Couldn't agree more! I could've bred Isla as although she's had cataracts, the experts are 99% sure they're congenital and on paper she passes all her health tests as ESS aren't tested for cataracts. But all I could think was "what if?". I just couldn't live with myself if I bred a litter of puppies with cataracts.

D'oh! To ask her why her opinion has changed (if it has)!

And I have never heard that "old saying" before lol

Is it Spondylosis or Spondylitis or Spondylolysis or Spondylolisthesis. I wasn't aware that any of these are a genetic condition

My ISDS dogs are both fully health tested with the exception of Keewee who still needs her clinical eye screening, but she isn't 2 yet.

Rjj is a CEA carrier & normal for all other genetic tests & Keewee is normal for all genetic tests & is also hip & elbow scored. Rjj hasn't been hip scored yet as I haven't had the funds to do so, but I do not intend to use him at stud & he is from hip scored parents so I do not see the urgency at the moment. He & Wu will be hip & elbow scored in the fairly near future

I will reserve my judgement until I have spoken to the breeder.

All I can say is that I am more than happy with the dog she bred that I own. His parents didn't have high hip scores and are of excellent health, fitness and temperament.

Thankfully Zak has followed in their pawprints, with his wonderful temperament, his energy levels and outlook on life. I obviously also hope that he enjoys a full and long life with me.

I actually meant did you buy your ISDS registered pups from health tested stock, rather than had you had the relevant health tests done in order for you to breed from your dogs.

So do you believe there should now be a test developed for ESS to be tested for cataracts?

Congenital disorders, as I am sure you are aware, may be the result of genetic abnormalities. Therefore it also illustrates the case that health testing does not always produce healthy dogs.

Again (and for those who like nit-picking!) - I am not saying health tests are not important, however health tests don't always produce healthy dogs - or, unfortunately, dogs of good temperament either

I suppose what it comes down to is the breeder in question knowing their lines inside and out. Looking at the dog/bitch they are intending to use and seeing the whole picture in 3D and not just numbers on a piece of paper. Looking at the health of said dogs in terms of generations, looking at the temperaments that are produced, as well as any other strengths or weaknesses.

Would I personally breed from a dog with a higher than average hipscore? Probably not. However, I am a relative novice in the breed (having owned GSDs for the past 15 years), and do not know lines inside and out like some breeders who have been in the game for generations.

Sometimes it is not simple to ascertain whether a dog has health problems/defects due to breeding or not.

Cherry developed cataracts at 8 years old and the experts at Newmarket Animal Health Trust hospital could not say whether this was a breed issue or just an older dog health issue. Neither Parker not Izzy have any health issues at 10 and 9 and a half fortunately.

I do know that I think temperament is extremely important and am concerned when I hear of a top breeder breeding from a bitch who has to be muzzled and held in a special breeding contraption as she would not be mated in the normal way as she would try to attack the dog.

However, anyone buying a puppy from this bitch would obviously not be aware of this!

Given that Isla is the only ESS known to have cataracts at this time (according to Stuart Ellis anyway), that it has not shown up in any of her family lines or the progeny of her sire and that Stuart Ellis (and another opthalmologist who's name escapes me now) himself is 99% sure it's congenital then no I don't think a test is necessary. However the point is I did the responsible thing and had her spayed as there is no such thing as a 100% guarantee, which is why it's pays to err on the side of caution.

I've never expressed the opinion that only health tests should be considered when it's comes to breeding, only that I disagree with your apparent belief that it's ok to breed from a dog with a poor hip score purely because he's deemed special by his breeder. The post from Nyrvanna is proof itself that breeding from dogs with poor scores can often lead to trouble. It's great that Zak is healthy, but that doesn't help the severely displastic puppies bred from the previous sire with bad hips. They've suffered because of this breeder and yet she's appears to be continuing to breed in this manner. I defy anyone to stand up and say "this is a good breeder", because as far as I'm concerned it's an appalling thing to do, no matter how special a dog may be.

Not health testing, or ignoring bad results when you do test clearly doesn't produce healthy dogs either, so surely it's better to test and have the knowledge to make the right decision, than to not bother or bother and then just ignore them anyway!

Both health and temperament should be considered by any breeder. Not one or the other, but both!

Hopefully, in time there will be compulsory conditions to breeding. Until then, we have to rely on the good breeders leading the way forward