New Problem To Address

[asal]

its just too risky letting a puppy go to a new home anymore. my friend even gave one away as she had an allergic reaction to her vaccination and feared she may be ill again when the boosters have to be done.

so what happened? vaccinations fine.

BUT six months down the track and get a phone call. my vets said this pup needs a $3,000 op and as the breeder the bills comming to you, hysterical was she? you bet.

That's really sad but pretty rare, isnt it (the hysterical reaction I'm talking about)? My fave dog was given to me - her breeder entrusted me to give a little dog a nice home. When the dog got sick the breeder offered to pay the vet bills. I said no because that's my deal when I take on a dog. I think most puppy buyers wouldnt even think to ask the breeder to pay if the dog gets sick or am I totally naive?

hey i just gave one as a birthday present for a friends daughter, just before puppy was ready to go to her, she developed a abcess, cause unknown. soo baby stayed here until given the all clear . her mum took puppy to their vet for its next vaccination... so what does their vet suggest? xrays, blood tests u name it, to make sure all infection has gone?

i was happy to pay all bills by my vet but shocked when i received the happy phone call of what had just been done without my or my vets knowledge by her vet. she was bubbling with happiness. puppy as the all clear, I ask what did all that cost, over 800 dollars, and yes i sure got a sinking feeling. except happy daughers mum had presented the bill her her horrified hubbie....

it was nice to know my vet had managed to reach the same conclusion at the staggering cost of 35 dollars only 2 weeks before... he is very pleased to know he is still on the ball though.

[raz]

you are not naive raz

my puppy came to me with an inguinal hernia and i had this fixed when she was desexed and i never expected the breeder to pay for it even though she had it the day she arrived at my home

I know, what's the story, Jaxx? We get a puppy and we realise at some stage vet fees will be part of the package. It's part and parcel. I think what I'm sort of thinking about now is what asal touched on - the greyshaft situation. I dont know if you were on here when that happened. It turned me off getting into breeding because some people will take breeders for a ride, but you breeders should know (I'm sure you do) that most of us are reasonable.

[Steve]

pet plan is a sponsor for the MDBA awards - Vet Nurse of the Year Category and this next post isnt an advertisement for them just answering some of the issues which have been presented.

Ive spoken at length and given hypotheticals for breeders. What if I get my pup examined - all clear - send it home and next thing its a mess.

Answer as long as it didnt have these issues when it went home and your vet gave it a clean bill of health when they examined it - all is clear and they will cover the insurance.

I put 6 weeks free insurance on my puppies as they are leaving my property and I recommend to every one that pet insurance is a good idea and give them soem very good reasons why. I give examples of the one I sent home where dad was playing golf in the back yard and the pup ran between its legs and was killed in front of the kids, I give examples of the one which drowned in the pool, I give examples of the one that ate snail bait 2 days after it went home,I give examples of the 2 which died from snake bite and explain how Petplan covered the vet fees and the price of the pup minus $100 and I explain that while I do everything I can to ensure that it will live a long happy and healthy life because its a living thing that anything can happen. I advise them to take out insurance when the free one runs out with either pet Plan or another company.

There is also a viable suggestion that a breeder may pay for the first year's insurance and add that onto the price of the pup.

Pet Plan have won Pet Insurance provider of the year in our awards 3 years ina row and the main reason is because of the fact that they let breeders off the hook a bit when they send the puppy home. Of course there are some exceptions but they are things Im happy to cover anyway.

If the buyer doesnt buy insurance when the free one runs out Im happy to discuss what my level of responsibility should be if its something I could have or should have avoided and I was neglegent in some way.

Edited November 21, 2010 by Steve

[jacqui835]

O.K. I know it had to happen and its as good as here as anywhere.

Ive no doubt that what Im about to say is going to get me in the poo.

The reality is that some breeds of dogs have less quality of life than other dogs - in regard to the ability to cater to the natual instincts of the dog as a species.

Its one thing to have a dog which doesnt play much with other dogs because it prefers not to because of how its temperament has evolved and quite another to have a dog which can't behave like a dog is normally expected to behave based on what other dogs normally choose to do because of the way it has been bred to look.

Around about now we also have to take into account realities and not just what people think the dog would like to do.

So the question becomes if a pug had every other gene the same as a pug except the way it looked would the pug choose to be more active ? Are they less active because they are temperamentally less inclined to action or are they less active because they are physically unable to cope with activity? Lots of dogs chase a ball but a Maremma will tell you to go get it yourself - that has nothing what ever to do with its mouth, or body - temperamentally there is no instinct or desire to chase or retrieve that ball. If it had a brachy head someone would be telling me about the poor dog because it cant catch a ball. Obviously when we have medical evidence the dog suffers because its structure doesnt allow it breath naturally whether it chooses to run around the block or not and registered purebred breeders are the ones breeding them thats a whole new ball game and one that its time we addressed - not as easy as it sounds but we can do it.

If its O.K. with everyone this is a whole new topic and one Ive been putting off until we work through some other issues but we have every intention of addressing it - in a way you dont normally expect breeders to go about it.

Just go to a park if you need evidence that pugs want to be able to do more than what they are physically capable of. There are many pugs, and I have yet to see a single one that didn't want to run after the other dogs, that wanted to just and lay on the ground. If you consider the history of the development of the breed, that makes sense, given that they have hunting in their background...

CKC spaniel today outside Oportos, lying on its owners lap. There's an example of a dog being perfectly happy with its reduced size and pretty looks -the characteristics it was bred for, because it was happiest when on its owners' lap.

You have to wonder, why are there no celebrities or vets or dog trainers standing up for pure bred dogs? Once you have answered that question, you can start to work on rectifying it. There is certainly a place for pure bred dogs, there is only one breed that satisfies my needs and I loved the predictability and knowing what I had to prepare myself for. But, with some breeds, it would be impossible to deny that pure dog breeders haven't done right by them.

So what do you do? Separate the breeds? Have the working dogs in great condition on one side, and the dogs bred for cute and weird characteristics who need extra care, can't reproduce on their own etc etc on the other?

Registered ethical breeders are so important to the world of dogs, like it's been said, we wouldn't have any health tests if it weren't for them. But, you go to the zoo, the dingoes, wolves and other wild canines are pregnant - do they need health testing for hips, hearts, brains etc? No. Why do our dogs? Because of the way breeds were created, the amount of inbreeding that was required to create dogs that presented more strongly with the characteristics of their parents and now the tiny gene pools they have today. All of those documentaries make the point that the dogs within a breed today are all terribly closely related - almost like siblings.

I don't know. I am all for better matching the right dogs to the right people, and stopping some people from having dogs all together - and that's where my interest in the purebreeding community comes from. But, I can also understand the reservations of the general public and I don't support breeding animals to their detriment - which unfortunately is in my eyes at least, what happens deliberately in far too many breeds.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

you are not naive raz

my puppy came to me with an inguinal hernia and i had this fixed when she was desexed and i never expected the breeder to pay for it even though she had it the day she arrived at my home

I know, what's the story, Jaxx? We get a puppy and we realise at some stage vet fees will be part of the package. It's part and parcel. I think what I'm sort of thinking about now is what asal touched on - the greyshaft situation. I dont know if you were on here when that happened. It turned me off getting into breeding because some people will take breeders for a ride, but you breeders should know (I'm sure you do) that most of us are reasonable.

i wasn't on dol when that happened but i have since looked it up.

i buy a puppy, i look after it. what i want to know is has the breeder done all that they can to ensure they have bred the best dog possible that will be healthy.

cr*p happens and we cannot hold breeders responsible for things outside their control.

HOWEVER, if there are tests that can be done and they are not done then i believe the breeders must take responsibility for what they have bred and the consequences of not testing

[Steve]

jacquie835 Im hearing you but there are many sub issues in what you are saying. Im not trying to duck the issue Im simply saying hang on a minute until we get to that bit. for the record Im not up for condoning any breeding which is to the detriment of the dogs or the breed either.

[sllebasi]

Do new puppy owners honestly believe that they are going to get a lifetime guarantee that they will never have to take their dog to the vet or something will never happen to the dog. That just beggars belief that you can get a 100% guarantee, and its never the owners fault (allowing dogs to jump, feeding crap)

sounds very similar to the childcare industry with the onset of these 'token' children. hand the kids over for 10 hours a day five days a week for five years, person who looks after them through thick and thin, mentions to parents concerns they have only to be told she'll be right mate, step inside school ground for one day, and suddenly the teacher is the best thing since sliced bread when they have said there is a problem etc. or its the day care persons fault when the child does not cope with school and its like where have you been for the last 5 years. I know its off topic but really people need to get a grip and take responsibility for their own actions, and guess what accidents happen, genetic flaws show up,and that is just the luck of the draw.

Maybe contracts need to be worded differently saying something like: we have loved the dogs, we have done these tests etc, but nothing is guaranteed in life, enjoy what you have got.

[Steve]

For those of you who havent seen this - This is the document shortstep is referring to whcih is the plan for us put out by Sydney Uni.

Their website tells us that they collaborate with the ANKC ,RSPCA, AVA,GSD club and a couple of others.

http://sydney.edu.au/vetscience/research/d..._point_plan.pdf

Ten-point plan for dog breeding

1. 
   
   
2. Collaborate: encourage collaboration amongst all interested parties; facilitate genuine dialogue amongst all interested parties, resulting in positive action that can be embraced by all stakeholders
   
3. Review breed standards: review breed standards and change them where necessary; provide incentives to encourage the breeding of healthy dogs with favourable temperaments
   
4. Conduct pedigree analyses and monitor the extent of genetic variation: enable pedigree analyses to be conducted on all breeds, to determine the actual levels of inbreeding and loss of genetic diversity. Complementary to the pedigree analyses, obtain estimates of actual genetic diversity levels in all breeds, using any information that may be available. Increasingly in the future, DNA technology (including dog SNP chips) will be used to obtain estimates of genetic diversity
   
5. Limit the mating of close relatives: recommend that the offspring of any mating between first-degree relatives (parent-offspring; full-sibs), and possibly second-degree relatives (e.g. half-sibs, double-first cousins, uncle-niece/aunt-nephew, grandparent-grandchild), be not registered
   
6. Import genetic variation from other countries and from other breeds: especially for the numerically-small breeds, encourage and facilitate (a) importation of less-related animals from the same breeds in other countries, and (b) programs involving an outcross to another breed, followed by backcrossing. Provide examples of how this has been done successfully without compromising the integrity of breeds. Such programs are very effective strategies for introducing genetic diversity in numerically-small breeds and for addressing particular inherited disorders in any breed. Progress in such programs can be monitored by genotyping with dog SNP chips
   
7. Monitor the incidence of inherited disorders: in conjunction with epidemiologists, implement the LIDA strategy for continually estimating the prevalence of inherited disorders within breeds, and for making this information available to breeders, veterinarians, researchers, and potential pet-purchasers
   
8. Control single-gene disorders: recognise the distinction between:
   

(a) eliminating (or decreasing the incidence of) inherited disorders (which is certainly possible), and

(b) eliminating all mutant genes that cause disorders (which is not possible)

Consistent with this reality, for known autosomal-recessive disorders, devise guidelines/rules that encourage/ensure that all matings involve at least one parent that is known to be (or has a high chance of being) homozygous normal [this will achieve (a) above]. At the same time, do everything possible to expand research into inherited disorders, especially with the aim of expanding the list of inherited disorders for which DNA markers are available for identifying homozygote normal animals. For practical feasibility, aim to expand current DNA testing to the stage where all available DNA tests can be incorporated in a single dog SNP chip (which can also include DNA profiling)

Control multifactorial disorders: for multifactorial disorders, develop schemes (in close collaboration with breeders) for using the most powerful means of predicting the results of any mating (namely estimated breeding values; EBVs), using phenotypic and pedigree data (and in the future, also from DNA marker data); and provide incentives for matings for which the average of the parental EBVs is on the favourable side of the kennel average and/or the breed average

Investigate insurance schemes: investigate the potential of insuring breeding stock against throwing offspring with particular disorders, especially those for which neither DNA tests nor EBVs are available. This provides increased financial security for vendors of breeding stock, reduces the likelihood of serious legal disputes between vendors and purchasers, and (very importantly) encourages reporting of disorders

Facilitate continuing education for all stakeholders: work with educational institutions to enable breeders, administrators, veterinarians and pet owners to increase their understanding of the biological and ethical issues involved in dog breeding

Frank Nicholas, Chris Moran, Peter Thomson, Imke Tammen, Herman Raadsma, Mohammad Shariflou, Bethany Wilson, Peter Williamson, Claire Wade, Paul McGreevy

Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, NSW 2006

17 September 2009

[Sheridan]

i wasn't on dol when that happened but i have since looked it up.

i buy a puppy, i look after it. what i want to know is has the breeder done all that they can to ensure they have bred the best dog possible that will be healthy.

cr*p happens and we cannot hold breeders responsible for things outside their control.

HOWEVER, if there are tests that can be done and they are not done then i believe the breeders must take responsibility for what they have bred and the consequences of not testing

Yes, indeed. I took on Grumpy at 10 and a half years knowing that we were certain to be visiting the vet for age-related health issues (of course, I didn't quite expect that it would be a military-style operation to get him there!).

Given that dogs are considered 'property' in law, what liability does that entail on the part of the 'manufacturer'? After all, a washing machine doesn't come with a lifetime warranty and if you want anything beyond a year or two, you have to pay for an extended warranty.

[raz]

Do new puppy owners honestly believe that they are going to get a lifetime guarantee that they will never have to take their dog to the vet or something will never happen to the dog. That just beggars belief that you can get a 100% guarantee, and its never the owners fault (allowing dogs to jump, feeding crap)

Amazing, isnt it. You dont get a lifetime guarantee for a car or a fridge but suddenly you need one for a dog. Poor bloody breeders. Any wonder they're dropping off like flies

[aussielover]

You have to wonder, why are there no celebrities or vets or dog trainers standing up for pure bred dogs? Once you have answered that question, you can start to work on rectifying it. There is certainly a place for pure bred dogs, there is only one breed that satisfies my needs and I loved the predictability and knowing what I had to prepare myself for. But, with some breeds, it would be impossible to deny that pure dog breeders haven't done right by them.

So what do you do? Separate the breeds? Have the working dogs in great condition on one side, and the dogs bred for cute and weird characteristics who need extra care, can't reproduce on their own etc etc on the other?

Registered ethical breeders are so important to the world of dogs, like it's been said, we wouldn't have any health tests if it weren't for them. But, you go to the zoo, the dingoes, wolves and other wild canines are pregnant - do they need health testing for hips, hearts, brains etc? No. Why do our dogs? Because of the way breeds were created, the amount of inbreeding that was required to create dogs that presented more strongly with the characteristics of their parents and now the tiny gene pools they have today. All of those documentaries make the point that the dogs within a breed today are all terribly closely related - almost like siblings.

I don't know. I am all for better matching the right dogs to the right people, and stopping some people from having dogs all together - and that's where my interest in the purebreeding community comes from. But, I can also understand the reservations of the general public and I don't support breeding animals to their detriment - which unfortunately is in my eyes at least, what happens deliberately in far too many breeds.

Your first point is very true. This needs to be addressed.

However, I would say most vets do own purebred dogs or rescue dogs. A lot of dog trainers also own purebred dogs.

Perhaps we should be recruiting them to take a more active role in promoting purebred dogs???

Your comment about zoo animals is not quite true. Zoo animals in captive breeding programs are often very inbred as they come from a very small pool of zoo animals. The number of captive dingoes, for example, would be a lot less than the number of purebred labradors, german shepherds, poodles etc.

And yes, zoos do often test for genetic health diseases as it can be quite time consuming and expensive to breed captive animals.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

i wasn't on dol when that happened but i have since looked it up.

i buy a puppy, i look after it. what i want to know is has the breeder done all that they can to ensure they have bred the best dog possible that will be healthy.

cr*p happens and we cannot hold breeders responsible for things outside their control.

HOWEVER, if there are tests that can be done and they are not done then i believe the breeders must take responsibility for what they have bred and the consequences of not testing

Yes, indeed. I took on Grumpy at 10 and a half years knowing that we were certain to be visiting the vet for age-related health issues (of course, I didn't quite expect that it would be a military-style operation to get him there!).

Given that dogs are considered 'property' in law, what liability does that entail on the part of the 'manufacturer'? After all, a washing machine doesn't come with a lifetime warranty and if you want anything beyond a year or two, you have to pay for an extended warranty.

excellent point and one that might be good to include in addressing bad press

[shortstep]

For those of you who havent seen this - This is the document shortstep is referring to whcih is the plan for us put out by Sydney Uni.

Their website tells us that they collaborate with the ANKC ,RSPCA, AVA,GSD club and a couple of others.

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%.

Edited November 21, 2010 by shortstep

[Sheridan]

For those of you who havent seen this - This is the document shortstep is referring to whcih is the plan for us put out by Sydney Uni.

Their website tells us that they collaborate with the ANKC ,RSPCA, AVA,GSD club and a couple of others.

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.

[Greytmate]

You have to wonder, why are there no celebrities or vets or dog trainers standing up for pure bred dogs? Once you have answered that question, you can start to work on rectifying it. There is certainly a place for pure bred dogs, there is only one breed that satisfies my needs and I loved the predictability and knowing what I had to prepare myself for. But, with some breeds, it would be impossible to deny that pure dog breeders haven't done right by them.

So what do you do? Separate the breeds? Have the working dogs in great condition on one side, and the dogs bred for cute and weird characteristics who need extra care, can't reproduce on their own etc etc on the other?

Registered ethical breeders are so important to the world of dogs, like it's been said, we wouldn't have any health tests if it weren't for them. But, you go to the zoo, the dingoes, wolves and other wild canines are pregnant - do they need health testing for hips, hearts, brains etc? No. Why do our dogs? Because of the way breeds were created, the amount of inbreeding that was required to create dogs that presented more strongly with the characteristics of their parents and now the tiny gene pools they have today. All of those documentaries make the point that the dogs within a breed today are all terribly closely related - almost like siblings.

I don't know. I am all for better matching the right dogs to the right people, and stopping some people from having dogs all together - and that's where my interest in the purebreeding community comes from. But, I can also understand the reservations of the general public and I don't support breeding animals to their detriment - which unfortunately is in my eyes at least, what happens deliberately in far too many breeds.

I think you have answered your own question.

You do not endorse purebreed dogs whole heartedly, you endorse what you consider good breeding of purebreed dogs.

Whatever brand we choose to personally endorse as individual people (and celebs are no different ), we have to be sure that we agree with the whole package that we are endorsing, in order to protect our integrity.

Separation of breeds into brands is an idea that is worth exploring.

Like Steve says, the sub-issues brought up by this topic are mind boggling.

[shortstep]

For those of you who havent seen this - This is the document shortstep is referring to whcih is the plan for us put out by Sydney Uni.

Their website tells us that they collaborate with the ANKC ,RSPCA, AVA,GSD club and a couple of others.

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.

Edited November 21, 2010 by shortstep

[Steve]

breedinginquiry.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/final-dog-inquiry-120110.pdf

The Bateson Report

Page 45

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

i have a brachy breed who runs like a loon, very rarely snores, has good knees, good eyes and a good heart. when i took her to my vet the day after she arrived he said to me, oh she is nice and look she has a bridge/snout.

some breeders are getting it right.

eta she has the best temperament as well

Edited November 21, 2010 by Jaxx'sBuddy

[sllebasi]

have just had a thought - should the issue be about the relationship you have with the breeder. If i go to a breeder and say i want a GSD to use for security work, and even after 6 months work, the dog is just absolutely no good for my purposes. If I have been in contact with the breeder, two options could be open to me (I am assuming) the dog is given back to the breeder to give to someone else as the dog is a perfect family pet, and you never know that someone else may be struggling with a high prey dog that would suit my purposes or I keep the dog as a pet.

[sllebasi]

Just had another thought and I could be totally wrong on this one. Guide dogs australia would have impeccable breeding stock, well ordered and documented training guidelines and feeding guidelines, and yet isnt their failure rate at approx 50%. So even with all these qualities there is no guarantee that the dog is going to be in pristine condition. So does it all come back down to educating the owners and making them realise the uncertainty of it all.