So you are seriously saying that in breeds such as the GDS/Labs/Boxers. and many more numerical large breeds, taking dogs out of the breeding programs that have less then good health results is detrimental to the breed as a whole

So lets say , we have a Boxer that has a fabulous temperament, he is a exceptionally good example of his breed, has a score of 0 for AS,yet he is carrying a gene for JKD, are you saying the whole picture should be looked at, before culling him from the breeding program, after all he is a special dog, he offers a lot, he is not ill himself, but you would take the chance he might pass on a genetic gene, or one of his of springs may.

Your saying that such a dog , should not just be thrown out with the bath water, simply because he has a bad result.

Same with a Lab, if its hips are bad , you would still consider said dog in the breeding program due to its other "special" factors.

Have you ever bred a litter Jackbox?

Perhaps you missed the addition to one of my posts a couple of pages ago to say ...

"While the GSD is numerically large, the gene pool is divided into two very inbred types, both the UK type and West German Showline type are very inbred and since they will not use each others dogs, they are perilously close to losing all diversity."

This could well be the case in other numerically large breeds.

Nope!!

How many have you bred ??

Are they ?

If as you say, neither ever mix, and they are so inbred, don`t you think its even more important NOT to breed from unhealthy dogs??

I think the above is what they call clutching at straws

I have never personally bred a litter - and most likely never would, as I don't have the indepth knowledge that reputable breeders of long-standing have.

"There is more diversity in the lines of the working line dogs as each country with a culture of protection training with dogs has developed their own depending on the leading dogsport in that country".

I wonder whether a mix of WG showline and WL bred GSDs could produce a middle of the road type of dog, but cannot see the show and working people regularly using each others dogs either.

I simply don't know what the answer is.

I think they are both as bad as each other... but, I would assume, if someone went to the trouble, and expense, of health testing a dog that they see the importance of it. So, to then ignore bad results doesn't indicate to me, that they are aiming to breed healthy dogs.

IMO, there are many factors in what dog should be bred... And it should be ALL of those things together, that count towards whether a dog should be used or not. Would you agree with someone breeding a dog who is a perfect example of the breed in looks, and has excellent health test results, but has an awful temperament?

So why the question?

I did not realise you had to have bred a litter to be able to see the benefits of health testing,

We also differ in what we call a reputable breeder, for me, its one who health tests and takes note of said health tests, not one that ignores the tests on more than one occasion.

If as you say the WL GSD is in such a bottleneck of inbreeding and numerically small gene pool, they have to use dogs with poor health results in the breeding pool, then its a sorry state of affairs, we are not talking (or are we) of a breed that is on the brink of extinction, one that has so few born, drastic action needs to be taken to keep the breed alive.

I said to look at the big picture and breed MORE really good dogs but to take less litters from each of them
I said not to knee jerk just because we have a test like HD to actually study the results of inheritance and things before simply ruling out dogs
To ask questions as to WHY a bad result is a bad result

I havent at any point said to breed from unhealthy dogs - but of course you like to put words in my mouth

Are you saying that in numerically large breeds like labs there are not enough healthy dogs that we have to heavilly inbreed and use the same sire again and again?
and tbh if there are breeds that that is actually the case then these breeds are prety much doomed anyway

am I saying to breed from a carrier of a horrible condiion - no of course not - if we are 100% sure about how the condition is passed on and we can wipe it out of a breed with testing

am I saying not to breed from a dog with what is considered a 'bed' result on hips - if there is no ecidence of anything but a number on paper and the dog is in no way suffering then until we have more research done on this condition then more things have to be taken into considerations

Health testing is ONE thing
But I think breeders and fanciers are using it as a crutch so they dont have to look at other issues like popular sire syndrome and linebreeding

Health testing can be very usefull to remove some (fairly rare) conditions from a breed (which lets face it are only a problem in a individual breed because of the excessive line breeding used to 'fix' things in a breed) which is a good thing
But the ever shrinking gene pool is a time bomb than can potentially cause a whole breed to be wiped out as their imune system becomes more and more similar one breed can be wiped out by one desease - it is a real concern

actually...sometimes you have to breed from carriers ...it's certainly something that BSD breeders will have to do if we are to both maintain genetic diversity AND reduce the incidence of Epilepsy in our breed

see here ( taken from the BSDA of GB website )

There is now a real possibility that in the not too distant future Tervueren breeders will have a DNA test that will be able to identify carriers of this major gene involved in epilepsy. This, of course, will be a very significant step forward. Breeders will be able to use the test to pre-screen all potential breeding stock. If a carrier is identified in this process, the breeder will know it and will be able to choose a genetically compatible mate. The breeder will know that if a carrier is mated to a dog that has DNA tested clear, then about half of the offspring will be carriers and half will be clears. Furthermore, the existence of the DNA test means that all of the progeny can be DNA tested to identify those that are carriers and those that are clear. The availability of the DNA test means that breeders will be able to mate carriers with confidence and also identify genetically clear progeny from carriers that can form the basis of future breeding programmes. The availability of a DNA test ensures that owners can mate their carrier dog with confidence. They can choose a mate using traditional values of breed type and temperament, but then back up, or fine tune, their selection using DNA testing.

The arrival of a DNA test for epilepsy in the Tervueren will not be quite the ‘god send’ that other DNA tests have been in other breeds, for example the DNA test for CLAD in the Irish Setter, because, remember what you are testing for is a major gene involved in epilepsy, not the only gene. However, the arrival of a DNA test for this major gene will permit breeders to make very significant in-roads into controlling epilepsy through selective breeding. There may still be the odd surprise in litters, even when DNA testing has been undertaken. However, this should not dampen breeder enthusiasm, being able to identify carriers of this major genetic mutation, if not all of them, will ultimately lead to a very significant reduction in the frequency of this condition in the breed.

Personally I put temperament on the same level as health. If bad each of those can cause misery to dogs and owners. If anything temperament is slightly higher on my scale.

That makes it difficult in lots of breeds.

rune

This may be a silly question, but are there not enough clear dogs here and abroad to eliminate the need to breed from carriers??