Question on hips? - Page 2

     Don't we need to know which kennel or breeder owns these dogs before we "cast judgement"
here? (sorry,couldn't resist).
     There really are many aspects of this scenario that would have to be looked at before you could really make any type definitive determination.
     On face value, it seem logical to remove dog C from the equasion. I would start looking for my answers as to what went wrong first off, by having someone  that  knows how to read the x-rays review those of dog C.
    Was the dog positioned properly, sedated,not sedated etc.,etc.,And for this, I would trust an individual that knows about all this over the OFA determination (as I stated in a different thread, a breeder told me their vet can and will manipulate the x-ray and dog to get a passing score)(how many 'other' vets will do that for their clients in the dog world? Probably more than we care to even imagine).
     How were these pups raised compared to dog B's litter, from birth up until x-rays? Nutrition and exercise I myself believe plays a big role in the developement of German Shepherd pups.
     I read an article not long ago about HD in wolves and it seems you DO NOT find too many wolves suffering these dysplastic conditions (yeah, survival of the fittest, but nature knows better than nurture what makes for healthy, fit animals).
    In that same article, it clearly stated, pups that are born to mother dogs that are not  providing an ample milk supply, causing pups to nurse ravenously with a constant strain on their hind legs as they struggle to force a milk supply, puts a great deal of stress on soft, growing bones with a constant rubbing, wearing at the hip sockets.(That makes a great deal of sense to me, and when I see large litters of pups being reared in plastic swimming pools with nothing but plastic between the pups and their pushing,sliding rear legs...makes me cringe at the idea of it).
     What was the age of the dogs from dogC when they were diagnosed and were they used for the same things.Sport, work, pet?
     I really don't believe there is ONE good reason why this would occur this way and in these numbers.
    After reviewing all the facts, would you want to take the chance and breed dog C with a different male to see if there was a different outcome?
     I wouldn't be willing to take that risk to  see if there was a different outcome. There already would be 3 too many more dysplastic dogs than I would care to produce.

There's not enough information to really make any hard and fast determination beyond that I wouldn't repeat the mating between A and C again, for sure.  There are far too many other pairings that can be made for each dog to risk breaking someone else's heart again when I knew how things shook out genetically the first time.  But to decide if any of these dogs should be removed from the pool, we need to know more.  Was the pairing of A and C a linebreeding, and if so, how close, and on what dogs?  What about the pairing of A and B? Linebreeding? Open pedigree? Linebreeding, but on different dogs than the combo of A and C?  Too many variables missing to make a determination other than not repeating A + C.   And nothing at all to indicate why B would even be in a discussion of capping her breeding career... 

Has C had other litters in the past with nearly the same lineage behind them where 100% had sound hips? How about litters from studs of different lineage, either partially or fully--any of those, and what were the results there? How did those studs differ from A's lines?  In any of C's previous litters, were there other issues than hip status that needed to be factored in when selecting a stud or deciding to stop using her?

IF I really, really liked what I saw in the three sound puppies when they were mature, if they totally rocked the world of anyone who saw them and worked them,  and C was my foundation bitch, it might be worth tweaking the formula a bit and pairing  her with a stud of similar lines to A but with those offset by lines (a) known for producing well with C's background, or (b) known to have produced well with C specifically, or at the very least, (c) known for producing prepotently with ANYTHING the lines were bred to. But those three sound pups from A + C would have to be ASTOUNDINGLY phenomenal to make it worth risking the use of a variation on the lineage theme of A with C instead of going in another genetic direction.

But I also agree with Blitzen that regardless of how legendary those three sound A+C pups were, they'd not be breeding candidates, not with half of their siblings with dysplastic hips.

As for A, also not sufficient info.  He helped C produce those 3 dysplastic hips; when he contributed to the production of offspring with other bitches, what were those results? Are these the only 3 dysplastic hips he ever helped produce?  What of other traits he's played a role in producing with other females, as well as with B and C?  Doesn't matter if a dog never sires a single progeny with bad hips, if he has a history of siring an inordinate number of nut-job offspring, or extremely poor structures [like every pup from him is cowhocked enough to churn butter...all of 'em]--a dog is more than JUST a set of hips and a set of elbows, but while I'd be willing to compromise a bit on conformation, compromising on a crippled dog simply isn't feasible.

So, to sum up--none of these dogs ought be eliminated from breeding at this point, because there's not enough info. A+C probably shouldn't be paired up again, but it's entirely possible that a repeat pairing could produce a litter with no dysplastic hips. It depends on how risk-averse the owners of these dogs are.

Gustav, if the sire produced ONE severely dysplastic pup AND the majority of the sire's full siblings [same litter or repeat breedings] were also dysplastic to varying degrees, THEN yes--I'd pull that sire from breeding.  If the majority of his siblings were sound, then a single pup, severely dysplastic or not, isn't sufficient reason alone to stop using that dog for breeding.

"But I have repeatedly heard people say that if this sire produced ONE severely dyspastic dog...the dog shouldn't be bred again"

I'm admittedly over my head here but it seems to me that you could equate this to sterilizing the parents of an unhealthy child.

If dog A has produced good offspring with dog B and then bad offspring with dog C, it stands to reason that dog C is the new variable and I would not breed A to C again. However if dog C has produced good offspring in the past you couldn't in good conscience write that female (hate the word bitch for dogs) off.

I personally feel that some people/animals DNA just don't mix well so to my way of thinking you could have two very solid dogs that produce great offspring just not with each other.

Just my uneducated opinion...

If I had a dog that produced only one puppy with severe HD, I would find out all I could about his sibs, aunts, uncles and the bitch to which he was bred.  I would eliminate that dog from breeding only if there were a  strong history of HD in most of those dogs.  When I breed him again, I would not take him to a bitch that was closely related to the one that produced the severe HD.

Personally, I think that most GSD breeders need to get over the stigma that all linebreeding and inbreeding is taboo and incest. It just might give breeders better hip records, etc in the long run. It's really not the same thing as having sex with one's own sister. Just saying..............

Some really good thinking being considered here. My point is it really takes this kind of indepth analyzing and knowledge of variables to be a good breeder. Why? Because all these insights go into the equation every time you breed. Also, most of this analysis is in addition to KNOWING the rating of the individual parents. This is why I cringe when I hear somebody say I wouldn't breed to this dog because he is fair, or goes to a dog because he is excellent. Just so much more to hips than the surface, and many breeders today make their decisions solely on surface ratings of the parents. Any wonder with all the kk1 to kk1 breedings taking place in certain lines...the hip situation is no better today than 25 years ago. Really appreciate the posts reflecting the thoughts and I hope newer people can see how complicated this can be necessitating as much knowledge of as many variables as possible.

Blitzen, I know you don't need an elaboration on it, but for those less experienced, inbreeding and linebreeding are what established most dog breeds to begin with; the problem isn't the practice of it, it's the practice of it without knowing every possible bit of information available.  Done correctly, with the appropriate research in advance of the breeding, it can be the savior of a breed that finds itself in dire straights; haphazardly, and it entrenches unwanted traits deeper into the gene pool.

There are things that just can't be compromised upon: a stable temperament that allows the dog to live safely within society is as vital to the breed as sound, correctly formed hips and elbows, and it benefits no one--especially not the dog-- for the animal to move like a dream, pain-free and effortlessly, if said dog has to be isolated from all save for its owner and family. At the bottom of the decision tree would be physical appearance--coat type & length, color and markings; intensity of eye color, ear set; while all of these traits play a role in the physical beauty of the dog, all should be the least of concerns to a breeder, factored into breeding decisions only after the critical points have been satisfied.

It is the very complexity of breeding good dogs that has long caused me to feel that it ought to be much, much more difficult for people to sashay into the breeder arena--it shouldn't rely solely on having one or more sexually intact, fertile canine specimens in house.   It won't happen here, in the US, I'm sure, but that doesn't mean I can't wish....

Glad you began a separate thread for this subject, Gustav. It's one that can never be over-discussed, IMO, and we all should review the topic frequently.

Great post, Hexe. Ditto for Gustav putting up the thread.

well thats like you have a female that has had 4 litters no heart problems all different studs. last litter you get 3 severe heart murmers. bred female again to a totaly different male no heart problems. and none in her earler progeny of obviously they where not compatable said male that produced. there are many factors that can happen.

Sure linebreeding and inbreeding needs to not be done haphazardly, but many GSD breeders have a mindset that it is a terrible thing and won't even consider it. If it's a close breeding, it'a automatically labeled a bad breeding. Often someone starts a thread here about an ad promoting a linebreeding like a grandaugther back to her grandsire acting as if it's the wost thing in the world without even knowing the results or anything about the parents or their parents. If it's a linebreeding or inbreeding, it can't be a good breeding period.

IMO if a breeder hasn't gained enough knowledge about the breed and their pedigrees to selectvely linebreed or inbreed from time to time,  it tells me that s/he probably shouldn't be breeding dogs in the first place. The devil is in the details.