A friend of my daughters  has just bought a gorgeous KC reg puppy.  The puppy came with paperwork and is in good health and obviously came from a good home. 
My question is, when you purchase a KC reg puppy, are they meant to be born more or less perfect? Im asking this because the puppy has an umbilical hernia.  I thought that surely the puppy should not have been sold with one.  The breeder didnt tell my daughters friend the puppy had a hernia, he discovered it when he got him home. Also he had not been docked or had his dew claws removed.
The puppy was not cheap either £450.

I would have thought the breeder should have informed him of the hernia ,though in most cases they dont prove to be big problem , it wouldnt be docked unless it was classed as a "working dog " as it is now illegal to dock dogs unless it is going to be worked , has he been back to the breeder and mentioned the hernia ? as for dew claws not all breeders remove them

A good puppy contract should cover things like this, unless the hernia is really bad they do tend to sort themselves out. I wouldn't consider £450 for a puppy to be expensive or at least in our breed it isnt if all health test are done on parents etc..

KC registration does not mean anything else but that the dog's ancestry is recorded as genuine, as are any health testing results for the parents. (Tests like eye testing, hip scores etc for the parents are printed on the registration certificate. Not all tests for all breeds are included though, it depends on what tests are on the official KC schemes.) It can be compared to car registration -it does not guarantee perfection.

I don't know what breed it is but £450 would be very cheap for most breeds, I'd say the average price for a wellbred pet puppy of most breeds is from £600 upwards. I'd almost be suspicious at how cheap it was to be honest.

Anyone can KC reg any pup as long as the parents are also KC reg.  It means nothing and carries no guarantees with it regarding health. You don't even have to have the health checks done on the parents ( a bone of contention with me ) to register pups. Just pay your £12 and its done

As said, docking is illegal now, unless a working dog.
Hernia should have been mentioned, most don't cause problems but its usually an hereditary problem. If the pups just a pet, should be fine. If the dog was bought for breeding purposes I would be asking more questions.

There are a few points here I think. 

>My question is, when you purchase a KC reg puppy, are they meant to be born more or less perfect?

I wonder if this question came out right?  There is nothing that can guarantee puppies are born perfect. 

>I thought that surely the puppy should not have been sold with one. The breeder didnt tell my daughters friend the puppy had a hernia

It sounds as if the big question is regarding the 'quality' of the breeder.  Most good breeders would have explained the possibility of hernias quite early in the discussions, even before birth if they were on the waiting list.  They are certainly something for a prospective owner to be aware of.  I would have thought that the potential owner should have been shown the hernia and had a chance to discuss the type of hernia, the medical options etc before bringing the puppy home.  The fact that this didn't happen reflects badly on their choice of breeder.

The one area where you can get some assurance of quality is by choosing a good and knowledgable breeder.  Although some breeders will expect their potential owners to have done some research on the breed beforehand, others go out of their way to fill in the gaps.  Where the breed has been previously docked the breeder will explain the new rules.  Did your daughters friend really expect that she was getting a docked puppy?   If she was misled by the breeder she may have some redress but it could be argued that she should have known the law - an interesting point I'd think.   Also cost is no guarantee of quality but I'd expect to pay twice that amount for another of my breed...

There are breeds where the breeder is more likely to mention that the pup does not have a hernia and to have one is the norm, we do not know the breed so we can't say if this is the case in this breed.

No puppy is born perfect, it just does not happen, registration just means that the pup is from registered parents and you should be able to follow the pups lines and breeders back and also enquire into the health of the pups ancestry.

Even not knowing the breed I would have thought that the fee charged was right at the bottom of what you would expect to pay for a pure breed pup.

Hernias can occur for several reasons - in some breeds they're more common than not. They also come in different degrees of seriousness - a small fatty lump at the umbilicus is harmless and won't affect the dog's well-being in any way. A larger hernia might need repair at some stage; either way the breeder should have pointed it out (and the buyer should have found it when they were handling and checking the puppy).

Unless the puppy is a working gundog or terrier then he wouldn't have been docked - it's illegal; and removal of dewclaws is optional.

£450 is at the bottom end of the price range for a well-bred puppy whose parents had had all the required health tests.

I have a pedigree dog with a hernia (small), I was told about it when I bought her and still paid more than the £450 to have health tested KC registered pup.  Price depends on breed and may have been reduced due to the problem.

My daughters friend didnt mind the puppy being un-docked :-)
Yes he is very familiar with the breed :-) We have 4 of them :-) ESS
Thanks for all your help regarding my HERNINA question and KC REG. I will pass on the information you have given me to him :-)
Thanks again.

> Yes he is very familiar with the breed :-) We have 4 of them :-) ESS

Was your daughter's friend not aware of the regulations regarding the illegality of tail docking?

everyone I know including myself do not agree with tail docking.  It was unfortunate that when we bought our first male ESS he was already docked and so was our bitch when we bought her.  Our 3rd ESS was not docked :-) And none of the puppies I have bred were docked.
Well if only you could see the puppies I have bred and homed, you could see that they didnt have to be born to prance around in a ring at Crufts!!!!!
Sorry I wont bother you anymore, im off to find a forum that love their dogs for what they are. 
Improving the breed?  Did any of you see the prograrmme last year about KENNEL CLUB DOGS, and they were breeding King Charles Spaniels to make their heads smaller, and their brains were then TOO BIG for their skulls. And they wanted to destroy a Rodesion Ridgeback because he didnt have the RIDGE on his back!!!!!!!!! Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!

> everyone I know including myself do not agree with tail docking. 

In that case, why were you complaining that the puppy had not been docked?   Or do I take it that you object to a friend buying a KC registered puppy when you breed unregistered puppies???? 

Puzzled as to why you think anyone would breed a ESS to prance most people do their best to stop them doing just that and would never breed to encourage that sort of behaviour.

As to your other remarks I would learn not to believe everything you read or see published in the media.

is this actually db posting or an id theft, profile shows they joined nearly 2 years ago and they are on 2 stars, how did they miss all the hoo hah about 'poisonous productions' and that programme?????????
Chris

You do have a point we may have a takeover here, it does seem almost impossible to think a member would not notice.

db,as you are discussing hereditary problems-when you bred the puppy with the cleft palate did you breed from the parents again? Just interested.

>Sorry I wont bother you anymore, im off to find a forum that love their dogs for what they are.

Mmm hernias an' all

I'm sure you can forgive some questioning here.  You do appear to be drawing lines and connections where there are none:

You seemed to be under the illusion that a KC registration was a guarantee that pups would be born free from defects.  You also questionned whether a breeder should sell a puppy without explaining a hernia to it's potential owner.  You had good answers to both of these questions.  You also got some clarification regarding the legality of docking. 

Why do you assume that this help or information has been given to you by non dog lovers??!  Who on earth do you think we are and what does it have to do with Crufts or that ruddy programme.  How odd.  Do you really think that those of us who've chosen to help answer your questions don't care about our dogs.  Please do not equate the breeders you've spoken with on here to that type of breeder that your daughters friend used.  Everyone who took the time to answer you has said that breeder (puppy producer) was not right to withold this hernia information.

As expected there was some eyebrow raising when it transpired that you yourself had bred dogs - and ought to know that nothing guarantees the birth of perfect puppies.  Also that you might have been in a position to help your daughters friend learn about hernias, find a good breeder, or at least reassure them once they'd made their decision.  People in glass houses...

Did any of you see the prograrmme last year about KENNEL CLUB DOGS, and they were breeding King Charles Spaniels to make their heads smaller, and their brains were then TOO BIG for their skulls.

Yes, those of us in dogs know all about this programme including that the CAVALIERS (NOT King Charles, that is an altogether different breed) shown actually being ill were from pet breeders much like yourself, NOT from show breeders who do all the health testing. I've just lost my own Cavalier, he was 15 years and 2 months old, and I am in the process of buying a pup from the same breeder. Parents tested for everything they should be including MRI scanning to show they do not have Syringomyelia. Again it is the pet breeders who do not health test that cause the problems -which is why I would never dare to buy a pup from a breeder who does not show or seriously work their dogs.

What an odd reply. If you breed ESS then you should be aware of the tail docking laws and that KC registration doesn't guarentee a perfect puppy. I assume as your pups aren't docked then i would imagine you aren't breeding them for working purposes or show purposes as you say you don't show (both show and working english springers are KC registered too by the way - so fit for purpose) then you are purely breeding for the pet market, adding to the over population of dogs in this world without breeding for a purpose, i.e. to improve the breed. I can't really see that you can start preaching to this forum that we are not dog lovers. I personally don't breed or show, but i have no problem with those that do it properly.
Surely as your friend bought the puppy from a good home, didn't want it docked and says it is healthy and fairly cheap i really can't see the problem. There is no such thing as a perfect puppy as mother nature has a way of stepping in, but a good breeder strives to get healthy pups as much has they can.

ooooohhhhhh its a troll!

> ooooohhhhhh its a troll

I don't think so, just from previous postings, just someone who I would personally call an irresponsible breeder.

> irresponsible breeder

Troll, Irrisponsible breeder

Tomatoe, Tomato  ;)

I am tired at the moment and am probably a bit tetchy as well as upset but I am really angry at this irresponsible breeder making stupid comments about all we are interested in is running a dog around Crufts. A friend of mine with a small gundog breed had her first litter a week Sunday. One pup just would not suckle and she struggled from day one with no weight gain. I have been up to her house every single day trying to bring as much experience as I could muster to help this little one along. I have not had many litters myself but had a bit more savvy than they have (we all no what it is like having your first litter). The pups have been to the Vets to be checked so we knew it wasn't a cleft palate but still struggled to get her to feed. She has been to the Vet since and was given AB's and rehydration. 4 am Sunday morning (one whole week later) got a phone call of desperation and tears so of course I went and when I got there I realised that there was nothing else we could do for her as she was gasping at this point. We just sat and cuddled her for comfort until she passed at 7.45am. Then of course you end up reading of this person pontificating about her breeding with untested, unregistered pups, but of course she loves them!!!. Yes I am angry. This pup wasn't going into the showring but it didn't stop us fighting every inch of the way with her. As you all say TROLL.

Maybe not a troll but someone totally and utterly misguided especially by a certain TV programme!

It's cost me so far for one of my girls £700 in health tests before she's even been bred from.  She enjoys rolling around in mud and whatever else she thinks is wonderful.  SHe also enjoys being shown, though she's a total nutter.

Yes, those of us in dogs know all about this programme including that the CAVALIERS (NOT King Charles, that is an altogether different breed) shown actually being ill were from pet breeders much like yourself, NOT from show breeders who do all the health testing"


I'm sorry Marianne, but that is simply not true. There was one pet-bred cavalier in the film - the rest were from show-lines. There is no evidence that show-bred cavaliers suffer any less SM than pet-bred ones and please don't forget the dog with SM we filmed winning the Cav Champ Show that the breeder had used profligately at stud despite being told never to breed from the dog by the vet who scanned him.

I agree with you that pet-breeders often don't health-test (although many individual pet-owners have now had their dogs scanned) but it's also been a real battle to get top breeders to test for SM.  This is now changing but there are still top cavalier breeders who continue to ignore the breeding guidelines. Indeed at the recent AGM the Club has just dismissed a proposal that members of the Committee should set an example by adhering to the guidelines.

Jemima

I'm sorry Marianne, but that is simply not true. There was one pet-bred cavalier in the film - the rest were from show-lines. There is no evidence that show-bred cavaliers suffer any less SM than pet-bred ones and please don't forget the dog with SM we filmed winning the Cav Champ Show that the breeder had used profligately at stud despite being told never to breed from the dog by the vet who scanned him.

Show lines and show breeders are two very different things indeed! You can have show lines in puppy farmed dogs. The BIS winning dog presumably had no symptoms of SM (have no idea but it would be my guess) as surely otherwise people would have seen symptoms -and as the official advice, having come via Clare Rusbridge, is that even a D can be bred to an A -do we know for certain this isn't the case? That he was a D mating As?

Jemima

I appreciate you feel the need to clarify points and defend your programme however it's not terribly helpful in this topic.  Did you read the entire thread and the other posts from the OP?

She has some alarming ideas about KC registrations guaranteeing that pups will be born perfect.  She also seemed to lack any understanding about the differences between a health check and a health test.

Whilst I understand your wish to correct facts relating to your work, could you not also take the time to reinforce the positive messages we are trying to give this user about how she could do things differently to improve the health of her pet bred puppies or help her friend choose a breeder who will.  She somehow felt that quoting your programme gave weight to her argument for breeding from an unregistered bitch with no health tests.  Is that really a message you wish to support?

She somehow felt that quoting your programme gave weight to her argument for breeding from an unregistered bitch with no health tests.  Is that really a message you wish to support?

No of course not. That the bitch is unregistered is not a big issue for me, but health tests clearly something I care very deeply about - as I think is evident in my reply to Marianne B.

Jemima

> That the bitch is unregistered is not a big issue for me, but health tests clearly something I care very deeply about

Registration is important as without it you do not have traceable/verifiable health data for the ancestors. 

Having the parents health tested is good (you ahve to start somewhere), but of little value if you do not have testing information for the generations that have gone before as for many conditions (HD as a main example) it is the overall picture one needs to look for with few issues having a black and white answer as you get with the new DNA tests for things with simple modes of inheritance.

Yes, you're right, KC registration does offer traceability (and, to come, hopefully a lot more health safeguards/info).  I had in mind working dogs who do have pedigrees/well-documented info without being KC-reg'd.

Jemima

Hi MarianneB
I dont show my Cavalier, we did try but she genuinely didnt like it, but I have just had a litter from her.
I have taken the time, effort and money to make sure that she has had her health tests...thankfully all have come back clear as have all the stud dogs tests or I would never have bred her. I dont begrudge spending any amount on testing her as long as she is fit and healthy and happy.
I know this wasnt aimed at me personally, but, not all pet owner/breeders ignore the health tests that need doing. I love my dog and I will continue to health test her and any other that we may get in the future.

ETS
I meant to add that the parents and grandparents have also been tested on both sides.