A friend of mine has just had her bitches hip score back and it is disappointingly higher than expected even though her parents and in fact the majority of dogs in her 5 generation pedigree have well below breed average scores (only 1 is just above - grandparent).

I have heard people call their stud dogs 'hip improvers' - do you have any experience or views on this?  I am a bit sceptical myself but interested to hear what other think.

I had this with a pup I sold and then was shown. All the dogs in my line including the sister I kept, her daughter as well have great hip scores. I do have mine done at just over a year and he was nearly 5 as he had done well in the ring they wanted to use him at stud. I was shockedwhen I heard his results as his movement was much better than my bitch and he consistently beat his sister.
The only thing I could come up with was the fact they had laminate flooring and he had been slipping and sliding around on it from a youngster.
Two things - one is people do seem to say that you can improve scores by using a lower hip score dog and the other is it is not really proven it is all heridetary and the scores can be affected by excercising too much when young. Mine are in cotton wool until they have their hips done so no stairs , no jumping in and out of cars etc.
It is bad enough they are jumping around on their back legs LOL
I'm going back quite a few years but a Champion dog in our breed said to have the best movement seen in the breed for a good while produced a massive hip score. I would have been devestated. A lot of people used him but it did not affect the scores produced overall withing the breed. It is so hard to understand because this particular dog lived a kennel life so no household situations for him and the best of experienced care.

I don't let mine jump in and out of cars until after they've had their hips done, in fact now teach them to put front feet up and lift them in and assist them out.  This bitch lives with 3 others and I think was walked with them too early - just my opinion.  As you say, movement is excellent.

They weren't certain they would breed from her but wanted the option whereas now it isn't there.

Now that brings back memories. I bought my second Golden Retriever from the same breeder in1996. At the time I was married to a man who didn't drive, and I don't, and the breeder was many hours away. Plus I had a one year old toddler. So, when we were offered a lift, my husband offered to go and collect the pup and I'd stay at home. I never asked the breeder the hip scores of the parents as she was a very prominent, world famous breeder and this wasn't my first dog from her. Well when my husband came home with the pup and handed me the paperwork at first I thought there must be a misprint on the registration certificate as it said the mother's hip score was 30/30. I actually genuinely thought it was a mistake and should say 3/3  but we phoned the breeder to check. She got all in a huff and said no, it is correct, but not to worry because the stud dog was a known HIP IMPROVER. (I can't remember his score offhand but it was below 20.) She said we could return the pup if we weren't satisfied -well that wasn't easy due to the distance involved, and with somebody who had been in the breed since the 1930s, I took her word for it.

Didn't hip score that pup until he was 6 years old. Score came back as 48/48 =96. So much for that hip improving sire!!!!

Sorry to hijack a bit but is it common practise for breeders to be very strict on their dogs' movement until they're scored? I know a friend who breeds labs said she was very glad to have had her youngest bitch hips and elbows scored so she could let her go crazy!

I ask as I'm hoping to have my boy done at the end of the year (not with the intention of breeding) and wonder if it will really be a true insight into the state of his hips and elbows, as he'll be 18 months old and has always been a looney, charging around.

Jess

I have a dog who was returned to me aged 20 months. He'd done agility and obedience and working trials and been very active. I didn't score him until he was 5 and he came back as 8; better than both his parents (one was 10, one 11). One of his litter sisters was very active from an early age and she came back as 6. A brother also very active agility dog was 7. The bitch I kept myself was probably the least active in that litter (only because I wasn't interested in agility) and she was 9. I don't think it makes a difference unless you're being really careless about it eg. walking a very young pup for miles and miles a day and similar.

That's good to know, thank you :)

> I have heard people call their stud dogs 'hip improvers' - do you have any experience or views on this?

Yes, and I think it can be true. If you look at some dogs' progeny - the KC health test finder section is a place to look - you can find some dogs whose scored progeny are below, to well below, average. This is to a selection of bitches. If you know the lines you can look back and find many examples of good hip scores in these dogs' pedigrees.

Equally you can find dogs with good hip scores themselves, whose progeny score disappointingly high. It's often the way that those sires are from lines with many examples of above average hip scores. Perhaps these latter dogs were wrapped in cotton wool, scored at 12 months and one day, or just plain lucky.

At any rate, I do believe that some dogs can indeed be hip improvers, and also the reverse can be true. If you know your breed and your lines, or have an honest mentor, you can factor this in to your breeding plans. Although it is far from foolproof!!

As I've mentioned in other queries like this I imported a dog from Spain.  He had a hipscore of excellent in Europe.  We used him a couple of times here before hipscoring was required and then I had him hipscored at around 7/8 years of age.  He came back with a hipscore of 41.  A couple have had highish scores but not as high as his but the majority have had hipscores well below the breed average.  Dogs with similar dogs in their pedigrees as him also have extremely low scores and I'm not sure but think that the only one with a score of 0 has him in its pedigree!

> is it common practise for breeders to be very strict on their dogs' movement until they're scored?

Certainly not in my case or my breed, that I am aware of, though sensible exercise for puppies, probably a bit more than the 5 minute per month of life rule.

I certainly don't allow mine to get overweight, once past three or four months, which is the main issue with pet owners.

according to Malcolm Willis once a dog has 10 offspring scored the overall pattern of progeny scores is as reliable as the dogs own score, once they have 20 scored offspring the overall pattern is more reliable than his own score.

Thing is except in prolific breeds you won't find enough scored offspring for a dog to be useful except maybe in retrospect.  For example if I was line-breeding to a dog/bitch I would not want to do so to one that produced poor scores.

I think when are registrations were double what they are now there was only one or maybe two dogs with 20 scored offspring, and quite few with more than 10.

I do believe that the more of the relatives that are scored the more likely a pattern of scores will be fairly accurate, you will always get the dog unexpected higher score as it is a multifactorial trait, not entirely governed by inheritance.

The rolling means scores do show that scoring and selecting breeding stock taking hips into account has improved the scores in most breeds, especially those where scores used to be high (as of course selection for this aspect would be of higher priority than in breeds where most scores are functionally normal).

Out of interest, now when Mate Select exists, I just typed in the sire of my past dog, the "known hip improver". He actually had a score of just 12, very good for the breed. He sired 196 puppies (!) but only 32 were hip scored. Out of those, 18 were higher than the dog himself, several of them quite a bit higher, such as my dog of 96 and another of 68, two of 39 and one of 32. Ten dogs were lower than their sire, but only marginally so (one or a few points). So much for the known hip improver!!

The dam had a total of 38 puppies, only 9 were scored. Granted, only my dog was higher than his dam (but with him I KNOW it was NOT a case of too much exercise OR weight -indeed for his first few years I did not show him as he was too thin), but the others weren't exactly excellent. She had one of 14, one 19 and one 21 which is okay, but then there were 32, 33, 39 etc -all of which I consider totally unacceptable, especially in such a numerically strong breed. And it does make you wonder what the 19 unscored pups were like.