Showing Dogs With Structural Faults

[Topoftheheap]

When I say 'major structural fault' I mean something like Hip displaysia or patella luxation, not a slight under angulation, or a hock that's not quite let down enough. I mean major things!!!!!! Not slightly cowhocked, not a slight dip in topline, MAJOR things, like at graded patella luxation, or Hip Displaysia, something that greatly affects not only the show quality movement, but also the dogs general well being.

I have seen and heard of all these situations, and Im just wondering what the general consensus is out there. Please be honest, , I don't want to judge, I just want to see what the general consensus in the dog world is at the moment. Am not attacking or criticizing ANYONE, am just wondering what is really happening.

Have not put in show ring or breeders community to get a wider range of responses.

Edited April 24, 2012 by tibbiesby2

[stonecutter]

A quick question - for the first poll item - are the 2nd & last responses the same thing?

[erinonthefarm]

I have a neutered Dobe, he is clear of genetic faults by parentage, but if he developed some sort of structual fault, I would continue to show him so I can continue to learn show craft... I consider it like any other dog sport with skills to be gained so if it was corrected by surgery I would keep entering the shows, doesn't mean judges have to award me with anything.

If I had a entire dog I would look at it the same way but I would never consider breeding.

In the dobes, some things like wobblers and DCM have onset later in life and I would like to see people wait longer before assuming their dogs are good stock to breed from.

[ellz]

I can't vote. The second category doesn't fit my criteria.

Yes, I would show a dog with a slip or mild HD. In some breeds it cannot be avoided and in some dogs, the problem is so mild it doesn't affect them. I can name a few dogs in a couple of breeds which are multi BIS winners and their issues were not even discovered until the time came to think about breeding them and their hip (or elbow) scores came back as not-quite-expected.

Which leads me to the second category. Would I show a dog which has been surgically repaired. No, but only because anything which is severe enough to require surgical intervention shouldn't be shown, not necessarily because showing a dog with a fault is wrong.

Would I breed from such an animal. Most probably not (certainly haven't until now but don't have a crystal ball) but would depend upon the actual dog, the circumstances, the issue and the severity of the issue. Not every skeletal issue is hereditary.

Edited April 20, 2012 by ellz

[Dogsfevr]

No dog is perfect

[Diva]

No dog is perfect

This. I don't think I'd show a dog with a major structural fault as movement is so important to my breed. But if I did I'd expect it to be judged accordingly. However I might breed a carrier of a genetic fault to a genetically clear dog depending on the fault, the mode of inheritance, my ability to be completely certain that the mating could not produce an affected animal, and if I was sure any carriers produced could be identified by DNA and their future breeding prospects managed accordingly. If it was a disease with a complicated or poorly understood mode of inheritance and no reliable test, and which materially impacted on a dog's quality of life, then no, no way.

Edited to add - I wouldn't show a surgically altered dog.

Edited April 21, 2012 by Diva

[mita]

No dog is perfect

This. I don't think I'd show a dog with a major structural fault as movement is so important to my breed. But if I did I'd expect it to be judged accordingly. However I might breed a carrier of a genetic fault to a genetically clear dog depending on the fault, the mode of inheritance, my ability to be completely certain that the mating could not produce an affected animal, and if I was sure any carriers produced could be identified by DNA and their future breeding prospects managed accordingly. If it was a disease with a complicated or poorly understood mode of inheritance and no reliable test, and which materially impacted on a dog's quality of life, then no, no way.

Edited to add - I wouldn't show a surgically altered dog.

This makes sense to me.

[espinay2]

Agree no dog is perfect. If we threw every dog out of the ring that had a structural 'issue' there wouldnt be too many left.

I suggest for those who haven't read it getting hold of Pat Hastings book 'Structure in Action' as well as her 'Puppy Puzzle' DVD.

IMO there are differences between showing a dog and breeding it.

I have shown a dog with HD (via x-ray and scoring), and yes she gained her Ch title. She was desexed when she was retired from the ring and not bred from.

I will not (knowingly) show a dog that is lame.

Re the second question - I wanted to say 'no' but did not like the way the no answer was worded (as I chose a yes answer for the first). I was therefore complelled to say I would show in neuter, even though I most likely would not show a dog after surgery.

[Bjelkier]

Agree no dog is perfect. If we threw every dog out of the ring that had a structural 'issue' there wouldnt be too many left.

I suggest for those who haven't read it getting hold of Pat Hastings book 'Structure in Action' as well as her 'Puppy Puzzle' DVD.

IMO there are differences between showing a dog and breeding it.

I have shown a dog with HD (via x-ray and scoring), and yes she gained her Ch title. She was desexed when she was retired from the ring and not bred from.

I will not (knowingly) show a dog that is lame.

Re the second question - I wanted to say 'no' but did not like the way the no answer was worded (as I chose a yes answer for the first). I was therefore complelled to say I would show in neuter, even though I most likely would not show a dog after surgery.

Exactly.

Why does it matter if the dog is shown?

Provided it's not showing it's issues in the ring or bred from and passing on it's issues why can't the owner/breeder enjoy their time out with the dog?

There is no such thing as a perfect dog.

[Crisovar]

Espinay has nailed it, there are huge differences between showing and breeding.

Not every dog that graces the show ring should be bred from, it is the choices that Breeders make that should be the most important, not the decisions of Judges. Every litter leaves a legacy for future generations.

[RubyBlue]

I have a neutered Dobe, he is clear of genetic faults by parentage, but if he developed some sort of structual fault, I would continue to show him so I can continue to learn show craft... I consider it like any other dog sport with skills to be gained so if it was corrected by surgery I would keep entering the shows, doesn't mean judges have to award me with anything.

If I had a entire dog I would look at it the same way but I would never consider breeding.

In the dobes, some things like wobblers and DCM have onset later in life and I would like to see people wait longer before assuming their dogs are good stock to breed from.

I need a like button for this. I want a go at showing not to win just to have a go and experience it. I think you need to be involved in a sport to be able to learn and understand it. I currently have no idea (or at least only an outsiders idea) of what goes on, what is looked for what is considered good etc. I have no interest in breeding.

On a completely different note - I dont understand why you need mains registered dogs to show. As has been pointed out a few times there is a difference between showing and breeding. You dont need mains reg to enter your dog in any other dog sport....(to my knowledge).

What makes sense to me is that all dogs start off life on the limited register then following successful campaign of whatever sort and health tests an application can be made for that dog be transferred to mains to be bred from. I think that might stop a lot of people who have a family pet (on mains reg) who have no goals for the breed, breeding it just because they can. There seem to be a lot of ads on DOL that look like they might have come out of that situation.

[Dogsfevr]

Ethical breeders sell potential pups on mains,there are many wonderful dogs out there on limited reg too because there weren't enough show homes BUT when done correctly & for all the right reasons

mains V limited does define its purpose.

No good breeder wants there pets shown,even for gaining experience the quality of the dog carries that breeders prefix in the ring & is assessed by the judge & peers .

If a dog is on limited because it wasn't going to make the grade as a show dog then it shouldn't be shown .

[newfsie]

It says major structural fault, so i would not have it in a breeding program or show it......

I know in my chose breed there are some breeders using dogs they should not use, which is worrying.....

[megan_]

So colour is a greater fault than HD? I'd love to know which breeds can't avoid getting HD

[mita]

Agree no dog is perfect. If we threw every dog out of the ring that had a structural 'issue' there wouldnt be too many left.

I suggest for those who haven't read it getting hold of Pat Hastings book 'Structure in Action' as well as her 'Puppy Puzzle' DVD.

IMO there are differences between showing a dog and breeding it.

I have shown a dog with HD (via x-ray and scoring), and yes she gained her Ch title. She was desexed when she was retired from the ring and not bred from.

I will not (knowingly) show a dog that is lame.

Yes, yes and yes.

I have a p/b little dog with a luxating patella & I regard it as insignificant next to her outstanding looks, temperament & general health.

Offer me millions for her....& it'd be No Sell!

And I'm eternally grateful to her breeder....for letting me have her.

[SkySoaringMagpie]

By major structural fault you mean a medical condition that without medical intervention means that the dog is lame or would quickly become lame if worked at its original purpose?

We're excluding from this dogs that might be a bit cow-hocked or have a straight front or flat feet etc etc?

The options you have don't fit the considerations I would apply, but like Diva one thing I wouldn't do is show a dog after surgery that arose not from injury or disease, but its birth conformation. Because that's cheating.

Would I show a dog whose hocks were a bit high or whose feet were a bit loose? Yes, providing its other attributes were of sufficient quality to mean that the overall picture was one of quality. No dog is perfect.

If you're up against a dog that has been surgically altered I think you make a quiet note not to use it yourself and you wait for time to take care of it while doing your best to beat it. Because it's extremely unlikely that you will ever have the proof needed to prove a formal complaint. And it really is a put up or shut up kind of thing, while there are dogs that are surgically altered there are also a lot of sour exhibitors.

[Angeluca]

People blast us newbies when we say we have a dog we'd one day love to breed from and this would be a foundation.

Then get millions of question and statements why we shouldn't! Has that dog got any titles what makes it a good example of breed ect ect ect!

We go through all the test and raise it so it perfect in temperament. But get told by some not all that we should not breed a dog whom does not have a title!

A part from witnessing a judge choose a dog over another because the owner was a judge of her dogs class in hope that they would too return the favor. This proves that there are some out there who Show substandard dogs and occasionally win over dogs whom are great in health and conformation?

I don't hold any prejudice against the dogs or the people that show these dogs. Just the statements that dogs should have titles before being bred! And I won't show because i'm not into it and do not believe a dog needs a title to be a prime example of breed.

Edited April 22, 2012 by Angeluca

[helen]

Not sure what you mean about the postive DNA result. All DNA tests that I know about (and there are no tests for my breed) give one of three results, affected, carrier or clear.

This is my understanding - Affected cannot be bred, carrier can be bred to clear, and clear can be bred to clear or carrier. These breedings will not produce an affected dog and are considered to be safe. If clear is bred to clear the pups will be clear by parentage and do not need to be tested.

[Steve]

A dog show historically was supposed to be the judging of the dog as it appears to the sight of a judge on the day fo how it stacked up against the breed standard.

It was a good system as long as everyone knew and understood that this was all it was and that before any dog regardless of whether it had been shown or if it had a title had to be considered for the health, temperament and structure as well. These things need to be judged by vets and experts as they are things which can change and cant be seen to the human who is standing in the middle of a show ring.

We had some choices when pedigreed dogs exposed hit [ or even before that ] - we could have said back off you lot - we are only judging the dog on how it looks to a judge on the day and all the other stuff will be judged by someone who is considering breeding via other veterinary judging methods. We could have picked up the education of breeders to tell them that in case they didn't know you shouldn't judge a dog suitable only based on how it has fared in the ring and you need to be honest and open and share these things to enable those selecting dogs for breeding to make informed decisions. We could have smacked the judges and ensured they understood the standards better and how to judge them away from extremes.

Dogs were never meant to be judged in a show ring for whether they had crook hips unless they showed the symptom of that on the day - it shouldn't matter whether someone shows a dog with a structural fault as long as anyone looking at the dog for breeding knows what the fault is and what it may bring to the gene pool. As long as everyone understands the dog is only judged on the breed standard at that venue and not to consider only that all is well .

So if someone wants to show a dog which has a structural fault as long as they are up front about it and anyone looking at the dog or one of its close relatives for breeding has that information - where is the problem if its judged in a show ring ?

[Jumabaar]

Not sure what you mean about the postive DNA result. All DNA tests that I know about (and there are no tests for my breed) give one of three results, affected, carrier or clear.

This is my understanding - Affected cannot be bred, carrier can be bred to clear, and clear can be bred to clear or carrier. These breedings will not produce an affected dog and are considered to be safe. If clear is bred to clear the pups will be clear by parentage and do not need to be tested.

In some breeds Affected may be bed to clear to produce carriers. Its important that this happens in numerically small breeds to prevent excessive loss of genetics.

In breeds where problems are not yet testable I would be putting away semen in the hopes of a test at some point in the future to prevent loss of genetic material in the mean time.

I would show a dog with structural faults that were not symptomatic. To me showing is a social event where I get to look at the good and bad of the breed. Some problems can be managed with appropriate exercise- such as patella issues where the muscles on the leg can be built up to hold the patella more securely in place. I wouldn't show a dog that had surgical correction. Not sure about a dog who had surgery after an injury though?? If it had an injury because of a predisposition then I wouldn't but after an injury like being hit by something it may be a bit of a grey area???