Squidgy Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 This has been puzzling me for a while. If the ANKC apparently strives to improve and promote the purebred dog then why is it not mandatory that EVERY ANKC breeder health test their breeding dogs in order for them to be register a litter?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazzat Xolo Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 (edited) Cant answer WHY the ANKC dont require it But IMHO any breeder worth their salt would test for anything in their breed that they could, sadly in my breed (testing hasnt formed a database )so I dont have any breed recognised problems,(yet) but I xray Hips and elbows and have eyes checked yearly. Temp testing is a MUST to me in any breed of dog. I will be interested to read answers. Edited October 16, 2012 by Wazzat Xolo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dame Aussie Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 I didn't know this was the case, will be reading with interest too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raineth Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 It doesn't make sense to me either. I know some people say that some breeds don't have any health tests (as in the problems they are prone to can't be tested for) but really I think that doesn't justify not having mandatory health testing for the the breeds who do have health problems that can be tested for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MalteseLuna Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 It confuses me as well. But if it was required I would like/want to see more labs offering testing. Also currently it is quite expensive for what are fairly simple genetic tests. Lots of profit for the company offering testing particularly as they hold most patent licensing in AU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podengo Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Does the ANKC have anything similar to the new NZKC accredited breeders scheme? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizT Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 I am a Cavalier Breeder, while there is NO MANDATORY health testing, my fellow breeders and I do annual Heart Checks with a Veterinarian Cardiologist and ACES EYE SCREENING with a Veterinary Opthalmologist. There was some talk of Mandatory testing within the Clubs but discussions fell through, as you can imagine it can get very political, personally I think self regulations is best as the Breeders who care and will do this as routine and as the General Public become more enlightened they will ask if you test and expect it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minimax Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 Because not all breeds have things that can or need to be tested for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oakway Posted October 16, 2012 Share Posted October 16, 2012 (edited) It's so simple people, only purchase off those that do health testing where it is available for that breed. Edited October 17, 2012 by oakway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dancinbcs Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 All health testing is instigated by breed clubs. If they are not interested in putting in the work to research problems, keep records and advise the ANKC when something has become a breed wide problem and can be tested for, nothing will happen. Once they advise the ANKC a proposal for mandatory testing is voted on by all owner/breeders who can be bothered voting and if it is passed it becomes mandatory. In some breeds mandatory hip and elbow scoring has been in for some time. Mandatory eye testing is a bit more complex because the opthalmologists kept no statistics for many years until recently, so the process of determining which breeds may need mandatory testing could take a few years yet. As most eye problems do not show until the dog is 5 years + and has already been bred from, collating data can take a while. With DNA testing the Border Collie breed are at the forefront with 2 tests developed here in Aust by the breeders and a third used from overseas. I spent nearly 2 years wording and re-wording regulations for mandatory testing and had it passed but then the ANKC brought in their own general rules about DNA testing that contradicted the arrangement our breeders had been happy with, so the whole thing was scrapped. The BC breeders had already deemed these regulations unworkable. Basically in order to make DNA testing mandatory, every puppy would need to be parentage tested as well and every second generation re-tested for the diseases, adding enormous costs to breeders who are already doing the right thing. Parentage profiling is expensive and patents create very complex legal issues with all this. As much as I support the concept of mandatory testing, I will not support it until the results can simply be sent to the ANKC, directly from the testing lab to be put on the pedigrees and parentage testing for clear by parentage, is widely and cheaply available for all ongoing generations, not just one as it is at present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squidgy Posted October 17, 2012 Author Share Posted October 17, 2012 I just do not see the difference between and backyard breeder and a registered breeder who does not show but breeds untested dogs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogsfevr Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 (edited) There are breeds that have to have certain tests under ANKC requirements. Many other breeds are wanting the same process to happen after new tests coming to light BUT there is also the other side to the story . Testing is a great tool but some people want only certain means of breeding with these tools & one has to be very careful not to go so test crazy that they lose gene pools & create other issues but breeding from only certain results In my breed they have been DNA testing for well over 20 years ,my other breed also has DNA options. Many breeds do not have DNA options or any testing even mentioned on AVA sites or the likes . The greater majority of breeders certainly do test but one can only test what is out there . As testing is becoming more common world wide place like the AHT are developing test to benefit the breeds worldwide but this takes time Edited October 17, 2012 by showdog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minimax Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 I just do not see the difference between and backyard breeder and a registered breeder who does not show but breeds untested dogs As previously said - not all breeds have things that need, or can, be tested for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squidgy Posted October 17, 2012 Author Share Posted October 17, 2012 I just do not see the difference between and backyard breeder and a registered breeder who does not show but breeds untested dogs As previously said - not all breeds have things that need, or can, be tested for. Yes that I understand what I am referring to is the breeds that can have tests done and should have them done. I am against BYB but I find it hypocritical when you come across a registered breeder who bags on a BYB for not bettering the breed etc when they themselves only joined for the title registered breeder. I do not think I will ever understand how all the politics work with this subject. Anyone can get their hands on a couple of papered dogs and breed them and register the litter I just think the ANKC and other controlling bodies are losing the quality of breeders it once possessed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
espinay2 Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Yes I wish more breeders would test but recognize that blanket mandatory testing for all breeds is a difficult and in some cases counterproductive notion. It is important to note that testing in and of itself is not the answer but how you use it and it is equally important not to throw the baby out with the bath water by limiting genetic pool too much through overly strict application and reliance on some tests. It must always be remembered that for everything there is a test for there are multiple things where there are no tests available and these have to be considered too (it may not pay to eliminate a dog from the gene pool who is potentially clear in one jmportant area but tests as a carrier in another for example). Now do I believe in testing? Yes I do and in my breed I can likely safely say I have the most comprehensively health tested dogs in this country and also likely quite high up there worldwide. But I don't believe it is the answer ito everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellz Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 In a perfect world there would be mandatory testing of health for breeds which have "known" health issues. However not every health issue has a reliable test and some issues have only partial tests (PRA in American Cockers for example). Until then, there is only visual testing for some breeds. But at the end of the day, the responsibility lies with the breeder and the potential purchaser. The breeder should be able to represent themselves with integrity and the purchaser needs to ensure that they ask the right questions, look at the right bits of paper and then use any knowledge to its best advantage. Legislation will never take the place of ethics and morality and they shouldn't be interchangeable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saffioraire Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Surely you can be held accountable if you are negligent in breeding with animals with detrimental health conditions? 20.1.16 A member shall take responsible action to reduce the incidence of hereditary diseases in accordance with the ANKC Code of Practice for Hereditary Diseases. There are several statements here: http://www.dogsvictoria.org.au/Portals/0/assets/aboutUs/Regs-Part-20-Codes.pdf that would make me differentiate between a registered breeder and a byb'er, (health testing aside). This is VIC specific so not sure on other states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellz Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Yes, if you actually KNOW about them. Not all conditions are known beforehand and it is easy to be wise in hindsight. And there are not DNA tests for every condition known to man. And as some of the more "modern" breeds evolve, issues will arise that probably weren't previously known about. There is still some responsibility on the part of the purchaser to ensure that they are happy with the level of testing (or not) that a breeder is doing. No breeder is given a crystal ball when they start breeding dogs. If only that were the case..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saffioraire Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Yes, if you actually KNOW about them. Not all conditions are known beforehand and it is easy to be wise in hindsight. And there are not DNA tests for every condition known to man. And as some of the more "modern" breeds evolve, issues will arise that probably weren't previously known about. There is still some responsibility on the part of the purchaser to ensure that they are happy with the level of testing (or not) that a breeder is doing. No breeder is given a crystal ball when they start breeding dogs. If only that were the case..... My apologies for not being clearer - I completely agree with you 100% What I meant was being negligent in terms of not testing for known health conditions with reliable tests. Ie. HD etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellz Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 I guess only if somebody challenges it. And something like HD isn't generally a condition that one would say is definitely a result of not having parents tested because two parents with perfect hips can still produce dysplastic offspring for genetic or other reasons such as environment. If there isn't a genetic pre-disposition to something in known health studies for a breed, then you wouldn't get anywhere challenging it either...some breeds are just genetically more healthy (sometimes this is the case in more primitive breeds such as Salukis) than others. In cases like Greyshaft, the condition was rare but still known in the breed so the success was based upon this. Now, it is commonplace for the testing to be done. Had Greyshaft not have happened...who knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now