Fanuilos

It appears my post from the other day regarding the ANKC and the possible integration of the local white shepherd population may have created some confusion. According to the ANKC minutes of the October conference, the ANKC are conducting a breed survey for owners opinions about integration, nothing more and nothing less. My post was written based on the information myself and the other people involved in the proposal have been told verbally and provided in minutes etc from meetings with the Canine Health and Welfare Committee and others within the ANKC over the last 12 months. After the proposal was referred to the ANKC Canine Health and Welfare Committee last year and subsequently investigated, we were told that the committee recommended the following and it was a decision of that committee that the local and ANKC dogs were the same breed. This is from the ANKC Canine Health and Welfare Committee Meeting Minutes from June 2012; 4.14 Integration of locally bred non ANKC Ltd and ANKC Ltd White (German) Shepherd Dogs into the ANKC Ltd White Swiss Shepherd Dog breed pool. It was unanimously RESOLVED on the motion of R Veale/C Eastley that the committee recommends ANKC Ltd support the proposal in principle pending a positive breed survey of all owners of registered White Swiss Shepherd Dogs (WSSD). The protocol to implement this integration could be finalised at the ANKC Ltd October Board meeting 2012. Rationale for the recommendation: The committee believes there is sufficient background and pedigree information to safely integrate these dogs with the ANKC Ltd WSSD. At the conference in October the result was that the ANKC conduct a survey. Rightly or wrongly, we assumed this was due to the recommendation of the Canine Health and Welfare Committee be accepted, hence a ratification of their opinion that the two gene pools were the same breed and should be integrated. If I am wrong and the ANKC management committee did not actually accept the recommendation of the Canine Health and Welfare Committee, I stand corrected. Having the proposal go to a breed survey is still a very important step in the process to having the local dogs integrated into the ANKC, a step that should be celebrated by those of us fighting for integration. Previously, supporters have been told "different breed, never going to happen". Going to a survey is a massive change from previous advice and if there is a positive outcome, it will be a win for everyone and a very positive endorsement of the way the ANKC can deal with issues like this in the future for the benefit of pedigree dogs. In no way have I intentionally gone out there to misinform people and my post was published before the minutes were updated as the WSSD item was mistakenly left of the minutes. Had I known the minutes would have such little information and no explanation on why the ANKC is conducting the survey or whether the recommendation of the Canine Health and Welfare Committee was accepted, I would never had gone public with the results as were told to those of us involved in this proposal. It is apparent that I could have been clearer with my communication with my announcement and I am truly sorry if this has caused any confusion. I am truly sorry to have been the cause of such high hopes only to have to bring them down slightly. We are still moving a step in the right direction and that should not be forgotten or disregarded.

It definitely is Kavik! We've been working on it for so long and it is great to see the ANKC make such a fantastic decision.

It is my great pleasure to announce some exciting news regarding the Australian lined White Shepherd Dogs and the locally bred non-ANKC White Swiss Shepherd Dogs. Last month, at the ANKC Conference in Melbourne, the ANKC have made a positive move to send the proposal of integration of the locally bred dogs into the ANKC to the members for a vote. This motion was submitted to the ANKC in July 2011, by a group of people from both the ANKC and non-ANKC world of our breed. Voting on the motion was postponed to enable investigation by the Canine Health and Welfare committee. Since then, we have worked closely with members of that committee to ensure they had all the information available regarding the case for integration and the history of the breed in Australia and worldwide to enable them to make the most informed recommendation for the health, welfare and viability of the breed. The ANKC Canine Health and Welfare committee recommended that the ANKC commence a program of integration. It appears this recommendation was ratified at the Annual ANKC conference last month. The next step in the process will be a positive survey by the registered owners of ANKC White Swiss Shepherd Dogs. The ANKC have concluded that integration is of benefit to the breed in Australia. We hope that all owners would vote in agreement with the ANKC's position. For further information, please contact myself or Neil Keen.

An interesting read is Jemima Harrison's blog. If you just google her name you'll find it.

Given the fact that vet checking the BOB of those 15 breeds is just a new thing, and it is going to be introduced at all KC shows now. Rather than it eliminating an entire breed from Crufts, it just means that next year these dogs would not even qualify if the same vet checks are in place, so a dog who is deemed healthy will win.

Just the end of the tail. No other issues that I am aware of. We saw her in November and didn't notice any other issues. I will check when I go to visit though, why?

Thanks guys, I will pass all this one to the owners. I am going to see them tomorrow. Unfortunately, the vet has been bandaging the tail up but she is still whacking the crap out of it but I think the toilet roll or hair curls might help.

Thanks Jumabaar!

We have a dog which was rehomed through White Shepherd Rescue and she is having a bit of an issue with her tail. She injured it a few months ago and it was split open. The vet cleaned it up and bandaged it. The owners have been to the vet several times, where they get antibiotics an steroids - the dog has been through 2 courses and she's still managed to open it up and get it infected. The owners have noticed that it is from her biting it and opening it up from spinning around in excitement. I don't know if they have had an Elizabethan collar on her while she is healing but I've told them to give one of the Novaguards a try but how do they stop her banging it against things in her excitement?

Yay Pockets! If you need a hand, just call out. If you don't have a whelping box, you could probably borrow ours.

I'm so sorry for you Angelsun. Poor little puppies. It is heartbreaking when you see the dogs looking for their pups or when they realise they aren't alive.

So sorry BB. I am sure they would have been lovely pups like Zarah's Mum has produced with the sire.

I wouldn't want to be in your position. Dealing with a recessive mode of inheritance is easy as you can still breed with carriers as long as you don't put two carriers together. Dealing with a dominant genetic mutation is so much harder as you can't put together a clear and a carrier and the pups will be okay. Fingers crossed that your dogs are clear. The fact that the disease is possibly fatal, I would be trying to weed it out of the breed pool. There are very few diseases which are inherited in a dominant manner as nature tends to weed those out, very few of the animals end up reaching an age where they are bred from, so hopefully you only have a handful of individuals with the disease.

The whole idea of genetic testing is risk/harm minimisation. Carriers shouldn't be excluded from breeding as long as the MOI is known for the specific disease/mutation/defect. With the WSS population, it is incredibly small so the chances of using a carrier in a mating is likely. Some of the carriers that have been used are exceptional examples of the breed and on a whole healthy with none of the hidden nasties breeders should be really worried about in their lines, which is why people have used them. In any breed, as long as everyone is testing and avoiding creating affected animals, it is manageable. If breeders are aware of and utilise the tests available for their breed, understand the breeding implications of mate selection and have knowledge of the diseases/mutations/defects they are trying to control using carriers shouldn't be a problem. With a small population avoiding the carrier animals may not be possible as you could be potentially wiping out quality lines in the process resulting in loss of genetic diversity and as Lowenhart has said - introducing something worst trying to avoid carriers.

We have a desexing rebate for all our pups, which is $200 as per our contract. We've never had any pups from any of our litters bred when we didn't want them to be. All the owners have desexed their pups when they have felt it was right for them and their situation, we do advise that they wait 12 months or do it as close to 12 months as possible. When people are paying 'their good money' for a pup, they don't necessarily want a breeder telling them when (and where) they do things. Some people are against desexing regardless of when and that doesn't make them bad owners who are going to randomly breed their dogs or exploit them. We've never had a pup end up in an undesirable breeding home, actually we've only had 2 litters produced from any of our pups and those have both been dogs as stud, with our full knowledge and we knew it would happen before the dog was placed. There is a lot to be said about establishing and maintaining excellent relationships with puppy families rather than using the big stick of threats and contracts. Some times people agree to contracts as they desperately want a puppy and having a breeder come back and hit you with that stick down the track and get nasty over it all can/would be pretty upsetting especially if they start threatening to take the dog back.