dragondawg
05-25-2005, 06:05 PM
(entering soap box mode)
In a post below a poster claimed they had obtained their dog from a reputable breeder. It gets one to wondering...
What is a reputable breeder?
Most certainly it's not someone who has decided on the spur of the moment to breed their dog for whatever reason. I've seen many- too many internet posts that start off in the train of thought: "I recently decided to breed my dog, and (it) (or the puppies) are sick, and this is my first time". I constantly cringe when I see such posts.
Most would answer that a reputable breeder is one who takes concious step(s) to improve the breed. For example let's consider the Golden Retriever. There has apparently been a lot of effort put forth to eliminating the genetic basis for hip dysplasia in the breed. So would you consider a breeder who screens the parents and siblings for hip dysplasia as reputable? Let's assume they also screen for elbow displasia which is also a common problem. Sounds good so far...
But that still leaves two other common problems: Aortic stenosis (commonly no symptoms in puppies less than 6 mos or at most a heart murmur), and Retinal dysplasia (signs show up at 3-4 weeks). How many reputable breeders would stop breeding the parents? How many would notify the owners of the siblings, explaining to the owners they should not breed their dogs? How many owners would even know these were genetic diseases associated with the breed, and notify the reputable breeder? How many of these owners would abandon their goal of showing and later breeding their dogs?
Ok that takes care of common inherited disorders for the Golden. Now we graduate to disorders of increased incidence: Atopy, Cataracts, Central Progressive Retinal Atrophy, Corneal dystrophy, Diabetes Mellitus, Distichiasis, Epilepsy, Hypothyroidism, portosystemic shunt, Von Willebrand's disease, X-link muscular dystrophy. Again some of these disorders may appear early, while others will only show up later. If a puppy turned up with Diabetes Mellitus would a reputable breeder withdraw the parents from his breeding stock as potential carriers? One has to keep in mind some of these disorders may have environmental factors as a possible cause. In additional to these disorders there's upward to 6 more that occaisonally show up in Goldens.
But probably my favorite(???) is cancer. As in humans, cancer in dogs has a family history that goes unrecognized. Why? Would a reputable breeder instruct his/her customers that if their dog comes down with cancer 10 yrs from now it should be reported? What are the chances a reputable breeder would withdraw a large proportion of their breeding stock (e.g. parents, sibling, siblings of the siblings) from circulation based on cancer in the line? What are the chances a reputable breeder would be willing to notify owners of all decendents of that line that their dog now of 5 yrs of age is at an increased risk for Lymphoma or Leukemia due to a parent or sibling having come down with the disease? The financial impact on their business of removing most of their breeding stock, not to mention hordes of unhappy customers would be great. This may be the primary reason cancer has become epidemic in our pets.
My personal conclusion is that there are no reputable breeders. There are professional breeders who try to eliminate the major or most common genetic faults of the breed, and attempt to sell their customers what they believe in good faith to be healthy puppies. But if one wants to stick with the original definition that a reputable breeder is one who tries to improve the breed, then most if not all have a long way to go.
(exit soap box mode)
The morale of the story might be that if one buys a purebreed puppy (something I have never done), from a reputable breeder, you should expect a healthy puppy for the moment. But there are many genetic faults that may appear soon there after or many years down the line in your dog. Buying from a recognized reputable breeder is no guarantee of having a dog free from genetic disease specific to its breed.
In a post below a poster claimed they had obtained their dog from a reputable breeder. It gets one to wondering...
What is a reputable breeder?
Most certainly it's not someone who has decided on the spur of the moment to breed their dog for whatever reason. I've seen many- too many internet posts that start off in the train of thought: "I recently decided to breed my dog, and (it) (or the puppies) are sick, and this is my first time". I constantly cringe when I see such posts.
Most would answer that a reputable breeder is one who takes concious step(s) to improve the breed. For example let's consider the Golden Retriever. There has apparently been a lot of effort put forth to eliminating the genetic basis for hip dysplasia in the breed. So would you consider a breeder who screens the parents and siblings for hip dysplasia as reputable? Let's assume they also screen for elbow displasia which is also a common problem. Sounds good so far...
But that still leaves two other common problems: Aortic stenosis (commonly no symptoms in puppies less than 6 mos or at most a heart murmur), and Retinal dysplasia (signs show up at 3-4 weeks). How many reputable breeders would stop breeding the parents? How many would notify the owners of the siblings, explaining to the owners they should not breed their dogs? How many owners would even know these were genetic diseases associated with the breed, and notify the reputable breeder? How many of these owners would abandon their goal of showing and later breeding their dogs?
Ok that takes care of common inherited disorders for the Golden. Now we graduate to disorders of increased incidence: Atopy, Cataracts, Central Progressive Retinal Atrophy, Corneal dystrophy, Diabetes Mellitus, Distichiasis, Epilepsy, Hypothyroidism, portosystemic shunt, Von Willebrand's disease, X-link muscular dystrophy. Again some of these disorders may appear early, while others will only show up later. If a puppy turned up with Diabetes Mellitus would a reputable breeder withdraw the parents from his breeding stock as potential carriers? One has to keep in mind some of these disorders may have environmental factors as a possible cause. In additional to these disorders there's upward to 6 more that occaisonally show up in Goldens.
But probably my favorite(???) is cancer. As in humans, cancer in dogs has a family history that goes unrecognized. Why? Would a reputable breeder instruct his/her customers that if their dog comes down with cancer 10 yrs from now it should be reported? What are the chances a reputable breeder would withdraw a large proportion of their breeding stock (e.g. parents, sibling, siblings of the siblings) from circulation based on cancer in the line? What are the chances a reputable breeder would be willing to notify owners of all decendents of that line that their dog now of 5 yrs of age is at an increased risk for Lymphoma or Leukemia due to a parent or sibling having come down with the disease? The financial impact on their business of removing most of their breeding stock, not to mention hordes of unhappy customers would be great. This may be the primary reason cancer has become epidemic in our pets.
My personal conclusion is that there are no reputable breeders. There are professional breeders who try to eliminate the major or most common genetic faults of the breed, and attempt to sell their customers what they believe in good faith to be healthy puppies. But if one wants to stick with the original definition that a reputable breeder is one who tries to improve the breed, then most if not all have a long way to go.
(exit soap box mode)
The morale of the story might be that if one buys a purebreed puppy (something I have never done), from a reputable breeder, you should expect a healthy puppy for the moment. But there are many genetic faults that may appear soon there after or many years down the line in your dog. Buying from a recognized reputable breeder is no guarantee of having a dog free from genetic disease specific to its breed.