>surely all breeds can suffer form HD ???? 

Yep - some worse than others. Unless all individuals in a breed have been proven clear by testing, no breed can claim to be free of a condition.

If Standard Schnauzers don't have HD how come there are no HD free dogs that have been scored ? Only a few have been done but all the dogs scored had HD BTW

This seems an attitude in many breeds where clinical cases have not been seen or seen rarely, but in fact when soem people do score there is nothing to be complcent about.

Some breeds that come to mind are Beagles, Shelties, Cavaliers, and now Standard Sznauzers, all having dogs scroign high within the few that have been scored.

To be honest all dogs ought to be hip scored.  the only ones to have consistently shown not to have a problem are Greyhounds.

Huysakies have very good scores, yet people still score to ensure it stays that way.

HD is not a problem in my breed, but I would not say that it is not necessary to score. An average for a breed is only determined if dogs are tested. We can all say there is no problem with anything if none are tested. Mongrels/crossbreeds are not routinely tested for diseases and that is why people have the very much mistaken view that they are healthier than pedigree dogs. :(

Just found this on STANDARD SCHNAUZERS

Standard Schnauzer    Hip Dysplasia, cysts

On this website if interested:  <a class='url' href='http://www.dogpack.com/health/healthproblems.htm'>http://www.dogpack.com/health/healthproblems.htm</a>

Or this on another site:-

Health Issues:

The Standard Schnauzer is known to be a very healthy breed with an average life expectancy is 13 to 16 years. However, like all breeds of dogs, certain health disorders have been seen in the breed, including Hip Dysplasia and some eye problems.

as i said, my breed is not screened, hardly my fault! if they bought in screening i would do it! i dont see how this makes me a bad breeder!

>if they bought in screening i would do it!

Screening's been available for years! Owners of at least 25 other standard schnauzers have done it - and the results haven't been great. :( Any dog can be screened if the owner wishes - it doesn't have to be only at the breed club's behest. 

yes i could screen my bitch, but the stud dogs arent screened so what then? i might add that the stud dog is a multiple champion and no, he isnt hip scored.

Sally,

If you really wanted to be as responsible as possible (and as you've stated you're a member of the breed club) why not put an item forward to be discussed at the Club's AGM to the effect that, as Standards are not usually scored, but those that have been haven't been good, the Club should now advise/insist all members to get their Standards scored and come in line with the other two varieties.  That way people would really see if there's a problem in the breed and if there is they could actually DO something about it instead of saying "well no-one else bothers so why should I?".  If there's no problems showing after 7 or 8 years then the breed can be thankful that at least one person had the foresight to make sure.

Debs

It's not going to happen all at once - these things take time to become established. If your animal's screened with good results, others are more likely to do so. It's a snowball effect. Just because most people in a breed are leaving themselves open to potential legal action doesn't mean you need to as well.

When I bought my eldest bitch born in 1992 not everyone routinely hip scored, and my girls mother was not scored.

Very shortly afterwards the breed clubs drew up a code of ethics that insisted all breeding stock was hip scored and eye tested,a dn the number now scored has doubled, giving a much clerer picture of the breed.

We are in a  fairly good position with hips (mean score varies from 13 to 14), but don't get too many really low scores, but we do get the odd unexpectedly high score so it is never worth getting complacent.  Most score under 20.

Multiple Champion????  We dont to my knowledge have Multiple Champions in the breed.

> if they bought in screening i would do it! i dont see how this makes me a bad breeder! < 

you can always do it anyway you know.  just because the club doesnt advocate it, doesnt mean you shouldnt do it.  i think i would be doing it anyway if i was going to breed.

Please could we at least get the breed name correct.  They are Schnauzers not Standard Schnauzers.  In the US they are known as Standard Schnauzers.

whats wrong with breeding a litter if people are waiting for puppies? if the bitch is a good show dog, mated to a champion stud dog, has no health issues(  my breed doesnt) people came from all over uk to buy my pups, perhaps everyone would tell me why they breed theirs?

Is your dog shown with success? Did you have all health tests completed on both sire and dam? ...and interestingly enough which breed is it that has no health issues??

Archer

see above

and her show results?

so no health tests(breeders don't have to wait to be told that they 'should' do them) and no show results?
Archer

im afraid my show results are none of your business and i wont rise to your bait either

No bait...just unanswered questions.....however sometimes saying nothing speaks volumes:rolleyes:
Archer

not at all, i just would rather not say so you cant disbelieve me

not at all, i just would rather not say so you cant disbelieve me

Well seeing as you can find champ.show results on Fosse and Higham going back a few years it would be easy enough to prove wouldn't it.

Yep, googling brings up my dog's show results from 2000. :)

As I said ladies...sometimes saying nothing speaks volumes
As you say.....show results can be verified but then when people have said what they have achieved in the past I have not felt the need to check since when someone is upfront I feel they have nothing to hide.Lets face it...most of us are more than happy to reel off our dogs successess when asked...even if they're not world beaters
Archer

Out of interest I just put the name into google of a new pup I bred who has only been to one show and it came straight up, so any dog placed at a champ show should come up.

hI

This was explained to me very simply once by a breeder, I thought it was a bit of when you have paid x amount of money and you cant breed it.

Her explanation was she has spent many years building up a good line and name in showing this breed. She doesnt want someone to come along and buy a bitch mate it to the neighbours poor quality dog and then sell the pups as her breeding.

If someone really wanted to show and breed she would select a puppy for them and then ask them to come back when the bitch is older and she can advice what dog to use then she would lift the restriction.

If they were not happy with this she would suggest they found another breeder. After she explained it to me I could see were she was coming from. How many times have you seen poor quality yorkies for instance and the owner says they come from cruft winners??

Wendy

Perhaps if you were aware of all the health tests & the recommnded age a Cavalier should be before being bred from, you might have a better understanding & if you were to pay £,000 for a Cavalier puppy you would have been conned

I have threee cavaliers all outwardly very healthy, however one has a grade three heart murmur & is on medication & my lovely youngest boy has a symptomatic Syringohydromyelia. There is no DNA test for SHM & you cannot screen puppies under 6 months for it. It can manifest at any age & dogs with symptoms can be in acute pain & may end up have a shunt inserted between the skull & the spine & can also have to be PTS. My dogs Champion father was PTS before he was three & had his owner breeders not been very honest & open & gone public over why he was PTS I would never had known. My boy's breeders were aware that his father had been PTS yet never bothered to tell me & his father's owners presumed that they had, so I learnt from the dog press. At his father's owners' request I had my dog MRI scanned & this revealed that he too has SHM. His brother, who was originally kept by the breeders, was bred from at 8 months :rolleyes: & after his father was PTS he was sold as a stud dog & has been used since then(after my boy was diagnosed). No restrictions are imposed on his offspring even though he is at best a  carrier & at worse an asymptomatic affected dog who will produce at best carriers in his puppies to spread the SHM. I've been castigated for having my dog scanned because he has no symptoms & for publicly stating that his brother's owners are irresponsible for using him unscanned at stud.

It is not just the testable problems like eyes & hearts but also the unseen internal problems. Even a dog screened clear by MRI may develop SHM at a later date.

Cavaliers should not be bred from before they are 3 & shouldn't be bred from until they have been MRI scanned for SHM.

Every living Cavalier has at least one(if not more)lines to a known carrier of SHM & this is why a responsible breeder will put restriction on the registration of puppies. Unless of course you want to have to pay£1,000 plus for a screened clear three year old dog ,of course, as a pet

Edited to add Of course you will know all about MRI scanning as your bitch will be clear I presume as you have already attempted to  breed from her

You are showing typical signs of the novice want to be breeder sadly.   If we could judge peoples characters so easily then why do we have court cases in the 100s for fraud etc etc. Don't judge a book by it's cover  saying works both ways.

You said you don't have a puppy bitch but you have a dog of either sex that you had indeed bred together. 

If you start off in your breed with such negativity to genuine breeders you won't get the help you very much need.

Sorry got you mixed up with the person who has a 16 week bitch pup.

Breeding quality pups responsibly takes a lot of knowledge and commitment that is more than most owners have.

So anyone looking to protect their own lines reputation, the breeds health and welfare will seek to ensure before anyone breeds that they are armed with everything they will need to do this properly, hence the endorsements.

These links may help to explain and take away any personal issue,

http://www.dogplay.com/GettingDog/breedercomparison.htm

http://www.dogplay.com/Breeding/index.html

As for breeders not wanting competition, if you mean in the showring, then I can't see that as any breeder wants to see pups they bred do well in the ring, it is the breeding that is remembered not the ownership.

As for profiting from breeding the occasional litter, only those who cut corners have little outlay or upkeep costs are likely to do so.

This would not be the case with breeders that spend thousands showing/working their dogs to prove their worth for breeding, spending money importing new stock, and of course the not inconsiderable cost of keeping a minimum of 4 or more dogs just to keep a line alive.

> i would feel peeved if i didnt make any money. but thats just my opinion<

Trying to say this as nice as I can BUT Sally it is just as well a lot of good breeders don't think like you. Every litter I have had has actually cost me more for the pup I have kept that ANY I have bought in WHY never because of money , BUT because I get pick of the litter, the most potential show puppy in the litter.

My breed has very few puppies, may last litter was a singleton with a c section and the one before that a litter of 3. Travelled many a mile to the stud, because I work whenever I have a litter I pay full time help.

Anyone who can't get their head around that shouldn't be breeding.

I am going to be honest and tell you I actually do not like to breed but I need to build my line.  I also always run on a few puppies. Never in a hurry to sell them. They are worth more to me.

I put endorsements on my puppies. If they pass the relevant health tests and if they are worthy of breeding from (I stipulate that it should not just be my opinion, but a "breed expert" judge) then the restriction will be lifted. I have recently had a litter of 9 which is a different line from anything else in the world so I do not want that line bred from unless they can have a positive effect on the breed I love. This cannot be determined when they leave me at 8 weeks old, so the endorsement is put on their registrations. I feel I have the right to protect the lines I have worked long and hard to create, and if I have made a mistake then others should not have to take responsibility for my mistakes after they have bred a litter.

I must admit it does prove that people are responsible and do care where their dogs, I did go to see a litter a while back of ckc, and was horrified the pups where out the back in a dodgie shed and they coward away from me, wen't even socialised i think he had about ten or more adult dogs all in one large pen with a shed attached clearly doing it for money not love.  When i asked what he was feeding them on he replied, a bit of bread and milk in the morning COWS MILK, and they what evers in the sale tin food...........I felt so sorry for the pup but i knew if by handing the money over then i was almost accepting what he was doing, above all we all want a health dog that can live out a happy life with us not one that is plauged with health and mental problems.  So i did walk away but it did really upset me.

How about the export endorsement? Does it have to be the breeder only who can lift it? And would it count if you only wanted the dog to go abroad for a few months and then come back, not to be exported for life?

Hi LucyD, the restriction doesn't actually stop you taking the dog abroad, just registering it with a foreign kennel club.

But don't you have to register it with the foreign club if you want to show it? Sorry, didn't make it clear that's what I was considering! :-)

The breeding endorsement makes me laugh really. Ultimately, its not going to stop anyone breeding from a bitch - only registering the pups with the KC.

If someone is of a mind to breed in a few years time chances are they will do it regardless and register the pups with the DLC.

It means nothing IMO :)

The breeding endorsement makes me laugh really. Ultimately, its not going to stop anyone breeding from a bitch - only registering the pups with the KC.

Surely it is better than NOTHING. At least the breeder and the KC has then done what they can, bar neutering the pups before sold. I know with cats that I have had MANY people change their minds about buying a kitten off me they SWORE was for a pet only, when they discovered it was registered as non active so could not have progeny registered. So it certainly does do some good. Why laugh, would you have prefered the KC to NOT have the endorsemets available? How would that help?

No, the KC has NOT done all it can. If it was doing it all it should then it would insist hip scoring and hereditary testing is done on parents before allowing pups to be registered.

It would also insist on independent assessment of the dogs to make sure they're of a good enough standard to breed from before their progeny could be registered.

And you'd still get people saying 'I don't need all of that.  I only want a pet.  And I'm going to breed mine when it has a season and I'm going to breed pets for other people who don't want to show!' Grrrr

Oh yes, that hugely insulting "I'm only going to breed pets" - as though 'pets' are somehow a lesser form of life, and their owners don't deserve the best.

No, the KC has NOT done all it can. If it was doing it all it should then it would insist hip scoring and hereditary testing is done on parents before allowing pups to be registered.

Have to agree with you there, definitely. They can do it in other countries so why not here?! But it still would not make any difference if people wanted to breed and were determined, NOTHING would except having the pups neutered before they are sold and I hope that day will not reach the UK.

The KC is a bit of a mystery to me. Really, its just a dog show regulator as far as I can see - so its no wonder some folk don't take registration seriously.

If the KC registration was a validation of a responsible and ethical breeder, with health tests that pass the standards set by them - then I might start to take it seriously and it might be worth something.

THEN there would be a big difference between a freead puppy and a KC reg puppy :)

Hi ChloeH, ethical breeders can only do their best, and I'm sorry that our best efforts make you laugh.
I doubt that many people have even heard of the DLC and think if they will register pups from dogs that have breeding restrictions on their registrations, then they are acting unethically.

Please read the post :) I said breeding endorsements make me laugh - not the people who use them. The fact is that if someone really wants to breed endorements are not going to stop them. Better to place the puppies with decent owners in the first place.

Hi ChloeH, I'm sorry if I misinterpreted your post. 
Placing pups with "decent owners" and using endorsements are not mutually exclusive!   I, like most of the breeders I know, spend literally hours speaking to potential puppy owners, finding out as much about them as possible and trying to ensure that they are suitable owners for our pups and that they understand about the implications of the endorsements.  Like I have already stated, we can only do our best.

>The breeding endorsement makes me laugh really. Ultimately, its not going to stop anyone breeding from a bitch - only registering the pups with the KC.<

Hi Carla, :-)

It is a start though. With education through forms like this we discourage people from  ever buy puppies that are not registered and though time it won't stop them all but it will help.

It also helps protect peoples lines and reputation.

I know it isn't the same example but if put criminals in jail it stops some of them reoffending some other will commit crimes regardless but we have to try.

For in it is a first initial screening .. a puppy enquirer would always be told of the endorsements you can almost tell right away from that conversation how genuine they are but their reaction to the endorsements.

No tool is perfect but in a things in life we have to work with what we have until someone creates a better method and we have got it through to the public.

I do agree with you though I think the KC and all the dog papers OWE some kind of responsibility to help promote good breeding.  I think they should be obligated to put ads in papers etc , they make enough money out the public to justify it.

I don't know how it works in all countries Lucy, but checked with the Swedish KC (they tend to follow the same as other FCI countries). The dog does NOT have to be registered with them, BUT it has to exist in their own database. To do that all you do is send them a copy of your registration certificate (provided it is from a KC recognised by them. No dodgy ones, LOL.) It's similar here isn't it, where foreign exhibitors need an Authority to Compete number.

And if it is a champion they require to see the certificate for that.

this is again where I get cross with our KC.

Other KC's registrations certificates are combined with a pedigree.

We have to pay extra to get one, and most of us can procuce better and more meaningful/persoanlised ones ourselves.

I think our Registraion certificates are horrible, especially the breeders ones (I understand after shelling out the transfer fee that new owners get a nicer one) but what we get for our £12 is horid and covered in advertising.

Th4e font is smal and hard to read, lots of wasted white space, no proper place for the BVA eye test stamps etc, so you end up with a very defaced certificate after a couple of years.

i agree with that Brainless, if we keep a puppy we get the one covered in adverts how do we get the nice one, pay another £10 for it ,so it ends up costing us £22 ?