dog geek Posted January 31, 2012 Author Share Posted January 31, 2012 Yeah,, the cages are NOT good... But the instructive aspects of the other modifications that occur with the particolour are so interesting! This relates to the breeding difiiculties inherent particolour Poms so well - the shorter legs for instance, and possibly a connection with the hip/elbow construction... And espinay2, I do indeed inform my potential puppy buyers of possible health concerns well before they make up their minds to purchase from me. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrinaJ Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 (edited) Just out of curiosity..... Does your breed club not have a health scheme that you need to adhere to? . For example, my state breed club has a maximum combined HD score of 20, breeding with anything over 20 constitutes a serious breech. We are doing our best to reduce the hip scores and therefore potentially lessening hip displaysia in the Rottweiler. This can only improve the breed. I cannot understand how breeding with 3:3 patellas is doing anything to better the breed, regardless of the colours t will bring you. Why not wait and import a structurally and temperamentally sound bitch to use the health and well being of the dog and its potential offspring is the most important consideration when breeding. I could not willingly place any puppy into someone else's care to raise knowing very well that this hereditary condition could cause a pup pain. I'm sorry but I just don't get your rationale Eta I don't mean to sound condescending or judgemental, I just don't undderstand Edited January 31, 2012 by TrinaJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dog geek Posted January 31, 2012 Author Share Posted January 31, 2012 I only wish our breed club had a health scheme! As far as I know, other than myself there are only one or two breeders who do any formalised health testing at all. I suspect - and I may be doing them a grave dis-service, and apologise if I have misinterpreted the lack of interest in allowing me to use or purchase their dogs - that my unabashed interest in, and disclosure of, health status in Pomeranians has made me unpopular. There were some very quelling responses when I brought up doing the health screening. Apparently Pomeranians have no health issues. So we do not need to do health testing. But then, apparently luxating patellas are just "in the breed" - almost a breed characteristic was the impression I was left with, lol. And there was no apparent knowledge of the correlation between hip socket formation and patella issues, either. I would say there are very, very few Pomeranian hip and elbow scores on the ANKC database... Can I emphasise, again, that this bitch was bred because her sire's lines are very close to what I was hoping to access. Additionally, I am curious - are any of this thread's respondents toy breeders, other than LizT? And what sort of numbers of KCCS's are screened - are there data on the verifiable occurrance of high patella scores? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizT Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 (edited) Just out of curiosity..... Does your breed club not have a health scheme that you need to adhere to? . For example, my state breed club has a maximum combined HD score of 20, breeding with anything over 20 constitutes a serious breech. We are doing our best to reduce the hip scores and therefore potentially lessening hip displaysia in the Rottweiler. This can only improve the breed. I cannot understand how breeding with 3:3 patellas is doing anything to better the breed, regardless of the colours t will bring you. Why not wait and import a structurally and temperamentally sound bitch to use the health and well being of the dog and its potential offspring is the most important consideration when breeding. I could not willingly place any puppy into someone else's care to raise knowing very well that this hereditary condition could cause a pup pain. I'm sorry but I just don't get your rationale Eta I don't mean to sound condescending or judgemental, I just don't understand TrinaJ, I applaude the stance that the Rottweiler Club has taken on mandatory health screening for HD. As far as I know any form of health screening, although strongly recommended and supported with clinics organised and run by the Club to help subsidise costs is still only voluntary in the Cavalier Clubs code of conduct with no breech as such if not adhered to in any form. I health test because the people I purchased my puppies from initially health tested my puppies and their parents, to me, this mode of practice makes sense and the baton has therefore been passed on. But this is not the case with every breeder. I have heard the words cited from breeders, I don't health screen because I have not had problems. This may well be the case or it could just be a head in the sand attitude. Edited January 31, 2012 by LizT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dog geek Posted January 31, 2012 Author Share Posted January 31, 2012 Just out of curiosity..... Does your breed club not have a health scheme that you need to adhere to? . For example, my state breed club has a maximum combined HD score of 20, breeding with anything over 20 constitutes a serious breech. We are doing our best to reduce the hip scores and therefore potentially lessening hip displaysia in the Rottweiler. This can only improve the breed. I cannot understand how breeding with 3:3 patellas is doing anything to better the breed, regardless of the colours t will bring you. Why not wait and import a structurally and temperamentally sound bitch to use the health and well being of the dog and its potential offspring is the most important consideration when breeding. I could not willingly place any puppy into someone else's care to raise knowing very well that this hereditary condition could cause a pup pain. I'm sorry but I just don't get your rationale Eta I don't mean to sound condescending or judgemental, I just don't undderstand No, I am fine with your tone, I encourage other opinions no matter the tenor ;) I have imported a bitch. But I am not sure how having just one bitch and a father and son is going to give me the next ten years' worth of breeding programme. It is not my plan to just breed the same litter over and over again - I am keen to explore the strengths and weaknesses of the imported lines, and I want to improve the Australian particolour lines. To be honest, this litter - as a test litter - is going to be staying close to home. And any puppy with hips or knees - or elbows, or shoulders - which has problems apparent at an early age (before 12 weeks) I will most likely euthanase. I reiterate - I am expecting my dog to improve on this bitch's faults, as he has shown himself capable of doing so, and the lines behind her sire are quite worthwhile. I already have an agreement with my previous litter's puppy owners that they will take the puppies to have xrays at the appropriate age, which I will pay for, and provide copies of to the owners - so that I can track how the hips and knees develop. We are, in addition, talking about dogs that rarely reach even 4 kilograms. Essentially - this bitch was the best I could do, the alternatives were straight out "high volume" breeders who sell to anyone. Apparently, I clearly am not reputable enough for "reputable" breeders to want to cooperate with (oops - apart from a couple of other particolour aficionados whose ethics I admire and who are sadly unable to offer me anything but animals closely related to my own) and I have already sourced the best genetics from overseas that I could afford. Effectively this meant that I was going to be breeding closer and closer, even if I only bred two or three litters from my imported bitch. I do have arrangements with other particolour breeders to combine forces and swap breedings and animals when appropriate - but they coincidentally had each been in the process of importing their own particolours who are very, very closely bred to my own two. I now have bought a bitch with the exact lines I had hoped to access, due to a combination of unlikely happenings and events, and am much happier about using this new girl. Her patellas are nice and tight, too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oakway Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 I breed Toys and I breed for conformation NOT colour. I don't care what colour a dog is as long as the conformation is there. I breed to improve the breed and I would never breed from a bitch as you have described. I breed to get bet better Aust. Champions. I hope they will be better than the parents, as, along with a lot of other breeders that are hoping to achieve the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebanne Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 I don't have toys but I don't understand why you would breed from such a bitch either. Why are you in such a hurry to get so many litter's on the ground? My bitch has had 10 live pups in 2 1/2 years. I have kept two boys, one already desexed. The bitch is also now desexed. I won't be getting another bitch for around 4 years, then won't be breeding for at least another 3 or 4. So potenially it's 8 years before I breed my next litter. It will take me 4 years to save the money to get my next bitch, most likely imported, you could have waited and saved as well instead of breeding to such a poor example of the breed. You could have done as already suggested and got a nice solid colour to breed too. You are just breeding for colour IMO. Too bad on your poor puppy buyers if any health problems don't show up until after you have sold them. Can they cope with the heartache and the expense? Can you wear the lawsuit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dog geek Posted January 31, 2012 Author Share Posted January 31, 2012 I don't have toys but I don't understand why you would breed from such a bitch either. Why are you in such a hurry to get so many litter's on the ground? My bitch has had 10 live pups in 2 1/2 years. I have kept two boys, one already desexed. The bitch is also now desexed. I won't be getting another bitch for around 4 years, then won't be breeding for at least another 3 or 4. So potenially it's 8 years before I breed my next litter. It will take me 4 years to save the money to get my next bitch, most likely imported, you could have waited and saved as well instead of breeding to such a poor example of the breed. You could have done as already suggested and got a nice solid colour to breed too. You are just breeding for colour IMO. Too bad on your poor puppy buyers if any health problems don't show up until after you have sold them. Can they cope with the heartache and the expense? Can you wear the lawsuit? :rofl: Sorry, not laughing at you, Rebanne, but I am amused at the number of views this thread is getting... I am quite happy to admit that your breeding programme sounds wonderful, and suited to your particular circumstances. My breeding plans are a little different - as is the breed I am devoted to. Have you not noticed the posts where I outlined the health screening I do on my dogs? Or where I have described the information I provide to ALL puppy enquiries, vis-a-vis health status of my puppies and their parents? Or the efforts I am making to track the structural development of the dogs of my breeding? Or the statements I have made re the fascinating lack of enthusiasm evident when I have made overtures to other breeders in my efforts to find outside lines, whether they are coloured or not? I find it moderately diverting that this thread is generating so much angst... particularly since I am very nearly the only breeder of Pomeranians in Australia that collects any formal data on the structural health of my animals. I have a somewhat more sanguine attitude to the scores this bitch has... perhaps because I regard an overly-negative interpretation of the *possible* future of this individual to be a little... alarmist? A little overly-emotional, even? But then, I do have an investment in focussing solely on the "best case scenario", and contingency plans for the varying degrees of "worst case scenario". Does anyone have any input on the original request to critique my interpretation of the colour genetics behind my dogs? And - pardon my effrontery, but... *of course* I am breeding for colour... I am a little non-plussed at the focus on this aspect of my plans. Coloured Pomeranians are a variety of Pomeranians that just rock my boat... and provide an extra dimension of interest when planning breedings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwaY Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Some of them don't even look like Pomeranians I don't blame a breeder for not selling to you, I know I would not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miranda Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 I cannot see any reason whatsoever to breed from a dog with grade 3 patellas and possibly unsound hips, these conditions can be extremely painful especially as the dog ages. I won't breed from any dog that has a painful heritable condition that can be passed on to its offspring regardless of how good the dog is in other respects, that isn't responsible breeding IMO. Well, I would love to be spoiled for choice in selecting breeding bitches... but I am not. Firstly, I seem to be having a world of trouble finding any Pomeranian breeders who will sell me a bitch - can't imagine why. And then - yes, it seems such soundness is part of the genetic complement passed on by each parent, and that so far my sire seems to passing sound hips and knees on to his offspring... now that this litter qualifies as a "test mating" I have an even better opportunity of assessing the soundness of this hypothesis. Finally - I failed to remember to add to the previous posts that I am paying for xrays and screening of the four pups I have bred and homed so far. Three of them are pet homes; but they have still been screened by a specialist for eye health, and will be screened for hip/elbow ehalth at the appropriate age... ... still disgraceful?? Yes, still disgraceful IMO. You say that you explain possible health outcomes to your puppy buyers, but they still go ahead with the purchase.....sorry but I cannot believe this, who in their right mind would buy a puppy which is at risk of being affected by a painful and disabling disease when they could go elsewhere and buy a healthy puppy from sound parents, either they didn't understand what you were telling them or you glossed over the risks. What will happen if these puppies have patella or hip problems when you have them screened, if you don't have everything in writing there is nothing to stop the owners from seeking legal advice and taking you to court, it has happened before and will no doubt happen again as long as people like you continue to breed from unsound animals because they like their colour. Previously you said that this latest litter would be placed into pet homes but now you say that you'll be retaining the puppies and having any that fail health tests pts, all I can say is that they shouldn't have been bred in the first place. The thought of breeding a litter of puppies that have a good chance of carrying a heritable disease, keeping them until they're old enough to be tested and then killing them fills me with horror, obviously you are made of sterner stuff than I am, because doing that would break my heart. I have read all your posts and looked at all your dogs and personally I don't think you'd recognise type and soundness if it jumped out and bit you on the bum, you rave on about health testing (which you apparently don't always bother to do), but there is a lot more to breeding than that. The way you are going you will end up with a heap of fluffy dogs in pretty colours that look nothing at all like the breed they're supposed to represent that you will no doubt sell at vastly inflated prices because you'll describe them as rare. I'm not surprised that reputable breeders refuse to sell to you and I'm glad that you started this thread because it will make more people aware of your practices and the fact that you are breeding solely for colour without any thought or concern for the individual dogs involved and the fate of the breed as a whole. You are no better than the so called 'breeders' of blue staffords. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dog geek Posted January 31, 2012 Author Share Posted January 31, 2012 I will keep that in mind next time I am in the market for a Great Dane, Sway, and remember not to upset you with an inquiry... I guess to an eye only accustomed to seeing the showline Poms commonly in the ring they are funny-looking... although to me, those Poms look less like a Pom, and more like a Chi with a very full coat. Additionally, I do admit to having very amateur photo skills, and that my best efforts at taking stacked shots of my Poms are doomed to produce pictures that sadly do not present them at their best. Oh - I take shots when they are out of coat too, and when they look all odd and gangly due to being teenagers. *geek alert* Interestingly, the first influential Pom that had the "teddy" look was shown in 1915 (thanks and acknowledgements to "The Pomeranian Project" http://www.pomeranianproject.com/). I am rather of the "preserve original type" school of thought, and I am quite happy to present Pomeranians that to me are better representatives of the standard than the teeny tiny teddybear Poms - because in my estimation, reducing the size of Pomeranians below about 3 kilos increases the probability that syringomelia and associated cerebrospinal disorders will surface in the breed. Additionally, I choose to breed Poms with longer muzzles in order to produce enough length of jaw for correct dentition; to reduce tear gland dysfunction; and finally in order to improve palate formation and reduce esophageal disorders. So - I agree, my Poms do not look like the winning Poms in Australia... as that is a deliberate choice I have no issues with people noticing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumabaar Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Just a random thought Its great to do health testing- but its a waste of money unless you exclude dogs with poor results. A RANDOM example Breeding a dog with 30:30 hips is a poor choice, and I wouldn't pat someone on the back for breeding with 30:30 hips just because they are the only one in the breed doing hips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordogs Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 QUESTION ?? If this is a TEST MATING then why are you not keeping the whole litter?? or at the very least keeping all resulting puppies until all health checks are done. Sorry if I have missed where you have referred to yourself keeping any of the puppies. I also have a breed where compulsory hip and elbow scoring is required for breeding and registration of all puppies and through out my many years of working as a vet nurse I have seen the results and pain of puppies with genetic grade 3 patellas even with surgery many still do not have the quality of life that should have been available to a healthy specimen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dog geek Posted February 1, 2012 Author Share Posted February 1, 2012 Yes, still disgraceful IMO. You say that you explain possible health outcomes to your puppy buyers, but they still go ahead with the purchase.....sorry but I cannot believe this, who in their right mind would buy a puppy which is at risk of being affected by a painful and disabling disease when they could go elsewhere and buy a healthy puppy from sound parents, either they didn't understand what you were telling them or you glossed over the risks. What will happen if these puppies have patella or hip problems when you have them screened, if you don't have everything in writing there is nothing to stop the owners from seeking legal advice and taking you to court, it has happened before and will no doubt happen again as long as people like you continue to breed from unsound animals because they like their colour. ??? *sound of eyes rolling* Well, I have had more than a few potential customers decline to purchase from me. Usually they have been looking for smaller dogs, and I happily recommend other breeders to them. Unhappily, for those wanting Poms with no chance of problems with soundness, there are only one or two breeders I am aware of with patella/hip gaurantees... I do not tippy-toe around the pros and cons of patella and hip structure, the relation it has to function, the possible health progression. I do believe I have a not unreasonble expectation of these puppies having better structure and type than their dam, since I have had good outcomes from this sire so far. Previously you said that this latest litter would be placed into pet homes but now you say that you'll be retaining the puppies and having any that fail health tests pts, all I can say is that they shouldn't have been bred in the first place. The thought of breeding a litter of puppies that have a good chance of carrying a heritable disease, keeping them until they're old enough to be tested and then killing them fills me with horror, obviously you are made of sterner stuff than I am, because doing that would break my heart. "Close to home" - in other words, they would not be far from home. Specifically, that the homes I have been lining up for this particular litter are being carefully chosen for their ability to grasp the possible consequences of any structural faults (should they be present); their ability/willingess to provide ongoing vet care should it be required; and for their willingness to work with me and allow me to contribute to any decisions or costs associated with *possible* vet care. *If* any pups had such evident malformations as to be evident by the age of twelve weeks, then of course I would euthenase. I look at such actions from the perspective that it is a little different to breeding with a breed carrying known lethal recessives - referencing natural bob-tailed breeds such as Bostons, Bulldogs, and Frenchies - and - once more - that the genetic heritage this bitch carries presumably will provide a statistical probability of her producing pups with better structure than herself even without the addition of my dog's superior contribution. [/b] I have read all your posts and looked at all your dogs and personally I don't think you'd recognise type and soundness if it jumped out and bit you on the bum, you rave on about health testing (which you apparently don't always bother to do), but there is a lot more to breeding than that. The way you are going you will end up with a heap of fluffy dogs in pretty colours that look nothing at all like the breed they're supposed to represent that you will no doubt sell at vastly inflated prices because you'll describe them as rare. I'm not surprised that reputable breeders refuse to sell to you and I'm glad that you started this thread because it will make more people aware of your practices and the fact that you are breeding solely for colour without any thought or concern for the individual dogs involved and the fate of the breed as a whole. You are no better than the so called 'breeders' of blue staffords. Oh, my - you might have read my descriptions of the health testing I do, but I am not convinced you understood what I was saying. Or that you were able to look objectively at the information... rather than through a rather emotional framework informed by an understandable outrage generated by the lackadaisical habits of some colour breeders. In any case, it is fallacious that I do not recognise type, or that I am unaware of the intricacies of breeding - fallacious, and entertaining. I do indeed recognise the different types of Pom, I am quite well-informed on the history of the different types, and I have my own rational, well-thought-out reasons for preferring the type of Poms I now own. And I judiciously adjust the price of my pups to allow for the fact that - unlike the majority of current Pom breeders - I: conduct formalised health testing on the pups and their parents I devote a great deal of energy and resources to raising pups that have the advantage of having been socialised in a manner designed to produce emotionally resilient family dogs and that I offer a lifetime of interested, engaged support to the owners of my puppies. Indeed - I am happy to have shared the best qualities of my imported dogs with a fellow breeder with no money changing hands; and this next litter of pups will be priced to only cover the costs of immunisations and vet checks, but not including specialist consults as I pay those myself. It is interesting that you are still making comparisons with the dreaded blue staffy breeders... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebanne Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 [quote name='dog geek' timestamp='1328056564' post='5704756' And I judiciously adjust the price of my pups to allow for the fact that - unlike the majority of current Pom breeders - I: conduct formalised health testing on the pups and their parents I devote a great deal of energy and resources to raising pups that have the advantage of having been socialised in a manner designed to produce emotionally resilient family dogs and that I offer a lifetime of interested, engaged support to the owners of my puppies. Indeed - I am happy to have shared the best qualities of my imported dogs with a fellow breeder with no money changing hands; and this next litter of pups will be priced to only cover the costs of immunisations and vet checks, but not including specialist consults as I pay those myself. It is interesting that you are still making comparisons with the dreaded blue staffy breeders...[/b] Interestingly you have enough money to pay for all these 'specialist' tests but couldn't find the money to buy a sound bitch. You are worse then a BYB'er, you are knowingly breeding from an unsound bitch, crossing your fingers that the pups will magically be sound because the sire supposedly is. If you now no longer need to use poor Sweetie in your breeding program cause you have something better why not abort and spey? But then you would lose the money these coloured pups would bring you. You are not a ethical breeder and shouldn't be allowed to post on this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dog geek Posted February 1, 2012 Author Share Posted February 1, 2012 (edited) Really? How very severe... and here I was, thinking I was doing it better than the way other Pom breeders do it. I am not at all regretful that I breed "for colour"... to me it is analogous to breeding for Ruby Cavalier King Charles Spaniels, or the perfect Blenheim Cavalier King Charles Spaniel, or recessive black Afghan Hounds, or Weimeraners, or yellow Labradors with good black pigment, or correctly marked Bernese Mountain Dogs, or white Salukis. To broaden the analogy, how is what I am doing different to breeding Lilac Himilayans, or Cinnamon Orientals, or Silver Maine Coons, or black Arabians, or pinto thoroughbreds...? I am interested that the respondents to this thread are passionately convinced that the patella and hip scores of this bitch will inevitably lead to degenerative joint diseases, and that she will end up a textbook worst case scenario. I do accept as a fact that a vet nurse would indeed see lots and lots of grade 3 patellas that require intervention... as I would hope vet practices would see most of, if not all of, the cases in the general population that require intervention. And I would still be very interested to hear your opinions of the proportion of "well-bred" purebred Pomeranians with scores of 2/2 or higher - that would be very interesting to find out. It would thrill me to find out that the majority of "well-bred" purebred Poms have patellas that never luxate at all; I should think that would be a phenomenon worthy of a great deal of public applause. Actually - I would be proud to find out that my own view of "well-bred" purebred Pomeranians being prone to significant patella luxation is erroneous, libellous, or unfounded in fact. I did believe I was being more responsible that the average breeder by offering the range of support to the owners of these pups as described... especially since it would certainly be useful information to confirm or refute the position I am taking regarding my dog. (Also, I would think that euthansing severe cases and/or cases with a poor prognosis would be preferable to ignoring that "quality of life" criteria and treating because the technology is available - and the financial resources, too. I would still be inclined to think that treatment is preferable to euthanasing in the cases with a positive prognosis. ) ETA: I think you might have missed the bit where I will be asking the new puppy owners to cover only the costs of the immunisations and vet checks.... Edited February 1, 2012 by dog geek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebanne Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Bottom line is you have chosen to knowingly breed a dog with serious faults, faults that can be passed on, faults that can cause a dog a life time of misery and their owners too. That makes you extremely unethical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
espinay2 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Just a random thought Its great to do health testing- but its a waste of money unless you exclude dogs with poor results. A RANDOM example Breeding a dog with 30:30 hips is a poor choice, and I wouldn't pat someone on the back for breeding with 30:30 hips just because they are the only one in the breed doing hips. You beat me to it. Health testing is all well and good, but really the value is in how you USE that information. Just doing health testing doesnt really prove anything. It is what you do with that information that counts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizT Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Really? How very severe... and here I was, thinking I was doing it better than the way other Pom breeders do it. I am not at all regretful that I breed "for colour"... to me it is analogous to breeding for Ruby Cavalier King Charles Spaniels, or the perfect Blenheim Cavalier King Charles Spaniel, or recessive black Afghan Hounds, or Weimeraners, or yellow Labradors with good black pigment, or correctly marked Bernese Mountain Dogs, or white Salukis. To broaden the analogy, how is what I am doing different to breeding Lilac Himilayans, or Cinnamon Orientals, or Silver Maine Coons, or black Arabians, or pinto thoroughbreds...? I am interested that the respondents to this thread are passionately convinced that the patella and hip scores of this bitch will inevitably lead to degenerative joint diseases, and that she will end up a textbook worst case scenario. I do accept as a fact that a vet nurse would indeed see lots and lots of grade 3 patellas that require intervention... as I would hope vet practices would see most of, if not all of, the cases in the general population that require intervention. And I would still be very interested to hear your opinions of the proportion of "well-bred" purebred Pomeranians with scores of 2/2 or higher - that would be very interesting to find out. It would thrill me to find out that the majority of "well-bred" purebred Poms have patellas that never luxate at all; I should think that would be a phenomenon worthy of a great deal of public applause. Actually - I would be proud to find out that my own view of "well-bred" purebred Pomeranians being prone to significant patella luxation is erroneous, libellous, or unfounded in fact. I did believe I was being more responsible that the average breeder by offering the range of support to the owners of these pups as described... especially since it would certainly be useful information to confirm or refute the position I am taking regarding my dog. (Also, I would think that euthansing severe cases and/or cases with a poor prognosis would be preferable to ignoring that "quality of life" criteria and treating because the technology is available - and the financial resources, too. I would still be inclined to think that treatment is preferable to euthanasing in the cases with a positive prognosis. ) ETA: I think you might have missed the bit where I will be asking the new puppy owners to cover only the costs of the immunisations and vet checks.... Sorry, really not trying to add fuel to the fire but just had to confirm, does this mean you will be covering the costs of any Patellar surgery should it be required by all or any of the puppies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordogs Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 You still haven't answered WHY you're doing the mating IF YOU HAVE NO INTENTION OF RETAINING ANY OF THESE PUPPIES. What are you hoping to PROVE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts