Czech GSD's with bad hips - Page 23

aaykay, in that I will agree with you--foolish breeders most certainly have overlooked or dismissed out of hand dogs that were less than a1, OFA EX, A/A, etc., but that's not the fault of the hip eval programs, or even the inclusion of hip status in the uppermost levels of breeding choices...it's the fault of foolish breeders who really shouldn't be breeding.  The reason the buying public--and for that matter, even police departments--are so concerned about hip status of the parents is because it's hard to find ANYONE who hasn't either experienced first-hand or had intimate knowledge of someone who had been through the emotional wreck of having a dog that is dysplastic. Though not always with GSDs, enough average guy-on-the-street types of folks have seen how it often ages a dog in double-time, and how difficult it can be to try and manage a large dog whose bad hips prevent him from climbing the stairs to get in and out of the house, and how pain relievers have their limitations and there are some dogs that just can't get sufficiently comfortable to justify making them endure another day of life.  THAT'S what drives the hip-status frenzy, not the certificatiion programs. 

I will also acknowledge that someone who is NOT breeding with an eye toward any of their pups going on to have a law enforcement career will be more likely to select the softer, OFA EX stud over the harder OFA Fair, if everything else about the dogs is equal--and that's simply because they are breeding for the homes and families with which those pups will be living. Is that good for the breed? That's an entirely DIFFERENT thread that can be started--I'll simply point out that organisms which fail to adapt as their environment changes have a special name: extinct.  Nature abhors a specialist, and some consideration has to be given as to whether the world the dog must live in will be tolerant enough of a type of temperament that some people feel is the 'only real' way a GSD should be.

I believe I mentioned it earlier in this thread [or it might have been in the vom Ron thread, or Gustav's hips thread] but I can't say it enough:  it is entirely TOO easy for people in the United States to become 'breeders', and I do not subscribe to the adage that 'no one makes any money breeding dogs', because it's just not true.  Lots of people make LOTS of money doing it, it's just that the ones who at least try to do it ethically make less than the ones who don't give a damn.  I'd like to see it become a lot more difficult for someone to toss two sexually intact, fertile dogs together [these days, they don't even need to be of the same breed!] at the opportune time, and 119 days later, start cashing checks and peddling pups.

Hans, yes, Sampson's hips were functional.  They also were abnormal, and while he probably was the kind of dog with a very high pain threshold, and clearly was a dog who LOVED his work--thus releasing a stream of endorphins as he did it, which do have some pain relieving and anti-inflammatory effects--he is an anomaly among dogs with that degree of dysplasia.

When I was introduced to Schutzhund, I watched a mature [meaning 5-6 yr old] GSD bitch perform the Sch3 OB and Protection exercises one afternoon, and she was just a little freakin' rocket, sailing over the wall and A-frame, jumping around on her hind legs in joy when her handler praised her on completion of each exercise, and launching herself into the helper like she was made of steel and the sleeve held an automotive-wrecking yard strength magnet.  This bitch was fun to watch work.  Afterward, while talking to her handler [who is now a USCA trial judge], I was astounded to learn that this dog was dysplastic to the point that there really wasn't any 'ball and socket' effect going on--more like a mallet and anvil deal.  The handler said she wasn't going to continue working the dog when she saw the x-rays, but the DOG insisted on being worked, and was miserable if she wasn't being worked.  I've met dogs like that...they have pain from the defect, but they only seem to notice it if they're forced to be sedentary; left to their own devices, this type of dog creates their own work if necessary, because they feel better when they're moving and active and engaged in some activity they get pleasure out of. 

But she, like SAR Sampson, are exceptions to the rule, sadly.  If they weren't, nobody would give a rat's ass about sound hips, because they wouldn't matter.

Time for sleep around here. Gentlemen and gentleladies, good night to you all!

From Prager:
"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)"

Hans,
Do you think that your point #6 might be much too difficult, or, even impossible in the U.S.?
We are a country of almost 315 million people.
Czech Republic has 10.5 million people. (or, equivalent to about half the population of the New York City metropolitan area)

I think the GSD radiologist would be way overworked and start having a lot of bad days and x-rays would be misread, and then, the whole system would be flawed.

I do like some of your other ideas. They could be very helpful. Maybe it is worth submitting those ideas to OFA , Penn Hip and AKC.

personally, i would be happy if all vets could be relied upon to position dogs correctly, take decent xrays & evaluate the xrays to a certain degree.
i am disgusted that so many pass themselves off as proficient when they are anything but.

i am glad that a few have brought up the fact that we are breeding more than hips.  very often the conversation does go in that direction.

a long time ago, i read something about early gsd breeding practices and even though i can't remember where i saw it, it has always kind of
stuck in the back of my mind.  it seems like some folks paired young stud dogs with older bitches who had already proven they could produce
well and paired promising young bitches with older proven studs.  in my mind this is one solution to the twin axis of production & performance.
a couple of test breedings would give you an idea of what/if they could produce while titling/evaluations could shed light on character and abilities.
one only has to click on dogs right here on pdb to see pages and pages of top performing dogs who are not able to produce themselves let
alone anything any better.  while the trophies may adorn someones mantle they do not guarantee a solid future for the breed.  production &
performance need to go hand in hand because either one without the other is worthless. 

pjp 

Hexe:I will also acknowledge that someone who is NOT breeding with an eye toward any of their pups going on to have a law enforcement career will be more likely to select the softer, OFA EX stud over the harder OFA Fair, if everything else about the dogs is equal--and that's simply because they are breeding for the homes and families with which those pups will be living. Is that good for the breed?

When I say superior dog, I don't mean just harder dogs.  I am also referring to dogs that have bedrock solid and unflappable nerves (just cannot be trained into a dog that does not have it !), which allows the huge drives to be kept bolted down when not needed, and to go all out when needed. 

They are absolutely stable around the house and around kids, and can settle down and go to sleep if need be, when they need to be out of the way.  Perfect family dogs and perfect workers and definitely not highly driven, uncontrollable individuals that typically spring to mind when one pictures "hard, driven" dogs.  No whining when in the crate, not hyper, no unnecessary barking to gain attention and disturbing the neighbors, but has completely settled down, because that is what is required now !  When working, simply will not quit when after something and is on the 200% mode.

When such diamonds are eliminated from the gene-pool due to less-than-absolutely-perfect hips (say an A2 or A3 instead of an A1), in favor of a lesser individual with A1 hips, this rock-solid trait and the huge benefits that come from it (for the family, for the working application and for the breed as a whole), are being eliminated from the breed for ever......never, ever coming back !  Some of the ignorant people (like the OP who opened this thread) would probably be thrilled that the sire or dam had an A1 and not an A3 and don't have a clue that the DOG is a total package and not just the hips alone and what they missed by choosing the A1 over the A3, in this case.

As a good breeder, one might have altruistic motives in wanting to pick the superior A3 dog and not use  the  inferior A1 dog from the breeding pool (in the above example), but they have to sell their pups too, and A1 unfortunately sells better (when blinking disco lights are highlighting the "A1" with all of the HD mania being drummed around) and these pups have to be placed, right ?

Aaykay, excellent post, very well said !

Ziegenfarm, you always bring common sense and a deeper grasp of the breed than many;  who only look at surface issues because they only have surface knowledge. Pet breeding is just as destructive to this breed as faulty hip breeding. When you read comments from some that put temperament behind hips in priority you have a pet mentality. Fact: the breed has always had HD in it from early times, yet the breed reached unparalleled heights as a working and service dog during these periods. Today with the New breed experts, and many of the shortcut props that allow these breeders to appear credible, we have had an unprecedented decline in the working/service component of this breed. And it's not just law Enforcement, seeing eye foundations and Search and Rescue organizations are also looking to other breeds because of the high washout of the "beloved" German Shepherd. Maybe we have loved this breed like a parent who creates spoiled children....they love these spoiled children to death, but come time for work they are severely lacking. 

I never said that hips should be the first, last, or only consideration when planning a litter. I simply said - IMO breeding dogs should have their hips certified by an accredited organization period. Never mentioned ratings, don't care about ratings, either a dog has HD or it doesn't. Personally I would have to see the xray of an NZ before  using it since my understanding is that translates to mild HD, not something I would want to introduce into my breeding program.

Hans suggested using a cradle to xray hips, good idea and I will go one step farther and say -SEDATE DOGS FOR XRAYS. In some caes it makes a difference.  I've seen it and I'll bet Hans and Cliff have seen it too. Not common, but not rare either .

Research siblings and other close relatives and withhold dogs that have produced moderate to severe HD from different lines.  I know a lot of breeders  who rarely get HD anymore in breeds that once had as much or more HD as this one simply by not using dog from litters with moderate to severe HD or dogs that tended to produce it in their progeny. Not rocket science - like begets like..

Bottom line - GSD breeders have the tools and the knowledge available to dramatically reduce the percentage of HD in the breed. Don't blame the OFA, the SV etc if  you're not seeing an improvement, blame the demands that are placed on the breed. The ethical ASL breeders people don't get much HD anymore, they can afford to put hips first. Maybe GSL breeders are getting less HD than the WL breeders, not sure. If so, again a matter of priorities that put normal hips and elbows at the top of the list.

In germany between 1999-2003 28.1% GSDs was x-rayed, the average each of these years I suppose, of these dogs 35.3% was dysplastic. A pretty low number x-rayed but a quite high level of HD. In sweden 2005 about 60% x-rayed and about 28% HD. Now some breeders are better or worse than this but still about one third of the breed has HD, about 18% also has ED remarks judging from the swedish populataion. I guess the question is if this is acceptable or not. In sweden for the GSD you are not allowed to breed on C hips and elbows that are not free, this is allowed in germany and many countries if I´m not misstaken, hence I´m not that surprised HD/ED is still pretty common when not even breedingdogs must be cleared, in combination with relatives that are checked in low numbers or ignored. A dog with HD C and several littermates with the same or worse can´t be optimal  to take a litter from, or?

I realize some countries have less rules, worse systems and less tradition of screening for HD/ED in combination with breeders that really don´t care and buyers that are not intressted to pay for checking the HD/ED status of their dogs, this is not good no matter what angle you look at it, at least if HD/ED is a concern. Some people argue we should breed a good dog with slight faults in HD/ED, but is this really necessary in a big breed like the GSD? I guess this may be less of a problem if the dog in question has many relatives with good HD/ED, but when this is often not checked so much do we really loose so much  to avoid such a dog and either breed to his free brother, or find another dog wihich are HD/ED free and where you have more info about the close relatives. Breeding two free dogs where you know there are problems in previous litters and in close relatives is obviously risky, but I can´t see breeding dogs with slight HD and you really don´t know much about the relatives is any better. It´s not like people should breed free dogs and think this is enough, the bottom line is how can a breeder know the status of the relatives when no or only a few have been checked for HD/ED.

Gustav, I can send you some info on breeders that are way below the average when it comes to HD/ED, where the majority of the dogs are checked for HD/ED and still they have produced dogs where around 90% is HD free, then you can judge for yourself if this is "petdogs" in your opionion;) To produce 3-4 litters where 30% are x-rayed for HD/ED and all are free is obvioulsy not the same compared to a breeder that have 15-20 litters or more and have x-rayed 75-90% of what he has produced. I think it´s also a fact that very large breeders with several hundreds of puppies produced over the years have a harder time to produce 90% HD free dogs just because of the fact HD is so widespread and therefore some litters will come from dogs that prdouce more HD than others. A breeder that have produced 250 puppies, x-rayed 75-90% of all these dogs and have 18-20% HD is very good I suppose when many kennels with less litters could have 35-40% HD even if they only have x-rayed 50%.

In order to know the hips status of littermates and close relatives, breeders need to share the information. If a dog is obviously dysplastic and the xray not submitted, they need to contact the breeder, the breeder needs to pass that information on to the owners of the rest of the litter and first degree relatives so they can make informed decisions about how to use that dog in a breeding program or not. Breeders can also ask that all puppies they sell get a preliminary xray, have it copied and sent to them at the expense of the breeder. Most buyers will do that, but sometimes it's necessary to keep reminding them that it's part of the contract and refusal to do it by the set date will nullify the guarantee.