This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Kerschberger on 01 November 2008 - 19:11
It is not the test which has been around long, however, the research has taken years and should be respected. I know now of two of dogs with DM who were tested to see IF the test would confirm this. And it did in both instances. Thus I find it an individual judgement call for the breeder if they continue to breed with such an AT RISK affected dog as 20% are affected. That is 8,000 akc registered GS dogs in the USA alone which are at risk! There are still plenty of great dogs out there with normal or carrier which is the way to go for any breeding program.
I have ran into resistance already. Understandably so when someone with a top ranking male making decent money on breedings and who's owner(s) have spent a fortune on buying and training such a dog. However, I won't affect me as I am going to be pretty vocal about this and hope that pup buyers are only going to be looking for pups from litters which were tested. Once pup buyers are going to ask this we will be on the right path.
For my tiny breeding program I will not breed to an outside stud male which tested AT RISK nor breed to an untested dog. Its simply going to be part of my protocol, just as much as the dog has to be tested for brucelosis, hip/elbows a1, or a2, (not a3) and the dog has to be dna profiled in case my pup buyers want to verify parentage. Nor will I breed a Carrier to Carrier, I know enough about math that it doesn't add up that way. (+ and + is minus)
What everyone else does is their choice and I can only hope they put the dogs and their new owners first before their bank accounts. We as breeders small and large, need to look into our hearts and ask if we would do this to our children if we had a choice to avoid it. We are breeding for the betterment of the breed.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top
