Health Testing Pets

I have noticed more and more breeders requiring full, or almost full health testing done on all dogs produced, not just ones that are being bred. For example requiring hips, elbows, thyroid, and cario done at 2yrs, 5yrs (and maybe other year) on a doberman.

What do you think of this?

I feal that its a good way to see how your breeding program is truely doing health wise. If you only test breeding dogs, then out of a litter of 8 (usually more) dobes, maybe 2 get tested. So you really only know how 1/4 of your dogs are health wise. You could have not great hips in your puppies and not know it because it may not cause a problem in a pets life time.

I see it much the same way you do, it lets the breeder know what the breeding produces in its entirety. I also think the breeder should pay for it though if it's going to be an additional requirement down the road. Or perhaps take a deposit when the pup is brought home and pay the difference int he future themself?

But its really nit that expensive. For a dobe less that $600. You wouldnt have to do it all at once. If you started when they turned 2 and finished by the time they turned 3. It would however be incredably expensive to do an entire litter yourself.

Yes but that could result in the puppy's price doubling. I dunno, I feel like that's the breeder's prerogative.

I think it's a great way to track and see what you're producing across the board, not just through the select few who get their championships.

It can get expensive, so I think that there should be time given to spread out the testings and such.

Yes. If I ever did it, I would give the buyers till they were 3.5yrs to have the testing complete.

I wouldnt require VwD testing in pets, because it really has no barring on your breeding program, except with the actual breeding dogs

I'm torn. On one hand, I think it would be extremely beneficial for a breeder to know the health of all puppies produced. On the other, it's a lot to ask of a pet owner. Health testing can be very expensive and is not something I personally would ask of a pet owner if I were a breeder. I think that if a breeder is going to require health testing on all puppies, that they should at least give a partial refund or something. But I can see how that might not be feasible for a breeder.

I think it's a great idea, and I plan on doing it with my Ibizan. I was the one who brought it up to the breeder, and of course she loved the idea.

I think it would be very valuable information for a breeder to have health testing preformed on an entire litter. But it is not a fair expectation that pet owners should foot the bill. I think the breeder should be prepared to cover the costs if they want the tests to be done.

Jennifer
Tailcreek Mastiffs - English Mastiff breeders in Alberta Canada - Home

I'm a little late to join the party here...

BUT, on another forum an idea was brought up.... that the breeder actually puts a certain amount of the purchase price into a savings account and then gives the owners a reimburesment after the health testing is done.... I happen to think that's a really great idea. Obviously, it puts the breeder a little more in the red, but I think it helps prove their lines even further and (IMO) is well worth it.

i see both sides absolutly
on one hand what a great wya to have a better veiw of your breeding program
on the other it can get very expensive (and in some breeds, even more so...)

I fully support it. IMO, it doesn't just help the breeder's program, but those of others.

I'm sure the breeders who require new owners to pay for health testing later down the road notify their buyers ahead of time of the obligations and associated costs. If they can't afford it, don't want to, etc there are other breeders they (figuratively speaking) can look into I'm sure

Luckily none bought my pups to reproduce . I was always in touch with the buyers so always was told how they were doing . Besides , back when there was't as much testing .

I health tested Auggie (though I haven't CERF'd his eyes - I had the chance to do so at a trial I went to, but I just didn't make the appointment to have it down.) because I wanted to, not because I was required.
It would be very nice if the breeder chipped in some... I think it also depends on how much exactly is being required. For Auggie it was around $200, if I had his eyes done it would only be around $30. So less than $250 total. That's hips, elbows, knees, and eyes. I really don't think $250 is a huge expense in the long run. Of course, I also did it mostly because *I* wanted to know about his joint health as it related to his agility career, but still. OTOH if it was pushing $600, that is quite a bit to spend IMHO...

The whole point is testing NON reproducing dogs grammy. Pet homes, not breeding homes.

As a breeder I already loose money. Why should I have to pay for a pile of extra health testing. I do think it should be mentioned up front to the buyer though. Or the breeder could just tack on the extra 600 to the puppy price (if that is the testing costs)...

Either way breeders (good ones anyway) tend to be in the red as it is. Its also in the buyers best interest (and dog people in general) to support health testing of more dogs.

I support it, either way. I'm not required to do any on Steve, but I'm going to OFA his hips and probably his elbows when he's neutered (they might be prelims, but good enough) for my own knowledge as well as for his breeder's. I'll probably get him CERFed somewhere along the line because it's cheap.

If the breeder is upfront about it and is upfront about their reasons for wanting it done, then the prospective puppy buyer is free to accept or decline the contract. I came across one breeder who required annual CERF exams for years on pet puppies, and I wasn't up for that, but I'm more than happy to do certain testing on my own dime.

I would be fine with it as a puppy buyer if the breeder was paying for it. It's not that we couldn't afford it, but I feel like something that is going to cost an extra $600 or so that is being done simply for the breeder's information should be paid for by the breeder.

But wouldn't you want to know if your dog had health issues? I mean I know you might not just do it on your own.. but isn't that why you would go to a good breeder? Cause you care about healthy dogs?

Why is the onus all on the breeder? I would think that people should embrace the idea (if not the practice) of supporting health testing. I do ask my puppy buyers to do a CERF test once after the dog is 4-5. Its $50. I suppose I could tack on an extra 50 to the puppy price...

Unless the breeder is wealthy they would likely just add the cost to the initial price. Personally I would rather have the cost spread out.

Very early on, my breeder told me that whether I got a pet or prospect that the puppy/dog would be health tested at various intervals through out the dog's life.

Hips, elbows and thyroid are to be done at 2 and then at 5.

However, now that she is going to be more then a pet, I know she will have extensive health testing through out her life.

DM is the latest "baddie" in the breed that people are testing for. My puppy could be DM clear or a carrier (but not affected) and she will be tested upon her arrival here.

Our hope is that she is DM clear, but one never knows.

Genetic testing is a vital tool if all progeny are tested. That is the only way to know exactly what you are producing.

Even in purebred dogs, there is some genetic variability.

One last thing- I really have no idea who is paying for it, but since she's my dog I'd bet that it's my responsibility to hold up that "end" of my contract.

It's a good idea, and something I would want to do if I ever produced a litter.

Strider will probably never, ever, ever be bred. However, when he turned 2 I did have a full blood panel with thyroid workup done. I wanted to know for myself what his bloodwork looked like when he hit adulthood. I like having that "snapshot" done of him in good health. We've got something to compare against 8 years down the road if something goes wonky.

His breeder appreciated it. I don't know, if it was my litter I'd be willing to chip in for costs of certain tests, depending on the frequency of problems in the breed. Hips aren't normally a problem for borzois, so I probably wouldn't shell out a couple hundred bucks per puppy to have them all screened if the parents and grandparents etc. were fine. But thyroids can be a problem, and I wouldn't have any problem paying for thyroid screens at 2 and 5 years old to see if any issues popped up in my lines.

Or if I was working with collies, it would be worth it to know specifically about all the puppies eyes, not just ones in breeding or show homes. I wouldn't be as concerned with every puppy's elbows and stuff, not typically an issue.