Pedigree Dog Segment On The 7pm Project

[toy dog]

We take health , work and temperament issues and add them into our pedigree system so that when someone looks at a pedigree if a dog has been - say a limited register dog but also had servere allergies that this is noted for everyone to see when they are looking at that pedigree.

Now before you jump all over me - everything has to be documented ,nothing is upgraded , no limited register dog is used for breeding all we do is use the info to increase the knowledge of the bloodlines for everyone who wants to use that sort of info to breed their dogs. It means that you could add dogs patella scores - and so could one of the people who own one of your limit register pets.

no need to jump all over you. I agree that is a very good idea and hopefully it may work. it all depends on how many breeders or pet owners for instance, log patella scores. I've been stating this very thing since i started research into this genetic problem for many years. I would love to see some sort of a recording registry going on so we can all use the information to our own advantages.

but by the same token if you are any kind of a caring ethical breeder, you'd be doing your own recording system yourself. i.e. tracking dogs you bred their patella scores jotting it down, on limit as a pet or not it makes no difference. Well i do that anyway! its the only defence i have against this genetic problem. but there are so many not doing this, don't care not interested its not funny.

i once did up a patella certificate and presented it to a few clubs to ask if breeders would be intersted in using them to grade their dogs and have some sort of a recording system.

do you know i only got 2 people interested. i continue to do this on my own.

so thats very good what you are proposing there, im all for it. i just hope that many will want to use it judging by the response i got........yeah.

[Steve]

We take health , work and temperament issues and add them into our pedigree system so that when someone looks at a pedigree if a dog has been - say a limited register dog but also had servere allergies that this is noted for everyone to see when they are looking at that pedigree.

Now before you jump all over me - everything has to be documented ,nothing is upgraded , no limited register dog is used for breeding all we do is use the info to increase the knowledge of the bloodlines for everyone who wants to use that sort of info to breed their dogs. It means that you could add dogs patella scores - and so could one of the people who own one of your limit register pets.

no need to jump all over you. I agree that is a very good idea and hopefully it may work. it all depends on how many breeders or pet owners for instance, log patella scores. I've been stating this very thing since i started research into this genetic problem for many years. I would love to see some sort of a recording registry going on so we can all use the information to our own advantages.

but by the same token if you are any kind of a caring ethical breeder, you'd be doing your own recording system yourself. i.e. tracking dogs you bred their patella scores jotting it down, on limit as a pet or not it makes no difference. Well i do that anyway! its the only defence i have against this genetic problem. but there are so many not doing this, don't care not interested its not funny.

i once did up a patella certificate and presented it to a few clubs to ask if breeders would be intersted in using them to grade their dogs and have some sort of a recording system.

do you know i only got 2 people interested. i continue to do this on my own.

so thats very good what you are proposing there, im all for it. i just hope that many will want to use it judging by the response i got........yeah.

But you see as it stands in order for people to access that really important info that you have on dogs in your lines its been reliant of word of mouth or you offering it to a select group and them seeing it as important as what it is .Some breeders have even told lies in order for it all to be kept secret. If its entered onto a system which everyone can access when they come to profiling their pedigrees then it can be used for the true betterment of the breed by everyone. We can see patterns on a much wider base line and the info is avilable for ever not just while you are around.

the reason we have invited those who have limited register dogs etc to add the info is because we know that if we only rely on breeders we wont have enough info to do what the system is capable of.

but for us this is a preferable method of tracking genetic or heritable issues in dogs we breed. We tried surveys and found that many breeders tell lies and so that info is not reliable and we look at the system propsed by Sydney uni and its not going to tell any stories about the dogs WE breed so for us this is the best we can see for our breeds into the future.

Edited July 9, 2011 by Steve

[Steve]

Further to dog shows and PDE. Seriously how could a conformation judge tell whether or not that dog had SM? It takes a specialist scan and it can be good one day and rotten in a year's time! Sure beat up the breeder because she knew it had SM and still used it for breeding but one must ask why did the KC just take it on the chin without explaining what a dogs show is - what it can and cannot be expected to judge and what else it expects its breeders to do?

Its got me buggered!

Edited July 9, 2011 by Steve

[bryan_mannix]

Thanks Steve for all the posts. Go and ice your fingers and I'll have a read.

[toy dog]

We take health , work and temperament issues and add them into our pedigree system so that when someone looks at a pedigree if a dog has been - say a limited register dog but also had servere allergies that this is noted for everyone to see when they are looking at that pedigree.

Now before you jump all over me - everything has to be documented ,nothing is upgraded , no limited register dog is used for breeding all we do is use the info to increase the knowledge of the bloodlines for everyone who wants to use that sort of info to breed their dogs. It means that you could add dogs patella scores - and so could one of the people who own one of your limit register pets.

no need to jump all over you. I agree that is a very good idea and hopefully it may work. it all depends on how many breeders or pet owners for instance, log patella scores. I've been stating this very thing since i started research into this genetic problem for many years. I would love to see some sort of a recording registry going on so we can all use the information to our own advantages.

but by the same token if you are any kind of a caring ethical breeder, you'd be doing your own recording system yourself. i.e. tracking dogs you bred their patella scores jotting it down, on limit as a pet or not it makes no difference. Well i do that anyway! its the only defence i have against this genetic problem. but there are so many not doing this, don't care not interested its not funny.

i once did up a patella certificate and presented it to a few clubs to ask if breeders would be intersted in using them to grade their dogs and have some sort of a recording system.

do you know i only got 2 people interested. i continue to do this on my own.

so thats very good what you are proposing there, im all for it. i just hope that many will want to use it judging by the response i got........yeah.

But you see as it stands in order for people to access that really important info that you have on dogs in your lines its been reliant of word of mouth or you offering it to a select group and them seeing it as important as what it is .Some breeders have even told lies in order for it all to be kept secret. If its entered onto a system which everyone can access when they come to profiling their pedigrees then it can be used for the true betterment of the breed by everyone. We can see patterns on a much wider base line and the info is avilable for ever not just while you are around.

the reason we have invited those who have limited register dogs etc to add the info is because we know that if we only rely on breeders we wont have enough info to do what the system is capable of.

but for us this is a preferable method of tracking genetic or heritable issues in dogs we breed. We tried surveys and found that many breeders tell lies and so that info is not reliable and we look at the system propsed by Sydney uni and its not going to tell any stories about the dogs WE breed so for us this is the best we can see for our breeds into the future.

yes, you are 100% right, as my brother quoted and he is not in the dogworld at all, just has two GR's as pets that are purebred one is a reg. pedigree and one is a rescue from a puppy farm found wandering down a busy road one day - he said, it seems to him the systems they have in place in the purebred registry is one big honor system. lol and i can't really dispute that. IT IS.

and yes, at times i've come across big secrets but i believe and many now believe its time to start being honest with each other and themselves and it seems to be getting through TO SOME EXTENT but we still have a long way to go.

this is why when i first came out and stated based on my experience 6-7 years ago that PL is very rampant in some toy breeds simply because not enough of us are honest with ourselves and each other, that caused quite a stir!!

Edited July 9, 2011 by toy dog

[toy dog]

Further to dog shows and PDE. Seriously how could a conformation judge tell whether or not that dog had SM? It takes a specialist scan and it can be good one day and rotten in a year's time! Sure beat up the breeder because she knew it had SM and still used it for breeding but one must ask why did the KC just take it on the chin without explaining what a dogs show is - what it can and cannot be expected to judge and what else it expects its breeders to do?

Its got me buggered!

i don't know, yes its true you wouldn't be able to tell the really bad ones would be itching and doing other things infront of whoever, the mild ones would not show much. Even PL the low grades sometimes you cannot tell by just viewing so some judges the good ones will get a dog on the table and actually outstretch the joints and feel for it.

i think they should come out and explain themselves a bit better really, they've only made themselves and all of us look silly. RSPCA here has gone directly to ANKC as i see on their website they're answering them on there, but really who reads that stuff only breeders, judges and already the converted. so infact i believe they're talking into their pillow. not getting to the wider audience the public. how much RSPCA has taken note of what ANKC has said to answer PDE i don't know but it seems they are still stuck with the same record, i.e. all pedigree dogs are unhealthy and inbred and we need to do something about it. i think its turning the public to the unwarranted and untested theory cross breeds are more healthier so we'll by pass the pedigree purebred.

[Steve]

We take health , work and temperament issues and add them into our pedigree system so that when someone looks at a pedigree if a dog has been - say a limited register dog but also had servere allergies that this is noted for everyone to see when they are looking at that pedigree.

Now before you jump all over me - everything has to be documented ,nothing is upgraded , no limited register dog is used for breeding all we do is use the info to increase the knowledge of the bloodlines for everyone who wants to use that sort of info to breed their dogs. It means that you could add dogs patella scores - and so could one of the people who own one of your limit register pets.

no need to jump all over you. I agree that is a very good idea and hopefully it may work. it all depends on how many breeders or pet owners for instance, log patella scores. I've been stating this very thing since i started research into this genetic problem for many years. I would love to see some sort of a recording registry going on so we can all use the information to our own advantages.

but by the same token if you are any kind of a caring ethical breeder, you'd be doing your own recording system yourself. i.e. tracking dogs you bred their patella scores jotting it down, on limit as a pet or not it makes no difference. Well i do that anyway! its the only defence i have against this genetic problem. but there are so many not doing this, don't care not interested its not funny.

i once did up a patella certificate and presented it to a few clubs to ask if breeders would be intersted in using them to grade their dogs and have some sort of a recording system.

do you know i only got 2 people interested. i continue to do this on my own.

so thats very good what you are proposing there, im all for it. i just hope that many will want to use it judging by the response i got........yeah.

But you see as it stands in order for people to access that really important info that you have on dogs in your lines its been reliant of word of mouth or you offering it to a select group and them seeing it as important as what it is .Some breeders have even told lies in order for it all to be kept secret. If its entered onto a system which everyone can access when they come to profiling their pedigrees then it can be used for the true betterment of the breed by everyone. We can see patterns on a much wider base line and the info is avilable for ever not just while you are around.

the reason we have invited those who have limited register dogs etc to add the info is because we know that if we only rely on breeders we wont have enough info to do what the system is capable of.

but for us this is a preferable method of tracking genetic or heritable issues in dogs we breed. We tried surveys and found that many breeders tell lies and so that info is not reliable and we look at the system propsed by Sydney uni and its not going to tell any stories about the dogs WE breed so for us this is the best we can see for our breeds into the future.

yes, you are 100% right, as my brother quoted and he is not in the dogworld at all, just has two GR's as pets that a purebred one is a reg. pedigree and one is a rescue from a puppy farm found wandering down a busy road one day - he said, it seems to him the systems they have in place in the purebred registry is one big honor system. lol and i can't really dispute that. IT IS.

and yes, at times i've come across big secrets but i believe and many now believe its time to start being honest with each other and themselves and it seems to be getting through TO SOME EXTENT but we still have a long way to go.

this is why when i first came out and stated based on my experience 6-7 years ago that PL is very rampant in some toy breeds simply because not enough of us are honest with ourselves and each other, that caused quite a stir!!

Yes but being honest with only a selective few rather than for everyone who comes behind us for ever is a long way apart. I believe that the pedigree system if used correctly is the very best tool we will ever have to be able to select breeding dogs which are for the true betterment of the breed - where show dogs and working dogs and sick dogs and healthy dogs can all be considered when we select.

[shortstep]

Further to dog shows and PDE. Seriously how could a conformation judge tell whether or not that dog had SM? It takes a specialist scan and it can be good one day and rotten in a year's time! Sure beat up the breeder because she knew it had SM and still used it for breeding but one must ask why did the KC just take it on the chin without explaining what a dogs show is - what it can and cannot be expected to judge and what else it expects its breeders to do?

Its got me buggered!

I only saw the show once and have no intention of looking at it again to check, but it did not strick me that they were expecting the judges to know that dog had SM.

What I got out of it was that the breeder kept showing the dog and breeding the dog after she knew it was sick. I recently read it had several more litters after PDE was aired too.

However I think judges do not take notice of health problems that they can see in the ring and will still award the dogs. Maybe everyone is so used to seeing it that they no longer think of it as a problem?

Like this dogs eyes, who won it's class at Cruffs this year.

Edited July 9, 2011 by shortstep

[toy dog]

We take health , work and temperament issues and add them into our pedigree system so that when someone looks at a pedigree if a dog has been - say a limited register dog but also had servere allergies that this is noted for everyone to see when they are looking at that pedigree.

Now before you jump all over me - everything has to be documented ,nothing is upgraded , no limited register dog is used for breeding all we do is use the info to increase the knowledge of the bloodlines for everyone who wants to use that sort of info to breed their dogs. It means that you could add dogs patella scores - and so could one of the people who own one of your limit register pets.

no need to jump all over you. I agree that is a very good idea and hopefully it may work. it all depends on how many breeders or pet owners for instance, log patella scores. I've been stating this very thing since i started research into this genetic problem for many years. I would love to see some sort of a recording registry going on so we can all use the information to our own advantages.

but by the same token if you are any kind of a caring ethical breeder, you'd be doing your own recording system yourself. i.e. tracking dogs you bred their patella scores jotting it down, on limit as a pet or not it makes no difference. Well i do that anyway! its the only defence i have against this genetic problem. but there are so many not doing this, don't care not interested its not funny.

i once did up a patella certificate and presented it to a few clubs to ask if breeders would be intersted in using them to grade their dogs and have some sort of a recording system.

do you know i only got 2 people interested. i continue to do this on my own.

so thats very good what you are proposing there, im all for it. i just hope that many will want to use it judging by the response i got........yeah.

But you see as it stands in order for people to access that really important info that you have on dogs in your lines its been reliant of word of mouth or you offering it to a select group and them seeing it as important as what it is .Some breeders have even told lies in order for it all to be kept secret. If its entered onto a system which everyone can access when they come to profiling their pedigrees then it can be used for the true betterment of the breed by everyone. We can see patterns on a much wider base line and the info is avilable for ever not just while you are around.

the reason we have invited those who have limited register dogs etc to add the info is because we know that if we only rely on breeders we wont have enough info to do what the system is capable of.

but for us this is a preferable method of tracking genetic or heritable issues in dogs we breed. We tried surveys and found that many breeders tell lies and so that info is not reliable and we look at the system propsed by Sydney uni and its not going to tell any stories about the dogs WE breed so for us this is the best we can see for our breeds into the future.

yes, you are 100% right, as my brother quoted and he is not in the dogworld at all, just has two GR's as pets that a purebred one is a reg. pedigree and one is a rescue from a puppy farm found wandering down a busy road one day - he said, it seems to him the systems they have in place in the purebred registry is one big honor system. lol and i can't really dispute that. IT IS.

and yes, at times i've come across big secrets but i believe and many now believe its time to start being honest with each other and themselves and it seems to be getting through TO SOME EXTENT but we still have a long way to go.

this is why when i first came out and stated based on my experience 6-7 years ago that PL is very rampant in some toy breeds simply because not enough of us are honest with ourselves and each other, that caused quite a stir!!

Yes but being honest with only a selective few rather than for everyone who comes behind us for ever is a long way apart. I believe that the pedigree system if used correctly is the very best tool we will ever have to be able to select breeding dogs which are for the true betterment of the breed - where show dogs and working dogs and sick dogs and healthy dogs can all be considered when we select.

im going to have to agree with you again there, i proposed that maybe we should have some sort of a registry for everyone not just a few. but i could only target a few that were listening the rest preferred to sadly, spread rumours that i was out to get whoever. could not do it alone, so having a whole organisation that pushes for this might have a better outcome, as the ANKC and controlling body were not interested in my proposal i couldn't even get anyone to talk to me i'll be honest.

[Steve]

Short step - Good example - but that is a prime reason why breed standards need to be re worded and when I talk of health issues not being able to be judged at a conformation show Im not talking about the ones a judge can see on the day and should not award.

That photo is 100 % about the breed standard and that's what the judge should be accountable for. If the KC needs to put up their hand and be accountable for that - no denying it from me but when people call on a judge to be judging things other than the breed standard it wont and cant work..

Dog shows are intended to judge dogs based on the breed standard and thats all they should be judged on in that venue. That sure as hell should have the judges responsible for letting that dog win be held accounatble and kicked in the bum.

Edited July 9, 2011 by Steve

[toy dog]

Further to dog shows and PDE. Seriously how could a conformation judge tell whether or not that dog had SM? It takes a specialist scan and it can be good one day and rotten in a year's time! Sure beat up the breeder because she knew it had SM and still used it for breeding but one must ask why did the KC just take it on the chin without explaining what a dogs show is - what it can and cannot be expected to judge and what else it expects its breeders to do?

Its got me buggered!

I only saw the show once and have no intention of looking at it again to check, but it did not strick me that they were expecting the judges to know that dog had SM.

What I got out of it was that the breeder kept showing the dog and breeding the dog after she knew it was sick. I recently read it had several more litters after PDE was aired too.

However I think judges do not take notice of health problems that they can see in the ring and will still award the dogs. Maybe everyone is so used to seeing it that they no longer think of it as a problem?

Like this dogs eyes, who won it's class at Cruffs this year.

but what i took exception to was becuase a few breeders decided to do that to their animals and breed in a genetic problem ALL BREEDERS are like this. that what i take exception to, becasue they showed one animal with a genetic problem it means ALL OF THE BREED is like this too. Becuase they showed one club with breeders who don't listen when they have a big problem it means all of us are like this.

i mean i don't do it, i refuse to, i try and breed healthy animals that are a pleasure to own whether show or pet because i believe it is cruel and i have a duty to my breed and also with my animals. there are alot of friends that are breeders who have the same beliefs as me.

no as i said, some judges don't award dogs who they can see and everyone else have health problems it depends on the judge who is judging but its not for them to say to the person you cannot enter your dog. all they can do is say no award and then quickly the owners come up (seen this) and ask all offended why the dog has been ordered out of the ring? some people cannot see their dogs are sick and telling them so does no good. but thats up to the individual person or people - why do we all have to be made accountable for the idiots who continue to breed diseased dogs and obvioulsy have no concience or ethics and no care towards their poor dogs. just care about themselves and bugger the breeds future.

Edited July 9, 2011 by toy dog

[Steve]

why do we all have to be made accountable for the idiots who continue to breed diseased dogs and obvioulsy have no concience or ethics and no care towards their poor dogs. just care about themselves and bugger the breeds future.

We dont - thats why we started the MDBA. But that example is as much due to the system as the breeders who bred them . If the goal is to win a championship and a certain look - an extreme is winning it makes people who havent got the whole big picture breed for their goal - a winning dog. if someone says Im not going to show my dogs because I think what is winning is not good for the breed we belt the hell out of them.

[toy dog]

Further to dog shows and PDE. Seriously how could a conformation judge tell whether or not that dog had SM? It takes a specialist scan and it can be good one day and rotten in a year's time! Sure beat up the breeder because she knew it had SM and still used it for breeding but one must ask why did the KC just take it on the chin without explaining what a dogs show is - what it can and cannot be expected to judge and what else it expects its breeders to do?

Its got me buggered!

I only saw the show once and have no intention of looking at it again to check, but it did not strick me that they were expecting the judges to know that dog had SM.

What I got out of it was that the breeder kept showing the dog and breeding the dog after she knew it was sick. I recently read it had several more litters after PDE was aired too.

However I think judges do not take notice of health problems that they can see in the ring and will still award the dogs. Maybe everyone is so used to seeing it that they no longer think of it as a problem?

Like this dogs eyes, who won it's class at Cruffs this year.

hmmm doesn't look too good. you'd think after all this publicity with the KC in UK about what they are doing and not doing, they'd take a bit more care, this only adds to the debate. i can't look at that dogs eyes.

[toy dog]

in some breeds they've started a system whereby the breeders can only register their pups if they carry out certain tests, but im of the opinion and maybe this might end up coming through, that in order to register a litter you would have to conduct tests out on all problems that affect that breed. talking to some breeders about this some are grumbling that its going to cost the earth to get all these tests done and they can't afford it so won't be breeding anymore.

ETA: coming from out of the mouths of some that don't believe in testing any stock at all mind you

so you can lead a horse to water but sometimes cannot force them to drink. lol

so another nail in the coffin and shooing breeders away but how else can we ensure that we are breeding and showing healthy examples of each breed?

i believe that HD scores use to be logged onto pedigrees? tell me if i am wrong. but i said a long time ago that i'd like to see PL scores logged the same way. it would help alot.

Edited July 9, 2011 by toy dog

[Steve]

in some breeds they've started a system whereby the breeders can only register their pups if they carry out certain tests, but im of the opinion and maybe this might end up coming through, that in order to register a litter you would have to conduct tests out on all problems that affect that breed. talking to some breeders about this some are grumbling that its going to cost the earth to get all these tests done and they can't afford it so won't be breeding anymore.

ETA: coming from out of the mouths of some that don't believe in testing any stock at all mind you

so you can lead a horse to water but sometimes cannot force them to drink. lol

so another nail in the coffin and shooing breeders away but how else can we ensure that we are breeding and showing healthy examples of each breed?

i believe that HD scores use to be logged onto pedigrees? tell me if i am wrong. but i said a long time ago that i'd like to see PL scores logged the same way. it would help alot.

HD scores are not included on ANKC pedigrees

I think in the main the conformation ring should only evaluate a dog on a breed standard - the breed standard needs to be better written so ears set low doesnt mean its so low it drags the face down and causes ear canal and eye problems etc so exactly where the ear needs to sit needs to be set in concrete so when its judged its not up to how a judge interpreted it but rather what it needs to be for the thing to be healthy. if you want to test it for scenting etc then you do that via another venue and if thats important to what you are selecting for you can take that into account but to have all bassets having to pass some test for scenting to win a conformation show doesnt warm me much.

[shortstep]

Further to dog shows and PDE. Seriously how could a conformation judge tell whether or not that dog had SM? It takes a specialist scan and it can be good one day and rotten in a year's time! Sure beat up the breeder because she knew it had SM and still used it for breeding but one must ask why did the KC just take it on the chin without explaining what a dogs show is - what it can and cannot be expected to judge and what else it expects its breeders to do?

Its got me buggered!

I only saw the show once and have no intention of looking at it again to check, but it did not strick me that they were expecting the judges to know that dog had SM.

What I got out of it was that the breeder kept showing the dog and breeding the dog after she knew it was sick. I recently read it had several more litters after PDE was aired too.

However I think judges do not take notice of health problems that they can see in the ring and will still award the dogs. Maybe everyone is so used to seeing it that they no longer think of it as a problem?

Like this dogs eyes, who won it's class at Cruffs this year.

hmmm doesn't look too good. you'd think after all this publicity with the KC in UK about what they are doing and not doing, they'd take a bit more care, this only adds to the debate. i can't look at that dogs eyes.

Actually to be fair this is one the purpose bred 'new edition' post PDE and post the new breed standard dogs. It does have shorter ears, it does not have all the excessive skin hanging in folds down around it's knees, ankles and feet, it has slightly more air under it's belly. So really hats off to them for trying, but I still think that no dog should get any awards until they get rid of the extreme features.

[toy dog]

HD scores are not included on ANKC pedigrees

hence why i said "use to" they did away with it, but i believe they use to be a few years ago.

[toy dog]

if you want to test it for scenting etc then you do that via another venue and if thats important to what you are selecting for you can take that into account but to have all bassets having to pass some test for scenting to win a conformation show doesnt warm me much.

no i meant test for known and common genetic problems within a breed to make sure they are healthy examples before they enter the showring. that would be ability and there would be other areas to test all that out some clubs hold not only confirmation shows but tracking shows or other sports in conjunction like GR's. the ANKC is not all about dog shows there a whole range of other events for dogs as well.

[Steve]

if you want to test it for scenting etc then you do that via another venue and if thats important to what you are selecting for you can take that into account but to have all bassets having to pass some test for scenting to win a conformation show doesnt warm me much.

no i meant test for known and common genetic problems within a breed to make sure they are healthy examples before they enter the showring. that would be ability and there would be other areas to test all that out some clubs hold not only confirmation shows but tracking shows or other sports in conjunction like GR's. the ANKC is not all about dog shows there a whole range of other events for dogs as well.

But how do you do that when many genetic diseases have no tests and others show clear one minute and there the next - whats the point? All you can do is hope the breeder gets this info before they decide to mate the thing. Even harder if they open stud books and there are more less common diseases.

For things like gait etc and other things a judge can see is clearly an issue with the naked eye - thats very much needed but asking a judge to be able to examine a dog the way a qualified vet does or for an evaluation of a whole pile of test results etc before a dog can be entered or get an award would be a nightmare logistically. If we just accept that the conformation ring only judges conformation and how a dog stacks up against a breed standard then we can go off and get other qualifications for the dogs before breeding with it etc. At the end of the day the show ring cant make the final dicisions its the breeders and they need as much info as they can get when they are about to mate the dog not go by a qualification made years earlier when it was awarded.

[toy dog]

But how do you do that when many genetic diseases have no tests and others show clear one minute and there the next -

which ones do this? im looking at it from my point of view. we can only test for the ones in breeds that we know that are there. atm there are no schemes going on for PL which is common in toy dogs mainly but can show up in other breeds we are finding out. im talking about diseases/genetic problems like that.

but asking a judge to be able to examine a dog the way a qualified vet does or for an evaluation of a whole pile of test results etc before a dog can be entered or get an award would be a nightmare logistically.

im not really saying this, im not saying for judges to turn into vets. im saying if ANKC had a system whereby puppies in order to be registered had to have certain tests done and then recorded somewhere if clear or what scores for PL or HD or whatever, then the judges and other exhibitors and indeed the public can be assured we are all exhibiting healthy dogs. Then that could carry over to breeding it would help tremendously if everyone had the same info so they can make an informed choice as you have said in the past - good idea i can't really disupte that, i would think to myself that would be progress..

its the breeders and they need as much info as they can get when they are about to mate the dog not go by a qualification made years earlier when it was awarded.

yes all this is in the hands of the breeder at the end of the day. To say (some one said it i can't be bothered going back how many pages long this thread is, some breeders only look at champion in the pedigree and mate according to seeing how many in there, some do some don't its not fair to blanket all show breeders doing this and only concerned with champion, as they say i've always said too, being a champion grand champion whatever is no indication of the dog itself, im certainly not dazzled by that title anyway. Some are already using the pedigrees and tracking dogs in pedigrees and mating according to that too. We are all different no one has the same formula, no one thinks the same everyone has had different experiences.