shortstep

Be careful what you wish for you may just get it.

The US is not having vets report illness by breed by microchip to the folks who are doing this research. That started here in Australia and in the UK. So they are not going to look at breed club information from the US (at least not for their data bank of EBV), they are going to to look at the data they collect. As I said in the beginning I have been won over to the regulation of breeding side of the argument. I can not see how I can promote all the dogs until I can show they have meet the public's expectations on health and health testing. Just like what you wanted for all cav breeders in OZ. I give up on the fight, we will take the power away from the Cav breeders and let the 'experts' decide what they can do and not do. Normally I prefer, in fact had demanded, that breeders to police themselves and make their own decsions, to keep government out of dog breeding. But it is clear that is only prolonging this issue. We need to get this over with. What ever the results are and what ever breeds we loose. At least there would then be some hope for the breeds that fair well to come out on the other side with the seal of approval. We can then start over with a good reputation, backed up by the most progressive Uni health breeding plans in the world.

Only my guess from what I see being done, but I think pug faces will be one of the first extreme traits they go after. I did think they would go after the Bull Dog first, but now it really is looking like they will go after a trait instead and then apply the science/evidence or what have you to all breeds where it fits. There was a drawing of what they wanted the Bull Dogs head to look like. It had a substanstial nose, the eyes were deep seated as in a normal skull and the head was of normal size (much smaller than it is now). So I would guess it will be about the same for all the pug faced breeds. A real nose, eye set deep and not a large head. Not up on it but I think ther eis also some spinal condition they are looking at too that go along witht he head?? Edited to ad. Just as you told Jed about her dog, you would need to really test before you can say that hearts, hips elbows, hocks and knees are clear of disease. indeed but the HUGE difference here is i am not breeding her so therefore am not giving the public possibly dodgy progeny You followed it by 'some breeders get it right', and I was saying that unless your dog was tested you can not claim the breeder got it right. Maybe I am not making myself clear. If we are to accept that only tested dogs can be said to be clear of disease, it does not matter who owns them, it is the fact they have or have not been tested clear that must go along with any statement of their perfection. So you could say my dogs seems fine though she has not been tested so I am hoping my breeder got it right. Anyway from what I gather, they are not going to be asking you about your dog, they will be looking at the vet record on Bostons likely collected from the UK and Australia and using thsoe to decide. Like this from the Uk Causes of death by organ system/category for Boston Terriers 1 Old age 12 28.6 Old age 2 Cardiac 8 19.0 Heart disease unspecified; heart attack; heart failure 3 Cancer 7 16.7 Brain tumour 4 Respiratory 5 11.9 Respiratory failure; unspecified 5 Neurologic 4 9.5 Meningitis; seizures 6 Endocrine 2 4.8 Addison’s disease; Cushings or hyperadrenocorticism Disease conditions by organ system/category for Boston Terriers 1 Ocular 10 27.0 Cataract (unspecified > congenital); corneal ulcer 2 Reproductive 9 24.3 Dystochia (uterine inertia > physical blockage); false pregnancy; prostatomegaly 3 Musculoskeletal 6 16.2 Arthritis (forelimbs); CLR; patellar luxation 4 Cardiac 4 10.8 Heart murmur (unspecified > Grade 2); collapse 5 Neurologic 3 8.1 Seizures; IVDD 6 Respiratory 3 8.1 Long soft palate 7 Gastrointestinal 1 2.7 Colitis 8 Urologic 1 2.7 Urethral obstruction

Cheaper to import semen. Maybe for some, it not cheap. I have a freind that has imported 3 different dogs semen at great expense, so far 2 have been used and no puppies, the last one will be tried soon. To me it is cheaper to import a dog, at least you have the dog if nothing else.

Yep that is it and I already do all of the things mentioned with the expection of EBV as you need the whole community and testing and reporting to be able todo that. I do not my own limed data collection but do not get an EBV. I also donot provide life time insurance, but I do provide lifetime return and refund for any reason. One other area I have concern over is the COI/Inbreding. I currently keep my COI below 0.5% in 6 generations, that is very low (that means good). However from what I have ben told, most breeds will get the breeding directive to lower the COI with each breeding. Once you get down to numbers like 0.5% in 6 generations it is very very difficult to reduce that number any further and you would have to select for only that one trait, this I disagree with. I think there should be a lowest acceptable % and once reaching that you do not need to keep lowering the COI each generation until you hit 0%. That would be very difficult with some breeds given the low worldwide population and the even lower choice of breeding stock in Australia. Well that is where importing or using other breeds come in. If you accept that lowering and keeping the COI low is important then you have to find ways to do it. Even in breeds with larger populations there is still need to keep bringing in new dogs/genetic and to keep reducing and preventing higher COIs. The more dogs you have to select from in the breeding population the easier it is to control (or maybe contain might be a better word) disease. For example the kelpies should open their stud book to the huge population of WKC dogs. Not my breed mind so please don't argue with me about it, I am just using that as an example we can all see. And how much change from $10,000 is there from importating a dog? If people could import more dogs, no doubt they would (I have no intention of arguing with you about your breed of dog as I don't know what breed you have ... ) None I just did one about 6 months ago and it was over 10 and looking at doing another right now and just the shipping (for a puppy) has gone up to over $4000.00, don;t have final cost yet but looking like 12,000 for a pup that might not pass all the health tests when it grows up. Crazy thing to do. Only for the love of dog.

Only my guess from what I see being done, but I think pug faces will be one of the first extreme traits they go after. I did think they would go after the Bull Dog first, but now it really is looking like they will go after a trait instead and then apply the science/evidence or what have you to all breeds where it fits. There was a drawing of what they wanted the Bull Dogs head to look like. It had a substanstial nose, the eyes were deep seated as in a normal skull and the head was of normal size (much smaller than it is now). So I would guess it will be about the same for all the pug faced breeds. A real nose, eye set deep and not a large head. Not up on it but I think ther eis also some spinal condition they are looking at too that go along witht he head?? Edited to ad. Just as you told Jed about her dog, you would need to really test before you can say that hearts, hips elbows, hocks and knees are clear of disease.

Yep that is it and I already do all of the things mentioned with the expection of EBV as you need the whole community and testing and reporting to be able todo that. I do not my own limed data collection but do not get an EBV. I also donot provide life time insurance, but I do provide lifetime return and refund for any reason. One other area I have concern over is the COI/Inbreding. I currently keep my COI below 0.5% in 6 generations, that is very low (that means good). However from what I have ben told, most breeds will get the breeding directive to lower the COI with each breeding. Once you get down to numbers like 0.5% in 6 generations it is very very difficult to reduce that number any further and you would have to select for only that one trait, this I disagree with. I think there should be a lowest acceptable % and once reaching that you do not need to keep lowering the COI each generation until you hit 0%. That would be very difficult with some breeds given the low worldwide population and the even lower choice of breeding stock in Australia. Well that is where importing or using other breeds come in. If you accept that lowering and keeping the COI low is important then you have to find ways to do it. Even in breeds with larger populations there is still need to keep bringing in new dogs/genetic and to keep reducing and preventing higher COIs. The more dogs you have to select from in the breeding population the easier it is to control (or maybe contain might be a better word) disease. For example the kelpies should open their stud book to the huge population of WKC dogs. Not my breed mind so please don't argue with me about it, I am just using that as an example we can all see.

Yep that is it and I already do all of the things mentioned with the exception of EBV as you need the whole community and testing and reporting to be able todo that. I do my own limited data collection but do not get an EBV. I also do not provide life time insurance, but I do provide lifetime return and refund for any reason. One other area I have concern over is the COI/Inbreding. I currently keep my COI below 0.5% in 6 generations, that is very low (that means good). However from what I have been told, most breeds will get the breeding directive to lower the COI with each breeding. Once you get down to numbers like 0.5% in 6 generations it is very very difficult to reduce that number any further and you would have to select for only that one trait, this I disagree with. I think there should be a lowest acceptable % and once reaching that you do not need to keep lowering the COI each generation until you hit 0%.

I recall reading one post a little while back where the breeder gave a month's worth of pet insurance to each puppy buyer. That was an interesting idea. A lifetime's liability (and maybe I'm reading Shortstep wrong here) seems inherently flawed given that so many issues are late onset or have unknown causes. Sheridan this is not my idea, it is on the 10 point plan for breeding pedigree dogs in Australia and has been mentioned through out the PDE activists push to regulate dog breeding. Even someone this very thread have said they want breeders to be responsible for the life of the dog. Anyway the idea is that it cover things that do come up any time in life. What they want to cover are things that there is little ability to control (even with screening), like SM, HD, diseases that have no DNA tests and so forth. This protects the buyer that they are not stuck with medical bills. But I think even more importantly it would also protect the breed's breeding committee members and also secondaryly the breeder. Remember yesterday when I said that if the committees take over making the breeding decisions then they would also have to take on the responsibly for the results? So yes rest assured if the government or it's agents take over dog breeding decisions they will make sure those pups are insured, as they know things will still go wrong. They will not want to deal with it, the owner was made aware of the risk when they bought the dog with the insurance coverage, end of liability. BTW no where have I seem any mention of containing costs on the price of dogs or on the amount of testing, by any of those pushing for the changes.

As far as genetic health lifetime liablity, number 9 of the 10 point plan. Insurance to cover inherited disease (breed based) for the life of the dog. So say the breed is know to have HD (almost every breed on earth can get HD) the insurance rate for the disease will be set using the breed average score and the litters EBV score for HD and the cost of medical correction or treatment of the problem. Higher the breeds risk and/or higher the EBV on the litter, or more cost related to treatment, the higher the higher the rate of insurance to cover the pup for that disease if it happens. This would apply to all genetic disorders in the breed for the whole litter and each pup would have it's own policy that is bought by the breeder and is given to the new owner. EVB is created by all vet sending all midical infomration o the uni linked to microship number, registration cross lined to microship number. Then it all ends up on the pedigree when ever that dog shows up (maybe also linkd as relative to dogs ont he pedigree such as in estimating breed values on HD families). No one is sure just how much this is going to add to the average pup in an average litter but most feel atleast $1000.00 per pup. I have to go someone is here.

As I said yesterday I am changing my stance and now support government regulated dog breeding as the solution to dog welfare issues. This issue of stopping bad press will happen but later. Right now the bad press is needed to get the laws put in place which will drive the change everyone is wishing for. So we need to get on the same page, right now bad press, no pats on the back for dog breeders, demanding lifetime liability for every pup breed, are all good things that will help to bring in the laws to make changes needed. After the laws are made, there will be a committee for each breed, primarily made up of those who are going to drive the changes through. Extremes in structure will be one of many topics addressed. This will be managed by changing the standards and using breeding directives and measureable goals. The breeders dogs (parents of the pending litter) will then be assessed as part of the EBV program and any deviation from the new standard or the measureable goals will be reflected in EBV for the litter and then in the cost of the mandatory pup insurance for inherited disease (for the life of the dog). In a nut shell , the breeders that are still active and do not follow the directives to remove extreme structure from their pups will be given an insurance rate that is so high that they will not be able to afford to breed the litter. I understand a pup with a not favorable EBV could have an insurance rate of over $5000.00. Each pup in the litter would require this insurance prior to being sold. I also hear they may require bonds be put up prior to getting a breeding permit if the insurance required in high amounts. So that will end any breeding of dogs with extremes. Maybe more time should be spent on understanding how all the changes everyone wants are going to be delivered once the laws go through. Maybe start with a review of the work in the Uk and then the 10 point plan.

LOL sorry that was no way to treat a freind.

Well I brought up the Finnland or was it Sweden, breeding plan for SM in cavs the other day. It said to breed atleast one A dog in every breeding and to not breed dogs with clincial symptoms (was ok to breed b c d to an A for example), that went over like a lead baloon, Bet wanted only A to A litters. Explaining what throwing out that number of the population would do to the breed did not matter. But you are right and I often go to these 3 contries to look up breed disease stats and to see what they are doing and how it is working. I actually have not see much if any reduction in most of the complexs disease rate like HD ED epi and on the list goes, but the simple diseases are really controlled well even those with out DNA tests. I am pretty sure that McGreevy has something else in mind for us however.

Can I ask what breed and what work?

Well said and I agree.

Sorry meant to answer this and got side tracked. An expert in this tense is anybody except an experienced breeder of the breed in question (and has some sort of social, ethical, community, legal or science background that might have some input).

Ditto and why I am having problems answering you...LOL um yes, well maybe too simplistic on my part but wolves brains are like dogs with long noses brains. There is no pug face in wild dogs?? so 1 + 1 = the change ??? here is a bit of what he says, enjoy lol But how could skull shortening affect cerebral organization? Studies of human craniosynostosis [22], [23] and immature head banding [23] suggest that the development of brain shape and size is closely interrelated to the configuration of dura matter as well as the co-developing cranial vault. Changes to any of one of these factors can lead to changes in the others [22]. Differences in canine skull length resulting from artificial human selection pressures may have led to alterations in cerebral development most evident in brachycephalic versus dolicocephalic dogs. Specifically, rostral intracranial volumetric restriction during development of short-skulled dogs may explain the combination of axis rotation and olfactory bulb repositioning. Regodon et al (1993) also noted that reduced skull length in brachycephalic dogs gives rise to a more perpendicular development of the cranium relative to the facial axis [5]. These anatomical adaptations could hence represent a biological solution to a ‘space problem’. The olfactory bulb seems to have migrated to a potential space ventral to the orbital frontal cortex, thereby freeing the anterior pole for normal development of the frontal cortex. Alternatively, animals at the dolichocephalic end of the spectrum may have sufficient ‘spare capacity’ in the cranial vault to permit olfactory bulb development almost directly anterior to the frontal lobe. Either of these possible explanations relies on an evolutionary and developmental preference to preserve frontal lobe volume. Future studies could therefore directly compare frontal lobe morphology in brachy- and dolichocephalic dogs.

Hmm, did you see any proof that the olefactory centre was elsewhere x years ago? And with NO MRIs, how did they deduce where the olefactory centre was ? SM - Griffons, Cavaliers, Bostons, Poodles, Chihuahuas, Maltese, Pomeranians - and more - have SM. The reason why the Cav got such excess publcity is because the BREEDERS, OWNERS, AND CLUBS WORLDWIDE donated quite a lot of money particularly to Claire Rusbridge for research to get to the bottom of this disease. And because there is a dedicated effort, with subsidised scans etc (paid for by breeders), which no other breed has, the poor old Cav got ALL the bad press. Hi Jed, it was McGreevy. I can hunt around for the link again if you like. I posted it in the News a few months ago. I think it was only in a different location in the pug faced breeds, but you need to read it to be sure Jed. I mostly remember that more research was going on to see what if any problems this might be creating for the dogs. here it is Breeding Is Changing Dog Brains, Scientists Find ScienceDaily (Aug. 2, 2010) — For the first time, scientists have shown that selective breeding of domestic dogs is not only dramatically changing the way animals look but is also driving major changes in the canine brain. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/...00802091205.htm here is the actual paper http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%...al.pone.0011946

oh I think it will take some years. It might be that it happens here suddenly, even before in the UK. I think we are very vulnerable for sudden unexpected changes. I used to think they would go after a breed first, but now I think it is going to be pug faces in any breeds. We will see what happens.

Ok if you think so. It makes no difference really, as you are going to get your wish and we will all see what happens. Maybe you see a future of perfectly healthy giant danes, all breed by great breeders following the magic breeding proticals (which will be set up to do away with all problems attributed to breeding to standards, extremes, show and purity). I hope you are right.

Well to be fair, if you are going to have breeding decisions mandated and controlled by "experts" then they will have to be accountable for what is produced. Can't have it both ways. Now to try to make more wishes come true. The first thing the experts will do when they take over the breeding of danes will be to reduce the size down to a non giant breed size, like a hunting type breed I would say. Next would be to fix the heart and cancer problems and you will know the answer to that better than I, but I do not think further screening would be seen as the way to tackle the problem. So your dane will not be much of a dane, but this should take care of some of the genetic and conformation problems you want addressed.

Well what exactly is the image you want to project? If we use DOL main page for example. I get the idea that this is about show dogs. 3 different things right off, the point score system, the breed show pictures, the show scene magazine. Then when I look at a few of the listing I mostly see dogs in show stance and words about show champions. So the impression is totally these are show dogs. I have often said that a lot more time needs to be spent worrying about what the people who own our dogs worry about. They want great pets. Dogs they can jog with. Dogs that will play nicely with their children. Dogs that are good companions in the home. Dogs they will take for walks. I do not see any pictures of dogs and people doing any of these things on the home page of DOL. No article about which breed was voted the best jogging companion, no story about how Robby the Lab is the perfect companion when the family goes camping. No picture of dogs cuddled up watching TV with the kids. No poll asking you to vote for which is the best dog friendly city in Australia. To me this is marketing the dogs correctly, to the people who will own them, doing what they will be doing with them. Dogs shows have nothing to do with their interest and these days is not something always associated with good thoughts. Anyone see the insurance commercial with Brian ( wolfhound I think) in the red sports car. Who wouldn't want one. But take that same dog and show him stacked at a dog show and you changed the whole image. How about the Lab tested puppy, nobody wants a lab stack at a dog show but chasing toilet paper rolls around the house, now that is a fun dog.

Just interested were the parents tested for SM. Have been doing some reading and seems the Boston's get this disease too and they think the rate could be getting up there and that testing should be done. Don't forget the spinal deformaties related to the twisted tail, (had a friend with 2 bostons that has this problem, it was so sad) need to make sure the breeder has done spinal xrays on both parents and hopefully the grandparnts too not sure how early you can screen the pup for this. Of course none of screening the breeders do will stop them from being banned eventually, they are doing lot of research on pug faced breeds and just the deformed skull shape (did you se the study where the olfactory center has moved to a different place in the brain!) and the dwarfism will be enough to do them in. So make hay while you can! Yes we all have opinions about who the fools really are. yes bostons get this disease too which is why i was interested in breeders opinions. i suspect the parents weren't scanned for SM and yes there are a few nasties with spinal and skull deformities. i am active on a usa forum and there seems to be more info there on boston issues ss i agree anyone who loves the brachy breeds need to make hay on the olfactory centre, i am very interested on the plasticity of the human brain and there are amazing things that happen...for instance there is one woman who was born without the left side of her brain and she functions extremely well because the right side of her brain does both sides job. they have done mri's on people with brain injuries and found that the speech centres move to another area....it is fascinating stuff so i suspect dogs brain can change as well I hope your dog is OK, were you lucky and did not get one with a nastie from a bad breeder? It is great to speak to someone who holds the wish for purebred dogs that I now intend to support to the best of my ability. All good luck in bringing about the changes you think are needed in the breeding directives for Bostons in Australia. Just how many litters/pup a year are there in Australia? Any idea how many breeders will drop out of breeding if you can get the SM and other tests maditory by law? Have you done any reserch on how the decreased numbers will affect the breed in Australia prior to it getting banned for good? How many years do you give the breed before it is banned in Australia?

Just interested were the parents tested for SM. Have been doing some reading and seems the Boston's get this disease too and they think the rate could be getting up there and that testing should be done. Don't forget the spinal deformaties related to the twisted tail, (had a friend with 2 bostons that has this problem, it was so sad) need to make sure the breeder has done spinal xrays on both parents and hopefully the grandparnts too not sure how early you can screen the pup for this. Of course none of screening the breeders do will stop them from being banned eventually, they are doing lot of research on pug faced breeds and just the deformed skull shape (did you se the study where the olfactory center has moved to a different place in the brain!) and the dwarfism will be enough to do them in. So make hay while you can! Yes we all have opinions about who the fools really are.

Yes I agree with this I can remember some years ago having a conversation with the owner of a med/small breed about HD. I was doing a lot of work in this area in my dogs. The affected rate in my breed was about 1 in 8-10. I am proud to day that my rate is currently 1 in 40 in 4 generations. Anyway they were suggesting that that I only breed 0-0 dogs and a few other things which were not things I was doing. It then came to light that this persons breed had a higher affected rate than my breed however they did not do any screening. I never made a point about it. Not my breed not my dogs. This was their choice and I am sure that this person who felt it was not needed knew what was important in their breed. This was truly their ground not mine and I support their decision both privately and publically to decide what health tests to do on their dogs. I would hope for the same from others, but this no longer happens. As I said above, there will always be some breeders, maybe even most of the breeders in a breed, that do not do what you think they should be doing. So now what? Do we decide for them? I think the answer has already been made by the 'us', the 'public', even if it is not our breed, and even if we are not experts in genetics and even if we are in different country and even if we have respected the breeders for many years. It is no longer their decision, the decisions now belongs to the world. The best I can see happening is the decisions gets taken away from the world of public opinion and given to some experts. I do not think that the experts will decide that differently from what the breeders are doing in most cases. We shall see. However I hope that people do understand what they are asking for. There will not be any more pug faced breeds, no breeds with curly tails, no breeds that are dwarfs, the list goes on. As the old saying goes, 'Be vary careful what you wish for, you just might get it'. These things will be changed, they have made this very clear. So what brought about the change, I am tired of trying to prevent wishes from coming true.