hip issue. Like Chris said, there are all manner of issues that could present in what are otherwise great dogs.

Breeders who don't know what they are doing or don't care are a bigger problem and you won't get through to them anyway.

 

[jaggirl47]

I'm not a breeder but this is not really that complicated to me.

Lets say you have a dog that has it "all" except for hips. You don't want to lose the "all" just because of the hip issue. So if you really understand pedigrees and bloodlines the way Chris, Robin and others do, you don't throw the baby out with the bath.

By selective breeding you can save the "all" and hopefully minimize or fix the hip issue. Like Chris said, there are all manner of issues that could present in what are otherwise great dogs.

Breeders who don't know what they are doing or don't care are a bigger problem and you won't get through to them anyway.

The big problem with this is the dogs do not get bred with the bad hips. The majority of breeders will place the dog and not add it to the breeding program. I already asked pretty much the same question but didn't get a response.

 

[robinhuerta]

I can totally understand the point of concern the OP has.....
Since any dog...(stud owner, brood owner ) can potentially produce a puppy with a defect or health concern....it is the responsibility of those involved with the breeding...to be aware of the "risks"....
But being aware of "risks" does not immediately mean.....omitting dogs from breeding. (It's all checks and balances).

I know as a breeder AND owner....I would much rather (if a potential problem) surfaces...it be with a dog/puppy that I have chosen to keep, than a dog/puppy that was sold/placed to someone else.
I would rather "suffer" the pain, tears and anguish...than to have someone else go through the torture.......as a breeder...I suffer twice as hard when it is happening to my puppy person....

 

[Jack's Dad]

The big problem with this is the dogs do not get bred with the bad hips. The majority of breeders will place the dog and not add it to the breeding program. I already asked pretty much the same question but didn't get a response.

My example was overly simplistic.

I think the idea I was trying to point out was expressed in much greater detail in another thread. By people who actually know what they are talking about. I think it was " Iceberg Breeders" or another like it.

 

[Chris Wild]

The big problem with this is the dogs do not get bred with the bad hips. The majority of breeders will place the dog and not add it to the breeding program. I already asked pretty much the same question but didn't get a response.

I see several responses. The dog WITH MegaE (or bad hips) shouldn't be bred. No one is saying that it should.

But that is not the same as saying that the parents, littermates, etc... of that dog should never be bred again, and it's those related dogs, not the affected one, that seems to be the main topic of this thread.

 

[jaggirl47]

I can totally understand the point of concern the OP has.....
Since any dog...(stud owner, brood owner ) can potentially produce a puppy with a defect or health concern....it is the responsibility of those involved with the breeding...to be aware of the "risks"....
But being aware of "risks" does not immediately mean.....omitting dogs from breeding. (It's all checks and balances).

I know as a breeder AND owner....I would much rather (if a potential problem) surfaces...it be with a dog/puppy that I have chosen to keep, than a dog/puppy that was sold/placed to someone else.
I would rather "suffer" the pain, tears and anguish...than to have someone else go through the torture.......as a breeder...I suffer twice as hard when it is happening to my puppy person....

One of the reasons I started this thread is not only would you breed the dogs again, but would you be honest to the owners of dogs you may want to breed to. I personally do not like the thought of breeding the dog again but I think it is much worse to hide the issue.

 

[jaggirl47]

I see several responses. The dog WITH MegaE (or bad hips) shouldn't be bred. No one is saying that it should.

But that is not the same as saying that the parents, littermates, etc... of that dog should never be bred again, and it's those related dogs, not the affected one, that seems to be the main topic of this thread.

Yep, that is the main topic. I was answering what the guy wrote about breeding a dog that has the bad hips.

 

[robinhuerta]

When I use a stud dog.....USUALLY, I use a dog that I have seen progeny from....
If the dog is overseas...I ask a friend to help with research...
Breeders do "net-work" with other breeders......we do ask other breeders about the litters they may have had with a specific stud dog. *I have.*
Brood owners have their own first hand knowledge with the litters they have produced.

BUT...we also know...that there are always "risks" involved. We (breeders) do not purposely breed to or from dogs that are *known* to produce genetic problems.....over and over again.....That would be reckless, and financially/emotionally devastating...
Eradicating dogs from the breed because of "risks", or because they may have potentially produced a problem.......is completely different than removing a dog from breeding because of *know & proven* genetic producing problems.....

IE: HD dog from breeding....than a dog that had produced an HD dog.

 

[martemchik]

This discussion is making me think about dalmatians, and their breeders. Knowing that the dogs have such a chance of producing problems, they still breed the dogs. I know they don't breed the ones that are already blind/deaf, but its pretty much impossible to find a dalmatian that doesn't have a litter mate that's not blind or deaf. I think breeders need to reduce the risk of passing this trait, but it just doesn't seem like at this point there is enough knowledge about how it is passed. It's clear that its not as simple as carrier/carrier, and is more like the HD problem which is pretty much known to be uncertain and the best advice is "stack the deck by using two dogs with great hips" but those dogs also do produce okay hips and even bad hips.

 

[robinhuerta]

Also to add:
IF a potential problem arises...it is important to keep track of which bloodlines were combined, which individual dogs and which line breedings.
One dog can "carry" a problem because of another dog...generations back.
By not "combining" the same dogs or a past dog....can also be useful in omitting potential risks.
Breeding is much more involved than just the 2 dogs being bred......it really is all about checks and balances. One combined pedigree can work beautifully, while another of similar ancestors...not so much....simply because of one specific dog.

 

[MaggieRoseLee]

Honestly, that thought process bothers me. I don't like the thought that a dog who knowingly produced a severe genetic disorder being bred again. Maybe nothing will happen with the next breeding or the breeding after, but what about the next generation? Or the generation after? Why risk passing this gene on when it is known the dog does pass it?

First of all, the condition is NOT always severe. In fact I think one of the problems/issues is because for many many pups there are few or NO symptoms. So only VERY informed and responsible breeders would be suspicious and then pay for the barium test at the vets.

Even the Seeing Eye with my Elsa Rose thought only ONE of the pups in the litter of 7 had mega. But because they have $$$$ and do the barium test with their vet they went ahead and tested the entire litter to discover only then that THREE of the litter had mega. They know what to look for and only thought there was a chance the one male may have had it.

So for all the BYB or smaller breeders out there that have never heard of it, they'd have sold all the puppies in Elsa's litter with full registry and breeding ability and not known any better! So accidentally been continuing passing on the genes.

The other issue with immediately remove any dog from your breeding program associated with mega is that this isn't the only genetic condition in the breed. Between all the temperment and genetic issues that have to be avoided or bred to, hard decisions have to be made realizing that only 1/2 the genes will come from your dog. So if you have great hips/elbows/no allergies/great drives in your dogs but a CHANCE of mega rearing it's ugly head....

Will you stop breeding all your dogs with all the GREAT genetic factors you've worked thru and have to start all over with ALL the issues maybe cropping up?

 

[robinhuerta]

If every dog was removed from breeding that produced 1 genetic or health problem....there would be no dogs to breed period.
No one should breed their dogs from any bloodline......because *guaranteed* there is/are at least one dog from both sides (mother & father) of every dog used for breeding that has produced a genetic problem within the first 5 generations.......which would mean removal of said dog, along with parents & siblings from not only that particular breeding....but from prior breedings as well....because after all.....they are all related and carry similar genes.

 

[jaggirl47]

OK, another question for you guys.....

This same stud dog impregnated a female. The entire litter died but no reason was given. Then, his last litter produced mega e from a completely different female.

What are your thoughts on this?

 

[robinhuerta]

When an entire litter dies....I would suspect the Herpes Virus as my first culprit.
The only way to know for sure....would be by performing necropsies on the entire litter.
I would not even begin to speculate anything else....until the virus was ruled out.
The stud dog would not be in question at that point...unless the necropsies proved that an "inherited disease or defect" was at fault.

 

[jaggirl47]

Robin, I should have clarified....the mega e litter, half of the litter was still born in addition to mega e. That is in addition to the other litter that all died.

 

[robinhuerta]

The one condition could have nothing to do with the other.....again, without a necropsy...no definite answer can be made.
*SUSPICIOUS...of course....and then YES....I would question, especially if the same female or male was used.*

But again....bacteria infections, under developed fetuses, viral infections...etc...can ALL play a park in stillborn pups.....along with infectious milk from the mother.
Speculation is all we can have....without necropsy results.

 

[jaggirl47]

Yes I know, it's all suspicion. Same sire, different dams. I wish necropsies were done but they weren't and noone will ever know.

I does make one question.

 

[martemchik]

If the male keeps producing megaE pups in every litter, I'd say he has the dominant version of the gene that causes the disease. At this point, the sire just shouldn't be bred. But what are you going to do about it? Even without mentioning the male and the owner's name, it sounds like you're dragging this guy through the mud. He's wrong to keep studding his dog, but 99% of the people out there wouldn't keep doing what he's doing. If the dog is constantly producing megaE pups, with different females, its clear that something else is going on.

I think in this case the male probably has megaE and it just isn't presenting itself...or it is and the owner is covering it up. The sire's owner is definitely not the most ethical person, but again, most people aren't like that. Yes, without more information no one can really say more about what is going on, but hopefully people will stop asking him to stud soon because they will hear about the kind of progeny he's producing. Natural market forces will cause him to stop breeding this male at some point.

At this point...its not even about megaE, its about ethical breeding practices. This one doesn't care at all, he'd breed this dog no matter what disease he was producing.

 

[jaggirl47]

If the male keeps producing megaE pups in every litter, I'd say he has the dominant version of the gene that causes the disease. At this point, the sire just shouldn't be bred. But what are you going to do about it? Even without mentioning the male and the owner's name, it sounds like you're dragging this guy through the mud. He's wrong to keep studding his dog, but 99% of the people out there wouldn't keep doing what he's doing. If the dog is constantly producing megaE pups, with different females, its clear that something else is going on.

I think in this case the male probably has megaE and it just isn't presenting itself...or it is and the owner is covering it up. The sire's owner is definitely not the most ethical person, but again, most people aren't like that. Yes, without more information no one can really say more about what is going on, but hopefully people will stop asking him to stud soon because they will hear about the kind of progeny he's producing. Natural market forces will cause him to stop breeding this male at some point.

At this point...its not even about megaE, its about ethical breeding practices. This one doesn't care at all, he'd breed this dog no matter what disease he was producing.

I wouldn't say I'm dragging this guy through the mud. Noone on here knows who he is as far as I know. I can tell you one thing, it is NOT my breeder. I am also not going to publicly post it.

As far as we know, this stud has only sired one litter with mega e. This same litter half of the pups were still born. One other litter the entire litter was lost. I honestly don't know if there are connections, but I truly believe it is unethical breeding.

 

[Chris Wild]

I would say that the sire having any contribution to stillborn pups, or a litter dying shortly after birth, is highly unlikely. The most likely causes would be environment, possibly a virus, or something with the dam rather than anything to do with the genetics of the sire. So whether sire or his owner are considered good or ethical or not, I really don't see how stillborn pups or a litter dying after birth could be laid on them.