> If people take the personal experiences quoted out of context and prefer to see them as preduce remarks it's not the posters fault,

Apologies for off topic:  mastifflover, it's an interesting point though isn't it.  Does putting in my experience in front of an inflamatory remark make it ok?

There was a comment made recently by a poster about her observations that all the fat dogs she saw had fat owners.  There was a huge negative response to this one but she was effectively saying in her experience fat dogs have fat owners

Can I say "In my experience, *** (insert any minority, religious or oppressed group) are greedy or lazy, or rude, or sluts" and get away with it?  I'm stretching here to find something appropriate to say but I hope you know what I mean!!  Try putting in my experience in front of any negative comment about Jews, Blacks, women, South Africans etc and see how it sounds.

It's semantics for sure BUT I'm not convinced that anyone who feels affected by the comment is going to think it less offensive because it happens to be one persons personal experience.  Particularly when it may echo a long held belief/prejudice that has negatively impacted their group for years.  My apologies for off topic comments but language is fascinating and seems to have endless potential to get confused on forums like this :)

dogs a babe - This is what I was trying to get at but couldn't think how to word it!

> Does putting in my experience in front of an inflamatory remark make it ok?

Good point dogs a babe
I suppose the difficulty over a forum (and without the use of facial expression, tone of voice etc..) is it is hard to judge the intent of a persons comments. So much is down to the readers interpretation it leaves plenty of space for crossed-wires and people being taken out of context.

My sister has had horrible luck with men, so it is true that in her experience men are 'selfish scumbags'. She may state that as her experience, without clarifying that it is not true of all men, yet she would genuinely be expressing her personal experience and not using the term 'in my experience' as a 'get-out clause' to enable her to make inflamatory remarks.

>There was a comment made recently by a poster about her observations that all the fat dogs she saw had fat owners.  There was a huge negative response to this one but she was effectively saying in her experience fat dogs have fat owners

Yes, I know the thread. I never took offence at the opening post and honestly did think it was the poster talking about thier own personal observations - untill the thread got nasty :(

It would be nice to think people felt free enough to join in debate, contributing thier own experiences, without feeling like they could not speak for fear of upsetting others, but it seems like there is a fine line between expressing ones own experiences and predjudism, that line made much finer on a forum.

Reply to Lucymissy:

Sorry to the original poster for this going off on the 'gypsy' issue.

However, I must respond. Mastifflover has interpreted my post exactly right. This is my personal experience. It is not racist (oh how I hate for the 'racist card' to be brought out at any opportunity). It is possibly prejudiced but solely based on experience of their behaviour, and that will prejudice me against them, as it would any other people who treated their animals badly. It is my experience of ALL gypsies I have come across (and in rescue we come across the results of their throwaways/cruelty frequently) and have an area several miles away where gypsies/travellers call them whatever you like, congregate. The number of people who see the 'abuse' that goes on and want to rescue the poor dogs is amazing and quite heartwarming. It seems from the other posts that their experience too is that gypsy dogs are not well treated. I wont even go into the case of the lurcher thrown out of a car (by gypsies) who suffered appalling injuries. It took over a year with a well known orthopaedic surgeon working on her for free, to put her back together again.

My response was to Magica, who seemed to be labouring under a serious misapprehension that gypsy dogs are having a lovely home life. I really felt the need to respond to that, as it simply isn't so.  If I really wanted to 'have a go' or be 'racist' about gypsies I would have used a much more well known and derogatory term.

> Yes I agree that puppies should not be sold in pubs or be sold underage but to me it seems that you are saying that they do this because they are gypsies and you are insinuating that ALL gypsies are cruel to their dogs which in completely untrue.

They do this because they want to make money in any way that they can, and this (as with puppy farmers) is an easy option, so long as there are gullible people like the idiots I mentioned in my original post, to buy them. Whenever I have heard of puppies being sold in pubs, it's always travellers - coincidence? I don't think so. To every gypsy I have ever come across their dogs are a throwaway commodity. In MY experience, all gypsies do treat their dogs badly. They create, by their behaviour in many ways (this being just one of them) their reputation. I judge people by their actions.

Are you defending travellers because your OH is a Romany, or from your own personal experience? I would be happy to know that not all gypsies behave this way, but I have never yet experienced it.

Goldie and Honeymoonbeam

I too did not buy my first GSD from a reputable source either. Again this was about 30 years ago. Things were different then. We did not have the same kind of access to information that we do now.  I do feel that people now are much more aware of puppy farming, health issues etc and how you should go about buying a new puppy, but they get caught up in the 'aaah' factor and buy from sources that, in their hearts, they know they shouldn't.

No accounting for people who will do that, especially, as with one of the people in my post, they DO know better. It's beyond me.

Then again, a few years ago i purchased a dog from a very reputable KC breeder accredited and on KC register!!! Dog was full of genetic defaults, bred into the pup for looks, instead of for temperament and health reasons!!! Oh and in case you where wondering, he had a hernia and died on the operating table!!! So who is to say who is right and who is wrong? 

Puppy farmers, should be found and have all dogs taken away from them, it should be illegal.  People breeding to make money?  Do you all find descent homes for your puppies at a cost? or do you find descent homes for your puppies and give away for free to the new homes as you are pleased they will look after them?  I'm guessing money comes into it somewhere along the line.... If only to cover your costs of breeding??? Of course.

Buying puppies is a minefield from newspaper advertisers down to accredited breeders!

I now have a Mini Schnauzer whom i payed an arm and a leg for, who has had all checks and is bred for temperament and health, let me tell you i had to go through many accredited breeders to find a breeder i was happy with, who's ethics where good! It was not the money, i would have paid double for the right dog, it was her health that was more important.

I'm not bitter, just the mentality that if some one is accredited then they are the dog's bollox!  Not necessarily true.

>Oh and in case you where wondering, he had a hernia and died on the operating table!!!

Hernias have several causes, not all genetic. That's not something you can necessarily lay at the door of his breeder, nor is his tragic death on the operating table.

It was an inguinal hernia.... its genetic, in fact even umbilical hernias are genetic! I spoke to the breeder, it was in her line.  The stud dog she used, which i hasten to add is a best of breed winner from crufts also had it in his lines.... I was advised its normal for the breed and only comes out in certain litters ha ha ha..... Oh how i laughed NOT! So i do lay it at the feet of breeders... My point is even accredited breeders, show breeders can get it so very very wrong!

> So i do lay it at the feet of breeders... My point is even accredited breeders, show breeders can get it so very very wrong!

I think the OP's point was that puppy buyers should do as much research as possible and not buy from any old Tom, Dick, or Harry who just happens to have pups on the ground.

Time and time again on here, and presumably other forums, there is a debate about how best to describe the type of good, ethical, caring, careful, concientious breeder that produces happy, healthy, breed standard puppies.

I'm not comfortable with the terms show breeder, pet breeder, hobby breeder, even accredited breeder as they are all just labels.  What is more important is that when asked, we all do our best to explain how to find one of the 'good' breeders and perhaps more importantly how to spot the bad ones.

Buyer beware is never more important than when looking for a puppy. 

he had a hernia and died on the operating table!!!

A dog dying whilst under GA can hardly be blamed on the breeder, can it? The fact that it was for a hernia was by the by, it could just as well have been an operation to correct an injury that happened whilst out for a walk. My Cavalier also had an inguinal hernia, it was operated on at 6 months. He's now 14 years and 8 months old.

I blame the breeder, i'm sorry but if he didn't have a hernia, no need for large operation.  It was an extremely large operation.  Also he was a toy breed dog so GA can be quite dangerous on toy breed more than med-large breeds.  I am glad your girl has fully recovered, but since an Inguinal hernia is hereditary, did you not question this with her breeder? I'm shocked, if not as she could have gone on to breed further puppies and pass this problem on to other families.  Families which dont wish to see their 7 mnths old dog have to go through such a traumatic operation....!

I'm sure you will have spoke to the breeder an would not have bred from your girl.....

I blame any breeder who knows there breeding lines contain genetic disorders that could result a puppy/dog having to go through unnecessary pain and operations and i am surprised there are people on here who would stick up for those practices! IT IS NOT THE SAME AS HAVING A FALL! OR TWISTING A JOINT THROUGH WALKING!

Yours very disappointed

>i'm sorry but if he didn't have a hernia, no need for large operation.

Anaesthetics are known to have inherent risk, whatever surgery is carried out. 7 months of age is when many people have their pet dogs neutered, and spaying a bitch is major surgery as well.

Dogs can require major surgery at any age, but puppies especially are renowned for swallowing foreign objects which then require emergency surgical removal - often even more stressful to the body than a planned operation on a healthy dog.

I agree it was a mistake of the breeder to mate two lines where inguinal hernias have occurred at a higher-than-average level, but even healthy dogs can die from anaesthetic after even minor treatment, so to blame the sad death during surgery on the breeder is unjustified.

Also he was a toy breed dog so GA can be quite dangerous on toy breed more than med-large breeds.  I am glad your girl has fully recovered, but since an Inguinal hernia is hereditary, did you not question this with her breeder?

First off I clearly  said HE. :) Secondly, a Cavalier is also a toybreed! Not by any means a medium to large breed. Thirdly, what makes you think I did not take it up with the breeder? Of course I did, and indeed she paid for the op. This is a good breeder and I am sure she will have taken the information available to her onboard and acted accordingly -but it's not my business.  And finally, like I said HE, so not a bitch to breed from (indeed he is neutered), and I do not breed Cavaliers and never have done. This is a pure pet dog, always has been.

> It was an inguinal hernia.... its genetic, in fact even umbilical hernias are genetic!

Just curious, how can you tell the difference between a congenital defect and an inherited defect?

Congenital problems are not necessarily inherited defects. They are structural abnormalities that occur before birth, sometimes caused by viruses or drugs used in the pregnant female. If a female has more than one litter with the same type of defect, and other females that received the same care and treatments while pregnant do not have similarly affected offspring, the defect is probably inherited.

Birth defect is a widely-used term for a congenital malformation, i.e. a congenital, physical anomaly which is recognizable at birth, and which is significant enough to be considered a problem, most birth defects are believed to be caused by a complex mix of factors including genetics, environment, and behaviours.

I am surprised you don't already know this.............

Like i said.... I asked the breeder and as she stated a couple of her dogs had Inguinal Hernias, therefore it doesn't take a Genealogists to work it out lol :-D

I am sorry MarianneB, it was a genuine mistake on my part.  I am glad your boy made a swift recovery.

But i am still shocked at the reply's on here, Breeders breeding with known Inherent conditions for show quality purposes!!! People on here are seem more interested in agreeing with these people and their ethics.  I had a toy breed which i purchased in good faith, from a registered breeder whom i trusted.  He died as a result of surgery, which he had to have due to an Inguinal Hernia, now i appreciate him dyeing was justBY THE BYas you put it!!! But i still say if he didnt have a genetic disorder he would be running around now, playing with my children, sitting on my lap, going for walks etc etc the list is endless.... Therefore i blame these irresponsible breeders who bring unnecessary pain and suffering into a dogs life, by going about practices for cosmetic and monetary reasons. I am also appalled by yourself who seems to feel that this is ok, because he could quite easily have died chewing a soft toy, this point we could argue till the cows come home as one would never know and is subject to conjecture.

I find this so strange as i have checked previous posts and you all seem so against Breeders who breed without all relevant health checks, or is that just when it suits what you have to say?

You see my dog was important to me, but hey thats just by the by :-(

Did you not know about the hernia when you bought your pup?

> I blame the breeder
> I blame any breeder who knows there breeding lines contain genetic disorders that could result a puppy/dog having to go through unnecessary pain and operations
> i am surprised there are people on here who would stick up for those practices!

This thread was about buyers not doing their research OR simply buying any available puppy without listening to advice.

Presumably you did your research, you questioned your breeder and you listened to advice.  Do you feel that you were misled by the breeder?  Were there questions that, in hindsight, you now wish you had asked? 

I don't think anyone here is defending breeders who knowingly allow faults to continue in their lines (however there are always situations when it occurs unexpectedly).  What action did your breeder take when you informed her of the problem?  Perhaps it might be useful for you to tell us how in your case this might have been avoided OR what to watch for in a breeder.

No one wants the sadness of early puppy death but sometimes these things just happen.  It would be a shame if the casual reader came to the conclusion that if no breeder can be trusted - it doesn't matter where the puppy comes from.

Did you not know about the hernia when you bought your pup?/tt]......

No :-( it started to show as he got older, noticeable when he was approx 6 mnths old, i wasn't sure at first as it was directly above his (excuse the wording) Penis and quite stupidly thought it was him maturing, it wasn't until a few weeks later when it moved to the side, i realised it was something far more sinister.... I am not a breeder so i had no idea what it was.  My vet confirmed it was an Inguinal Hernia and it needed to be operated on immediately. I still miss him....

So the breeder wouldn't have known he had one either, and your vet didn't spot it when you took him for his injections?

Yes you are right dogs a babe i would ask the breeders....."are there any congenital/hereditary defects in their lines".... and i would look into their eyes and see their reaction!!! My advice....ask x

Jeangenie....the breeder did not know....but not knowing is not an answer for ignorance....especially when breeding dogs!

Jeangenie.... he came fully innoculated :-(, i often wish he hadn't now......

> Birth defect is a widely-used term for a congenital malformation, i.e. a congenital, physical anomaly which is recognizable at birth, and which is significant enough to be considered a problem, most birth defects are believed to be caused by a complex mix of factors including genetics, environment, and behaviours.
> I am surprised you don't already know this.............

I know that just because somthing is congenital, does not make it a genetically inherited trait. And a congenital defect does not have to be significant enough to cause a problem to be termed a congenital defect, my dog has a 'congenital defect' (vets term, not mine) in both eyes, it does not and will not ever cause him a problem.

> I asked the breeder and as she stated a couple of her dogs had Inguinal Hernias, therefore it doesn't take a Genealogists to work it out lol

LOL, really? - just because somebody owns 'a couple of dogs' with hernias, any litter coming from that person must have a 'genetically inherited hernia' as opposed to congenital hernias?  Wow, I never knew genetics were so simple :-D I'ts amazing there are any genetic faults still passed on with genetics being that easy to determine ;)

The laugh of it is, the breeder was a lovely woman... She was understanding, she offered us another dog.... my answer was no thank you.  The lady did go on without my knowledge and save me two dogs.... However when she contacted me a few months ago to tell me she had kept two dogs back from her last litter and "ran them on" to make sure they where ok....She found that one had patella luxation and the other was undershot.......................... I rest my case

just because somebody owns 'a couple of dogs' with hernias, any litter coming from that person must have a 'genetically inherited hernia' as opposed to congenital hernias?/i]- Mastiflover i did't realise people had litters!!

Inguinal and other types of hernias can certainly be genetic in nature as the breeder already had a girl with an inguinal hernia, and the Inguinal hernia was prevalent in the stud boy's lines, i am guessing it would most likely be genetic!!!!! now do we have to be a geneologist to work this out....and when you continue to breed this line knowing there was a genetic defect through breeding not congenital or through circumstance, then it is wrong!!!  Would you breed your boy with eye sight problems???

>She found that one had patella luxation and the other was undershot

Luxating patellae are very common in toy breeds as a whole because of their miniaturisation, and it's so common in jack russells that it's almost considered to be a breed characteristic ("the Jack Russell skip")! Again, faulty mouths aren't uncommon - it's often what makes an otherwise good example of a breed a 'purely-pet' puppy, and can happen out of the blue. (And, of course, in some breeds an undrshot mouth is a requirement, not a fault.)

I'm not trying to whitewash your breeder, but there's very little you've told us that points to breeder negligence; in fact she seems to have gone out of her way to try to recompense you ("The lady did go on without my knowledge and save me two dogs") for the tragic death of your pup.

Chip

I'm sure you have everyone sympathy - you certainly have mine - but don't allow your experience of one breeder to completely colour your judgement OR colour your attitude to those posters that have been asking questions.

Mastifflover is right, genetics is NOT that simple and sometimes things don't work the way that your breeder might have planned for.  You may have got a relatively inexperienced person, you may have just had some bad luck this time but it sounds as if she didn't deliberately sell you a dog with a known condition.  However misguided she might have been over your litter, she also tried to do right by you and offer another dog.  She obviously also tried to do the right thing by running on a couple of dogs, however flawed.

I'm not defending her per se but I am concerned that you don't throw blame at all breeders.  You seem to be unnecessarily cross with some posters and have somehow combined their comments with your bad experience to conclude that anyone breeding for show is wrong.  If you can take a step back for a minute you'll realise that these very people consistently give the kind of advice designed to prevent amateur breeders from making mistakes and to prevent buyers from choosing the wrong breeder.  You may well be preaching to the converted :)

We are just going to have to agree to disagree.  I think the negligence is breeding from dogs that have inherent genetic disorders.... compounded by knowing this and still breeding the lines.... I wouldn't.... If i decided to breed it would be to improve a breeds health and genetics for the good... to produce and eradicate as much as was possible from a line...

Dogs a babe, again thank you for explaining things in a NICE way... I agree re Breeder in this instant not knowing, After loosing my boy, i decided to get another he was a Chihuahua, i went through perhaps 30 breeders, questioning them extensively as you can imagine... I eventually decided to change breed lol.  I realise most on here do the right thing, but it truly is a minefield. just because you are accredited doesn't mean you are doing the right thing... I have a naughty Mini Schnauzer instead.  But she is as perfect as she can be! WELL IN HEALTH :-) Thank you

> Would you breed your boy with eye sight problems???

He has no problems with his sight, he can see perfectly fine and the defect will not cause him problems it is purely 'cosmetic', however, I do not know enough about breeding in general, breed dispotition or dispotition of my dogs specific line regarding eye abnormalities to know weather a minor congenital defect such as his should render him unfit for breeding **(he will never be bred from anyway). There is much, much more to breeding than casting aside the dogs that are not 100% perfect.

That said, I can't see it being good practice for a breeder to use sires & dams with prevalent occurance of Inguinal hernias, unless of course, this is common in the breed/there is limited gene pool in which is it impossible to avoid using a dog with that in it's pedigree.

ETA, ** LOL, I do NOT breed!!!

>There is much, much more to breeding than casting aside the dogs that are not 100% perfect.

Exactly. All dogs have faults, and the smaller the gene pool, the sooner the breed becomes unviable even if closely inbred (as is guaranteed with a narrow gene pool) and becomes extinct.

He died as a result of surgery, which he had to have due to an Inguinal Hernia, now i appreciate him dyeing was justBY THE BYas you put it!!!

It's extremely sad but it doesn't matter HOW I or anyone else put it -the facts are still that anything could have necessitated surgery at any time in his life and he could have died then. Were you for instance going to neuter him? If he had died during neutering surgery, would you have blamed the breeder then, or the vet? Or something else? What if he, especially as a small bred, had ever needed his teeth cleaned by the vet? That's almost guaranteed to have been needed at some point in his life. The hernia did NOT kill him. It's not common for dogs to die during hernia operations. Now if it had been a heart problem I could have understood your point, because then surgery would instantly have become very risky indeed. But a problem that SHOULD be fine to correct surgically (the only problems from inguinal hernias usually comes when they are not repaired), that the breeder didn't know about -it's nobody's fault. Yes I FULLY agree that nobody should breed from any dog that had an inguinal hernia if there is any risk at all that it is inherited, but it did not cause your dog's death.

Chip
I understand and agree completely that buying from a good breeder will not necessarily guarantee health. However, to return to my original point, I still believe that you have a far better chance of getting a healthy dog from a good breeder over a puppy farm, pet shop, or gypsy in the pub.

Your experience is tragic and I do really feel for you. I am not a breeder, and have often been involved in heated debates over pedigree dog health on this board. However, I do feel that you have been a little harsh on your original breeder, and I also feel that one or two of the replies on this thread have been less than compassionate, considering the sadness you suffered with your pup, and are clearly still hurting from.

However, I think the majority of good breeders are trying to do the right thing. It doesn't always work out and some dogs, despite coming from health tested stock will still go on to develop an inherited disease. What can and is being done is trying to minimise that risk by health testing and breeding to reduce exaggerations.

I am only hard on the original breeder on here, because i am still angry....

I appreciate she didn't know............

But for the fact she is still breeding these lines, really gets my goat.........

Yes agreed, avoid Puppy Farms, pet shops.......

As i stated earlier in a different post in april, my family did dog rescue from these puppy farms for most of my teenage life, i have seen some terrible sights, nursed some terrible injuries and watched some die as a result of what these type of people do in the name of money.......

Hence why it is so emotive a subject for me.....

Thank you all, even those i still cant understand!

> But for the fact she is still breeding these lines, really gets my goat.........

Not defending anyone breeding the same way again when a problem has resulted, but certainly in conditions that have a complex or recessive inheritance certainly the parents can still be used for breeding as long as the partners are not from the same lines as produced issues before.

Taking for example Hip Dysplasia, even dogs with excellent scores can still occasionally produce a dysplastic.  Should the parents not be bred from because that particular combination produced badly?, or should they be bred to different partners to pass on their good points, and a note made not to combine particular animals.

Brainless....You just shut me up!!!

I never thought about it quite that way.... Agreed

I am glad it makes a bit more sense.

In some breeds there are several negative traits most of which do not have an easy or mode of inheritance or screening process, so only careful pedigree research can help avoid the issue, but even then it will crop up from time to time.

With advances in DNA research things are looking better and dog that carry negative traits or clear dogs from lines with problems can be safely used.

For example there are several DNA tests available in border collies and any one dog may be a carrier (one hopes not affected), or clear for one or more of these problems, but all can be used safely to the correct partner and no affected offspring produced.

This may explain the situation in a recessively inherited trait  http://www.optigen.com/opt9_test_prcd_pra.html

The sooner we can get more DNA tests the better, but paradoxically in order to get these tests we actually need enough affected animals to sample and compare their DNA with unaffected ones to identify the genes, so many breeds are victims of their own success in this regard having kept the amount of affected animals to a minimum.