Rips, I think you've read a bit more in to this than is actually there. I certainly don't see anyone saying that breeding blind dogs is a good thing. And I think we all see that for breeding in a small, closed gene pool, all the help that we can get from DNA testing is a bonus.

But, the point as I see it, is that breeding for original purpose ie. as dogs were bred before the advent of pedigree breeding and closed gene pools, is by far the most efficent way of preserving good health. Now that's not to say that all working dogs are healthy, of course not but the very fact that their existence is down to their suitability in form and temperament to perform their duty, is one major step in determining good health.

That was just an example Pod, a rhetorical question as it were.

I totally agree that breeding healthily is the way to go (eg less line/in breeding), but that doesn't mean that just because nothing has cropped up in generations, isn't there lurking and waiting to pounce!

Breed healthily yes, but why ignore health tests? How can that help a breed?

At the end of the day, pedigree breeds are here to stay, we're never going to go back to "all crossbreeds", so imo the health tests should be used just to be sure regardless of breed or it's intended use.

I don't entirely agree with working dogs being healthier due to being used for their original purpose. Field trial dog breeders are just as guilty as show breeders, and vice versa, when it comes to line/in breeding.

Breeding solely for one characteristic in any anmial, will always spell troble imo.

Well it depend on what that characteristic is. Aesthetics is not a good starting point. With working dogs, their chance of reproduction depends on their fitness for work, which in turn is dependent on health. No it doesn't mean every single one will be healthy but a greater chance than a show dog that doesn't rely on the same level of fitness.

I do think there may be a change in pedigree breeding on the way. We are becoming more and more aware of the deterioration in health associated with modern breeding methods. With the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals and the recently published CAWC Report, this is becoming more known to the general public. And I'm sure you are aware of the BBC's Horizon programme in the making.

Our KC has even taken steps by altering breed standards and openind breed registries in some cases. I think the time will come when legislation takes care of the rest.

I would pay more. I recently paid for my puppy and was 1st time had actually paid for a dog other than donation.
I started looking into his breed and was totally shocked at the scams and under handedness that goes on. The pedigrees are worth pants have bought a dog that isnt even what he is supposed to be. Breeders in the breed are using dead dogs on pedigrees, breeding bitches to death and generally just no honesty so I would pay for a dog that has all DNA done.
Also spoke to an ex so called good breeder that crossed a pap with JRT and sold as pedigree paps "pet homes only", kc registered. So my 1st experience with the breeding world makes me see how corrupt and unethical it is.

I have to say I disagree with this, many of the working gundogs I've come across have bad conformation and although it doesn't effect the dog early on in life, later on it does have an effect (arthritis, queen anne legs etc). But truth be told, by the time the dog can no longer work, the newer stock have taken over. So, no, imo just because the dog can and does work, certainly doesn't mean it's fitter for the purpose, or healthier.

At the end of the day many (many, I said, not all!) of the working gundog people see their dogs as livestock and as long as the dog has the drive and instincts to work, health doesn't come into it. Fitness for work also doesn't take into account hereditary diseases with late onset, where by health testing hasn't been undertaken to prevent the spread of the disease in the first place.

One thing is for sure I agree that things need to change, seeing some breeds just makes me want to cry! Shorter ears on the show ESS would be a good start from my point of view!

Because there are unscrupulous breeders I like the fact that the tests I see are linked definitely to the dog in question through his DNA.
Also some problems do not neccessarily show in a working dog, I know when they first started hip scoring dogs used by customs & excise they were horrified at the scores of some working dogs who had shown no signs of problems all their working life.
However as a breeder it was not the health checks that excited me. as I would expect those done & hope I knew the owner of the dog/bitch well enough to know they would have actually used the dog in question to have these tests done, Rather it was the fact that his breed survey results were shown, after all these are based on actual measurements tests etc of the dog against the breed standard & not on the personal opinion of a judge. I know of champions who have not got the top level in a survey. OK it was only size that prevented it but this all helps me with my selection. I also like the fact they give the grade result oh his korung survey & his schutsund level helps me, who can't read German, to know more too.

I don't know that there is any connection with queen anne legs and early onset arthritis. If there was, we would be seeing an awful ot of this in achondroplastic breeds. Conformation is just a small part of fitness. There is a whole load of other qualities to do with soft tissue and physiology that are all under genetic control and if a dog is an efficent worker despite a bone abnormality, then he has to have good general fitness, not to mention temperament which is a major part of this.

A dog that is put through the rigours of a work discipline would break down if it did not fullfil the requirements and I'm talking here about qualities that don't have DNA or clinical testing, there's no way that those could cover everything. The only way to test for fitness is to use the dog in the field.


Late onset disease is always a problem and this where DNA testing is a godsend but it will never eliminate all LO diseases as new mutations always occur. But the very practice of breeding within a closed gene pool increases the incidence of these... and yes I know the working fraternity do breed this way, though probably to a much less extent than show breeding. What I'm proposing as a heathier way of breeding, is to open gene pools to selection based on performance rather than aesthetics and pedigree. This would reduce the incidence of genetic diseases across the board, to an extent where DNA testing wasn't needed.

There is massively more genetic diseases in the human population compared with dogs (5,000:~400) but we don't all go through DNA screening before being allowed to breed, yet the incidence of serious genetic disease in humans is relatively low... much lower than in the canine population.


Oh yes I agree I think we've got to a point where the deformities we see in many breeds will become unacceptable to the general public.

Pod - another one who can say exactly what I want in fewer words

I dont think anyone is saying that DNA testing and stuff isnt a good thing in some places - I was just saying that my preference was to find a dog proven on the field so to speak

Just taking collies as an example, I know there are new genes being discoverd all the time
when you are testing your dogs where do you stop?? Hips and eyes, parentige, how about all the temprament things that are being discovered?? I believe they are well on the way to find the nervousness gene, then agression? then of course if they found the gene for 'eye' in a collie would show breeders care to keep that in their selection?

Many working collies would not be considered good conformation - cow hocked or something - but they have proved themselves with work abitlty
Many show bred collies have evolved due to judge selection to be too heavy boned for most farmers to look twice at - although these are considered good conformation

and a big problem I can see with the DNA testing is that it will further restrict a already small gene pool
DNA testing is not really 100% yet - we dont know everything
so dogs with 'bad' results would be excluded from breeding - wheras - as has already been said - there have been some excelent workers who would not have been considered for breeding because they had bad hip scores - but because of the muscle development these dogs were able to perform as well as a dog with good hips

hahaha - I was just thinking about how everyone would be up in arms if it was suggested that humans would have to be screened before being alowed to breed.


Yes totaly agree on the state some breeds are getting into - that has to be sorted out NOW before these poor animals are so deformed they can have no quality of life
and its sad because many of these people would argue that breeding for show and conformation is preserving the breed - but if that was the case why over time is the looks of the show dog changing so dramaticly?

Well I for one wouldn'd touch a puppy if it's parents weren't health tested and clear from HD PHPV VWD DCM and I would want to see the paper work that back's it up, all my dogs are health tested even the one I haven't bred from as I would like to know what her chances are of getting any of the above, thankfully her chance's are very very slim to none, for breeders not to health test there just pushing there breed's backwards in respect to health issues, and IMO shouldn't be breeding full stop, there are enough healthy dog's in the world not to have to use infirior stock if you want to further your breed you will travel to do so unless your only in it to make a quick buck.


Mo and the Gang

No Dna testing means that we dont have to restrict the gene pool as far as before as a carrier can be bred to a clear safe in the knowledge that affected wont be produced and these deseases can be worked away from gradually. Where as previously once a dog was proven to be a carrier they were removed from the gene pool as no one knew for certian where the other carriers were.