asal

Ive only seen this once and the entire litter was affected, the vet gave them gluose injections but they all died within 24 hours whatever the cause.

I think owners really need to shop around and dont hesitate to get a second even third opinion. for goodness sake how can any vet justify $99 for a second or third vaccination? we all know places where $40 to $60 is the norm so if you dont call and check first you can discover a heap of difference. recently one had what her owner thought was bladder infection. so choofs off when antibiotics didnt work a ultrasound discovered stones in the bladder. the quote for the op? $600 as owner couldnt afford it she was given back to me, phoned my vet, n quote for same op plus desexing? $400. to his credit the other vet nearly fainted when learned what she was getting her done for and returned half the charge for the ultrasound. makes u wonder doesnt it. same vet who quoted $1600 for patela op on a pup no other vet agreed needed one. so you really do need to ask others before you pay out so much money that quite possibly is not in the best intrests of the pup at all. so beware, as one vet said to me, most of these patella ops are done because they need a next months payment for the new car. I have seen many dogs live long and happy lives with patella without ever needing an op. particuarly in the small breeds like chihuahuas. well remember one lady her first and last litter of 5 pups all with the worst and loosest grade of patella. none had any op and all were still running around at 17 even if they looked like bowlegged jockies once the cartlidge is removed no it dont pop out any more because a groove is cut into it, but arthritis is a given (cut out the cartlidge and so go the growth plates in it) soon as bone begins rubbing on bone. humans get artifical knees. dont see that yet in dogs

I remember when I got my poodle pup, his breeder told me to roll him on his back and pretend to brush him for a few minutes every day lengthing the time hes asked to lay and be brushed. she said it conditions him to the hours that I will be spending as he grows up. it worked a treat. although as he got older at about 11 he would decide at about the half hour mark, time for a break n would give a little growl, times up. it can become quite fun finding little knots you missed first time round, then when you hve them looking all nice styling their coat in different ways. i bought a book on how to do it. my mum bought a standard girl and it was nothing to see mum with tilly sound asleep on the grooming table as mum groomed her .

Is it true that animal welfare groups who rehome are not expected to pay for any later problems that come to the fore as the dogs/cats mature? I know they didnt breed them, but they did sell them. Isnt that the same thing ? A breeder tends to have had to start somewhere yet the breeder of the dogs they bought is not the next on the list for "please explain"

trouble is although as a breeder I would sign people up but trouble is those who dont keep it going if their pup ends up at the vets then its amazing how as the breeder you are asked to chip in if it turns out the pup has developed anything the vet deems heridatory, for example, patella as it grows even though there was no sign of such in it during its first 3 months. in many cases as in the pup i gave away two of three vets did not consider it needed surgery. that pup is only 7 months old the two vets who say no surgery is necessary also point out that surgery at such a young age precludes the very real possiblity of the problem resolving with maturity anyway. ive had two people whose vets have operated on pups before they were 10 months old and expected me to pay because they did not keep their insurance current. none of the ancesters of the three pups I speak of have had any form of patella, in every case they passed all vet checks until after 7 months, yet as the breeder expect to be held responsible for the bills and blame. Ive met one breeder who apparently decided it was less stressful to pay the full first years insurance herself. but that does not remove the guilt of the owners asking you why did u sell me a crippled pup. its no use saying I can only go by what the vet tells me, its a little weird you cop the blame not the vet and subsequent vets who find no fault until the pup matures, they bear no responsibility the buck stops with the fool who bred it. no one else. the reason I am no longer a breeder its not worth the stress. no one wants to hear that you put the best to the best and hope for the best. if you cannot give an ironclad guarantee you are unethical. as any parent can tell you they cant give their unborn child one, yet a puppy buyer expects one? check this story on aging DNA. so even if the parents are clear they can still pass on mutations they dont have themselves anyway http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/241162-the-pitfalls-of-breeding-with-the-older-generation/

a puppy recentl, had developed slight patella in one leg at 7 months checkup. definately my vet said not going to be any problem. except the new owners vet quoted 1800 to 'fix' the patella? got a third opinion which tallied with the first vet. no intervention necessary. so who do u believe anymore? then there the vet who charges $99 for a vaccination???????????? I know a child who was a perfect candidate for knee reconstruction being warned that if its done a knee replacement will eventually be a certainty down the track as any cartlidge removal guarantees arthritis will result eventually, opted to skip surgery and stick to psyhio instead and sound as a bell 10 years down the track???????????

saw this today. real food for thought in light of the push to wait for your dogs to age before breeding from to help eliminate genetic faults. its already known that the mothers aging eggs in older mothers is a direct cause of higher percentage of downs syndrome and goodness knows how many other forms of damaged dna that then becomes inheritable in the offspring. at least human parents cant be sued (yet?) breeders certainly are held accountable seems we just cant win http://www.nature.co...hey-age-1.11247 Nature | News Fathers bequeath more mutations as they age Genome study may explain links between paternal age and conditions such as autism. Ewen Callaway 22 August 2012 In the 1930s, the pioneering geneticist J. B. S. Haldane noticed a peculiar inheritance pattern in families with long histories of haemophilia. The faulty mutation responsible for the blood-clotting disorder tended to arise on the X chromosomes that fathers passed to their daughters, rather than on those that mothers passed down. Haldane subsequently proposed1 that children inherit more mutations from their fathers than their mothers, although he acknowledged that “it is difficult to see how this could be proved or disproved for many years to come”. That year has finally arrived: whole-genome sequencing of dozens of Icelandic families has at last provided the evidence that eluded Haldane. More­over, a study published in Nature finds that the age at which a father sires children determines how many mutations those offspring inherit2. By starting families in their thirties, forties and beyond, men could be increasing the chances that their children will develop autism, schizophrenia and other diseases often linked to new mutations. “The older we are as fathers, the more likely we will pass on our mutations,” says lead author Kári Stefánsson, chief executive of deCODE Genetics in Reykjavik. “The more mutations we pass on, the more likely that one of them is going to be deleterious.” Haldane, working years before the structure of DNA was determined, was also correct about why fathers pass on more mutations. Sperm is continually being generated by dividing precursor cells, which acquire new mutations with each division. By contrast, women are born with their lifelong complement of egg cells. Stefánsson, whose company maintains genetic information on most Icelanders, compared the whole-genome sequences of 78 trios of a mother, father and child. The team searched for mutations in the child that were not present in either parent and that must therefore have arisen spontaneously in the egg, sperm or embryo. The paper reports the largest such study of nuclear families so far. Fathers passed on nearly four times as many new mutations as mothers: on average, 55 versus 14. The father’s age also accounted for nearly all of the variation in the number of new mutations in a child’s genome, with the number of new mutations being passed on rising exponentially with paternal age. A 36-year-old will pass on twice as many mutations to his child as a man of 20, and a 70-year-old eight times as many, Stefánsson’s team estimates. The researchers estimate that an Icelandic child born in 2011 will harbour 70 new mutations, compared with 60 for a child born in 1980; the average age of fatherhood rose from 28 to 33 over that time. Most such mutations are harmless, but Stefánsson’s team identified some that studies have linked to conditions such as autism and schizophrenia. The study does not prove that older fathers are more likely than younger ones to pass on disease-associated or other deleterious genes, but that is the strong implication, Stefánsson and other geneticists say. Previous studies have shown that a child’s risk of being diagnosed with autism increases with the father’s age. And a trio of papers3–5 published this year identified dozens of new mutations implicated in autism and found that the mutations were four times more likely to originate on the father’s side than the mother’s. The results might help to explain the apparent rise in autism spectrum disorder: this year, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, Georgia, reported that one in every 88 American children has now been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, a 78% increase since 2007. Better and more inclusive autism diagnoses explain some of this increase, but new mutations are probably also a factor, says Daniel Geschwind, a neuro­biologist at the University of California, Los Angeles. “I think we will find, in places where there are really old dads, higher prevalence of autism.” However, Mark Daly, a geneticist at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston who studies autism, says that increasing paternal age is unlikely to account for all of the rise in autism prevalence. He notes that autism is highly heritable, but that most cases are not caused by a single new mutation — so there must be predisposing factors that are inherited from parents but are distinct from the new mutations occurring in sperm. Historical evidence suggests that older fathers are unlikely to augur a genetic meltdown. Throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Icelandic men fathered children at much higher ages than they do today, averaging between 34 and 38. More­over, genetic mutations are the basis for natural selection, Stefánsson points out. “You could argue what is bad for the next generation is good for the future of our species,” he says.

saw this today. real food for thought in light of the push to wait for your dogs to age before breeding from to help eliminate genetic faults. its already known that the mothers aging eggs in older mothers is a direct cause of higher percentage of downs syndrome and goodness knows how many other forms of damaged dna that then becomes inheritable in the offspring. at least human parents cant be sued (yet?) breeders certainly are held accountable seems we just cant win http://www.nature.com/news/fathers-bequeath-more-mutations-as-they-age-1.11247 Nature | News Fathers bequeath more mutations as they age Genome study may explain links between paternal age and conditions such as autism. Ewen Callaway 22 August 2012 In the 1930s, the pioneering geneticist J. B. S. Haldane noticed a peculiar inheritance pattern in families with long histories of haemophilia. The faulty mutation responsible for the blood-clotting disorder tended to arise on the X chromosomes that fathers passed to their daughters, rather than on those that mothers passed down. Haldane subsequently proposed1 that children inherit more mutations from their fathers than their mothers, although he acknowledged that “it is difficult to see how this could be proved or disproved for many years to come”. That year has finally arrived: whole-genome sequencing of dozens of Icelandic families has at last provided the evidence that eluded Haldane. More­over, a study published in Nature finds that the age at which a father sires children determines how many mutations those offspring inherit2. By starting families in their thirties, forties and beyond, men could be increasing the chances that their children will develop autism, schizophrenia and other diseases often linked to new mutations. “The older we are as fathers, the more likely we will pass on our mutations,” says lead author Kári Stefánsson, chief executive of deCODE Genetics in Reykjavik. “The more mutations we pass on, the more likely that one of them is going to be deleterious.” Haldane, working years before the structure of DNA was determined, was also correct about why fathers pass on more mutations. Sperm is continually being generated by dividing precursor cells, which acquire new mutations with each division. By contrast, women are born with their lifelong complement of egg cells. Stefánsson, whose company maintains genetic information on most Icelanders, compared the whole-genome sequences of 78 trios of a mother, father and child. The team searched for mutations in the child that were not present in either parent and that must therefore have arisen spontaneously in the egg, sperm or embryo. The paper reports the largest such study of nuclear families so far. Fathers passed on nearly four times as many new mutations as mothers: on average, 55 versus 14. The father’s age also accounted for nearly all of the variation in the number of new mutations in a child’s genome, with the number of new mutations being passed on rising exponentially with paternal age. A 36-year-old will pass on twice as many mutations to his child as a man of 20, and a 70-year-old eight times as many, Stefánsson’s team estimates. The researchers estimate that an Icelandic child born in 2011 will harbour 70 new mutations, compared with 60 for a child born in 1980; the average age of fatherhood rose from 28 to 33 over that time. Most such mutations are harmless, but Stefánsson’s team identified some that studies have linked to conditions such as autism and schizophrenia. The study does not prove that older fathers are more likely than younger ones to pass on disease-associated or other deleterious genes, but that is the strong implication, Stefánsson and other geneticists say. Previous studies have shown that a child’s risk of being diagnosed with autism increases with the father’s age. And a trio of papers3–5 published this year identified dozens of new mutations implicated in autism and found that the mutations were four times more likely to originate on the father’s side than the mother’s. The results might help to explain the apparent rise in autism spectrum disorder: this year, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, Georgia, reported that one in every 88 American children has now been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, a 78% increase since 2007. Better and more inclusive autism diagnoses explain some of this increase, but new mutations are probably also a factor, says Daniel Geschwind, a neuro­biologist at the University of California, Los Angeles. “I think we will find, in places where there are really old dads, higher prevalence of autism.” However, Mark Daly, a geneticist at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston who studies autism, says that increasing paternal age is unlikely to account for all of the rise in autism prevalence. He notes that autism is highly heritable, but that most cases are not caused by a single new mutation — so there must be predisposing factors that are inherited from parents but are distinct from the new mutations occurring in sperm. Historical evidence suggests that older fathers are unlikely to augur a genetic meltdown. Throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Icelandic men fathered children at much higher ages than they do today, averaging between 34 and 38. More­over, genetic mutations are the basis for natural selection, Stefánsson points out. “You could argue what is bad for the next generation is good for the future of our species,” he says.

Because even well trained dogs have a brain fade, or do something naughty when home alone. ooo what an understatement. the neighboourhood was being burgled regularly soooo thought it might be a good idea to leave my australian cattledog in the house. 1. so she was safe from being hurt or baited 2. dog in house might be more off putting to intending burgler. sooo what do i find when i get home? jodie had been doing the wall of death along all the windowsills. the sunroom has fishtanks and dozens of potplants. only took a whole dayto repot the survivors and clean the mess out of the fish tanks.. no fish died amazingly jodi? had a ball, she said

i for one would never go to an offlead park and let my dog loose if others were there, to do so is to acknowledge i am prepared to risk losing my dog if its attacked, fatal injuries can be inflicted in seconds. if i do so choose i wont be posting my poor didums was attacked there either. a group of dogs loose is a potential receipe for disaster as well as fun. its like the surfer who dives into the sea and complains if they hit the bottom and are injoured, that the council is to blame. or dive into a wave and bang into a shark, i was lucky it was a wobigong who didnt retaliate. even wobigong's can bite, especially at such close quarters as that. nor do i pretend diddums couldnt do exactly the same to somone elses either. theres risk assessment and a decision to take or not take such risk. well there was. now its no one seems to take responsibility for bad outcomes anymore.

im sorry if what i said came across as bull bashing, i meant it as the ego centric creatures attracted to what they perceive as an extension of their egos. regardless of which breed is in favour at the time, i knew the pitty would attact these types in droves and time has bourne that out unfortunately, the mentality has selecting for the most savage for future generations a priority, again regardless of the breed of choice. my family had cattledogs before i was born. when there was a litter, the number of people who ask "how savage are the parents" is proof posative this mentality exists all right. a true cattle dog is not savage. it guards its family and their belongings and doesnt go on alert until family or belongings are under threat. never forget at the tip one day, two chaps were walking by the truck, jody was sitting in the passenger seat looking through the open window interestedly watching proceedings, they suddenly realised she was watching them, they suddenly did a huge circle well away from the truck. she hadnt done anything but look at them. huge difference. my parents would NEVER leave two running loose, knowing one would egg the other on to mischief . ALSO all fences were totlly secure, none of their dogs were ever permitted to roam of the property. its good manners and GOOD SENSE. WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO BOTH? P.S.love saffies

It ran onto the road because it was being attacked by the other dogs. So they are directly responsible for the dogs death. The only thing sensational about the title is the reference to pit bulls. The headline actually says "Guide dog killed after being ambushed by pit bulls in Bellfield in Melbourne's northeast" This is true, but what if it was something else that had startled the dog? It wouldn't even have made the news then. Say it was a windy day and there was a tarp that suddenly moved, the dog startled and jumped into the road. My dogs have almost done this on several occasions. What if it had been a golden that suddenly jumped out from behind a corner and startled the dog? Other than the pit bull type dogs involved, it's not even worth reporting. True, but the guide dog was not startled by anything else but 4 dogs, pit bulls or other breed, it doesn't matter what. The fact is that these dogs attacked and mauled a cocker spaniel and then chased the guide dog onto the road. What would have happened if the blind owner was with the guide dog, and not his brother at the time? Why are you making excuses for these brutes whatever their breed happens to be? maybe it was their dogs that did the "startle" ? The behaviour of the 2 attacked dogs is irrelevant. They were on lead, the attacking dog were off lead. The responsibility lies with the attacking dogs owner. Are you saying that the guide dog and the cocker were "asking for it" somehow? curious isnt it, same mentality towards rape victums? no dogs should be allowed to be loose unleashed. full stop. until thats a chargable offence and enforced we will continue to see such tragedie's

until there is muscle and fines sufficient to make sure people actually make sure their dogs ARE under control and not loose this will occur over and over again. one dog can attack, put them in numbers and the gentlest can become something you never imagined possible, even human packs are terrifying. never forget the bondi riots.... its not just dogs in a pack that are dangerous regarless of breed

I never forget the video i saw of a women dog catcher in america being torn to bits by a pit bull she had been sent to catch, the attack was sickening and the dog just kept leaping and ripping at her arms legs body i still cant believe any humane person could film such horror instead of going to the womans aid. that was before even the first pit foot ever landed in australia. it was a guarantee that such dogs would be bought by every ego manic in the country. dogs like that are a magnet for such people, before they were german shepherds, dobermans, rotties and every pig cross imaginable but not until some idiot allowed the importation of the pittie has the massacres become so sickening. although quite a few other breeds pupular with the mafia and such are equally as capable, saw an add for 10 cane corsos pasted in a shop window beside a for sale add for 9 pitties. just written up on sheets of quarto paper. long as there are people whose egos need their tough dog status symbol all are potentially in danger sadly when that lot grow up, whats the odds, more headlines waiting unfortunately.

It ran onto the road because it was being attacked by the other dogs. So they are directly responsible for the dogs death. The only thing sensational about the title is the reference to pit bulls. The headline actually says "Guide dog killed after being ambushed by pit bulls in Bellfield in Melbourne's northeast" This is true, but what if it was something else that had startled the dog? It wouldn't even have made the news then. Say it was a windy day and there was a tarp that suddenly moved, the dog startled and jumped into the road. My dogs have almost done this on several occasions. What if it had been a golden that suddenly jumped out from behind a corner and startled the dog? Other than the pit bull type dogs involved, it's not even worth reporting. True, but the guide dog was not startled by anything else but 4 dogs, pit bulls or other breed, it doesn't matter what. The fact is that these dogs attacked and mauled a cocker spaniel and then chased the guide dog onto the road. What would have happened if the blind owner was with the guide dog, and not his brother at the time? Why are you making excuses for these brutes whatever their breed happens to be? maybe it was their dogs that did the "startle" ?

Ho well Ive made the decision no more a breeder. just gave away my two about to whelp girls to a friend. This was last staw what happend this week. still cant believe it. had the rspca around. some hero of the abused reported me for transporting my dogs 'crammed' in "boxes" in the back of my station waggon and added they looked like they lived in them as well? since when were fully legal carry crates "boxes" for starters. now you can be reported for not having your dogs safely contained during transport and just as legitamatly reported for 'cramming' them into "boxes"? no complaints about the lady inspector . really nice person, but cant take or cope with "the guilty until proven innocent" mentallity that is the general public if you breed, any more. Some potential puppy buyers just are not to be belived are for real. but they are. as one lady asked me "how can you prostitute your fur baby like this?" when I asked her what are you talking about she said "would you sell your grandchild? this is no different?" like what the? she wanted the puppy, she was prepared to buy the puppy, yet she despised me because, to her eyes, I was no better than a prostitute if I could part with the puppy? its weird. Today if you dont keep every puppy you breed a growing percentage out there despise you and report you for any thing, even transporting puppies or parents can get you reported. considering the stringy nightmare has taught me that it doesnt matter that your dog has nothing wrong with it is going to protect either your dog from dozens of unnecessary testing and resulting income (you HAVE TO PAY) EVEN when the testing proves he/she is healthy all costs are at your expense. as the head of the dept of agriculture to whom the rspca is accountable to report their activities for the year. assured me, my dog had now had a complete work up . so this complaint could easily end up with a repeat of the stringy episode if the inspector is another donnelly to decide to "form the opinion" such tests are necessarily in the "best interests" Nope end of the line for me, cant cope risking another being punished for being mine.

I agree, you should not sell to someone just for breeding, or someone who did not believe in the same things as you. But we have been showing now for over 39 years - not just with Cavaliers, with great success at local, interstate and Royal shows. Despite the fact that all the Cavaliers I have owned have eventually turned out sick or suffering from great genetic faults such as patella's I have managed to title 3 of them before they sucumbed to thier diseases. I have never asked for a dog primarily for breeding, but rather to put in the show ring first, and eventually breed with them, IF they turned out to be breeding quality. When approaching the 'top' kennels I have offered to co-own the dog, sign any contract they care to offer me, and even only breed with thier permission regarding what dog and when, etc, etc. I have never been blacklisted, pissed anyone off, am great friends with many in the show world, done ANYTHING dodgy - in fact it would be the opposite. I have had 8 Cavaliers from 6 different breeders that were sold to me on main register, show potential. Because of thier faults (patellas, heart murmurs, etc) I have not bred in my 15 years. Less scrupulous people would of, and if i had a dollar for each time I had been told to 'take my chances' I would be a millionaire! I have been promised throughout those years HUNDREDS of puppies from great bloodlines. I get my hopes up, only to have them dashed. Something ALWAYS happens. Not with dogs, but always with bitches. i understand why, but it is still very frustrating. I WILL NOT breed from crap, unhealthy dogs, or dogs who do not meet my strict requirements, and that has meant I have had nothing to breed from, so really I am NOT a breeder, but just a showie with a big dream. from my limited experience obviously because the show scene does zilch for me. all the people i have met want their dog as a pet. as healthy a pet as possible. I know when i whet shopping for my sister it took me 6 months to find a breeder who ticked the boxes i had written up as must haves. you were incredibly unlucky we were and are very happy with ours. i only know three who actually went on to become breeders, n ive had as i said chihuahua's since 78 i think I have met a few hundred, if not more, happy to be pet owners. my guessamate as to the percentage to end up actually breeding would be something less than 1 in a hundred. so all these others seem to hve met racing to become breeders I have missed meeting.

As for the OP's question, yes they sure are around. no problems with mine, well except for the one the neighbour ran over. sis now has her second pair and they are over 12 months old and she thinks they are awesome, their breeder had heaps of old dogs, descended from the same family as the first two. can i mention the kennel name? Its Pribar, really nice lady

As I learnt the hard way. It wasn't there because they hadn't looked. Once they started dropping dead it was a bit late! my vet was given a litter of cavalier x beagle puppies to rehome. only a few months later one of the litter had syringamyelia dignosed, very distressed and in pain puppy and was put down. so hybrid vigor isnt the be all and end all as the garden knome has been telling us. he also told me its being found in ALL small dogs NOT just cav's, Its just that the Cav's have been the hot topic. has had me wondering if it may be in beagles as well, how many of you are aware thats it is also in humans? last I looked no ones been breeding for small heads in the homo sapien's. So just what is its mode of inheritance really needs a lot more research along with just how widespread it is across not just dog breeds either. Somehow labeling the parents of an affected child as unethical would be hard to get the label to stick as easily as it is to the dog fraternity.

Ho love it. my friend Colin's, Boxer can do the same without needing to carry a stick, his undocked tail is about the same weight and damage capacity as a baseball bat. I learned from experience. You seem to get the same sort of look when trying to explain. yes I've been kneecapped. how? the boxer did it. no not a boxing human. the dog. a boxer dog.. canine dog... his breed is boxer....... ummm dont think they believe me somehow.? how did it? with his tail. nope they think Im not going to admit hubby did it I suspect. maybe you should always take the doggy weapon of mass distruction with you perhaps

Car sense and self preservation from same are two genes we need dna selection testing found soon as possible for, that would be wonderfull, I suspect cars account for more than every other cause of death with this darling dogs. It should be noted on every puppy before purchase, no fence no sale. as for gates maybe all of them should have spring closures just in case they dont latch properly

forgot as another said, look for breeders with old dogs, my sisters dogs grandmum and great grand mum were still with their breeder when they were born and were 11 and 13. miffie lived to 15 and her sisters, champagne to 13, tequila to 14, they did have a 4th sister tiki died only 3, who was run over by a neighbour, who as he said, "I speeded up, but she didnt get out of the way" Unfortunatly I had to watch it unfold as I ran towards her calling her to come back, I saw him run her down too terrified to turn off the drive and get out of the way of his car, when he gunned the motor she lay down and was killed by the passenger wheels. the side gate had been accidently left open and she had ran out and along his driveway as he was leaving for work, he wasnt even running late. That was the hardest to come to terms with. apparently, to stop long enough to let me pick her up wasnt an option. He was my family doctor till that day. To me if you dont have enough humanity to let her live what do you think of your patients?

Realised after a lot of thinking about the topic, if you want the best chance of a healthy pup forget asking does the breeder show. ask are the parents and grandparents checked and have certificates or vet reports to prove it. regarless of whether the breeder has registered parents and grandparents or simply unpapered purebreds. if the breeder cant find a sale for puppys from unchecked and/or un dna'ed parents then they wont be breeding another litter too often would they. as for the kennels who are dead ends , so what, even if the numbers of registered dogs drops to unstainable levels. I realised thats exactly what happened to the Stumpy Tailed Cattledog and the registry began a grading up scheme from the available unregistered Stumpies. so the breed is back on track anyway (by the time the grading up scheme was implemented there was only one registered breeder left in the country so all wont be lost after all. they will just embrace the remining entire purebreds that fit the standard back into a grading up scheme anyway. why didnt i remember that before.. no doom for breeds at all that drop too far in registered numbers...

LOl from what Ive seen the owner is trying to make it clear their staffy isnt a american/pit bull. most of the local shop windows are no longer putting they have pitbulls for sale they are amstaffs now, just not papers of course. thats what bsl has accomplished, just a name change. no thats too simplistic, n the deaths of a lot of innocent dogs

This might be a bit obvious, but doesn't the second point override the third? How can you breed before 5 years of age if they have to be MVD tested until 5 and be clear? I am not a breeder (only a first time dog owner) but is there a maximum age that a dog should have it's first litter by, and is there an age at which it is best to stop breeding at? For a dog, 5 years seems like a long time to wait to have a litter. Part of me wonders how much human intervention has affected certain breeds - in most species it is expected there will be genetic factors that will affect some of the offspring, call it 'natural selection' or genetics or mutations or whatever. Not all offspring will be healthy, live to an old age and be extremely fertile and produce vigorous offspring themselves. To expect perfection is not a reality. For breeders to expect perfection is not a reality. For buyers to expect perfection is not a reality. I know that there has been a lot of good done to eradicate nasty genetics but the fact is, there are genes present in any species or breed that could potentially mutate or recessive genes that may not be "shown" but are being passed on and will in the future generations be "shown" when 2 recessive parents are mated. The reason inbreeding creates problems is that it is more likely that recessive genes end up being "shown" and mated together and carried on to offspring (like the "royals" with haemophilia in times past). Unless you can map the 2 parent's genomes and know every single possible genetic outcome of breeding them you have to take what the luck of the draw is. Breeders can do their best to predict, but none can give any sort of guarantees. Personally, I used a number of website "what breed suits me" quizzes to make a short-list of possibilities from there I did some research and decided that despite a possible short lifespan (compared with other breeds) and possible illness, that the CKCS was indeed the "perfect" breed for us. I think you firstly need to decide the best breed for your circumstances and be prepared for what that breed may entail - health-wise or other, and if you aren't prepared for that then look at another breed. Your observations are just so sensible you make me hope maybe there might be a future. but how to get this message back out there, instead of expecting the impossible from a breeder and deamonising them when the obvious does occur. that is why the phrase exists "put the best to the best and hope for the best" thats reality. as you so well said. The other downer to potential puppy buyers is being constantly told by the self styled "precious ethicals" to ask. "do you show" and cross of the list any breeder, even though a member with registered dogs as a puppy farmer. there is nothing. be it NSW, VIC, QLD, TAS, SA, WA or NT. (NOT yet anyway) in the membership rules of any state canine council, that state to own and breed your main registered dogs they MUST be shown. Yet this is what the self labled "ethicals" are labeling those who choose not to show as "unethical" and what some for decades have used as the reason to justify using the RSPCA (and only too happy to oblidge to the best of thir abilty, as I discovered with Inspector Donnelly) to persecute those who do not agree with them or end up on the black list for whatever reasons, even those who do show,have found themselves on the 'to be purged for the good of the breed list'. nice world the dog show fraternity. there is a way, go back to the bad old days of the 50's and early 70's when everyone worked together and encouraged newbies and each other, freely exchanging bloodlines for the good of the breed instead of just 'their' kennel. even those with all the tests done and proven will not release any but a limit register pup these days, or face the music. one lady I met does sell on main register, the catch being the puppies are already desexed before they go. not much improvement for future generations there but they are great pups and do come with a lifetime guarantee, well for as long as she is a member anyway. LOL