sandgrubber

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/new-guineas-singing-dogs-found-alive-wild-180975704/ Apparently quite a few of them and not as inbred as those in captivity

Scratch is right. Also, and I would be surprised if you don't already do it, make sure he's registered with Council and wears his Council tags. In many places, they only scan for microchips if there's no Council tag.

Buyers normally pay for health checks. (Vet can also help with temperament testing... they see puppies day in and day out and many develop an eye for behavioral problems). You should agree on it in advance, as well as what happens if problems turn up. The full price? Open to negotiation. If all is well and the original price was reasonable, I would pay full price. Pups are hard to get these days.

Good suggestions above. I'd also read up a little on behavioral screening for baby puppies. The vast majority of Lab pups are sweet, cute and land sharks and it's likely that the family had unreasonable expectations. But there are a small number of puppies in any breed who are off kilter from the start. For example, if the pup won't make eye contact or relax when held, I would be concerned.

For genetics geeks https://darwinsark.org/about-us/ Interesting citizen science project looking at/for the genetic basis for behavior and appearance. If you like doing surveys about your dog(s) it's a fun one. There's both a free (waiting required) and a paid version for the genetic sample. They'll even do a full genome for a big donation. THE SCIENCE While commercial dog DNA tests offer between 1,800 to 200,000 genetic markers, Darwin’s Ark’s technology offers over 4,000,000 markers, offering an exclusive look into your dog’s ancestry. Uniquely, we also offer the option of Trailblazer Level sequencing, where each of the the 2.4 billion bases (A, C, G, T) of your dog’s DNA is sequenced thirty times to ensure exceptionally high data quality."

Puppies of most popular breeds are scarce these days.

https://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2020/08/400-million-pounds-of-dog-food-year.html It's often made by some company other than the one on the label.

I often say stuff and then feel a need to go back and research it to make sure. Tried that on genetic testing. Looks like we're a long way from having a reliable guide there https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05771-0 And yes, counsel is likely needed, but maybe not from the company providing the tests.

Using what / how many markers? There have been misidentifications in criminology. Given greater scrutiny for quality control and use of much larger portions of the genome, 'identical' profiles will be extremely rare.

Sure, you can do it marker by marker. But when it reaches 300 health related markers (likely to increase to thousands) and sire and dam may be using different laboratories... or the tests may have changed since the sire was screened... there's an argument for doing the analysis in pairs and getting a bit of genetic counseling. I seem to remember stories of awful panic setting in when 23 and Me was first released, and lots of recommendations that expert advice is called on for interpretation. I'm still trying to make sense of the changing landscape here and it's likely that my opinion will change. The main point is that the existing pedigree/show trial system does little to ensure health or temperament, and a lot of people don't place a high value on purity. (As a Labrador person, I also often doubt how pure the breed is. When I see a Lab with long ears and a whip tail, I'm inclined to think there's a lot of hound blood back there somewhere... as was noted by Mary Roslin-Williams several decades ago). New tools are becoming available. It's good to be skeptical, but in time they may provide us with better ways to make breeding decisions.

IMO the direction of the future is to skip registries and just ensure that sire and dam aren't closely related or don't have common deleterious recessive genes. If it looks and acts like a purebred and isn't highly inbred or genetically cursed, that's good enough for me. I'm impressed to see that the genetic laboratories are moving in the direction of screening sire and dam together and red flagging possible doubling of deleterious recessive, plus giving reading on degree of inbreeding directly from DNA. The pedigree based COI is frustrating because it tends to stop at 5 or 6 generations and problems often originate much further back, with the legendary peripotent sire of 30+ years ago. Not sure we're there yet, but I think in the near future something like this might tell me a lot more than the pedigree records kept by the K9 associations. https://shop.embarkvet.com/products/embark-for-breeders-dog-breeding-package?_gl=1*okzhnt*_gcl_aw*R0NMLjE1OTg2NjQzNTUuQ2owS0NRancxcUw2QlJDbUFSSXNBRFY5SnRiNDVfZzZLR2FYVGhBYkVaRUdhaGZPTHVGUmJaS3FLeFFNQ1hub2FieUtfX2wzTDFPVHJVc2FBbmJERUFMd193Y0I.&_ga=2.6962741.669324769.1598664326-653636141.1597860419&_gac=1.51892699.1598664357.Cj0KCQjw1qL6BRCmARIsADV9Jtb45_g6KGaXThAbEZEGahfOLuFRbZKqKxQMCXnoabyK__l3L1OTrUsaAnbDEALw_wcB

I disagree. There are many reasons for cross breeding, and I would be quite happy going back to the days before stud books were closed and the dog fancy was open to the notion of creating new breeds. In the past, as a Labrador person in WA, I could see reason to experiment with cross breeding to try and develop a breed that had Labrador temperament and looks, but was not burdened with a coat totally inappropriate for a hot, arid climate. (Of course I would never have dared to do it). I fully understand crosses like the 'puggle' that attempt to capture the traits that make pugs so loveable but get rid of the problems of brachycephaly. Or the rat terrier, bred for ratting. Nor can I condemn Guide Dogs for experimenting with Lab x Goldens. Many existing breeds were established out of deliberate mixing of breeds or land races. To me the term 'puppy farmer' should be reserved for people who, as the words suggest, view dogs as livestock and puppies as a crop. As for not registering, with the 'fancy' getting all snotty about not selling on main register and looking down on people who breed so they can share their breed with families wanting pets... I can see lots of reasons not to register. Especially as genetic testing is advancing to a point where it can give better guidance about avoiding the pitfalls of inbreeding than pedigree based indices such as the COI.

Some breeds are easier to toilet train than others. Lab pups often have a basic grasp when they go to their forever homes. My litters have tended to seek the far corner of the puppy pen by 8 weeks. This transfers easily to going outside (if they can). I've heard breeders of other breeds say toilet training is hard.

Hard to say. Here's a decent article : https://www.thelabradorsite.com/antlers-for-dogs/ For a few months I can't see a problem. Young pups don't have the jaw strength needed to break a tooth, and their teeth will be falling out soon, anyway.

Noble intention. As a retired breeder who always tried to do the right thing, I'd urge caution. Even if you do all the available tests and are very selective in breeding, things will sometimes go wrong. And there is no test for some of the worst diseases. Breeders cop blame and many decent hobby breeders are struggling or have quit. Also, beware of the BYB label. In some cases, such as out crossing to avoid hereditary diseases that are found throughout a breed, the outsiders who get accused of being BYBs may be working to correct problems that are deep rooted in a breed. Also, where the dog fancy has pushed for extremes, BYBs who have the occasional litter from a loved and healthy pet may be reservoirs for healthy genetic traits. People who want, for example, to produce pugs or bulldogs with moderate heads and faces may have no choice but to bring dogs into their breeding programs that lack pedigree papers.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/pandemic-puppy-dog-coronavirus/2020/08/17/0045605e-d094-11ea-8c55-61e7fa5e82ab_story.html How having a pet can change lives for a cooped up family

Boyar (Russian, next rank below prince, warrior class) conveniently shortens to Boy

Apparently this all is a press error. The law merely requires a TOTAL of one hour a day outside of a KENNEL, i.e. you cannot lock a dog up 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. It also places some restrictions on breeders (eg, no more than 3 litters at a time) and strengthens Germany's existing laws against 'torture breeding '.

It's not a QLD issue. It's Australian Consumer Law. Horrible to think of a dog as merchandise, but the law does. And this comes down to defective merchandise. https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/consumer-rights-guarantees

So sad! Poor Dougie. Poor you. I checked several sources and all agreed that Pectus Excavatum is a congenital (ie present at birth) disorder. It's rare, but most often found in brachy breeds. I think you can legally claim that you purchased a defective product and demand a refund. Talk with the local Small Claims Tribunal. Btw BOAS can be found even in show winning pugs, bred by well regarded breeders. If you want to avoid it, look for a breeder who actively breeds to avoid it. Or avoid brachy breeds altogether.

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-dogs-must-be-walked-twice-a-day-under-new-rule/a-54627195 The German agriculture minister has announced she will introduce a controversial new law that will require dog owners to walk their canine friends at least twice a day, for a total of at least one hour. The rules would also forbid owners from tying up dogs for long periods of time or leaving them alone all day. Around one in five German homes has a dog; over 9 million dogs are kept as pets in the country. "Pets are not cuddly toys — and their needs have to be considered," Agriculture Minister Julia Klöckner said Monday. She said her ministry was acting in accordance with "new scientific research about dogs' needs."

Long ago I used to do scans through Murdoch Vet School using pro radiographers on top of the line equipment. They often picked up attachment sites from where pups had been absorbed. They said this was normal... some embryos don't develop normally and get absorbed. Often 2-4 per litter. That said, I still ended up with litters of, typically, 9 or 10. It sounds like you face a different situation.

Yoli is an English springer spaniel. Her genetic results came back today from Orivet. All clear on the health related genes. Could someone please help interpret the color stuff or direct me to a simple explanation. I'm used to Labradors... where it's mostly E and B locus with occasional with occasional K locus (most Labs are KK). P. S. Yoli is black and white. Note, I don't really care. I prefer black and white, but it's a weak preference. Am I correct in thinking the E/E means she can only throw black and white pups? AUTOSOMAL HEREDITARY RECESSIVE NEPHROPATHY NEGATIVE / CLEAR [NO VARIANT DETECTED] FUCOSIDOSIS (ENGLISH SPRINGER SPANIEL TYPE) NEGATIVE / CLEAR [NO VARIANT DETECTED] PHOSPHOFRUCTOKINASE DEFICIENCY (SPANIEL TYPE) NEGATIVE / CLEAR [NO VARIANT DETECTED] E LOCUS - (CREAM/RED/YELLOW) E/E - DOMINANT BLACK DOES NOT CARRY YELLOW/RED/WHITE BROWN (345DELPRO) DELETION Bd/bd - CARRIER OF BROWN/CHOCOLATE/LIVER [DELETION] BROWN (GLNT331STOP) STOP CODON Bs/Bs - DOES NOT CARRY BROWN or CHOCOLATE [STOP CODON] BROWN (SER41CYS) INSERTION CODON Bc/bc - CARRIER OF BROWN/LIVER/CHOCOLATE [INSERTION] K LOCUS (DOMINANT BLACK) K/K - DOMINANT BLACK - SOLID [WILL NOT BE BRINDLED or EXPRESS AGOUTI] BLACK HAIR FOLLICULAR DYSPLASIA NEGATIVE - NOT SHOWING THE PHENOTYPE A LOCUS (FAWN/SABLE;TRI/TAN POINTS) at/at - TAN POINTS/BLACK & TAN or TRICOLOUR MAY BE BRINDLED [SEE K LOCUS] CONE-ROD DYSTROPHY I - PRA (CORD I) NEGATIVE / CLEAR [NO VARIANT DETECTED] HEREDITARY NEPHROPATHY NEGATIVE / CLEAR [NO VARIANT DETECTED] D (DILUTE) LOCUS D/D - NO COPY OF MLPH-D ALLELE (DILUTE) - PIGMENT IS NORMAL

Hope I'm not sounding like a broken record (do people still know that sound?) but I think testing has become part of the snobbery. One NZ FB group I frequent is heavy on breeders advising people not to buy from people who don't do ALL of the tests, including several genetic tests and annual eye exams. In the breed of interest, the incidence of serious non-PRA eye problems (PRA can be screened with genetic tests) is <1%, most occurring late in life. There are only half a dozen veterinary opthamologists in NZ, so eye exams require long distance driving for people who don't live near a big urban center. As for genetic testing, I think it's great if the test screens for a serious and/or common problems. I can also see X-rays for hips and elbows. And I can see screening much used stud dogs for diseases that have arisen by chance mutation and seem to be spreading in the breed. What I can't see is requiring every genetic test the laboratories come up with, and eye exams that rarely catch anything other than the occasional floater of someone who has a bitch from lines with good health history and only intends to have one or two litters. Where I live, these sorts of pressures mean that working dogs drop out or the pedigree system and often go totally without testing.

I thought that was standard procedure. I don't remember using a dog or chilled semen on any other terms. P. S. A failed mating costs the bitch's owner a lot more than it costs the dog's owner. Charging when there are no pups seems mean spirited to me.