Czech GSD's with bad hips - Page 22

"There are many OFA Excellent and Good dogs that I WOULDN'T breed to because of hips.....now that should really give my detractors some reasons to think I'm unethical....lol."

Laughing right there with you, Gustav. If all there was to breeding sound, healthy dogs was certifications regarding this issue or that, it wouldn't be such a labor of love and sorrow to get it right.

Thank you for making it unquestionably obvious that you do not consider a dysplastic dog [NZ isn't mildly dysplastic, IMO] to be acceptable for breeding or as a law enforcement candidate. 

Slamdunc:That is exactly the reason to pass on litters and breeders where both parents are not OFA'd, Penn Hip, the SV or some other certifying organization.  For the novice puppy buyer be very careful and start to demand that the dogs are not just X-rayed but also submitted to an objective outside agency for review.  Sure, you may miss out on a good dog but the gamble isn't worth it in my opinion.  There are plenty of other great breedings to look at.    

I would apply the above logic to unknown breeders or "breeders" who are selling their first ever experimental litter, with a set of parents who have never been OFAd or X-rayed or otherwise evaluated via some objective professional.  The whole litter in this case is highly suspect and I personally would look elsewhere.   However, with folks like Hans or Jinopo etc who have had literally 1000s of puppies and dogs pass through them, I would apply a totally different yardstick.  I would have no problems in going with their judgement on the litter, which IMO, they would not have bred unless there is some real goodness in it.   Does that mean that an occasional mistake does not happen when we are talking about 1000s of puppies ?  Absolutely not.

"Pet quality" dogs with A1 or "Excellent" rated hips are a dime-a-dozen and IMO, the temperamental degeneration of the breed is directly attributable to choosing those individuals for breeding, over much higher quality dogs who were excluded from the gene-pool due to being classified as "good" or "fair" from a hips perspective, while ignoring everything else that composes the total dog.

Hexe,  
You asume  too much because you make staements  on international forum which insunuate that I would justify breeding dysplastic dogs. Please forgive me but I must ask. Are you drunk? 
 Here is your statement. 
 So I want to 'hear' Gustav say it in the simplest form, so no one can point to his words and try to use them as justification for breeding a dysplastic dog. Because so far, neither he [nor Hans, for that matter] has said anything as simple as this: 

A dysplastic dog is not a candidate for law enforcement work OR for breeding, no matter how slight the dysplasia.

I also did not say that I like vanila shake, old cars and sunsets in Arizona. . Does that mean that I hate  vanila shake, old cars and sunsets in Arizona? Of course not!
In that matter you also have not said that you would not breed dysplastic dogs.  What does that mean?  Noting! Right?   Can you point me to anyone, who would say that they justify breeding dylplastic dogs? Are you serious!?
You are reaching litttle too far into sophistry of logically false statements and personal insults.  
 

aaykay, this has to be one of the most preposterous claims I've EVER read here regarding the 'cause' of temperament changes in the breed:

"Pet quality" dogs with A1 or "Excellent" rated hips are a dime-a-dozen and IMO, the temperamental degeneration of the breed is directly attributable to choosing those individuals for breeding, over much higher quality dogs who were excluded from the gene-pool due to being classified as "good" or "fair" from a hips perspective, while ignoring everything else that composes the total dog.

Not  even a semi-knowledgable breeder would select an OFA Excellent or a1 stud with poor temperament over an OFA Good or Fair/a2 to NZ stud with outstanding temperament...that's simply anecdotal.  If you know of specific breedings where this actually happened, it would be elucidating for everyone here.

No one in this thread ever said that they're okay with mildy or fully dysplasiac dogs. All that was in question from the get go were the mediums that are used to certify hips and elbows and whether these are indeed trustworthy and ultimately beneficial to the breed! Hans and Gustov both stated that they have vets (coupled with their expertise) that they refer their breeding stock to as far as x raying hips and elbows are concerned, their reasoning was that their vets are far more trustworthy than the curruptable OFA or any other "nuetral" medium and I agree with them. I think that they should OFA their stock for the sake of shutting up the critics but I pity anyone that relies on OFA solely. Again...EXPERIENCE, KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERTISE ARE UMATCHED AND TRUMP EVERYTHING OUT THERE. 

To get back on course,....
 OFA was supposedly establish to improve hips in dogs. However 
as far as OFA goes it was so far a 46 years of failed effort.
I believe this is what needs to be done in order  for the OFA to have any serious impact on improvement of hips.
1. all pups should be micro- chipped or tattooed  at 16 weeks this should be done or at least checked by  breed warden. This could be a veterinarian.  
2. All breeding dogs should be DNAd. 
3. X rays of dogs should be done in a cradle which positions the dog perfectly.
4. System similar to German ZVV  should be established .
5. OFA should not destroy x rays but should make them available on internet to  public for evaluation. 
6. For consistency sake the evaluation should be done by one radiologist per breed.  ( That is, same as other points here, a common practice in different registries in Europe) 
7. this point is not realistic but it would be helpful. No prelims should be allowed to be done without sending a copy to OFA for evaluation. That would allow the statistic of HD be accurate. 
8.These records could be kept by AKC, AKC should post this OFA hips evaluation on the pedigrees. 
9. Pups should not be registrable with AKC  unless  both parents are OFAd 
Unless these points are established then  OFA is  not going to do much good in order to improve statistics on HD.  If OFA stays same as is, then the positive results are going to be as is . Non. 

Hans, I most certainly did NOT insinuate that you would justify using a dog that had been found to be dysplastic as a breeding candidate.  I AM telling you that somebody wanting to besmirch your program WILL take a term like 'functional' and claim that it proves you are only concerned about whether the dog can get around, not whether the dog's hips are normal.  A car with a flat tire still has a 'functional' tire--it just doesn't function as well as it is meant to do.  A dysplastic dog's hips structure still permits the dog to move around on four legs, just not as well [or comfortably] as they were meant to do.

The problem is that you, Gustav, Slamdunc, Blitzen, Red Sable and a whole HOST of others recognize that when a breeder such a yourself or Gustav refers to 'functional' hips, it is with an unspoken presumption that for the purposes of breeding working dogs functional goes well beyond the dictionary defination of the word; for a breeder, and in the world of working dogs most especially, 'functional' means the hips are sound and free of abnomalities.

You ask if I can point you to anyone who would say they were willing to breed dogs that are dysplastic?  Fortunately, I don't know of anyone personally, because anytime I've ever come across people that irresponsible and clueless, I make a point of disassociating myself with them unless they have an epiphany and realize how wrong they were.  If I were inclined to put the time in, I probably COULD dig up some specific individuals who hold that notion, however.

Because this whole damn thread began as a wholesale indictment against a single type of GSD, and further a single kennel's GSDs, I DO think it's important for as many knowledgable people as possilbe to discuss the concepts at their most basic points--
emphasizing that there is a difference between 'breeding dysplastic dogs' as in producing pups that do develop dysplasia, and 'breeding dogs that are dysplastic' as it pertains to both the willful use of one or more adult dogs which were x-rayed and shown to be dysplastic as breeding stock [whether they were certified as such by some organization, or the breeder and/or the vet taking the x-rays identified the animal as dysplastic], OR using one or more adult dogs for breeding whose hips were NEVER x-rayed and never evaluated for dysplasia.

There is a limit to what ANYONE can do to avoid PRODUCING dysplastic dogs; it is, however, extremely simply to avoid breeding dogs that themselves are dysplastic.  That gets lost in discussions, especially when breeders speak of 'functional' hips instead of sound hips, or healthy hips. That's what I find to be a concern, and that's where others find what they think are loopholes that they can exploit in threads like this.

You are a business man, whose business happens to be dog breeding and training.  As such, it is beneficial to you if the average person seeking to buy a German Shepherd puppy knows that you do have the hips of your breeding stock x-rayed and certified as being sound and non-dysplastic.   Are there going to be dogs in the background of those certified dogs which did NOT have hip certification? Yes, of course--every GSD, no matter who the breeder is or how spectacular the pedigree in every other capacity,  has multiple dogs behind them which had neither hips nor elbows even x-rayed, let alone certified--because the entire program of checking hips really isn't an ancient art. 

And I'll take a guess and say that yes, you probably DO like sunsets in Arizona, because you live there [I would hope you would no longer be living someplace you don't like, after all the years you've worked so hard to build your own little 'American dream'] and also because it cools off at sunset, and it's damn hot in Arizona, so the change in temperature must feel delightfully refreshing.

Hexe:Not  even a semi-knowledgable breeder would select an OFA Excellent or a1 stud with poor temperament over an OFA Good or Fair/a2 to NZ stud with outstanding temperament...that's simply anecdotal.  If you know of specific breedings where this actually happened, it would be elucidating for everyone here.

I might have been a bit hyperbolic when I stated "pet quality" dogs with excellent rated hips used for breeding etc., but what I meant to state is that a FAR superior DOG from a temperamental and structural perspective, but has an A3, would be eschewed in favor of one that is an A1 for hips, but notably inferior DOG temperamentally (but meets the minimum criteria from a temperament perspective of course !) being used for breeding.

This is not being done by the breeders out of malice or to deliberately trash the breed, but is being done because the market now "demands" both parents to be A1 certified to enable the pups to be sold.  People of the Aadilah ilk would be shouting from the rooftops, and grabbing the mindshare of the vast population of gullible individuals, if the above scenario (FAR superior A3 dog used instead of the FAR temperamentally and structurally inferior but A1 rated dog) were to have taken place.  Makes sense ?

Can you state with a straight face that over the past decades, with the constant drum-beating about hips, that such superior dogs were not eliminated from the gene-pool, in favor of lesser (but meeting minimum temperamental standards) dogs ?  If so, then you have not been paying much attention to what is happening around.  No hyperbole here !

HEXE I except the olive branch
and I will open another can of worms here  :).
But first let me state the obvious. I do not condone nor do myself in any shape or form breeding together two dogs where one or two of them  are dysplastic in any degree. 
OK, now with that out of the ways here is a question.
What do you say about "functional" hips of a S&R dog Sampson who was totally dysplastic, but  was able to run all day up and down the mountain  through  the chest deep snow with the best of healthy dogs.  And oh yes as far as I remember Samson was 9 years old. This is a true first hand story from Wyoming. Sampson was dog in Jackson Hole Search dog non profit organization which I have started with local Sheriff department under Roger Millward.  
So, did Sampson have "functional" hips?  
 

AAYKAY To your last post's question I would say absolutely yes.It happens all the time.