As a breeder so many issues can crop up in breeding. You can use all the tools available, take all the necessary steps in raising them, but still have problems with our Labs come to haunt you. Sometimes there is just no answer. Why is it that the stud dog always seems to be the one who takes the blame?

I think this is why issues get swept under the rug. Afraid fellow breeders will come at you with pitch forks if you voice that a problem has cropped up. Where is the support?

JMO

It comes down to the all mighty dollar. Too much at stake to loose for some.

If you really want a logical answer for this, I will try to explain some of the thinking. If you just wanted to air your complaint about others, skip the rest of this message.

Yes, most breeders in ALL breeds look FIRST at the stud dog when problems arise. This may not be a very astute way of analysing a problem, but it is the one most tried in the beginning. Part of the reason is that the average bitch will only contribute 3-4 litters of pups in her lifetime - around 30 pups. The average USED stud dog (not even a FUS)will sire about 6-7 litters - or about twice as many pups.

So, if you are going to get concerned about an apparent genetic problem, it makes sense to look at the most "prolific" parent initially. There is a greater liklihood of finding another offspring with the same problem by researching other litters sired by the dog. If no other problems are found, then it is relatively (pun intended) easier to look at the (usually) FEWER offspring of the dam.

Also, since a single popular dog MAY spread a genetic problem across a breed before it is even noticed, people want to asses their relative "safety" in breeding those many and varied offspring. Sure, it often "takes two" to make the problem, but a sire that is passing it along will have a far more reaching effect on the breed.

Interestingly enough, one of the key talking points we used to argue against the PAWS legislation in 2005 was that ethical, reputable breeders police each other to keep the breeding standards higher. If breeders can't help each other to breed better, healthier dogs, the government will be more than happy to make them do it, and punish them for not doing it.

I don't know, after doing this for almost 25 years I've finally
decided there are people who will point fingers and be mean
no matter what you do. Just look at this list! =:-O Usually
these people have not been breeding for long. When I first started,
my mentors always talked about every problem they encountered, without
finger pointing, and taught me basically stuff happens. Dr. Padgett
even wrote a book, Control of Canine Genetic Diseases, that basically
said all dogs carry genetic problems, as long as we have talked about
it enough to not double up on problems we'll be ok.

Most of the breeders I know do share information. Maybe it's because
I choose to deal with people I know and trust. Frankly, I think
using $ as an excuse is crazy, because I give my $ to people I trust
and respect. Down here I think a lot of it is fueled by the wonderful
Hyspire ladies, who test for everything and share the information they
recieve. Obviously they are doing well with their stud dogs, so don't
worry too much about poor stud dog owners. The good ones will always
do well. All we have to do to encourage that is vote with our pocketbooks.

Boy how I long for those days when all breeders were so open about issues, I remember when I started over with my breeding program the well known breeder I got my new foundation from was so open and honest and told me what was there and what to avoid to double up on it and she was right, I eliminated the problem by following her advice... so sad what it has come to now where people like to lay blame and point fingers, that's why I tend to stick to and breed from the "old lines" Very well said Becky!
Aloha,
jackie

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

I don't know, after doing this for almost 25 years I've finally
decided there are people who will point fingers and be mean
no matter what you do. Just look at this list! = Usually
these people have not been breeding for long. When I first started,
my mentors always talked about every problem they encountered, without
finger pointing, and taught me basically stuff happens. Dr. Padgett
even wrote a book, Control of Canine Genetic Diseases, that basically
said all dogs carry genetic problems, as long as we have talked about
it enough to not double up on problems we'll be ok.

Most of the breeders I know do share information. Maybe it's because
I choose to deal with people I know and trust. Frankly, I think
using $ as an excuse is crazy, because I give my $ to people I trust
and respect. Down here I think a lot of it is fueled by the wonderful
Hyspire ladies, who test for everything and share the information they
recieve. Obviously they are doing well with their stud dogs, so don't
worry too much about poor stud dog owners. The good ones will always
do well. All we have to do to encourage that is vote with our pocketbooks.

Very interesting Maureen. Thanks!

As educated as we all are on breeding matters, I would think anyone who thinks all the health problems fall from the stud dog, should not even be breeding. BIG DUH. Things pop up. Put the wrong two dogs together and they will see.

I agree that is is not right for the stud dog to get blamed for everything. But, at what point would you lay the blame? The thread below talked about 2 litters from one stud dog that had at least one TVD pup in each. It is very possible that the stud dog had nothing to do with either of those. But, at what point would you assume he does have something to do with it? 3 separate litters? Or 4? 5? There has to be a point somewhere where you have to lay blame. I think everyone has a different point.

We all know the stud dog is only 1/2 of the equation. With my females, I defitely keep a notation of any health issues that may come up in her pups. If the same issue comes up twice from 2 different stud dogs, well that's enough for me to say no more.
Let's put the shoe on the other foot. To the stud dog owners out there - do you keep a notation of health issues as well? If the same issue comes up from 2 or 3 or 4 litters out of different bitches, would you retire your stud dog?

An unidentified person wrote:
"Let's put the shoe on the other foot. To the stud dog owners out there - do you keep a notation of health issues as well? If the same issue comes up from 2 or 3 or 4 litters out of different bitches, would you retire your stud dog?"

Most stud owners I know are interested in what the dog produces - good and bad. Some issues wouldn't take more than ONE time to make me remove a dog from stud - and I have done so. Some issues I feel require a notification, but leave the decision to the bitch owner. Here are some examples from my own experience.

One of my boys, Ch. Nimloth Quantum Leap, was an excellent producer overall. He was not used much, but did produce 5 champions and many pointed get in limited breeding. He also produced our only confirmed case of PRA. HE was ERG clear and the mother of the affected pup was also ERG clear - so the best method available at the time was useless. He was removed from stud immediately and neutered. At the time, there was no safe way to use him in any breeding program.

One of my top sires of the past, Ch. Nimloth Black Jack, produced a black and tan pup in his third litter. We felt it was important to warn anyone who inquired about him that he carried the tan point gene. His pups were robust, healthy sound and of good conformation. Many of them were titled and excellent gun dogs as well. We did not withdraw him from stud and used him ourselves several times after discovering that he threw a color fault.

My point is... some genetic flaws should not be spread for the future health of the breed. Some require full disclosure, but do not adversely affect health. Each person has to decide which category a problem falls within and act accordingly. However, full disclosure is still the best policy so people know their risks before breeding. 'Nuf said.

OK... here is my "high horse" answer (for those who have accused me of being on a high horse before). Laying blame never solved a problem --- not ever. Being cautious and identifying risks is not laying blame. If a dog does produce a particular health problem in several litters, it is not the dog's choice to do so - nor really that of the breeder or owner. Being harsh in judgement and derogatory in opinion on such a dog (and those associated with it) is of no value in the situation - in fact, one might say that the dog and owners deserved a little compassion because the health issue cropped up to shatter THEIR plans as well.

There are stud dogs I would not include in my breeding program today because of issues in the pedigree that I identified as risks generations ago. This does not mean that I can not have a very high opinion of the dog, the breeder and the owner if the dog demonstrates exceptional quality. I STILL wouldn't use it in my breeding! Is the dog to blame?? No, it is my CHOICE.

Having said that, I have had a couple of experiences with OWNERS that have intentionally hidden health issues on dogs that I planned to use. Luckily, I discovered the truth by doing good research before breeding and avoided the potential disaster. In those cases I DID feel it was justified to hold the owner responsible for intentional misrepresentation - but not to subject that individual to PUBLIC criticism. Again, that falls under identifying risks - and dealing with those owners in any manner that required honesty constituted a "risk" in my book.

If asked for a stud opinion on a dog owned by that person, I would advise anyone to be cautious, check ALL the paperwork for accuracy and talk to others who have used the dog. But then.... I would give the same advice to EVERYONE considering breeding to ANY dog owned by ANYONE. I hope you see my point here - complaining about a dog or owner or breeder and holding them up to public censure is NOT constructive. Using the information gathered for making breeding choices, however, is necessary to avoid some unpleasant outcomes in the future.

That is why I always opt for full disclosure and practice it in my own kennel. It is better to know the identified risks before the breeding rather than get a nasty surprise afterward. It doesn't mean that my dogs never produce a problem, but that I am usually the FIRST to announce it - for the protection of the breed, those who own dogs of my breeding and, of course, my own reputation. Honesty is always the best policy and prevents a lot of the "blame game" hostility that seems to be prevalent in dog circles.

That depends, if the stud dog has sired 50 to 100 litters how can you blame him for problems arising from 2, 3, 4 or 5 litters? The only way is if the bitch gets bred to totally different studs with different bloodlines and doesn't produce any problems and then that is still iffy!
Aloha,
jackie

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

I agree that is is not right for the stud dog to get blamed for everything. But, at what point would you lay the blame? The thread below talked about 2 litters from one stud dog that had at least one TVD pup in each. It is very possible that the stud dog had nothing to do with either of those. But, at what point would you assume he does have something to do with it? 3 separate litters? Or 4? 5? There has to be a point somewhere where you have to lay blame. I think everyone has a different point.

"The genetic etiology of TVD in dogs has been recently located to a defective gene on chromosome 9 and is a heritable disorder."

This is copied from vetsforum. Since they say this is where the problem lies, can dogs be tested for it to see which parent passed it in?

Consider donating money for genetic research concerning TVD!

TVD RESEARCH FUNDING

We have some heavy hitters in the Lab world, and we have those of us who can donate only small amounts of money...but, TOGETHER, we can fund Dr. Sleeper's research. Today is a good day to do just that!

HOW many of us will it take to raise $50,000.00?
Some of us have big pockets, some of us, small.
Look at what it will take to raise the monies needed to get this TVD Research off the ground.
Please consider the below:

1 concerned caretaker of the breed at $50,000.00
2 at $25,000.00
5 at $10,000.00 each
10 at $5,000.00 each
20 at $2,500.00 each
25 at $2,000.00 each
30 at $1,667.00 each
40 at $1,250.00 each
50 at $1,000.00 each
100 at $ 500.00 each
200 at $ 250.00 each
250 at $ 200.00 each
300 at $ 167.00 each
350 at $ 143.00 each
400 at $ 125.00 each
450 at $ 112.00 each
500 at $ 100.00 each
600 at $ 84.00 each
700 at $ 72.00 each
800 at $ 62.50 each
900 at $ 56.00 each
1000 at $ 50.00 each

We only need 500 Labrador fanciers to fund this project by donating $100.00 each!

Please click on the letter in the previous post from Dr. Sleeper and see how you can help.

You know there was someone up a ways on this thread who said that there are certain lines that she has found in the past carry certain things genetically so she stays away from them. I am not bashing you because I understand that is the best we are often able to do with the information provided. But I also have to say, haven't we learned anything from the Optigen test. Let's think back a little. After STrutts death we found out he had produced PRA. No optigen yet so that was all we knew. If optigen had not come along breeders who had 'identified' that particular problem in our lines would have never bred to them again. That means no one could have bred to PIpe Major ( and yes he is a carrier) but what about STrutts brother Morgan ( who is not a carrier), or Travis who is not a carrier, or Blaze or Armani, and on and on all dogs who are not carriers. Please don't say I am advertising. I could have used some other famous dogs for this demo but I felt it better to use my own rather than someone else's who might not have appreciated it. So basically what I am saying is if a whole bunch of us who have been around forever got together and looked at the pedigrees of almost all the dogs being used today at stud we could easily identify some genetic disorder in that line- so then who would we breed to? But we have learned from the optigen test that these genes are hit and miss and we cannot know who the carriers are until we get a dna test for the 'disease'. You have to breed go pedigrees that have produced problems because they ALL DO! This is hard stuff and there are few things written in concrete here.
Besides stud dog owners being as honest as they can be, the other thing that could help us all evaluate better the stud dogs we are using is for people (usually novices) to stop running with every little rumour they hear and totally distorting it. Then you have a rumour that is completely untrue, possibly even about the wrong dog, (I've seen that happen more than once)that causes everyone to stop using a perfectly wonderful dog that would help our breed. When you hear a rumour about a stud dog the first words out of your mouth should be, "And how do you know that" then it is your responsiblity to follow that rumour right to the original source and not to spread it around. Interestingly I just heard a rumour about one of my own dogs from someone who didn't realize she was speaking in front of me. I personally was thrilled she did though as she is a very nice person and it gave me a chance to talk to her about the situation and give her the facts as I knew them. It was a golden opportunity for both of us to learn more.
Judy

Thank GOD for the optigen test! I too have been breeding on one line for many years and ended up with a pup out of one breeding that had PRA, by that time the one with PRA was already bred and had pups (the PRA affected one was owned by someone else) and she was bred to a normal/clear dog but I would have never known my bitch was a carrier as she was already passed on by the time the optigen test came along unless the one pup she produced bred to a very well known dog who I won't mention here turned up with PRA. Boy didn't everyone here condem me and the owner of the bitch about the horrible breeder who bred the dog with PRA and it didn't matter that she was bred to a optigen normal/clear dog and none of the pups would end up with PRA.
Aloha,
Jackie

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

You know there was someone up a ways on this thread who said that there are certain lines that she has found in the past carry certain things genetically so she stays away from them. I am not bashing you because I understand that is the best we are often able to do with the information provided. But I also have to say, haven't we learned anything from the Optigen test. Let's think back a little. After STrutts death we found out he had produced PRA. No optigen yet so that was all we knew. If optigen had not come along breeders who had 'identified' that particular problem in our lines would have never bred to them again. That means no one could have bred to PIpe Major ( and yes he is a carrier) but what about STrutts brother Morgan ( who is not a carrier), or Travis who is not a carrier, or Blaze or Armani, and on and on all dogs who are not carriers. Please don't say I am advertising. I could have used some other famous dogs for this demo but I felt it better to use my own rather than someone else's who might not have appreciated it. So basically what I am saying is if a whole bunch of us who have been around forever got together and looked at the pedigrees of almost all the dogs being used today at stud we could easily identify some genetic disorder in that line- so then who would we breed to? But we have learned from the optigen test that these genes are hit and miss and we cannot know who the carriers are until we get a dna test for the 'disease'. You have to breed go pedigrees that have produced problems because they ALL DO! This is hard stuff and there are few things written in concrete here.
Besides stud dog owners being as honest as they can be, the other thing that could help us all evaluate better the stud dogs we are using is for people (usually novices) to stop running with every little rumour they hear and totally distorting it. Then you have a rumour that is completely untrue, possibly even about the wrong dog, (I've seen that happen more than once)that causes everyone to stop using a perfectly wonderful dog that would help our breed. When you hear a rumour about a stud dog the first words out of your mouth should be, "And how do you know that" then it is your responsiblity to follow that rumour right to the original source and not to spread it around. Interestingly I just heard a rumour about one of my own dogs from someone who didn't realize she was speaking in front of me. I personally was thrilled she did though as she is a very nice person and it gave me a chance to talk to her about the situation and give her the facts as I knew them. It was a golden opportunity for both of us to learn more.
Judy