mjk05

Just looking around at various DNA testing facilities in Australia. Does anyone use Orivet or ASAP (same company, I think)? Any other recommendations?

Chocolate colouring occurs in stumpy tail cattle dogs- maybe this is what they're on about? Coat colours

Are you serious?! How long ago was this? In a teaching hospital? A GP anaesthetist or an actual specialist anaesthetist? and the patient was definitely under GA, not just regional and a bit of something to help him snooze? What sort of airway did he have?

I think you're probably right, Owey. I've been through the TNS puppy nightmare twice, and as horrible as that was, I think it would have been worse if we'd sold those pups to someone else. It's quite likely that they didn't CHOOSE not to do testing, they just didn't know anything about it. Yes, they should have done some research first, but an amazing number of people have no idea that certain breeds are prone to certain genetic diseases, and even less knowledge of the available genetic testing. I know people who have decided to breed their nice, apparently healthy dogs, have pup buyers lined up, take the bitch to the local vet ahead of time for a pre-mating check-up and a discussion of the planned breeding, then take the pups in for checks before sale, and nothing has been mentioned to them about genetic disease. I actually doubt whether many vets would know what TNS is or how it presents or how to test for it. I've discussed it with quite a few vets (including specialists) before and after the DNA test became available, and almost all have not even heard of TNS or have misconceptions about the epidemiology and clinical presentation. The people that bred these pups were negligent, probably through ignorance rather than intention or malice.

The main problem I see with this project (as it has been reported) is the difficulty in defining the traits "that make a good farm dog". What each individual farmer/stockperson/trainer actually wants in a dog can vary widely depending on their operation/preferred methods of stockwork/training methods/etc etc etc. Some people mainly use their dogs in yards, others in paddocks, some people like dogs that bark or don't head so they can drive with them easily or they prefer strong heading dogs that can be trained to come off the head. If you look just at sheepdog triallers, where the work itself is relatively standardised, there's a range of preferences in style as well as temperament, and some successful handlers have dogs that others wouldn't touch with a bargepole. So while it might be interesting to be able to better understand the inheritance of heading or eye or square break and even to test for it, I don't see that it will help identify what makes a "good farm dog"- that will still be about breeders and handlers understanding and matching expectations. If this is supposed to be about animal welfare and/or increasing cost effectiveness of working dogs, then I think that funding could be better spent on research and education on health issues (including genetic disease) as well as education on using/training work dogs, like the courses the UK Ag Dept used to run. I've also heard that none of the researchers have any significant background in training or working sheepdogs. If this is true, it's disappointing. I just don't know how you could begin to look into this area without lots of experience working dogs. I wonder if they've had input from people like Don Robertson who have already put years of practical work into understanding inheritance of working traits.

That's so true. He is such a lucky pup to have a family who love him so much, have made his short life so happy, are prepared to go the hard yards to work out what's going on, but also to make the hardest decisions of all for him. Whether or not it is TNS, you are doing everything right by Bailey, none of this is your fault, and whatever you decide it will be the right decision for him.

No, it doesn't. If Bailey has TNS, then each of his siblings have a 25% chance of also having it, a 50% chance of being a carrier, and a 25% chance of being clear. In the litter that we had with TNS, 2 pups were affected, 2 were carriers (and are both happy, healthy 6 year old dogs). But you're right, the parents should never be bred together again. At least the person who bred Bailey is trying to do something to help you out- I guess it's up to you whether you want to go with one of their pups, or wait a while before looking for a breeder who is aware of and tests for this sort of thing.

I think it could be TNS too. You can actually test for it on a mouth swab, send it by mail. I'd give your vet a call ASAP and ask them to check it out. They probably haven't heard of it or think it's very rare, but it's much more common than previously believed. The reason it's important ti diagnose is that it's incurable and really horrible for you and the pup, and euthanasia now would save you all a lot of suffering. Also the breeder needs to know. It could be a neurological infection, but you'd wonder why such a young otherwise healthy pup had developed this, and TNS would be a possible reason.

Must be something like that. I think in Q'land there was enough interest for a couple of Faansie Basson schools, lots from ANKC people. I was surprised not to have any ANKC interest in WA even from fence sitters. It's such a great opportunity to see/work with someone with his experience and record, considering the costs of getting people to Australia. I'm really grateful to the organisers. Piper wrote: Aw, that's a pity! The original schedule had SA instead of WA- I was hugely excited, was going to get a weekend away to attend, and it was being held right where my dad grew up so it would have been a nice visit back for me, beautiful area too. But they didn't fill the places so had to cancel , and so he's coming to WA instead. So now instead of the kid-free weekend away, I get to try to clean enough of the junk out of our house to fit people in, and try to find enough sheep/room to hold the clinic at our place You're welcome to come to WA! There's a bit of info on Faansie's website: here

I would love to but there isn't one to my knowledge in NSW. It might be worth travelling for! I was going to fly to the SA one originally, and was actually really looking forward to a weeekend away, but now it's been moved to WA, so no kid-free jaunt for me Fortunately we've had enough interest to get it up and going here, but no-one from the ANKC scene, which surprised me. I don't know if we'll get ISDS-style trials up and running in WA again, but maybe I'll get to travel for those...

Is anyone else doing the upcoming Faansie Basson clinics?

I'd have thought that taking dogs back would be fairly standard, and that would be the first place owners would think of if they couldn't keep their dog. We've always made it clear to pups' new owners that we'll take them back at any time and for any reason, one year or fifteen years down the track. Maybe your breeder didn't specifically mention it because they thought it was a given?We also offer help with training, and have taken pups back for training here, but that's because they're bred/sold for a specific purpose. For ordinary pup issues we'd be happy to chat about it, offer some simple ideas, but anything more complex I'd be more likely to refer them to someone local and professional. We've had a few dogs come back to stay when their owners went on holiday too. I don't think any of that is out of the ordinary.

I'm pretty sure that sire is deaf/blind, it said so on the breeder's website. I'm having trouble linking from my phone... ETA-maybe just blind- but that's definitely stated by the breeder as the reason he can't be shown himself. Sandgrubber's link on the first page links to it.

Hi Deb, The vets are volunteers. One is a current trialler, another is a relative of a trialler. I don't know whether in SA they have paid vets or volunteers. No ID required for TNS/CL testing, although some dogs are microchipped/tattooed. Of course, we're a small enough community that the vets actually know almost all the individual dogs. I'd anticipate that eventually microchipping will become more standard and will become part of the process. If you want more info, email me and I can put you in touch with some of the organisers.

Sure- of the top of my head there was last year's Mayanup 3 sheep trial and possibly also Esperance +/or Ballidu 3 sheep trials- of those we only went to Mayanup, so I'm not sure. The year before I think they did collection at the State Arena Champs, and possibly one other trial. They could collect for anything you wanted- most people did TNS and some CL, but the collectors are vets so if someone wants to test for CEA it's available, you just need to let them know and arrange paperwork ahead of time. The state association (like SAWSDA, who have also had collection days) have negotiated a discounted rate for TNS with the Uni of NSW, and that's the major identified problem in local dog populations, so that's what most people were doing.

Similar to what we do here. We have had DNA collection available (with negotiated reduced rates for some testing) at quite a few trials recently. I think there are already some Australian dogs in South America. A rancher from Argentina came out specifically to buy dogs maybe 15 years ago (the story is that they offered a blank cheque for a certain dog, but her owner wouldn't sell her), and ended up buying a couple. They've had some semen sent over as well- not sure if it was the same people buying it, though. Lab Rat, you should try writing to the ABC- they've had some plans for televised sheepdog trials on and off for a while now, there was a program that almost happened last year, it was being advertised in newsletters etc- but for some reason they keep falling through. Maybe if they got a few emails requesting coverage they'd get onto it?

I rang around half a dozen vets for prices in our area and the cheapest I could get was $450 per dog (that's just hips, under GA, no scoring- medium sized dogs). We ended up going with the closest, and because we had 6 dogs to do, they discounted to $500 per dog. Two of them were really badly positioned and not suitable for scoring, so we'll have to get them redone, unfortunately.

Found on another site: Effects of breed, sex, and neuter status on trainability in dogs Authors: Serpell, James A.; Hsu, Yuying Source: Anthrozoos: A Multidisciplinary Journal of The Interactions of People & Animals, Volume 18, Number 3, 2005 , pp. 196-207(12) Publisher: Berg Publishers Abstract: In a previous study of canine temperament (Hsu and Serpell 2003), a distinct “trainability” factor was identified, characterized by a dog's willingness to attend to its owner and obey simple commands, combined with a high “fetch” motivation, and low levels of distractibility and/or resistance to correction. This paper explores the distribution of this trait in a large sample of dogs in relation to breed, sex and neuter status. The owners of 1,563 dogs belonging to 11 common breeds were invited to assess them for “trainability” using a standardized questionnaire (C-BARQ©). Highly significant breed differences in trainability were detected. In two breeds with distinct field and show bred lines, show bred dogs obtained significantly lower trainability scores. Although no overall sex differences in trainability were detected, male Dachshunds and West Highland White Terriers were found to be significantly more trainable than females. Neutering was not associated with any differences in trainability in female dogs in any breed, but was associated with positive effects on trainability in male Shetland sheepdogs. The findings suggest that there is scope for improving trainability in most breeds of dog, and emphasize the dangers of generalizing among breeds with respect to sex differences in trainability or the benefits of neutering. The biological basis of the trainability trait is also discussed in light of recent research on the evolution of canine social cognition. Full text here

Thanks. For anyone else, the drug name is proligestone, and I think its called Covinan in Australia.

I don't know anything about the SV system- why do people think it is limited to males? And yep, I'm sure that's a major factor- if you're going to spend $10 grand+ importing a dog, you'd want to maximise your chances of getting a return, I guess- plus, if you really think it's a fabulous dog, it can have much more impact through breeding, considering number of pups, length of breeding life, semen storage and possibility of AI years later. I'd be really interested in hearing about the injection, too- we have a pet bitch with a severe heart defect who has irregular and mostly silent seasons. She isn't fit for surgery, and it's a nightmare trying to manage her with entire dogs around.

No, I understand that BB was generalising from schutzhund to everything when she said she thought trialling desexed dogs was a waste of time. But this thread wasn't talking only about schutzhund, most people initially were talking about agility, retrieving etc. You have been talking directly about sheepdogs, when you questioned why I'd trial my desexed dogs, or when you said you don't see desexed dogs at sheepdog trials, etc etc. But if you want to change tack and just refer to schutzhund, that's fine. It does sound one sport where, due to low numbers of interested parties and suitable dogs, they need to encourage more entire dogs to participate. Oops! BB, I didn't mean that I prefer my working sheepdogs to be entire males- actually I prefer training and working bitches, but when I have male dogs, I'd rather leave then entire. My favourite dog to work + train (and I'm talking sheepdogs, agility and obedience) is a desexed bitch, because I like their attitude and you don't have to worry about seasons. In the handful of really consistently top 3sheep trial dogs in my area, most of them are bitches. If we're talking about schutzhund now, though- if males are better at the sport, as you've said, does it really matter that few bitches are trialled? If the aim is to produce dogs of either sex to do the best job possible, but males are almost always better at it than bitches, then can't you assess the worth of a breeding bitch by the calibre of her sons in competition (if that's the best way to assess them)? Sure, you need to assess the bitch herself for working traits before deciding to keep and breed her, but I'd expect most breeders to be able to train a bitch to a high level themselves, without having to compete, and be able to ensure that she was a quality performer before breeding her. And people trying to decide which bitch lines to go for can still look at all the dogs competing and see which bitch lines are producing the best performing dogs. Honestly, if I were buying a pup to do any performance/work with, and I had a choice between a pup from a top trialling bitch, or a pup from a bitch with many top trialling offspring, even if she herself had never trialled, I would choose the second pup. For assessing production values of animals, you don't actually have to test the animal in the same way as its offspring- we can accurately estimate how well our rams and ewes produce high quality fat lambs to eat, without eating those rams and ewes themselves. Anyway, it seems to me that if you want more people trialling their bitches, it's a matter of: 1) separating the bitches from the dogs in competition, so people are particularly rewarded for working bitches 2) make sure they aren't disadvantaged by trialling entire bitches- ie allow bitches in season to compete 3) increase the popularity of the sport overall- perhaps that may include allowing desexed animals to compete (in separate classes?) to get more people interested in the sport, if that's an issue. I'm not surprised people spend their money importing males- the main reasons to do this (investing heaps of time and money) would be to succeed at the sport (you've said males do better), and to import new genetics into the breed. Males can produce many more pups than bitches in a lifetime, so their potential value as new blood is higher. It's also less risky to breed a male (few male dogs are injured or die from siring a litter), and no time out from competition. And if schutzhund people use competition results as their main index of breeding potential, then of course a male dog has more chance of attracting interest than a bitch.

You said: QUOTE 4 of my current 5 trialling dogs are desexed, and the other one is probably going to be soon. I dont really understand this. I thought your trialling dogs would be your best dogs. If I were a newcomer, just thinking about it, I'd be finding your comments about desexed dogs in sheepdog trialling (as well as top working dog breeders) fairly discouraging so far. Absolutely, and that's why we're having a discussion about it.

She didn't say Schutzhund, though, she said "Personally, I don't understand why anyone would use a desexed female for performance/sport in the first place. A sporting female IMHO should be trained in work/sport as a proofing foundation that the line is work/sport capable and then used for the breeding of a proven and titled bitch. " And then you questioned why I'd bother to trial desexed dogs. I'd hate for people to think that they shouldn't bother approaching a top working dog breeder about a pup, or even getting involved in sheepdog trialling, just because they don't want to breed or would prefer to have desexed animals. That's the impression that you (and BB, even if she's talking about Schutzhund) have given in this thread so far. Are you sure? I know quite a few desexed dogs trialling, but I don't think anyone would pick it. I know a few infertile ones too, and dogs that aren't going to be bred from for other reasons. One of the most recent Australian 3sheep rep dogs is desexed. ETA: I don't think you'll get anything other than anecdotal evidence as far as sheepdogs go. Personally I prefer to have entire males, mainly for physical reasons, so I'd desex after physical maturity and not at all unless there was a reason for it. But I find desexed bitches more stable- you don't have problems with bitches getting moody or going off their work around seasons.

So do I. So what does it matter if some of those siblings are desexed? Desexing a dog which turns out to be a good working dog is some loss of breeding potential. But working that desexed dog, showing what inherited traits it carries, still gives a significant amount of useful information to breeders. So it's still worth doing. BB said she didn't understand why anyone would bother working a desexed dog (and that in fact her sport doesn't allow it). I think it's fairly obvious why- but I've tried to explain it anyway.

Maybe that's the situation for Schutzhund, or for your working sheepdog breeder, but most working sheepdog breeders I know sell pups to people who need working sheepdogs. We don't tend to have contracts for breeders' terms, so when you sell a pup, it belongs to someone else and they can do what they like with it. Of course, we believe that most pups we produce are going to contribute positively to the breed, so we're not telling people to desex, but if they want to, no problem. The most important thing is that they're worked. Having said that, there are situations where a working sheepdog breeder may "stash" pups, sell them with the agreement that they can use them for breeding later. But that's the exception rather than the rule. We did it recently when we bred an old stud dog, perhaps for the last time, to a bitch we hadn't used before. We had high hopes for the litter and thought they might be very important in our breeding program- but also had some people waiting for a bitch pup from that dog. There was only one bitch in the litter. After some debate, we sold the bitch to them, asked them to keep her entire with the possibility of getting a pup from her one day. Of course it is a home where she will get worked, and they are in a situation to manage an entire bitch. We also kept all 4 male pups, so we know we will be able to choose the best of them. It was an exceptional situation. No, I'm talking about the reality of someone who wants a working sheepdog for a farm, and doesn't necessarily want to breed. What are they supposed to do? It's shearing time, they need their dog, and she's in season, they're busy and distracted, accidents happen. I think it's fairly responsible if they decide ahead of time to sterilise her so that situation doesn't arise. Seriously, do you think every pup from every one of the top breeders of working sheepdogs in Australia goes to a "breed enthusiast"? What happens to all those pups? Does the top breeder have a hand in all the breedings of all those pups? We have neighbours who buy all their dogs from a top kelpie breeder, they've paid up to $5000 for them, and they aren't going to breed from them. Shock, horror! Are they great working dogs? Yes, they generally are. Are they worth $5000? Yep, to their owner the work they do is well worth it. They'll keep going back to that breeder, who still has those lines and is intelligently breeding to keep producing top working ability in their lines. Working dogs aren't (and shouldn't be) just for "breed enthusiasts". They should be for people who need/want a dog to do the work. If they want to sterilise them, bully for them. There are other ways for clever breeders to keep producing top dogs than by keeping every single puppy entire. Dogs have more than one litter, there's more than one pup in a litter, it isn't that hard. The most important thing is that as many pups as possible are worked enough to be assessed.