The so called accredited breeder scheme (U.K) - Page 5

pencil if you have not got anything constructive to add re. accredited breeders then please do not post on this thread.

thanks

Tracie

Mo wrote..........   I Intend to take note of the dogs that have all the necessary requirements Sue.... then it would be meaningful, as it has to start some-where.   Mo

What do you consider are the necessary requirements then Mo...... UK DNA test or German DNA test? Because having one parent done in the UK scheme and one in the other is meaningless as it will not prove parentage!!.

Regards

Sue

"pencil: You DODGE the biggest question - who exactly are you?"

Here we go again!

When are you going to realise David, that you joined this forum *knowing* names were not mandatory!!

Zac

German scheme for me at moment Sue.

Mo

Surely it is better to use dogs that are proven healthy and screened for the normal conditions, rather than ensuring the DNA??  With variation in DNA testing being as incomparable as the various hip scoring systems it renders itself useless unless people can afford to carry out testing in every country that the dog is used in?

Also with testing when does testing become an exercise with no purpose.  For example there are some breeds that have no testing requirements under any of the KC schemes, and some that that show dogs genetically clear and means that as long as both parents are registered genetically clear then no further testing is required.  In these instances why would people waste good money on unnecessary tests and in some cases putting dogs under potentially dangerous anthestic or sedation just so a breeder can list totally irrelevant health screens??

My old boy was hip scored and that was it, his parents where hip and haemophilla scored - thats all that was required 13 years ago - and he is still going strong.   Yet you also hear of dogs that have come from overscreen lines and with the resulting restricted gene pool as only the same breeder group is considered and the dogs are not as healthy or as long lived as those of less screened but from wider gene pools.

Just remember that genetic diversity reduces some health issues and narrowing the gene pool can increase problems especially if  a disease targets a genetic strain it can wipe that gene pool out extremely quickly.  (And before Im accused of making this up - this is something I have been taught at degree level)

Beepy writes

Surely it is better to use dogs that are proven healthy and screened for the normal conditions, rather than ensuring the DNA?? 

Agreed - the whole picture is a requirement - as much as one can do nowadays is good.  I hear what you say about 13 years ago, and I was enjoying that hey day too - but information and education regarding our breed has moved on, and in the main its improved knowledge (even if it is a little confusing at times)  I dont think we all should be jumping through hoops, but as I said on another thread - "just because you dont test for it, doesnt mean your dogs dont suffer from it" and I would rather know if there are problems than not know even if the result was disastrous.  - Mo Lakin

tigermouse:

You've missed the point as usual, serious hard hitting questions are put ( especially to videx and sue b ) but as always they never answer them.To muddy the waters they always say that not puting your real name( when I have mentioned my name numerous times now) means they won't answer-YET other nameless people on here with easy questions( in other words harmless) get answered by sue b. etc etc.

As for mentioning griffiths-a court of law found him guilty of malpractices pedigree wise, and i was just reminding folks of the dangers that abound without DNA

Zac: When are you and a few others going to realise that anonymous trolls should NOT make personal comments or  make snied remarks in any way about those who are NOT anonymous??? They do it solely bases on the knowledge they can "throw stones" without any being thrown back. There is a name for such people, and yes you know what it is "a coward!"

pencil

I HAVE MISSED THE POINT?.......

....lol you my dear need to read my last post again carefully. have you got the point..       

if you haven't got the guts to give your name then you are as videx says a coward indeed!

i have read a few of your prior posts and all i can see is that you enjoy causing a drama .                                                            perhaps its time that you engaged your brain before opening your mouth and mayby just maybe you could come up with something useful.

throw what you like but you still avoid the question who are you???

how can we take you seriously if we don't know your name?

what dangers with DNA ...got something to hide have we? 

and before you ask yes my dogs are  DNA profiled.

Tracie

Videx:When are you and a few others going to realise that anonymous trolls should NOT make personal comments or  make snied remarks in any way about those who are NOT anonymous???

Where does it say that in the board rules?  People are entitled to an opinion and that doesnt have to be the same as yours. Live with it!

Maybe it is time you looked closer to home when accusing others of making sneid remarks about others. How many times have YOU, David, accused anonymous posters of being people they are not? Do you call these unfortunate named persons up later and apologise?

On the subject of identifying 'better breeders', has anyone noticed how few people have signed the Breed Council or GSDL Breeders charter? that've been running for as many years as I can remember.

Zac