I have this client…she raises dogs for fun and, occasionally, she profits financially, too. Mostly, though, it’s a labor of love—Rottweiler love, to be exact. Her most recent acquisition to her burgeoning pack of canines includes one very fancy pedigreed Rottie (for whom she traveled to Germany to personally hand-pick for his breeding potential).
Because I have misgivings about his personality (aggressive!) I recommended she neuter him (she has kids he interacts with). More specifically, I pressed her to keep him out of her dogs’ gene pool—no breeding whatsoever.
Undeterred by my advances, she elected to check his hips in preparation for a life of stud-dom. Indeed, he’s a thing of beauty (and, consequently, she’s unable to comprehend that this $10,000 dog has been rendered a completely frivolous expense as a result of some random vet’s opinion). Mind you, he’s never been shown. She has no time, energy or inclination for such extraneous undertakings. His papers and his gorgeousness should be enough, she warrants.
In light of her determination to breed this dog (one I can’t get close to without a muzzle and a ready cache of sedatives), I guess I should be pleased that she’s at least elected to check his hips in advance of his first foray into canine parenthood.
X-rays (under full-on anesthesia, as is the protocol for all dogs) at two years of age (again, the required age for certification) consequently revealed moderate hip dysplasia.
Horror of horrors! This one’s a dud!
The most well-regarded certifying body for canine hips (the Orthopedic Foundation for Animals or OFA) reached a unanimous decision in favor of denial to certify. So much for that. The X-rays were of excellent quality—but the hips were bad. That’s it for his life as a stud. No appeals possible.
Still not satisfied that this was possible (the Germans had shown her paperwork proving excellence in his forebearers’ hips), she sought a second opinion (not that it was going to change the outcome as far as the head honchos at the OFA were concerned).
The board-certified orthopedist she sought for a second opinion gave her the same line: Not only is this an aggressive dog not worthy of inclusion into any breeding program, his hips are dysplastic. Period. End of story. No fancy digital X-rays will refute these findings.
Although this owner was frustrated and out a huge chunk of unrecoverable change, this is when I’m gratified there’s a system in place to protect dog lovers everywhere from too-invested dog breeders. Though I consider this client a basically well-intentioned owner (she doesn’t want puppies with bad hips polluting her beloved breed any more than I want to inform people like her that their dogs’ hips are dysplastic), emotions run high when heavy-duty finances (not to mention ego) are on the line. Overlooking aggression is just one symptom of that.
It’s clear that animal lovers everywhere are well served by an independent body’s ratification of good health. It should be just as clear from this example, however, that certification of hip status alone is not enough to ensure that you’re getting a wonderful pet. Who knows what lurks in the hearts of emotionally biased dog breeders everywhere?
Add Comment12 Comments
Registries like OFA are only part of the answer, of course, but they certainly help. If a breeder is willing to be open concerning the negatives as well as the positives of his/her dogs' hip status, I would feel more confident about buying one of his/her products than I would about buying a puppy from a breeder who eschews the registry. I bought my first purebred puppy from a woman who had been a Scottish Terrier show breeder for 30+ years and who told me she had never had a problem with any of her puppies. I was credulous, and I wanted to believe her. The years of heartache and expense that followed as I struggled to find solutions for my puppy's numerous health challenges made me a Scottie health activist.
Lisa Paddock October 12th, 2007 09:40:00 AM
That line "We've never had a problem with any of OUR puppies" infuriates me. How do they know? Do they check? Do they x-ray hips, patellas and cerf eyes and do thyroid testing before breeding? (or do any of the genetic tests their breed has problems with?) Do they call new owners later to check on their produced puppies?
The breeder of my Jack e-mailed me just this week (he is almost 3) to check up on him and to let me know a litter mate was diagnosed with a disease. Now THAT is a reputable breeder! Admit the issues you might have and strive to do better.
Ignorance really is bliss for some of these backyard breeders though. They don't want to mess with their bottom line, the almighty dollar.
That is why we need to educate buyers as much as possible in my opinion. I used to be an akc snob and thought all reputable breeders must show their dogs to prove they are improving the breed. I do believe that can be important but it has become secondary to me. AKC doesn't prove anything other than the dog can be registered, just like your car. Shows only prove they meet a physical standard. Not a healthy one. I have considered getting into showing frenchies. I have an interest in breeding a healthier free whelping frenchie. I know enought to know I don't know enough yet though. We'll see if that ever pans out.
If they are breeding real working dogs then the show ring isn't the test that works for many of them anyhow. Show vs working can be a huge difference in a dogs temperment, drive and structure. So in that vein I guess akc shows aren't always proving there IS an improvement for the breed if they are ring perfect. Define improving.
And I admit to be somewhat conflicted about the whole crossbred issue too. If they are doing health tests then good. But aren't there enough breeds out there to chose from already? Not to mention the ones in need of adoption from shelters, both purebreds and mixes. (but I digress, again)
The FIRST concern for ANY puppy produced must be health issues and temperment. A healthy dog isn't much good if it is to aggressive to live in society. One of the reasons I have gone to breeders in the past is so I can find those that do the health testing so I hopefully don't end up with the large vet bills down the road. No one wants a dog that will suffer from some painfull disease or die prematurely. Yet people put more research into their next car or computer than they do the next living member of the family. Usually because they can't be patient to wait for a planned puppy or they want to save a few dollars. ( XXXX breeder is excellent but their puppies cost to much) Yeah they cost more because they are doing the health tests that will save you money down the road. Tho I admit nothing is 100% and even good breeders can have things go wrong down the road. But it sure cuts down on that happening statisticly doesn't it?
OK I didn't mean to rant. You would think that a woman that could afford to go to Germany to hand pick a puppy would be smarter though. Breeding an aggressive rottie? In this day of liability that sounds like a bad idea for any breeder.
It's to bad we don't have more registries that some of the rare breeds have. I know one (Leonbergers) that has to send a person to evaluate the dogs BEFORE they are bred to make sure they are good specimens temperment wise. If they fail, any puppies they produce aren't eligible for registration. Plus they have to pass the required health tests. Now I know that sounds like way to much control for some peoples taste but it seems to work for them. And no one wants to have a 140lb plus aggressive dog as their neighbor right?
Just my 2, ok more like 4 cents. :-)
Marie October 12th, 2007 10:17:00 AM
Wow. This may sound terrible, but I'm glad the OFA report came back as a no-go. Not that I'd ever want a pup to have bad hips, but if this keeps an aggressive dog out of a breeding program, so be it. Sad that it took something like that to (hopefully) convince her not to breed the dog.
I think I'll stick with my cross-breeds from the shelters... What they seem to lack in working dog smarts and show status, they make up for in sweetness and sloppy kisses. (I also still feel they get the best of both parents genetically.)
Cindy October 12th, 2007 11:15:00 AM
I just have to wonder what person would spend that kind of money on a dog without getting the health check *before* plunking down the money. It's common sense. I wouldn't buy a $10,000 used car without a warranty or mechanic's inspection. Thank goodness the dog was dysplastic, though. The breed doesn't need more aggressive dogs any more than it needs dysplastic dogs.
I have a coworker whose family is ripped apart because her sister paid $25,000 to her brother for a barrel racing horse that went lame. The brother won't give the sister her money back for the horse becuase he said it went lame after she bought it and it's her fault. She claims the brother knew it was lame and sold it to her anyway. The whole thing could have been avoided for a $500 inspection. $500 is a small price to pay when your putting $25,000 at risk.
Jen H October 12th, 2007 12:07:00 PM
Bless the OFA- it's a good start at the very least. First, I don't get that she'd want to spend like that but not show, since you have to have winners in order to get a lot of buyers for your pups. And this makes me just that much more in love with my collie's breeder. Before my collie's mom was bred they both had certificates for hips, both parents had had eye checks (she is moving toward eliminating carriers of CEA in her breeding program - and yes, it can be done without losing show ribbons!), and I know my dog is good on both hips and eyes as well, since she was checked before I got her.
Recently my breeder sold a male for stud, but when his hips were checked they were dysplastic, and so the breeder took him back, gave his owner another older male stud who'd already been certified, and paid for the vet bills as well. Now that is a breeder who cares about her dogs and wants them to go to the best homes possible- and wants to improve the breed as well.
Good for you for trying to get an aggressive dog out of the gene pool, too. I wouldn't want a pup from him.
Cindy October 12th, 2007 12:29:00 PM
Regarding shows: for many of us, AKC conformation shows provide a way for a bunch of us in the same breed to get together and see what else is out there. We know the pedigrees. We want to see the dog. It's not about who gets picked by the judge (who might be looking at the wrong end of the leash or who might not have great breed knowledge). AKC also provides performance venues so we can all get together and see how the dogs work.
Regarding pre-purchase health checks: it doesn't work like horses. Horses are rarely sold as foals :-) and there needs to be some maturity in the animal to perform some tests, like the OFA exam for hips. That said, any reputable breeder would only sell their pups on contract and in the contract there should be some discussion regarding the health of the pup (testing if a breeding prospect and a requirement to report back to the breeder any issues no matter if it is or isn't a breeding prospect) and a guarantee to take back the pup at any time in its life, no questions asked. In my breed, some breeders require testing of the non-breeding stock just so they know what they are producing.
When we got our first retriever, we were given a health report that went back 5 generations. So yes, some breeders do keep tabs on the progeny. :-)
Like DH says, some people have more money than brains. Why spend all the money to import the dog if you aren't going to get involved with the breed -- showing and working or at least getting to know as many in the breed as possible (which I don't know how to do if you aren't showing and/or working). As the owner of a stud dog, I would want to see my guy mated to the best bitches, not just anyone who comes along. (No way am I going to ask the dog what he wants!)
Genetics is a tossed salad -- if crappy stuff goes in, crappy stuff comes out. (Heck, if good stuff goes in, sometimes it's a disappointment.) Love my mixes, wouldn't trade them for the world, but it's incorrect to assume better health just because it's mixed. :-)
I really feel for vets. Your job is to provide care for the animal in front of you, but it's also your job to advocate for the welfare of all animals. What a tight-rope to walk.
Deanna October 12th, 2007 02:25:00 PM
Oh! so near and dear to my heart! I got my first Cardigan as a performance candidate from one of THE top show breeeders in the country. She also has done some herding and obedience with one or two of her dogs. Now, at 3 1/2 years old, my first Cardigan is 'retired' from agility because of dysplasia and early arthritis. Unfortunately, her breeder, like so many others in my breed (and other breeds as well, I'm sure) takes the attitude that there is no dysplasia problem in Cardigans because there are not a lot of limping dogs around, or at least not until they get older. And so they don't x-ray. Uh. . .yeah. Most 'show' breeders never do performance with their dogs, so their dogs never get the conditioning and work that a performance dog gets. I suppose if my girl had been a couch potato her whole life, she might not have gotten arthritis until she was older too. My point being that even the top winning breeders are sometimes no more responsible with testing than BYB. And it was a big discussion on our breed list recently that THE top winning Cardigan of all time is a carrier for PRA, which Cardigans have had a genetic test for almost 10 years. There is not excuse to still be breeding carriers ten years down the road. I have a great deal of respect for breeders that test and poor blood, sweat, tears and a lot of money into a breed they love; it's a huge responsibility that I couldn't face. But! I learned the hard way that some of the 'show' breeders with the best reputations need to be asked do they test, what for, can I see the paper work. There are never any guaruntees when it comes to living animals, but if you don't test, you don't know. Oh yeah, and poor temperments should NEVER be bred!!
Cardimom October 12th, 2007 02:57:00 PM
Cardimom,
You are absolutely right. It isn't just the byb's that are a problem. The terrier breeder with 30 years showing who never had problems with her puppies is just one example of show lines without health checks. We see it in akitas too. Mostly with breeders ignoring poor temperments saying this breed is SUPPOSED to be aggressive with other dogs. Because it says so in the standard. (which we are working to change)
I'm not saying that showing means nothing, it just isn't the be all and end all I used to think it was. (my own opinion) It is just one part of the picture. It can help you find find a good breeder because most who show DO consider the health of puppies they produce. And I believe that most who show care about their breed or they don't last long. It takes alot of time and work to show not to mention a monetary investment.
You need to ask the right questions of any breeder you are considering getting a puppy from. Of course you need to know what those questions are first. That brings us back to research being important. Every breed has their own specific issues.
Marie October 12th, 2007 03:19:00 PM
Marie,
I hope I didn't sound too harsh about show breeders; it's only been a few months since I found out about my girls dysplasia, and I'm still a little blown away. I early on thought that showing in breed was the be all and end all to a responsible breeder too. And certainly finding a show breeder is such a step up from a BYB. Now that I've been in my breed for a while, I've found that the show breeders who also are heavily involved in performance do the most testing. Why? Because they are usually breeding for their next performance/show prospect. They don't want health issues getting in the way of their fun. Of course, having found several breeders I would love to get a dog from, I'm years and years from getting another. With a 2 1/2 year old boy I show in breed and in agility, and my girl that I'm working with in obedience (we're trying to convince each other that we can enjoy it as much as agility) I've got my hands full enough.
Thanks Dr. Khuly for always having such great topics and keeping us all thinking and pondering. Got any goat sperm yet? :-)
Cardimom October 12th, 2007 04:04:00 PM
As Cardimom said: "if you don't test, you don't know" - that is such an elegant way to state such an important truth! And it's true for EVERYTHING - not only health testing, but anything you want to do with a dog. I've got a page on our web site about one of my pet peeves... breeders who have never shown their dogs but who - based upon their own assessment - claim that their puppies are "show quality". You can't know if they are or aren't if you don't show. The same holds true for performance dogs, hunting dogs, herding dogs etc etc. The shows and trials aren't just for ego (although that does figure into it of course) but also to test potential breeding stock for the specific desired traits. They're not perfect but they're a start.
But health testing - and what you do with the results - are IMO the real test of how ethical a breeder is. There is no such thing as a perfect dog, and there will always be some faults or problems that you decide you can live with, and some you can't. But it takes real dedication to your goals and the welfare of your breed to take a dog that you REALLY like out of your breeding program. I hope your client follows through, and doesn't succumb to the tempation to use this dog anyway. This has been a hard lesson for her, but it's one that most breeders run up against sooner or later.
Personally, I'm with you all - in this case, the temperament alone would have stopped me cold. That's the first thing I look for in any dog I own or breed to. But not everyone sees it that way.
Barb October 12th, 2007 07:07:00 PM
The other difficult feature in all the dysplasia issues is that heritability is certainly not 100%. In fact estimates put the heritability around 20-40% depending on the local degree of inbreeding. So a lot affects the outcomes on hips (and other parts as well!) besides genes, and these are not well understood at all. Diet? Sure. Early stress? Maybe. What else? Phase of the moon? Who knows...
kate7047 October 13th, 2007 09:15:00 AM
Apparently your client doesn't know that "selling to the stupid American" is a lucrative method of culling in Germany. Whole kennels of "high-line" German shepherd dogs are sustained by overseas sales of the culls. (Americans and Japanese are the popular fools with money.) The people who sold her the dog probably knew that his hips wouldn't pass their *mandatory* screening process -- they'd likely pre-screened him. And they probably didn't care for his temperament any more than you do.
At least your client took the trouble to do the OFA, and sounds as if she won't be breeding this surly beastie. (Ever consider that some of his bad attitude could have to do with chronic joint pain?) In the US, the AKC will issue papers on his offspring no questions asked, and she'd have no shortage of buyers.
It was heartbreaking when our first SAR dog came back "moderately dysplastic" per OFA, and it killed us to spay such a wonderful animal. Fortunately the information came when she was young, but already indispensible. Lilly needed glycoflex early and pain control in her old age, but worked until past her eleventh birthday, and stayed mobile until cancer got her.
BTW, there's no requirement that the dog be anesthetized to get an OFA view for hip evaluation. I've gotten quality OFA radiographs on several dogs without any chemical restraint. The dogs are well-trained and calm by nature, and in a couple cases my vet handed me an apron and I handled the front end of the dog. If I can avoid an anesthesia, I'll do so.
PennHIP evaluation, OTOH, requires anesthesia due to the joint manipulation involved. Now that I am using PennHIP as part of my evaluation protocol, I just get the OFA view shot at the same time.
PennHIP doesn't issue a "clearance" that says "full speed ahead," but a numerical score for each joint and a place in the breed percentiles. That requires more subtlety when one factors it into the whole dog -- it takes a ruthlessly honest expert to do it well. PennHIP's own advice to breed only from animals in the top half of the breed's percentiles is sheer foolishness -- particularly for breeds that have fairly sound hips as a group. Eliminating half of one's gene pool based on one metric that isn't demonstrably correlated with a clinical problem is genetic suicide.
H Houlahan December 7th, 2007 06:05:00 PM
Add Commment