Testicles

[CharlieDog]

It is a genetic thing, yes. We've established that. Basically, what it comes down to is its a genetic thing, that MIGHT cause problems if left in place for too long. The sire had his undescended testicle removed. He has produced phenomenal dogs. He is a top winning dog.

These are working dogs. I know several cases of GSD's who were cryptorchid and police dogs. When they had both testicles removed, the dogs lost all desire to do apprehension work. Completely would not do it. Not saying its the norm, but it's what I've seen.

This is a nine week old puppy. Her breeder is a highly ethical, respected breeder, with excellent breeding practices.

And as to the last post, Border Collies should NOT be shown in confirmation. There is a HUGE rift between AKC BCs and actual WORKING BCs. The breeding for confirmation is producing BCs WHO CANNOT DO THE WORK. Sure, they are producing dogs who "show" well, with lots of flash, but you see the rift between the working dogs, and the show dogs. They dont even look the same anymore.

Its the same thing in GSD's. I would NEVER ever take a showline GSD and expect him or her to be able to perform on the Schutzhund field, or to do stockwork even. They CANNOT do it.

That said, in almost every breed, there are working lines, and there are show lines. Now, there are even some "sport" lines, who are out of the AKC confirmation, who cant do the work, but have enough drive to do flyball, agility, etc.

 

[adojrts]

But if the testicle that hasn't dropped is removed, how is that causing cancer? From what your saying, if the testicle is left in the body it could cause cancer, but if it's removed, it's fine?

*Putting aside all "it isn't ethic" stuff for this qestion*

For the simple reason that although your breeder removed the offending testis and you plan on removing your dogs testis, if bred you can't guarantee that every puppy produced from that line will have that done to it. Therefore YOU are responsible for those pups and the quality of life that they have. It starts with the breeder but in many cases it doesn't end with the breeder. One breeder or a combo of breeders can have a huge negative impact on a breed that often isn't felt for years and its the dogs that suffer.
So why would you want to be apart of that on any level? Especially knowningly? As said by someone else, there are too many dogs that don't have health issues and can do the job they were bred for with excellance, to breed one that isn't.

And it comes down to this...........ANYTHING that can cause a dog pain or threaten its life and/or cause the future owners of said puppies any added expensives because of a inherited problem/condition etc, SHOULDN'T be bred.

 

[Laurelin]

Working is not an excuse to ignore a problem like this. Just my two cents. Good dog who can work, I don't doubt it, but as in everything a dog is a whole and health is a big part of that.

I don't believe you should breed for anything above health and temperament. Not working not anything... health will affect a dog's entire life. Yeah you can remove this particular problem but it's still genetically there and can still be passed on.

Honestly I know of the breeder. I really liked her dogs from what I saw. I was really surprised that they would breed a dog with this condition.

In general you don't have to agree with everything your breeder does nor do you have to do as they do... Not everyone who shows is ethical about their breeding practices- I know this. Likewise not everyone who works is ethical. People seem to forget that sometimes. Top winning dogs only mean so much.

Also if you talk to the BC people they'll tell you spaying and neutering doesn't seem to affect work much at all.

side note- Also, it's conformation, not confirmation. Not trying to be a bitch, it's just a pet peeve of mine. I'm sure the Catholics don't appreciate either.

EDIT: Also remember there is a big difference between a dog that is good for working and a dog that is good for breeding. Not every dog that can do their job imo is a breeding candidate... There's more to it than that.

 

[CharlieDog]

I couldn't remember how it was spelled, Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[Laurelin]

Lol all in good fun!

 

[noludoru]

God, Charlie, learn to spell! (Or conveniently blame it on the keyboard!)

 

[Juicy]

God, Charlie, learn to spell! (Or conveniently blame it on the keyboard!)

evil.....evil.....today though no lie, ALL MY LETTERS WORK!!

 

[CharlieDog]

It was the keyboard. I SWEAR!

 

[Lizmo]

It was the keyboard. I SWEAR!

Uh huh

 

[adojrts]

It is a genetic thing, yes. We've established that. Basically, what it comes down to is its a genetic thing, that MIGHT cause problems if left in place for too long. The sire had his undescended testicle removed. He has produced phenomenal dogs. He is a top winning dog.

These are working dogs. I know several cases of GSD's who were cryptorchid and police dogs. When they had both testicles removed, the dogs lost all desire to do apprehension work. Completely would not do it. Not saying its the norm, but it's what I've seen.

This is a nine week old puppy. Her breeder is a highly ethical, respected breeder, with excellent breeding practices.

And as to the last post, Border Collies should NOT be shown in confirmation. There is a HUGE rift between AKC BCs and actual WORKING BCs. The breeding for confirmation is producing BCs WHO CANNOT DO THE WORK. Sure, they are producing dogs who "show" well, with lots of flash, but you see the rift between the working dogs, and the show dogs. They dont even look the same anymore.

Its the same thing in GSD's. I would NEVER ever take a showline GSD and expect him or her to be able to perform on the Schutzhund field, or to do stockwork even. They CANNOT do it.

That said, in almost every breed, there are working lines, and there are show lines. Now, there are even some "sport" lines, who are out of the AKC confirmation, who cant do the work, but have enough drive to do flyball, agility, etc.

Sorry but I don't agree, in my breed there are some genetic nightmares in lines of WORKING dogs (not sport dogs and not conformation dogs) that were ignored and blown off and good luck trying to find outcrosses because those dogs were heaviliy used for breeding.
We are not talking about ear set, colour etc but health issues that effect the breed long after those breeders are dead or retired (talking about the people here).
And btw, many of the top 'sport dogs' i.e agility and flyball come from working lines. Because all those drives that are so highly valued for Working are just as desired in sport dogs.
There are ways to 'approve' a dog for breeding and it doesn't have to be in a conformation ring. There are several breeds out there that the dogs have to pass inspections to be granted the 'RIGHT' to breed.
Actually I also think the German's have a very stick criteria for breeding dogs/horses and its a Gov. thing.

 

[OutlineACDs]

In my breed, the dogs should be able to do both equally well. The standard is written with nothing but the working dog in mind. Any ACD who can work, and work well, should fit the written standard to a "T". Any conformation ACD who finishes should have the body and temperament to work. Sorry to offend the non-conformation BC people, I just disagree.

 

[Romy]

In my breed, the dogs should be able to do both equally well. The standard is written with nothing but the working dog in mind. Any ACD who can work, and work well, should fit the written standard to a "T". Any conformation ACD who finishes should have the body and temperament to work. Sorry to offend the non-conformation BC people, I just disagree.

It's going to be different in every breed. Many conformation borzoi are too narrow chested to perform on the field in a long term performance career. Their tongues will literally turn purple as they try their hardest to course, because they simply can not get enough oxygen the way their bodies are put together. Some of the top ranked lure coursing borzoi in the country are criticized as being "barrel chested" (as if ) and tend not to be as favored in the show ring. I'm sure everybody here can give examples of differences and similarities between show and working strains in their dogs. In some breeds like the GSD those differences will be extreme, in others like the ACD less noticable, if any at all.

On the topic of cryptorchid breeders, it's not something I would ever, ever choose to do if my dog had that particular defect. I don't believe it would be ethical. Doesn't your dog's sire have any other sons who are not cryptorchid? If so, it would be better for the breed as a whole for those males to continue that bloodline rather than another cryptorchid dog. That's the risk with any livestock/breeding program involving animals. Sometimes (most of the time) things out of our control pop up and blast our plans down the toilet.

 

[RD]

Hm.

Does anyone have any studies on the heritability of cryptorchidism? Buddy has an undescended testicle. I know his line inside and out (SHOW lines, so we don't have to pick on the "working breeders breeding unhealthy dogs in this case) and there are no dogs in his pedigree with undescended testicles, as most are conformation champions. Where'd he get it? Should his sire no longer be bred because he produced this pup?

Personally, if I acquired a cryptorchid pup, I'd neuter him after a year or so if the testicle didn't drop.

As for the ethics of the matter, personally I wouldn't breed a dog with an undescended testicle, but I don't think it's always wrong. There is NO breeding clear of all health issues, there is no perfect sire and no perfect dam. I would not rule out a breeder who uses a superb stud with a UDT, who is otherwise in perfect health. If I was looking for a breeding quality puppy, I might rule out that litter, but I don't think it speaks poorly of the breeder. I would consider it differently if this breeder were producing dogs for the show ring.

How do you all feel about breeding dogs with, say, allergies? DJD1?

Speaking in a broader sense and not in regards to this one particular instance - if breeders were to cull every dog that had a minor physical flaw or health issue, the wonderful, broad gene pool in the Border Collie breed would be slashed dramatically. This diverse gene pool is the very life of the breed, and I'd rather see a dog with an UDT bred to the right bitch, than the same "perfect" dog bred to over and over, while other good dogs are expelled from the gene pool.

And for the record, most working border collies do fit the standard. QUITE well. But judges like to see this:

And would laugh this out of the ring:

Even if the latter is the better working dog and better built, to boot. Conformation shows for border collies are no longer about functionality, and therefore the BC bred for show has taken a path completely opposite the one the working dogs are on.

And before anyone tells me I'm being awful and mean, do consider that I have two dogs from show lines and I do indeed understand "the other side".

 

[Romy]

RD, I agree with you to an extent. If a cryptorchid dog was coming from lines with no previous cryptorchid-ism, and he had something to contribute to the breed that couldn't come from his normal-testicled littermates that would be one thing...but to reproduce an animal that is 2nd or 3rd generation cryptorchid is something else. Especially if there is an option of using a litter brother without the defect instead. Oftentimes genetic flaws can be bred out of a line (with any type of livestock), but doing so requires being extremely careful with the lines being outcrossed to, and being very vigilant and strict in culling the defect as it pops up later in the line. While we were refining our strains of disease resistant chickens for a genetics project, the rule we used was only 10% of each generation born was allowed to reproduce. It was pretty ruthless, but also made a lot of progress in eliminating defective genes with every generation.

 

[RD]

I don't entirely disagree, Romy. I wouldn't breed a cryptorchid dog from a long line of cryptorchids, either. To the extent of my knowledge, the dog in question is from clear lines.

I would've liked to have seen how your chicken project progressed through the generations and if your strain of chickens wound up with any defects and mutated genes due to the increasingly narrow gene pool.

 

[MafiaPrincess]

To the extent of my knowledge, the dog in question is from clear lines.

Blaze's sire's had done this and that the one "lost" testicle was removed

Would seem like it is a line of retained testicle dogs continuing the genetic defect.

 

[RD]

I was speaking of Blaze's sire, since if I read correctly, the breeder's ethics were being called into question due to his decision to breed the dog.

 

[Buddy'sParents]

Jennifer, I just want to say that you've handled this very well despite people continuing after requests not to. Kudos to you!

 

[Laurelin]

RD, I agree to an extent. There are definitely some breeds where I'd in no way get a show bred dog and some where I'd definitely only go to a show breeder. Every breed's politics is case by case... anyways, that's off topic.

I think this is an interesting discussion, though.

As far as allergies and DJD1 goes... it'd depend. How severe are the allergies, what is the dog allergic to, and how does it affect his quality of life? And DJD1... I'd have to know how prevalent it is in the breed. If the majority of dogs have DJD in one elbow or another then you'd have to use the best and the best might very well be DJD1....

There is no breeding clear of all health issues, but you should try to avoid them especially if they are known.

I mean, my question would be- why not use a brother or sire for breeding if they are unaffected rather than pass this along?

 

[ACooper]

Jennifer, I just want to say that you've handled this very well despite people continuing after requests not to. Kudos to you!

:hail::hail:

I think so to