how important is a dental notation? - Page 1

Pedigree Database

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by ghost on 05 August 2003 - 01:08

How important is a dental notation? If your pup has extra teeth should you have them indecreminately removed? Or are you trying to save the GSD by presenting what it is? What is the overall effect of dental genetics?

by Kerry on 05 August 2003 - 21:08

The dental notation is kind of like insurance. If you have the teeth examined and noted, and a tooth gets injured and/or has to be pulled at a later date, then you have proof that the teeth were all there, and normal. According to CURRENT USA regulations, dog cannot VA with a broken tooth within , no matter what the dental notation states. Johannes Grewe is working to change this. As far as pulling extra teeth, I'm not voiced on this. If baby teeth are just crowded, I would certainly pull them, to give the adult teeth more room to come in, if necessary. My female had cute little puppy teeth, and nice BIG teeth coming through, so I had a couple of teeth pulled on each side. So, in essence, I would say that if it's a GENETIC FAULT, I wouldn't do it, but if it's for DEVELOPMENTAL reasons, I would.

Dog1

by Dog1 on 06 August 2003 - 12:08

The dental notation program has an important reason to exist. The reasons are listed on the USA website under Dental Notation Program. Unfortunately USA does not accept the results of their program for the purpose it was intended. See their comments under dental notation expert. The dental notation program is accepted by the WDA and the SV. If you plan to show a dog at a USA show don't bother with the program. It's useless. If you plan to show at a WDA show or in another country that judges according to the SV rules, then you must participate in the dental notation program.

by Kerry on 07 August 2003 - 02:08

Dog1, please say more about why you feel the way you do.

Dog1

by Dog1 on 07 August 2003 - 05:08

Kerry, The dental notation program exists as it states; to see that a dog that breaks a tooth does not have it's conformation rating affected by the tooth. This is what the USA website says and this is the purpose of the program. Simple as that..... In Bakersfield dogs that had properly noted broken teeth were placed in a position or received a rating that was less than they deserved because of a properly noted broken tooth. The V-3 male and V-3 female received placed back from where they would have finished and The VA-6 male had his VA rating changed to V-1. This defeats the purpose of the plan, therefore it serves no purpose to participate. The WDA and SV do not change a dogs placing or conformation rating because of a broken tooth. This is clearly consistent with the purpose of the plan. You'll have to ask USCA why they don't accept the results of the program they offer. It makes absolutely no sense to me??????????

by Kerry on 07 August 2003 - 21:08

I remember hearing several comments about teeth by the judges. I thought that what would've been the VA6 FEMALE was demoted to V-1 after the initial announcement, Gitta v.h.Boombos. It was after the 2003 Sieger Show that I had the email exchange with Johannes. The regulations did contradict itself when it states that a broken tooth has no effect on breed rating, but when it comes to a Sieger Show VA rating, it wasn't so. Perhaps the change has taken place since then. If so, good.

by grimster1970 on 07 August 2003 - 21:08

I don't think Gitta's bumping was for her teeth I think it had something to do with the documentation of her SchHII title not being with her at the show. She couldn't receive the VA title as it would have been her second attempt with a SchHI.

Dog1

by Dog1 on 07 August 2003 - 21:08

The rules are very clear in black and white. There is no contradiction whatsoever. How any judge could interpret them in such a manner that a dogs place or rating is affected by a properly noted broken tooth is utterly amazing. It defeats the purpose of the Dental Notation Program. I could go on. But it's beyond belief to me. The interpretation is supposed to be changed, but not officially yet.

by Kerry on 07 August 2003 - 23:08

I think that the contradiction occurs from the following: "4.2 To qualify for a V-Select rating, dogs must have a breed survey ranking of Class 1, have complete and faultless dentition..." -AND- "4.3 Extraordinary circumstances which resulted in partial tooth damage or tooth loss do not affect breed ratings." When I asked Johannes about this, he said that "complete and faultless dentition" disallowed broken or chewed teeth, which was the specific question that I asked him about. I don't think it's been changed, yet. If indeed dogs are being penalized for broken or chewed teeth, and if they have documentation, from a dentist or after having dentition noted on the Korschein, this, I don't understand.

by Kerry on 08 August 2003 - 00:08

Thanks for the correction, ghost. I thought it was teeth, but you're right, it was the SchH2 documentation.





 


Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top